Alignment Problem [Archive] - Wizards Community

Alignment Problem [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Kojin_Delacour
08-13-06, 08:39 AM Ok fellow DM's here is my problem. I have a Lawful Good PC and 3 Neutral PC's in a party. No problem there. The problem lies when the neutral pc's constantly do things the LG know are wrong. Now what can be done to help this problem solve itself.
Stev Beren
08-13-06, 08:43 AM What sort of wrong things?
Kojin_Delacour
08-13-06, 08:50 AM Well for instance last night one of my neutrals thought it would be a good idea to kill a shop owner because it helped him gain some gp. My LG pc didn't really know what to do because technically the other isn't evil. He just does what benefits him at the time. Pretty much I am trying to figure out what can be done to help my pc's stay in a group and not have an all out pc war. Paladins versus evil acts don't mix to good.
Stev Beren
08-13-06, 08:57 AM Well, first off, that Neutral isn't neutral.

Its like the MOnty Python sketch, he just crossed off "Evil" on the alignment liscence and replaced it with Neutral.

That is the definition of showing "Wanton disregard for sentient life" if I ever saw it.

ANd any self respectign Paladin woudl have allready turned the guy in to the authorities. Heck, any self respectign character with an alignment of good, and half of those with an alignment of neutral would as well. Psychopaths are not good news.
Kojin_Delacour
08-13-06, 09:11 AM Ok I see your point because I felt like the pali should have done something to prevent this. Well I guess my last question would be what is the true meaning of neutral because for many years now I thought they did what helped them most whether it be a good deed or and evil act.
Stafir Ortnev
08-13-06, 09:21 AM I think a better way to think of Neutral is 'apathetic'. They don't go out of their way to do something good or something evil. They tend to be on the middle line of things. However they also tend to not go tooo far one way or another. Killing someone just to get a break on price? The same way stealing something heads towards chaotic more than lawful...killing someone has a heavy leaning towards being evil and may indicate the character is starting to, if not having already, fallen.

Neutral can probably be seen as 'evil light' or 'good light'. In this case..the character may have somehow threatened..maybe harmed...but they wouldn't have killed.

As for the Paladin...definately needs to try and turn in the characters if he knows whats going on. Otherwise I think the Paladin's god needs to have a little talking with him. A Paladin can travel with others not of his alignment...it just requires that they never give the Paladin a reason to think that they have done something wrong. A paladin is really more suited for a more black/white and hack/slash campain. He can be good in a roleplaying one as well, however certain conditions need to be implied to make sure the paladin dosn't turn on the party or loose his paladinhood (like the party never gives him a reason to go against them)
Kojin_Delacour
08-13-06, 09:28 AM Thank you for that input. I am going to start viewing neutral a different way now. You have made some good points here. Thanks yall.
Stev Beren
08-13-06, 11:25 AM If you want more help. .from the SRD:

A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil—after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.

Yours sounds more like:

A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple. She sheds no tears for those she kills, whether for profit, sport, or convenience. She has no love of order and holds no illusion that following laws, traditions, or codes would make her any better or more noble. On the other hand, she doesn’t have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil villain has.
BrotherMarcus
08-13-06, 11:31 AM Well for instance last night one of my neutrals thought it would be a good idea to kill a shop owner because it helped him gain some gp. My LG pc didn't really know what to do because technically the other isn't evil. He just does what benefits him at the time. Pretty much I am trying to figure out what can be done to help my pc's stay in a group and not have an all out pc war. Paladins versus evil acts don't mix to good.

That is not a N. Killing for personal gain is an evil act. A neutral character would have stolen the money.
Reversefigure4
08-13-06, 07:11 PM Characters will react to the deed, not the alignment. A Good character would respond favourably to an Evil character's suggestion that they give the money to the orphanage, for example, regardless of what alignment the Evil character is.

A Good character would respond poorly to anyone threatening to murder an innocent shopkeeper, even if the character suggesting it was Good or Neutral.
Archmage Atrus
08-13-06, 07:40 PM Ok... her'es the thing chap.

A person can be lawful good and still let a few neutral people do some morally ambiguous things. Heck, he can be lawful good and hang out with evil people if he wants. He can adventure with them, all that good stuff.

A paladin, however, cannot. He is morally forbidden from hanging out with evil people. He can't assist them in their schemes.

So, the real question isn't whether or not he's Lawful Good. It's whether or not he's Paladin Lawful Good.

That's a totally different bar to look up to.

