Post/Author/DateTime	Post
savatage 05-04-05, 07:30 AM	Here is the situation.... I'm playing a CN 1/2 Drow Rogue. I'm playing her as to hate people that tend to scoff at her because of her Drow features but like people that disregared that and see her for who she is. She tends to get very upset/violent when being accused of being a drow. .... OK, we come to this town because the food shipments were not arriving in the town we just left and we were sent to investigate the problem. It took about en days to get there and on the 8th day were were attacked by a lyancathrope(spelling) of some form. We didn't know that till after we killed it and the next morning it was a human form. Anyway,.. We reach the village of about 300 and I went to the INN for some answers and was told to go see the man at the church. We get there and Me and my friend who is playing a Skulk went around back to find a man digging in the ground babbling something about an orb or something...Being cautious because of the recent lyancathrope attach...I try to talk to this man but he refuses to talk to me and seems very rude and had no repect for me and my friend. I questioned him about any recent problems with the crops/lyancathrope activity in the area and he gets ****** of and screams out for the guards!!! On a whim or I should say panic, I run him through with my sword in fear of being caught(I am a drow, 1/2 anyway). It was not what I meant to do but it just happen. Needless to say I was questioned about my Alignment all night.. Was I wrong in doing that?? Remember!!! My character hates being ridiculed. I know it wasn't the best option to do but she panicked... Any feedback would be great...
Ut-Napishtim 05-04-05, 09:17 AM	Actually that's funny and sounds exactly what a CN character might do. The dude calls the guards for no reason, and the character panics and kills him. I wouldn't make a habit of offing people or you might start to shift towards evil, but in this instance it seems perfectly natural to me.
savatage 05-04-05, 09:34 AM	I agree. I don't make it a habbit to go into every town and kill someone...It was a split second decision. Do I take the risk of being caught and thrown in jail for being a 1/2 drow or do I take care of the matter myself. Like I said she gets very offended when people look down on her for being a drow...
VirgilCaine 05-04-05, 09:50 AM	I agree, this sounds reasonable for CN. Don't make it a habit, though.
savatage 05-04-05, 09:59 AM	This was the first time my character did this and I get the DM and one other player ****** off at me for doing it..The player that was mad even summoned the guards on me..Gee, thanks for being a party member and defending me... Maybe I'll off him next...That would really **** him off... :P
Earndur 05-04-05, 11:25 AM	This was the first time my character did this and I get the DM and one other player ****** off at me for doing it..The player that was mad even summoned the guards on me..Gee, thanks for being a party member and defending me... Maybe I'll off him next...That would really **** him off... :P Your character may feel completely justified in killing of that man but that doesn't mean it wasn't cold-blooded murder. Your PC is Chaotic Neutral. The act was evil. Drow are notoriously evil humanoids. You look like a drow. You and a skulk approach a lone man at the church. He's rude to you. He becomes suspicious or frightened and he calls for help. You kill him. You have justified any prejudiced suspicion or fright which your appearance might provoke. A PC found out about your murder and informed the authorities. Now you want to kill him? The neutral into evil slope is slippery indeed. A good-aligned PC should inform the guards of your murderous acts. A neutral PC might also turn in your PC, if he fears that your aggressive attitude about bigotry has slipped into a homicidal mania. You could probably justify the deed to the other PCs if you could prove that the man you killed was himself evil and part of some diabolical plot concerning those orbs he was mumbling about (speak with dead). That way you can justify the death as furthering the causes of good! Overall, don't take it too personally that your DM and fellow players might be worried that your character's first act of murder isn't just the beginning of a long string of evil acts hiding under the banner of being "neutral".
savatage 05-04-05, 11:38 AM	Very informitive post..thanks...That line about me killing my friends character was just a joke... But it pisses me off that he would turn me in instead of asking me why and what happened. Instead he just turns me in with no reason or explanation... Later on in the game...My Skulk friend and I sneaked into town to investigate and we were attacked by about 12 of those lyancathrope things and they hacked and slashed them but our Lawfull good cleric did not because they were just innocent people afflicted with it... Our Narc did hack them and we told him he was the murderer for killing towns people too...It was a funny night of gaming....
Droog 05-04-05, 04:35 PM	Here is the situation.... I'm playing a CN 1/2 Drow Rogue. I'm playing her as to hate people that tend to scoff at her because of her Drow features but like people that disregared that and see her for who she is. She tends to get very upset/violent when being accused of being a drow. .... OK, Remember!!! My character hates being ridiculed. No where in your original post does it indicate that the man who called out for the guards did so because you are (half)drow, nor does it suggest that he was in any way ridiculing you. So far it looks like you killed a man who was rude and disrespectful to you, and who was calling out for guards. Paniced or not, you killed a man to save your own skin, which in this case is definitely an evil act.
