|
So, I had a character that wanted an alembic/flask. Instead of going into the general store and buying it, he went in, used sleight of hand and stole it.
Not wanting to bog down the game, I left it at that for the less than gold it would have cost.
But in general ? how much leeway can there be for GMs on matters that could draw the town guard/involve arrest/monkey-business that can sidetrack a game and force it to run long?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I don't think you need to create new encounters involving lawmen, etc. But at the very least:
1. He doesn't get to keep the flask after the scenario, because he didn't pay for it, just like any loot he would have found in the course of the adventure.
2. It should be marked on his chronicle as an evil act, and if it becomes a pattern at all, his character should have his alignment changed to evil, and therefore marked as "dead," per the campaign rules. Make sure you warn him about this first, though.
|
I don't think you need to create new encounters involving lawmen, etc. But at the very least:
1. He doesn't get to keep the flask after the scenario, because he didn't pay for it, just like any loot he would have found in the course of the adventure.
2. It should be marked on his chronicle as an evil act, and if it becomes a pattern at all, his character should have his alignment changed to evil, and therefore marked as "dead," per the campaign rules. Make sure you warn him about this first, though.
Stealing from other players is not allowed. There is no PVP.
Stealing from NPC seems to have some legs. It could be an laternate way to complete a Faction mission or in scenario task. I agree that the stealing character should not be able to keep the item after the adventure but there is the question of how much mileage and risk should be involved. What happens if the character starts stealing consumables? i.e potions, oil, arrows, etc.What are the risks for getting caught?
I can see making a ruling but marking the act of stealing as "Evil" seems plain wrong. Marking it a "Greedy" or "Lazy" seems more appropriate. Robin Hood stole all the time and he was the good guy. I expect he was more "Chaotic" than "Lawful" but there was no question if he was "Good" or "Evil".
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Stealing from NPC seems to have some legs. It could be an laternate way to complete a Faction mission or in scenario task. I agree that the stealing character should not be able to keep the item after the adventure but there is the question of how much mileage and risk should be involved. What happens if the character starts stealing consumables? i.e potions, oil, arrows, etc.What are the risks for getting caught?
That'll depend a lot on the situation. Since the GM has the responsibility to keep the game on schedule, they will have to decide how much of it to roleplay out and how much of it to "fast-forward" through to some unceremonious skill checks.
I can see making a ruling but marking the act of stealing as "Evil" seems plain wrong. Marking it a "Greedy" or "Lazy" seems more appropriate. Robin Hood stole all the time and he was the good guy. I expect he was more "Chaotic" than "Lawful" but there was no question if he was "Good" or "Evil".
I think RainyDayNinja's comment was under the assumption that the PC stole just because they wanted the item - not as a faction mission, not to give to the poor, not to keep from starving; just because they'd rather not pay for it. And THAT would be an evil act, and should be marked on the chronicle sheet.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it made sense based on the roleplay happening at the table at the time, then I would allow it, and roleplay through it. I'd make sure the player understood they wouldn't be able to keep the item without paying for it though.
If the player was having his character do it, for whatever justification, just to do it, then that would be sidetracking the scenario. When under a time crunch you don't have time to deal with things that aren't directly dealing with the scenario or a faction mission. In this case, I'd just narrate that they got the item and move on.
If they persisted to roleplay or carrying on as such, I'd actually take the player to the side and have a conversation with them about why they are trying to sabotage the flow of the game.
It may be they are new and don't know what Pathfinder Society is all about, or what being a Pathfinder is all about. If they don't, then you can explain it to them.
If they don't care, or persist disturbing the flow of the game, then you can ask them to leave.
I don't feel this is an issue of a character being evil or not. I think this is more an issue of a player wanting attention.
|
|
I think RainyDayNinja's comment was under the assumption that the PC stole just because they wanted the item - not as a faction mission, not to give to the poor, not to keep from starving; just because they'd rather not pay for it. And THAT would be an evil act, and should be marked on the chronicle sheet.
