Can this character actually be considered Lawful Good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Can this character actually be considered Lawful Good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
FrostyObsitnic
09-16-07, 03:35 AM As the thread title implies, I have a roleplaying question.

According to the rules, a cleric of Wee Jas, (Death, Law, and Magic), can be Lawful Good. To play a cleric of a god of death, however, death has to be pretty damn important.

So here's the character: He's helpful to allies, if a bit creepy, heals the sick and all that nonsense, but if a character or monster behaves evilly (not just performing a nebulously defined "evil action" like casting a necromantic spell, but robbing, murdering, etc.) he makes sure they die. He finishes off all NPCs the party drops in combat. If the party needs to question the NPC, he kills them after questioning. He believes death is a tool for ensuring the safety of innocents, and that his granted powers as a cleric of Wee Jas mean that he should administrate death's workings.

Could that be considered Lawful Good, or is that bordering on Lawful *******?
Lukasa
09-16-07, 03:40 AM Depends who you ask. This is likely to turn into an alignment debate. But I'll throw my two pence in anyway:

I'd call it Lawful Good. It's not Exalted-level Lawful Good, but so long as they are evils, it fits the PHB definition of Lawful Good, and would also fit most people's definition of Lawful Good.

I've been thinking about playing a character similar to this in my friend's campaign, and so I do think your player ought to consider this: he seems to be hastening the death of Evil, while putting off the death of Good. He probably should consider those priorities from the position of the Church of Wee Jas. Does Wee Jas want her church members to heal, to put off death, or does she want her church members to kill, to hasten death, or does she want them to not get involved, to allow creatures to die at their appointed time?
FrostyObsitnic
09-16-07, 04:05 AM Depends who you ask. This is likely to turn into an alignment debate. But I'll throw my two pence in anyway:

I'd call it Lawful Good. It's not Exalted-level Lawful Good, but so long as they are evils, it fits the PHB definition of Lawful Good, and would also fit most people's definition of Lawful Good.

I've been thinking about playing a character similar to this in my friend's campaign, and so I do think your player ought to consider this: he seems to be hastening the death of Evil, while putting off the death of Good. He probably should consider those priorities from the position of the Church of Wee Jas. Does Wee Jas want her church members to heal, to put off death, or does she want her church members to kill, to hasten death, or does she want them to not get involved, to allow creatures to die at their appointed time?

I also think it's a legitimate RP, and I've considered the question of what Wee Jas would do. The character's position on this is that the mere fact that Wee Jas gives him access to healing magic (cure, resurrect, etc) and death-dealing magic (freaking DEATH TOUCH) means that the god means for him to administrate death to the betterment of the world. He is, after all, given choice as to how to use his abilities. Basically, Wee Jas may not necessarily mean for death to be a tool for good, but Wee Jas is neutral in order to allow her followers to interpret death as they see fit.
Asciiman
09-16-07, 04:11 AM Since he seems to follow so closely to the letter of his diety, with less regard for the moral implications, his reasons for killing are those of Wes Jas after all, I'd say he's Lawful Nuetral.
Kazuhiro
09-16-07, 04:33 AM I personally consider Wee Jas, along with Nerull, the absolute epitome(s) of neutrality, both of them being concerned with Death, the great equalizer. In all of my campaigns, alignments are blurry (I don't have much of a moral compass, myself) and Wee Jas and Nerull act something closer to True Neutral. I disagree with the supposition that Nerull, the Reaper, is the god of murder for fun. But this is more "me" and less "what's in the books."

Law, Magic, and Death... Consider that for a moment. It does't get much more neutral than Law, Magic, and Death. Death doesn't care who you are-- this is a very key concept when considering how followers of Wee Jas should act.

If Wee Jas doesn't care who dies, why should a Cleric of Wee Jas? The Cleric might have Good impulses, himself, but I would make sure that that person understood that his role as a Cleric of Wee Jas is to be what the PHB describes as "The Judge," who lets Law guide his actions, not Good. This character is perfectly allowed to help his party, come to the aid of those in need, and sacrifice everything to save the kingdom. However, if this Cleric spares someone and/or their cause because they were working toward the common good, then they may be in danger of losing their position.
Starcloud
09-16-07, 06:24 PM Death does not necessarily mean killing or murder.

