alignment question Please help [Archive] - Wizards Community

alignment question Please help [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Vecna, lord of secrets
05-14-04, 03:44 PM I have come to a big snag in my campign, the cleric wants to use pro evil and pro lawful to protect from my BBEG and the paladin has been preparing holy smite and I found out the bad guy has no alignment, and I have allowed player to take advantage of these abilities so I need her to have one

This is what I have

1. She wants to gain power to acheve good things i.e. end to slavery , predijuce, opression and many things she considers evil

2. she worships Vecna, yes this is confusing but I think that he has no code saying you are to opress and keep slaves

3. She belives that though these clearly chaotic ideals need to be acheived through lawful means

4. Though see wants good she is willing to go about evil acts to do so

5. She opposes directly doing evil acts and sends other to do them

I really think shes evil, but is she lawful nuetral or choatic, i never really was good with alignments
MoogleEmpMog
05-14-04, 04:00 PM Based on your description, I would say the character is True Neutral, with some Neutral Evil tendencies. It sounds like she doesn't WANT to do bad, but when others get in the way of her doing GOOD, she's willing to have some heads busted.

I suppose it depends on just how evil her means are. If she has her thugs rough enemies up and perhaps even kill them if they fight back, does a bit of stealing, assassinates evil folks, creates undead... she's True Neutral on the edge.

If she consorts with demons and devils, terrorizes innocents with her undead legions, mass-executes people to fuel said legions, and holds dark rituals involving bloody sacrifices to Vecna... she's Neutral Evil all the way.

Either way, she's definitely Neutral on the Law/Chaos axis.
Autosponge
05-14-04, 04:25 PM Yeah, I'd go along with N.
FangsofChaos
05-15-04, 12:03 AM Yeah I would go with either Chatotic Neutral or just Neutral.
Llewelynn
05-15-04, 12:21 AM I think Moogle has it right.... N with NE tendencies.

- Llew
Xyplex
05-15-04, 12:51 PM I think of Dr. Doom when I think of someone who wants to establish a 'good' society through evil means. Just because she believes that the ends, "good", justify the means, "evil", doesn't make her neutral.

Consider this ... she doesn't like to do evil things personally, but has no problem telling other people to do so? So she orders a minion to go and kill the aristocracy, all of them, because they support the oppressive society, in which slavery exists. Numerous threads have been presented that slavery, in and of itself, is not evil, so it's irradication is not nessisarily good. Oppression is one thing, but that's the halmark of both Lawful and Chaotic socieites (one uses peer pressure to oppress people, the other uses personal force), and it really depends on what you call oppression ... if you say that a monarchy is naturally oppressive because it restricts the rights of it's citizens to own property, than the good king, no matter what he does, no matter how kind he is, is part of an oppressive system, and a target for elimination.

Just because a particular person believes a particular act is evil, does not make it so. A miserly person might consider giving money to the poor to be an evil act, because it 'encourages' them to be poor, and that by letting them live in their squaller, she's indirectly encouraging them to improve their position.

My arguement would be for LE ... she has a clear view of what the world is she wants, and how to go about doing so. Her methods will only make things worse, rather than better ... because she has no qualms about what path she would take to get there. She has her own moral code, that happens to run counter to what most people consider to be good.
totoro
05-15-04, 02:59 PM Originally posted by Vecna, lord of secrets
1. She wants to gain power to acheve good things i.e. end to slavery , predijuce, opression and many things she considers evil

2. she worships Vecna, yes this is confusing but I think that he has no code saying you are to opress and keep slaves

3. She belives that though these clearly chaotic ideals need to be acheived through lawful means

4. Though see wants good she is willing to go about evil acts to do so

5. She opposes directly doing evil acts and sends other to do them
1. Wants to gain power makes me think evil tendencies. The desire for power is a corrupting influence.

2. Worshipping an evil god makes me think evil tendencies. While you may say it has little influence on her in-game actions, it would make sense that the little things you don't notice in the game would lean in the evil direction.