Also, totally agree with the others. That's not Neutral. Neutral could be simply stealing from the guy. (Maybe chaotic, if they keep doing it.) But once you kill him, jst for the hell of it, or because it suits you, that's evil.
necrom99
08-13-06, 07:49 PM I find its easiest if you simply think of Neutral alignment as how most normal people in real life like to live. Not really much moral compunction but generaly prefer good to evil........so anything extreme is out. and killing people who are a core race from the PHB in a good town is a no no. so make sure they have fangs first is usually a good bet.....and there stuff is usually more expensive too!
CzarGarrett
08-14-06, 10:02 AM Is the LG guy a Paladin?

If so, he should be actively trying to get them to stop doing 'evil' things entirely and reduce the amount of 'neutral' actions.

If not a Paladin, not much of a problem. He might try to get them to do a few more good acts here and there, but it shouldn't be a big concern. Although perhaps he might want to be more NG or CG to fit with the party.
Stev Beren
08-14-06, 10:11 AM . .I take objection to the concept that ANY character with a good descriptor in their alignment could be nonchalant and have 'no problem' with a companion murdering a shopkeeper for his money. If they don't have a problem with it, and a SEVERE problem, they quite frankly aren't good themselves and the alignment needs to be changed to reflaect that.

"“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others."

Even NEUTRAL on the moral axis would have a bit of a problem with it.

"People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships."

Moreso a LAwful good, even NOT a paladin would have a HUGE problem with it. Or Lawful good no longer describes him at all.

A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished .

Tell me how anyone with that descriptor in their alignment could "Not have a problem" with murdering a shopkeeper to get some money?
Archmage Atrus
08-14-06, 10:57 AM If the LG guy was accomplice to the murder, then, yes, he would no longer be considered LG.

If the neutral people just murdered the guy and the LG was off elsewhere, and he only learns about the murder later, he shouldn't be penalized. He may very well walk off in disgust, (I think he probably should,) or he might try to talk his companions back into Good... whatever. The reasons why the guy sticks around are his own. If he wants to be known for hanging out with murderers and thieves, that's not something that speaks to his own alignment. (Well, perhaps Lawfulness, as he cannot in good conscience be a law abiding citizen without turning in a murderer.)
Gedrin
08-14-06, 01:50 PM They both change alignment. While alignment is more than a single act, willful murder for money is a grossly evil act. Willfully ignoring such an act is to willfully turn your back on justice.

The "NN" guy is in fact either NE or CE. Murdering someone for their money, when you've already got the kind of cash that adventurers normally have, is clearly evil. I'd even say it tends chaotic. Again, while alignment isn't a single act, this isn't stealing a single loaf of bread from a hungry family. It's murder for no purpose other than personal profit when the character no doubt already had more wealth than a commoner could dream of.

The "LG" guy is probably NN. If he's willing to stand by and do nothing when a man has been murdered, he's clearly not concerned with ideas such as civil order, justice, or the defense of innocents. A single act doesn't make an alignment, but this is a murder. Turning your back on a murder isn't a light act.

The apropriate response, for a LG type, upon learning that an associate has murdered someone for their money, is to try to convince them to turn themselves in, and since that will fail, then report them to the local law. A paladin should go a step further and aid the local law enforcement in aprehending the murderer to the best of his ability.

If a paladin were to have witnessed and chosen to allow his associate to commit this murder, he looses his paladin status. Permanently. Without possibility of atonement. To allow a murder is so obvious and massive a violation of his duty to uphold the civil order and defend the lives of innocents that it is amazing he was ever chosen for so noble a profession.
Likewise, if the paladin has learned of the murder at a later time, and does nothing to bring justice to the slain innocent shopkeeper, he will have again willfully chosen to allow the murder to pass.

However, it may be that this particular campaign has run things for a while without clear rules such as "murder is a greatly evil act". I normally consider such things as standard, but they aren't always. If it has been unclear in the past if LG types should oppose murder, or that murder is a clearly evil act, the DM may wish to be easy on the players this time. Of course, the DM will also want to set some clearer standards, and to advise the players they will be held to them in the future.
Dolo
08-14-06, 03:28 PM It sounds like either this player of the Paladin is new to playing the game, or playing a Paladin. Or he is trying not to just nuke the game cause basically the other 3 are pretty much asking to be thrown in jail. Unless he wants to play an evil/neutral character he is going to have problems, or he can just report them to the authorities and watch them get carted off to jail.

