This past weekend, we had a gaming session where a question of alignment came up (yet again). I was curious what others thought.
Situation:
Our band of heroes encounters a new city. When entering the new city, we find the normal layout of a standard city, with one notable difference being a very long line of people eagerly waiting to be served some food from a certain restaurant. We do some investigating and find that something peculiar is going on. I even cast an illusion of thousands of roaches flooding out of the door of the restaurant, which does nothing to dissuade those lined up from wanting to eat at the establishment. We go in and order food, detect magic and poison and find nothing. We collect a sample to examine, which yields nothing other than it decomposes more quickly. We talk to a competing barmaid and find that everyone in town lines up to get food and are quite upset when they cannot get in each day. This barmaid also has lost almost all of their business since the new restaurant has opened up.
We decide to try and get one of our group into the restaurant disguised as a waiter. I create a diversion by pretending to be a traveling spice salesman, offering to sell saffron at absurdly cheap prices. While I do this, the other sorcerer disguises himself as a waiter and he makes his way in. The plan works, and in the confusion, a real waiter and myself are ejected from the restaurant. I cast color spray on the waiter in order to keep him detained, as he was heading back around front in order to complain and possibly ruin our plans and find our disguised sorcerer.
Question about morality is this.
Is casting a spell that would cause no physical harm and is used to temporarily detain at all evil?? In this case, I am a neutral good sorcerer, and felt as though doing this was perfectly within the bounds of what a neutral good person would do.
Not evil, but some GMs might say chaotic.
To save a plan from being ruined I think it's perfectly fine.
Color Spray side-effects may include...
You just used nonlethal force to create a stall for the party when it was needed. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
So you've kidnapped and drugged an innocent waiter. Yes, you've drugged him with magic instead of with a handkerchief soaked in ether, but same net result. And all this based on merely the suspicion that something hinky is going on.
Now, I know you've painted in your mind that you're good heroes, but if there is something hideous going on in the kitchens, you've placed an innocent in an awkward position, and if there isn't anything going on, then you've really messed things up for him. At very least the management will probably think he was acting strange and he'll lose out on his pay.
So, the question of whether it would be evil would be "yes." Not to a huge degree, but more than stealing a candybar, even if less than stealing a horse.
If you end up finding nothing more sinister than an exquisite chef who knows how to age a steak properly, and maybe a bard who was hired to use Suggestion on key folk in town to create a fad for this particularly restaurant (and while the Suggestion might compel them to try a new place, it would have a hard time working again if the food was really bad), well, what then?
Evil, no, neutral, yes... if you didnt drug him, you would be doing something along the lines of the CIA or NSA. Perhaps Even Druging him you are doing as much. If you Killed him then its evil :) You are heading from Neutral Good to Neutral or Chaotic Neutral though if you are not careful. You druged him for a short period and got him out of the way, then let him go within minutes. This is not evil. Misguided and not good, but not evil. If you would have killed him then you would be evil. Or if you got him hooked on a drug or sold him or tortured him or kept him over long periods and whatever.. but you just kept him out of the way for a few minutes. Not a good way of going about it, fairly misguided, and slipping downward on the alignment scale.... but not evil yet... Yet...
Color Spray only temporary: Blinded, Stunned, or Unconscious... None of which "kills, manes, or does lasting damage".
So i would not call this an evil act.
Now.. with that said... Just because an act is not evil, does not mean that you might not get in trouble with the authority's for doing this to the waiter.
Depends on how your GM plays this out. After all dozens of people have bar fights in the USA each night, but only some lead to Assault and batter charges. Depending on were you have the fight, who is involved, and how much each side got hurt, who started it, etc, etc, etc,...
Anyway the effect is exponential based on the variables. So who knows what will happen in the future.... shrugs.
.
.
.
PS = Page 166-167: Alignment. Might want to just re-read, about what a good person is, and evil person is. Despite what many people think... being good or evil is not as ALL in-composing of an alignment as some think it is. ((example: Good people can steal, as long as it does not hurt others or for a good reason. Evil people can save lives, and keep the peace as there daily jobs... even if they are only doing it for their own selfish reason... like that nice gold coin pay check :)
|
Not evil, but some GMs might say chaotic.
I agree, not evil but unlawful. Knocking someone out, detaining him and pretending to be him to his employer are illegal actions, especially on your own initiative when there is nothing definitely harmful going on except some likely use of magic. Compared to other things an adventurer does, it's still pretty minor.
I agree on this with it being not evil but it being definite unlawful.
*Pardon my English, it is not my proper language.
Not evil, but some GMs might say chaotic.I agree, not evil but unlawful. Knocking someone out, detaining him and pretending to be him to his employer are illegal actions, especially on your own initiative when there is nothing definitely harmful going on except some likely use of magic. Compared to other things an adventurer does, it's still pretty minor.
You mean like invading other species homes, killing them and taking their "phat l00t"? :)
Yeah, kind of minor by comparrison.
Not evil, but some GMs might say chaotic.I agree, not evil but unlawful. Knocking someone out, detaining him and pretending to be him to his employer are illegal actions, especially on your own initiative when there is nothing definitely harmful going on except some likely use of magic. Compared to other things an adventurer does, it's still pretty minor.You mean like invading other species homes, killing them and taking their "phat l00t"? :)
Yeah, kind of minor by comparrison.
I always plant a dagger on any random people I kill in my games, just so I don't get an alignment change. "Evil? That wasn't Evil, he had a dagger!"
Its definitely not evil. Its non lethal, and the adventurers are investigating a potentially harmful drug or magical effect and have probably been around the block enough times to know that this sort of thing always ends with mind controlled slaves or zombie hordes or everyone growing gills or something.
In pursuit of that goal , you are taking reasonable steps to assure the safety of a potential innocent (the waiter) by using non lethal means in pursuit of a noble goal. 100% absolutely NOT evil.
It is definitely unlawful (you are assaulting the waiter without a warrant after all), but even then wouldn't cause an alignment shift.
Of course the law of the town could be that: Anyone who subdues another can thereafter make them their slave.
In that case: There was a plan (lawful) that needed to be preserved (lawful). And the law of the town could make the incapacitation of the waiter well within the laws of the town (lawful). :)
Physical assault by definition includes physical harm. He would be justified killing you in self-defense.
Is casting a spell that would cause no physical harm and is used to temporarily detain at all evil??
Yes it would. I means that its possible for two good people to try to assault each other, not that one is good and another is evil.
|
I do not see an alignment issue for the NG PC...he did his best to detain the waiter in a non-damaging way.
I do not see how this would be unlawful, as per the L alignment. The L alignment does not make it mandatory to "follow the laws". The L alignment is about being truthful, respecting authority, honoring tradition...
A Chaotic person can really be as law abiding as a Lawful person. A C person would be more prone to being dismissive of a police officer than a L one though.
|
As with all allignment questions the true answer is "what do you think?"
Having said that it's my opinion that it's definitely not evil, nor is it extremely chaotic. Mildly chaotic perhaps but not to any great extent.
Put it this way I would have no problem with anyone in a group I was running subduing the waiter, not even a paladin. I would expect a lawful good character to feel mildly guilty about it though and expect them to make it up to the waiter after the event if they can.