Moral questions of a D&D world...

[Sejs]

No, it is immoral, period. Truly Good characters would demand the perpetrator's gonads be char-broiled. Evil characters would be claiming "the only thing he did wrong was get caught".

In D&D, morality is absolute, at least as long as alignments are not abolished.

Counterpoint: Actions determine alignment, not the other way around. Alignment doesn't state what you can and cannot do - your alignment is a reflection of the tendancies the characters actions take.

A character is a person. People arn't issued a pamphlet that says "So you've decided to be Lawful Neutral." and list a set of behavior that they can and cannot partake of. People don't get them in the real world, likewise they don't get them in D&D.

 

[Hypersmurf]

a king is killed, and his brother became king. Later, the king is raised. So... is he still the king?

The new king didn't think so.

This is addressed in a SF setting in both Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan saga (hypothetically), and David Weber's Honor Harrington series (practically).

In the Vorkosigan book A Civil Campaign,

Spoiler

it's known that the sister of a dead Count has travelled to Beta Colony, which specialises in advanced medical practices. One of the theories proposed as to her possible intentions is that she's off to have her brother cloned, so he can 'inherit' the Countship, with herself declared legal guardian, thus preventing her nasty male cousin - technically her brother's heir, given that females can't inherit - from taking the position.

In actuality, she's off to make herself eligible to inherit...

And in the Harrington series,

Spoiler

Countess Harrington is believed dead, and her title passes to her cousin Devon. Given that her seat in the House of Lords was never confirmed, the Queen has to throw her weight around a little to ensure that the cousin is seated. And so, when Honor shows up alive a coupe of years later, the Queen is loathe to have Devon unconfirmed as the Earl... so she sidesteps the issue by leaving Devon as Earl Harrington, and making Honor a Duchess instead.

But if different characters had been involved - if, for example, someone like an Earl North Hollow had shown alive up to find his brother bearing his title - things might not have been resolved quite so amicably...

In some ways, it's like the situation that might have arisen had Tom Hanks' character married Helen Hunt's character at the start of Cast Away.

Spoiler

When he comes back, and is declared no-longer-legally-dead, is he still married? Is her second marriage valid? Is she technically an accidental bigamist?

Did his legal death terminate the legal marriage, and did his legal resurrection fail to reinstate it?

-Hyp.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

"Power is the greatest aphrodisiac." -- Kissinger

Power will lead to lots of dates, even if you have a low Charisma. I don't think he'd need to use Charm Person.

-- N

Yeah, us old fogeys remember Henry Kissinger with a different beautiful woman on each arm all the time. Do you really think they were attracted to him for his body?

 

[evileeyore]

Charm Person is not the Ruffies of D&D worlds. CP is the alcohol of the D&D World.

Dominate is the Ruffies.

That aside. On alignment, The SRD:

ALIGNMENT
A creature’s general moral and personal attitudes are represented by its alignment: lawful good, neutral good, chaotic good, lawful neutral, neutral, chaotic neutral, lawful evil, neutral evil, or chaotic evil.
Alignment is a tool for developing your character’s identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character. Each alignment represents a broad range of personality types or personal philosophies, so two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other. In addition, few people are completely consistent.

Thus Alignments are not 'inflexible' and are really meant as guidelines. (Go ahead and 'Rule Zero' this in your campaigns all you like.)

Morality is defined by Society, or those in Power over said Society.


TTFN

EvilE

 

[Dogbrain]

No, they're not. The only characters for whom alignment is an absolute are for those such as paladins.

The next time you respond to a message I write, read it first. I did not say that a character's alignment is absolute. I said that the concept of alignment reflects a setting that requires an absolute morality.

The "Good" that qualifies for the "alignment" of "Good" is absolute. If a person does enough "Evil" things, that person enters the "Evil" alignment. However if Good (moral) and Evil (immoral) are relative and not absolute, it is not possible for a person who manages to relativistically rationalize things to ever be Evil.

From a D&D standpoint, such a person is most likely extremely Evil, always with an excuse as to why raping and slaughtering this particular batch of virgins is actually a "Good" act and not an "Evil" act.

 

[Dogbrain]

"Power is the greatest aphrodisiac." -- Kissinger

Power will lead to lots of dates, even if you have a low Charisma. I don't think he'd need to use Charm Person.

Stinky McSmelly the Archmage will always be able to get a date--but only so long as he's an Archmage. If he ever becomes plain old Stinky McSmelly, his prospects will dwindle as the gold-diggers search for other prey.

 

[evileeyore]

This is addressed in a SF setting in both Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan saga (hypothetically), and David Weber's Honor Harrington series (practically).

