Gladiator's Alignment Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Gladiator's Alignment Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Xanthia
05-21-07, 01:29 AM Is it possible for a gladiator or pit fighter to be true neutral? My DM is thinking about running a beer-and-pretzels campaign based around a gladatorial tournament. Because there will be three rounds per session, there will be three character deaths per session. We will be given bonus levels so we're all within one or two levels of one another, and the whole point of the short campaign is to have fun killing each other and trying out class combinations that we otherwise wouldn't have time to play all the way through 20th level.

I'm thinking about playing a Cleric as one of my later characters, and I was going to use Dictum, Holy Word, and the like to outright decimate the competition, whom I would assume to be an extreme alignment. But my DM insists that us warriors of the pit may be true neutal, although I assume it would be highly unlikey that anyone killing a stranger in cold blood for a purse of gold would be neutral.

I'm NOT saying that all gladiators are evil (although killing, especially a stranger, especially for money, is pretty wrathful and greedy), as there are some champions of good who would enter an arena to smite a famous evil gladiator in a legit, legal setting. Chaotic characters may not care about the laws, and lawful characters may be disciplined to battle each day for money. If I'm placed in a pit with another guy who wants to kill me, it's either fight or flight (and if I have a sword, and there's no where to run to, I'm choosing fight). But, to me, it seems silly that Joe the rogue and Bob the fighter would want to quit their day jobs, put their lives on the line, and kill a stranger in cold blood just for a prize purse of gold.

Can anybody see a justification for playing a True Neutral arena fighter?
Kouk
05-21-07, 02:35 AM You are forced to fight to survive and possibly win your freedom. You fight, or you die. Most any alignment would work with that motivation.

You could be True Neutral and fight only to improve yourself, or you lost interest in life so you just fight to find meaning...

This is just random fighting in a campaign though, so don't arbitrarily put limits on alignment because that might prevent you from smiting opponents.
Derren S.
05-21-07, 03:04 AM So all the fights are to the death? If yes then the only instance where the gladiator could be TN is when he is a slave and forced to fight (and as far as I know that was the norm with gladiators).

Anyone going in the arena voluntary would be evil.
Eric888
05-21-07, 04:20 AM Alignment is mostly a roleplaying thing, and it doesn't sound like the game you intend to try is going to be a traditional game in that way. If you are just making charecters to pit them against eachother then you should probably just ignore alignment altogether.

If instead you are trying to make this into a real game, then it depends on the nature of the fights. Are they to the death? Do they sometimes cause death? Are you willing to fight or being forced? Etc. Etc. Once that is determined then common sense should fill in the gaps.
DX2052
05-21-07, 05:02 AM Anyone going in the arena voluntary would be evil.

I disagree if the sport is legal all alignments could be found in the pit, sure CE or NE might participate because it is an easy way to kill someone, but a LN or LG person might do it so they can use the prize money from it to do some good act or use the fame gathered from fighting to convert people (to a cause or deity). a CN person might join because of the lack of rules, whereas A NG person might do it solely for the money (and perhaps the loot from the corpses) as mentioned before a TN or LN might join to better himself or to find a strong enough foe and a LE person might join in order make sure a ridged fight happens properly.
AffableDoomwalker
05-21-07, 05:27 AM But, to me, it seems silly that Joe the rogue and Bob the fighter would want to quit their day jobs, put their lives on the line, and kill a stranger in cold blood just for a prize purse of gold.

Can anybody see a justification for playing a True Neutral arena fighter?

Erm... don't Joe and Bob already have jobs where they put their lives on the line and kill complete strangers (sentient beings count as strangers) in cold blood for glory and gold?

Isn't that what adventurers do?
Derren S.
05-21-07, 09:52 AM but a LN or LG person might do it so they can use the prize money from it to do some good act or use the fame gathered from fighting to convert people (to a cause or deity).

When you put it that way then a LG person should also be perfectly able to purse assasination contracts (and keep his alignment) as he also could use the money from the contract to do good and might even convert some of his fellow assasines.

