Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 3454424" data-attributes="member: 22424">IMC there is no distinction between real-world morality and in-game morality. If something is labelled Evil in the real-world, then it's just as Evil in-game. And if a character wishes to retain a Good alignment, he has to act accordingly.That said, I don't provide a clean black-and-white world. Characters, settings and situations are complex, and the PCs therefore have to deal with problems where it is not clear what is right and what is wrong. Unfortunately for Paladins in my games, the bad guys tend not to wear black hats, the good guys are not always entirely pure, and everyone has an agenda.(I do match that with a charitable view of character morality. If you make a mistake and trust the wrong person, then the setting might respond, but you won't get an alignment shift right away... you need a pattern of behaviour to change alignment. Also, you can't be 'accidentally' Evil. You need to consciously choose to perform Evil actions to become Evil. Of course, you might not recognise the act as Evil, but you do have to consciously choose to do it.)Not IMC. Slaughtering the women and children would be more likely to cause a fall from grace.Some or all of these can be found in some or all cultures in my setting. Those cultures are generally mistaken in their actions, but that doesn't prevent them holding them... just like in the real world. Whether their attitudes and actions are Evil or just a rather unpleasant Neutral depends on how far they take them.My campaign draws a clear line on this one: slavery is the very definition of Lawful Evil. Paladins are expected to not own slaves, and to oppose the practice of slavery where they encounter it. If this practice is a blight on an otherwise Good society, the Paladin must tread carefully, because he has to use Lawful means to try to persuade the culture to change. If it's a feature of an otherwise Evil society (as is more common), the Paladin is free to forment revolution, to change the entire structure at the top.Note that while I say that a Paladin is expected to oppose slavery, it does not follow that the Paladin must do so right now, or to the exclusion of other goals. If the Paladin is engaged in a desperate quest to destroy the artifact that will give the Dark Lord unending dominion, he's a bit busy to take on the local slave-trade. It's a battle for another day, and although he won't like doing it, he will have to leave it.(Caveat: there is a theoretical scenario where a person might sell himself into slavery, either as payment of his debts or as a punishment imposed by the judicial system. In this case, the slavery might not be considered Evil, probably depending on the treatment of the slave. This is one of those areas where things get murky. In such a case, the Paladin is entitled to follow his own course, as long as he does so consistently.)My players have never protested. If one did, I suspect my response would be that perhaps this isn't the game for him.I don't like the idea of not calling things that we consider to be Evil, Evil. Either these things are Evil, and should be recognised as such, or they are not, and we should adjust our thinking. And just because the vast majority of inhabitants of the setting consider something to be Good doesn't mean it is good - it can also mean that the vast majority of inhabitants of the world are deluded.So, while slavery exists in my world, and while the vast majority of inhabitants of my world consider it to be both okay and a facet of the status quo, that still doesn't make it anything other than Evil.</blockquote>

Verification