| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not Quite.It is not Murder by legal terms AFTER the law is applied to it, but the act by itself before you look at it through the eyes of the law... is 'murder'.
But what I've been trying to get at here is that murder has NO MEANING if not looked at through the eyes of the law. Or no meaning in regards to killing.
Murder has exactly 3 definitions: An unlawful killing (of another human. Easily stretched to "another sentient being" for this discussion), a flock of crows, and the slang terms for something difficult.
NONE of those is simply "killing another human/sentient creature".
If you want to differentiate between the Legal term 'Murder' and 'Murder' : The Evil killing of sentient life. then we can try to do that.
I would like to differentiate between the two distinct terms, yes. Killing and murder are vastly different things.
Killing is unaligned. Murder is, at the very least, a non-Lawful act, and usually Evil as well.
Superman doesn't kill Lex Luthor, Batman doesn't kill Joker, Spiderman doesn't kill Venom, this is all because there is always another option: stopping them without killing them, then trying to guide them back to the path of good. To not try that option is to not respect their right to live, and to be a Good guy you have to respect life.
This is the morality of the modern age. NOT the morality of a pseudo-medieval setting.
This whole "You must respect an individual's right to exist" stuff is a recent construct.
Paladins are not evil for killing evil people. Their purpose is to wipe out evil wherever they find it, not to hug and cuddle it.
Good is Not Nice (note the page quote). Good is Not Soft (also note the page quote).
None of this contradicts the alignment description for Good vs Evil, either. There's a very important word people seem to be overlooking: Innocent.
"Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit."
You are not evil for killing a bandit, or a demon, or some other guilty party.
|
The above example is exactly what I was talking about. Solid justification. My problem with the original post is the blood bit. That is gratuitous.
Gratuitous that there would be blood from killing a guy? or that I mentioned it in my RP description? I play with friends who take RP pretty serious and we try to be as descriptive as possible. Go watch the movie Braveheart...blood spatter gratuitous or accurate? either way needed for the setting and effect.
Yes that is exactly what I meant. Killing hurting and opressing is evil when you do it to innocents and maybe good and maybe not if you do it to evil people on the battlefield. In the same regard as doing acts to harm evil people may or may not be good or evil depending on the act.
For example, If my paladin has a smite spell (yes I know its evil but bare with me), is it evil if he smite's evil? probably not. What if he smite's good? Probably....What if he smite's evil and enjoys it? Hmm that's the question.
Not necessarily.
You capture a known bad guy who has been tried and convicted of his evil acts. That doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with him and it would be good. Doesn't matter if he is evil or not, if I decide to execute him by slowing cutting off his limbs, it's still going to be evil.
A paladin should regret his actions when he is force to kill, with perhaps the exception of undead or demons, which are unnatural beings. If he id enjoying it, he is at best slipping into neutral, and over time might increasingly look for excused to kill, and shift into full evil
I think it would be hard to play the 'always peaceful' Shelynite with too much love for the killing that could come if diplomacy 'fails...' That said, if you have a sensible story/RP to go with it, I probably wouldn't bother you much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As with any roleplaying game, you have the freedom to make of it whatever you want. However, D&D/Pathfinder was never meant to be morally ambiguous. The alignments are strict and fairly cut and dry: Good people are Heroes and should act heroically. Evil people are Villains and are expected to be heinous. Neutrals are neither. So here's how I see the tale of Yeebin the Cleric:
A police officer, like a paladin, is "lawful good." They are expected to act in the interests of the innocent, but within the boundaries of law; there is a process to law that they must follow. This is why a police officer will not kill you for shoplifting, but rather apprehend you and take you to justice as the law demands. However, should you draw your gun on them, a police officer WILL shoot you dead, and will be completely within the bounds of law and righteousness. If that same police officer happens to get a few jollies from killing scum like you, he's still the hero in this little fable. He followed the law, and killed you for just reasons.
On the other side of town, you have Dirty Harry (Chaotic Good). He knows that criminals abuse the constraints of law and he's sick of it. Laws be damned when good people suffer. He's gonna crack skulls, blow up cars and shoot bad guys in their bad guy faces. But he's not doing it for himself- oh no, he's doing it FOR GREAT JUSTICE. Sure, he shot you in the gut and smiled as you bled out. Still not evil!
