When does CN become CE?

[mythago]

I find it a little bit funny that anyone would take seriously a "promise" from a chaotic character.

Um. Look at it this way: you're a helpless prisoner. You don't have an always-on Know Alignment ability. The big ugly half-orc with the sword says "Tell me about X, and we'll let you live; I promise."

What do you do? Ask for a signed contract? Not tell him about X and hope he doesn't kill you anyway?

I would have pushed this guy to CE a while back, at least from the holy sword's perspective.

 

[candidus_cogitens]

So you're saying that someone who kills people out of hand, imprisons them on trumped-up charges, or drags them through the street in chains, can be neutral if he's following an agenda rather than just having fun????

Remind me not to vote for you, buddy.

That is sorta what I am saying, yes. Although, when you say "trumped up" I have to wonder what the agenda might be.

You see, the agenda itself itself would have to be something other than the desire to dominate and manipulate others in cruel fashion.

But let's say your character carries a personal vendetta against somebody ... I can see trumping up charges against them and still be neutral.

 

[Mallus]

Re: Re: Need more info...

I consider it fair to assume that Gods gain power and revel in acts that exemplify their portfolio.

That's totally not my take on deityhood I never liked the idea that gods where somehow dependent on the psychic/spiritual energies of their worshippers. Sure, they might fight for status against their peers, using worshippers as coin, but in the end THEY ARE THAT THEY ARE...

But your take has some great implications. Taken to an extreme, it would certainly lend a game an air of superstition and wonder; where every act taken may act as a gateway to pantheon of petty, jealous Gods. Very much like actually folklore. Full o' mystery...

 

[Mallus]

So you're saying that someone who kills people out of hand, imprisons them on trumped-up charges, or drags them through the street in chains, can be neutral if he's following an agenda rather than just having fun????

Sure. Depends on the context. They could be good, even. As DM, I intentionally design situations where the well-intentioned PC's are face with the choice between killing out of hand, imprisoning the innocent, having fun with the dragging&chains, and accomplishing a worthwhile, noble task, like protecting the kingdom during times of war... I favor political campaigns, which are great for this kind of content. Its dramatic to pit people against their own principles, or risk a failure that involves the lives of many more innocent people. Its a question of which principles you actually compromise. What's your integrity {or morality} worth when you're entrusted with the fates of others? {Of course, I'm sounding really pro-CIA now, so I'll stop}

OT-ish: There's a fabulous episode of DS9 {In the Pale Monlight} where Captain Sisko faces the possibility that the Romulans will ally with the Dominion in their war against the Federation/Klingons. Sisko enlists the aid of Garak, and togther they execute a plan which ends the chance of alliance, but involves the death of an innocent Romulan diplomat. Sisko deceives himself throughout the episode, going so far as to confront Garak, full of moral outrage over the methods used, but by the end happily rationalizes his action --which meant the survival of Federation-- to himself before destroying all the evidence of his plan.

 

[Kilmore]

Regardless of whether or not the character pings "Evil" on the alignment radar, the holy weapon (if it's in a position to do anything about it) does not have to put up with behavior that it percieves as evil.

 

[Balgus]

I am with Teflon Billy and King Stannis-

Alignment is whacked. As for a cleric- he is able to stray one step away from alignment- so CN-> CE is OK. Unless his God strictly forbids it. But realistic reactions should be the main thrust of your DMing world. If a char is killing things left and right (especially prisoners) instead of using them as leverage or ransome against the enmy- he will have to deal with the neemy sooner or later.

As for the other players who don't like this- why should you say anything. they should tell him- either in game or out- that his actions will invoke grave repercussions that they are not able to handle. Whthere he chooses to acknowledge or change is up to him. T

If it gets out of hand and the game is hurting, then step in and say "GOD of chaos finds this evil. You have one day to change your ways or your powers will be revoked!! the powers that be have spoken."

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Re: Re: Re: Need more info...

Why would God's bother with portfolios if they gain nothing from them. Why would Bane from FR be the God of Murder and Strife if he doesnt gain anything from murder and strife?

Why not be the god of Dandelions and Fuzzy Bumblebees instead?

That's totally not my take on deityhood I never liked the idea that gods where somehow dependent on the psychic/spiritual energies of their worshippers. Sure, they might fight for status against their peers, using worshippers as coin, but in the end THEY ARE THAT THEY ARE...

But your take has some great implications. Taken to an extreme, it would certainly lend a game an air of superstition and wonder; where every act taken may act as a gateway to pantheon of petty, jealous Gods. Very much like actually folklore. Full o' mystery...