Give the Paladin a warning((Cause it sounds like he is trying to figure out what to do out of game since he realizes there is going to be problems)) and have him start trying to reign in and focus these guys towards something less deadly and constructive. Also since one of them murdered a shopkeeper, have the cityguard((If there is one)) track him down and arrest him. after they have confirmed that he did it......well start sharpening up that Axe its gonna ugly.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kojin_Delacour 08-13-06, 08:39 AM	Ok fellow DM's here is my problem. I have a Lawful Good PC and 3 Neutral PC's in a party. No problem there. The problem lies when the neutral pc's constantly do things the LG know are wrong. Now what can be done to help this problem solve itself.
Stev Beren 08-13-06, 08:43 AM	What sort of wrong things?
Kojin_Delacour 08-13-06, 08:50 AM	Well for instance last night one of my neutrals thought it would be a good idea to kill a shop owner because it helped him gain some gp. My LG pc didn't really know what to do because technically the other isn't evil. He just does what benefits him at the time. Pretty much I am trying to figure out what can be done to help my pc's stay in a group and not have an all out pc war. Paladins versus evil acts don't mix to good.
Stev Beren 08-13-06, 08:57 AM	Well, first off, that Neutral isn't neutral. Its like the MOnty Python sketch, he just crossed off "Evil" on the alignment liscence and replaced it with Neutral. That is the definition of showing "Wanton disregard for sentient life" if I ever saw it. ANd any self respectign Paladin woudl have allready turned the guy in to the authorities. Heck, any self respectign character with an alignment of good, and half of those with an alignment of neutral would as well. Psychopaths are not good news.
Kojin_Delacour 08-13-06, 09:11 AM	Ok I see your point because I felt like the pali should have done something to prevent this. Well I guess my last question would be what is the true meaning of neutral because for many years now I thought they did what helped them most whether it be a good deed or and evil act.
Stafir Ortnev 08-13-06, 09:21 AM	I think a better way to think of Neutral is 'apathetic'. They don't go out of their way to do something good or something evil. They tend to be on the middle line of things. However they also tend to not go tooo far one way or another. Killing someone just to get a break on price? The same way stealing something heads towards chaotic more than lawful...killing someone has a heavy leaning towards being evil and may indicate the character is starting to, if not having already, fallen. Neutral can probably be seen as 'evil light' or 'good light'. In this case..the character may have somehow threatened..maybe harmed...but they wouldn't have killed. As for the Paladin...definately needs to try and turn in the characters if he knows whats going on. Otherwise I think the Paladin's god needs to have a little talking with him. A Paladin can travel with others not of his alignment...it just requires that they never give the Paladin a reason to think that they have done something wrong. A paladin is really more suited for a more black/white and hack/slash campain. He can be good in a roleplaying one as well, however certain conditions need to be implied to make sure the paladin dosn't turn on the party or loose his paladinhood (like the party never gives him a reason to go against them)
Kojin_Delacour 08-13-06, 09:28 AM	Thank you for that input. I am going to start viewing neutral a different way now. You have made some good points here. Thanks yall.
Stev Beren 08-13-06, 11:25 AM	If you want more help. .from the SRD: A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil—after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. Yours sounds more like: A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple. She sheds no tears for those she kills, whether for profit, sport, or convenience. She has no love of order and holds no illusion that following laws, traditions, or codes would make her any better or more noble. On the other hand, she doesn’t have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil villain has.
BrotherMarcus 08-13-06, 11:31 AM	Well for instance last night one of my neutrals thought it would be a good idea to kill a shop owner because it helped him gain some gp. My LG pc didn't really know what to do because technically the other isn't evil. He just does what benefits him at the time. Pretty much I am trying to figure out what can be done to help my pc's stay in a group and not have an all out pc war. Paladins versus evil acts don't mix to good. That is not a N. Killing for personal gain is an evil act. A neutral character would have stolen the money.
Reversefigure4 08-13-06, 07:11 PM	Characters will react to the deed, not the alignment. A Good character would respond favourably to an Evil character's suggestion that they give the money to the orphanage, for example, regardless of what alignment the Evil character is. A Good character would respond poorly to anyone threatening to murder an innocent shopkeeper, even if the character suggesting it was Good or Neutral.
Archmage Atrus 08-13-06, 07:40 PM	Ok... her'es the thing chap. A person can be lawful good and still let a few neutral people do some morally ambiguous things. Heck, he can be lawful good and hang out with evil people if he wants. He can adventure with them, all that good stuff. A paladin, however, cannot. He is morally forbidden from hanging out with evil people. He can't assist them in their schemes. So, the real question isn't whether or not he's Lawful Good. It's whether or not he's Paladin Lawful Good. That's a totally different bar to look up to. Also, totally agree with the others. That's not Neutral. Neutral could be simply stealing from the guy. (Maybe chaotic, if they keep doing it.) But once you kill him, jst for the hell of it, or because it suits you, that's evil.
