Thoughts on the alignment of Assassins

[smootrk]

In the Forgotten Realms book Unapproachable East (and also reprinted in Complete Divine), there is the Black Flame Zealot, which allows for an essentially Neutral Divine Assassin. I think the PRC does a good job at making a Church enforcer.

 

[Nyeshet]

Consider this situation:

-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-

The PCs are offered a quest to slay a monster that has long troubled a town. They accept the quest and eventually return with the monster's head (or some other proof of success). They are rewarded for their great deed and later leave, continuing on their journey.

-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-*-|-

Now, to me this does not seem that different from an assassin that is offered a job, accepts it, and follows through with it. The core rules states that an assassin must be evil because it assumes the assassin will always accept the job - that is, that greed is the ultimate motivation. Yet other motivations can also exist: patriotism, a desire to aid others, etc.

Personally, I find it odd that a game based upon slaying creatures and gaining / taking loot would state that one who makes their livelihood in this manner is intrinsically Evil - or even utterly incapable of being good.

The assassin in the core rules is typically seen as part of some shadowy organization that will always accept any job they have a fair chance of succeeding in performing - irregardless of whom the target happens to be. Yet when I think of assassins I rarely imagine such a guild. Usually I imagine lone hitmen or government agents, the former often unknown except to those 'in the know' and who may accept or decline any offer based on their own (sometimes unpredictable) views. IF they decide to go along with it then they are probably going to request some percentage (at least a quarter, perhaps as much as three quarters, usually half) up front. The latter may be part of an official spy organization within the government, or it may be an elite team of 'special forces' or 'elite guards' that mete out 'justice' as their Lord / Senate / etc sees fit.

The 'shadowy organization' assassin guild bit always struck me as equivalent to a mercenary company, but one that works on an odd individual level or sends in a team - like, say, a party of 4-5 adventurers. In fact, I tend to see mercenary companies as the historical (and modern) equivalent of the 'typical' adventuring party (which, often, is not specifically and completely tied to a single lord or government, as might be expected of a group of knights, a privateer ship, etc).

Thus, I see no problem with having a 'good' assassin, but then I admit I rarely pay much attention to alignment. So long as the 'good' assassin is not in a situation where they are expected to take whatever job is given them, of course, (as would be the case in the instance of a guild member or even an agent for a non-good government) because then their alignment may find itself conflicted with their objective.

If the assassin is part of a guild or an agent for some lord, religion, etc, then it might be best to state that they can only be good if their organization is good, and that they must be within a step of their organization's true alignment. A LN government might hand out assignments that could stray into LE, so a LG assassin would eventually find their AL compromised, but if you follow those two rules above, then the assassin could only be LN, LE, or TN - none of which would be compromised by the occational LE job. Similarly, a NG organization would - by its nature - be quite unlikely to have Evil jobs for its assassins. The jobs may be of any good alignment or occationally a truly neutral alignment, but it won't be calling for a Harold-esque slaying of all children two or younger. Actually, it would be the type of organization that, hearing of such a plan in the works, would send out an assassin to slay the king prior to his making the plan a known command to his guards / army.

So, those are the rules I propose for an assassin that is part of an organization:

1) The assassin can only be good if the true alignment of the organization is Good.

(If the organization is publically known to be NG, but its true alignment is NN, then any assassins working for it cannot be Good, as sooner or later they are likely to get Evil leaning assignments.)

2) The assassin must be within one step of the alignment of their organization.

(The jobs an assassin is likely to get is probably going to be determined by a large degree by the true alignment of their organization. Thus their acts will draw them ever closer to their organizations' true alignment, presuming they fulfill their jobs.)

How do these work for you.

 

[Dioltach]

For a movie reference on a non-evil assassine, watch The Professional (Leon). He never kills woman, or children "it's against the rules". It's a great movie, if you get the chance you should watch.

Or The Big Hit with Mark Wahlberg: I very much doubt that anyone could consider his character evil.

 

[Berandor]

The assassin is a character that doesn't fight stuff and kill, but that murders people in their sleep or at their dinner table. As such, the predominant alignment for assassin – even those in a king's or a priest's employ – will be evil. However, IMC I've opened up to allow neutral assassins on the grounds of having those who must be convinced of the need of their talents, i.e. the king must somehow show him that the little duke must be assassinated, else a war will likely break out, or somesuch.

