Doing actual 'good deeds'. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Doing actual 'good deeds'. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Lincoln Hills
02-10-05, 08:42 PM A post over on the Mature boards ('The most exalted thing you can do' or some such title) got me thinking about how often players write "Good" down on their character sheets... and how seldom they do anything that's actually a positive good.

Reactive good is pretty common. It ranges from feeding a hungry beggar to decapitating Demogorgon (twice): anything that stops an evil from happening, essentially. That's where most of us build our PCs' reputations for good.

But I thought I'd canvas for ideas: things you can actively do to improve your PC's "goodness". Mind you, a PC who's doing them so he seems to be good is, at best, a borderline sort of good (and, at worst, a CE assassin setting up for his next hit. ;) I'm talking about the sort of things a character can do (other than fighting evil) that make it clear what a great guy he is.

Examples from my own characters' histories: seeking out an under-funded orphanage to donate a percentage of my take to: founding a seminary to instruct young members of a NG religion: paying for mercenaries to stand guard duty over an under-defended town.

(Just to show you how perverse a "good deed" can be: a diabolical character of mine once informed the local paladin order of the locations of a number of rival churches (of CE alignment). Good deed? Certainly. Caused a lot of joy and justice? Sure. But the important part is, I benefited. It was a Bender moment. ;) )
fallabel
02-10-05, 08:47 PM This is one of the reasons that they wrote the Book of Exhalted Deeds. Thinking along these lines in the reason that my character donates 30% of his loot to churches.

But, being good also includes showing mercy to your enemy. Try to convert one of them to a good religion if they're evil.
Nom
02-11-05, 07:41 AM From one perspective, a person that consciously does "good deeds" isn't actually good. This sounds a little odd until you think about it. However, to be conscious of doing "good deeds" implies that they are somewhat exceptional - that you wouldn't do them normally. For someone who is naturally good, doing good things is normal, not exceptional, and thus they don't think in terms of "good deeds". In fact, someone who is good is more likely to be aware of "bad deeds", because these are noteworthy (if shameful).

Of course, the alignment buckets are a lot broader than such a focused perspective, and can include a wide variety of interesting perspectives.
fallabel
02-11-05, 08:15 AM Well, what we mean is that the player 'conciously' does good deeds, because his character would do them naturally. It's really just more accurate roleplaying.
ck2001wendt
02-11-05, 08:52 AM Back before Vow of Poverty existed, I had a amnesiac 3.0 Monk who would donate 90% of whatever treasure he made to the village he had adopted as his home. That feels actively good.

Currently, I'm part of an actively good campaign based on exactly the premise of the first post. My Wizard went around to Faerun's Good organizations and asked "say, why are you just letting Damara sit there under the rule of the Witch King? Shouldn't you do something about this?"

So he's starting a revolution in the country. Our adventuring party just proactively went out and killed a Green Dragon to get the funds we need to equip the rebels, and from here on out we'll be proactively targeting the Witch King's forces until we destroy his army and free the country.

In reality, my Wizard just wants to liberate the country for the power vacuum it will create (allowing him to pick the successor). But on the face, it SEEMS like a Good deed...and the sort of thing that Good parties should be doing more often.
fallabel
02-11-05, 08:56 AM Well, technically, starting a revolution is chaotic. So, while it might be for the greater good, a Lawful Good character would prefer different methods of change.
ck2001wendt
02-11-05, 09:15 AM First off...I'm Good. Who cares about Lawful?

Second...this could be seen as a Lawful action. It's overturning an action achieved through unlawful use of force. If you see the Vaasan takeover of Damara as a violation of Damaran sovereignty (and there is no way to see it otherwise, legally anyway), then it would be perfectly Lawful to incite an armed revolt to return the rightful rulers.

What am I going to do...go to the non-existent Security Council?
fallabel
02-11-05, 09:45 AM If you're not a lawful good character, then it doesn't matter. However, if someone is a tyrannical ruler, but he's got the right to rule the land, then overthrowing him is chaotic. Lawful Good characters are supposed to respect legitimate authority, and thus they need to find methods other than inciting a revolt to deal with this leader.
ck2001wendt
02-11-05, 10:28 AM True enough...I should have specified that the rightful rulers were usurped through unlawful invasion by an Evil horde. Therefore, the overthrow of the new Evil King is a Lawful act...restoring the kindom's legitimate authorities (though since the King and his line are pretty much wiped out, "legitimate" is broadly defined). Lawful characters are not bound by laws or rulers unlawfully installed. Otherwise, Might would make Right.

