| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1Starcomet24Jul 28, 2015 11:15:31 | So I have been playing D&D for a number of years now and an interesting situation came up in my 5e game. We were talking to the Red wizards of Thay who are of Lawful Evil alignment. They told us that they would help us in our battle against the dragon cult that is trying to revive Tiamat if we helped them first. I stated to the group that as long as we can get them to give us their word then after we help them remove these rogue red wizard they should help. We knew that they were Lawfully aligned and evil so this was not metagaming on my part.
The problem arose that the players and the DM argued that a Lawful character does not have to keep their word or always tell the truth. It is true that Lawful characters can lie, but they avoid doing so and only do it depending on certain situations. Lawful Goods would only lie if it helps to hinder evil or further the cause of good. Lawful Neutrals would lie only if is necessary to benefit them or their group. Lawful Evil would lie if it benefits them and if they deem the person not worthy of their honor or respect. As for keeping ones word, they will always keep their word, deals, or contracts unless they can find some legal way to break it or weasel their way out of it. But that was not the case here as the DM said they could just break their word to us even if they signed a physical contract.
What do you all think? I know all about the alignment wars and how it can cause arguments and I am not trying to do that here. But I just cannot see a Lawful person lying or breaking their word whenever it suits them. That would make them at best neutral on law vs chaos axsis. |
| #2Starcomet24Jul 28, 2015 11:17:59 | Oh and I am playing as a Lawful Good cleric. |
| #3MonsterEnvyJul 28, 2015 11:43:22 | A Lawful human and the like can break contracts and deals and the like. They prefer not to, unless it's really disadvantagous to them, but for the most part they won't offer a deal they plan to back out on unless they are desprate.
While the Red Wizards here don't need to keep their word, they most likely will. As is the case with almost any Lawful being.
Outsider beings of Law however must keep their word when given. A Devil or a Modron won't go back on their word for example. Devils are capable of Lying, but prefer half truths and clever wording. But when it comes to a promise or a deal they must keep their word. When they can't back up their promisies they are harshly punished.
Modrons are not even capable of lying.
Humans and other normal beings of the material plane are under no obligation to keep their word or tell the truth. For some Lawful just means they have a code of conduct they always go by.
AKA the WIzards can back out on their deal, but it's unlikley they will unless it would really benifit them not to. Plus Tiamat their problem as well. |
| #4Starcomet24Jul 28, 2015 11:56:04 | Well yes non-outsider Lawful beings can break contracts and lie but it is unlikely they will. If they do break a contract, they have to find a legal way to do so. I mean it is okay if they just break their word without good reason a few times if the deal is bad for them, but if they do it all the time then they are acting more like a neutral or chaotic being even. I am just saying that it is highly unlikely a lawful person would lie or break a promise without good reason to do so. |
| #5Starcomet24Jul 28, 2015 12:05:43 | The key is that for a lawful individual they can can break laws, rules, codes of conduct, or lie to someone only under certain situations. A neutral or chaotic individual on the law vs chaos axsis can do those things regardless of the situation at hand. |
| #6bawylieJul 28, 2015 12:08:20 | your character's alignment is basically a moral code. What your character aspires to be.
From time to time, we fail to meet our goals, or fall short of the expectations we set for ourselves.
Being a good person or a lawful person means choosing those things even when it's inconvenient or costly to do so. Being good comes at the expense of inaction, ease, and convenience. Being lawful comes at the expense of laxity and freedom.
But for all that, pobody's nerfect. |
| #7Ralif_RedhammerJul 28, 2015 12:17:27 | I’d say that I’d have expected the Red Wizards to keep the letter of the contract, but still try to find a way to get the upper hand in the end through a technicality “Oh, I’m sorry, you never specified how much help you’d get with Tiamat, so here are a bunch of apprentices that flunked out and a couple of scrolls of detect magic. Best of wishes and thanks for getting rid of that troublesome fellow.” Either that or they’d send legitimate aid, then run off with the treasure the moment the dragon cult was taken care of.
Personally, I like the three lawful alignments for the challenges inherent in keeping a strict code of some sort. |
| (Reply to #6)Mechatarrasque |
|
| #9Starcomet24Jul 28, 2015 12:33:24 |
|
| #10HebitsuikazaJul 28, 2015 13:15:25 | Think of people as being people.
Lawful means that you believe, perhaps quite strongly, that rules in society need to be in place in order to mitigate people violating one another through use of coercion or force-- that such coercion or force should be in the hands of those chosen or earned the right to rule rather than by individuals doing whatever they want. They are socialist or fascist if you like.
There is nothing mystical compelling them to keep their word, particularly if it would greatly violate their morals and ethics. Though keeping their word and dealing with people relatively honestly (at least by the letter you say). If one has made a verbal or written contract, the society should enforce that it be kept... to a point.
Now, granted, in this particular situation... let's say that it is also relatively in th Red Wizard's best interests to stop the Dragoncult. Maybe they would prefer not to do it themselves. But if they have made a contract with you, you should have every reason to expect them to keep it. But they aren't compelled to do so mystically-- it is just in their nature to deal with people fairly and consistently and honor their deals.