It can mean standing by someone's bedside, certifying that life really has left the body. It can mean performing ceremonies to make sure the dead stay dead and not become undead. It can mean consoling the bereaved by affirming the necessity of death as part of life.

Just because a character worships a goddess of death does not mean that character is *required* to kill; Wee Jas is a guardian of the spirits of the dead, not a deity of slaughter, pestilence, and murder.
StevenO
09-16-07, 06:53 PM I think that character description is much closer to LN than to LG. I don't have a problem with finishing a fallen foe but causing death for sport isn't something a good character would do.

To me the LG aspect of a death god would be conserned with a creature's immortal soul. They wouldn't reveal in death but do hold it in respect and see it as part of life. A LG Death Cleric would perform last rites and console the grieving. They would defend final resting places so that the dead remain undisturbed and would likely be VERY much against undead. Although it begins to boarder on fanatical and perhaps away for LG I could also see them aggressively pursuing those who cheat death by raising or resurrecting the dead; they may just wish to council those who have died or it the reason for returning to life isn't good enough may try to send the raised back to the grave.
Dragonsblood
09-16-07, 06:57 PM Yes he is being lawful good. His motivations are to protect innocents and he is killing evil creatures, two very good things. He is doing this because he believes his god wills it, which is very lawful.
Starcloud
09-16-07, 07:45 PM In fact, the original doctrine for Wee Jas, which appeared in Dragon Magazine during the 1st edition days, states that Wee Jas is very much anti-undead and anti-resurrection. She did not like the undead, particularily the sapient undead (vampires, mummies, ghosts, liches), and would not allow her priests to raise the dead or resurrect the dead without a very very good reason.
VulcanStormwrath
09-16-07, 08:10 PM Heh Ruthless Good can still be lawful. Especially since law is iherently cold and precise
JohnnyWeird
09-17-07, 09:34 AM The extent to which he HELPS others is the key factor here. He destroys evil, which is helpful generally, but to my mind good requires also a positive investment of energy. Healing PCs is a good start, but he may want to put his money where his mouth is by administering death rites to NPCs convalescing in pain, curing painful (rather than fatal) illnesses, etc. A LE character would destroy evil things and heal party members to obtain loot and glory for his deity. How you treat others is the real determinant here.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FrostyObsitnic 09-16-07, 03:35 AM	As the thread title implies, I have a roleplaying question. According to the rules, a cleric of Wee Jas, (Death, Law, and Magic), can be Lawful Good. To play a cleric of a god of death, however, death has to be pretty damn important. So here's the character: He's helpful to allies, if a bit creepy, heals the sick and all that nonsense, but if a character or monster behaves evilly (not just performing a nebulously defined "evil action" like casting a necromantic spell, but robbing, murdering, etc.) he makes sure they die. He finishes off all NPCs the party drops in combat. If the party needs to question the NPC, he kills them after questioning. He believes death is a tool for ensuring the safety of innocents, and that his granted powers as a cleric of Wee Jas mean that he should administrate death's workings. Could that be considered Lawful Good, or is that bordering on Lawful *******?
Lukasa 09-16-07, 03:40 AM	Depends who you ask. This is likely to turn into an alignment debate. But I'll throw my two pence in anyway: I'd call it Lawful Good. It's not Exalted-level Lawful Good, but so long as they are evils, it fits the PHB definition of Lawful Good, and would also fit most people's definition of Lawful Good. I've been thinking about playing a character similar to this in my friend's campaign, and so I do think your player ought to consider this: he seems to be hastening the death of Evil, while putting off the death of Good. He probably should consider those priorities from the position of the Church of Wee Jas. Does Wee Jas want her church members to heal, to put off death, or does she want her church members to kill, to hasten death, or does she want them to not get involved, to allow creatures to die at their appointed time?
