Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Akordya 06-07-07, 09:30 AM	I am having some trouble with understanding my alignment. I play a lawful-good cleric of Kelemvor who is fanatic on putting back to rest the undeads, fighting evil necromancers and priests and all wickedness in general. She has a very strict moral. Now yesterday that fighting all evil attitude cause a total zizany in our group (composed of a paladin of Lathander, a good rogue and a good elf bard). Two "merchants" complained about brigands stealing their properties and asked for our help. By asking questions I realized they were hiding something. My cleric asked too much questions and the "merchants" panicked and one of them attacked me with a lightning bolt taking the whole group totally by surprise. We fought, one merchant died, the bard put to sleep the other "merchant" with her spell after he drank an invisibility potion and sneak attacked one of us. Far away from a city, I was for hanging the cutthroat or at least cut one of his hand away as punishment (the foe admitted to dealing with stolen valuables and thieves, not wanting to be caught by autorities etc). The paladin wanted to bring the man before a tribunal but we are in the middle of something extremely important and cannot go back to a city to hand over the thief to justice. The bard wanted to make the man promise he will not to that kind of activity again and let him go free. Our rogue was taking all the other merchant's valuable in his pockets meanwhile. Now they all said I was too extreme, cutting a hand of a cutthroat was not a good action, nor was hanging him. I was true to my dedication to fight evil, we were tricked and they tried to kill us, how come hanging was not a good thing? Am I acting as lawful-good or do my actions ask for a change of alignment? On another time I killed a very evil man whom I was sure would not be punished if I let the city justice take care of him. Beside that my cleric is very helpful and kind and often sacrifice herself for helping others in need.
Apupunchau 06-07-07, 11:29 AM	D&D Alignments are generally pretty straight forward (a little to much for some people who like shades of gray) but Lawful Good generally means that you follow the laws of the land (or at least the law system of where you are from if you are in a barbaric land with no laws). Now if the land you are in has a justice system and courts and it's own offices (of which I'm assuming you are not one of) then as a lawful character you should in theory turn over any captured villains to the proper authorities. Paladins who are by nature of their class Lawful Good may kill many "evil" creatures but these creatures (Tolls, demons and other monsters) are generally not subject to the laws of the land. They may also fight to the death evil humanoids that don't surrender. However you start treading on the path to evil when you believe that you have the right to be judge and jury as a matter of ease because you don't want to go back to town. The number of fanatics that become evil but still believe in their minds that they are doing things for the cause of good is high. As a DM I may not force you to change alignment right away but I might start really looking at how you play your character if you decided to start chopping off more hands just because you can't bother to turn a villain in to the proper authorities. Now they all said I was too extreme, cutting a hand of a cutthroat was not a good action, nor was hanging him. I was true to my dedication to fight evil, we were tricked and they tried to kill us, how come hanging was not a good thing? Cutting his hand is Extreme but you a man who believes in law decided that it was your place and not the laws to execute this man thus putting yourself above the law. On another time I killed a very evil man whom I was sure would not be punished if I let the city justice take care of him. With this statement you show that not only are you above the law that you believe the law will not work in and of itself. After all of this I can see this being a drastic alignment change. You have your own code of conduct which could be considered Lawful but you decided to kill people because no one else will which can definitely be considered evil.
Akordya 06-07-07, 12:52 PM	I understand what you mean Apupunchau, totally. Yes I think my good sister of Kelemvor is starting to see herself as supreme justice when none in the field is available. Why? Because she is sure that her code of conduct is true and good and thus gives her the right to judge wicked foes, humans and monsters alike. This indeed can lead slowly to the path of evil which could also be an interesting concept (blinded by her dedication to Good). Now usually she has the autorities in high esteem but if they are corrupted... how can one trust justice will be done? In this scenario the man surrender himself to the paladin so he could be free from direct punishment. My character saw that as exploiting the code of conduct of our fine paladin to gain more time and that got her angry hehe. With truly repentent poeple she is not that extreme, like a man who realize that what he did was wrong and want to amend is worthy of forgiveness and help. Thanks for making me see it with other eyes.
