How would you classify "Good by any means neccessary"

[delericho]

I'd say NOT torturing two people and letting millions die because of it is pretty fricking evil.

Only if you take moral responsibility for the actions of others. Which is a very quick way to burn out and madness.

Basically, you do what you can to stop the million deaths, but if you fail, or if you come to a line you can't cross, then that's it - the responsibility for all those deaths lies with the person who caused them, not the person who couldn't stop them.

 

[Slife]

Only if you take moral responsibility for the actions of others. Which is a very quick way to burn out and madness.

Basically, you do what you can to stop the million deaths, but if you fail, or if you come to a line you can't cross, then that's it - the responsibility for all those deaths lies with the person who caused them, not the person who couldn't stop them.

QFT

 

[I'm A Banana]

Only if you take moral responsibility for the actions of others. Which is a very quick way to burn out and madness.

Basically, you do what you can to stop the million deaths, but if you fail, or if you come to a line you can't cross, then that's it - the responsibility for all those deaths lies with the person who caused them, not the person who couldn't stop them.

QFT * 2.

"Preserving Life by Any Means Nessecary" quickly gets you slapped with what some people would identify as Anti-Villain: you have good intentions, but you're doing horrible, soul-destroying things to achieve them. You may want to save a million people, but unless you respect the life of your enemy, you can't save a million people. Kind of like, you may be telling your girl the truth when you say "I Love You," but unless you also tell her the truth when you're, say, talking about past relationships, you're picking and choosing when to apply your morality, and such relativism has no place in D&D morality.

 

[Jim Hague]

I believe the quote we're lloking for here is:

"What profiteth a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul?"

 

[Kristivas]

I've seen a scenario about torture played out before, but it was kinda disturbing. One of the group had a son that was kidnapped. He was buried alive, but we caught him. We had to decide wether or not to torture him to find out where the boy was in time, because there was no other way he would talk.

Luckily, there was no paladin in the group. You can do some messed up stuff to someone as long as there's a cleric to cast cure light wounds on them.

Had there been a paladin in the group, I'm not sure what would've happened. The character who was the kid's Father would have done the deed, as I think would I. Even the cleric (NG) helped (by keeping the guy alive, not with the actual pain) and didn't lose her spells or any such, though she did repent and whatnot afterward.

I guess we woulda had to KO the paladin to get it done.

 

[Umbran]

Okay, somewhere here I am failing to understand....

I said "Honorable = Lawful".

I'd disagree with that, just based on features of D&D.

...snip...

Heck, you can even find this:

3.5 PHB p 104.

The first words are, "'Law' implies honor..." Kinda proves my point. What's to disagree there? Law can also imply other things at the same time, but honor is among them.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The moral equation Honorable = Lawful has 3 possible meanings:

1) All Honorable acts are Lawful
or
2) All Lawful acts are Honorable
or
3) Both 1 and 2, above.

Yet clearly, Lawfulness can also stand for acts that are not at all honorable- the close mindedness and other negative attributes listed in the same paragraph. If law can stand for both Honorable and dishonorable acts or attributes, then the equation Honorable = Lawful isn't true. There is significant overlap, but not identity.

Furthermore, there are chaotic acts that can be honorable. A person who breaks into a house to free the slaves in a country where slavery is legal has broken the law, but has performed an honorable act. Thus, because there are acts that are chaotic and honorable, again the equating of Honor & Law fails.

IOW, if you drew a Venn diagram with one circle being "Lawful acts" and another "Chaotic acts"-and heck, lets even throw in "Neutral acts"- then drew another circle depicting "Honorable acts," that last circle would have to overlap the other 3. If "Honorable = Lawful" were a true equation, Honor and Law would have 100% overlap (one would be entirely encircled by the other- position 1 or 2 above) or identity- both circles would be the exact same size- position 3, above).

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The Assassin from Serenity sounds like the kinda 'good' you're talking about. I read the Shadowbane Inquisitor and this guy wanted to play one. The abilities of a paladin, with the freedom to be an evil jackass (as aside from a L-Stupid jackass)? No way. I allowed the class, without the freedom to commit evil.

One of the examples of the Shadowbane Inquisitor was to destroy an entire village because a demon is hiding there. What the hell kinda paladin is that?

The shadowbane inquisitor is the kind of "paladin" that gets the prereqs to blackguard as a bonus feat and a special ability that lets him keep his inquisitor abilities even if he turns to evil and becomes a blackguard. So, the answer is, "the kind of paladin who is on the way to being a blackguard."

 

[Asmor]

Consider the highly contrived situation of someone committing an evil act on an innocent person in order to save thousands of other innocents. It's my contention that it is a selfish act to NOT do the evil act, and not doing the evil thing is evil itself.

Why is it a selfish act? Because the reason you don't want to do it is because...

*It's a damning act and would sentence you to eternal damnation.
*You couldn't live with yourself afterwards.
*Etc.

And therefore, you're being selfish by not doing it. You can make the greatest sacrifice to save the others.

Discuss.

 

[Mr. Wilson]

I'd peg the characters somewhere in the N-LN-LE area depending on how it was carried out, the players reasoning, and my gut feeling.

Alignment is really hard to peg anyways, since everyone approaches it with their own views on the matter.