Post/Author/DateTime	Post
albinomonkeyking 10-06-06, 01:13 PM	Well, I am taking on a Knight (PH2) and going into Knight Protector of the Great Kingdom (Sword and Fist), and I know that is mixing 3.0 with 3.5 (sweet raptor jesus no!) but the DM okayed it. Anyway, both of those classes have codes they must follow, so my character is going to have a strict moral code that I roleplay him as. My initial impression was the stereotypical paladin, they always seemed pretty rigid, so I am going LG. So I am going to have strict codes I adhere to, not hurting innocents, helping innocents, not hurting helpless, etc., but I am a little fuzzy on LG. Do I have to always follow laws laid down in towns? One DM I know interpreted it like that and I am just looking for some feedback. Any advice, LG characters, anything LG would help, thanks a lot. (Also perhaps situations that could be difficult to roleplay or challenges I may face, thanks again)
mike_beavers 10-06-06, 01:52 PM	you and your dm should probably get together and write a code of conduct for your character. this way you and your DM can see each others point of view and hash it out before playing the character
Paxar 10-06-06, 01:54 PM	You are not necessarily bound to actual law. That's a common misconception about LG. LG in it's most basic form is just being organized, structured, helping good people, hurting bad people, and generally orderly. Your codes of conduct may add to this, however, and require you to obey laws and whatnot, I'm not too familiar with the Knight and Knight Protector's codes. You should respect legitimate authority, and thus follow the laws that they lay down (unless you feel that a law is unjust). Also, tyrants, illegitimate authority, and anarchic peoples will probably find themselves on the angry end of your sword. Basically, you would probably feel that laws and government are necessary for civilization, but you also understand that some laws and governments can be corrupt or harmful and you may seek to drive those out. Problems can occur when a law (however well-intentioned) interferes with the greater good. This is where you may have to choose between your alignment extremes in favor of either protecting the sactity of the law or deciding that the law in this instance should not apply because it would cause harm instead of preventing it. So, LG people can and do break the law. Usually, though, they will need a reason for doing it. Having reasons for their actions is in their nature anyway, so it's not really something that should be considered differently from any other choice. That's my take.
Gryllmyre 10-06-06, 02:02 PM	I think the truest form of LG is summed up by one phrase: Goodness is the law. Goodness is defense of innocent life. If you want to deepen (or complicate) your character's behavior by a set of traditions or conduct, that of course is your choice.
Illithid_Tentacles 10-06-06, 02:04 PM	Do I have to always follow laws laid down in towns? One DM I know interpreted it like that and I am just looking for some feedback. Oi... no, it does NOT mean that, which is why I think it should be renamed something else. As it says in the PHB, "Lawful characters tell the truth, keep thier word, respect authority, honor traditions, and judge those who fall short in thier duties. Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can inlude close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, and lack of adaptability." So basically, your average Lawful guy is going to be notably honest, reliable, trustworthy, but not to a fault. Also notice that the description of Lawful makes NO mention of actual laws. Also note that it states "implies... obedience to authority." This does NOT mean that you have to do what anyone with any authority whatsoever tells you, it means that the average Lawful guy will respect and obey legitimate authority. The leader of a band of bandits has authority, but only because he's coerced/tricked/strongarmed/etc. the rest of his group into it- in other words, his authority isn't legitimate. The average Lawful guy is also going to be something of a stick in the mud, uneasy about, or in extreme cases, unwilling at all to even try, new ideas, especially radically new or different ones. Most laws are made for the good of the people, so you shouldn't have any trouble following them. Unjust or ridicuous laws, like "all women must wear fish on thier head on Thrusdays," you are not at all obligated to obey, unless part of your personal code inludes "Must obey all local laws."
