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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7746202" data-attributes="member: 6683613">If you're just saying that the people who enforce the law expect them to follow it and might arrest them if they don't, then sure, that's true of every character. But I'm not sure how that proves anything. As you say, characters of differing alignments can feel differently about following the law, and there's nothing to indicate that a lawful good character should feel obliged to follow a law that is not good. Not to keep beating a dead horse, but their convictions are not neutral on the whole "is it good?" question.It's a bit of both, really. A character decides what ideals to espouse and what actions to perform. A paladin, in particular, chooses to swear an oath to behave in a specific way. That's what I mean by alignment selection. But the label we give the character's ideals and actions is from us, the players. A character who works as a professional assassin for a criminal cartel but sees themselves as "basically good"... isn't.Again, paladins swear an explicit oath. Other characters who follow a higher law rather than the laws of society, like archetypical monks for instance, might evince their lawfulness implicitly by acting in a rigorous and consistent manner.I don't even understand the question. Not all lawful good characters are paladins. Perhaps not all paladins are lawful good, but it's the lawful good ones who are relevant to this discussion. And certainly not all lawful good paladins behave the same way. Depending on the campaign setting, they may or may not all swear the same oath, but even those who do swear the same oath are different characters with different backgrounds, personalities, and outlooks.By virtue of all being lawful good paladins, however, they do share some common traits. They all frown upon butchering random people in dark alleys, to give a trivial example.Where do I come to the conclusion that they are in all cases to be considered lawful good? I have given no less than five cases in which they are not to be considered lawful good. Your choosing not to regard the morality of the laws is causing you to miss the point entirely.A paladin who follows and enforces the law is lawful good... if and only if the law is good.A paladin who follows and enforces the spirit of the law is lawful good... if and only if the spirit of the law is good.A paladin who ignores or breaks the law is lawful good... if and only if the law is not good.So if there is a law that abolishes slavery, then a paladin who follows and enforces it is lawful good, and an alleged paladin who ignores or breaks it is not lawful good. But if there is a law that allows slavery, then an alleged paladin who follows and enforces it is not lawful good, but a paladin who ignores or breaks it is lawful good.In short, lawful good = wants good laws. I am not sure what part of this is getting lost between me and you.</blockquote>

Verification