Why are these evil?!?

[Storm Raven]

This is why I like the idea of the assassin without spells. If the assassin is simply a highly trained individual whose job is to kill people, he can be neutral -- the people paying for the service are evil, the assassin is just a tool;

Highly trained individuals who don't cast spells are usually called "Rogues", and can be neutral.

 

[Marius Delphus]

I don't normally read, much less get involved in, D&D alignment debates because of my strong feelings in the matter. Regardless, I felt compelled to respond briefly to this post:

Assassins don't make decisions on who to shoot and who not to shoot either. Their employer does that.

The assassin *always* *always* *always* has the choice to follow or not follow his employer's orders. The assassin is *not* an inanimate object; he has a brain, free will, self-awareness, and the capacity for moral decision-making. A free-willed individual who chooses to hire himself out as a professional killer, who chooses to kill at the behest of an employer no matter the target, who chooses to kill whomever he is told to kill, *is* making a moral choice.

A gun is a weapon, and so is an assassin. If a gun will kill whoever it is fired at, and an assassin will kill whoever he is paid to kill, then the role of an assassin and the role of a gun are pretty much equal in my eyes. Just because the assassin accepts payment, and because he has feelings makes little difference, IMO.

Again, an assassin is always a living, thinking being, as differentiated from a weapon (of any sort), which is an inanimate object. Inanimate objects are incapable of making moral choices. (In D&D, even *animated* inanimate objects are incapable of making moral choices. )

And regarding a good Assassin only killing for his country. I don't think that's possible, as IMO someone who kills only for their country is Lawful Neutral.

As defined, a Lawful Neutral person cannot take the Assassin PrC. The Assassin's Guild will not deign to instruct someone who has moral compunctions about killing. Therefore, a Lawful Neutral "patriotic" agent must learn how to assassinate his country's enemies in some way that does not leverage the power of an Evil alignment. I *do* agree that someone who is in the business of assassin-style killing in D&D is unlikely to be Good.

 

[Voadam]

Assassins don't make decisions on who to shoot and who not to shoot either. Their employer does that.

A gun is a weapon, and so is an assassin. If a gun will kill whoever it is fired at, and an assassin will kill whoever he is paid to kill, then the role of an assassin and the role of a gun are pretty much equal in my eyes. Just because the assassin accepts payment, and because he has feelings makes little difference, IMO.

And regarding a good Assassin only killing for his country. I don't think that's possible, as IMO someone who kills only for their country is Lawful Neutral.

The role of an assassin and the role of a weapon may be equivalent to you in what they are used for and what they can accomplish, but the assassin is an automonous individual who can make choices. The gun is morally neutral because it is purely an instrument not capable of making moral choices. The assassin can make himself another's instrument but that does not remove his ability to make moral choices.

An assassin is more accurately described as someone who takes on the role of a weapon. This does not excuse the assassin from the moral ramifications of his actions. It is just to blame an assassin while pointless to blame an inanimate object.

 

[Henry]

Sixchan, you seem to have a concept of the D&D Assassin as almost like James Cameron's Terminator. But the assassin is not a construct - he/she is not a loaded weapon, incapable from distinguishing between good and evil. In fact, NO person would be like that, and still be a "person."

Well, I dunno about this. Aside from the flavour prerequisite, what are the chances that an assassin will ever be hired to kill someone completely innocent?

Actually, QUITE good odds. How about a paladin who dedicated his whole life to eradicating undead? How about a cleric who spent most of his life eradicating disease and feeding the hungry? These kinds of characters are very likely to have accumulated enemies that would hire an assassin to kill.

Now, how about someone a little grayer -- imagine a rogue who drifts from town to town, conning businesses out of large sums of money, and then moves on to the next town? Such a character might be gray, Neutral of some stripe, but Worthy of assassination? I cannot see it. Yet, someone could well get ticked off enough to hire an assassin to do away with them, as an object lesson. What do they care? They don't have to SEE the assassination!

BUT -- the assassin does. The assassin has to see in graphic detail how they kill their targets - with the knowledge that these people have done mothing more wrong - than cheat a fat businessman. Or feed the poor. Or slay undead. To turn one's self off to these things, to be emotionless in the face of BEING ABLE to have emotion, is what fits the "Evil" qualifier. Burke once said, "all that is necessary for evil to triumph, is that good men do nothing." This applies intenally as well as externally.


-----------------


Now, totally ignoring the above, there is another reason why Assassins are evil. Monte/Skip/Johnathan designed an assassin class that fit the vision of an organization that is allied with evil powers in return for the knowledge of stealth, killing blows, and use of poisons. THe arcane lore, and the power to kill with a single striek was granted not by Special Forces, but by Dark Ones. Hence the requirement -- the DMG Assassin comes from an evil organization, not the position that the powers they get are necessarily evil - they are given by evil means, for evil goals, and are evil because of that. If a DM wanted a version NOT in the DMG mold, then it's fairly easy to change.

