Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="moritheil" data-source="post: 2144809" data-attributes="member: 30610">DnD is not such a great system to run actual moral dilemmas in - systems such as In Nomine are much better for that - but this post intrigued me.What would I have done?  The entire matter hinges around the particulars of their alignment.IIRC, a paladin has a code that says that prisoners should be treated with respect, so a paladin is in definite danger of losing paladinhood.The line about the American military is totally irrelevant, but I will answer that according to some Vietnam stories, it has in fact been done, so it depends on whether or not you believe those stories.In one iteration of the DnD alignment system, Neutral Good was an "ends justify the means" deal - any method could be used so long as it clearly served a greater good - so if the player could reasonably say their character thought they were serving a greater good, they are acting in an NG fashion (again, in one iteration of the alignment system, and not in the 3.5 version).Now, let's get to the particulars.Alignment violation costing xp - I do not do this for non-clerical, non-priest types who do not derive their power from a divine source. I simply say their alignment changes. And IMC, changing from Neutral to Good is much harder than changing from Good to Neutral.Violation of ethos - that depends on the patron. In real life, Western society is informed by the Judeochristian concepts of justice and mercy. This, I think, is where you draw your ideas about good from. Prior to the influence of monotheism, many acts that we would now consider savage and barbaric were accepted as parts of daily life - including the torture of captured enemies. In fact, they may well have been mandated as part of law. More to the point, "mercy" and "good" are not necessarily associated in DnD as we as a society tend to associate them in real life. I doubt that a cleric or paladin of Helm from the FR setting is going to be merciful, and indeed many would view it as a dereliction of duty to grant mercy. Paladins in that setting would be grim avengers and disciplined killing machines, not chivalrous knights. (Remember, irredeemable evil is widespread in DnD, whereas people do not consider it widespread in real life.)At any rate, if characters take the view (and if it is true in your campaign) that all Zhentarim are irredeemably evil, just as fiends are evil, then it is their solemn duty to exterminate them, and as such they have not committed any infraction of their alignment.If you take the view (and I suspect you do) that the Zhentarim are often morally neutral, only fighting because they were born into a system that they can do nothing about, AND that this completely excuses their evil acts, then killing the mage (who called upon the power of evil, and was dangerous to boot) was not an alignment infraction, but killing the soldiers was unnecessary and therefore a violation of alignment.</blockquote>

Verification