Lord Ian Stark 05-04-05, 04:52 PM	So Mister savatage what are you going to do when town's people or good aligned hero's track you down and want justice for the murder of an innocent man? Going to kill them too? Because your just so silly and chaotic right? Slaugtering an innocent for your gain is both chaotic and Evil. Prepare to reap the benefits of your action by the Lawful and Good people in the area.
Arrowhen 05-04-05, 04:57 PM	Paniced or not, you killed a man to save your own skin, which in this case is definitely an evil act. But if you kill a goblin, a troll, a dragon, or an evil necromancer to save your own skin, it's not an evil act. It's just considered "adventuring." ;)
Lord Ian Stark 05-04-05, 05:08 PM	But if you kill a goblin, a troll, a dragon, or an evil necromancer to save your own skin, it's not an evil act. It's just considered "adventuring." ;) The Priest that he killed was not a lethal threat to him at that second like the creatures you described are. He could have just as eaily grabbed the guy and silenced him by putting his hand over his mouth. However his first intent was to kill, not subdue. His character is quickly going down into the evil area if he keeps that up.
epifreak 05-04-05, 05:13 PM	So Mister savatage what are you going to do when town's people or good aligned hero's track you down and want justice for the murder of an innocent man? Going to kill them too? Because your just so silly and chaotic right? Slaugtering an innocent for your gain is both chaotic and Evil. Prepare to reap the benefits of your action by the Lawful and Good people in the area. Fighting to avoid death is not innately evil; it's self defence. Killing someone in a panic is not necessarily evil. It definitely isn't a good deed; really it's more of a neutral one. Consider these alternatives for show. Evil: Same scenario happens, up until right before he calls the guards. Your character gets fed up with dealing with him and kills him in frustration. Same scenario, guards have been called. Your character saps him, drags him off into the woods, and tortures him either for information or just for giggles. Good: Same situation, guards haven't yet been called. You apologise for bothering the man, thank him for his time, and leave. If you are sneaky enough to get away with it, you might follow him afterwards to see what exactly that strange man does. Same situation, guards have been called. You can't afford to be taken by the guards, but killing this man just wouldn't be right, so you sap him, leave him unconsious (after making sure he's not dead), and run.
Lord Ian Stark 05-04-05, 05:24 PM	Epifreak if killing an inncoent unarmed priest and showing no remorse or care is not an Evil action in your campaign so be it. For the rest of us who follow the RAW it's Evil.
jrod10 05-04-05, 06:26 PM	Savatage forgot to mention that he showed the be-headed head of a missing townfolk to the priest before the priest screamed murderers. The head was aquired earlier when the creature attacked us on the road. After killing the creature it turned into a human. Savatage be-headed the dead human and kept the head. So it actually went like this: The two characters approached the priest working in the garden. The priest wasn't very cooperative. The head was showed to the priest. The priest screamed murderers. The priest was killed. Was this evil?
Lord Ian Stark 05-04-05, 06:36 PM	The priest wasn't very cooperative. The head was showed to the priest. The priest screamed murderers. The priest was killed. Was this evil? It was a Chaotic and Evil act.
DDogwood 05-04-05, 06:39 PM	Savatage forgot to mention that he showed the be-headed head of a missing townfolk to the priest before the priest screamed murderers. The head was aquired earlier when the creature attacked us on the road. After killing the creature it turned into a human. Savatage be-headed the dead human and kept the head. So it actually went like this: The two characters approached the priest working in the garden. The priest wasn't very cooperative. The head was showed to the priest. The priest screamed murderers. The priest was killed. Was this evil? Killing a priest in a cemetery, when the priest didn't pose a clear and immediate threat to the PCs' lives, was definitely evil. Showing a townsperson's disembodied head to a priest in a cemetery, without warning or precaution, is just stupid. That said, murdering someone isn't necessarily enough to justify an alignment change. If the PC did it more than once or twice, though, I would shift the character's alignment to Evil.