Then there's Spartacus the Gladiator (neutral). He kills people in the arena. Lots of people. But he's not doing it for the pleasure of killing (thrill of victory being something else entirely) and he's not doing it for justice. He's doing it to survive. Sure, sometimes he cuts off all your limbs while you're still alive and paints his face with your blood as you watch, but hey, the crowd loves it! Kind of a jerk, technically not evil.
And finally, there's Yeebin the Cleric. He started off one of those sucker LG's. All he wanted to do was help people. But years of battle wears on a man's soul, and after a while righteousness just didn't seem to matter as much. But Yeebin still did his best to follow the rules of the Church, because it's his job (LN). But lately he's started to notice that the thrill of battle and the rush of victory have started to alleviate the crushing apathy he's been feeling. And suddenly it's not enough to just beat a powerful foe. Now you have to crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women! Motorboat their entrails and teabag them! Coincidentally, not a lot of people hang out with Yeebin much anymore. He's kind of creepy. But hey, he doesn't go looking for trouble, he only gets weird when trouble comes looking for him. Let's give him a pass for now. Yeebin is now the Diet Coke of Evil. Just one calorie! Not quite evil enough. (CN)
And finally, the sad end of Yeebin's tale. It's not longer about doing good (who cares about that anyway?). It's no longer about being the best. It's about pain. The delightful music that screams make. The myriad of colors that blood can turn. Puppies? Delicious. Babies? Hate 'em. Set 'em on fire. Yeebin is now Evil. Time to reroll!
So needlessly longwinded post, short version: I'd say by straight alignment you've had one instance of a Chaotic Neutral act at the absolute worst. However, RP-wise your character could arguably be showing signs of slowly heading down a dark path. This is indeed something your deity may start to take issue with.
If Yeebin's deity is LG, or LN, then Yeebin should already be on the outs, having slipped into CN. Even CG would be out of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well certainly, but I couldn't have created such an overly elaborate post in that case!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To echo what TOZ and Death quaker said......"It doesn't matter what you think it is, it matters what the organizers think it is."People kept bringing up this point, but I never mentioned that I had a disagreement with a GM or even other players as to how this should be handled. I was simply asking for my own understanding as it would guide how my player proceeds. I will move my guy to neutral myself if I think that's how he's devolping. I don't RP in PFS to make some GM satisfied with my character's actions. I might respect and play by his rules sure but that doesn't stop how my PC progresses.
Your GM plays your god. If you act in a way that causes your GM to declare your god would be displeased with your cleric's actions and you lose all of your class abilities, then you might realize you might need to consider that from his POV more and how they might interpret your actions. That doesn't have to be an alignment issue per se, even, it just has to violate the god's portfolio dramatically enough the GM would smite you with the anvil of depowering. Especially as I understand organized play is more strict than home play (although I could be wrong), and thus you actually do kind of have to worry about what is okay with your GM far moreso than you might at a more informal RPG setting. Those of us who keep bringing up the point are aware of the fact that depending on how you choose to play things, your GM could lay an unpleasant smackdown on your character, so it is something you should actually be concerned about and try to anticipate.
But if you don't care what your GM or the organizers think, then I don't understand why you would appear to care what random strangers on a message board think. It looks, honestly, like you've made your decision and did so before you ever posted: you think it's appropriate to your character, and your mind is made up. Which means you're not looking for discussion, you're looking for validation. Why you think the approval of strangers from the Internet makes what you have already decided more meaningful--especially since you don't seem to care about the opinions of the people you actually play the game with--I don't know, but whatever floats your boat.
Ooo...ooo... I love this game!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even according to most modern day real world religions/philosophies killing is not in and of itself immoral (read evil). Murder is evil, killing is perfectly acceptable in a whole slew of circumstances.
1. Protecting yourself
2. Protecting your family
3. Defending your community
I think we can safely say that inherently evil creatures are a constant threat and that they not only can be killed but should be killed in order to protect the community.
That is my understanding of how most RPGs handle monsters. They are there to be killed. If you don't they will eventually commit some atrocity.
Off course I know that is old school and many gamers today prefer more shades of grey, and that is fun too! But originally you just killed the Orc and did not worry whether or not it was the one good Orc because there were no good orcs!
|
|
Sounds like the GM and other players are already on board with it, and he's just opening things up for hypothetical internet discussions. But it wasn't entirely clear from what he's posted...