Now, if it most certainly isn't in their best interest to deal with the Dragon Cult, if they benefit tremendously from its existence.. then they may just lie to you in order to get you to do their dirty work.
At this point, I feel a sense motive check is in order and if the result is that you believe them, then by all means you should move forward as though you are expecting them to act in good faith. |
| #11Starcomet24Jul 28, 2015 13:21:58 |
|
| #12HebitsuikazaJul 28, 2015 14:27:10 | Yes. So you should go ahead with the assumption that they are acted in good faith.
Unless someone in the party really has some reason to hold some grudge against the red wizards and even then you should probably argue to cooperate.
They may not be mystically compelled to keep their word, but being Lawful they will not just break it just because they feel like it. Particularly if you are Lawful Good. As Lawful Good, you should be expecting other people to act either Lawful or Good.
But do characters even have conceptions of alignments?
Regardless, your character should cooperate with them... until the point where they ask you to do something that is just so evil that you can't even justify it for the greater good of all. |
| #13MonsterEnvyJul 28, 2015 14:59:43 | Unless they would greatly benifit from betraying you. They are unlikley to do so when it comes to the Dragon Cult. It's a mutal enemy. |
| #14Xeviat-DMJul 28, 2015 15:25:42 | I always describe a character's alignment as what kind of actions make them feel good to do, and the opposite represents what makes them feel bad to do. People can act out of alignment, but will do so for a reason and will feel bad about it after.
An evil person may get joy out of killing, for example. A lawful person feels good about themselves for keeping their word. A chaotic person feels bad when they are forced to follow the rules against their own interests.
Think about feelings and it's easier to judge alignment. The Red Wizards may be okay lying to you because they consider themselves better than you, or maybe they'll keep their word to prove to you hat they're better. |
| #15OrethalionJul 28, 2015 19:07:49 |
|
| (Reply to #15)arnwolf666 |
|
| #17OrethalionJul 28, 2015 20:51:15 |
|
| #18lawrencehoyJul 28, 2015 21:47:02 |
|
| #19HebitsuikazaJul 29, 2015 2:48:35 |
|
| #20PsikerlordJul 29, 2015 5:15:41 | We havent used alignment since 2e and dont miss it. I suggest trying a no alignment approach. |
| #21Be3Al2Jul 29, 2015 5:17:13 | Descriptions from the pregen characters in the Starter Set: Lawful Neutral (for this noble): "It's essential to establish law and order, even if it takes an iron fist to do it. The nobility are bound by honor and tradition to protect their people from both external and internal threats to stability. An organized society leaves no room for evil and chaos to take root."
Lawful Good (Folk hero): "A hero stands up to evil and never lets bullies have their way. A hero fights for law and order, so that everyone can live in prosperity and hapiness. A hero slays monsters, clears ruins, and protects the innocent. You strive to be such a hero."
From the PHB p 122: Lawful good creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society. Lawful neutral individuals act in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes. Lawful evil creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order.
The Red Wizards would probably find it in their interest to be able to make deals in the future, so they should probably keep their promise. However, there is nothing to stop them from fooling everyone and everything outside the Red Wizards if it fulfills the goals of the order. |
| #22Starcomet24Jul 29, 2015 9:38:40 |
|
| (Reply to #22)arnwolf666 |
|
| #24OoftaMegJul 29, 2015 12:32:26 | I've always viewed lawful alignment as adhering to a strong code of conduct, but there is no universal code of conduct.
Some lawful creatures may openly lie to anyone they deem as not being worthy of the truth.
I view the zhentarim as being similar to the mafia, they follow a strict code of conduct but they can also be ruthless. In adition the zhents may uphold the letter of the law but find some loophole when it suits their need.
Oh, and bonus points if, while the zhents are springing a trap on the PCs, they shrug and say "It's nothing personal. Just business." |
| #25HebitsuikazaJul 29, 2015 15:04:50 |
|
| #26BRJNJul 29, 2015 15:47:18 | The Red Wizards are selfish first and foremost. They are LE because a bunch of powerful rivals MUST have some sort of Code of Conduct to prevent them nuking each other and leave the peons to take over the wreckage. (See also the novel Darth Bane: Path of Destruction for how a group of Sith treat each other.) If you do RWs a big favor, they can do you a medium-sized one and decide to break off the transaction while they are ahead.
Consider that Szass Tam wants reliable subordinates. A person who proves unreliable - say by betraying a powerful group of adventurers - automatically goes down a notch in his estimation. Also, one of the few things in the world that could tackle Szass Tam one-on-one IS Tiamat. The Red Wizards will act in more-or-less good faith to mess up the Cult's plans, because they want Tiamat to be kept where she now is: far away from THEM.
|
| #27OrethalionJul 29, 2015 18:44:58 |
|
| #28edwin_suJul 29, 2015 18:53:43 |
|
| #29RazintarrJul 30, 2015 3:12:03 | You can trust the Red Wizards to act selflishly. They won't act against their own interests. If helping against the dragon cult was against the Wizards interests, they wouldn't have agreed to it. Stopping the cult was probably on their to-do list already, as was acting against the rogue Red Wizards. And here comes a party that can be used to complete one item on the list, while only asking for help in another item on the list. The Wizards actually made a pretty good deal from their point of view, so why endanger that deal by betraying the party?