equilibrium17 10-06-06, 02:09 PM	This is defintely something you should talk about with your DM. . . "Lawful Good" means different things in different campaign worlds. In my campaigns, one of the first things I ask characters is to define which aspect of their alignment is most dominant. That is, in your case, are you Lawful and also Good, or are you Good, and also Lawful? Being Lawful is all about adhering to a set of Rules and behavior -- not necessarily just formal, written laws of the land, but codes like Chivalry, Bushido, social norms, etc. A character that is dominantly lawful sees upholding the "Rule of Law," and whatever social order he espouses as the MOST important thing. Being Good is all about wanting to help your fellow man (or dwarf, elf, dragon, etc.) -- make their life better, shelter them from harm, ease their pain and suffering, etc. One of the interesting shades to this is what a Good character thinks about evil beings -- A Good character might believe Orcs are inherently evil, and therefore must be eradicated, or alternatively might hope to convert Orcs to the "Good Side" and mend their Evil ways. In the latter case, they would (regretfully) kill Orcs engaging in evil deeds, but might look for opportunities to reform them, instead. In any event, inevitably situations come up where Good and Law come into conflict. For example, what your Lawful Good character *knows* that there has been a mistake, and an innocent man has been convicted to be hanged? Assume that all legal recourse has been exhausted -- there is no way to save the innocent man without breaking the law (i.e., breaking the wrongly accused man out of prison). A Lawful Good character, Law Dominant might decide that, despite the fact that he knows the man is innocent, the Rule of Law must be respected, and it is not his place to subvert the decision of a Just legal authority. Such a character might be very upset over the innocent man's death, and swear to look after his family, raise a memorial, clear the man's name after death, etc., but he would not break the law to save him. On the other hand, a Lawful Good character, Good Dominant might decide that, despite the fact that it involves breaking the law, he must save the life of an innocent man, and possibly participate in a break-out scheme. Such a character would certainly feel very conflicted about breaking the law, and might continue to "set the record straight" to prove the man's innocence, etc., but would see saving the man's life as most important. Basically, think about what "Law" and "Good" mean to your character specifically. What Laws? What Good deeds are most important? What does your character do when the two come into conflict? And again, involve your DM. A lot of this stuff is campaign specific. Cheers, E17
albinomonkeyking 10-06-06, 02:32 PM	He strictly adheres to his codes, or, his 'laws', but he feels for the people and would want to do anything he could to save them. For instance, by his code children are innocence and are not to be touched, if a noble or high-to-do of a kingdom was seen hitting his child he would promptly interfere, and if he had to go to the extreme of physically incapacitating the man he would. So he believes in a greater good set down by his code, so....I suppose his actions would make him more Lawful Good than Lawful Good. I think. He was also fiercely loyal to his king, but his quest began when his kingdom fell. If his kingdom were still around he had such unswaying loyalty that he would have looked for the good or the tried to defend any seemingly unjust thing the king would have done, because he trusted him. So, in that kingdom he would have followed the law. Now, if he had reason to start doubting the king, (an innocent woman is to be hanged) provided he had enough reason he would save her, even if it meant breaking his leiges law. So, again... I believe that is more Good than Lawful. Also, his code of conduct is going to be defined, it has been discussed, but it is largely protecting innocents in all its many forms, and honor in battle. His code strictly defines what he does in a battle, no striking an unaware opponent, helpless, no surprising, etc.. I also have, I suppose from a few biased DMs an image that LG have to be perfect, but I wanted some flaws. For example: Great Protector discusses the glory of the battle as everything, and he was going to treat battle as sacred, but also a chance to show off. He was going to be extremely vain and cocky and constantly wanting to make sure people know, more or less, how cool he is. Kinda like some of the people on these boards.....Anyway, there shouldn't be anything wrong with that, (in alignment terms) right?
equilibrium17 10-06-06, 02:46 PM	Yep, sounds like you've got some good ideas. Discuss 'em with your DM, make sure they match with the campaign world, and you're good to go. And yes, a Lawful good character can still be vain, cocky, etc. Those are character traits. As long as he's out to protect the innocent, and smite evil, he can be as Arrogant as you want him to be about how good he is at it. ;)
kelvinaw273 10-06-06, 05:44 PM	Lawful good can be summed up with two words: Honour and compassion. Establish a code of honour for yourself, and apply it to all situations. Only bend it to show compassion to others. What you don't have to do is: Show honour to those who have demonstrated they have none. Show compassion to the unrepentant. You are lawful good, after all, not Lawful Stupid.
Aeromus 10-06-06, 06:28 PM	If you read comic books, act like Superman.
