Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 3583067" data-attributes="member: 32740">Alignment comes under the heading of "description" for characters.  Actions determine alignment - it must be that way because if alignment determines actions then players CANNOT have their characters behave in ways in which alignment will ever change and that is an abominable approach to good roleplaying.  But, in the very rare circumstance that you simply don't have opportunity to do evil and thus demonstrate your alignment then the mere desire and willingness to do evil when the opportunity does eventually present itself is sufficient.In this case, the fact that the NPC's radiate evil demonstrates that barring only magical misdirection or obfuscation these individuals ARE evil - even if they are not KNOWN or actively seen to do evil things.  This, however, does not make them an immediate threat justifying their death at the hands of the Paladin.  In ANY reasonably cosmopolitan society this is something that a Paladin will run into on a daily basis.How the paladin handles the situation should be largely based on the paladins present circumstances more than the evil peasantry.  Is he just wandering the street aimlessly with nothing to do?  Then he might well decide to undertake watchdogging these peasants, learn what evil they ARE up to and put a stop to it.  He is likely busy with other tasks so maybe he just notes who they are if he can so that he might investigate later.  Maybe he grabs the nearest constable and simply says, "Keep an eye on those fellows - they are likely up to no good."Two things:First, any paladin (indeed, every paladin) should know what would be the right thing to do - or at least what is allowed and not allowed - in such common circumstances.  This requires that the PLAYER and DM be on the same page with how alignments work and are defined in the DM's campaign.  For paladins specifically this is vital knowledge that CANNOT legitimately be omitted by a DM for a player.  Alignments do not exist in the campaign for the DM to play whack-a-mole with PC's, when in lacking specifics from the DM they attempt to guess at correct action and are punished for failing to guess CORRECTLY what the DM's interpretations might be on the matter.Second, to present an encounter like this, to set up some kind of "test of character", is to present the PLAYER with a roleplaying opportunity or challenge.  It is not a failure of the player to choose NOT to accept the opportunity - to NOT choose to have his PC fail to uphold his ideals and proceed to engage in roleplaying such a flaw or error in judgement at this particular time.  It is not a failure of the player to NOT desire exploring darker aspects of his character.  There's nothing wrong with a paladin character NEVER EVER being remotely tempted to do something he shouldn't and spending the entire campaign safe and secure in his oaths.  There IS something wrong with a DM assuming that just because a paladin CAN fall from grace that the DM should seek to ENGINEER that possibility - unless it is established upon the creation of the character that the DM believes anything to the contrary.  It makes as much sense for a DM to try to trick or force a paladin to fall from grace as it does for him to do anything similar to a monk, barbarian, druid, or ranger.  ANY character with an alignment restriction is NEVER EVER an agreed green light for the DM to casually throw that characters continued advancement in that class into question.This is not to say that this is at all your intent.  I'm just saying that while you may be greatly interested in TESTING alignment rules and character concepts, the player in question may simply want to continue to enjoy PLAYING the character as-is and seek his/her roleplaying challenges elsewhere in the game.</blockquote>

Verification