RogerWilco 05-04-05, 07:06 PM	I didn't read all the posts as I'm tired, but I'll tell you the same thing I did over in the DM board to a very similar story: The act was evil, in itself maybe not enough for an alignment shift, but definately on a slippery slope. You live in a world where "detect lies" and "detect evil" are low-level spells, you should not fear guards in most towns, unless you start killing unarmed innocent civilians. There's always the option of doing some subdual damage, instead of just running through an NPC with your sword. Half-drow don't survive long with this behaviour, as in the thread below you exactly become what you're (falsely) accused of. Also check out this thread: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=423872
Wildonion 05-04-05, 10:30 PM	You did an evil act, once. You arn't making a habit of it. I say it was just a slip up and as long as you don't keep doing it you won't have to change alignment. Anyway just be good if you do become evil for your actions and repent and you will be fine. :)
Always-Late 05-04-05, 10:45 PM	I'd say it was chaotic (really) stupid, not evil or anything. First of all, he was panicked. If a guy was going to call guards down on you (and most of the town assume's you're a drow), most likely you'd get lynched pretty fast. Of course, now he'll get lynched even faster, so I'll just say it's stupid. Just don't make a habit of it.
epifreak 05-04-05, 11:37 PM	Savatage forgot to mention that he showed the be-headed head of a missing townfolk to the priest before the priest screamed murderers. The head was aquired earlier when the creature attacked us on the road. After killing the creature it turned into a human. Savatage be-headed the dead human and kept the head. So it actually went like this: The two characters approached the priest working in the garden. The priest wasn't very cooperative. The head was showed to the priest. The priest screamed murderers. The priest was killed. Was this evil? In light of this, well, yeah, I retract my statement about it not being evil.
Asciiman 05-05-05, 04:57 AM	Chaotic Evil. Chaotic Evil. Chaotic Evil with a fair dose of the Chaotic Stupid thrown in. Your DM is right. This is a VERY evil act and you should be punished for it.
q'afuu 05-05-05, 05:17 AM	On a whim or I should say panic, I run him through with my sword in fear of being caught(I am a drow, 1/2 anyway). It was not what I meant to do but it just happen. Usually, killing someone doesn't 'just happen'. Your character used lethal force, period. If she really didn't want to do so, she wouldn't have. "It was an accident" might be considered extenuating circumstances by a *very* lenient judge or jury, but it won't get you acquitted.
savatage 05-05-05, 06:32 AM	It's not whether it was an evil act or not... It's whether a CN 1/2 drow would do something like this. Would I do it again if I could rewind the day??? yes I would...Without hesitation.. My character has done all good things till this one act of violence and is thrown to the dogs for it.. Crap happens!!! Deal with it.
Minias 05-05-05, 07:02 AM	The acts you described can fit the behavior pattern of chaotic neutral character (regardless of race) as a singular incident. You sound contrite - maybe for the wrong reasons - but at least your character is able to admit that it was a foolish mistake and one you'd not repeat if given the chance. It is the preponderance of your actions and the intent which ultimately determine the character's alignment. A single act of evil does not make a chaotic neutral chracter evil. To be honest, if I were at the gaming table with you then I'd likely harrass you a little myself. Hopefully, your DM and fellow gamers will give it a rest - at least until the next innocent life you take in a panic.
Callista 05-05-05, 07:04 AM	Well, let's see: You're a half-drow hanging out with a Skulk! No wonder the guy didn't want to talk to you!! Those races are... shall we say, not too good for diplomacy? Anyway, yes, it was evil. But it's not out of the range of something a CN character would do. If it becomes a habit, then change your char to CE.This is a VERY evil act and you should be punished for it.Now there's a misconception I would dearly love to banish from the game. Yes, a good society punishes people who commit evil acts... but the DM should never, never punish a character for committing an evil act. (Unless it's totally out of character. Then I would withhold role-playing XP. But I would also withhold role-playing XP for a totally evil character who out-of-the-blue decided to commit a totally selfless act, no explanation given.) It should not be considered a bad thing for a character to commit an evil act. It should not be punished by the DM. Yes, the character who commits murder will be hunted by the city guard--but the character who rescues a sacrificial victim will get into trouble with the evil cleric whom they thwarted. Do you see what I mean? Sure, Good should work against Evil and vice versa. That's taken for granted. But to have the DM take sides is not a good thing. Punishing players who play evil characters makes no more sense than punishing them for playing good characters. Changing a character's alignment is not a punishment. It reflects the character's personality changing from one alignment to another. If it changes towards evil, that is not something that either the DM or the character should regard as a "bad thing". Ideally, it should be the player who takes the initiative to change his own character's alignment; it is, after all, the player who knows his character best. The DM is neutral--do not take sides with one alignment or another (not even neutrality). Represent the creatures in the world around the PCs as they would respond to the PCs; don't arbitrarily decide that evil characters have it harder than good characters. If you're in the Underdark, it's the Good character who gets in more trouble, am I right? If you punish anything at all, punish metagaming and bad RP; and that, only by not giving as much RP XP as you would normally.
