Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 12:51:42	Hello, I'm about to begin playing my very first (3.5ed) DND game and after our first "try out" session me and the DM have come to a dissagreemet. I'm playing a LN Cleric who worships Wee Jas (I originally wanted to worship "Death" as a concept but he said I have to pick a god and this is as close as I could get with my alignment). Originally I my goal was to make a necromancer who believes that the universe has an plan for when everyone must die and if its your turn to get offed then so be it. He cares nothing for the mortal realm and worships only his God as the only and ultimate authority. The issue that arose is that my DM (who is turning out to be a serious rules lawyer) keeps insisting that I cannot play my character that way and that he is by definition CN. His arguments include things like "murder is chaotic" "a LN PC in a CE society would be the outlaw", "Lawful means the written law", "law can be abused by either side" "if we have chaotic laws then its no longer lawful" . He says taht as a LN I cannot break any laws and that I must obey Society's rules. My original intrpretation of Lawful was that it represented Oder as a force of nature and that Laws area tool of Order not Order itself. If someone could point to a rule that backs up his argument then I'll relent, but it feels like he keeps pushing me into this "if you wanna do this then you are CN" situation.   TLDR: first time player wondering if Lawful means follow laws or if its Order as a concept like Good is
#2 Beldak_Serpenthelm Jan 25, 2014 13:24:57	Azea14 wrote:
#3 wildefox Jan 25, 2014 13:44:12	Since you are playing 3.5, I'll post what it says for Lawful Neutral (emphasis mine):   Lawful Neutral, "Judge": A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strang, organized government. Ember, a monk who follows her discipline without being swayed either by the demands of those in need or by the temptations of evil, is lawful neutral.     Your DM's belief that a LN character must always follow the local law in all situations is one interpretation of LN. Your character concept is valid, and you can point to the description in the PHB to back it up, but I would caution you that simply following Order as a concept is likely not enough. I think the best thing for you to do is sit down and hammer out an actual personal code that your character lives by. A written account of how you believe that you should act according to your own personal beliefs, that you can show to your DM and say "this is the law that my character believes in".   Examples for your character might be "The universe alone decides when it is a person's time to die. I will never save a life, nor strike a killing blow." or "Death shall not be halted in its progress. I will never accept outside healing." Those are tough to live with, but they fit your concept. The trouble I imagine your DM is having is that you want to be Lawful, but you're trying to follow an esoteric concept instead of a set of rules. That's problematic.   Wee Jas is a god of law, and a follower of her would respect the laws of a given area because that is what she advocates. You can't be a LN follower of Wee Jas and break the law when you feel like it. You might consider your god the ultimate authority, but your god considers mortal law sacred.
#4 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 13:52:35	The way my DM made it sound is that if I don't stick to LN to the letter then I'd be LE and I, as a rule could not follow Wee Jas anymore as being LE would like undo my Cleric powers. To further elaborate hte way I rationalize things is my Cleric is for the most part law abiding, he won't steal or decieve and the like but he believes that death is universal and that if Wee Jas Will says that it is you time to die then he will kill the person. My DM is of the stance Murder= CE as a blanket statement. He says I cannot kill even if I were to go to a place where murder is legal because those are "Cahotic Laws"
#5 wildefox Jan 25, 2014 14:08:32	I play a lot of Clerics, and arguing with the DM about alignment is one of the main reasons I hate the whole stupid alignment system, so I feel for your plight. By the way, you can be one step away from your deity. Wee Jas is LN, so you can be LE, LN, LG, and true Neutral. Being changed to LE should not undo your Cleric powers.   The best you can really do is open the rulebook and point to the written definition of the alignment. If he isn't willing to abide by what the book says the description of LN is, you're just screwed. As cool as you might think your character concept is, I would recomend not playing a Cleric. I've been down that road before and it is not worth it.   You cannot have a "chaotic law" any more than you can have an "evil good". Murder is also a social construction. You can kill a person anywhere, and you can judge the action to be Evil or Good, but it only violates the law when there are laws in place that prohibit it. Wee Jas does not care about "evil" or "good", all she cares is if you are following the law. Does a law prohibit you from doing something? If so, don't do it. If not, your own god encourages you to do it.
