Evil with morals?

[SableWyvern]

First off, I'd like to point out that I'm not looking for a definitive answer here. Its just a thought, feedback on which would interest me.

Could a character who will not, where possible, injure children, be evil?

The question arises from the antagonists in Die Hard III. The main bad guy, while he threatens to blow up a school, would not do so; similarly a couple of the bad guys won't leave a bomb lying on the streets because it could be found by kids.

I'm pretty happy with the alignments in 3e - I feel that alignments are intrinsic to the classic D&D feel, and was glad to see they were written up in a less concrete, far more playable fashion in this edition.

But evil, as written, still seems to indicate a desire to kill for fun or the feeling of power, irrespective of the victim's status.

So, would the characters mentioned above be evil or neutral?

 

[Wild Karrde]

I would still say evil for the fact that they are still willing to kill for personal gain and no other reason. What's the value of a child's life vs. an adult's life?

Since they were willing to kill just about anybody but people under a certain age they still fall into the evil category as far as I'm concerned. It's one thing to kill for self-preservation or to destroy evil but to do it for selfish reasons qualifys you as the dark side.

 

[Maddenus2]

yes not a problem

Many people would have no worries about slitting a throat of an adult male, robbing them torturing them but would draw the line at women and children.

in your campaign you could allow them to be neutral evil, giving them the option to do as they wish but allowing for some balance.
or Lawful evil which allows them to follow "their" code which may be one that is generally evil but the laws (code) that they follow doesnt allow for those acts.

Also Evil, like lawful good, isnt stupid.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I think the fact that they wouldn't kill kids changes little. It's nice to know the bad guys aren't total sociopaths but they were still willing to kill others to make money and to extract revenge.

 

[UD]

I would say this was lawful evil.

 

[Rashak Mani]

Its more a question of situation... my evil characters were not bloodthirsty... but in a bad situation where its my life or a childs life... I would take the option and kill the kid... but hey many Neutrals might do that as well ... self preservation.

Evil has more to do with priorities and morals... Evil will always have themselves as first and other people afterwards... they might have tendency to use violence or not... to be cruel or not... but whenever a situation arises Evil thinks of himself.

Lawful Evil is a competitive and maybe unscrupulous... but hierarchy and laws are part of the accepted system. They prefer some kind of groups structure and organization... I once played a Lawful with some evil... his Evil part just was toned down and Lawful given more strength.

 

[Raduin_Nimblegrund]

Evil people can have things that they will not do, yes. Just because on one singular point they shift toward another alignment does not mean their whole alignment goes with it.

But Lawful Evil, especially, restricts their own behavior like that. If you look at the description in the PHB they are described as being that way... "A lawful evil villain takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard to whom it hurts." and more importantly, "lawful evil villains often have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped)."

 

[Gargoyle]

In the context of the game, it has less to do with the structure of alignment than it has to do with having dramatic villains. You can ask a hundred different players what being "Lawful Evil" means and will get a hundred different answers.

The best villains have a few redeeming traits, so that you can identify with them.

 

[Omegium]

Where does it say evil involves killing? Someone like scrooge (dickens), who asks people for money they have lend from him, even if they are hungry and its christmas. I think you can account him as evil, but he doesn't kill

 

[Gargoyle]

Where does it say evil involves killing? Someone like scrooge (dickens), who asks people for money they have lend from him, even if they are hungry and its christmas. I think you can account him as evil, but he doesn't kill

See what I mean? Now ask 99 more people. 99 other different answers.

I agree that you can be evil without killing though. Cruelty has something to do with it. Whether Scrooge was cruel because he was a greedy miser depends on your POV. Some would call him Neutral.