Cifer 10-06-06, 06:45 PM	What you don't have to do is: Show honour to those who have demonstrated they have none. Show compassion to the unrepentant. You are lawful good, after all, not Lawful Stupid. Make that "What you don't have to do is". In general, discuss the alignment with your DM. My preferred definitions would be: Good: Altruism. Simple as that, you want to help others. Lawful: You keep to a personal set of rules (that may or may not contain "obey local laws"), straying from them only when absolutely necessary
Ldyparadox99 10-06-06, 10:15 PM	My advice would be (like many others said) to talk to your DM about your codes. My next question would be to my DM, what is HIS vision of lawful good. Because we all have our own definitions of what we think lawful good would be, and it would be benificial to know how much room you have on your code to roleplay. In the past I've played with a guy that ALWAYS plays a lawful good type character...he even had a knight in our vampire game! He followed his paladin's code to the letter and often would charge into battle without thinking...he got dumbed as lawful stupid even to the point that the captain of the local paladin's order had to tell him that common sense was nothing to be ashamed of. Cheers!
Totentanz 10-07-06, 12:25 AM	First, the only definition of LG that matters is the one your DM believes in. You really need to discuss your alignment and your code with him before the game starts, to avoid mid-game arguments. If you have different visions, see if he is willing to give you a little lee-way in the name of RP. This highlights a problem I have with the 3.0/3.5 alignment system. In the good old days, the Law-Chaos axis was secondary to the Good-Evil axis. Now, supposedly they are equal in some vague way I still don't fully grasp. Lawful: You believe in an orderly, rules-oriented society. You abhor chaos. This doesn't mean you would follow laws that don't make sense or that violate your morals (following rules without moral question is LN). You may even disagree with law established by good people, because you believe it is mis-guided. Good: If you have the BoED, it does a great job of defining what "good" means in a fantasy setting. Too many people interpret good as "not evil." Being unconcerned for others' well-being while not actively wishing anyone harm is Neutral. I see good as being willing to actually help people who need help, and being unwilling to harm innocents. On being vain/arrogant: To put it simply: hell yes. Being LG is not being perfect. You can be vain, arrogant, ignorant, intolerant, and have a whole host of other flaws. A LG character might ride in to save a village, and then preach endlessly to them about how they brought the orcs down on themselves with their heathen ways, and should convert. He wouldn't convert them by the sword, nor would he refuse to help them. Too many people think good in general, and LG in particular, is some cookie-cutter knight in shining armor. Alignments aren't straight jackets, nor do they determine personalities. You have a good character idea here, and I wish you good luck with it.
JasonOrlandoHawk 10-07-06, 03:09 AM	As it says in the PHB, "Lawful characters tell the truth, keep thier word, respect authority, honor traditions, and judge those who fall short in thier duties. Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can inlude close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, and lack of adaptability." Honesty, Authority, Honor These are Lawful. These are your character. Throw in a touch of Discipline, and Lawful is neatly summarized. Determine what Honesty means to you, but note it must be important. Some options include: 1) I never intentionally lie. 2) I never break my word, even in the slightest. 3) I never allow a lie to be spoken in my presence. (most extreme) Determine what constitutes "legitmate" authority to your character. Some options include: 1) The oldest male of the royal family's decree is legitamate. 2) The teachings of a particular religious sect or sacred text is legitimate. 3) Only laws established by the consent of the community, or an elected governing body, may be considered legitimate. 4) Some watery tart has to lob a scimitar at you for you to carry authority... (Sorry...) Establish a code of Honor. (You seem to be handling that well enough, as is.) And determine how serious honor is to you. For example, Your Reputation Proceeds You (Chivalry) to I Must Watch My Deeds, Lest I Shame My Kinsmen (Knightly Orders/Jedi) to Death Before Dishonor (Samurai). Finally, on the subject of discipline: Lawful characters are typically disciplined about something, such as immaculate organization, strict prayer time in the morning, 2 hours of sword practice/day irregardless of weather/hazards, etc... Lawful characters gain strength from such daily routines. As for your suggested flaws... they sound fine. And, as mentioned multiple times above, check all w/ your DM over any advice given by this board. Good Luck! May the Force be with You!