Why? If you faction head says that it is OK, will everyone look the other way? Stealing as an act is not evil. How you do it might be. Taking an unattended object likely is not evil. Taking the medicine that is needed to save a sick child and taking it knowingly might be evil. Killing someone and taking their stuff is evil, unless it happens to be an opponent/monster rather than an old lady or helpless shop owner. Raiding crypts and tombs is likely considered evil but Pathfinders do it all the time. It is sort of their thing.
The game is filled with situations that you can argue both sides for or against but some are more accepted than others.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I don't feel this is an issue of a character being evil or not. I think this is more an issue of a player wanting attention.
Huh. Not the type of situation my mind first went to at all.
I was picturing more like if the party is expecting some swarms, then they decide to hit the marketplace first for bunches of alchemist's fire. Then one PC decides that instead of buying it, he'd rather be cheap and just steal it.
That's where I'd raise the "evil action" flag. Your example makes sense too, though, and in that situation I'd probably do what you described.
|
|
I would say that it is fine to go forward with the player stealing an item. I would just let the player know that the item will not transfer past this scenario unless he buys it. It's up to you to figure out what to do during a failed attempt. Try not to let it derail the scenario. I would just say that they fail and are told to get out of the store. I would only step out of RP and tell the player to stop if the player continues to derail the scenario with further attempts that are bound to lead to guards / arrest / combat.
As far as "stealing is an evil act" crowd. Um...no. Stealing is at most a neutral act.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Why? If you faction head says that it is OK, will everyone look the other way?
As of Guide 4.2, yes.
Stealing as an act is not evil. How you do it might be. Taking an unattended object likely is not evil. Taking the medicine that is needed to save a sick child and taking it knowingly might be evil. Killing someone and taking their stuff is evil, unless it happens to be an opponent/monster rather than an old lady or helpless shop owner. Raiding crypts and tombs is likely considered evil but Pathfinders do it all the time. It is sort of their thing.
The game is filled with situations that you can argue both sides for or against but some are more accepted than others.
I wasn't trying to make a blanket statement that any time anyone does anything that could potentially be labeled as stealing, it's an evil action. I was just meaning a "basic" situation of "I want item X, which I could buy, but I'll just save some money by stealing it instead."
That's what I'm saying is evil. I'm not commenting on any or all situations contrived for the express purpose of making the morality of theft look as gray as possible. Just the one basic situation is all I was talking about.
|
|
While the act of stealing is not 'evil', the intent behind it determines if it is evil, neutral or good. If they stole the object just because they didn't want to pay for it, that would be an evil act. You have it within your means to pay for the object but you have decided to impose your will on someone else and take something that isn't yours. And don't tell me that an something on a store shelf is unattended.
If the character needed the object for the mission and they didn't have the gold...I would say that was more neutral to good depending on what the mission was.
I mean, shooting a puppy in the face isn't by itself an act evil. Doing it because it is rabid and about to attack a child would be basically good. Doing it because to didn't like it's cute puppy face, well, that would be evil.
|
The point is, this is NOT an alignment issue, it is an Organized Play issue.
Wealth by level is pretty closely regulated, and a player abusing their skills to gain an advantage is not kosher.
Personally, I'd allow it for flavour or minor items, once, but if it got out of hand, or starting including magical items, etc. I'd have the law come down on them. I'm pretty sure store owners are familiar with the Sleight of Hand skill, and have developed countermeasures (which are outside the scope of the game). Heck, the grocery store that was my first job had undercover security posing as shoppers, video cameras, and kept the easily steal-able stuff under lock and key except when it was attended by a staffmember.
Also, remember the limitations of the skill: sleight of hand doesn't let you steal something when someone is watching you constantly... they might not see where you put it, but they sure know that it was in your hand a minute ago and now it's gone, and they will call the watch.
Overall, bad career move for a Pathfinder.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I was in fact assuming that the player stole the item simply because he wanted it, and he didn't want to part with the money to buy it. Obviously there are situations where stealing isn't evil (like if it serves the greater good of your faction, or to keep from starving, or stealing from evil people to keep them from doing evil, or in a finders keepers scenario, etc.), but petty theft for fun and profit is quite clearly both evil and chaotic.
|
|
no, he was not saying it stops being evil. He was saying it isn't evil to start with. He's saying A /= B is just as likely as A = B, and the fact that A = C has no effect on it.I wonder why you guys believe that stealing is evil, when it is obviously chaotic since it goes against the laws of the land...Outlawing something causes it to stop being evil? It is possible for something to be both chaotic and evil, you know.
