But yet rogues are still expected to be sneaky and open locks and disarm traps and then there are the feats and tricks they learn as well.
Expected by who? Other players? They don't dictate your character choices. You can make a government diplomat out of the rogue class just as easily as a footpad.
Government diplomat... of backstabbing!
I'm not sure but that Holmes isn't neutral good. He doesn't seem too concerned with following the letter of the law -- doesn't mind breaking and entering, fraud, and other underhanded tactics -- and doesn't even mind accepting hush money or cutting out the police on occasion.
Perhaps he stays on the good side of the police and within the letter of the law "enough" of the time to be considered LG, but I'm not sure.
Sherlock holds himself to an internal code, he still tries to obey the law, the letter and it's intent, but many of his cases require him to commit minor crimes in order to serve a higher good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Law doesn't mean following the laws. It means internal consistency and personal codes that one follows. This is why some incarnations (see up) of Batman are lawful good, he's very firm in his rules like "no killing". It's also why Paladins must be Lawful Good because of their code.
Sherlock holds himself to an internal code, he still tries to obey the law, the letter and it's intent, but many of his cases require him to commit minor crimes in order to serve a higher good.
Just to point out:
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, self-righteousness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Lawful Good: A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.
Lawful good combines honor with compassion.Chaotic Good: 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 combines a good heart with a free spirit.
Nowhere is written that a Chaotic character has no personal code. Quite the contrary, it is precisely him which has a self-made personal code (not 'imposed by above', be it a religious order, a sovereign, or any other authority like a Lawful person should have).
A character without any personal code at all is not Chaotic - it's a crazy lunatic which one day could eat dirt 'because it tastes good' and the following day could cross-dress 'because it's funny'.
Judging from the above definitions, RDJ Sherlock Holmes could be NG or even CG, not LG (after all, he doen't work WITH Scotland Yard - the official authority - , he solves cases 'on a whim' by himself, although he does so for a just cause).
Just my 2c.
Expected by who? Other players? They don't dictate your character choices. You can make a government diplomat out of the rogue class just as easily as a footpad.Government diplomat... of backstabbing!
Sneak attack doesn't require stabbing in the back, it requires hitting vulnerable areas. With the right feats or a flanking buddy you need never stab someone unawares. Hardly a warrior's fault if the enemy cannot keep a dagger out of his throat.
She should wear a white hat.
Shouldn't that be a White Collar? ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lawful good rogue? Easy!
A rogue trained from early age in the arts of espionage by his order. They send him into orc camps/goblin lairs/cultist hideouts in the dead of night to slit the throats of these evil-doers. He is no thief, but a master of espionage.
A rogue need not be a thief, heck, not even a non-good rogue has to be a thief.
Basically, a rogue is anybody who is good at stealth/trickery.
Thief, spy, runaway noble, hide-and-seek champion turned adventurer...
Yep, government ninja-corp, without the fancy ki abilities.
Spies.
@Wraith - I hadn't thought of that. By the game rules, I'd have to concede your point. For myself, though, I've never liked the literal definition of Law - what kind of paladin, for example, would hop about country to country mindlessly obeying each law he discovers? What happens when those laws contradict? What if Anarchy is the law? Or cannibalism?
I suppose I've taken Law to mean Order. So the distinction I would draw for Holmes is his rigid obsession (indeed, obsessive-compulsion) with Logic. Textbook Lawful, to me.
@Wraith: When Sherlock breaks the law, it's because he's been backed into something of a corner, he breaks it, or people die. The rest of the time he follows the letter, the intent, and the implications of the law. To be properly lawful good, sometimes you must emphasize the good over the law.
After all, paladins don't lose their problems for committing chaotic acts do they?
A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
No, it seems they don't. They don't like breaking the law, but they will if they have can't find a 3rd option. The honor thing is still wacky business though.
But this isn't about paladins is it? No, this is about Lawful Good, and nothing states that you have to follow your alignment 100%, perfectly, all the time, just that you try. Otherwise you'll see odd stuff like occasionally a lawful evil guy will suddenly switch over to good, because he helped someone in order to build his reputation up, with the intent of getting into a higher office.
That's an amusing point as well, Star. I tend to presume that Sherlock doesn't really give a fig about the law, as such - only it's more sensible to follow it than not. So if good intentions, whatever they are, come into it, then he's still pretty chaotic by society's standards. He is, in effect, an extremely orderly renegade.
Sherlock goes to bizarre distances out of his way to make sure that the police are with him, when he can, typically so he can also give them all the respect and credit for the capture.
