Bonedagger said:
Yes. Good and evil are concrete forces. But so is lawful and chaos. In D&D these forces oppose each other just as good and evil as you described above. In D&D not following laws does not make you evil. They may as you said have lied to get what they wanted but lying is not evil in D&D either. I don't see anything that say that the girls death wasn't an accident. (Punnishment should follow though). They had her tied up but at some time they trusted the girl enough to remove her "mouthpiece". That would indicate that they wanted to communicate with her or cared for her wellbeing. Something that wasn't needed.
Without more info I don't see why this could not be a "conflict" between law and chaos instead good and evil.
Per the first post, they didn't "trust" the girl at all, she "wriggled free".
Beyond that, it doesn't matter if this is a conflict between Law and Chaos.
In D&D alignment land, Law and Chaos, Good and Evil go hand in hand in defining one another. No one is just "Lawful" or "Chaotic". Further, "Good" in D&D is an objective ideal - both Lawful and Chaotic characters work towards the same Good, they just take different roads to get there.
Taking the initial post at face value, we have:
1) the thief who caused the incident was stealing purely for her own gain.
2) The party kidnapped the child because it was "the easiest way".
So, we have a case of profitting off the misery of others (theft), followed by kidnapping, which involves terrorizing and oppressing others, for no reason other than the sake of expediency.
Pretty durn uncaring to me, bordering on evil.
Follow that up with cracking the victim on the back of the head with a SWORD, regardless of the death that followed, and you head right into Evil territory.
Heck, in the real world (tm) of moral ambiguity, that falls squarely into the realm of evil. Attempts to justify it with shades of grey or defenses that the party doesn't accept the validity of the law (Chaos vs Law) fall into the realm of silly justifications and relativism.
Picture the interrogation scene:
Cop: You guys have anything to say for yourselves?
Accused Park Ranger: Well, see, our friend got pinched while prying a stereo from a car.
Cop: Yeah. We got her in a cell.
Accused P. R.: So see, we knew she did the crime, so we figured it would be hard to convince you to go easy on her when, you know, you had no reason to.
Cop: And so?
Accused P. R.: And so we kidnapped the mayor's daughter, cause we had, you know, a lead on a big score out of town, and we weren't ever gonna come back to this backwater.
Cop: So, padre, why'd you kill her?
Accused Padre: Well my son, we didn't do it on purpose. She simply wouldn't be reasonable, and sit there quietly.
Cop: Don't you think she might've been scared?
A. Padre: I suppose, but I don't know why. After all, all we did was kidnap her and hold her for ransom, in exchange for the release of a lawfully arrested, caught in the act criminal.
Cop: So, how did she die?
Soldier: That was me, but I swear I didn't mean it! You gotta believe me! I just wanted to shut her up, cause if she kept talkin, some group of heroes might have come along to rescue her.
Cop: Is that when you hit her with the crowbar?
Soldier: Yeah, but I... I didn't think I was gonna hit her so hard.
Cop: Jeez. What a waste. Why didn't you guys just come down and make restitution? Or, you know, let your buddy get what she deserved?
Padre: Please. We don't acknowledge the validity of your laws.
Cop: How nice for you.
Accused P.R.: So, now that you know the extenuating circumstances are you gonna, you know, be lenient?
Cop: Nah. You're gonna swing for this.
Accused Padre: But, I TOLD YOU! We don't accept the judgement of your laws! We're free spirits! Rugged individualists!
Cop: Guess it sucks to be you, huh?
Patrick Y.