savatage 05-05-05, 07:29 AM	Here is the link the other player posted.. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=423872 He too left out a few things... Thanks for your support....now I sound like those two old guys from the Bartles and James commercials......
q'afuu 05-05-05, 08:29 AM	My character has done all good things till this one act of violence and is thrown to the dogs for it.. Good acts don't balance out evil ones. More to the point, doing both good and evil doesn't make you neutral. So no, a CN character (regardless of race) wouldn't normally do this.
jrod10 05-05-05, 08:42 AM	Tino- Can I be one of the Bartles and James guys 'cause I'm getting support also? Anyway..............Let's just call it a day, get together next week, work out the kinks and get back to gaming. Thoughts? Jrod
Lord Ian Stark 05-05-05, 09:59 AM	So everyone agrees that if my knife is constantly stabbing and killing an innocent man it was all an accident. So it's not Evil just an accident. :rolleyes: What happened if someone saw you kill the priest. Oops gotta go run over and "accidently" kill him to. What? It was an accident? There wasn't enough time to think of doing anything other than an Evil act. That makes you not CN but evil thinking my friend. There were plenty of non-Evil ways to fix that situation and you took the easy road of death. Like I said in the other post, CN is not a get of of Evil free card. Will your alignment change after this one incident? No. However you stated you would do it again and can care less about the innocent you slaughtered. So guess what? Next time you do an Evil act you will be changed alignments as you don't care about killing innocents as long as it betters your goals. Unless of course you don't follow the RAW, but then why ask what peoples opinnions on the matter are when we are using the RAW as our source of information for a D&D game?
Cantankerous 05-05-05, 10:00 AM	It's not whether it was an evil act or not... It's whether a CN 1/2 drow would do something like this. Would I do it again if I could rewind the day??? yes I would...Without hesitation.. My character has done all good things till this one act of violence and is thrown to the dogs for it.. Crap happens!!! Deal with it. Might a Chaotic Neutral person do this? Sure. A Lawful Good person might too. But for either of them, the action is evil. The Chaotic part has NOTHING whatsover to do with it. Look, if you give money to charity and work as a doctor in a free clinic for fifteen years and then murder someone... what do you think the authorities will do when they catch up with you? Do you think that telling them that your ethical standards call for extreme individualism and that your moral stance is ambivalent will matter at all in your defense? When you commit an act of mayhem there are consequences. Indeed, crap happens. Now though the one who has to deal with it isn't the rest of the universe, it is the person who perpetrated it. Isshia
Lord Ian Stark 05-05-05, 10:10 AM	Might a Chaotic Neutral person do this? Sure. A Lawful Good person might too. But for either of them, the action is evil. The Chaotic part has NOTHING whatsover to do with it. Look, if you give money to charity and work as a doctor in a free clinic for fifteen years and then murder someone... what do you think the authorities will do when they catch up with you? Do you think that telling them that your ethical standards call for extreme individualism and that your moral stance is ambivalent will matter at all in your defense? When you commit an act of mayhem there are consequences. Indeed, crap happens. Now though the one who has to deal with it isn't the rest of the universe, it is the person who perpetrated it. Isshia :clap: Well said. Everyone things that because I'm "Chaotic" I can do what I want and not have the other part of my alignment affected.
Callista 05-05-05, 12:17 PM	Exactly... CN alignments generally don't commit very good or very evil acts at all. The Chaotic part just means you're independent and individualistic, that your moral compass (such as it is, since you're Neutral) doesn't really depend on what others think; you're your own master, probably don't think much of authority and tradition... etc. One act doesn't change an alignment, and this act, assuming you're smack-dab in the middle of Neutral, probably isn't enough to take you to CE. But you really do have to wonder why your character's first impulse is to kill the guy, rather than gag him or knock him out... does your character have low WIS? That could be part of the explanation. Or maybe your character is impulsive or a poor decision-maker in general; that could also be part of the reason. But if your character's impulse to kill the man came from anything more evil than that, you may want to consider changing her alignment. This whole fiasco really gives you a lot of RP opportunities. Your character, a half-drow, has been stereotyped as evil for as long as she can remember. Now she's had the bad judgment to do something that really *is* horribly evil. What's the effect on her? Does she go out of her way to prove she's not evil, or does she embrace it? Does she completely reject society, becoming even more individualistic than she was before? Or is she stricken with guilt? This could be a turning point in your character's life, leading to an alignment change towards any of the four axes.
savatage 05-05-05, 12:34 PM	Well, she does have the reckless flaw if that helps,.....
q'afuu 05-05-05, 12:44 PM	I really don't see what being reckless has to do with this, aside from it being a bit strange that a reckless person's first reaction in this situation was to panic...