Lina_Inverse 10-07-06, 03:16 AM	Well, I am taking on a Knight (PH2) and going into Knight Protector of the Great Kingdom (Sword and Fist), and I know that is mixing 3.0 with 3.5 (sweet raptor jesus no!) but the DM okayed it. Anyway, both of those classes have codes they must follow, so my character is going to have a strict moral code that I roleplay him as. My initial impression was the stereotypical paladin, they always seemed pretty rigid, so I am going LG. So I am going to have strict codes I adhere to, not hurting innocents, helping innocents, not hurting helpless, etc., but I am a little fuzzy on LG. Do I have to always follow laws laid down in towns? One DM I know interpreted it like that and I am just looking for some feedback. Any advice, LG characters, anything LG would help, thanks a lot. (Also perhaps situations that could be difficult to roleplay or challenges I may face, thanks again) You must respect legitamate authority if you are a paladin. Lawful charecters believe in the inherant RIGHTNESS of structure and rules, and would not break them without good reason. Even if you dont agree with those rules, haveing rules is ALWAYS better than not haveing rules. This means you wont try overthrowing a goverment you dislike without doing it within the rules, it also means youll try your best to respect those laws when going though that authoritys lands. Note, try, best. If the law requires you to be evil, discreetly and sadly ignore it.
Dolomite 10-07-06, 03:46 AM	I used to play a LG Wizard and was faced with such a situation that one of our party had killed 2 people in a marketplace in defense of herself, but it was a setup by our enemy to frame her and weaken us. We knew that she was innocent and that she was being framed, but instead of fighting the guards, me and the Paladin talked to the Sheriff and got her released into our custody and give a set amout of time to get evidence to clear her name or her punishment would be carried out. We worked with the Locals to clear her name and things worked out, all just by respecting the authorities and being flexible. Being LG does not mean you are inflexible, but it does mean you do have a line in the sand you do not cross and it dosen't shift too often unless there is a good reason too. LG is dynamic as the other alignments when you realize there are plenty of ways to play a LG and still have fun with it.
Cifer 10-07-06, 05:56 PM	Good: If you have the BoED, it does a great job of defining what "good" means in a fantasy setting. Look into the mature boards. There is a nice debate going on about both books. Let's just say that the BoED managed to turn the epic concepts of good and evil into blue team vs. red team. Lawful charecters believe in the inherant RIGHTNESS of structure and rules, and would not break them without good reason. Even if you dont agree with those rules, haveing rules is ALWAYS better than not haveing rules. This means you wont try overthrowing a goverment you dislike without doing it within the rules, it also means youll try your best to respect those laws when going though that authoritys lands. Note, try, best. If the law requires you to be evil, discreetly and sadly ignore it. Er... no. Not at all. Being lawful means, as I have already said, that you have a set of rules which you don't stray from. Does an ascetic monk care about worldly rules and laws or does his lawfulness rather stem from his rigid discipline and inner code? "Obey local laws" may be one rule your character has, but it is in no way mandatory if you are not a paladin.
King Bulba 10-07-06, 09:52 PM	You are lawful good, after all, not Lawful Stupid. Sorry I dont buy it. They are one and the same hehe! Being LG does not mean you are inflexible, LIES!
Kradlo 10-08-06, 10:04 AM	Ah, once again a drive-by comment from the peanut gallery. Some people can't resist providing statements of zero worth to a discussion. :ahem: Back to the issue at hand. I think you're on the right track, AMK. Alignment is a basic framework, and your class choices have particular restrictions that must be observed. The Knight Protector of the Great Kingdom has been updated to the Knight Protector in Complete Warrior, pages 55-57, so it's 3.5 compliant now. The changes are fairly minor, I believe. Finding a nobleman beating a child allows several options to the LG knight. One response would be to issue a challenge to the nobleman, something along these lines. "Good sir, I see that you have considerable mettle when it comes to facing hapless children. Will you demonstrate similar courage when engaging an opponent that rises higher than your hip? Will you do me the honor of meeting in a test of arms, or is your backbone soft as butter in the noonday sun?" This meets the Knight's Code, issuing the challenge and allowing the opponent to ready himself. The Goad feat (Complete Adventurer, pg 109) is virtually tailor made for the Knight. Play on, and have fun!
