Bloodthirsty but neutral? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Bloodthirsty but neutral? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Kaalan
02-19-04, 12:05 AM How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races. Kind of an arrogant I'm the %^$% kinda character? Huge ego, the kind of guy who you might offend fairly easily and he challenge you to a duel but the next moment give a bunch of gold to a poor person.

My DM thinks it would be evil. I think it's neutral.

Thoughts?
ieattrollsforbreakfast
02-19-04, 05:44 AM Killing the orc, goblins etc for no other reason than they are orcs or goblins (not because they are terrorising, killing people etc) is evil.
Arrogance and a huge ego have nothing to do with alignment, so forget about them.
Challenging someone to a duel is not exactly evil, afterall they have wronged you. If they can accept or decline the duel, its their choice to fight you, so its more neutral. However, if it is a duel to the death, and they have no means to defend themselves, its evil.
Giving gold to the poor is good, no doubt about that.

Hmm, its difficult...I don't think its extreme enough for evil, so I'm going with neutral.
Ahnehnois
02-19-04, 05:50 AM In a normal campaign world, in which you are not at war or something with goblinoids, simply hunting and killing them without provocation is an evil act. But evil acts do not make you evil. Would you kill goblin women and children and other harmless individuals given the chance? If so, almost definitely evil. If you fight in self-defense and don't hurt enemies who aren't doing anything to you, you could easily rationalize neutrality.

Arrogance is not evil, it's just arrogance.
Morka
02-19-04, 08:17 AM Originally posted by ieattrollsforbreakfast

Giving gold to the poor is good, no doubt about that.

Giving gold to the poor is more Lawful than Good. A Lawful character think that if everyone has enough money to buy food in the city, the city shall be stronger.

A Good character will empathize with the poor one and search what he really needs. If it's only gold, then so be it, here is a bag of gold, I hope next month shall be better for you. If he doesn't have job, the Good character will try to find him a job.

It's easy to confound a Lawful act for a Good act. An Evil character who want a good reputation just has to give some gold to the beggars, and everybody think he is generous.
Tzor
02-19-04, 10:31 AM Originally posted by Kaalan
How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races.
It really hard to tell given the information you have provided. It's not evil to enjoy doing what you do ... per se ... otherwise almost every character would be evil. But how you go about "plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc" will determine if you are evil or not.

If you go after orcs that attack you, that's neutural.
If you deliberately seek out orcs where ever they are that borders on evil.
If you are out to exterminate all orcs from the face of the earth, that's vile evil!

Giving money to the poor is a somewhat good thing, but if you are really evil, that's like throwing a bucket of water on the house that's on fire ... the house will continue to be on fire, even though the fire has been diminished by the one bucket of water.
Jagyr Ebonwood
02-19-04, 05:57 PM I have a character right now who is Chaotic Good. He loves a good fight, so when he gets into a battle, he'll fight to the death and with ferocity (taking a level of barbarian soon). He doesn't attack unprovoked, and he'd rather subdue someone if it looked like they weren't a real challenge...
I hate to say it, but he reminds me of Goku in Dragonball Z...

So, you can relish killing evil things, and still be good, you just have to be careful about it.
Citizen Philip
02-19-04, 06:33 PM Originally posted by Kaalan
How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races. Kind of an arrogant I'm the %^$% kinda character? Huge ego, the kind of guy who you might offend fairly easily and he challenge you to a duel but the next moment give a bunch of gold to a poor person.

My DM thinks it would be evil. I think it's neutral.

Thoughts?

With the details you have given, the character you describe would be Chaotic Neutral. Your not trying to do good, and your not trying to do evil. You have no particular orderful method, and are very fickle.

If orcs and goblins are not 'creatures of evil' and instead are xenophobic expansionists (hate others, grow quickly to consume resources): Then hunting down and killing them for what they are, would be considered evil or possibly a preumtive neutral. Probably making your character Neutral evil or Neutral.

If your character only hunted and killed orcs and goblins when they began to overpopulate a region/make unwarranted attacks, you could be Chaotic Neutral or maybe Neutral.

Your character is never doing anything good. Shades of grey dancing between neutral, chaotic and depending on circumstance evil.

CP
Veton
02-19-04, 07:20 PM How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races.

If he enjoys it, or is doing it for a non-evil purpose, it's fine. If, on the other hand, he goes out just to kill orcs and goblins, then he would be evil.

Kind of an arrogant I'm the %^$% kinda character? Huge ego, the kind of guy who you might offend fairly easily and he challenge you to a duel

If he's going to kill someone just because they accidently offended him, that's evil. I would recommend having him either fight to the "first blood" or using the flat of the blade.

but the next moment give a bunch of gold to a poor person.