#6 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 14:23:45	I see, Im in agreement with most of what you guys say and the fact that turning Evil won't cost me my powers is a relief. Then I guess the following question would be does killing make me evil? I though not because my Cleric sees death as a Natural phenomenon and is of the "when your time is up. its up" kind of deal, but my DM is of the Killing=Bad school of though. I've argued that Soldiers, Executioners, Assassins would all be LN and they kill all the time, but he continues to refute it.
#7 wildefox Jan 25, 2014 14:31:25	Typically people would describe killing as evil, with some caveats. Most people would allow for self defence, things like mercy killings or state executions are more of a gray area. I suppose what I would put forward is the reminder that yours is a God of death, not of murder. Death is natural, but killing is inheriently unnatural. Wee Jas allows necromancy on the stipulation that the undead subjects are not unwilling, and I don't think she'd approve of her clerics going around killing people on a whim. You may worship death, but it is not your responcibility to dispense it. I would have to know the specific circumstances to speak authoritatively, but I think it's a safe bet to say killing is generally evil.   Executioners are probably the only definitive LN example you provided, because they are following the law without concern for morality. They don't kill whoever they want though, there are fairly strict rules and the choice is never theirs. Soldiers are not inheriently LN, and although they might kill you can often argue that it is a form of grand national self defence. Again, they don't get any choice either. Assassins are almost always evil. They kill people not because they have to, but for profit. Most people consider that evil.
#8 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 14:40:39	When I was thinking of Assassins I immagined people like Leon from the Professional or the Assassins from Assassins' Creed, who are at least morally ambigous if not good. How I interpreted Wee Jas would be that if I'm "meant" to kill someone its not evil per say, Im merely doing my pre dermined duty. I mentioned executioners because I guess in a simplified manner my Cleric is a form of executioner.
#9 wildefox Jan 25, 2014 14:54:15	I don't know Assassins' Creed so I can't speak to that, but Leon is not morally ambigous. He kills people for money, which is evil. Are there people in the movie who are more evil? Sure. Does he do some good things? Yeah, he does help the girl. Is he fairly emotionally neutral? Also yes. But none of that changes the fact that he commits murder for profit, which is evil.   Why would you believe you are "meant" to kill someone? On whose authority? To be an executioner you have to be acting on behalf of a higher authority. Don't say Wee Jas, because she doesn't do that. Also remember that any outside authority would be controlled by the DM, not you.
#10 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 15:18:47	You bring some very good points, when I say I'm "meant" to I mean kind of like how Link is meant to defeat Ganondorf, How Oedipus was meant to kill his father and marry his mother. As in its my destiny to do such things. My character is following fate's plan basically
#11 wildefox Jan 25, 2014 15:25:49	This is where I can understand your DM having some problems. Killing someone because you feel that you were personally "meant" to is not really Lawful Neutral or in keeping with the teachings of Wee Jas. It sounds like an excuse to do what you want, and that's probably how I'd treat it at my table. Also I'd point out that Link and Oedipus never went around doing things and using "destiny" as an excuse. They may have had destinies, but they certainly weren't very much in their control and were never used to justify their actions as an end in itself. I'd also ask again why it is you think you know fate's plan. If it is actually your destiny to kill someone, from where are you getting that information?
#12 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 15:40:14	OK, lemme see if I can elaborate on what my stance would be: As I said I'm new played about 3 hrs of a "trial" game so I personally now very little of what Wee Jas' actual morality is. All I know for sure is that she's LN, and is the Godess of Death, Magic and other things. Now please correct me If I'm making assumptions here, but the interpretation of Wee Jas I have is that a goddess of death who is Neutral, would be unconcerned as to HOW a person dies (on a moral stance such as whether they deserved it or if it was a just death), but being Lawful would have concerns that it was done in concordace with a grand plan, I.E. there is a predetermined time and place where person X must die, whether person X gets a heart attack or is killed doesn't mater as much. Thus my rationale is that a Cleric who worships death, would also want to follow the plan set up, thusly if it is in fate's plan for him to kill something he would do it. Now as a caveat this isnt just a way for me to get a "kill anyone you want" excuse, my Cleric would either communicate direcly with Wee Jas, or failing that use a book that would "guide" him as to what the correct path is. I'm not looking to kill all the time I'm just trying to rationalizewhat a appropriate Neutral route to killing would be as I don't wish to play an Evil PC.
