Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
First, CdG is never a good act, but it isn't always an evil one. Not good =/= evil.
As to GM interpretation variance, it's an unfortunate necessity, and ultimately creates what I like to call the alignment interpretation tax. When alignment disagreements happen, the player has to either not authentically RP their character, or they may have to pay for an atonement.
It blows, but it's a reality.
Agreed fully!
Let's also not forget that a PC needs several alignment warnings before a shift to evil alignment is forced. So an isolated incident like this probably isn't the end of the world.
But it is at least an interesting discussion point.
Actually, the OP already acknowledged that what he was doing was evil:
Killing an evil man before he can kill again is a sacrifice I was willing to make.
If it wasn't an evil act, there was no sacrifice to make.
What he is now arguing is that he was willing to pay the price, but since other people were bad, he shouldn't have to.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no catch-all for what alignment CDG falls under it is completely within the domain of GM discretion. Trying to box it up is probably unhealthy. The motivations of the OP are a useful piece of evidence that could help categorize it, but unfortunately it's just one anecdote among an infinite number of possible scenarios. So I'm not sure we should say "CDG is evil" just based on the motivation put forward in this thread.
And I don't think blanket declarations about what action it is will help anybody. GM discretion is a simple way to look at it that can be handled on a case by case basis by people who fully understand the situation.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Killing someone who has surrendered or been incapacitated is an evil act.
So are you arguing that countries that engage in execution as punishment for crimes are evil? Almost every method I can think of for executing a prisoner involves them being incapacitated and unable to defend themselves.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Killing someone who has surrendered or been incapacitated is an evil act.So are you arguing that countries that engage in execution as punishment for crimes are evil? Almost every method I can think of for executing a prisoner involves them being incapacitated and unable to defend themselves.
No, I am saying that countries that execute criminals are committing evil acts. Committing (isolated) evil acts does not make you evil. They are also (hopefully) committing good acts, such as feeding the hungry.
Committing an evil act just because all the alternatives are more evil does not make it a good act, but may make you a good person.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
By the way, the recognition that executions are evil are the reason some jursidictions in the real world use artificial means to diffuse responsibility for the execution, such as supplying one or more people in a firing squad with wax bullets but not telling any of them who has the wax bullet so each one can tell themselves they did not fire the lethal shot.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ OP, that's quite a situation btw,
Since we're on the topic of alignment values of CDG..
in the bossfight, the archer paladin (follower of Sarenrae) got his 1 hit kill with a confirmed arrow to the chest.
With the battle over, he whispers into the unconscious dying man's ear who he is, then proceeds with a cdg by beheading.
Paladins are LG, does this action carry any risk for his alignment or paladin legitimacy?
It's more common for your average barbarian or hellknight to do this.
----Considerations------
*Was this decapitation of a helpless evil fanatic violating the local law?
I don't know, but this guy orchestrated a carnage.
Sarenrae approves of swift justice, but that didn't confirm/deny applying CDG.
* Was the kill necessary?
He'd fight to the death. Yet he was dying and bled out, no more threat to society, so that's iffy.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that he is a mass murderer doesn't make it less evilYes. It does. Doing things to innocent people vs doing them to people who deserve it is a huge part of morality.
Lock a murderer in an 8 by 10 room for 50 years: Warden.
Lock a random innocent person in an 8 by 10 room for 50 years: Psychotic criminal.
Sorry, I had to go do some research for this one.
You tried this exact arguement on Mike Brock in the torture thread. He shot it down there too.
Completely different argument: eviler stuff we otherwise get away with vs who you do things to.
|
Killing someone who has surrendered or been incapacitated is an evil act.Then how is there a lawful good empyreal lord of execution?
You have no basis for this statement, at all.
It's funny, you bring Damerrich out as an example, when you don't really seem to get what he is about. You lock onto one word, and ignore the rest of what he is about. There is actually a difference between a just execution (which is what the empyreal lord you keep bringing up is about) and ganking some unconscious bad guy. And killing someone (like an unconscious / helpless opponent) in cold blood, regardless of their alignment, in cold blood is absolutely an evil act. Two wrongs don't make a right, as the saying goes.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's funny, you bring Damerrich out as an example, when you don't really seem to get what he is about. You lock onto one word, and ignore the rest of what he is about. There is actually a difference between a just execution (which is what the empyreal lord you keep bringing up is about) and ganking some unconscious bad guy.
Yes. The difference is that you make sure that the person deserves it. You weigh the ramifications carefully, thoughtfully, and deliberately with the full weight of the very important decision you have to make firmly in your mind, with the pros and cons weighted.
And sometimes you do it anyway. Knowing the scenario in question I know that that guy is DEFINITELY one of those times.
And killing someone in cold blood, regardless of their alignment, in cold blood is absolutely an evil act. Two wrongs don't make a right, as the saying goes.
