|
Welcome to the Boards!
Alignment is tricky and there's lots of dynamic that makes it controversial in game.
I break it down this way:
There are two kinds of gamers, those who hate Alignment issues in their game and those who love it. (Those who don't care, well, don't care so they don't matter -- they'll enjoy the game with or without.)
Be careful when you run into those Players who hate Alignment; make sure Alignment issues don' take up so much of the game that they hate the game -- make sure their PC has something fun to do while the angsty PCs struggle with what to do with the goblin that surrendered.)
For those of us who love Alignment issues :
Because Alignment is so "gray", no one Player (DM or Player) can have absolute authority over an Alignment definition.
Lawful Evil (FOR ME) means an orderly, disciplined evil person. Evil , yes, he can break contracts and do other evil stuff that the idiots who think lawful people can't do (like break contracts.)
The LE guy thinks things through; doesn't take rash actions or do things haphazardly the way Chaotic characters do.
The LE character, BECAUSE he's Lawful and thinks things through and considers long term repercussions, he's more likely to do something "good" or allow "goodness" to happen. The greater Evil is his concern.
.............................
But that's just MY take on LE.
I can't force that down a Player's throat just because I'm DM.
When a LE PC wants to do something that he feels is LE and he can explain to the DM why it's LE then I, as DM, need to allow him to interpret LE the way he sees fit!
I like to think of the typical LE character as one who is Evil, but who holds himself to *some* type of code of ethics. For example, he might be willing to murder nearly anyone--*except* children. He also prefers not to lie and will try to keep his word--BUT will have no problems taking advantage of any loopholes in his word (which he is likely to purposefully work into any type of "promise"). In your example, if he says, "You have my word, I will not lay a hand on you." Then, yeah, he could just send his goons to kill the person without a second thought--he's following the letter of his promise, even if not the perceived spirit behind it.
I think a Lawful Evil character will almost never make a promise that cannot be twisted to suit his own selfish purposes--because it is his nature to follow the letter of the promise, but not the spirit of it.
I think Lawful Evil is one of the most interesting alignments, especially for BBEGs, because they do possess a modicum of honor, even if it is twisted and warped from your own perspective. Perhaps by being Lawful, or "ethical," he is able to justify his actions in his own mind, even if they are incredibly Evil (or "immoral").
I think it helps to consider specific examples. Consider a wealthy landlord who evicts a little old lady in the dead of winter because she missed a rent payment--even though this is the first time she has missed one in 15 years. The law says he can do it, therefore he does. He doesn't care if he causes suffering or death, so long as his actions are lawful. Consider the corrupt politician who carefully studies the nuances of law and exploits loopholes to line his own pockets, to hire his own friends and family (to be paid by the taxpayers), and to fire people he doesn't like or who he doesn't find attractive. So long as it is technically legal, he will do anything and everything to advance his own interests, even if it means the public he is supposed to serve has to suffer for it.
(Lunch is here--I may have more to say later) :-)
|
Yep...I had a LE NPC who the PC's dealt with to negotiate the release of a prisoner (very powerful guy otherwise the PCs would've just attacked...they knew better). If the PCs did something for him he promised 'not to harm a single hair' on the prisoner. Of course after they get back doing this thing for the guy, he hands them over the very much so tortured dead body of the prisoner and a single hair. He only promised not to harm a single hair after all ;)
Yes if he's Chaotic Stupid Evil trying to pretend he's Lawful Evil.
Now what a true Lawful Evil would be doing is wording his guarantees carefully so that he's NOT breaking his word when he has you killed.
"You have safe conduct out of this chamber. After that you are on your own."
Actually "I won't harm you" is a promise that would not be broken if he has his goons get to do it...
True, technically, but it also restricts one from having direct involvement pertaining to said demise. If you give the order, you're still directly involved, to say otherwise would be equivalent to pulling the trigger of a gun and passing the blame toward the instrument. That's why Lawful Evil is so difficult for most to effectively use, as it has a "moral" obligation to structure(and I use moral pertaining to the rule of law) yet a selfish dedication towards oneself through "Evil". This is where the debate begins as "evil", according to western culture, is a goal in and of itself; which defined by the alignment axis is more Neutral Evil. Remember that just because and individual is Evil doesn't mean that he has to eat goat fetuses for power and get a jolly out punting orphans, on a daily basis we don't often judge our actions as "Evil" or "Good", and Evil doesn't necessarily view itself as such, for instance a Lawful Evil anti-hero could be merciless to lawbreakers because they harm innocence. He is Evil because of his approach, yet he dedicates his life to the betterment society. Alternatively, just because you're good doesn't meant you automatically ally with everyone who claims to be good either, look at the classic Arthurian legends. Lancelot, a paladin as defined by 1st edition, lied and cheated on his most trusted friend with his wife no less, but he too fought for the peoples of Albion selflessly.
Take alignment with a grain of salt, it's not written in stone and more of a guideline than anything else. There are an infinite number of interpretations for the same alignment, just play it out.
|
Have a good long look at the Alignment section of the CRB. It has far more concrete substance than most people tend to think.
For example, you will note that a big criterion for the Good-Evil axis is how you treat innocent people. The fate of guilty people (most opponents for a somewhat Good-oriented party) has usually no consequence for Good PCs.
The example you gave is quite good for LE IMO, because if the "good guys" were satisfied with such a promise from the mobster, then they deserve all the misery thay will get for being Stupid Good.
BTW, the Church of Asmodeus could be an enticing career change for your mobster.
Of course, in any case, check with your GM beforehand to avoid misunderstandings.