Allow me to introduce Dei Juri, a lawful neutral monk who now has a bit of a dilemma.
In his most recent adventure, the city has been saved from a massive spider swarm. It would have been initiated by the sacrificial victim having a massive number of evil spider eggs hatching inside his stomach. Naturally the victim would not have survived!
These spiders from the underdark would then have gone and infected lots more people (including the victim's relations) and it would have been pretty unpleasant for the whole community.
However, our hero together with his associate averted this horror and saved the victim from a grissly fate. All good stuff.
The rescued victim is quite powerful and has a number of nice magic items. Dei Juri has conceived the notion that the victim should be grateful. Indeed the victim owes him his life. There is therefore (in his mind,at least) a debt that needs to be repaid. Dei Juri would like the victim to give to Dei Juri a particular item of his treasure in settlement of this "debt." Sadly the victim does not see it that way. He has offered up a sum of money, which, while not inconsequential, it is no where near the value of the items involved.
The city authorities regard such issues with indifference (something like Thieves World or Ankh Morpak) so it just an issue between Dei Juri and the victim.
So then, given his lawful neutral alignment, should he keep the valuable treasure or take the offer from the victim?
Of course, I know that lawful doesnt always mean law abiding. However, if you try to take something from him without his permission, then it WILL become a matter of law. This will NOT end pleasantly, either by him setting his lawyers on you, or the city guard, or gods know what...
You have no legal claim to anything at all. The fact that he is offering you ANY reward is beyond what you deserve, in the eyes of the law.
Of course, I know that lawful doesnt always mean law abiding. However, if you try to take something from him without his permission, then it WILL become a matter of law. This will NOT end pleasantly, either by him setting his lawyers on you, or the city guard, or gods know what...
Unless your Lawful-ness was a sort of Eye-for-an-eye thing, in which case he could pretty much dropkick the dude in the face, take the items, and inform the man that they are equal.
What motivations does the monk act on? How is he lawful?
What motivations does the monk act on? How is he lawful?"
You are right that I am limiting the information. This is deliberate because I need to focus on how lawful neutral affects the actions the character could take.
However, if it helps, my monk is perhaps the usual self interested variety - seeking to perfect himself (which to the casual observer might seem quite close to "optimisation"). He seeks to improve himself through self discipline and by testing himself in difficult and challenging situations. His obligations to others relate to the fact that they have looked after him or protected or helped him and he is in their debt (e.g. other party members). He is not evil, nor bound by others codes or beliefs - merely dedicated to his own code and his own path.
"LN does not provide enough information.
What motivations does the monk act on? How is he lawful?"
You are right that I am limiting the information. This is deliberate because I need to focus on how lawful neutral affects the actions the character could take.
However, if it helps, my monk is perhaps the usual self interested variety - seeking to perfect himself (which to the casual observer might seem quite close to "optimisation"). He seeks to improve himself through self discipline and by testing himself in difficult and challenging situations. His obligations to others relate to the fact that they have looked after him or protected or helped him and he is in their debt (e.g. other party members). He is not evil, nor bound by others codes or beliefs - merely dedicated to his own code and his own path.
Okay, dedication to his own code and his own path.
But he's LN. So what is the model? At the very least, your character's own code is the ideal that guides him. But I guess the rule of thumb for LN would be that there is some authority, and the most powerful of LN lords would understand the unwavering premise of a certain code of conduct.
Personally, I would take the money, and issue a statement (or writing) to the effect that his full obligations were not released. In time, he would see that.
This decision is partly strategic. As you get more powerful, you'll be able to sway him through words and without violence. Or, at least, you'll have more supporters who will be able to persuade him.
But maybe the DM's just a greedy SOB who doesn't want to give you the shineys. And to further muddle things, the player's handbook states that, "Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot."
What does that mean? You decide, but I think you should have asked old spider-guts up front how much he was willing to pay for his life.
Unless your Lawful-ness was a sort of Eye-for-an-eye thing, in which case he could pretty much dropkick the dude in the face, take the items, and inform the man that they are equal.
yeah, this is the sort of monk i play. (you might be surprised by how useful dropkicking things can be - like when you kick the head off a statue in a temple and the temple later gets destroyed (gorram load-bearing bosses): guess who has the last remaining piece of history from the temple in their haversack?)
Bottom line is, your character, as I said in my last post, has no actual claim to ANYTHING, bar the reward the person has offered you. To demand more by force is basically extortion. Certain cultures are very strict on that sort of thing. Performing an illegal / evil act, on the basis that you are only concerned with your own power, is the start of the path to becoming evil, and most likely hunted down by legitimate authority.
Taking something from someone by force, even if you 'think' you've earned it, is certainly an evil act. Sure, nothing stops you from doing that IC, but its certainly something to watch out for.
Bottom line is, your character, as I said in my last post, has no actual claim to ANYTHING, bar the reward the person has offered you. To demand more by force is basically extortion. Certain cultures are very strict on that sort of thing. Performing an illegal / evil act, on the basis that you are only concerned with your own power, is the start of the path to becoming evil, and most likely hunted down by legitimate authority.
Too true Dedeverekm.
You should just take the vow of poverty.