"I RP, because this is a ROLEPLAYING game, I don't just come up with a half-ass excuse for 'rp' just to satisfy the GM with as little rp as possible."
But maybe I'm just giving the benefit of the doubt...
I don't need to reply to Deathquaker cause this is exactly my response. Did you cast a message spell and listen to my thoughts :D
And finally, there's Yeebin the Cleric. He started off one of those sucker LG's. All he wanted to do was help people. But years of battle wears on a man's soul, and after a while righteousness just didn't seem to matter as much. But Yeebin still did his best to follow the rules of the Church, because it's his job (LN). But lately he's started to notice that the thrill of battle and the rush of victory have started to alleviate the crushing apathy he's been feeling. And suddenly it's not enough to just beat a powerful foe. Now you have to crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women! Motorboat their entrails and teabag them! Coincidentally, not a lot of people hang out with Yeebin much anymore. He's kind of creepy. But hey, he doesn't go looking for trouble, he only gets weird when trouble comes looking for him. Let's give him a pass for now. Yeebin is now the Diet Coke of Evil. Just one calorie! Not quite evil enough. (CN)
And finally, the sad end of Yeebin's tale. It's not longer about doing good (who cares about that anyway?). It's no longer about being the best. It's about pain. The delightful music that screams make. The myriad of colors that blood can turn. Puppies? Delicious. Babies? Hate 'em. Set 'em on fire. Yeebin is now Evil. Time to reroll!
So needlessly longwinded post, short version: I'd say by straight alignment you've had one instance of a Chaotic Neutral act at the absolute worst. However, RP-wise your character could arguably be showing signs of slowly heading down a dark path. This is indeed something your deity may start to take issue with.
I'm pretty sure I would enjoy playing with you. That was awesome.
Although Yeebin the Cleric is trending in the dark side direction, he still only kills when provoked, still defends the innocent, still protects his companions, and still respects art and love. Just when he's confronted with conflict, he embraces is and enjoys his victory.
|
|
Your GM plays your god. If you act in a way that causes your GM to declare your god would be displeased with your cleric's actions and you lose all of your class abilities, then you might realize you might need to consider that from his POV more and how they might interpret your actions. That doesn't have to be an alignment issue per se, even, it just has to violate the god's portfolio dramatically enough the GM would smite you with the anvil of depowering.
Actually, I was thinking about this more and you have a point. If the GM expressed to me that Shelyn has made me aware she is not happy with my current actions and she is contemplating removing me from her good graces therefore stripping me of my clerical powers, I would care what the GM thought at that point. This would be a legitimate concern my cleric would have since his deity has made it clear she is not happy with his actions.
But my point is that if the GM or organizers think that I should be RPing differently because I am a NG cleric of Shelyn and someone who followed Shelyn wouldn't act that way so I should change my RPing. I say screw that. Essentially my GM would be telling me that my PC is incapable of backsliding or having his view of his faith warped or changed over time due to his experiences. If that was the case, RPing would be boring and bland just like 90% of the people I have played with.
Its all good to come up with some creative backstory or history of your PC but then to think that over the course of 12 levels (36 scenarios, and likely 75-100 enounters with 200-300 enemies) your chacater would stay static in his views, outlook, perception, faith, etc. and that his actions would always remain the same, is a bit myopic and I personally think if you played this way, you are selling yourself and your experience short.
|
|
RPGs are about playing a character. It's not just about the dice roll, but about the drama in the life story of that character. Portraying a descent into evil *with accompanying alignment shifts*, maybe with a change of deity or class, can all be part of having a multidimensional character beyond just "healbot". If your character is more than just dice mechanics, having messed up things happen to it, or be done by it, just deepens the character.
|
If your NOT chaotic, I would say you should be getting some chaos points on your chronicle sheets with how you have been acting at the very least. I would also seriously consider if your still good. Gaining evil points as a good character should be easier then as a neutral one. Now note that being CN wouldn't all on it's own remove you from being a cleric of shelyn...but then again I have reservations about your actions as a shelynite irrespective of alignment with the actions you described and as such would be marking that on your sheet as well. General rule being 3 strikes and your out.
