I´ve a cg elf in my campaign. We are currently running Mad God´s Key in Greyhawk. They have been fighting the Green Daggers, and when he downs a rogue he always CDG:s them on the next round. He has done that at least 3 times.
So, I´m hinting that he´s going cn, if he not considers his action - bring them to justice, etc.
What are your opinions?Asmo
I'm assuming that when you say that he "downs a rogue" that the rogue in question in laying on the ground at negative HP?
If that is the case, I don't see anything wrong with any player, CG or otherwise, "finishing" a dying foe. Afterall, they were bleeding out anyways, and I doubt you'd force an alignment change or penalize a PC for just ignoring a dying foe and letting them die slowly from blood loss over a few rounds.
Also its been a while since I've seen the adventure in question, but the rogues are coming after the PCs? Or are the PCs seeking out the rogues?
I mostly agree - it's all about WHY, not how.
If the rogues are attacking the party and known to be Evil, then his CDGs are a "merciful and honorable end to someone who didn't deserve it"... Of course, saving a prisoner or two might be good for gathering some information - but hey, I'm not their leader.
If the rogue was using CDG on opponents who are of ambiguous alignment and/or unknown motives, or worse - known to be Good, weak or innocent - then the implication is clear...
M
|
There was a pretty good discussion about CdGs here:
http://paizo.com/dungeon/messageboards/ageOfWorms/archives/paladinSMoralDil emmaAtBlackwallKeep&page=1#31625
Like Marc, I think that when it comes to the CdG, it is all about why it's being done. In Mad God's Key (assuming you are running it as it is in the mag), the players are investigating the Green Dagger's guildhouse. If he's killing some of the rogues that are were still up and a threat(the halfling twins, the one in the stairwell...), I think that its justifiable. If he's giving the CdG to the sick ones laying on their bunks in the back room, the alignment shift would probably be in the works.
|
Having run Mad God's Key, a great adventure BTW, I would have to question the rogue's motives and his alignment. The Green Daggers are guilty only of theft and being duped, little grounds for murder. Even the laws of Greyhawk support them in this. On top of that, they're diseased, dying, and defending their home from the PC's.
I believe that alignment change is a gradual thing unless a pc is just not playing anything close to his chosen alignment. I have no idea how many gm's graph alignments; but, I really recommend that you do so. This game has always, until recently, had a big problem with alignments and what they mean - so much so that many gm's completely ignore alignment.
Here is a basic outline of how I graph pc alignment.
First; I chose 100 arbitrarily as a starting point; therefore each character gets 100 points in any alignment chosen; an LG person would have 100 lawful points; 100 good points; 0 neutral, evil, or chaos.
Secondly; at the end of each gaming session; on my copy of the character sheet that the pc's do not see; I give a point for actions given; more if necessary; judge actions accordingly; for example; if a LG pc is charmed to do an evil act and really fights against it; I award a good point; if they are neutral and dont fight it; no point; if they willingly do it and embellish; and evil point; if no charm was used; and the pc is seduced or willing sleeps with the succubus; makes plans to "em work" with her again; does favors for her; I would give a a couple evil points; and possibly a chaos point depending on what happens. I would also give a point of taint.
Finally, when the pc gets to within 50 on another alignment say evil; from their base alignment; I warn them they are in alignment trouble; here gods who care about alignments do give spells over 3rd level; ect. When the alignment numbers are basically even; say between 115 good; 95 evil; this character is basically neutral; if now pc action occurs to correct this; I have the person change that axis of their alignment;
Alignment changes are really very rare; most of my pc's are very committed to their alignments; meaning; I have one character for example that has 675 lawful points; 422 evil points; 16 nuetral points; 46 good points, 0 chaos points.
another character in my campaign who has a character the same age; has 172 nuetral points; 112 good points; 32 evil points; 16 lawful points 32 chaos points; (the evil and chaos all coming in the last year of a 8 year campaign (ie wizard channel the Old Ones Power).
I dont believe it just towards a player to change alignment based on action for a couple deeds; give the character time to consider his/her actions and repent.
Just thought this sort of thing might help; my pc's seem to like it as their is no nebulous middle ground and I am always available and willing to discuss a pc's alignment with them individually.
I´ve a cg elf in my campaign. We are currently running Mad God´s Key in Greyhawk. They have been fighting the Green Daggers, and when he downs a rogue he always CDG:s them on the next round. He has done that at least 3 times.
So, I´m hinting that he´s going cn, if he not considers his action - bring them to justice, etc.
What are your opinions?Asmo
Isn't bringing them to justice a lawful act?
So it´s better to kill them without mercy that letting the law handle it?
Yes, I guess it would be a lawful act, but I can´t see how it could be considered a good act to cdg helpless foes.
I don´t care for goblins, kobolds etc that are evil per se,but when it comes to humans, elves etc, it becomes something else.
All imho.Asmo
I'm not saying he should kill them. I'm just wondering what the definate CG way of dealing with downed foes should be. Maybe he feels justified in his killing. If the rogues are part of an organized group as it sounds, maybe he fears they'll regroup and retalliate. Someone else pointed out that going to the law won't result in the permanent abolition of this evil group. I think you should ask the player why he's doing it, and why he thinks it's CG.
I think the SRD says this very clearly if you go by the RAW as much as anyone can with such a debatable topic.
"GOOD VS. EVIL
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.
“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
“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."
Furthermore, with regards to Chaotic Good.
"Chaotic Good, “Rebel”: A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he’s kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.