3. What you call "clearly chaotic" are ending slavery and oppression. And saying you are achieving something "through lawful means" has little to do with alignment. I think alignment is set by deeds, not words. Anyway, ending oppression sounds like good to me. I don't think a LG ruling elite oppresses its people. I think they rule by example and obey the laws they set down themselves. Evil ruling elite oppress, regardless of their lawful/chaotic tendencies. So, IMO, ending oppression is a sign of good (not chaos).

The alignment associated with ending slavery depends on the level of evil of the institution of slavery as practiced. The general concensus on these boards is that slavery may be neutral or evil, depending upon its implementation. However, any evil alignment would have no problem with keeping slaves. Partly for that reason, I think slavery indicates at least evil tendencies (balanced by potentially enlightened laws or norms that protect slaves). Ending slavery indicates at least some good tendencies (unless you are advocating an out of the pot into the fire scenario, where being a slave is just as bad as what you can expect as a free person).

4. Willing to do evil to achieve good sounds good to me as long as the current system is evil. I rely more upon intent than just about anything else. However, the big question is whether the good that is being strived for is really Good (capital G) and whether the current system is really Evil. If she says, "I'm gonna kill every prejudiced person." Then I would label her evil. Prejudice is probably neutral (it is just categorizing, something all humans do, with ignorance, something all humans have to a variable degree). I would argue that using evil means to turn neutral into good introduces evil into a neutral system and is therefore evil. Using evil to turn an evil system into a neutral (or good) one might be neutral (or good).

5. Doing the dirty work yourself is the same as sending others to do it. It might be slightly more lawful to send minions to take care of your dirty work, though.

-----

Using the factors you provided, I think she comes out as Evil (the most important factor being her willingness to introduce evil into a good or neutral system) with Lawful tendencies.
DarkThoughts24
05-15-04, 03:10 PM ne. with ng intentions.