Sadly - there is no legitimate authority. It is just a matter of my character's alignment.
Being neutral on the good/evil axis does give me a certain amount of discretion (though I reckon I should avoid absolutes - such as being extremely good and foregoing the money and adding some of my own cash to allow him to overcome his trauma or being extremely evil and killing him (and his relations) so I can keep his loot to prevent anyone coming after me).
However, I am lawful ... so how would you reckon my self interested but disciplined monk should behave?
Thanks for the responses so far.
Sadly - there is no legitimate authority. It is just a matter of my character's alignment.
However, I am lawful ... so how would you reckon my self interested but disciplined monk should behave?
I'll be honest, it sounds to me like your monk is borderline evil already. He's interested in nothing more than developing his own power, and is (apparently) happy to assault an innocent in order to achieve it?
Thats the fundamental point to consider. This person offering a reward is innocent. he has committed no crime, offered a reward where none was offered, and yet you are asking more than that.
Interest in developing yourself is certainly a reasonable interpretation of lawfulness. Taking that to the extreme you seem to be suggesting, of caring about nothing except your own power, is stepping into evil. You are definitely looking at profiting at the expense of others, for a start.
If the victim made no promises then he doesn't owe you anything on the Lawful front. Stealing (which is what you contemplate) is chaotic if anything on the L-C axis.
Taking stuff against his will is definitely Evil (I'm assuming he's not Evil himself). Doing so when he has already offered you a significant reward is probably enough to actually change your alignment.
If this character really has such an over-developed sense of entitlement then he should be thinking about what the rest of the city "owes" him.
Moral of the story: You should have made your demands before you saved him
It is, indeed, chaotic to decide that somebody owes you something arbitrarily, but the decision, in this situation, was not arbitrary. This is why I said "In this context."
It is a lawful thing to believe in the equality of exchange. When somebody does something for you, you do something for them. When you do something for them, they do something for you.
In the context of what has been said, it is a lawful thing for the monk to request the item as payment because it is his lawful belief that he is owed something. It is not lawful for the monk to take it without the second party agreeing to the exchange.
I believe I have been misunderstood.
It is a lawful thing to believe in the equality of exchange. When somebody does something for you, you do something for them. When you do something for them, they do something for you.
In the context of what has been said, it is a lawful thing for the monk to request the item as payment because it is his lawful belief that he is owed something. It is not lawful for the monk to take it without the second party agreeing to the exchange.
I was referring to the OP, who due to the difference in what he thought he was owed, and the NPC affectionately known as "spiderguts" thought he should get, was considering taking what he thought he owed(actually what he wanted).
Long-term goals could be good or evil, but you don't seem terribly concerned with that. Doing it to effectively extort and leverage the victim's sense of honor for personal gain would be a step towards evil. Doing it selflessly because it helped people and prevented suffering would be a step towards good.
However, doing it because it brought order to chaos would be a step towards lawfulness. Bringing order and balance to oneself may also involve bringing order and balance to one's environment. This massive spider swarm would indeed spread panic and chaos. Stopping it could even be a selfish act on your monk's part, as it would otherwise prove a distraction from meditation and self-perfection.
So maybe your reward could be the gained wisdom that, next time the town needs saving, get a contract in writing first.
Or delay acceptance of anything, and contact the initial sacrificers and see if they have a better counter-offer to re-initiate the evil spider swarm attack. That'll teach him to be stingy.
Thanks everyone for their contributions.
The ruling fromm the DM was that I could make a diplomacy check to see if I could turn "spider-guts" friendly and buy the items with a mark-up on the price in the DMG.
That seemed reasonable to my character and fortunately he made the roll (sometimes I can roll a 19!!).
If I had failed, then I think my monk would have decided to take the offer of the money and reflected on a lesson that another's friendship is worth more than (rather nice) gloves of dexterity. It might be a tough lesson - but one which he felt might help him on his way to enlightenment!
If I had failed, then I think my monk would have decided to take the offer of the money and reflected on a lesson that another's friendship is worth more than (rather nice) gloves of dexterity. It might be a tough lesson - but one which he felt might help him on his way to enlightenment!
yeah i would've just jump kicked his face (now 50% better than stabbing it!)
Then go and tithe it all.
Continue to do good works, and diligently work out your own salvation.
Good luck.
Continue to do good works, and diligently work out your own salvation.
But the monk isn't good, he's lawful neutral
."Continue to enforce order, and discipline throughout the land..." whatever.
Point being, I'd take the third option, Tithe it away.
Here are some observations:
If you'd discussed his fate before saving him and demanded a reward, that'd be evil. If after the fact you threatened him with violence or death for not giving you a reward, it would also be evil. As it stands, the character is just a selfish jerk.
A monk striving for personal perfection has no need for the distractions of wealth. Being really good at wielding a sword +5 is no better than being really good at wielding a common sword. So.. if you are buying flashy stuff to supplement your weaknesses, you should stop training as a monk.
As a DM faced with your guilting the guy for cash, I wouldn't say you were violating your alignment. I'd likely compare you to a mother-in-law though.
(Take gear AND money.... goodies only sell for half their price in the stores...
If you take the money, well.. woot! you are X number of coins richer!