#13 wildefox Jan 25, 2014 15:53:10	Ah, well I can clarify that for you a bit. There's not a whole lot about Wee Jas in the PHB, but you can see that her domains are Death, Law, and Magic. You are correct in your assumption that she has little concern over how a person dies, but she is concerned with it being done in a lawful manner. This isn't a "grand plan" thing so much as a "legal" one, though the former does come into it to some extent. She would not condone murder, not because she has a problem with killing someone but because murder is by definition illegal. If you could kill someone in a way that violated no law, she would have no problem.   Directly communing with your diety is a great idea, but remember that your DM controls Wee Jas, not you. If your DM has your god tell you that you should kill someone, I have a hard time believing that he would then get mad at you for doing so. If there is some account of when people are set to die, again, that is going to be the business of your DM.   The neutral route to killing people is not to. I'm not sure what kind of campaign you are running, but typical dungeon crawl stuff isn't going to set off any major moral snares. In all honesty, as a Cleric of death you should be opposed to people being killed because it interferes with the natural workings of your deity.
#14 Azea14 Jan 25, 2014 16:08:34	I guess that does clear up some things thanks. I guess when I think "Lawful" I figured it had more to dowith both intent and order rather than laws. I saw lawful as having to do with things other than laws, kinda how laws are a tool of order not actual order itself. in that regard I was trying to come up with a higher authority than laws otherwise lawful seems extremely limited.
#15 Krusk Jan 26, 2014 7:30:14	No ammount of "These guys on the internet says I'm right" will get your DM on your side.   You and your DM need to come to an agreement on what these terms mean before you continue to play this character (or in this game in general). Otherwise these issues will come up again and again.
#16 Khaelieth Jan 29, 2014 9:49:56	What Krusk said.
#17 Chiba_Monkey Jan 29, 2014 10:32:41	Minor nitpick here: wildefox wrote:
#18 randomvirus Mar 10, 2014 1:05:21	How is murder chaotic?   I mean, there's "premeditated" murder...   XD
#19 Man_in_the_Funny_Hat Mar 13, 2014 9:52:25	Azea14 wrote:
#20 aliendude777 Mar 17, 2014 13:22:31	Your perceptions of the concept of order is correct. For Lawful Evil, think V.I.K.I. from I, Robot.
#21 YagamiFire Mar 17, 2014 13:42:18	Beldak_Serpenthelm wrote:
#22 Methen Mar 22, 2014 20:56:52	lawful is a alignment which noone ever pays any attention to cause if they did then good based characters would not be going out killing and stealing from monsters who never done anything to them in the first place...
#23 DaBeerds Mar 24, 2014 15:48:16	Methen wrote:
#24 TylerTheCleric Apr 02, 2014 8:59:56	In my experience as a DM and a Player, Lawful is more about following a set of rules, but not nessicarily every law of every land.   I've played a Paladin who followed a CN Deity he was able to remain LG because the laws he followed were those of his religious order.
#25 BRJN Apr 13, 2014 18:17:45	As stated above, your DM can decide to make his game one your character won't fit into.  I usually play Lawful characters of some sort - even when I don't officially designate their alignment - and I think this situation you describe is not reconcilable.  For what that's worth.   Are you trying to be the equivalent of a 4e Avenger?  If so, writing your character's Code of Conduct will not be hard. OTOH, if you are going to be the randomly-striking Angel of Death, you and the DM will need a way for the god to tell you whom you may / must / can't target.  This will probably just put off the arguments about who is REALLY running that character.   Not all deaths are Evil, nor Chaotic.  Consider for example old age.  Teach your character knowledge of painkillers &c, to ease those who cannot be saved into the next step of their soul's journey.  Is THAT what you are trying to get across with 'worships the concept of Death'?   P.S. I stay away from character concepts who will persuade the other players that my character is Evil.  It causes too much dissention at the table.