I'd say that would be Good

Thoughts?

I'd have to say he's mostly Chaotic Neutral, with some good tendacies. He does what he wants to do, but he enjoys giving gold to the less fortunet.
Ualyr
02-20-04, 01:21 PM I would agree with CN.

I differ on one point than most people. It is generally assumed that orcs and such that are holed up in dungeons are evil. If you have reason to believe that the creatures you are hunting are evil, then it would not be an evil act necessarily. If you are killing them because you think they're evil, then it would even be a good act, although on the chaotic side of things.

If you believe these creatures are evil but you're wrong, then it would be misguided, but not evil. If someone points out htat they are not evil and you attack anyway then it would be evil.

I agree with the assesment of gold giving being more of a lwaful issue in some cases, but it depends on the character. It is a good act to give to the poor, it's just a better act to give them a job. Some lawful societies could very well feel that a person receives a certain amount of money for their work, and if they lose their job or spend thier money unwisely then they have blown their chance. They might even forbid giving money to them. Of course, that's more lawful evil, but still lawful.
VirgilCaine
02-20-04, 10:23 PM Giving gold to the poor is more Lawful than Good. A Lawful character think that if everyone has enough money to buy food in the city, the city shall be stronger.

*BUZZ* Wrong answer, would you like to see what you would have won?

Making a personal sacrifice for others (giving money away to the poor, enduring risk of death or kamikaziing an invading army) is a Good act. It is NOT Lawful. It may be in som situations Lawful AND Good, but not only Lawful, EVER.
Strife
02-21-04, 10:22 AM I would agree with Neutral.

But if I were you and the DM insissted that the character's evil I wouldn't weep, I would print NE on my char sheet and play him out as an everyday evil char (the good kind of evil :D) - perhaps even getting a throphy room :smirk:

-Ah, yes - that's particular fine specimen, an orch warchief whom I tracked and killed near Ten Towns. Noticed those tusks?

or to make him really evil - start to hunt "halfbreeds" too, now put those up for display and call me neutral :smirk:
TheBlackBart
02-21-04, 12:33 PM I do not believe it is Evil. It's just stupid.

But hey, stupid people do exist.

That character was probably raised in a society and fed anti-monstrous humanoid propaganda... that's not too hard to imagine.

He's probably chaotic too...