Erm... don't Joe and Bob already have jobs where they put their lives on the line and kill complete strangers (sentient beings count as strangers) in cold blood for glory and gold?

Isn't that what adventurers do?

Thats what evil adventurers do.
Prator_the_Legendary
05-21-07, 10:00 AM Thats what evil adventurers do.
Now that's hardly fair. By extension, everyone who joins the army volunarily must be evil, because they're signing up to kill NationX's enemies for money.

If you're the type who kills for cash, you may not be a good person, but you're not necessarily evil. People who kill indiscriminately or sadistically for cash are the REAL evil ones.
Optimized_Commoner
05-21-07, 11:12 AM If the arena is voluntary it doesn't seem that evil, everyone wants to be there fighting to the death. Same with duels, they don't need to be evil if everyone is agreed. Ditto with wars against other soldiers.

In the world of D&D it seems that killing defenceless innocents is evil, but killing enemy combatants is just fine.
AffableDoomwalker
05-22-07, 01:38 AM Thats what evil adventurers do.

You've obviously never been involved in a Dungeon Crawl before.

Now that's hardly fair. By extension, everyone who joins the army volunarily must be evil, because they're signing up to kill NationX's enemies for money.

If you're the type who kills for cash, you may not be a good person, but you're not necessarily evil. People who kill indiscriminately or sadistically for cash are the REAL evil ones.

Yeah! What he said!

If the arena is voluntary it doesn't seem that evil, everyone wants to be there fighting to the death. Same with duels, they don't need to be evil if everyone is agreed. Ditto with wars against other soldiers.

In the world of D&D it seems that killing defenceless innocents is evil, but killing enemy combatants is just fine.

Him too!
Sunic_Flames
05-22-07, 07:46 AM Thats what evil adventurers do.

All adventurers kill things and take their stuff. Even the good ones, and even the paladins. It doesn't matter how you spin it, this is what it boils down to. What type of stuff may vary of course, but the general actions are the same. Why? Because that's how the game is designed, unless you run a game entirely devoid of combat you are expected to kill things and take their stuff so that you can then kill bigger things and take their better stuff and so forth. Oh and most of the good stuff can't be bought at all, meaning you need to adventure for it, and even if you could you'd still need to get the gold somehow...

Of course I don't allow good alignments for precisely this reason, so I'm not the one who should be shooting that down. :P
DX2052
05-22-07, 10:44 PM When you put it that way then a LG person should also be perfectly able to purse assasination contracts (and keep his alignment) as he also could use the money from the contract to do good and might even convert some of his fellow assasines.

If the Assassination contracts are done like Wirts from Morrowind's Morag Tong (A legal assassins guild) I would say that even a Paladin could do that

but really your missing a key fact, the target of an assasination did not agree to or volunteer for it, a gladiator did.
Oakes
05-22-07, 11:11 PM Including previously mentioned ideas so far, I'm sure:

Slavery
Philosophy
Subdual damage
Bred for it
Derren S.
05-23-07, 01:28 AM If the Assassination contracts are done like Wirts from Morrowind's Morag Tong (A legal assassins guild) I would say that even a Paladin could do that

SO when in a city it is allowed to beat, kick or even kill homeless people then a paladin is free to do so?
Only because something is legal doesn't mean that it is good.

but really your missing a key fact, the target of an assasination did not agree to or volunteer for it, a gladiator did.

Except if some of those gladiators are slaves and don't fight voluntary.
DX2052
05-23-07, 02:52 AM SO when in a city it is allowed to beat, kick or even kill homeless people then a paladin is free to do so?
Only because something is legal doesn't mean that it is good.

Except if some of those gladiators are slaves and don't fight voluntary.

A.The guild used as an example (The Morag Tong) is in the games lore, largely based in tradition, steaming from the gods disallowing open conflict between the Chimer and is "Constrained by ancient traditions and rigid codes of conduct" and is far from killing a homeless man (I am not going to explain the whole thing to you).

