Law chaos and honesty in the Savage Tide (no spoilers)

[Kahuna Burger]

In our Savage Tide game, we are sailing the high seas and one character, who is of a nautical persuasion, is officially the captain of our ship. Now my character, who is quite chaotic, sees this merely as a coordinating position of "the person who will make the ship go efficiently and avoid confusion in ship related emergencies." But he convinced the party that we needed to maintain a social fiction with the passengers and crew that he is The Captain, with the nice private cabin, an inflated treasure share (which we have agreed to privately pool and distibute evenly) and various social heirarchy perks.

This has slowly started to wear on my character. She is about to privately inform the first mate (who the captain unilaterally exempted from a screening the party had agreed on for everyone) that the captain is not a higher authority over the rest of the party and that she needs to know and accept that to remain in such a sensitive position.

But the interesting thing about this is, the "captain" is Lawful and is maintaining an elaborate charade of lying to multiple people for very lawful reason of wanting to maintain a heirarchy that tradition requires. My character is Chaotic and is wanting to just tell everyone the truth and let them cope with it or work on another ship. It seems to contrast a little with the stereotypical allignment assumption that law is truthful and chaos more likely to lie.

Is lawfulness actually more honest, or just more likely to maintain social falsehoods to prop up traditions rather than tell personal lies for personal reasons?

 

[sckeener]

LAW VS. CHAOS
Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.
“Law” implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closemindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
​

He might be breaking one aspect of Law, but is he keeping the rest? If so, I'd say he is more lawful than anything else. Is it lawful to lie for one's king or for the group? It'd say so as long as the end goal is a lawful one.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

He might be breaking one aspect of Law, but is he keeping the rest? If so, I'd say he is more lawful than anything else. Is it lawful to lie for one's king or for the group? It'd say so as long as the end goal is a lawful one.

er, perhaps I wasn't clear. I think he is being completely lawful. What he is not being is honest, which is not really the same thing as "keeping your word" but often rolled in with it in discussions.

 

[Umbran]

Is lawfulness actually more honest, or just more likely to maintain social falsehoods to prop up traditions rather than tell personal lies for personal reasons?

Is he maintaining a social falsehood to prop up a tradition, or is he working on establishing a social truth by slowly establishing traditions? Possession being nine-tenths of the law: he possesses the title, the perks, and the appearance of the office to all but a select few. Is this a lie, or is it merely a process of establishing that he is, in fact, the Captain after all?

 

[helium3]

Ships don't sail very well when run by committee.

 

[el-remmen]

This is just the kind of situation and conflict I love to explore in my games.

 

[Quartz]

Intra-party conflict is always bad. Further, it's often happenned that the captain of the ship is not the senior person on board, but the captain's word is the final one.

 

[sckeener]

er, perhaps I wasn't clear. I think he is being completely lawful. What he is not being is honest, which is not really the same thing as "keeping your word" but often rolled in with it in discussions.

The part I 'spoilered' out was telling the truth is part of lawful per RAW.

I agree with Umbran. It sounds like to only a few people, the party, that the captain is living a lie. To everyone else he is the captain.

 

[painandgreed]

Is he maintaining a social falsehood to prop up a tradition, or is he working on establishing a social truth by slowly establishing traditions? Possession being nine-tenths of the law: he possesses the title, the perks, and the appearance of the office to all but a select few. Is this a lie, or is it merely a process of establishing that he is, in fact, the Captain after all?

We'll see once the chaotic character flips him the bird infront of the crew and see if he has him disciplined or not.

 

[Celebrim]

Is he maintaining a social falsehood to prop up a tradition, or is he working on establishing a social truth by slowly establishing traditions? Possession being nine-tenths of the law: he possesses the title, the perks, and the appearance of the office to all but a select few. Is this a lie, or is it merely a process of establishing that he is, in fact, the Captain after all?

Quite.

I can't really answer the question without knowing the prevailing social and legal traditions of the world. But, at least at see, I agree that the person who publically looked the part of Captain would be percieved by everyone on the ship as being the Captain in legal fact, and hense having autocratic authority over the ship for as long as he holds the position.

Now, a ship needs a Captain. Even Pirates recognized that. The legal real question here is from what does the Captain derive his authority, and in particular in this case since it is a private vessel that boils down to "Does 'the Captain' own the ship?" Because if the Captain does not own the ship, and this is made clear, then the owner of the ship (in this case, I would presume collectively the PC party), can dispose 'the Captain' pretty much at will (though if 'the Captain' is popular and the party does this in an emergency situation, expect a mutiny from the crew).

I'm not even sure that 'the Captain' is lying to the crew when he acts the part of 'the Captain'. There isn't very much difference from acting the part of the Captain and actually being the captain provided someone else doesn't have a legal claim on the title. The only lying going on her might be to the party, who he feels the need to say, "Well, you know, when I say that I'm the Captain, I'm not saying that I'm 'the Captain'.". Or perhaps that 'the Captain' is lying about also being the owner of the ship?

If the legal ownership of the ship isn't clear - that is to say papers are not on board -then I would expect at this point 'the Captain' has a pretty strong circumstantial bonus to a bluff check that the ship is in fact his. Of course, this might not matter for a hill of beans if he arrives in a foreign port of call and has no documentation to prove he's anything but a pirate...

And if 'the Captain' in legal fact has his name on the paper that grants ownership of the vessel, then he's pretty much 'the Captain' in the eyes of the law.

If said Captain orders you flogged, the owners could hold an emergency meeting to remove him from the post, but otherwise - assuming the world's 'common law of the sea' recognizes the right of the captain's of vessels to flog the crew (which it might not except in the case of commissed captains aboard military vessels) - then you get flogged.