I'm curious as to how you think one of Damerrich's executions is supposed to work? He's an executioner, right down to the axe and black armor. You are supposed to meditate on the act. Its a HOT blooded murder he'd have a problem with because you didn't consider the ramifications.
Unless all of your executions are trial by combat to the death he wouldn't have a place there.
|
|
It's funny, you bring Damerrich out as an example, when you don't really seem to get what he is about. You lock onto one word, and ignore the rest of what he is about. There is actually a difference between a just execution (which is what the empyreal lord you keep bringing up is about) and ganking some unconscious bad guy.Yes. The difference is that you make sure that the person deserves it. You weigh the ramifications carefully, thoughtfully, and deliberately...
And sometimes you do it anyway. Knowing the scenario in question I know that that guy is DEFINITELY one of those times.
And killing someone in cold blood, regardless of their alignment, in cold blood is absolutely an evil act. Two wrongs don't make a right, as the saying goes.I'm curious as to how you think one of Damerrich's executions is supposed to work? He's an executioner, right down to the axe and black armor. You are supposed to meditate on the act. Its a HOT blooded murder he'd have a problem with because you didn't consider the ramifications.
Unless all of your executions are trial by combat to the death he wouldn't have a place there.
Meditating before performing just (the guilty has been tried and sentenced) execution is not the same as premeditated murder (cold blooded murder. One of those is a person delivering duly appointed justice and the other is still plain ol' murder. It doesn't matter what the alignment is of the person being murdered is, murder is still murder. If someone planted a greataxe in Zarta Dralneen's head, it's still murder even though she's evil. Just because someone pings as evil does not give someone carte blanche to kill them.
The proper course in the scenario in question (in my opinion) is to turn the dude over to the people he terrorized, then offer to serve as executioner, if that's what they want.
One man does not have the authority to name himself Judge, Jury, and Executioner.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meditating before performing just (the guilty has been tried and sentenced) execution is not the same as premeditated murder (cold blooded murder. One of those is a person delivering duly appointed justice and the other is still plain ol' murder. It doesn't matter what the alignment is of the person being murdered is, murder is still murder.
This pretty much makes Chaotic Good a contradiction. This is a very Lawful Good attitude and it has a lot of merit, but its handing a higher level of authority to the state/group than to the individual and is the antithesis of chaos that conflates law with good.
If someone planted a greataxe in Zarta Dralneen's head, it's still murder even though she's evil. Just because someone pings as evil does not give someone carte blanche to kill them.
Pathfinders commit unlawful killings all the time. So do rebels, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, and half the country or Nirimathis.
One man does not have the authority to name himself Judge, Jury, and Executioner.
Thats a very lawful attitude. The value of a system is not in the system itself but in its discernment. If the state is blind to its own evils or an individual can see better what do the trappings of society and order bring to a question of good and evil?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinders commit unlawful killings all the time. So do rebels, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, and half the country or Nirimathis
A group of rebels that kills all defeated opposition and never takes prisoners isn't likely to be good aligned, no matter who or what they oppose.
|
|
A group of rebels that kills all defeated opposition and never takes prisoners isn't likely to be good aligned, no matter who or what they oppose.Pathfinders commit unlawful killings all the time. So do rebels, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, and half the country or Nirimathis
You are putting words in his mouth. He didn't say that.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It certainly isn't lawful.Oh?
What if your personal beliefs demand you execute the prisoner?
You see yourself, as having to be the Judge, Jury, and Executioner, in many situations.
Is following your strict code, a "chaotic" act?
Not going to get into the good vs. evil thing. I certainly have already made my stance clear in many, many other threads.
But here you are wrong. Following a code is the exact definition of being Lawful. Lawful doesn't necessarily mean following all the local laws in countries you run into. It means that you find a credo and follow it to the exclusion of all else.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do think one thing should be kept in mind when weighing what is "evil" in a universe such as Golarion, and that is that we are all rather strongly influenced by westernized ideas that may not really be applicable.
In western culture we tend to hold life to be incredibly important and put significant weight upon upholding its virtues. I'm not saying this is wrong - far from it - but I do want to suggest that upholding such a philosophy is a luxury brought on by a very advanced civilization and code of laws. We are privileged to live at a time when so much value is put on human life. Hopefully we'll put even more value onto in the future.
Earlier civilizations - as well as fictional civilizations - may not have this luxury. When times are rough, people have to get rough. The westernized notion of upholding the value of human life severely degrades in times of strife and of course in times of war.
Golarion is a tumultuous place which suffers from great struggle within as well as invaders from without (stupid stupid demons). The value that they hold life is obviously going to be less than what we do in reality, and players and GMs should keep that in mind. A killing that some in this thread may call "cold blooded" in our world may actually be more of a "practical and cautionary act" in a universe such as Golarion.
