Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

In game stealing


Pathfinder Society GM Discussion

1 to 50 of 99 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Qadira **** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Amsterdam aka Seraphimpunk

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 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.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:

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".

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1970Zombie wrote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

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.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:
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.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:
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.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1970Zombie wrote:
Why? If you faction head says that it is OK, will everyone look the other way?

As of Guide 4.2, yes.

Quote:

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.

Andoran

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game Subscriber

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.

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Michigan—Alma

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wonder why you guys believe that stealing is evil, when it is obviously chaotic since it goes against the laws of the land...

Grand Lodge ****

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.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.

Qadira ***

I beleave that it would be unlawful, but not evil.
Thieft is not considered an evil act, just an unlawful act.
.
IMHO.

For example - I am in the armory of the local chapterhouse of Hellknights. I lift an Alchemist Flask. Is this an evil act?

Or, during an adventure, I capture a merchant and steal all his property. Evil act right? well.... he actually was a slaver, and the property I took was 4 halfling slaves - and yes I am an Andorian Eagle Knight. Doing evil acts of thieft is what I do...

Now, if I wanted to be a pain to the player, I might have the Alchemist Flask be a "display model" that doesn't actually work. After all, I wouldn't leave "armed" ones out where someone could drop it in my shop! (or for that matter, use it to hold me up).

** 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.

Qadira ***

Jiggy wrote:
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.

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.

Qadira ***

RainyDayNinja wrote:

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).

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

nosig wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.
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.

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.
Andrew Christian wrote:
nosig wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.
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.
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?

i, i, i, i... I just don't know what to say to that.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:
nosig wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.
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.
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?

The term for the value of C in this case is "i".

Paizo Employee ** Developer

Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
nosig wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.
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.
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?
The term for the value of C in this case is "i".

And either A or B is also i, with the other being 0.

Qadira ***

Andrew Christian wrote:
nosig wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
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.
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.
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?

is this a trick question? C would be i...

edit: drat! ninja'd 3 times!

Paizo Employee ** Developer

or A and B are each different multiples of i

** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

nosig wrote:
RainyDayNinja wrote:

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.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

So if an imaginary number of people stole something for fun and profit, would evil equal -1?

*****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Finally my "elective" math class in college of Complex Variables is being utilized in real life! w00t! Let's start putting this conversation into three dimensions!

Qadira ***

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.
.
I can understand why the Hellknight would fight against it - it is afterall an UNLAWFUL act.

But if my PC steals an alchemist flask from the shop down the street, which is owned by the local Hellknight chapter, and the judge marks my chronicle as "commited an evil act"... I will be question this.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:
So if an imaginary number of people stole something for fun and profit, would evil equal -1?

More importantly, the motive of an evil PC is usually a -1.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

nosig wrote:
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?

Qadira ***

Jiggy wrote:
nosig wrote:
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?

why yes, otherwise I would have to mark most of the PCs chronicles "commited an evil act" after every scenarion I run, right? did you kill someone? Opps! there go your Paladin powers (poor Pallys allways get the shaft).

(I personally IRL feel ... wait, not getting real life in this. Nevermind.)

I am forced to assume in the game that most of the actions the PCs are required to do are likely to be neutral or good. Otherwise I would need to be marking Chronicles all the time.

Grand Lodge ** 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.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

Kyle Baird wrote:
Finally my "elective" math class in college of Complex Variables is being utilized in real life! w00t! Let's start putting this conversation into three dimensions!

Only if the language we use for 3-D conversation is Geodesic Trigonometry.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Finally my "elective" math class in college of Complex Variables is being utilized in real life! w00t! Let's start putting this conversation into three dimensions!
Only if the language we use for 3-D conversation is Geodesic Trigonometry.

Or Azlanti.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

Jiggy wrote:
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.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
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.

Rumplestiltskin wrote:
Evil isn't born, dearie; it's made!

;)

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

But isn’t truth determined by the victor? I mean if I am victorious, then my stealing for fun and profit was merely what was rightfully owed me…

That certainly can't be evil... right?

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Anoka

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.

Qadira ***

Jiggy wrote:
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.

OP: "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. "

with the facts presented in the original post, I would consider this an unlawful act, and a neutral act. C/N in alignment.

the second post says:
"...2. It should be marked on his chronicle as an evil act,..."
I disagree with this statement.

I reviewed the OP.

Original Post:

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?


Still appears to be Unlawful, even in the opinion of the original poster. "...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?"

The original post asked how to address this in game, even mentioning the town guard and arrest... still seems to be Unlawful.

Classifing it as "an Evil Act" to be reported on the Chronicle seems to be to be an attempt to punish the player. (Second poster: "...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.")

Thus, to me, it feels like - "You are not playing the way I want you to, you are having Bad/Wrong/Fun. Stop or I will take your character away."

But, heck, that's just IMHO. and I'm not the judge at the table anyway. My advise WAS to "have the Alchemist Flask be a "display model" that doesn't actually work." and when he throw it in game, it doesn't work.

** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

Andrew Christian wrote:

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:

CRB wrote:


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.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

nosig wrote:

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.

Qadira ***

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.

** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:

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."


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What happens if you say you're stealing for the Pathfinder Society?

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Cheapy wrote:
What happens if you say you're stealing for the Pathfinder Society?

That's called "looting". ;)

Qadira ***

RainyDayNinja wrote:
nosig wrote:

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."

well... I guess while we are at it we can switch out eat with steal and get the following.

"Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and eat without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, eating for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master."

eating is an evil act???

sorry, it appears we have a difference of opinion here.

If my PC steals a weapon (alchemist flask) from the armory of a Hellknight order,

Poor Hellkight!:
it DOES inflict pain and suffering on someone if that flask was going to be used to fight demonic cultists - some Hellknight will likely die because he didn't have the weapons he needed

or steals it from a general store,
or steals it from some orphan on the street
are all different things. Thieft (in game) is a neutral act. It is the intent behind the thieft that matters.

In my opinion -
XXX because it's cheaper than buying is neutral.
XXX because it inflicts pain and suffering on someone is evil.
XXX to reduce pain and suffering on someone is good.

replace the above XXX with any of the following,

Killing,
Stealing,
Crafting

all are the same. To say,
XXX is evil, it needs to be evil in MOST cases. Stealing is not.

** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

So how about:

"Killing your employee, because it's cheaper than paying him, is neutral."

Does that work? Remind me never to apply for a job with you...

** 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?

Shadow Lodge ** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Silicon Valley aka JohnF

Andrew Christian wrote:
But what if A squared + B squared = C squared, and C squared = -1 and you wanted to know what C was?

Are you trying to derail the thread into a discussion of imaginary problems?

*

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.

1 to 50 of 99 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / Pathfinder Society GM Discussion / In game stealing All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.