In PFS (if I remember right anyway) the dm always has to warn you before any hits to your penalty or divine power. So that's something to think about.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If that was the case, RPing would be boring and bland just like 90% of the people I have played with.
Ah-ha. So this isn't a "is this evil thread" but more a "look what a great role player I am" thread.
|
|
In PFS (if I remember right anyway) the dm always has to warn you before any hits to your penalty or divine power. So that's something to think about.
Generally, three marks on chronicle sheets is enough to have you lose powers or shift alignments. This includes going from neutral to good. However, for paladins, you can lose your power in one go because of their code and if you do something REALLY bad, you can have it go at one instance as well. For instance, you kill an entire village for the thrill of it and nothing else while cackling and reveling in their blood...yeah, your losing your good alignment and deity granted powers right then and there.
If your character is fighting to defend the weak, they shouldn't be reveling in the blood of their enemies. Otherwise they'd be fighting for the fun of it, not to defend the weak.
If your character is fighting to defend the weak, they shouldn't be reveling in the blood of their enemies. Otherwise they'd be fighting for the fun of it, not to defend the weak.
I disagree. The two should not be mutually exclusive.
-Nearyn
|
|
Ah-ha. So this isn't a "is this evil thread" but more a "look what a great role player I am" thread.
sigh...if by me hinting that I hate players and GMs who metagame means that I am trying to tell the internet how good of a RPer I am is then so be it.
If people tell me my solution to my problem is to metagame more then ya I am going to reject that pretty harshly.
Soapbox cause you got me started: If players and GMs were to metagame less, I think their experience would be much more enjoyable overall. It would evolve from lets just roll dice and move minis around a table to really enjoying a imaginative experience. That's not 'Im better than you' speak, but rather 'I wish everyone were like me' speak. Get it right :)
I disagree. The two should not be mutually exclusive.
-Nearyn
They kind of are. The motivation is important - an evil person can fight or torment evil people and still be evil, because they're doing it just because they enjoy causing suffering (to whoever).
Alignment is not a straightjacket. Everyone sometimes does things that are a little out of character. In the game the only characters who that might be a problem for are paladins.
It sounds to me like you have a generally good character who occasionally does things that are morally questionable. That could easily fit into Chaotic-Good or Neutral-Good, and might be a sign that your character's alignment is starting to slip, which can be a rewarding theme to explore.
If this is done for story-purposes then it's fine, and even admirable.
If it's done for the squick-factor because the player likes making people uncomfortable, then it's annoying, showboating nonsense.
Without knowing the OP personally and sitting at the table with them, there's no real way for us here in internetland to make a judgement one way or the other.
They kind of are.I disagree. The two should not be mutually exclusive.
-Nearyn
I disagee.
The motivation is important
And in no ways limited to one at a time...
an evil person can fight or torment evil people and still be evil, because they're doing it just because they enjoy causing suffering (to whoever).
I fail to see the relevance. Nor do I see how this forms a reasonable argument for why a character cannot have multiple reasons for doing something. This is not a challenge for you to find such a reason, because it cannot be done.
Characters may have any series of motivations of committing certain acts, or having certain mannerisms.
-Nearyn
Characters may have any series of motivations of committing certain acts, or having certain mannerisms.
The point is that if a character who has as an overwhelming factor for engaging in combat the love of bloodshed and killing, as in the OP's example, one cannot really say that that character is doing what they're doing from the perspective of a good alignment. It's really hard to argue neutral, as well, honestly.
Characters may have any series of motivations of committing certain acts, or having certain mannerisms.The point is that if a character who has as an overwhelming factor for engaging in combat the love of bloodshed and killing, as in the OP's example, one cannot really say that that character is doing what they're doing from the perspective of a good alignment. It's really hard to argue neutral, as well, honestly.
Stepping out in front of the Taros, came a warrior dressed in green and gold. The warrior raised a hand to his face, brushing away long strands of silky hair. His form was one of conflict, for where he looked and dressed almost effeminate, his stance was that of masculinity, of a warrior. On his chest, he wore a gilded plate. In his left hand, he held a glaive. Taros met the warrior's eyes, a deep colour of mahogany, but rather than warm, his gaze was hard as steel.
"Stand back!" Called the warrior, and Taros took a defiant step forward.
"Whatever quarrel you have with this temple, lower your torch, and stand back now!"