 

[Left-handed Hummingbird]

Now, totally ignoring the above, there is another reason why Assassins are evil. Monte/Skip/Johnathan designed an assassin class that fit the vision of an organization that is allied with evil powers in return for the knowledge of stealth, killing blows, and use of poisons. THe arcane lore, and the power to kill with a single striek was granted not by Special Forces, but by Dark Ones. Hence the requirement -- the DMG Assassin comes from an evil organization, not the position that the powers they get are necessarily evil - they are given by evil means, for evil goals, and are evil because of that. If a DM wanted a version NOT in the DMG mold, then it's fairly easy to change.

Ha! What do you know - my reasoning was right!

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, I'm not sure *exactly* how I feel about the spells...I think I would like them to be Cha-based, and sorcerous, instead of Int-based and wizardly, myself.

I can understand the organization gifting this sort of lore upon the assassin...

....but I think the roguish talent developed to a nearly magical level is a much cooler image to go with.

Again, not that the original is flawed, just that I'd take it in a different direction...

(Though...I wonder....would the DMG assassin maybe change so that being evil isn't a prereq, because of the amount of peope who had been complaining about it?)

 

[Sixchan]

Sixchan, you seem to have a concept of the D&D Assassin as almost like James Cameron's Terminator. But the assassin is not a construct - he/she is not a loaded weapon, incapable from distinguishing between good and evil. In fact, NO person would be like that, and still be a "person."



Actually, QUITE good odds. How about a paladin who dedicated his whole life to eradicating undead? How about a cleric who spent most of his life eradicating disease and feeding the hungry? These kinds of characters are very likely to have accumulated enemies that would hire an assassin to kill.

<snippety snip>

IMO, an assassin doesn't really need to know these things. He could be told "Kill Mr. X" and then go kill him. Why does the assassin know (or even want to know) that Mr. X is a Undead Slaying Paladin?

Marius
The assassin *always* *always* *always* has the choice to follow or not follow his employer's orders. The assassin is *not* an inanimate object; he has a brain, free will, self-awareness, and the capacity for moral decision-making. A free-willed individual who chooses to hire himself out as a professional killer, who chooses to kill at the behest of an employer no matter the target, who chooses to kill whomever he is told to kill, *is* making a moral choice.

If they were following a contract, then IMO their actions would be Lawful Neutral. The actions weren't evil since they were following orders. They weren't good because they were killing.

Henry
Now, totally ignoring the above, there is another reason why Assassins are evil. Monte/Skip/Johnathan designed an assassin class that fit the vision of an organization that is allied with evil powers in return for the knowledge of stealth, killing blows, and use of poisons. THe arcane lore, and the power to kill with a single striek was granted not by Special Forces, but by Dark Ones. Hence the requirement -- the DMG Assassin comes from an evil organization, not the position that the powers they get are necessarily evil - they are given by evil means, for evil goals, and are evil because of that. If a DM wanted a version NOT in the DMG mold, then it's fairly easy to change.

Marius
As defined, a Lawful Neutral person cannot take the Assassin PrC. The Assassin's Guild will not deign to instruct someone who has moral compunctions about killing. Therefore, a Lawful Neutral "patriotic" agent must learn how to assassinate his country's enemies in some way that does not leverage the power of an Evil alignment. I *do* agree that someone who is in the business of assassin-style killing in D&D is unlikely to be Good.

Wasn't one of the main points of this debate wether or not the assasin is evil once you take out the flavour text?

Voadam
The role of an assassin and the role of a weapon may be equivalent to you in what they are used for and what they can accomplish, but the assassin is an automonous individual who can make choices. The gun is morally neutral because it is purely an instrument not capable of making moral choices. The assassin can make himself another's instrument but that does not remove his ability to make moral choices.

An assassin is more accurately described as someone who takes on the role of a weapon. This does not excuse the assassin from the moral ramifications of his actions. It is just to blame an assassin while pointless to blame an inanimate object.

I disagree.

 

[The Fifth Elephant]

If the spells were granted because of evil, they should be Wis based, and divine. Only reason they are Int and wizard based is probably for balance, so that the assassin has to worry about arcane spell failure.

The DMG assassin is evil because they belong to an evil organization that accepts any contract, no matter the target. If you want to make your own organization that has a different moral code(only kill evil beings, for example) then that PrC would most likely not be evil. This would also apply to a "self-trained" assassin PrC; the character would have to make a code that fits their alignment.

 

[BLACKDIRGE]

Having had my own players ask if they can play a "nuetral assassin" I have simply stated that if they can up with a workable prestige class for such a being I will approve it. In my opinion the assassin presented in the DMG is an example of an "evil" assassin and therfore meant to be an NPC and unplayable in my campaign.

There ar many ways to play a hired killer without resorting to being an assassin, but I think generally when a PC asks to play an assassin they just want access to the kool powers gained by the prestige class.

Dirge

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'm curious why you disagree. The basic fact is that a gun is an object that cannot refuse to be used to kill someone. An assassin has the ability to understand what he is doing and decide if it violates his morals. To say that a man who is paid to blow up a school is no more morally liable than the object he used to do it seems silly. One had a choice while the other didn't.

Any good non-spell casting PRC assassin classes out there? I'm not sure that you need a class to become a pro killer but I'd like to see some other takes on it. A rogue or Fighter/Rogue would make an ideal assassin I'd think.