would say ne since has no real love of the law or order, but has no issues ethically doing things that would make a good character wince.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Vecna, lord of secrets 05-14-04, 03:44 PM	I have come to a big snag in my campign, the cleric wants to use pro evil and pro lawful to protect from my BBEG and the paladin has been preparing holy smite and I found out the bad guy has no alignment, and I have allowed player to take advantage of these abilities so I need her to have one This is what I have 1. She wants to gain power to acheve good things i.e. end to slavery , predijuce, opression and many things she considers evil 2. she worships Vecna, yes this is confusing but I think that he has no code saying you are to opress and keep slaves 3. She belives that though these clearly chaotic ideals need to be acheived through lawful means 4. Though see wants good she is willing to go about evil acts to do so 5. She opposes directly doing evil acts and sends other to do them I really think shes evil, but is she lawful nuetral or choatic, i never really was good with alignments
MoogleEmpMog 05-14-04, 04:00 PM	Based on your description, I would say the character is True Neutral, with some Neutral Evil tendencies. It sounds like she doesn't WANT to do bad, but when others get in the way of her doing GOOD, she's willing to have some heads busted. I suppose it depends on just how evil her means are. If she has her thugs rough enemies up and perhaps even kill them if they fight back, does a bit of stealing, assassinates evil folks, creates undead... she's True Neutral on the edge. If she consorts with demons and devils, terrorizes innocents with her undead legions, mass-executes people to fuel said legions, and holds dark rituals involving bloody sacrifices to Vecna... she's Neutral Evil all the way. Either way, she's definitely Neutral on the Law/Chaos axis.
Autosponge 05-14-04, 04:25 PM	Yeah, I'd go along with N.
FangsofChaos 05-15-04, 12:03 AM	Yeah I would go with either Chatotic Neutral or just Neutral.
Llewelynn 05-15-04, 12:21 AM	I think Moogle has it right.... N with NE tendencies. - Llew
Xyplex 05-15-04, 12:51 PM	I think of Dr. Doom when I think of someone who wants to establish a 'good' society through evil means. Just because she believes that the ends, "good", justify the means, "evil", doesn't make her neutral. Consider this ... she doesn't like to do evil things personally, but has no problem telling other people to do so? So she orders a minion to go and kill the aristocracy, all of them, because they support the oppressive society, in which slavery exists. Numerous threads have been presented that slavery, in and of itself, is not evil, so it's irradication is not nessisarily good. Oppression is one thing, but that's the halmark of both Lawful and Chaotic socieites (one uses peer pressure to oppress people, the other uses personal force), and it really depends on what you call oppression ... if you say that a monarchy is naturally oppressive because it restricts the rights of it's citizens to own property, than the good king, no matter what he does, no matter how kind he is, is part of an oppressive system, and a target for elimination. Just because a particular person believes a particular act is evil, does not make it so. A miserly person might consider giving money to the poor to be an evil act, because it 'encourages' them to be poor, and that by letting them live in their squaller, she's indirectly encouraging them to improve their position. My arguement would be for LE ... she has a clear view of what the world is she wants, and how to go about doing so. Her methods will only make things worse, rather than better ... because she has no qualms about what path she would take to get there. She has her own moral code, that happens to run counter to what most people consider to be good.
totoro 05-15-04, 02:59 PM	Originally posted by Vecna, lord of secrets 1. She wants to gain power to acheve good things i.e. end to slavery , predijuce, opression and many things she considers evil 2. she worships Vecna, yes this is confusing but I think that he has no code saying you are to opress and keep slaves 3. She belives that though these clearly chaotic ideals need to be acheived through lawful means 4. Though see wants good she is willing to go about evil acts to do so 5. She opposes directly doing evil acts and sends other to do them 1. Wants to gain power makes me think evil tendencies. The desire for power is a corrupting influence. 2. Worshipping an evil god makes me think evil tendencies. While you may say it has little influence on her in-game actions, it would make sense that the little things you don't notice in the game would lean in the evil direction. 3. What you call "clearly chaotic" are ending slavery and oppression. And saying you are achieving something "through lawful means" has little to do with alignment. I think alignment is set by deeds, not words. Anyway, ending oppression sounds like good to me. I don't think a LG ruling elite oppresses its people. I think they rule by example and obey the laws they set down themselves. Evil ruling elite oppress, regardless of their lawful/chaotic tendencies. So, IMO, ending oppression is a sign of good (not chaos). The alignment associated with ending slavery depends on the level of evil of the institution of slavery as practiced. The general concensus on these boards is that slavery may be neutral or evil, depending upon its implementation. However, any evil alignment would have no problem with keeping slaves. Partly for that reason, I think slavery indicates at least evil tendencies (balanced by potentially enlightened laws or norms that protect slaves). Ending slavery indicates at least some good tendencies (unless you are advocating an out of the pot into the fire scenario, where being a slave is just as bad as what you can expect as a free person). 4. Willing to do evil to achieve good sounds good to me as long as the current system is evil. I rely more upon intent than just about anything else. However, the big question is whether the good that is being strived for is really Good (capital G) and whether the current system is really Evil. If she says, "I'm gonna kill every prejudiced person." Then I would label her evil. Prejudice is probably neutral (it is just categorizing, something all humans do, with ignorance, something all humans have to a variable degree). I would argue that using evil means to turn neutral into good introduces evil into a neutral system and is therefore evil. Using evil to turn an evil system into a neutral (or good) one might be neutral (or good). 5. Doing the dirty work yourself is the same as sending others to do it. It might be slightly more lawful to send minions to take care of your dirty work, though. ----- Using the factors you provided, I think she comes out as Evil (the most important factor being her willingness to introduce evil into a good or neutral system) with Lawful tendencies.
DarkThoughts24 05-15-04, 03:10 PM	ne. with ng intentions. would say ne since has no real love of the law or order, but has no issues ethically doing things that would make a good character wince.