The problem was that there was a pair of adventurers that seem to have gotten set up to be the fall guys for a string of crimes. They refused to testify unless they were given immunity, which immediately set off warning flags and essentially solidified their guilt in his eyes. The Watch Captain wasn't going for it.
My character took the Watch Captain into another room and suggested that they might try to "escape" during prisoner transfer or that they might have an "accident". Sharn is the City of Towers, after all. There's plenty of places to fall. The Captain took to it and immediately agreed to given them a drastically reduced sentence in exchange for my warlock being in charge of the prisoner transfer.
During their testimony, I felt that they might not actually deserve to get killed, but the Watch Captain was opposed to me backing out.
This is the part that I wanted to further role-play, but there are only so many hours in the day. The agonizing that I wanted to do got extrapolated out into him actually doing the deed. My warlock was piloting the prisoner transport air-coach and crashed it. (Fell flight is ridiculously useful)
My problem is that I don't know whether I should try to re-explore that plot point and whether or not my character would necessarily feel guilty about essentially committing premeditated murder on two adventurers.
Any ideas on how to revisit the quandary in a logical fashion? I can't see him admitting to murder and turning himself in, but I do feel that the situation remains unresolved.
If you want to start drifting toward good (meaning first becoming neutral I imagine) then your guilt would cause you to question your actions up to that point, and you may begin to change. You don't have to turn yourself in (that's too easy really, and basically might end your character unless the DM says otherwise) you could instead simply strive to make up for whatever wrongs you felt you did by finding the real cause of the robberies and maybe being a "good cop" in the future.
Or, maybe you are crazy and blame everything on the Watch Captain. It was his idea, he was trying to set you up! You should arrange for him to be brought up on charges so that you can take his position. Actually, if your character doesn't truly believe this, he could still orchestrate for the captain to take all the blame. That would put you still as Lawful or Neutral Evil though.
Question is, what can the character do to make it alright? That Watch Capt'n surely deserves to pay for forcing the character to go against his beliefs. A good guard of Sharn can't sit by as an unreasonable official fails to see the value of Sharn's laws, can they?
However, reading your responses, I think that seeking an insidious revenge for being placed into a tight spot is probably the way to go. Because of his dedication to the Watch and the order of Sharn, he wouldn't act openly, though. Exposing corruption to the public would weaken the Watch's ability to enforce the law. However, if personal misfortune were to befall the Watch Captain, perhaps my warlock would arrive too late to save her.
However, if personal misfortune were to befall the Watch Captain, perhaps my warlock would arrive too late to save her.
Make sure you clutch his dying body in your arms once you "arrive at the scene" and that your wicked grin is the last thing he sees...
Make sure you clutch his dying body in your arms once you "arrive at the scene" and that your wicked grin is the last thing he sees...
Yes. And don't forget that it's always best of you have two or more enemies, and turn them against each other to waste their resources as well as keep the backlash from striking you.
You may also want to consider the 'Ask an Evil Overlord' thread in the mature forums for more feedback.
You may also want to consider the 'Ask an Evil Overlord' thread in the mature forums for more feedback.
The where? I see no mature forum in the forum listing.
Thanks.
Ah. I see. I guess the change over to Gleemax didn't import my date of birth and I never noticed it. Weird.
Thanks.
Don't do it! You'll never be able to turn it off!
Ahh, my eyes! They buuurn...
Seriously, you can't turn it off once you have it show up on the forum list.
Am I missing an option somewhere? I've gone into the 'my account' thing, set my birthday (I'm 28, before you ask) and it still doesn't display the mature forums. Can people direct me to the right option in the right page, as I seem to be missing it in my old age...
I almost asked the same question, but decided to do a bit of digging around on the forums. It turns out that you won't be granted access immediately, but after the daily forum maintenance period. (2am PDT to about 3am).
Given that you posted before then, you should have it now.
Now there is a long an distinguished history of Lawful characters making Deals that didn't mean quite what the other party thought they did and then sticking rgidly to the letter of the Deal ..but I think you'd have mentioned that.
You might claim that you were acting independently of the Legal system but since your only 'beef' with them was the legal one in the first place you're definitely veering into chaotic territory.
You should in any case be plotting to take over the Captain's job ..but then he should know that.
While the rules might be loose on enforcement they are not going to allow you to murder people who have legal immunity for all the acts you know them to have committed. ..and sticking to your agreements is pretty much what makes someone lawful.
I think the point I failed to make is that as a Town Guard there are a set of rules that you presumably swore to abide by and a set of laws that you swore to uphold.
While the rules might be loose on enforcement they are not going to allow you to murder people who have legal immunity for all the acts you know them to have committed. ..and sticking to your agreements is pretty much what makes someone lawful.
The character is wanting to uphold the spirit of the law, not so much the letter. While he's not the traditional weaselly bastard that LE typically represents, no other alignment suits the personality. His rigid adherence to the protection of society's order requires that he be lawful and there is no way that anyone willing to entertain cold-blooded murder be anything but evil.
Consider him the fantasy equivalent of Dirty Harry or The Punisher.
There are two kinds of people in his eyes: criminal scum and innocents. The first receive horrible punishments and the latter receive selfless protection. The character's complexity comes from deciding what category someone belongs in. The quirk with the above scenario was that he initially assigned them to the wicked, which in his eyes, denied them any of his compassion. The twist was that after they explained the back story, it was determined that they were just patsies, putting them into the innocents. But, by that time, it was too late to not punish them, because of the pressure put on him by his superior.
See also: Baatezu.
Hence, if your personal code of honour is 'uphold the spirit of the laws' then it is fine to do so.
Lawful evil can do so, if they do so with extreme predjudice to lawbreakers. This is what the OP said they do, so I see their actions as consistent with the alignment they say they use.
In his mind, they did it.
The immunity would get them off
The guilty need punished.
He punished them.
He did it himself for a lesser man might not, or the guilty might escape.
If they didn't do it, why were they arrested for it in the first place.
I've read a lot of Kafka, so I can see this, start to finish.
"the latter receive selfless protection" ...but somehow the pressure of your superior was more important?
That's a good point and that moral problem is probably why he feels so conflicted and guilty now.
The thought process looks something like this:
- They're guilty. They must be punished.
- They're just patsies. I must go after the bigger fish.
- The Watch Captain says they're guilty. She's the Watch Captain, so she must be right. Isn't she?
- They're dead. They ... didn't actually deserve that. What have I done?