What is your alignment?
- Thread starter kdogg3403
- Start date
"kills, steals and betrays others to gain power." The definition of chaotic evil in the PHB. There isn't even room for debate.
Ryujin
Legend
Maybe it would be easier to analyse if the actions were broken down.
Theft - It could be argued that it's evil, but I tend to think of it as more selfish and lazy. There are occasions when it could be evil, as when stealing medicine that is known to be needed, to heal the sick in a village.
Watching the wagon get attacked, then killing whatever goblins survived - Certainly not a good act, but definitely expedient from a military standpoint. If your goal is to obtain something that is carried by the wagon then why have to fight TWO enemies in order to get it, when you could just pick up the pieces after they are done killing each other? Expedience isn't evil, per se.
Killing the teamster - First you have to put aside the concept that killing is evil, or else the characters commit evil on a daily basis. They gave him a chance to live. He refused to be swayed, and so he was killed. The manner in which this was performed was pretty straight forward, other than the incident in which the fighter had an attack of conscience. His death was expedient and only became necessary when he refused to co-operate. It wasn't frivolously done, nor was it done for mere sport.
Means and motive go a long way to determining the alignment of an action. "If you're Unaligned you don't actively seek to harm others or wish them ill. But you also don't go out of your way to put yourself at risk without some hope of reward. You support law and order when doing so benefits you. You value your own freedom, without worrying too much about protecting the freedom of others."
That pretty much says it all right there, but then you get into dieties and ethos. Is cutting down a few million hectares of forest good, or evil? An environmentalist or follower of Corellon or Melora would say yes, but a follower of Erathis would say that it's laudible.
Theft - It could be argued that it's evil, but I tend to think of it as more selfish and lazy. There are occasions when it could be evil, as when stealing medicine that is known to be needed, to heal the sick in a village.
Watching the wagon get attacked, then killing whatever goblins survived - Certainly not a good act, but definitely expedient from a military standpoint. If your goal is to obtain something that is carried by the wagon then why have to fight TWO enemies in order to get it, when you could just pick up the pieces after they are done killing each other? Expedience isn't evil, per se.
Killing the teamster - First you have to put aside the concept that killing is evil, or else the characters commit evil on a daily basis. They gave him a chance to live. He refused to be swayed, and so he was killed. The manner in which this was performed was pretty straight forward, other than the incident in which the fighter had an attack of conscience. His death was expedient and only became necessary when he refused to co-operate. It wasn't frivolously done, nor was it done for mere sport.
Means and motive go a long way to determining the alignment of an action. "If you're Unaligned you don't actively seek to harm others or wish them ill. But you also don't go out of your way to put yourself at risk without some hope of reward. You support law and order when doing so benefits you. You value your own freedom, without worrying too much about protecting the freedom of others."
That pretty much says it all right there, but then you get into dieties and ethos. Is cutting down a few million hectares of forest good, or evil? An environmentalist or follower of Corellon or Melora would say yes, but a follower of Erathis would say that it's laudible.
Oh, please point out which act was lawful:
-Not reporting a plot to murder the guards and steal the shipment.
-Plotting to instead murder whichever side won and steal the shipment.
-Threatening and extorting the driver for reporting to the local law authorities the thieves who stole his shipment.
-Murdering the driver to cover up the theft of his shipment.
While you're at it please indicate a line that doesn't show a gross lack of concern for innocent life, in other words, isn't also evil.
LittleFuzzy
First Post
Not at all. You simply have to put aside the modern Western idea of humanitarian universalism, that everyone is part of one Community. Violence has always been generally acceptable directed toward that which is Other. Kin groups, tribal extended kin groups, your village, your nation, all these might be considered your Community and killing within your Community is generally considered evil *with exceptions. Particular provocations, a ritualized system for violence, etc* In any Points of Light setting, just about everything outside a Point of Light is going to be considered Other to the population of that Point. All those things, including the monsters, aren't part of the Community and violence against them is going to be generally understood and tolerated. In no few situations, such violence against particular Others will probably even be formally sanctioned. But what is permitted and ethical wrt Others is a far cry from what is permitted and ethical against your own.
Ryujin
Legend
I was writing an essay already. Going into the concept of social constructs would have been a little over the top
This applies... how? Which part was "other", the driver, the guards or the shipment meant for the city? Or do you mean "other" means everything that isn't the party, so the party is legitimized in taking any action at all against anything outside the party (outside which would include each other's family members, friends, neighbors, contacts, children etc. of course)
"I raped your mother and sister last night and fed them to my dog." "Oh, thats okay, I killed your dog this morning and thats what you had for breakfast." "Oh." "Hey, lets go burn down that town and take their gold." "Now you're speaking my language!"
Ryujin
Legend
Or, "We broke into this house and took a machete to everyone in it, then took their stuff." The difference is that the house is a hole in the ground. Is it much of a difference?
LittleFuzzy
First Post
Other would almost always apply to monsters, and would frequently apply to anyone from foreign parts. Neither the guards or the driver would be Other. Letting the guards die can fall into Unaligned because it's an act of omission instead of comission, and because the party would face unnecessary physical risk by helping them. Letting them die isn't nice, but it it seems more flavored toward unaligned than anything evil. Killing the goblins is unaligned or good because they're Other. Killing the driver, OTOH, was a cold-blooded act of commission against a member of the player's community, in a situation where little to no physical risk was posed to the players. The worst they faced was some potential social difficulties they might have to avoid in the future (like avoiding guards). Under this sort of framework, that would definitely be an evil act
It is of course possible to envision the community being limited to the self or the party, as you reference. A character played that way would almost certainly get labelled Evil for being a sociopath, in a socially constructed world.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