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?no, he was not saying it stops being evil. He was saying it isn't evil to start with. He's saying A /= B is just as likely as A = B, and the fact that A = C has no effect on it.I wonder why you guys believe that stealing is evil, when it is obviously chaotic since it goes against the laws of the land...Outlawing something causes it to stop being evil? It is possible for something to be both chaotic and evil, you know.
i, i, i, i... I just don't know what to say to that.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?no, he was not saying it stops being evil. He was saying it isn't evil to start with. He's saying A /= B is just as likely as A = B, and the fact that A = C has no effect on it.I wonder why you guys believe that stealing is evil, when it is obviously chaotic since it goes against the laws of the land...Outlawing something causes it to stop being evil? It is possible for something to be both chaotic and evil, you know.
The term for the value of C in this case is "i".
Developer
|
The term for the value of C in this case is "i".But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?no, he was not saying it stops being evil. He was saying it isn't evil to start with. He's saying A /= B is just as likely as A = B, and the fact that A = C has no effect on it.I wonder why you guys believe that stealing is evil, when it is obviously chaotic since it goes against the laws of the land...Outlawing something causes it to stop being evil? It is possible for something to be both chaotic and evil, you know.
And either A or B is also i, with the other being 0.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I was in fact assuming that the player stole the item simply because he wanted it, and he didn't want to part with the money to buy it. Obviously there are situations where stealing isn't evil (like if it serves the greater good of your faction, or to keep from starving, or stealing from evil people to keep them from doing evil, or in a finders keepers scenario, etc.), but petty theft for fun and profit is quite clearly both evil and chaotic.
ah, IMHO no.
"petty theft for fun and profit is quite clearly both evil and chaotic" is not a true statement.
"petty theft for fun and profit is quite clearly chaotic" is true,
but
"petty theft for fun and profit is quite clearly evil" is not.My PC may practice ""petty theft for fun and profit" stealing from persons of power and athority, avoiding taxes, not tithing to the church of Asmodaus, stealing slaves, etc. and he does it 'cause it's fun - and cheeper than the lawful way. It does not make these acts evil. Just Unlawful (chaotic).
...and this is why I always lock my car when I leave it.
Basically, it boils down to this: Hurting people for your own pleasure is evil. Stealing hurts people. So stealing for your own pleasure is evil.
In the examples you gave, I could agree that avoiding taxes isn't necessarily evil, because the government's right to tax you is purely a legal construct. Not tithing to a church is not stealing, because that church doesn't own your money until you give it. Stealing slaves could be good if you steal them in order to set them free, or to rescue them from a cruel master; if you're just stealing them because, hey, free slaves, then that is evil.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
an "evil act" that is only evil in the right circumstance, is not an "evil act". If it's a good act sometimes and an evil act sometimes and a neutral act sometimes... I figure it's neurtal.
Interesting logic. I wonder how it applies to killing people.
It's a good act sometimes (killing someone who's attacking innocents), an evil act sometimes (killing a random child for fun), and a neutral act sometimes (killing someone in the course of an unfortunately escalated conflict of interest), then you figure killing people is neutral?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Your response makes me think you misunderstood the original claims about stealing and evil. No one was saying that stealing was always evil - just that stealing for no good reason was. In those cases, and those cases only, it should be marked on the chronicle as an evil act.
|
|
Your response makes me think you misunderstood the original claims about stealing and evil. No one was saying that stealing was always evil - just that stealing for no good reason was. In those cases, and those cases only, it should be marked on the chronicle as an evil act.
Stealing for fun and profit is a good reason though… to the guy who’s doing the stealing that is.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Your response makes me think you misunderstood the original claims about stealing and evil. No one was saying that stealing was always evil - just that stealing for no good reason was. In those cases, and those cases only, it should be marked on the chronicle as an evil act.Stealing for fun and profit is a good reason though… to the guy who’s doing the stealing that is.
Sure, they always think they have a good reason.
