How can this not be evil?

[Voadam]

I don't agree. It's my opinion, and a number of D&D designers seem to share it, that no one but those who're evil can do evil deeds without moral consequence. Let's say you have a good PC who uses soul bind on a random innocent bystander, because doing so and then destroying the soul will get the PC something he wants- something morally insignificant like a +12 hackmaster or the return of a long-dead empire. How can a PC who follows through with this continue to be good? How could fellow party members ever believe the PC is still good? How could people who hear of the PC continue to trust in the gods of good who condoned his actions?

In core D&D your alignment is determined by the totality of your actions on balance, not any individual act. An evil necromancer who saves an orphan is not redeemed and considered good from then on. Similarly, one sin does not damn you forever on the alignment judgment scale. The individual acts are judged on their own merits and the totality of a character when you consider all the acts is what determines alignment. Consistent evil will turn a good character evil in D&D but one act of evil does not make you evil outside of divine/magical intervention.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

No, that would be silly, wouldn't it? Statistically there would of course be lawful goods with a strong enough desire to save the world to do the unthinkable. It may be a large portion of lawful goods. In the course of saving the world, however, they would break the edicts of the lawful good alignment and cease being lawful good. In the same way, this supposedly lawful good society is doing things which blatantly break the edicts of the lawful good alignment. Why then should they magically continue to be lawful good?

I see. I was fixating on the 'it should be a job for the LNs of the world'. I do, in fact, agree that a LG engaging in acts of this nature isn't really LG anymore. Although I would argue that it would take more than one such act to permanently change a LGs alignment (unless they are paladins). Redemption should be possible - just not easy.


For the 'if they were destroying evil necromancers it would be ok' side what if, instead of evil necromancers it was the termanilly ill? Assuming the body was made healthy by the process would that still be ok? I mean they were going to die anyway right?

 

[Epametheus]

The example "orb people" that DMH just posted look like people who are slipping -- "the people don't know what's best for them, they need to do what we say."

In all likelyhood, their society (assuming the nation survived) didn't go to hell in a handbasket after the orb people were lost; it's adapted to do without them. Possessing hosts and obliterating their souls so that the orb people can forcibly revert their society into one that depends them reeks of evil.

Sacrificing yourself "for the sake of the people" is thoroughly Lawful Good. Sacrificing others "for the sake of the people" may be Lawful, but no way in hell is it Good.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Sacrificing yourself "for the sake of the people" is thoroughly Lawful Good. Sacrificing others "for the sake of the people" may be Lawful, but no way in hell is it Good.

I agree. People claiming that a LG society would sacrifice the few for the many in such a clearly evil way reminds me of an ethics class I took in college, in which we were asked to consider a scenario in which one healthy person was taken to the hospital (against his will) and cut up into pieces, so his organs could be distributed to a few dozen dying organ recipients (thus reviving them). A clear cut case of the needs of the many taking priority over the needs of the one.

The class was fairly unanimous in its belief that this was morally wrong.

 

[Zappo]

For the 'if they were destroying evil necromancers it would be ok' side what if, instead of evil necromancers it was the termanilly ill? Assuming the body was made healthy by the process would that still be ok? I mean they were going to die anyway right?

Wrong. If the victims were killed, we could argue this point. Since their souls are being destroyed, whether they were going to die anyway or not is completely irrelevant, because what these "good" beings are doing is worse than death. The terminally ill can still hope for heaven.

 

[Hellcow]

Exactly- why the spheres were not made to be used with dead bodies, constructs, or something else I have no idea.

Because that's how the magic works. You're dealing with artifacts; who knows what limitations the creators were working with?

The point of the Taerans is that their existence DOES place them in a moral quandary. They are heroes - and yet, their continued existence is entirely dependent on the sacrifice of others. Place them in constructs, and they're simply powerful constructs - how is that interesting?

Looking to the Taerans, you have a number of factors.

• The orbs were not simply advisors: They were protectors and shapers of society. The magic of the immortal wizards and clerics held in the orbs would have been used for far more than battle; these epic-level spellcasters used their magic to advance their civilization and tend to the needs of the people.
• Between magic, knowledge, and discipline, the Taerans truly believed that their society was a utopia, whose people were educated and free of fear and poverty. The Taerans believed that they were helping others by bringing this civilization to them. Certainly it's not the first time that conquerors have thought that they were doing good by enforcing their values on others...
• The religion of the Taerans is specifically noted as being a harsh one - the Arbiter does what must be done for the greater good, and mortals must trust in his wisdom.
• In Kel Taera, the role of orb-bearer was a tremendous honor. An orb-bearer is a vessel through which society is preserved. As an orb-bearer, you have the chance to be Einstein or King Arthur - or at least to ensure that these noble souls live on to guide civilization. It was a noble sacrifice - and seen as a necessary one.
• The Taerans see the modern age as being hopelessly chaotic and primitive. It is a hell: if they can restore Kel Taera, they will make it a paradise. Yes, it is sad that a few souls must be destroyed in the process, and it is something the orbs will mourn and carry on their conscience - but they believe that they have the potential to bring order and peace to the world, and that it is their duty to do so.