They may, however, skimp the party on the amount of help they provide. Stopping the dragon cult at the cost of 10 Red Wizards and the loss of a convenient tool that the pcs were is more preferable than the loss of 20 Red Wizards and the party alive. It's nothing personal, it's just good resource management. And the amount of help provided wasn't stated in the contract, so any help would do to satisfy the contract. But the help must be sufficient to help the players succeed in their task, or else it's just a waste of resources.
And from a game-play point of view, that is actually good. It keeps the focus on the players, they are the ones that will have to succeed at the task. And it will keep the task challenging. If a lawful good faction was asked for help, they might have barged in with everything they have, taking over from the players and diminishing the feeling of succes.
|
| #30edwin_suJul 30, 2015 3:28:38 |
|
| #31OrethalionJul 30, 2015 6:05:33 |
|
| #32Xeviat-DMJul 30, 2015 7:55:37 |
|
| #33FFSAAJul 30, 2015 9:34:00 | People are giving answers that would seem to be more for different editions. 5E does not go to much length to describe alignment like some previous editions did. Lawful itself is not defined in 5E, but Lawful Evil is and it is merely "methodically take what they want within limits of a code of tradition, loyalty or order."
That description does not seem to say they will do what they say they will do, only that they won't take or do things that are against their code. It certainly does not say they wouldn't help the party and then immediatly slaughter them and loot their bodies afterwards either. |
| #34HebitsuikazaJul 30, 2015 9:56:17 |
|
| #35bawylieJul 30, 2015 11:29:18 | Ugh. Everything I read about alignment, including my own writing, is the stupidest thing I've ever read.
Do we turn off our brains before clicking "submit"? WTF?
/out |
| #36VulfJul 30, 2015 11:59:36 | Don't worry about whether they intend to keep their word or not. Make it publicly known in every town you pass through that you have a contract with the Red Wizards.
If they break their promise they basically screw themselves over, as noone will ever have any dealings with them.
Or just refuse their quest and their help. If they want something, keep it for yourselves or sell it, or give it to the Harpers.
If the DM railroads you, just ask him whenever your character makes a decision "Ok, what does my character decide to do now? Will my character attack that red dragon or join him? Does my character keep watch or wander off alone?" He'll get the picture. |
| #37MonsterEnvyJul 30, 2015 14:50:30 |
|
| #38lawrencehoyJul 30, 2015 22:03:41 |
|
| #39lawrencehoyJul 30, 2015 22:04:48 |
|
| #40arnwolf666Jul 31, 2015 12:32:33 | I love alignment, because I love the struggle between the Lords of Light, and the Dark Powers as well as an immense cosmic struggle of the Lords of Order versus Courts of Chaos. |
| (Reply to #40)Mechatarrasque |
|
| #42GrazelJul 31, 2015 23:07:56 | Lying is more a moral issue than an ethics issue. Law - Chaos is the ethics axis, and Good - Evil is the moral axis. Also in 5e alignment isn't a shifting thing (unless a player constantly has their character act in a manner different than their alignment) but an abstract to describe their view of where they stand. Like 4e's unaligned, in 5e Neutral isn't so much the 1e-2e absurd "must balance everything out" druid, but more a "I couldn't care less about the cosmic struggles between law and chaos, or good and evil".
A Neutral person could be "good" or even "lawful" (as in abiding the local law) but those are their actions, not their outlook on the world. In the real world of today most people are likely to be Neutral unless they're devoutly religious, law enforcement, or have a personal code of beavior and/or ethics. This doesn't make them a bad person, and likely not evil, though those at the extreme edges of a D&D alignment might see them that way.
Alignment is a very metagame construct and is almost impossible to implement in a non-one dimensional campaign because they're abstracts that if taken too strictly create a very cliched and stereotyped character. While it can work for angels and devils since they're whole thing is being the emobiment of a very narrow set of behavior, an abstract made concrete, it doesn't work well for "mortal" races.
Look at the comment above about your alignment "shifting" when crossing political borders. Lawful and Good are great abstracts, but the definitions of what IS Lawful or Good behavior varies from culture to culture, religion to religion. A cannabilistic culture probably doesn't see eating another sentient being as always an Evil act, though they likely see it as a Chaotic act if it's done for reasons or in a manner contraditary to the rules of their culture. Alignment is also very personal, a paladin won't give up their oath and beliefs just because they travel to a kingdom run by a vile lich where murder is legal and people are required by the local law to eat the flesh from the corpses of their family. They may be breaking the local law but that doesn't make them less Lawful as these laws aren't the laws native to their world-view. |