In the Vorkosigan book A Civil Campaign,

Spoiler

it's known that the sister of a dead Count has travelled to Beta Colony, which specialises in advanced medical practices. One of the theories proposed as to her possible intentions is that she's off to have her brother cloned, so he can 'inherit' the Countship, with herself declared legal guardian, thus preventing her nasty male cousin - technically her brother's heir, given that females can't inherit - from taking the position.

In actuality, she's off to make herself eligible to inherit...

-Hyp.

Yeah and the little lord Vorkosigan has his own problems

Spoiler

with his clone/brother, as by Betan Law the clone is his legal heir, but by Barrayaran law, ummm, clones aren't covered or even humans seperate from the original. Miles could kill Mark (the clone) with his bare hands in front of a courtroom of witnesses and legally be in the right. I wonder if the reverse would be true. Me pictures Mark pinning Miles down, choking the life from him, shouting "Stop killing yourself! Stop killing yourself!" Haha.

TTFN---EvilE

 

[Deadguy]

Maybe not. Imperial Rome didn't have a law of succession. England didn't get one until the Act of Settlement about 1700.

Let's look at England, shall we?

The kingdom was elective until 1066.

1 In 1066, William the Bastard siezed the throne, while the lawful king Edgar was still alive.

In fairness, the general mood of England was that Harold was going to be the successor, by force of arms and weight of personality. Plus his victory at Stamford Bridge proved his skill. Then again, Harold had sworn to support William in a claim to the English throne; on the other hand, that oath was de facto extracted under duress whilst Harold was William's 'guest'. Just showing that real life is even more complex than most of the stories we imagine!

2. When William died, his son Willilam Rufus seized the throne, though the heir was his brother Robert.

Of course, in strictness Robert was promised the senior appointment of Duke of Normandy, and William Rufus would owe him fealty for England. It didn't work out that way though, as William II demonstrated the power of holding a powerful England...

I find this one useful as a reminder that our neat little prepackaged idea of the importance of things is distorted: a Duchy can be more valuable and powerful than a Kingdom, and a King can be a very weak man, depending upon the basis of his authority.

7. When Richard I died, his brother John became king. I think Arthur was dead by then, but I'm not sure.

Actually Arthur was still alive. For a while there was a tense standoff, with Norman landholders backing Arthur, and the English ones John (actually more complex than that, but I am sure you get the idea). John's strength was that he managed to seize the English treasury before Arthur did (imagine it - the King's wealth followed him around, rather than sitting in some dungeon!) With this wealth John was able to buy support... never underestimate the value of money even in these early times!

8. When John died, his son Henry became king, the first due succession of an eldest son to his father according to the supposed hereditary principle.

This largely because of the support of one of England's most powerful nobles and highly-regarded warrior, William Marshall. I like this story because it feels most like a classic D&D story straight out of the Forgotten Realms - William Marshall can be rendered as an almost paladinic figure of nobility... right up until you realise that he was a calculating landholder who worked out he had more to gain from maintaining the child Henry III in power rather than cutting a deal with the Dauphin and King of France! Borrowing ideas like these can be very helpful to get a more 'realistic' feel to succession politics!

11. Edward II was deposed, and his infant son Edward became king.

And I recommend people look up what happened to Edward II! It's messy, and a curious tribute to the inventiveness of Edward's wife and fellow plotters!

I don't think the addition of Resurrections would make tthis simpler.

Quite! As is often the case, real life is botha good guide for DMs and an indicator of how messy things might be. It does show, however that it is by no means certian that a ruler will automatically be resurrected by his grieving heir; human nature being what it is, it might well be the case that the body is destroyed and royal preroagtive exercised to forbid the resurrection of a person who has gone on to his reward!

 

[Woas]

IIRC, the appropriate term is "weregild".

'Weregeld' is german and comes from the germanic tribes of the Roman times. And it worked the other way. If you challenged someone in a 'sanctioned' duel (meaning you didn't jump out of the woods and ambush them but both agreed to a duel) and harmed them in any way, you recieved awards of fixed price. An arm might be several hens, some teeth might be a buddle of firewood, etc.

 

[Nifft]

Stinky McSmelly the Archmage will always be able to get a date--but only so long as he's an Archmage. If he ever becomes plain old Stinky McSmelly, his prospects will dwindle as the gold-diggers search for other prey.

Yep -- just like Dumbo McDumbell will only be able to get dates while he's in good shape.

Many people have "schticks". Magical power is not much different than muscles & strength or wealth & political power... different type of power, really. Charisma is just "personality power", so it's no more "honest" than any of the other types.

-- N