FrostyObsitnic 09-16-07, 04:05 AM	Depends who you ask. This is likely to turn into an alignment debate. But I'll throw my two pence in anyway: I'd call it Lawful Good. It's not Exalted-level Lawful Good, but so long as they are evils, it fits the PHB definition of Lawful Good, and would also fit most people's definition of Lawful Good. I've been thinking about playing a character similar to this in my friend's campaign, and so I do think your player ought to consider this: he seems to be hastening the death of Evil, while putting off the death of Good. He probably should consider those priorities from the position of the Church of Wee Jas. Does Wee Jas want her church members to heal, to put off death, or does she want her church members to kill, to hasten death, or does she want them to not get involved, to allow creatures to die at their appointed time? I also think it's a legitimate RP, and I've considered the question of what Wee Jas would do. The character's position on this is that the mere fact that Wee Jas gives him access to healing magic (cure, resurrect, etc) and death-dealing magic (freaking DEATH TOUCH) means that the god means for him to administrate death to the betterment of the world. He is, after all, given choice as to how to use his abilities. Basically, Wee Jas may not necessarily mean for death to be a tool for good, but Wee Jas is neutral in order to allow her followers to interpret death as they see fit.
Asciiman 09-16-07, 04:11 AM	Since he seems to follow so closely to the letter of his diety, with less regard for the moral implications, his reasons for killing are those of Wes Jas after all, I'd say he's Lawful Nuetral.
Kazuhiro 09-16-07, 04:33 AM	I personally consider Wee Jas, along with Nerull, the absolute epitome(s) of neutrality, both of them being concerned with Death, the great equalizer. In all of my campaigns, alignments are blurry (I don't have much of a moral compass, myself) and Wee Jas and Nerull act something closer to True Neutral. I disagree with the supposition that Nerull, the Reaper, is the god of murder for fun. But this is more "me" and less "what's in the books." Law, Magic, and Death... Consider that for a moment. It does't get much more neutral than Law, Magic, and Death. Death doesn't care who you are-- this is a very key concept when considering how followers of Wee Jas should act. If Wee Jas doesn't care who dies, why should a Cleric of Wee Jas? The Cleric might have Good impulses, himself, but I would make sure that that person understood that his role as a Cleric of Wee Jas is to be what the PHB describes as "The Judge," who lets Law guide his actions, not Good. This character is perfectly allowed to help his party, come to the aid of those in need, and sacrifice everything to save the kingdom. However, if this Cleric spares someone and/or their cause because they were working toward the common good, then they may be in danger of losing their position.
Starcloud 09-16-07, 06:24 PM	Death does not necessarily mean killing or murder. It can mean standing by someone's bedside, certifying that life really has left the body. It can mean performing ceremonies to make sure the dead stay dead and not become undead. It can mean consoling the bereaved by affirming the necessity of death as part of life. Just because a character worships a goddess of death does not mean that character is required to kill; Wee Jas is a guardian of the spirits of the dead, not a deity of slaughter, pestilence, and murder.
StevenO 09-16-07, 06:53 PM	I think that character description is much closer to LN than to LG. I don't have a problem with finishing a fallen foe but causing death for sport isn't something a good character would do. To me the LG aspect of a death god would be conserned with a creature's immortal soul. They wouldn't reveal in death but do hold it in respect and see it as part of life. A LG Death Cleric would perform last rites and console the grieving. They would defend final resting places so that the dead remain undisturbed and would likely be VERY much against undead. Although it begins to boarder on fanatical and perhaps away for LG I could also see them aggressively pursuing those who cheat death by raising or resurrecting the dead; they may just wish to council those who have died or it the reason for returning to life isn't good enough may try to send the raised back to the grave.
Dragonsblood 09-16-07, 06:57 PM	Yes he is being lawful good. His motivations are to protect innocents and he is killing evil creatures, two very good things. He is doing this because he believes his god wills it, which is very lawful.
Starcloud 09-16-07, 07:45 PM	In fact, the original doctrine for Wee Jas, which appeared in Dragon Magazine during the 1st edition days, states that Wee Jas is very much anti-undead and anti-resurrection. She did not like the undead, particularily the sapient undead (vampires, mummies, ghosts, liches), and would not allow her priests to raise the dead or resurrect the dead without a very very good reason.
VulcanStormwrath 09-16-07, 08:10 PM	Heh Ruthless Good can still be lawful. Especially since law is iherently cold and precise
JohnnyWeird 09-17-07, 09:34 AM	The extent to which he HELPS others is the key factor here. He destroys evil, which is helpful generally, but to my mind good requires also a positive investment of energy. Healing PCs is a good start, but he may want to put his money where his mouth is by administering death rites to NPCs convalescing in pain, curing painful (rather than fatal) illnesses, etc. A LE character would destroy evil things and heal party members to obtain loot and glory for his deity. How you treat others is the real determinant here.