The key point is that the lawful good Taeran is in all other ways a noble soul. He is driven by a desire to help others, to end suffering and fear and bring order to the world. He possesses immense powers that can be used to accomplish these goals. But to do this, he requires the sacrifice of a single individual. And again, in the past, the victims were all willing participants in this process. The Taerans have trouble understanding why a rational person wouldn't want to help them - the host has the chance to be the instrument of change, to bring a new golden age to the world!

Furthermore, nothing specifies that the Taerans know that the souls are destroyed. The soul is eventually pushed from the body - but in Kel Taera, no one would ever have tried to remove an orb and recover the original soul. So it's quite possible that the Taerans themselves assume that the souls of their hosts are passing on to a well-deserved rest. Also bear in mind that the spiritual transformation is not an active process controlled by the orb. It simply happens as the orb-bearer gains levels; as long as the orb remains attached, it will overpower the soul of the bearer. Much of this depends on your use of the afterlife as an active part of your campaign. If the afterlife is something mysterious - as opposed to being a fun place planewalkers can drop by to have tea with the departed - then the destruction of souls becomes a hard thing to be certain of. Again, the only way to know for certain would be to kill the orbbearer, remove the orb, and try to restore the original soul - which the Taerans would never have attempted.

If the Taerans were evil, they would have no interest in ending the suffering of others, or bringing peace and prosperity to the world. They are not concerned with personal power or comfort. They do not enjoy dominating others: they truly believe that when others are shown the benefits of Taeran culture, they will embrace it.

My belief has always been that alignment covers a broad range of behavior. The evil man can be a ruthless murderer or simply selfish and greedy. The good person can be a kind social worker or a crusader who believes that destroying evil is the way to promote good. Like the Church of the Silver Flame in Eberron, the point of the Taerans is to say that people who truly seek to do good can still do evil, and can be just as dangerous or frightening as their evil counterparts.

Obviously you can make the Taerans evil or place them in constructs. But the point of the Taerans as they stand is that when they have the power, they will start striking out at the forces of evil - though they may be just as frightening themselves.

[Edit] Just to clarify another point: The orbs themselves do not actively choose to destroy the soul! The bearer chooses to implant the orb, and as long as the orb remains implanted, the transformation is automatic. The orbs are used to volunteers carrying the orbs, so again, it's not something they would think about: the bearer chose to make the sacrifice for society. So certainly, the creation of the orbs in the first place could be seen as evil - creating artifacts that would have to destroy souls to serve their intended function - but the paladin does not choose to destroy the soul of his bearer. Now, if the Taeran paladin discovers that the soul is destroyed (like I said, I see no reason to assume he'd know) and that the victim is unwilling, perhaps, as a paladin, he would be driven to try to find a way to help the host remove the orb - possibly coming into conflict with Taerans of other classes who are more willing to accept the one act of evil in the name of good.

 

[green slime]

Good points Hellcow.

Yet, in all their wisdom and morality, why do the Taerans not debate the effect their possessing bodies has on the soul of the possessed? Given the magnitude of their power, why are they unable to ascertain the effects? In a campaign where this is impossible to discover, there would surely be a huge debate? In a standard DnD environment, with the ability to speak to the souls of deceased this would be more obvious? Perhaps it is assumed the soul is absorbed into the metaconsciousness of the orb... This would mean that possessing the body of an evil person runs the risk of the evil person's soul contaminating the orb.

 

[Enkhidu]

...Furthermore, nothing specifies that the Taerans know that the souls are destroyed. The soul is eventually pushed from the body - but in Kel Taera, no one would ever have tried to remove an orb and recover the original soul. So it's quite possible that the Taerans themselves assume that the souls of their hosts are passing on to a well-deserved rest...

This assumption is the one I would make. These heroes of old don't really know/understand what happens to the volunteers (and I think that the "volunteers" would be just as important to the CG Taerans as anything else - I've always though CG takes freedom of choice as seriously as life itself).

Now once the Taerans become aware of the damage their continued existence can cause - now that would be interesting. I figure you could get lots of rping milage out of that situation and its aftermath (and the eventual fall of at least a some of the heroes).

 

[Hellcow]

In a standard DnD environment, with the ability to speak to the souls of deceased this would be more obvious?

Well, bear in mind that speak with dead doesn't actually put you in contact with the soul of the deceased - from the PHB, "it instead draws on the imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse." Which raises the curious question of whether you could use speak with dead on the living body of someone whose soul has been supplanted by the orb.

Perhaps it is assumed the soul is absorbed into the metaconsciousness of the orb...

Actually, I'd guess that this is exactly what they believe (and might actually be the case). Once the soul of the orb assumes control, it has completely subsumed the host soul, and the host soul cannot be separated from it or recovered. But it may, in some metaphysical sense, still be part of the orb's soul. For the Taerans, this would be seen as an honor and strengthen the view of the orbs as the heroes of the culture - they contain both the spirits of the greatest heroes, and those of the noble people who have sacrificed their lives to allow the orbs to continue to serve Kel Taera.

 

[green slime]

I was thinking more along the lines of Commune which could provide information as to the fate of the absorbed souls (destroyed, consumed, merged, baked, fried....)