Kolytszusk 06-07-07, 05:03 PM	Hmm, there is another way of looking at this, too. You could instead be Chaotic Good, doing good things in unconventional ways. If you consider 'good' to be the same as 'the greater good', then you are still doing good things. You are simply taking justice into your own hgands. As long as this justice is still not for your own good, but for others', then you could stay good, but change your alignment to chaotic.
Akordya 06-09-07, 10:53 AM	Aye, but then I would not be able to be a cleric of Kelemvor for he grant spells to only lawful characters, either good or evil.
EpicEvokerElf 06-10-07, 10:07 PM	You should probably dispense with alignment if you're that grey. The hand-cutting-off is a Lawful Neutral act at best, so I'd say that's what you resemble. You have a fair balance between good (most actions) and evilish (radical acts of punishing justice). LN is yopur best bet, but slipping to evil is a good plot device, so don't be afraid to let go a little.
Dead_Weasel 06-11-07, 04:35 AM	The great virtue, and the great weakness, of Good (in D&D, as I see it, of course) is that it relies a lot on redemption. It does not have to forgive and forget, but it does need to encourage others to "see the light," "lead by example," and "give peace a chance." By extension, a Lawful Good alignment requires an individual to be both less forgiving and more open to the possibility of redemption - once something is verifiably evil, it needs to be destroyed, but if there is a good chance that it is not evil or is no longer evil, then further examination into the matter is needed. The "corporeal punishment" episode you describe is one that I am perfectly willing to ascribe to LG (albeit a particularly strict LG), but if pursued to often or without consideration could certainly prompt a shift to LN, or even LE if pursued with too much glee. Keep in mind that since alignment exists in D&D along two axes, attempting to have an extreme view on two axes requires a balancing act. It is not always possible to act both Lawful and Good at the same time, and if you are pursuing Law to the extent that Good is a secondary concern instead of a primary one, it might be time to switch alignments. The alignment titles themselves can be deceptive - what prevents a character from being Good Lawful, really? Is Good-Evil the primary axis to your character, or does she consider the Law-Chaos axis more important, more relevant, or more significant somehow?
warwinner 06-11-07, 05:19 AM	I'd say the cleric sounds paranoid and oppressive People might fall to evils due to their environment Cutting their hands or hanging them without proper trial is neither lawful nor good I'd say the character is conflicted, helping some and fanatically judging others Hence i'd say she's becoming chaotic neutral The commoners would fear such a heavy handed enforcer of justice.As common People sin and do minor evils from time to time
Prime361 06-11-07, 07:25 AM	Am I acting as lawful-good or do my actions ask for a change of alignment? I would say your actions are more Lawful-neutral with evil tendancies. But L/N is deffinately good enough. Look at pg. 106 of Player Handbook, you will probably agree.
Mathurian 06-12-07, 04:25 PM	Alignment is always a tricky (and somewhat discretional) issue, and some of these questions will be affected by the "tone" of the campaign you're in. Personally, I would have no problem with a lawful good person executing (or cutting off the hand of) an evildoer. In many cultures the death penalty is appropriate and I believe it is reasonable to assume the role of judge, jury, and executioner if the proper authorities are not easily reached. In the second case however (and maybe even in the first, depending on circumstances) I don't think you're acting as a lawful good character. Surprisingly, and after some consideration, I'd place you at neutral or chaotic good (I know that messes up your class, but maybe you could change deities after finding that your God puts Law before good). You basically decided not to hand someone over to the authorities because you felt that the greater good would not be served by it. That sounds to me like a choatic (or at least neutral) good act, vigilante justice when other options are available isn't a Lawful act, though by my standards it can still be a good one.
Stormbrand 06-12-07, 05:37 PM	Why do people seem to think that Lawful = formal trials in courtrooms? As I understand it, the main connection between Lawful and secular law is the general attitude towards the concept - a Lawful characters believes that laws are the best way. We have a confession from the punishee, who, by the way, attacked you for asking too many questions. There was no reason why even a paladin would be obligated to spare them. So 'trial' is a non-issue because guilt has already been established and proven - at least on the charge of the attack against you and your companions. Confession from the other pretty much settles any trial. By the way, surrendering to a paladin is actually a stupid way to escape punishment - in the paladin code is a clause labelled 'punish those who harm or threaten innocents', not to redeem or be nice to them. If the paladin does not inflict punishment he is breaking his code. ---------------------- Read Lawful Good, SRD: A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. The example LG character is Alhandra who "fights evil without mercy" - your behaviour matches the iconic Lawful Good character. Many people label stuff that they personally dislike as evil. Lawful Good is free to be harsh and uncompromising. Squeamish does not equal Good.
