Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Hippokrene 04-21-06, 04:04 AM	In Amberlee, on the south side of town, far from the soft twilight fetes of the noble houses, is a squat, solid beer house called the Alerock. Ruckus noise, the sickly yellow light of oil lamps, and the pungent smoke of Serpent Powder filter through the boarded-in windows from evening til dawn. At the back of the Alerock, is a narrow set of wooden stairs leading to large root cellar that stays cool, even in the humid height of summer. Save when the fights start. Then it packs with all manner men, sailors, slumming merchants, prostitutes, and laborers, who crowed around the fenced-in fighting pit. The third and fifth night of every week, poor and desperate men come without fail to wager their lives in the 'rat pit.' Cheered on by the crowd, two men (or orcblooded) descend into a twenty-five foot diameter circle, armed with whatever weapon Alerock's owner has supplied them with this night. They circle in the moldy sawdust until first blood. Sometimes it's scimitars and first blood means the loss of an arm, sometimes it's mauls but all the loser suffers is a broken nose, and sometimes it's daggers - a simple thrust to the gut bleeds little but in a few days a man will be dead with infection. No matter what the loser's condition, he's deposited in the Alerock's back alley to make it home on his own. Most people assume the dead or near-dead get tossed in the bay waters by the Alerock's guardsmen. Not so, there's a place for them in the back alley as well, twice a week something waits quite patiently in the rubbish piles, hoping for a meal. Blood and bones! Skill and chance! Hope and desperation! All yours for just three coppers at the Alerock. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ *ahem* I do get carried away sometimes. My character background says she's a frequent fighter at the rat pit. Is that more neutral or evil? I'm ambivalent. Possible neutral: She's poor and acts more of necessity than desire She tries to avoid deadly force, though that's difficult while in combat. The person she fights has chosen to put their life at risk. Even though she has chosen to be there, the person is attacking her and what she does is a form of self-defense. Possible evil: She is attacking/wounding people for profit It's quite possible that her opponent could die She's feeding the bloodlust of the crowd It's not legitimate to say she's acting in self-defense; or, it's just as legitimate to say her opponent in acting in self-defense. What would the wise and all-knowing DMs of this forum say?
Lord Ian Stark 04-21-06, 04:13 AM	Besides this one "hobby" what else are her views?
Hippokrene 04-21-06, 04:37 AM	She's a guttersnipe turned mercenary. She's lived at the edge of society for so long that she become insensate to the brutality she sees. She understands that the world is a huge hierarchy of power and that she is and will always be at the bottom of hierarchy. She's trying to eke out a living, if she had to rob, cheat, and occasionally hurt others, it's sad but it's better than the alternative, which is her being robbed, cheated, and hurt. Again, I can see it going either way.
geekling 04-21-06, 04:48 AM	OK then, I'll stick my neck out and call it neutral. It could well be argued that the one arranging these fights are if not already, rapidly heading toward evil. But the fighters - on the base of being price fighters alone (even if would be talking mortal combat here - not as you seem to be implying first blood) isn't evil.
Lord Ian Stark 04-21-06, 04:57 AM	She sounds CN IMO.
Hippokrene 04-21-06, 05:10 AM	Lord Stark, I was thinking CN as well. However, I can just hear the collective goan when I tell my group this. For some reason, D&Ders seem to find CN characters worse than CE. Maybe I should just add, "And she kills babies." to the end of every sentence. Geekling, The person arranging these fights it quite evil. I'm interested in your assertion that even if this were 'to the death,' the fighters wouldn't be in evil territory. May I ask what your theory on this is?
Lord Ian Stark 04-21-06, 05:19 AM	Gladiatorial combat may be the only way for these people to earn some coins. If they don't fight, then they'll die of starvation or get locked up and die in prison for stealing/robbing. Does that make them evil? All depends on intent IMO. If they enjoy twisting their blade in an enemies gullet hearing the muscle and tendons pop and shred, then they may doing it for more than the coin and their survival.
mojorooks 04-21-06, 05:55 AM	She could even detest the fighting and just be doing it to feed her family. That could be considered good, although corruption is almost inevitable.
geekling 04-21-06, 06:33 AM	I'm interested in your assertion that even if this were 'to the death,' the fighters wouldn't be in evil territory. May I ask what your theory on this is? It's really all down to free will. Barring any foul play. That on the other hand would be evil. You're talking about mortal combat between fighters that have made the choice to be there and take part. Knowing fully well that loosing means death. It's their choice, their free will. Both enter the ring under the agreement that one will die and both willing to take the risk that that one will be them. If anything the resulting death is assisted suicide, and IMO not evil. While killing another person might generally be counted as evil, there are in D&D plenty of exceptions to this generality - execution of a criminal, war, when the one that dies is of an evil race and killed by the PC adventurers ;) , etc. I'd claim that this mortal combat is another example of an exception to the killing a sentient being = evil - on the base of free will in a fantasy word where life is cheap.
Sereno 04-21-06, 10:09 AM	Yeah, I'd go with N or CN (but light on the "C"). There's nothing evil about pit fighting (unless you are forcing others to do it). And, if it's agreed to be no-holds-barred, then it's not even evil to cheat ... because nothing can be considered cheating. It's not even evil to ENJOY pit fighting, unless the ONLY reason you are doing it is because you like hurting others. Why not just play the character the way you think the character should be played and NOT tell the other players what her alignment is? There's no stamp on her forehead telling everyone in advance what her alignment is and the other players around the table have no more right to that information than their characters would have....
Bruunwald 04-21-06, 12:32 PM	I'd go with Neutral with leaning to Chaotic, as well. The likely reason your fellow players might groan is that they've had experience with people who played their CN characters as CE, but only called them CN to "get away with it." We call that Chaotic Stupid. If you play your character true to what you've described (and you sound competent enough to me to pull it off), then you'll be the proud exception to this phenomenon, and prove them wrong.
Nyaz 04-21-06, 12:57 PM	Yeah. Players see CN as an "I don't give a s***" alignment that lets them get away with anything short of murder... or even with murder. Fortunately, there is always a couple of gallows awaiting the Chaotically and Unredeemably Stupid... As to the question, I'd go with Neutral. Although this might be more true of slaves who fight as gladiators, as they do not have a choice.
kelvinaw273 04-21-06, 01:15 PM	I'd vote neutral. Unless she enjoys twisting the knife, neutral is OK. The big question is how will she reacts to people who are not out to rob her, cheat her and use her, but instead show friendship, cammeraderie and trust. If she reciprocates, that makes her definitely N, if she ignores them and even treats them just the same as she treats all the other scum (by robbing / cheating / using them) then she shifts to evil.