Whatever quarrel he had? What did that presumptious little pansy know of his quarrels? Taros felt his heart race as his rage took hold. That little maggot! He had no idea how the Shellynites had wronged him, how they had humiliated him, yet there he stood, defiantly in the path of Taros' revenge.
"Who are you?!" demanded Taros. The warrior raised his hand to his shoulder and made the slightest of nods towards him.
"I am called Yeebin" He responded "And I am afraid I cannot let you endanger the works of art in this building"
Taros shifted the torch to his left hand, and in his right, took the hilt of his father's sword. The warrior calling himself Yeebin did not flinch. But with the rasp of the blade leaving its scabbard, something different came over the warrior blocking Taros' path. It was small, almost imperceptible, a shift in stance, the way his shoulders moved; The suddenly playful glint in his eyes.
"Oh yes, please! By all means..." spoke the Yeebin, his voice almost a whisper, yet it carried far. And his lips curled up into a smirk.
"...come, test my steel, filthy mongrel!"
At the insult, Taros flew into a rage an charged. The warrior assumed an aggressive stance and raised his glaive to meet Taros' charge.
"Show me battle!!"
-Nearyn
What's going on in 'Yeebin's' head is kind of important, which is not something you elaborate on.
In any case, Shelynites are only supposed to use violence as a last resort, which is clearly not Yeebin's MO.
What's going on in 'Yeebin's' head is kind of important, which is not something you elaborate on.
In any case, Shelynites are only supposed to use violence as a last resort, which is clearly not Yeebin's MO.
Not trying to illustrate Shelynites, but I like that you caught on, anyway.
I am illustrating that the character can have 2 motivations. What prompts Yeebin in my example, to enter the conflict in the first place, is that he wishes to protect the art in the temple, against this angry man wielding a torch. Despite the threat of violence, Yeebin does not back down, deadset on protecting the temple. However, he is not scared at the prospect of fighting Taros, he looks forward to it. Because he enjoys the thrill of battle, the clang of steel and the feeling of victory.
Multiple motivations have a hand in this conflict. :D
-Nearyn
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By the way...This post really should have nothing to do with Shelyn. She just so happens to be the god of my cleric but the discussion is more about the acts of enjoying killing your enemies as a good character. The Shelyn banter sort of railroads the discussion as now the thread has evolved into 2 separate discussions.
This post has everything to do with Shelyn and very little to do with alignment. Alignment is not some absolute part of the character.
Part of how a DM determines if a character is acting in alignment involves the gods they worship, their background, and their profession. A worshipper of Shelyn acting as you are acting would give a DM pause, especially a cleric of Shelyn. The DM would have to ask themselves "Is this cleric representing Shelyn in the manner the goddess wishes?" If the answer is no, then they have to decide how Shelyn will answer your character's behavior.
If you're doing what you're doing as a worshipper of Ragathiel, the DM would probably shrug. Ragathiel is a raging force of vengeance that may well enjoy shedding the blood of a wrongdoer and enjoying the taste of an evil enemy righteously killed. The blood itself might not even matter, but the blood of an unrepentant, unrighteous evil-doer might be as sweet as that of a pure, sinless individual is to a demon-lord.
Alignment without the context of background including deity worshipped is worthless. If you were worshipping Sarenrae and doing what you're doing, you might be turning towards evil. Sarenrae is the goddess of redemption and doesn't revel in the kill, even if her followers will swiftly kill enemies they deem unredeemable.
Then there is background. If you were raised as a cleric of Shelyn in a culture of barbarian halfings of Shelyn, that might change things in entirely. Then the DM might view this as a part of your character as they were raised.
If out of nowhere you start to enjoy the blood of your enemies whether they are good, neutral, or evil, then a DM might start to explore why your character feels this way. Are your actionse barbaric? Are they pursuing the path of cannibalism? Why does she enjoy the blood of her enemies? Why does she enjoy killing? Does it fit with Shelyn's view of right and wrong?
I don't view the act as inherently evil unless she starts doing it with anyone she kills remorselessly. It's definitely worth looking into and seeing how appropriate it is in the context of the character in its entirety.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a vacuum, "is it evil to really really enjoy killing things?" is an unanswerable question. Really, what it most comes down to how much your enjoyment of killing things factors into the decisions leading up to those moments when you're killing things.
