Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 1811599" data-attributes="member: 5171">Of course, reveal.&nbsp; If you dance around enough, you can work the moral relativism pitch enough to make a case for just about anything.&nbsp; I'm not saying there isn't a line.&nbsp; I'm not saying that the line isn't fuzzy.&nbsp; I'm not saying that there isn't gray territory.&nbsp; I am saying that based on what we have here, this guy's actions are firmly on the &quot;Evil&quot; side of that line.&nbsp; Not as evil as murder, not as evil as rape, not as evil as selling your children into slavery, no.&nbsp; But on the evil side, yes.He robbed innocent people, taking the opportunity to do so specifically because his comrades were unconscious (and possibly not knowing whether they were unconscious or dying -- we're unclear on character knowledge here).&nbsp; He is not trying to save his starving family, from what we understand here.&nbsp; He does not have massive extenuating circumstances that can create gray room.&nbsp; His character concept was &quot;sneaky and greedy&quot;, and he is choosing to follow through on that concept by stealing from innocent people.By the same logic, I could say that my character concept was &quot;bloodthirsty and short-tempered&quot;, and then it doesn't really affect my alignment if I get angry and kill a man who didn't get out of my way fast enough.&nbsp; That'd just be Neutral, then, right?From an alignment perspective, he's acting evil -- as I said, not murderously evil, but evil -- which is fine in an evil game, heck, fine in an antihero-neutral game, but not good if what the game called for was heroes (which it seems to have done, based on the paladin in the party).&nbsp; From a gaming perspective, he just dropped to the bottom of my &quot;people to help in combat&quot; list, since I know that he's gonna wander off and steal things from innocent people while I'm lying on the ground bleeding.Bad decisions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="takyris, post: 1811599, member: 5171"] Of course, reveal. If you dance around enough, you can work the moral relativism pitch enough to make a case for just about anything. I'm not saying there isn't a line. I'm not saying that the line isn't fuzzy. I'm not saying that there isn't gray territory. I [b]am[/b] saying that based on what we have here, this guy's actions are firmly on the "Evil" side of that line. Not as evil as murder, not as evil as rape, not as evil as selling your children into slavery, no. But on the evil side, yes. He robbed innocent people, taking the opportunity to do so specifically because his comrades were unconscious (and possibly not knowing whether they were unconscious or dying -- we're unclear on character knowledge here). He is not trying to save his starving family, from what we understand here. He does not have massive extenuating circumstances that can create gray room. His character concept was "sneaky and greedy", and he is choosing to follow through on that concept by stealing from innocent people. By the same logic, I could say that my character concept was "bloodthirsty and short-tempered", and then it doesn't really affect my alignment if I get angry and kill a man who didn't get out of my way fast enough. That'd just be Neutral, then, right? From an alignment perspective, he's acting evil -- as I said, not murderously evil, but evil -- which is fine in an evil game, heck, fine in an antihero-neutral game, but not good if what the game called for was heroes (which it seems to have done, based on the paladin in the party). From a gaming perspective, he just dropped to the bottom of my "people to help in combat" list, since I know that he's gonna wander off and steal things from innocent people while I'm lying on the ground bleeding. Bad decisions. [/QUOTE]

Verification