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kaalan 02-19-04, 12:05 AM	How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races. Kind of an arrogant I'm the %^$% kinda character? Huge ego, the kind of guy who you might offend fairly easily and he challenge you to a duel but the next moment give a bunch of gold to a poor person. My DM thinks it would be evil. I think it's neutral. Thoughts?
ieattrollsforbreakfast 02-19-04, 05:44 AM	Killing the orc, goblins etc for no other reason than they are orcs or goblins (not because they are terrorising, killing people etc) is evil. Arrogance and a huge ego have nothing to do with alignment, so forget about them. Challenging someone to a duel is not exactly evil, afterall they have wronged you. If they can accept or decline the duel, its their choice to fight you, so its more neutral. However, if it is a duel to the death, and they have no means to defend themselves, its evil. Giving gold to the poor is good, no doubt about that. Hmm, its difficult...I don't think its extreme enough for evil, so I'm going with neutral.
Ahnehnois 02-19-04, 05:50 AM	In a normal campaign world, in which you are not at war or something with goblinoids, simply hunting and killing them without provocation is an evil act. But evil acts do not make you evil. Would you kill goblin women and children and other harmless individuals given the chance? If so, almost definitely evil. If you fight in self-defense and don't hurt enemies who aren't doing anything to you, you could easily rationalize neutrality. Arrogance is not evil, it's just arrogance.
Morka 02-19-04, 08:17 AM	Originally posted by ieattrollsforbreakfast Giving gold to the poor is good, no doubt about that. Giving gold to the poor is more Lawful than Good. A Lawful character think that if everyone has enough money to buy food in the city, the city shall be stronger. A Good character will empathize with the poor one and search what he really needs. If it's only gold, then so be it, here is a bag of gold, I hope next month shall be better for you. If he doesn't have job, the Good character will try to find him a job. It's easy to confound a Lawful act for a Good act. An Evil character who want a good reputation just has to give some gold to the beggars, and everybody think he is generous.
Tzor 02-19-04, 10:31 AM	Originally posted by Kaalan How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races. It really hard to tell given the information you have provided. It's not evil to enjoy doing what you do ... per se ... otherwise almost every character would be evil. But how you go about "plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc" will determine if you are evil or not. If you go after orcs that attack you, that's neutural. If you deliberately seek out orcs where ever they are that borders on evil. If you are out to exterminate all orcs from the face of the earth, that's vile evil! Giving money to the poor is a somewhat good thing, but if you are really evil, that's like throwing a bucket of water on the house that's on fire ... the house will continue to be on fire, even though the fire has been diminished by the one bucket of water.
Jagyr Ebonwood 02-19-04, 05:57 PM	I have a character right now who is Chaotic Good. He loves a good fight, so when he gets into a battle, he'll fight to the death and with ferocity (taking a level of barbarian soon). He doesn't attack unprovoked, and he'd rather subdue someone if it looked like they weren't a real challenge... I hate to say it, but he reminds me of Goku in Dragonball Z... So, you can relish killing evil things, and still be good, you just have to be careful about it.
Citizen Philip 02-19-04, 06:33 PM	Originally posted by Kaalan How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races. Kind of an arrogant I'm the %^$% kinda character? Huge ego, the kind of guy who you might offend fairly easily and he challenge you to a duel but the next moment give a bunch of gold to a poor person. My DM thinks it would be evil. I think it's neutral. Thoughts? With the details you have given, the character you describe would be Chaotic Neutral. Your not trying to do good, and your not trying to do evil. You have no particular orderful method, and are very fickle. If orcs and goblins are not 'creatures of evil' and instead are xenophobic expansionists (hate others, grow quickly to consume resources): Then hunting down and killing them for what they are, would be considered evil or possibly a preumtive neutral. Probably making your character Neutral evil or Neutral. If your character only hunted and killed orcs and goblins when they began to overpopulate a region/make unwarranted attacks, you could be Chaotic Neutral or maybe Neutral. Your character is never doing anything good. Shades of grey dancing between neutral, chaotic and depending on circumstance evil. CP
Veton 02-19-04, 07:20 PM	How would you rate a character who enjoys plundering dungeons, killing orcs, goblins etc, but still doesnt kill "civilized" races. If he enjoys it, or is doing it for a non-evil purpose, it's fine. If, on the other hand, he goes out just to kill orcs and goblins, then he would be evil. Kind of an arrogant I'm the %^$% kinda character? Huge ego, the kind of guy who you might offend fairly easily and he challenge you to a duel If he's going to kill someone just because they accidently offended him, that's evil. I would recommend having him either fight to the "first blood" or using the flat of the blade. but the next moment give a bunch of gold to a poor person. I'd say that would be Good Thoughts? I'd have to say he's mostly Chaotic Neutral, with some good tendacies. He does what he wants to do, but he enjoys giving gold to the less fortunet.
Ualyr 02-20-04, 01:21 PM	I would agree with CN. I differ on one point than most people. It is generally assumed that orcs and such that are holed up in dungeons are evil. If you have reason to believe that the creatures you are hunting are evil, then it would not be an evil act necessarily. If you are killing them because you think they're evil, then it would even be a good act, although on the chaotic side of things. If you believe these creatures are evil but you're wrong, then it would be misguided, but not evil. If someone points out htat they are not evil and you attack anyway then it would be evil. I agree with the assesment of gold giving being more of a lwaful issue in some cases, but it depends on the character. It is a good act to give to the poor, it's just a better act to give them a job. Some lawful societies could very well feel that a person receives a certain amount of money for their work, and if they lose their job or spend thier money unwisely then they have blown their chance. They might even forbid giving money to them. Of course, that's more lawful evil, but still lawful.
VirgilCaine 02-20-04, 10:23 PM	Giving gold to the poor is more Lawful than Good. A Lawful character think that if everyone has enough money to buy food in the city, the city shall be stronger. BUZZ Wrong answer, would you like to see what you would have won? Making a personal sacrifice for others (giving money away to the poor, enduring risk of death or kamikaziing an invading army) is a Good act. It is NOT Lawful. It may be in som situations Lawful AND Good, but not only Lawful, EVER.
Strife 02-21-04, 10:22 AM	I would agree with Neutral. But if I were you and the DM insissted that the character's evil I wouldn't weep, I would print NE on my char sheet and play him out as an everyday evil char (the good kind of evil :D) - perhaps even getting a throphy room :smirk: -Ah, yes - that's particular fine specimen, an orch warchief whom I tracked and killed near Ten Towns. Noticed those tusks? or to make him really evil - start to hunt "halfbreeds" too, now put those up for display and call me neutral :smirk:
TheBlackBart 02-21-04, 12:33 PM	I do not believe it is Evil. It's just stupid. But hey, stupid people do exist. That character was probably raised in a society and fed anti-monstrous humanoid propaganda... that's not too hard to imagine. He's probably chaotic too...