King Bulba 10-08-06, 04:16 PM	Ah, once again a drive-by comment from the peanut gallery. Some people can't resist providing statements of zero worth to a discussion. :ahem: Try to lighten the mood and get stoned to death. Sorry my sarcasm wasn't up to your standards. :pbbbtt:
Tarvok 10-08-06, 05:08 PM	Great pieces of advice from everyone, particularly Kradlo (though I did find King Bulba's comment humerous). Some questions to consider when considering what constitutes "legitimate" authority. What is the source of legitimate authority? For example, who resides higher, Civil authority (king, council, parliament), or religious authority... in other words, does one derive their authority from the other? If a king, does he gain his authority by clerical appointment, or is the clergy subject to the King? Or are the two independent of each other, having strictly separated spheres of authority? Who issues laws? Is it the King? Is it the Clergy? The Estates General? Are the laws a static set handed down from The Gods or The God (and what about the other gods, if your law comes from The God)? Or are the laws derived a priori from a single, divine principle? If so, who has the authority to interpret that principle? If it is a set of laws, who has the authority to interpret those laws? What is the procedure for dealing with lawbreakers? What are the scope of your laws? Do they apply only to a defined area, with other laws applying elsewhere? Or are your laws universal, meaning that even when you leave the area of immediate political influence, you are still subject to them, and, if an agent of your government, still required to uphold them regardless of local custom? If there are multiple lawgiving bodies with defined spheres of influence, whoever your knight works for, he ought to champion the staticness of those borders. If your liege is trying to step on the clergy's toes, for example, he exceeds his authority, and any orders he issues are ILLEGAL, and thus, at the very least, it is required for you to disregard those orders... if not enforce the legal border yourself (or turn him over to the appropriate judicial body). The same goes if there are defined borders between different lands. If you live in a lawful-good kingdom, which neighbors a lawful-evil kingdom, and you regarded the borders as inherently lawful (as opposed to being simply the current situation), you would generally try to stay out of the lawful-evil kingdom; to go there would be to "knowlingly associate with evil." Containment would be the order of the day. And if you find yourself bopping about an international community, observe international law (while trying to shape it, where possible). However, if you regard your laws as universal, play as an agent of colonialism. If you find yourself the only Lawful person in a chaotic world, find some ancient code of law (or maybe seek direct contact with a deity for a divine set of laws), pursuing the dream of founding a nation upon such a divine code. Lawful can be quite fun to play, if you've got a DM who will work with you.
Kradlo 10-08-06, 05:18 PM	Arthur - "I am the King of the Britons." Peasant - "Who are the Britons?" Arthur - "We are. We all are." Peasant - "How did you get to become a king?" Arthur - "The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the most shimmering samite, held forth Excalibur from the bosom of the waters, proclaiming that by divine providence I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur, and that is why I am your king!" Peasant - "Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme governmental authority is derived from a mandate of the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. If I was to say I was emperor because some dampened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd have me locked up."
Stev Beren 10-08-06, 06:38 PM	Ok. A LAwful good will "Respect legitimate authority" BUT - A Lawful good can have different ideas of what makes authority legitimate. There very well might be certain acts that automatically delegitimize an authority. Abuses of power which, due to the good, are illegitimate even if technically legal. See, the full lawful good might hold a ruler to a stricter interpretation of the law than he holds himself to.
Stormbrand 10-09-06, 12:00 PM	Look into the mature boards. There is a nice debate going on about both books. Let's just say that the BoED managed to turn the epic concepts of good and evil into blue team vs. red team. Er... no. Not at all. Being lawful means, as I have already said, that you have a set of rules which you don't stray from. Does an ascetic monk care about worldly rules and laws or does his lawfulness rather stem from his rigid discipline and inner code? "Obey local laws" may be one rule your character has, but it is in no way mandatory if you are not a paladin. 1) I am pretty sure the BoED tried highlighting the differences between good and evil - things like mercy, forgiveness, helping others. Red vs Blue was a problem in d&d long before BoED came out. 2, i) Just because you have already said something doesn't mean everyone else has to accept it as truth. ii) Having a set of rules and not straying from them can easily be chaotic, depending on the set of rules. Some rules have nothing to do with law and chaos. In fact, Lina_Inverse's point about lawful characters believing in and supporting structure and rules is perhaps the best definition of Lawful alignment I have heard yet.
dizfactor 10-09-06, 03:26 PM	1) I am pretty sure the BoED tried highlighting the differences between good and evil And many would argue that it failed miserably, primarily because the things it highlighted as "good" were not really "good" so much as "lawful," and many of the things it highlighted as "evil" were not so much evil as "kinky."