For instance, I have a paladin I'm playing in a game I have going right now, and yeah, she totally enjoys killing things. Dropped an adult black dragon with a single charge a few sessions back, spent quite a while in character beaming about it and telling the story to various people. However, this is a character who absolutely only ever uses violence as a last resort. If you're intelligent, she is always going to try to negotiate, and repeatedly offer chances to surrender once a fight breaks out, just shoves through mooks when it seems like they're only fighting because they're under orders, AOOs be damned, and when there's non-intelligent things around to kill, generally makes a policy of leaving them alone unless they're prone to attack random people minding their own business down the line. It's fun lopping heads off, but she has to be really really sure those heads need to come off to not feel terribly guilty about it. Pretty darn LG there.
In the same party, there's a barbarian who quite enjoys killing things, will humor the paladin's attempts at diplomacy, but always hopes a fight is going to break out, and gets frustrated when peaceful solutions win out.CN.
Then there's the witch, who makes a big show of acting in keeping with the party's always-negotiate policy, but is constantly on the lookout for any possible excuse to start slinging around lightning bolts. For instance when asked to translate for the paladin, he'll paraphrase, presenting everything said on both sides in the most hostile and threatening way he can without outright lying. LE.
All that said though, believing that nothing is beyond redemption, with particular emphasis on what others don't give the benefit of the doubt to, is pretty much Shelyn's whole deal. So she really really isn't the best choice of deity if you're the revel-in-the-glory-of-combat type, so you might want to consider converting.
|
|
What's going on in 'Yeebin's' head is kind of important, which is not something you elaborate on.
In any case, Shelynites are only supposed to use violence as a last resort, which is clearly not Yeebin's MO.
Why is what's going on in Yeebin's head important? The actions of a man should manifest what's in his heart. Meaning if Yeebin is volunteering in the soup kitchen at the local temple to Shelyn, would it matter if he was daydreaming about slicing the local hobos in half with his glaive while he serves them food? He's doin good acts while evil thoughts run through his head.
This is just a sort of extreme example and is no way a reflection on the actual bloodthirsty Yeebin of Shelyn.
What's going on in 'Yeebin's' head is kind of important, which is not something you elaborate on.
In any case, Shelynites are only supposed to use violence as a last resort, which is clearly not Yeebin's MO.
Why is what's going on in Yeebin's head important? The actions of a man should manifest what's in his heart. Meaning if Yeebin is volunteering in the soup kitchen at the local temple to Shelyn, would it matter if he was daydreaming about slicing the local hobos in half with his glaive while he serves them food? He's doin good acts while evil thoughts run through his head.
This is just a sort of extreme example and is no way a reflection on the actual bloodthirsty Yeebin of Shelyn.
Yes... and no.
Motivation is exceedingly important, and divorcing thought from action is not really probable, at least not for long. Divorcing thought from motivation? Possible. Very, in fact. But you're likely going to end up with a miserable character: one who continually thinks X, but ends up doing Z.
("If I... but have not love..." etc.)
Which is fine if you want to do that.
Part of that comes from the fact that people have far more control of their emotions than most people like to admit. It's not always possible to control yourself and your feelings and thoughts in the heat of the moment (such as your OP example), but when volunteering at a soup kitchen? That's when your alignment stuff starts coming into place.
So long as Yeebin never acts on his daydreaming... okay.
But what's in a man's heart does manifest in actions... eventually. And allowing yourself to dwell on things (which is the case in the soup kitchen example) will result in that kind of stuff coming out eventually.
That said, I think one of the reasons that people responded so strongly and negatively to your OP is because the way it came across was as a consistent thing.
You're preference is, of course, that alignment be fluid. You've made that clear. That's fine. ... so long as you are okay with the consequences. To some extent, you seem to be. If you a) recognize that Yeebin is on a "slippery slope" and can and (if he continues to indulge in such thoughts) will eventually change and shift. That's how people work. You're good with that? Pretty much everyone is good, I think.
But really, you're putting yourself into the interpretation of a GM. And that's... iffy. GMs have many responses to such things, so don't be surprised if you play this (or similar) and find out your character is informed that they change.
Most people are looking at it from the (more common) position where a player (let's say player "A") wants to keep their alignment and deity and don't want to lose the powers that come along with that... but are still behaving in a different manner.
