Good assassins?
- Thread starter Avatar_V
- Start date
Avatar_V
First Post
Tsyr said:
You can't imagine good-aligned hired soldiers? Or the average DnD adventurer?
Hehe.. I think I phrased that badly
I mean that anyone who kills _just_ for money is probably not 'good'. Hopefully good-aligned PCs have motives other then treasure in mind when they start killing. As far as the hired soldier, I don't think a mercenary would be 'good' if they'd work for anyone. Maybe someone who's careful which jobs they take could be good, but then the motive isn't only getting money; it's stopping evil (and getting money).The only thing that is evil about the assassin is the background. It is entirely possible to have a good-aligned assassin that stalks evil and kills them in the middle of the night with a poisoned dagger. A good assassin wouldn't be a character that just kills people for money, they'd have to have 'good' motivations.
Tsyr
Explorer
Hejdun said:
That doesn't make them "good" however... What's the road to hell paved with, boys and girls?
Assassination, as in killing someone quickly, without warning, with the other party not having a chance to defend themselves, is not, to me, a "good" act. I could see a good character that on RARE occasions resorted to that, if they had no other choice, but I couldn't see a good character doing it enough to take even a prestige class dedicated to it.
Just my personal view.
Blood Jester
First Post
Hejdun said:
Can you say 'The Punisher'?
Even 'Hitman' kills for money, but won't take a contract on a non-criminal, and turned down a pact with demons.
Nifft
Penguin Herder
IMHO this all depends on the moral clarity of your world. If your world has unambiguous evil, and killing such evil is unambiguously good, then there's no problem being a Good Assassin.
On the other hand, if your world has deities who say things like "thou shalt not kill", the concept is probably going to be a problem.
Some worlds concern themselves with shades of moral grey, some with issues of redemption. Others concentrate on finding and killing Evildoers. The latter is a good place for a Good Assassin.
-- Nifft
On the other hand, if your world has deities who say things like "thou shalt not kill", the concept is probably going to be a problem.
Some worlds concern themselves with shades of moral grey, some with issues of redemption. Others concentrate on finding and killing Evildoers. The latter is a good place for a Good Assassin.
-- Nifft
What was that sig quoting Escalla the Fairie? "This is an adventure...I demand financial compensation for acts of homicide" or something to that effect.
Face it, "adventurer" can be defined as one part hero, one part looter...Under the D&D alignment system, I'd rank James Bond either neutral good (avenging Felix Leiter) or true neutral (just doing his job). He has a reputation for being a loose canon, disobeying orders and creating chaos, but goes about it in a professional, clinical, organised manner. He kills the evil guy's henchmen who try to stop him in pursuit of a good cause, but adventurers do that all the time - even paladins - so it's forgivable in D&D wurld.
Last edited:
shadow
First Post
Not to start a political debate, but during the Iraq war American forces fired upon Saddam Hussein's palace, trying to kill him as a "target of opportunity". Politics aside, how is this different from assassination? Could a "good" aligned assassin take out an enemy leader if it would end a war?
As far as D&D's alignment goes, I would say no in the strict sense. If you want to diverge a little from D&D's black and white morality, I would say either do away with alignments all together, or allow a neutral character (but not good) to become an assassin.
As far as D&D's alignment goes, I would say no in the strict sense. If you want to diverge a little from D&D's black and white morality, I would say either do away with alignments all together, or allow a neutral character (but not good) to become an assassin.
Similar Threads
