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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Frostmarrow" data-source="post: 6733482" data-attributes="member: 1122">From the words of a 13th century king, famous for prohibiting his soldiers from plundering the peasants' barns at will.The law is established and instituted to the guidance of all people, both rich and poor, in the distinction between right and wrong. The law shall be observed and kept to protect the poor, ensure peace to the peaceful, but to the violent bring chastisement and fear. The law shall honor the just and wise, but correct the unjust and unwise. Were all people just, then no law should be required. The country shall be built with law and not with acts of violence. For all shall be well with the country when the law is followed.How can a character be evil if the character believes in and lives by the above? A LE character could seek protection from the law and would probably not use direct violence by his own hand.(Oh, Bats brings chastisement and fear to the violent. Huh.)So let's say the law opposes violence. Not all kinds of violence of course. Violence that is part of upholding the law, self protection, war, etc is not opposed by law. But Law is against violence as a means of settling what is right.If a character is shortchanged at the market a chaotic character is more likely to settle the score with the use of violence there and then whereas a lawful character would seek to settle the score in other ways.Also a lawful character has a need to frame his violence by some sort of procedure or rules. A lawful charater needs to rationalize his violence where a chaotic character doesn't. So a duelist is probably lawful and a thug chaotic.So Indiana Jones when he guns down a sword-wielding challenger shows his chaotic side. When Feyd Rautha enters a knife duel with Paul Muad'dib he is lawful (and evil with his secretly poisoned blade).Darth Vader will fight in duels and he will kill wantonly. Interestingly Vader foregoes personally using violence even when he can (boarding the Tantive IV), capturing Han at Bespin), which goes to show he isn't chaotic. Han Solo on the other hand draws and shoots at Vader without a moments notice.I guess my point is: A lawful character will need a recognised justification to use violence.</blockquote>

Verification