:)
But what's in a man's heart does manifest in actions... eventually. And allowing yourself to dwell on things (which is the case in the soup kitchen example) will result in that kind of stuff coming out eventually.
I'm thinking that's an opinion more than fact.
A good character who fights to defend the weak and innocent but revels in the blood of his enemies.
I stabbed a human enemy through the sternum instantly killing him, raised my glaive above my head, yelling to the sky in a rage. While the glaive was over my head, some blood dripped off my blade and fell onto my face and into my mouth and I enjoyed it.
I'm going to give a real world twist to this scenario.
Yeebin the policeman does his job to protect the innocent:
1: but he loves it when he kills people, especially those who start trouble with him. In fact he take particular enjoyment in seeing their dead bodies.
2: but he loves to punish those who break the law, he especially gets a thrill when they are sentenced and loves to see them they suffer for their crimes.
3: As long as it's legal he enjoys to beating people with his club. He enjoys seeing their blood as it gives him a rush, often when no one is looking he likes to taste the blood left over.
4: He bashed in a man's sternum with his baton and when they collapsed to the ground, Yeebin held his club up in the air and screamed in delight "I love this job!"
I don't know about you but all of these variations are pretty chilling. Reveling the in suffering of others is plain psychopathic, sure we all get a little kick when we see someone we hate trip up but to put ourselves in situations so we can see and enjoy that suffering...
|
|
I don't know about you but all of these variations are pretty chilling. Reveling the in suffering of others is plain psychopathic, sure we all get a little kick when we see someone we hate trip up but to put ourselves in situations so we can see and enjoy that suffering...
Conversely,
Yeebin is a grunt in the military. He has seen many of his fellow soldiers die at the hands of insurgents. He now takes thrill in the hunt for finding them, entering into combat, and killing them. Afterwards he goes up to the corpse, spits on it and shoots it in the head again for good measure. He clearly takes pleasure in killing these guys and adds to their suffering whenever possible.
As chilling as Yeebin the police officer?
Yes, that sorta thing gets your head reviewed. Purposely increasing the suffering of a person before they die is both a war crime and breach of human rights codes.
Yes, that sorta thing gets your head reviewed. Purposely increasing the suffering of a person before they die is both a war crime and breach of human rights codes.
When did we start torturing people and prolonging in their suffering?
But what's in a man's heart does manifest in actions... eventually. And allowing yourself to dwell on things (which is the case in the soup kitchen example) will result in that kind of stuff coming out eventually.I'm thinking that's an opinion more than fact.
You are welcome to your belief, but let me suggest that you try an experiment.
Begin dwelling on - and enjoying - fantasies that others consider socially unacceptable. Love them, and keep them close to heart. Think about and enjoy them all the time. (This is what "dwell on" means in my post. It means "staying" somewhere, mentally.)
And then never act on them, allow them to affect your behavior, or allow them to affect your emotions. Not once.
The point is: that's not how people work. If you allow yourself to dwell on things it will eventually out in your actions in some form or another.
Examples, evidence, and broad agreement abounds:
1) Actors who get so deep into their roles that they reflect characteristics taken on from them.
2) The whole idea of socially ostracized frustrated "nerds" who long for something better than they actually have, but never truly achieve.
3) The movie Matchstick Men. It's a really interesting flick.
4) Pretty much most of my psych courses. (Although - I have to admit - I always found the conclusions of psychology potentially dubious, due to potential abuse, many of the studies and elements have found enough correlation to reality to show trends.
5) Pretty much all of the major religious or philosophical beliefs have come to a similar conclusion: control your mind to control your actions.
However, Role Playing can affect behavior as well. Much like actors occasionally take on some of the traits of the characters they're playing - Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump taking on loving and caring traits for a positive example, and Heath Ledger as the Joker become depressed and eventually committing suicide as a negative example - Role Playing can, and does, occasionally filter into real life, in small ways. This is one of the (many and valid) reasons people don't like to play certain things, whether sexual, evil, or otherwise taboo - it can filter into their thoughts and ideas. We have enough real-life examples to show that this occurs.
Dungeons and Dragons isn't what the moral panic authorities of the 80s claimed it was. But individuals who play the game can allow themselves to be affected in that way. Thus...