Callista 05-05-05, 02:35 PM	Well, she does have the reckless flaw if that helps,.....It might. What does she think about being reckless? Does she embrace it, or try to overcome it? Either way, that might change after this event. You might train whatever skills the flaw lowers, in order to show that your character has overcome that flaw... "Reckless" just means you don't think about things before you do them; panic is a reckless sort of action, if you think about it; at least the sort of panic that spurs you to heedless action. If you're naturally violent and don't have a lot of moral fiber (as this character seems to be), then killing someone might well be the result of panic. How many people, after all, have gotten killed by a panicked robber, after making the wrong move during a robbery?
savatage 05-05-05, 02:40 PM	I like this Callista person!!!! :D
Cantankerous 05-06-05, 04:27 AM	I agree with Callista completely. No surprise there though. The thing is, the action, as any action you take does, has to be incorporated by the DM into how the WORLD responds to YOU. I get the feeling that this is really a two way problem. The town is half full of lycanthropes from what you and another have said, yet the "Good" people of the town aren't taking this into account? Why not? They certainly have to know about it if there are so many of them around. No one is getting surprised here. Still hauling out a severed head, while travelling with a Skulk? Can you really ask why the old priest would have paniced and started shouting for help? Unless the character is exceptionally low stated in intelligence or wisdom even being reckless doesn't fully account for this one. Even then, it would not EXCUSE the action. The local constabulary would, at the least, be out in force looking for you. Very likely the Church would either dispatch hunters of their own, or set a high bounty. It isn't a good precedent for them to set to let the murder of one of their clergy go unpunished... and punished severely. Isshia
Mystical Druid 05-07-05, 12:49 AM	I would say this was a chaotic neutral act, it was essentially done to protect the character, this was ceraintly not done for pleasure or treasure. Its not good but not real evil. A poor rogue is robbing a nobels house. A guard discoverse the rogue and attemtps to take him into costudy. The rogue panicks and pushes him out a window. The guard falls to a horrible death. Overal: Rogue is not evil.
Cantankerous 05-07-05, 01:13 AM	The rogue is not evil, but the act was evil. By D&D term definitions the killing of another sapient life form without the ACTIVE need to do so to perserve your own or anothers life, is evil. The Rogue wasn't saving his own life. He was avoiding capture. Even in a city where he might face the death penalty for theft (which is almost ridiculous in itself) there was no active threat. If the guard attacked him, or even pulled a weapon on him, there MIGHT be some mitigating circumstances; but in a situation with an unarmed Priest out gardening? Please, you have to draw the line somewhere or there is NO such thing as an evil murder. This doesn't change the alignment however. It takes a preponderance of evil actions to do that. Isshia
q'afuu 05-07-05, 06:24 AM	Um, theft is evil to begin with (even if not on the same level as murder). Being poor and needy mitigates that somewhat, but doesn't make it right.
Planar Wanderer 05-07-05, 07:29 AM	Lets not start the theft = evil/chaotic debate again please, the DMG specifically mentions a "robin hood" charachter as Chaotic good, now how that relates to real life is another matter but as far as D&D goes then the DMG is possibly the best point of reference available. Now as for the original poster IMO was it evil? yes, should it shift your alignment? provided you don't make a habit of it and maybe do a good action or two to balance it you should be okay, Was it IC? possibly, it depends on whther your charachter is really "trigger-happy" or not.
q'afuu 05-07-05, 05:29 PM	Lets not start the theft = evil/chaotic debate again please, the DMG specifically mentions a "robin hood" charachter as Chaotic good, now how that relates to real life is another matter but as far as D&D goes then the DMG is possibly the best point of reference available. Robin Hood stole from the rich to give to the poor. He didn't steal from the rich because he *was* poor. ;) ... should it shift your alignment? provided you don't make a habit of it and maybe do a good action or two to balance it you should be okay, ... At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'm going to repeat myself: being neutral is not balancing good and evil acts. It's being *neutral*, which means not doing either. If - being a neutral character - you've committed some evil acts so your alignment is leaning towards Evil, performing a couple of good deeds is not going to make you more neutral again. All it does is make you inconsistent.