Role-Playing vs. Alignment Conflict

[Nifft]

IMC, goblinoids are unrepentable evil. They are the product of demonic magic twisting the earth's own fey for a thousand years.

Killing the Damned is A-OK in my world.

Ogres, on the other hand, are Free. They have free will. Killing them is only sometimes okay.

I recommend that you figure out your world's morality -- what's black-n-white, what's shades-of-grey. If your PCs have only ever seen goblins in black-n-white morality contexts, it's unfair to spring shades-of-grey moral situations on them, unless you've previously spelled out that they can be shades-of-grey.

My campaign uses the terms "Damned Races" and "Free Races". Feel free to mooch them.

-- N

 

[Wippit Guud]

'Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to HATE..."


Talk to Yoda for all your alignment quandries... hate shouldn't be a reason for a lawful good character to kill.

 

[Desdichado]

LG does not mean militant and unforgiving. In fact, lawful good characters should show a degree of humility, a firm commitment to order and through that order, a firm commitment to good.

Not necessarily. That's hardly the last word on LG.

 

[Haradim]

Such a mindset would inevitably drag one away from Good in my games, though it would depend just how often Goblins (or whatever) appear and are treated in such a fashion.

Odds are, treatment as you defined would be enough to cause a change of alignment after only a couple of such encounters.

In general, my only exception to this approach is outsiders. There is no requirement to treat a balor kindly, though one may score extra points if they treat one in a Good manner without being foolish (like taking one prisoner and then releasing it because they 'believe it can turn'...not that that's impossible, but....).

 

[deltadave]

Ask yourself what he could have done otherwise? it may have been a mercy to kill them from one point of view... Couldn't turn them loose and leaving them to starve could be torture.

On the other hand, what consequence are you going to have occur? if you as DM feel that unreasoning hatred of goblins is un LG then maybe you could start describing the character as consumed by hate to NPC's that he runs into and have them react appropriately (rumors get around).

 

[Umbran]

... I don't believe that a Lawful Good character would just go up and slaughter his enemies if they were totally helpless and tied to a chain. Would you say that an Alignment violation has occurred or is this acceptable behavior for a Lawful Good character given his hatred of goblins?

Well, I'll echo the statements of others - actions cause alignment, alignment does not cause actions. Alignment is the long term average of behavior and motivations. It is not a matter of "violation" unless he's a paladin or has other alignment restrictions.

As to if it's "acceptable". Well, let's see. He says the character hates goblins. Always has. Sounds like he's following a personal rule or plan, and doing so strictly. That sounds lawful enough to me, especially if goblins are not counted among the citizenry protected by the local laws.

As to it being good or not. Well, that depends on the world and situation. If, as far as the character knows, all goblins are outright evil wicked, nasty things that eat children in the night when they can get 'em, then I don't expect the dwarf has done an evil act.

 

[swrushing]

The first rule of alignment is it means different things to different people, so, if you and he are of differing opinions, you need to sit down and explain what LG means in your world. As you do this, i would also emphasize that since this event happened before you had this discussion it will be ignored.

You don't want him to feel hung over something before you made it clear.

Now, in my games, i hardl;y use alignment. I explain my number one rule and number two rule...

1. Play your character, not your "alignment".
2. Alignment is DERIVED from the character's actions. Alignment does not DRIVE the character's actions.

In other words, run the "person" you imagine and let me fret the alignment issues.

So i would not have an issue with the character's actions. If he kept repeating it, I might reduce him to LN after a time but for a fighter that would hardly be noticeable. I would put him in a few situations where mercy could be chosen, and make it obvious, and see what he chooses. But if he persisted i would simply get eventually to the point of saying "you are more neutral than good" and go from there.

However, what you do have to ask yourself as Gm when you want to bring alignment up is "what would be the right choice for the alignment?" What should he have done with the goblin prisoners? Should he have gathered them up and hauled them back to town for some trial? Would that be a fair trial or would the goblins have been summarily killed? Was he on some quest or mission at the time and should he have abandoned it for the sake of these goblins? Is the outright killing of goblins c0onsidered Ok and lawful or do people routinely capture them and haul them back to town?

have the answers thought out before you make an alignment issue an issue.

Anyway, from a story perspective, having a bigotted pc is great fodder. you can slowly work him into a circumstance where he needs a goblin for info or assistance and take time to have this goblin try and earn his trust. Eventually, you might get the character to deal with the conflict of hating "all goblins" but finding a decent one.

Its not something i would try and "rule out" by dint of vaguely worded alignment definitions.

 

[Sejs]

*nod* What Swrushing said.

Anyway, look at it from the character's perspective: as far as the dwarf is concerned, Goblins are wicked, deceitful, evil, baby stealing, well poisoning monsters and the only reward you'd get out of one for freeing it would be a knife between the shoulders as soon as your back is turned. Just because someone chained a couple up doens't make them innocent all of a sudden. It just makes them helpless - not something you'd laud about in tales of heroic battle, but putting the little buggers down is still a good thing to do. Means they won't go stealing someone's baby or poisoning some town well later on down the line.


Just as an example, mind you - I've got no idea what the dwarf's player actually thinks on the matter.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It depends.

According to the MM, Goblins are not irrepentably evil -- they can change algnment, and they're not nessecarily outcast random insane one-in-a-million chances if they do.

But barring that, there is the issue of motive. Ask the player why his character did what he did. If it was hatred, pure and simple, that seems to be one of the defining characteristics of evil, and I might adjust his alignment to suit it.

But there could be more complex reasons. For instance, he knew that if he freed them they'd just die anyway. Or they had been captured and held prisoner for doing a wicked deed, and showed no desire to repent. Or maybe it was a mercy killing, because they were too starved to survive if left to their own devices, and he knew no one would care for them....

There's a lot of reasons that could be described as LG in this circumstance. But if it is, indeed, motivated by hatred, then the dwarf is probably LN at best. Hatred is not something that is welcome in the hearts of the holy, in D&D.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

You know, I think Sejs had it right. The dwarf is probably firm-set in his belief that if he turned those goblins loose, he'd be responsible for the next baby they ate or the next well they poisoned.

I don't think that makes it a good act-- I could believe the same thing about Celestials, for instance.

But it does make the act morally consistent with the character's beliefs and prior actions.

If this came up frequently, it'd be cause for him to become a Lawful Neutral. On the other hand, as long as he's a Dwarf, and as long as he hates goblins, and as long as he doesn't have incontrivertible proof that the goblins he's killing are actually Good, it'll never make him Evil.

I think Kamikzae Midget is off-base-- certainly, a single incident like this isn't enough to change his alignment, and racism isn't enough to rule out a Good alignment, though it's certainly a character flaw that can lead to evil.

There's also a difference between being merely Lawful Good and being "holy".