But good? The very act of killing silently (and not only sneaking, but killing, coup-de-gracing and death-attacking at sleeping targets, slipping lethal poison into wine etc.) make the assassin non-good.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, I love that movie too.

Note however, the description in the Lawful Evil alignment how they often have particular codes of conduct that "put them above other unprincipled villains". I'm not saying Leon was like that, but it could be another factor there.

I would say that Leon is perfectly Lawful Evil. He kills whomever he is told to kill, not because those he kills are a threat to anyone, but because he's been told to kill them (or deliver a message at least).

The difference with an adventuring party is that that big beast they are sent out to slay is an actual threat to the population. It is far closer to bounty hunting than assassination. However, in any case, the typical adventuring party is acting in such a way that they are protecting innocents by going out to do battle with the threat.

An assassin just kills people for money.

 

[Tonguez]

The difference with an adventuring party is that that big beast they are sent out to slay is an actual threat to the population. It is far closer to bounty hunting than assassination. However, in any case, the typical adventuring party is acting in such a way that they are protecting innocents by going out to do battle with the threat..

So if the PCs are sent to kill Dark Lord Necromancer who is threatening to invade the kingdom with his armies of darkness and do so by sneaking into his Castle and ramming a stake through his heart then this isn't assasination?

However IMC I don't use the assasin PrC so its all moot.

However I am wandering what alignment people would peg on Itto Ogami (of the Lone Wolf and Cub). He is an assasin and kills for money, I'd suggest he was LN ....

 

[Aus_Snow]

Could there be a neutral assassin that would just as soon kill an evil target? Or even a GOOD (gasp) assassin that will only kill evil targets?

Of course. I can't go beyond that (here) without stepping into forbidden territory. . . but yeah, there sure could be.

Has anyone ever used non-evil assassins in their game?

Yes. Quite often, really.

Has anyone ever let a player take the assassin prestige class without being evil?

I don't use that particular Assassin class. . . but if I did, I would.

 

[danzig138]

So the DMG says that to take the Assassin prestige class, the character must be evil. The argument to back that up would probably be that getting paid to kill people is an evil act, and that assassins use dishonorable methods such as poison.

Requirements
Special: The character must kill someone for no other reason than to join the assassins.

This is why the assassin prc is/must be evil.
Non-evil assassins? Maybe.
Good assassins? No. Killing people for money isn't good. Sneaking into the kitchen and poisoning King Bob's stew for God and Country isn't good. Doesn't mean it isn't necessary, just that it isn't good. That's why the world needs a/immoral folk. Someone to do the jobs that need doing, even when they're bad jobs.
And yes, if the adventurers are getting paid to go kill people (not monsters), they probably shouldn't have Good marked on their CRS.

 

[Storyteller01]

FFG has the Ossorus. It's a church sactioned good assassin whose PrC structure is nearly identical to the assassin. Swap out poison use, saves bonuses aganist poison, and hide in plain sight for turning undead and limited freedom of movement. There's also a differing spell list, bujt the spell per day progression is the same.


But to add to the conversation, think about police snipers. Unlike other officers who usually fire their weapons in the heat of defense, they sit on a roof top with crosshairs on their target. When they pull the trigger, it's a premeditated act that takes place when an order is given, and it's one the sniper gets paid to do. It is the planned killing of an individual through stealth to save the lives of others.

What alignment would the sniper be?

 

[Yalius]

What alignment would the sniper be?

He could be any alignment. The difference is, the person targeted by a police sniper most likely poses a direct and immediate danger to other people. Also, a sniper is usually the method of last resort for police. A military sniper, on the other hand, is most certainly not good, the closest he could be would be LN.

Second, a supposedly "good" assassin would have to be looked at very closely. Does he attempt to use nonlethal methods to accomplish an assignment? If not, and immediate lethal force is his preferred method, even if that is what he was ordered to do, then neither the assassin nor the organization that ordered the "hit" is good.

For someone to be good, both goals and methods have to be pretty much beyond reproach. Too many lapses for expediency, and you have a guy who is pretty darned neutral, although he might still believe he's good.