Surprise 10-09-06, 08:29 PM	The best example of a Lawful Good character that comes to my mind is Captain Picard from Star TNG.:w00t: -Surprise
Tarvok 10-09-06, 08:57 PM	The best example of a Lawful Good character that comes to my mind is Captain Picard from Star TNG.:w00t: -Surprise Yeah, he was pretty darned good... but he had it easy, since not only was he Lawful, he was also in charge. It's a lot easeier to be Lawful Good when you're in charge. (I once tried to play a Lawful-Good monk... in a party of chaotic good characters. Needless to say, he was a bit frustrated at times.) Another good example is Jet Black from Cowboy Beebop. (I consider Spike chaotic good.)
Magus Gar Kan 10-10-06, 02:15 PM	Not to interrupt the alignment debate, but Knight Protector was reprinted in Complete Warrior, so there is a 3.5 version of it. Thank you :tiphat: , you may now return to your discussion and impending flamewar.
Stormbrand 10-11-06, 06:12 PM	And many would argue that it failed miserably, primarily because the things it highlighted as "good" were not really "good" so much as "lawful," and many of the things it highlighted as "evil" were not so much evil as "kinky." Beautiful! :clap: :tiphat: How come I can't actually find the mature boards? I could argue some of that, but that is a discussion for another thread.
captainswift 10-11-06, 06:32 PM	By my interpretations, and in the simplest possible terms (I am speaking of the generality of the alignment, not the perfect ideal): Lawful characters plan; Chaotic characters are impulsive. This is not to say that a well-played lawful character sticks strictly to every plan, or obeys every rule (this would be "Lawful Stupid"), but they want to go into a situation prepared. A lawful character encounters a dragon unexpectedly, he's more likely to try and pull back, to plan the battle. Nor is it to say that chaotic characters should run around doing random things for no reason ("Chaotic Stupid"). A chaotic character encounters the above dragon, he's more likely to impulsively attack it (or attempt to reason with it, you never know). Neutral characters keep a happy medium.
Sereno 10-12-06, 10:20 AM	Another good LG example is Captain Carrot (Ironfoundersson) from the Discworld novels. Despite the fact that he's honorable, painfully honest and compassionate, he still kicks the bad guys' asses when necessary.
Comus 10-12-06, 01:25 PM	Optimus Prime. Before you do anything, just think "What would Optimus Prime think if I did this?" If he would be disappointed, then you should reconsider.
dizfactor 10-12-06, 03:26 PM	My take is that Lawful Good people generally believe that laws are there for the common good. They usually believe that people need to be guided and regulated by a strong but compassionate and moral authority, or they will give into temptations and the common weaknesses of the human character. They think that disorder and chaos breed evil, and a just society produces healthy, happy, morally sound people. As a result, they work to establish such a society.
HazelEyedDragn 10-12-06, 04:05 PM	I didn't read all of the replies, so if I repeat something, please forgive me. Anyway, I would suggest looking into The Book Of Exhaulted Deeds. When I first started D&D I was lawful good and failed terribly, causing me to make this purchas. As was stated before, I make a code of conduct and talk about it with the DM. One problem usually faced with LG characters is that their code is very rarely challenged. One example the book gives is a LG character encountering two demons that quite obviously love each other. Do you slay them, because they are evil, or do you honor their love and let them live? I think it would be more challenging for you if situations such as that had to be tackled by your character, fully demonstrating the code by which you live. Good luck!
Optimator 10-12-06, 04:15 PM	Optimus Prime. Before you do anything, just think "What would Optimus Prime think if I did this?" If he would be disappointed, then you should reconsider. Damn straight!
Chrono Nexus 10-12-06, 04:19 PM	Optimus Prime. Before you do anything, just think "What would Optimus Prime think if I did this?" If he would be disappointed, then you should reconsider. The transformers are a gift from god. Like, we had, like, a chart.
LordHawkeye 10-12-06, 05:42 PM	A thing to remember, is that if your character believes a law to be unjust, he should take it up with those in charge. You don't just break laws because you don't like them. That's the path towards anarchy. You discuss such matters (so diplomacy is a very good skill to take) Now, in more extreme cases, you may learn the highers ups are corrupt. Remember that a corrupt ruler is not legitimate authority and your are in the right for exposing them.