warwinner 06-12-07, 10:34 PM	Isn't someone who dispenses personal justice [cut his hand off/hang him] neutral in some way [more self oriented] If all who were even slightly evil met horrible fates, no-one would reveal themself, redeem themself, change to good etc what appeal does good hold then ? Punishing evil must be after looking at it's degree, which the cleric seems to ignore in favour of personal laws. so she is more of LN judge or CG does whatever she thinks is good or CN does whatever she thinks is right even if it is somehow extreme
godbeepit 06-12-07, 10:53 PM	I personally think you're totally justified in being Lawful Good. So you wanted to cut his hand off big deal. It's just a hand and he's a rich merchant dealing in stolen goods he's got the money to buy another one. Aside from that, he's still breaking the law and was caught in a place where you could not simply turn him in. So naturally you act as the law and do as the law would normally do (Assuming cutting off his hand is a normal punishment doled out by the government as well... that's kind of important... It's not Europe it's D&D. But alas I am side-tracked). So you would definitely be Lawful. If anything I'd say your party members are just blaming you because they got put into a conflict with someone who wasn't pure evil seeping power straight from the Plane of Negative Energy and corrupting the world with his mere presence. So, you acted lawfully (by oh I don't know, abiding by the law. that one's hard) and you acted good (by punishing evil-doers (which makes you twice as lawful)). I dunno... lawful... and good... that must mean he's Lawful Good. *Gasp*:eek:
Mathurian 06-13-07, 12:31 AM	The example LG character is Alhandra who "fights evil without mercy" - your behaviour matches the iconic Lawful Good character. I agree in the first case, but to me the second case he mentioned (particularly when taken in conjunction with the first) makes him sound didtrustful of legitimate authority and possibly not lawful. Obviously these are only two low detail situations, but particularly with his motivation in the second case, "I was sure would not be punished if I let the city justice take care of him" sounds non-lawful to me. Just my .02
Master_Vega 06-13-07, 01:29 AM	Ah but following the law even though it's corrupt is the job of the samurai, not the paladin. I remember reading the following probably slightly incorrect quote in the samurai class once: "Samurai respect paladins as fellow upholders of the law, but are confused by their tendency to question whether what their superiors ask is the right thing." Judging by that, I don't think a paladin who knows the authorities are corrupt will consider them legitimate.
Mathurian 06-13-07, 12:40 PM	Ah but following the law even though it's corrupt is the job of the samurai, not the paladin. I remember reading the following probably slightly incorrect quote in the samurai class once: "Samurai respect paladins as fellow upholders of the law, but are confused by their tendency to question whether what their superiors ask is the right thing." Judging by that, I don't think a paladin who knows the authorities are corrupt will consider them legitimate. Yeah, those are some of the unclear issues, but it seems from the second scenario that the cleric simply doesn't trust the law to do its job in general. If it's simply a matter of unjust authorities, then the paladin (or in this case LG Cleric) is within his rights to take justice into his own hands (IMO), but it sounds like this character is beginning to disregard and distrust legal authorities. It is hard to tell for sure without more complete info, but if the distrust becomes general then your lawful componant is in doubt.
Master_Vega 06-13-07, 01:07 PM	True indeed... *waits for the thread starter to post again* On a random note, my brain clicked mid-post last time that the thread was about a paladin. Sorry for any confusion there; I think my point still applies to some extent. In the meantime, I once described the LG, NG, and CG like this to a friend: In the event that a thief passes by, and is verified as a thief by pursuers, different good alignment will have the following reactions... LG: Stop, thief! *pursues, beats the thief down, returns the goods and turns the perpetrator in* NG: Damnit not again! *gauges distance of the fleeing person and decides whether they're close enough to chase, or if it is instead more convenient to shoot them with his crossbow, returns goods or lets the owners catch up to retrieve the items themselves* CG: Get back here! *shoots crossbow at thief and chases, shooting more if the criminal does not stop, returns goods or lets the owners catch up to retrieve the items themselves*