Evil isn't born, dearie; it's made!
;)
|
|
Who determines what’s evil in a society?
The people?
The Gods?
The victorious?
The downtrodden?
Is it a pig with lipstick?
Or is evil, evil, and regardless who calls a wolf a sheep, the duck is still a duck? (love mixed metaphors).
Is evil more a state of mind? The why of something, rather than the action itself?
If that’s the case, and you steal the meal that will keep a starving orphan alive, fully knowing that orphan will die, simply because you want to… then your wanton disregard for life, and your egomaniacal nihilism is probably more what makes you evil, than the simple act of stealing.
If you kill because you enjoy watching someone else suffer, and this is what causes the serotonin and endorphin levels in your brain to rise and give you a sense of pleasure, then it’s the sociopathic sadism that’s evil, and not the act of killing itself.
So in other words, let’s not be so black and white as to an action, and rather look at the motive behind it before we start marking evil on someone’s chronicle.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Who determines what’s evil in a society?
The people?
The Gods?
The victorious?
The downtrodden?Is it a pig with lipstick?
Or is evil, evil, and regardless who calls a wolf a sheep, the duck is still a duck? (love mixed metaphors).
Is evil more a state of mind? The why of something, rather than the action itself?
If that’s the case, and you steal the meal that will keep a starving orphan alive, fully knowing that orphan will die, simply because you want to… then your wanton disregard for life, and your egomaniacal nihilism is probably more what makes you evil, than the simple act of stealing.
If you kill because you enjoy watching someone else suffer, and this is what causes the serotonin and endorphin levels in your brain to rise and give you a sense of pleasure, then it’s the sociopathic sadism that’s evil, and not the act of killing itself.
So in other words, let’s not be so black and white as to an action, and rather look at the motive behind it before we start marking evil on someone’s chronicle.
I agree that we should look at the motive behind the act, but as far as I can tell from the OP, the motive was simply that "he wanted it." If you hurt someone (by taking their property), just because you enjoy it, that's evil.
For reference, here's the CRB description of the Evil alignment:
Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit...
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
the second post says:
"...2. It should be marked on his chronicle as an evil act,..."
I disagree with this statement.
The guy who said that later clarified that he only meant it in the context of if the player was only stealing because it's cheaper than buying, not necessarily every situation that could match the OP's description.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
stealing because it's cheaper than buying is not evil.
stealing because it inflicts pain and suffering on someone is evil.
stealing to reduce pain and suffering on someone is good.XXX because it's cheaper than buying is not evil/good.
XXX because it inflicts pain and suffering on someone is evil.
XXX to reduce pain and suffering on someone is good.This works for me.
But stealing DOES inflict pain and suffering on someone. It inflicts pain and suffering on the person you stole from. Just because they're not bruised and bleeding at the end, doesn't mean they aren't harmed.
If you replace every instance of the word "kill" with "steal" in the CRB description of evil, it sounds exactly like the kind of thing you said wasn't evil:
"Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and steal without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, stealing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master."
What happens if you say you're stealing for the Pathfinder Society?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I'm really trying to understand where the disconnect lies here. Earlier I presented this syllogism:
Premise 1: Hurting people for your own pleasure is evil.
Premise 2: Stealing hurts people.
Conclusion: Stealing for your own pleasure is evil.
You obviously disagree with the conclusion. So which of the premises do you disagree with?
|
|
I will post a new hypothetical question that happens every single game at every single table.
Is it evil to steal items from the people you kill? You don't own them. You KILLED for them. They are the property of those peoples heirs, loved ones, and family. You are stealing from them. In addition, a lot of cultures consider stealing a dead mans things to be an evil act and really bad luck on top of that. How do you feel about gaining loot and gold at the end of scenario?
ALL of you are thieves. I will see each and everyone of you in court with the weeping widows and children of those you have slain in the name of adventuring and society. Please line up and forfeit all gear, magic items, and monetary units. Clerics and Paladins of Abadar will be on hand to enforce all legal decisions made by the court with impunity.
I'm less worried about stealing from a shopkeeper being evil than I am about it turning into a mini-adventure for one PC while the other (lawful) PCs sit around doing nothing except pretending not to notice.