Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 862951" data-attributes="member: 463">I agree with your point.  The burglar example is what happens in Britain, where I live (Tony Martin case) - I'd characterise this as highly Lawful, since what happens is that murder is phrased as a crime against society and no exceptions are made for individual circumstances the way they are in a more individualist society like the USA.  I'd say the intent of the system is LG, the actual result may be a more CN to CE society since the message it sent encourages crime - I remember after that sentence, seemingly every little kid in my neighbourhood tried to 'hold up' the corner store!  I'm talking 8-10 year old demanding money from the shopkeepers right in front of my eyes.The second case is non-western - in this case the victim is not seen as relevant (has no rights), the initial crime is an honour crime against the family, with solution kept in-family.  Since the double victim is excluded from all rights on account of her gender, under PHB definitions this would be an Evil act, since it's aimed at maintaining group (family) honour I'd tend to see it as a Lawful-Evil system in PHB terms.Edit: in the Tony Martin case, some people characterised the result as excessive concern for the rights of the burglar who was killed (CG) as opposed to those of the defendant Martin, a farmer, who the police disliked.  Not having been in the courtroom I couldn't say.  Since the result encouraged crime (chaotic, probably evil) you could argue that this 'no exceptions to crime of murder' approach in the circumstances was CN at best.</blockquote>

Verification