B. but all the more fiting! in this case one could spare there lives, where as if they had not joined they would have been slain by a crueler foe.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Xanthia 05-21-07, 01:29 AM	Is it possible for a gladiator or pit fighter to be true neutral? My DM is thinking about running a beer-and-pretzels campaign based around a gladatorial tournament. Because there will be three rounds per session, there will be three character deaths per session. We will be given bonus levels so we're all within one or two levels of one another, and the whole point of the short campaign is to have fun killing each other and trying out class combinations that we otherwise wouldn't have time to play all the way through 20th level. I'm thinking about playing a Cleric as one of my later characters, and I was going to use Dictum, Holy Word, and the like to outright decimate the competition, whom I would assume to be an extreme alignment. But my DM insists that us warriors of the pit may be true neutal, although I assume it would be highly unlikey that anyone killing a stranger in cold blood for a purse of gold would be neutral. I'm NOT saying that all gladiators are evil (although killing, especially a stranger, especially for money, is pretty wrathful and greedy), as there are some champions of good who would enter an arena to smite a famous evil gladiator in a legit, legal setting. Chaotic characters may not care about the laws, and lawful characters may be disciplined to battle each day for money. If I'm placed in a pit with another guy who wants to kill me, it's either fight or flight (and if I have a sword, and there's no where to run to, I'm choosing fight). But, to me, it seems silly that Joe the rogue and Bob the fighter would want to quit their day jobs, put their lives on the line, and kill a stranger in cold blood just for a prize purse of gold. Can anybody see a justification for playing a True Neutral arena fighter?
Kouk 05-21-07, 02:35 AM	You are forced to fight to survive and possibly win your freedom. You fight, or you die. Most any alignment would work with that motivation. You could be True Neutral and fight only to improve yourself, or you lost interest in life so you just fight to find meaning... This is just random fighting in a campaign though, so don't arbitrarily put limits on alignment because that might prevent you from smiting opponents.
Derren S. 05-21-07, 03:04 AM	So all the fights are to the death? If yes then the only instance where the gladiator could be TN is when he is a slave and forced to fight (and as far as I know that was the norm with gladiators). Anyone going in the arena voluntary would be evil.
Eric888 05-21-07, 04:20 AM	Alignment is mostly a roleplaying thing, and it doesn't sound like the game you intend to try is going to be a traditional game in that way. If you are just making charecters to pit them against eachother then you should probably just ignore alignment altogether. If instead you are trying to make this into a real game, then it depends on the nature of the fights. Are they to the death? Do they sometimes cause death? Are you willing to fight or being forced? Etc. Etc. Once that is determined then common sense should fill in the gaps.
DX2052 05-21-07, 05:02 AM	Anyone going in the arena voluntary would be evil. I disagree if the sport is legal all alignments could be found in the pit, sure CE or NE might participate because it is an easy way to kill someone, but a LN or LG person might do it so they can use the prize money from it to do some good act or use the fame gathered from fighting to convert people (to a cause or deity). a CN person might join because of the lack of rules, whereas A NG person might do it solely for the money (and perhaps the loot from the corpses) as mentioned before a TN or LN might join to better himself or to find a strong enough foe and a LE person might join in order make sure a ridged fight happens properly.
AffableDoomwalker 05-21-07, 05:27 AM	But, to me, it seems silly that Joe the rogue and Bob the fighter would want to quit their day jobs, put their lives on the line, and kill a stranger in cold blood just for a prize purse of gold. Can anybody see a justification for playing a True Neutral arena fighter? Erm... don't Joe and Bob already have jobs where they put their lives on the line and kill complete strangers (sentient beings count as strangers) in cold blood for glory and gold? Isn't that what adventurers do?
