IanB said:
I completely, 100% agree with the disagreement. I think it is entirely possible for an evil character to *never* commit an overtly evil act. Motivation and philosophy are important too.
If an evil creature never performs evil acts or a good creature never performs good acts, how can they claim to be evil or good respectively?
A good PC who never does a Good act is really being played neutrally:
Neutral, “Undecided”: A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil—after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.
That's the difference between good and neutral.
Good is committed to upholding good. Neutral is not. If a PC does not perform actions to help others and uphold good, then that PC is not committed to Good. He merely thinks that good is better than evil. He is still neutral, not truly good.
“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
That's part of the definition of good in the game system. If one plays his PC without helping others, he is not good.
“Evil” implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
That's part of the definition of evil in the game system. If one plays his PC without harming others, he is not evil.
Lawful Good, “Crusader”: A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.
...
Neutral Good, “Benefactor”: A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them.
...
Chaotic Good, “Rebel”: A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he’s kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.
You'll note that these say "acts" or "does", not "thinks". Philosophy comes into it, but actions is a major part of it and cannot be just dropped on the floor.
A kind and benevolent PC who helps others is not LE and a PC who never helps others is not altruistic and good.
I really think that because the game system does not have a lot of solid rules about alignment and how it affects game elements (outside of a few spells), that people tend to blow it off as a non-serious aspect of their character.
To me, like other character attributes, it helps define the character.