Chaotic good is the best alignment you can be because it combines a good heart with a free spirit."
In light of the above, IMO your rogue probably should have stayed his/her hand and perhaps staunched the wounds and had the weaker rogues see to their friends once they were no longer a threat. I don't see that character even considering turning to the authorities since he/she probably has no faith in the establishment and really doesn't want to get involved in such things.
Now, if it was a truly evil or malicious creature that had no redeeming qualities or humanity where NOT killing it could be detrimental, then by all means a CDG is par for the course.
You really should just watch the character and after about 3 game sessions with this type of behavior warn him/her that this is not in keeping with a good character that is supposed to have compassion. If it continues, you are within your right to switch that PCs alignment. I usually jot down a note to myself with the PC's new aligment and keep an eye out for situations in which the new alignment might become known to others (and the player. he he) such as in the effect of a detect evil spell.
Contributor
|
Sage Advice in Dragon #341 addresses this question:
"Is a coup de grace attack an evil act? (i.e., can a paladin make such an attack without falling from grace?)
"The coup de grace is simply a kind of attack and is neither inherently good nor inherently evil. In some cases, it’s the best option against a foe (such as an unconscious but regenerating troll). If attacking a particular character would be considered an evil act—such as stabbing an innocent merchant in the middle of his shop—delivering a coup de grace on that character would be just as evil.
"Of course, if the paladin has already promised to face her foe in nonlethal combat, delivering a coup de grace would almost certainly violate her code of conduct."
I think from your example using coup de grace was an evil act. A single evil act doesn't really require a PC to change alignment, though. Nobody is good all the time (except maybe paladins?). If it becomes a trend, then maybe you should talk to the player about his character's alignment.
That said, if he has something in his character's background that makes him despise Green Daggers for some reason (maybe a Green Dagger killed his mom) then it would make sense for him to kill them off whenever possible. His friends should probably try to keep him from doing it, but you might want to consider giving him some more leeway.
That Sage Advice sounds like it's beating about the bush, or perhaps its just stating the obvious for less experienced players. Of course a coup-de-grace is evil if it would be evil to attack the same target; that's obvious. Here's my thought on the topic.
Remind the player that it's a full-round action to coup-de-grace, and so it's not always the best combat option. It also helps if they have some idea of the likelihood of their opponents seeking revenge if not coup-de-graced. In my games, an opponent beaten by the PCs would typically be afraid to attack them a second time, and would need to be exceptionally motiviated to make a second attack later, as well as being either brave or stupid.
That Sage Advice sounds like it's beating about the bush, or perhaps its just stating the obvious for less experienced players. Of course a coup-de-grace is evil if it would be evil to attack the same target; that's obvious. Here's my thought on the topic.
A coup-de-grace against a wholly evil creature such as a demon, or when it is necessary to kill the creature outright to protect innocent beings, is a good act.
A coup-de-grace in self-defence, in other words if the letting the creature live would be to risk your life, is a neutral act.
A coup-de-grace performed primarily out of unjustified hate for the creature or to exact unfair revenge for their attacking you, can be considered an evil act. A good aligned creature would not make a habit of this without good justification. Remind the player that it's a full-round action to coup-de-grace, and so it's not always the best combat option. It also helps if they have some idea of the likelihood of their opponents seeking revenge if not coup-de-graced. In my games, an opponent beaten by the PCs would typically be afraid to attack them a second time, and would need to be exceptionally motiviated to make a second attack later, as well as being either brave or stupid.
Full agreement. Of course, I don't use alignment when I can avoid it, but in the context of the alignment system, this is definitely how I interpret it.
I believe that alignment change is a gradual thing unless a pc is just not playing anything close to his chosen alignment. I have no idea how many gm's graph alignments; but, I really recommend that you do so. This game has always, until recently, had a big problem with alignments and what they mean - so much so that many gm's completely ignore alignment.
Here is a basic outline of how I graph pc alignment.First; I chose 100 arbitrarily as a starting point; therefore each character gets 100 points in any alignment chosen; an LG person would have 100 lawful points; 100 good points; 0 neutral, evil, or chaos.
Secondly; at the end of each gaming session; on my copy of the character sheet that the pc's do not see; I give a point for actions given; more if necessary; judge actions accordingly; for example; if a LG pc is charmed to do an evil act and really fights against it; I award a good point; if they are neutral and dont fight it; no point; if they willingly do it and embellish; and evil point; if no charm was used; and the pc is seduced or willing sleeps with the succubus; makes plans to "em work" with her again; does favors for her; I would give a a couple evil points; and possibly a chaos point depending on what happens. I would also give a point of taint.
Finally, when the pc gets to within 50 on another alignment say evil; from their base alignment; I warn them they are in alignment trouble; here gods who care about alignments do give spells over 3rd level; ect. When the alignment numbers are basically even; say between 115 good; 95 evil; this character is basically neutral; if now pc action occurs to correct this; I have the person change that axis of their alignment;
Alignment changes are really very rare; most of my pc's are very committed to their alignments; meaning; I have one character for example that has 675 lawful points; 422 evil points; 16 nuetral points; 46 good points, 0 chaos points.
another character in my campaign who has a character the same age; has 172...Ouch. I'm pleased if this works in your campaign but it is a great arguement for me to abolish all alignments once and for all - ala Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved.
Monte's system was such a no-brainer that it staggers me it hadn't been 'officially' done before. Alignment just has never worked and removing it makes little game difference and worlds of difference to the level of roleplaying encouraged.
Cheers
Llowellen