 

[Apok]

Two thoughts.

1. The difference between CN and CE can be explained this way. A Chaotic Neutral person looks at personal freedom being the ultimate right. Nothing is more important. This though includes the personal freedom of others. Basically a CN's freedom with his fist ends at the tip of other peoples noses. A CE on the other hand feels that his personal freedom is so important that it should and will infringe on the freedoms of others. Basically his freedom with his fist ends at the back of the other guys skull. So your Barbarian is definately being CE he is infringing on the freedom of others which is the most important trait his alignment has.

To me, this sounds more like the difference between a CG and a CE person. Someone who is CG looks at personal freedom as being of utmost importance but is willing to go out of his way to maintain that freedom to others. Not just to friends & family but everyone . Someone who is CN isn't so altruistic. They value freedom for certain, but their own personal freedom and that of their close friends and family comes first. As far as infringing on the freedom of others is concerned, it's a matter of context. If the Barbarian in this case was wasting people just for kicks or to be cruel, damn skippy he's CE.

My definition of what delineates Good from Neutral from Evil is mostly how a person relates to friends, family and strangers. A Good person will do their utmost to protect the rights and lives of everyone unless they are irredemably evil. This goes for people he knows personally to the miller in some far off town he's never been to. Altruism is the mark of the Good aligned person.

Somebody who is Evil could give less than 2 coppers for the well-being of anybody. They may betray friends and family and they certainly don't give a damn about the masses. Their own personal goals are all that matter unless they are just doing evil for the fun of it.

A Neutral I define as someone who has respect, to some degree, of friends and family and is lukewarm about everyone else. A Neutral person likely won't do something because "it's the right thing" or for altruistic reasons. They do things because they want to, because there is something in it for them. What makes them different from an Evil person? Well, it's a fine line. It's about behavior. A Neutral person likely wouldn't committ acts of moral bankruptcy (rape, torture, murder, etc.) against someone for no reason. Even if they had a reason, it would have to be a damn good one (think the Count of Monte Cristo). Neturals follow their own agenda with more care for human life and freedoms than someone who is outright Evil and that is my definition.

Say, while I'm at it, here's a little moral scenario for ya. Let's take your basic Inigo Montoya story but give it a little twist. Some guy kills your father and so you vow revenge, but by the time you find him he has turned over a new leaf. He is genuinely sorry and repentant and has worked hard to do some good in the world to make up for all the terrible things he was responsible for.

If such was the case, how would it affect your alignment if you still waxed the guy?

 

[Felix]

PHB, p. 89
Chaotic Neutral, "Free Spirit": A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. ...

Originally posted by DocMoriartty
... A Chaotic Neutral person looks at personal freedom being the ultimate right. Nothing is more important. This though includes the personal freedom of others. ...

Perhaps I have spent too much time in the Rules forum, but I don't see how Doc can draw his interpretation straight from the PHB. I'd say it's his own opinion, and not that set out by the PHB. Not that there's anything wrong having a different opinion, but alignment consequence discussions should start with a description of the official definition.

Killing helpless people is not necessairly Evil (in some cases it can be considered Good). Lying is not necessairly Evil (though it is definitely Chaotic). The repitition of this abmiguous act is not necessairly Evil. So what if the other characters are disgusted? Their characters could possibly be spineless, and the players are playing them that way.

I don't think the holy sword should be offended. Neither should the players. If the characters are disgusted, then the party should ask the .5 orc to leave. Or the party leave the .5 orc. Problem solved. Group solidarity isn't the be all end all of DnD, you know.

Mapleaxe:
You did say that the other PC's were disgusted, so it's possible to interpret it that the CN .5 orc is being unnecessairly cruel. I'd like to hear about what the circumstances of these killings are. If the .5 orc is being cruel, the act might very well be Evil. Then the sword would hurt the .5 orc. And you would take the character away from the player and NPC him. Problem solved.

In either case, try talking to the .5 orc player and make sure he knows that you think (if you do) that his acts are Evil however he might try to rationalize it. Warn him NPCage might be in his future.

 

[ced1106]

Problem with alignments is that you can define them either by principle (Chaotic = individuality) or behavior (Chaotic = unpredictable). AEG's Dungeons has an interesting discussion of the evil alignments. I'd actually suggest that the PC may even be Neutral Evil. Such characters only use lawful behavior (eg. promises) when it suits them. Chaotics don't follow any orderly structure, but at least they're **predictable** that way...!


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^