necrom99 08-13-06, 07:49 PM	I find its easiest if you simply think of Neutral alignment as how most normal people in real life like to live. Not really much moral compunction but generaly prefer good to evil........so anything extreme is out. and killing people who are a core race from the PHB in a good town is a no no. so make sure they have fangs first is usually a good bet.....and there stuff is usually more expensive too!
CzarGarrett 08-14-06, 10:02 AM	Is the LG guy a Paladin? If so, he should be actively trying to get them to stop doing 'evil' things entirely and reduce the amount of 'neutral' actions. If not a Paladin, not much of a problem. He might try to get them to do a few more good acts here and there, but it shouldn't be a big concern. Although perhaps he might want to be more NG or CG to fit with the party.
Stev Beren 08-14-06, 10:11 AM	. .I take objection to the concept that ANY character with a good descriptor in their alignment could be nonchalant and have 'no problem' with a companion murdering a shopkeeper for his money. If they don't have a problem with it, and a SEVERE problem, they quite frankly aren't good themselves and the alignment needs to be changed to reflaect that. "“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others." Even NEUTRAL on the moral axis would have a bit of a problem with it. "People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships." Moreso a LAwful good, even NOT a paladin would have a HUGE problem with it. Or Lawful good no longer describes him at all. A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished . Tell me how anyone with that descriptor in their alignment could "Not have a problem" with murdering a shopkeeper to get some money?
Archmage Atrus 08-14-06, 10:57 AM	If the LG guy was accomplice to the murder, then, yes, he would no longer be considered LG. If the neutral people just murdered the guy and the LG was off elsewhere, and he only learns about the murder later, he shouldn't be penalized. He may very well walk off in disgust, (I think he probably should,) or he might try to talk his companions back into Good... whatever. The reasons why the guy sticks around are his own. If he wants to be known for hanging out with murderers and thieves, that's not something that speaks to his own alignment. (Well, perhaps Lawfulness, as he cannot in good conscience be a law abiding citizen without turning in a murderer.)
Gedrin 08-14-06, 01:50 PM	They both change alignment. While alignment is more than a single act, willful murder for money is a grossly evil act. Willfully ignoring such an act is to willfully turn your back on justice. The "NN" guy is in fact either NE or CE. Murdering someone for their money, when you've already got the kind of cash that adventurers normally have, is clearly evil. I'd even say it tends chaotic. Again, while alignment isn't a single act, this isn't stealing a single loaf of bread from a hungry family. It's murder for no purpose other than personal profit when the character no doubt already had more wealth than a commoner could dream of. The "LG" guy is probably NN. If he's willing to stand by and do nothing when a man has been murdered, he's clearly not concerned with ideas such as civil order, justice, or the defense of innocents. A single act doesn't make an alignment, but this is a murder. Turning your back on a murder isn't a light act. The apropriate response, for a LG type, upon learning that an associate has murdered someone for their money, is to try to convince them to turn themselves in, and since that will fail, then report them to the local law. A paladin should go a step further and aid the local law enforcement in aprehending the murderer to the best of his ability. If a paladin were to have witnessed and chosen to allow his associate to commit this murder, he looses his paladin status. Permanently. Without possibility of atonement. To allow a murder is so obvious and massive a violation of his duty to uphold the civil order and defend the lives of innocents that it is amazing he was ever chosen for so noble a profession. Likewise, if the paladin has learned of the murder at a later time, and does nothing to bring justice to the slain innocent shopkeeper, he will have again willfully chosen to allow the murder to pass. However, it may be that this particular campaign has run things for a while without clear rules such as "murder is a greatly evil act". I normally consider such things as standard, but they aren't always. If it has been unclear in the past if LG types should oppose murder, or that murder is a clearly evil act, the DM may wish to be easy on the players this time. Of course, the DM will also want to set some clearer standards, and to advise the players they will be held to them in the future.
Dolo 08-14-06, 03:28 PM	It sounds like either this player of the Paladin is new to playing the game, or playing a Paladin. Or he is trying not to just nuke the game cause basically the other 3 are pretty much asking to be thrown in jail. Unless he wants to play an evil/neutral character he is going to have problems, or he can just report them to the authorities and watch them get carted off to jail. Give the Paladin a warning((Cause it sounds like he is trying to figure out what to do out of game since he realizes there is going to be problems)) and have him start trying to reign in and focus these guys towards something less deadly and constructive. Also since one of them murdered a shopkeeper, have the cityguard((If there is one)) track him down and arrest him. after they have confirmed that he did it......well start sharpening up that Axe its gonna ugly.