Derren S. 05-21-07, 09:52 AM	but a LN or LG person might do it so they can use the prize money from it to do some good act or use the fame gathered from fighting to convert people (to a cause or deity). When you put it that way then a LG person should also be perfectly able to purse assasination contracts (and keep his alignment) as he also could use the money from the contract to do good and might even convert some of his fellow assasines. Erm... don't Joe and Bob already have jobs where they put their lives on the line and kill complete strangers (sentient beings count as strangers) in cold blood for glory and gold? Isn't that what adventurers do? Thats what evil adventurers do.
Prator_the_Legendary 05-21-07, 10:00 AM	Thats what evil adventurers do. Now that's hardly fair. By extension, everyone who joins the army volunarily must be evil, because they're signing up to kill NationX's enemies for money. If you're the type who kills for cash, you may not be a good person, but you're not necessarily evil. People who kill indiscriminately or sadistically for cash are the REAL evil ones.
Optimized_Commoner 05-21-07, 11:12 AM	If the arena is voluntary it doesn't seem that evil, everyone wants to be there fighting to the death. Same with duels, they don't need to be evil if everyone is agreed. Ditto with wars against other soldiers. In the world of D&D it seems that killing defenceless innocents is evil, but killing enemy combatants is just fine.
AffableDoomwalker 05-22-07, 01:38 AM	Thats what evil adventurers do. You've obviously never been involved in a Dungeon Crawl before. Now that's hardly fair. By extension, everyone who joins the army volunarily must be evil, because they're signing up to kill NationX's enemies for money. If you're the type who kills for cash, you may not be a good person, but you're not necessarily evil. People who kill indiscriminately or sadistically for cash are the REAL evil ones. Yeah! What he said! If the arena is voluntary it doesn't seem that evil, everyone wants to be there fighting to the death. Same with duels, they don't need to be evil if everyone is agreed. Ditto with wars against other soldiers. In the world of D&D it seems that killing defenceless innocents is evil, but killing enemy combatants is just fine. Him too!
Sunic_Flames 05-22-07, 07:46 AM	Thats what evil adventurers do. All adventurers kill things and take their stuff. Even the good ones, and even the paladins. It doesn't matter how you spin it, this is what it boils down to. What type of stuff may vary of course, but the general actions are the same. Why? Because that's how the game is designed, unless you run a game entirely devoid of combat you are expected to kill things and take their stuff so that you can then kill bigger things and take their better stuff and so forth. Oh and most of the good stuff can't be bought at all, meaning you need to adventure for it, and even if you could you'd still need to get the gold somehow... Of course I don't allow good alignments for precisely this reason, so I'm not the one who should be shooting that down. :P
DX2052 05-22-07, 10:44 PM	When you put it that way then a LG person should also be perfectly able to purse assasination contracts (and keep his alignment) as he also could use the money from the contract to do good and might even convert some of his fellow assasines. If the Assassination contracts are done like Wirts from Morrowind's Morag Tong (A legal assassins guild) I would say that even a Paladin could do that but really your missing a key fact, the target of an assasination did not agree to or volunteer for it, a gladiator did.
Oakes 05-22-07, 11:11 PM	Including previously mentioned ideas so far, I'm sure: Slavery Philosophy Subdual damage Bred for it
Derren S. 05-23-07, 01:28 AM	If the Assassination contracts are done like Wirts from Morrowind's Morag Tong (A legal assassins guild) I would say that even a Paladin could do that SO when in a city it is allowed to beat, kick or even kill homeless people then a paladin is free to do so? Only because something is legal doesn't mean that it is good. but really your missing a key fact, the target of an assasination did not agree to or volunteer for it, a gladiator did. Except if some of those gladiators are slaves and don't fight voluntary.
DX2052 05-23-07, 02:52 AM	SO when in a city it is allowed to beat, kick or even kill homeless people then a paladin is free to do so? Only because something is legal doesn't mean that it is good. Except if some of those gladiators are slaves and don't fight voluntary. A.The guild used as an example (The Morag Tong) is in the games lore, largely based in tradition, steaming from the gods disallowing open conflict between the Chimer and is "Constrained by ancient traditions and rigid codes of conduct" and is far from killing a homeless man (I am not going to explain the whole thing to you). B. but all the more fiting! in this case one could spare there lives, where as if they had not joined they would have been slain by a crueler foe.