If you come up with "wrong" thoughts, but reject them as being applicable to real life, that's different, and not what I'm talking about. That's not dwelling, it's not delighting, and it's not an inevitable outcome for your actions.
The soup-kitchen example? It may well be a one-time thing. But if it's not, and Yeebin doesn't work to stop it... then either Yeebin will eventually come closer toward his fantasies, become extremely frustrated and unhappy as his cognitive dissonance consumes him, or else is not acting like pretty much every other person who's ever existed. That last is not "realistic" or even really "role playing" in any way that most would understand it (outside of "role playing" a very alien-to-humanity mind). That's just strange.
The former two are fine.
EDIT: to avoid double-posting.
Yes, that sorta thing gets your head reviewed. Purposely increasing the suffering of a person before they die is both a war crime and breach of human rights codes.When did we start torturing people and prolonging in their suffering?
Um...
Conversely,
Yeebin is a grunt in the military. He has seen many of his fellow soldiers die at the hands of insurgents. He now takes thrill in the hunt for finding them, entering into combat, and killing them. Afterwards he goes up to the corpse, spits on it and shoots it in the head again for good measure. He clearly takes pleasure in killing these guys and adds to their suffering whenever possible.
As chilling as Yeebin the police officer?
... the bolded part?
|
|
I don't know about you but all of these variations are pretty chilling. Reveling the in suffering of others is plain psychopathic, sure we all get a little kick when we see someone we hate trip up but to put ourselves in situations so we can see and enjoy that suffering...Conversely,
Yeebin is a grunt in the military. He has seen many of his fellow soldiers die at the hands of insurgents. He now takes thrill in the hunt for finding them, entering into combat, and killing them. Afterwards he goes up to the corpse, spits on it and shoots it in the head again for good measure. He clearly takes pleasure in killing these guys and adds to their suffering whenever possible.
As chilling as Yeebin the police officer?
Umm...HELL YES!!!! Sorry, war crimes are EVIL. The fact that the US government sanctioned war crimes by just giving the soldiers who did this is real life just administrative punishments does not make this okay. This is a despicable and evil act in real life and is so in the game world. So yes...your being evil...deal.
Umm...HELL YES!!!! Sorry, war crimes are EVIL. The fact that the US government sanctioned war crimes by just giving the soldiers who did this is real life just administrative punishments does not make this okay. This is a despicable and evil act in real life and is so in the game world. So yes...your being evil...deal.
Probably best not to transplant real life ideas into dnd. This is a game where at its core you kill someone and steal their magic shoes, sometimes only to steal their magic artifact shoes... Usually killing and stealing are both incredibly evil and despicable.
|
|
Umm...HELL YES!!!! Sorry, war crimes are EVIL. The fact that the US government sanctioned war crimes by just giving the soldiers who did this is real life just administrative punishments does not make this okay. This is a despicable and evil act in real life and is so in the game world. So yes...your being evil...deal.Probably best not to transplant real life ideas into dnd. This is a game where at its core you kill someone and steal their magic shoes, sometimes only to steal their magic artifact shoes... Usually killing and stealing are both incredibly evil and despicable.
And as other have already pointed out...most PFS characters are played as neutral AT BEST. We do a lot of evil...REALLY evil s%~@ in the course of our adventure. Just because the world doesn't have our legal and societal system does not make these actions any less evil.
Probably best not to transplant real life ideas into dnd. This is a game where at its core you kill someone and steal their magic shoes, sometimes only to steal their magic artifact shoes... Usually killing and stealing are both incredibly evil and despicable.
In the Dnd world killing is much more socially acceptable (maybe stealing too), the debate in my opinion really isn't about the killing, it's about ENJOYING IT.
Also killing someone just for their magic shoes is pretty evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also killing someone just for their magic shoes is pretty evil.
Well I'm pretty sure he was involved with a cult of the unholy wyrm or something. And they were, like, really nice shoes and go really well with my new hat!
These alignment threads get much simpler when you realize you can just find a few of the regular posters in them, see if they have to justify it isn't evil using more than a paragraph, and when they do know yes, yes it is evil.
Basically, asking if something is evil on these forums is like asking if drugs are bad while standing outside the weirdest smelling tent at burning man. There will be some bias in the answers you receive.