Which is even weirder when you consider how much he badmouths Inspector Lestrade, the only conclusion I could come to is that he is simply giving Lestrade a hard time, but Sherlock still respects him and his authority.
Nah, he gives them credit because he'd hate to be mobbed by the spotlight. Can't work if everyone's watching - better to focus that reputation in the right places.
I disagree, he is quite vain you know.
In sussing out Sherlock's motivations, keep in mind that he is often short on cash (which is why he took on Watson as a roommate in the first place) while needing to keep up the appearances of a gentleman with means. There's always the implication (which is only occasionally allowed to become blatant) that he's subtly paying attention to increasing his bottom line.
I think he kept the connections he did with the police because it was good for business.
Surely, he did - it's only logical, any way you look at it. Also, vanity wouldn't require him to desire a spotlight so much as to control precisely how he is viewed, and by whom.
Batman and Robin Hood are good examples of chaotic good behavior. Laws are not working so take the law into your own hands.
A great LG rogue could be a spy in payment to the Kingdom or a religious order.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of people confuse Lawful with "following the law."
Just because someone is Lawful doesn't mean they'll automatically toe the line of whatever weirdo laws are in place wherever they might be.
While an amusing role-playing idea, it's hard to imagine that a clearly LG paladin would cheerfully engage in slavery, sacrifice and other stuff just because they happened to walk through the gate of a city.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll echo what others have said already, the Rogue is not a default thief.
I think a lot of this discussion is about the interaction of 'lawful' and 'good' with the iconic rogue abilities and roles.
Lawful Characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability.
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life.
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others'
A good tangential question that I hope illustrates the disparity between the 'Lawful' and 'Good' aspects of the alignment.
Do Lawful Evil character not murder, torture, exact vengeance, manipulate, tempt and torment?
Any of those acts would, under standard applications of 'Lawful' be violations of Law.
As for playing a LG rogue, I would emphasize the traits of trustworthiness, honor, tradition and reliability. The character is up front about what they are with those close to them. They should be absolutely reliable and forthright when it comes to the success/advancement of the group. Basically, a solid team player, not a solo. One who has tradition and honor and puts the welfare of others before their own well being. Ie, first one in, last one out.
I disagree with the idea that a lawful character can never tell a lie. If that was the case a lawful player could never try to infiltrate an enemy using stealth and guile.
If you are a detective or a spy it will be necessary to lie to suspects and enemies as part of your work. As long as you are doing these things to promote the kingdom and not yourself this is still the act of a lawful person.
A lawful person believes that the welfare of society as a whole is more important than individual rights. You uphold the law even if you do not agree with it. Just saying that you have a personal code and go out each night dressed as a bat does not make you lawful. You may have "good" reasons for what you do but you have decided that societies "laws" can not be trusted to deal with what is wrong with the world.
This is what separates Vigilantes from Policemen.
I think a lot of people confuse Lawful with "following the law."
Just because someone is Lawful doesn't mean they'll automatically toe the line of whatever weirdo laws are in place wherever they might be.
While an amusing role-playing idea, it's hard to imagine that a clearly LG paladin would cheerfully engage in slavery, sacrifice and other stuff just because they happened to walk through the gate of a city.
There are many places where laws are evil. Such as places where slavery is legal. A paladin could not survive for long in such a society because he would constantly be challenged to uphold the Law or Good. The answer for that person would be to swear allegiance to an order dedicated to bringing down these evil laws.
If he just went out and started killing slave owners and freeing slaves he would be a lawbreaker and by definition chaotic. Look up the Liberation domain for clerics. This is only granted by chaotic gods.
|
Staying with a the Dragon Age tangent I've had an idea of a LG Rogue based off of Aveline. The character would be a guardsman, using his rogue skills to thwart the criminal element in the city.
I too have found that my players feel that Rogue = Thief. I try at every avenue to get them into the mindset that a rogue is a versatile warrior who uses his skill to defeat opponents with finesse, looking outside the box to tackle problem.
Nothing in the description above excludes LG.
If rich elites are abusing/side-stepping the law to further their own selfish ends, a LG rogue is right to rob them and give to others. Maybe donate a bit to non-corrupt welfare plans, orphanages for families killed by fireballs. There is a lot of good a rogue can do. I recall my kingmaker ninja donated so much of the wealth around.
If the government/elites are operating via a LE code, the LG character no-where has to respect them or how they protect themselves "legally".
Now whether the LG rogue wantonly kills their hired help, that is another matter.
CG gets around a lot of these problems, but LG doesn't have to tow the political party line, if the party is evil.