You could also see it as a Chaotic act...but really you can play it any way you want.
fallabel
02-11-05, 10:39 AM Oh, in a situation like that, then you're completely justified in overthrowing the ruler, and I'd say it's very lawful, since their invasion was both evil AND illegal.
Gudra
02-13-05, 06:09 PM IA with Nom- that if you have to say something about doing good, then it's not natural to the character. That's not saying that good deeds can't become natural for a character, that's what redemption arcs are for. :)

Doing a good deed could be anything from helping with the city watch to sitting with the ill or dying to keeping street kids 'out of trouble.' Even helping with literacy, if your setting has a general populace that doesn't read or write in general.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Lincoln Hills 02-10-05, 08:42 PM	A post over on the Mature boards ('The most exalted thing you can do' or some such title) got me thinking about how often players write "Good" down on their character sheets... and how seldom they do anything that's actually a positive good. Reactive good is pretty common. It ranges from feeding a hungry beggar to decapitating Demogorgon (twice): anything that stops an evil from happening, essentially. That's where most of us build our PCs' reputations for good. But I thought I'd canvas for ideas: things you can actively do to improve your PC's "goodness". Mind you, a PC who's doing them so he seems to be good is, at best, a borderline sort of good (and, at worst, a CE assassin setting up for his next hit. ;) I'm talking about the sort of things a character can do (other than fighting evil) that make it clear what a great guy he is. Examples from my own characters' histories: seeking out an under-funded orphanage to donate a percentage of my take to: founding a seminary to instruct young members of a NG religion: paying for mercenaries to stand guard duty over an under-defended town. (Just to show you how perverse a "good deed" can be: a diabolical character of mine once informed the local paladin order of the locations of a number of rival churches (of CE alignment). Good deed? Certainly. Caused a lot of joy and justice? Sure. But the important part is, I benefited. It was a Bender moment. ;) )
fallabel 02-10-05, 08:47 PM	This is one of the reasons that they wrote the Book of Exhalted Deeds. Thinking along these lines in the reason that my character donates 30% of his loot to churches. But, being good also includes showing mercy to your enemy. Try to convert one of them to a good religion if they're evil.
Nom 02-11-05, 07:41 AM	From one perspective, a person that consciously does "good deeds" isn't actually good. This sounds a little odd until you think about it. However, to be conscious of doing "good deeds" implies that they are somewhat exceptional - that you wouldn't do them normally. For someone who is naturally good, doing good things is normal, not exceptional, and thus they don't think in terms of "good deeds". In fact, someone who is good is more likely to be aware of "bad deeds", because these are noteworthy (if shameful). Of course, the alignment buckets are a lot broader than such a focused perspective, and can include a wide variety of interesting perspectives.
fallabel 02-11-05, 08:15 AM	Well, what we mean is that the player 'conciously' does good deeds, because his character would do them naturally. It's really just more accurate roleplaying.
ck2001wendt 02-11-05, 08:52 AM	Back before Vow of Poverty existed, I had a amnesiac 3.0 Monk who would donate 90% of whatever treasure he made to the village he had adopted as his home. That feels actively good. Currently, I'm part of an actively good campaign based on exactly the premise of the first post. My Wizard went around to Faerun's Good organizations and asked "say, why are you just letting Damara sit there under the rule of the Witch King? Shouldn't you do something about this?" So he's starting a revolution in the country. Our adventuring party just proactively went out and killed a Green Dragon to get the funds we need to equip the rebels, and from here on out we'll be proactively targeting the Witch King's forces until we destroy his army and free the country. In reality, my Wizard just wants to liberate the country for the power vacuum it will create (allowing him to pick the successor). But on the face, it SEEMS like a Good deed...and the sort of thing that Good parties should be doing more often.
fallabel 02-11-05, 08:56 AM	Well, technically, starting a revolution is chaotic. So, while it might be for the greater good, a Lawful Good character would prefer different methods of change.
ck2001wendt 02-11-05, 09:15 AM	First off...I'm Good. Who cares about Lawful? Second...this could be seen as a Lawful action. It's overturning an action achieved through unlawful use of force. If you see the Vaasan takeover of Damara as a violation of Damaran sovereignty (and there is no way to see it otherwise, legally anyway), then it would be perfectly Lawful to incite an armed revolt to return the rightful rulers. What am I going to do...go to the non-existent Security Council?
fallabel 02-11-05, 09:45 AM	If you're not a lawful good character, then it doesn't matter. However, if someone is a tyrannical ruler, but he's got the right to rule the land, then overthrowing him is chaotic. Lawful Good characters are supposed to respect legitimate authority, and thus they need to find methods other than inciting a revolt to deal with this leader.
ck2001wendt 02-11-05, 10:28 AM	True enough...I should have specified that the rightful rulers were usurped through unlawful invasion by an Evil horde. Therefore, the overthrow of the new Evil King is a Lawful act...restoring the kindom's legitimate authorities (though since the King and his line are pretty much wiped out, "legitimate" is broadly defined). Lawful characters are not bound by laws or rulers unlawfully installed. Otherwise, Might would make Right. You could also see it as a Chaotic act...but really you can play it any way you want.
fallabel 02-11-05, 10:39 AM	Oh, in a situation like that, then you're completely justified in overthrowing the ruler, and I'd say it's very lawful, since their invasion was both evil AND illegal.
Gudra 02-13-05, 06:09 PM	IA with Nom- that if you have to say something about doing good, then it's not natural to the character. That's not saying that good deeds can't become natural for a character, that's what redemption arcs are for. :) Doing a good deed could be anything from helping with the city watch to sitting with the ill or dying to keeping street kids 'out of trouble.' Even helping with literacy, if your setting has a general populace that doesn't read or write in general.