An assassin's motives.

[Umbran]

I'm going to vote for NE or LE.

"Above all, I assassinate people to make money" - sorry, but that's casual disregard for the value of life to earn a personal profit - that's evil.

Whether these guys are LE or NE depends a bit on how they operate. They say there's a whole mess of things they won't do. Do they check? Do they refuse jobs that turn out to be about passion and hatred? They say they offer an alternative to war - do they specialize in political assassination, specifically? What if the war is driven by hatred? What do they do if someone hires them under false pretenses to fulfil some non-policital agenda?

The more they hold to strict guidelines of behavior, the more lawful they are.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

Assassins kill for money...

Paladins kill for ideals...

 

[[mik]]

I agree that, if you focus on the sentence "Above all, I kill to make money" evil is the only way to go for this character.

However, depending on how strictly you base the character on Terry Pratchett's Guild of Assassins, there are some additional points to consider. For example, Pratchett's Assassins cannot kill anyone incapable of defending themselves (although if your income is high enough you are assumed to be able to defend yourself) and may only kill their victims face to face. In 'Night Watch' they seem to perform a civic function as the easiest means of getting rid of corrupt dictators, and refuse to kill the Commander of the Watch as he is too important to the stability of the city. 'Pyramids' seems to suggest that often the Assassins are the major way of avoiding wars.

If you play up the civic angle, the focus on keeping the city a safe place for business, I could maybe, just maybe, see the character as neutral. But that would be quite hard to do well.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

I'm reminded of Splinter Cell. For those not in the know, the main character, on several occasions, assassinates the bad guy. His reasoning is that, while it is a dirty, distastful job, the fact is that in killing one man to prevent a war, he saves the lives of thousands.

It has nothing to do with money, but with duty to his country and the lives of its citizens.

That's almost Lawful Good. Lawful in that he obeys orders that are very difficult to carry out, and Good in that he suffers the guilt of killing for the good of others.

 

[domino]

I agree that, if you focus on the sentence "Above all, I kill to make money" evil is the only way to go for this character.

Well, when it starts with "Above all," it sorta tells people that's the part to focus on.

 

[Snapdragyn]

I agree that the money statement limits things to LE or NE, depending on how closely a code is followed.

It was interesting reading the passage, since up until the final part I was actually seeing a lot of similarities with my own assassin character -- who is (thanks to a house rule change to the PrC) LN. He kills not for money, but because of his unwavering dedication to the organization which trained him & their ideals. He isn't good because he's quite willing to sacrifice innocents in order to achieve these 'higher' ideals, nor is he evil since he does not kill for any form of personal or organizational gain.

 

[Drowbane]

I'd saw the organization would be Lawful Evil, the members ranging from L/N, L/E, N/E, and perhaps N.

 

[painandgreed]

I could go for either LE, NE or N depending on how the character was played. Even if assassinations were evil acts, it's not the only thing that a character does. His attitudes towards other things as well would determine his alligment. One's alignment is an average of all the things that they do. Drop the "above all ... to make money" part and they might even be able to swing a G alignment.

 

[Ion]

I think the most interesting part of a character or organization to focus on would be assasination as an alternative to war.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Assassins kill for money...

Paladins kill for ideals...

I do believe I have a new addition for my sig.