My take on 'evil' acts within this fictional universe is that they are typically self-evident (though that too is sadly subjective). By self-evident, I mean "obvious". Killing a defenseless opponent for personal gain or for personal glee - and for no other reasons - that's pretty obviously evil. Killing a defenseless opponent because they are a ruthless destroyer who certainly will kill again is not an evil thing to do at all, and is more a reflection of the troubled world in which they reside.
tl;dr: Be careful when applying modern westernized notions of morality towards a war-torn fictional realm.
|
|
You are putting words in his mouth. He didn't say that.A group of rebels that kills all defeated opposition and never takes prisoners isn't likely to be good aligned, no matter who or what they oppose.Pathfinders commit unlawful killings all the time. So do rebels, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, and half the country or Nirimathis
I believe the argument was, and I'm paraphrasing here, that it matters who you're killing when deciding if said killing is considered a good or evil act. The groups listed are all associated with fighting evil or oppression in one form or another, and are generaly considered nuetral to good, thus why they were brought up as an example to counter the opinion that 'killing an evil person is still murder'. I personaly feel that a group of people who make it their mission to kill all evil-doers are also evil, though I understand why someone may disagree. I was simply trying to point out that the listed groups are defined by their actions just as much as an individual is, and that who they fight doesn't matter. I just did it lazily.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
tl;dr: Be careful when applying modern westernized notions of morality towards a war-torn fictional realm.
The counterpoint to this however, is that Golarion has a more absolute morality than the real world, in that there is a set of Gods, aligned on a single pair of axis, that dictate what is good and what is evil, and those gods, with some exceptions are heavily influenced by a modern, western morality. (in that the authors who wrote them were so influenced.)
Thus we have things such as the flat declarative statement from Mike Brock that torture is evil, and this is not debatable. And we also have the declaration from the design team that undead are evil (hence the errata to the Juju Mystery.)
Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis
|
Following a code that is your own is not lawful if it is contrary to society as a whole. If that is not obvious I cannot begin to explain it to you.
I would suggest you go read the alignment descriptions on this point.
As an example:
Lawful Neutral: A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government.
In the case of a lawful good character:
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.
So, one could choose not to follow the law, and yet still be lawful. For example, a character defying an unjust law would not be chaotic.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Following a code that is your own is not lawful if it is contrary to society as a whole. If that is not obvious I cannot begin to explain it to you.It certainly isn't lawful.Oh?
What if your personal beliefs demand you execute the prisoner?
You see yourself, as having to be the Judge, Jury, and Executioner, in many situations.
Is following your strict code, a "chaotic" act?
Not going to get into the good vs. evil thing. I certainly have already made my stance clear in many, many other threads.
But here you are wrong. Following a code is the exact definition of being Lawful. Lawful doesn't necessarily mean following all the local laws in countries you run into. It means that you find a credo and follow it to the exclusion of all else.
Which society? We aren't talking 2015 Earth morality and ethics here. Golarion has many lawful and good societies where a coup de grace wouldn't violate either ethos.
|
|
The keyword there is "supposedly". We don't have actual confirmation of that dragon's alignment.Alignment in Golarion: a world where a supposedly lawful good gold dragon can run a centuries long eugenics program on his james-bond-villain-esque island in peace.
. Well, all gold dragons are supposedly lawful good, all undead are supposedly evil (apparently in pathfinder world this is a fact, which is a shame). I always enjoy discussions about alignment in pathfinder because it is so subjective and uniquely colored by absolutes and grey areas depending on who you're talking to. I have some fairly hard opinions on the matter or morality myself, but I've only ever called for an alignment check three times in my home games because i understand that people have different opinions. One involved chopping off both of a drunk old man's hands because he was 'unruly'. One because the player clearly wanted an alignment shift for role playing purposes. The last because the players decided they needed a distraction, and the distraction they settled on was to set fire to an occupied building while the tennants were sleeping inside... Which I might've let slide except one charater actualy said "it's not a distraction unless someone is dying." with a smile.
|
|
No. Most gold dragons are LG but there are exceptions.. Well, all gold dragons are supposedly lawful good,The keyword there is "supposedly". We don't have actual confirmation of that dragon's alignment.Alignment in Golarion: a world where a supposedly lawful good gold dragon can run a centuries long eugenics program on his james-bond-villain-esque island in peace.
Oh yeah, I forgot that was one of the big changes from 3.5 to pathfinder proper. Anyway,
I'm sure the gold dragon in question believes he's doing his work for good and noble reasons. It doesn't really matter what his alignment is, which is why it' makes for a good story.
It is just a game, to be so upset not to be able to kill an imaginary character when "There's no mechanical difference in rewards if we capture or kill in this scenario" is kind of disturbing. Chill.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is just a game, to be so upset not to be able to kill an imaginary character when "There's no mechanical difference in rewards if we capture or kill in this scenario" is kind of disturbing. Chill.
From what I can tell, he is angry because in his opinion, from his perspective, the GM cheated to allow the player whose play style he was more in line with the GM's to get his way.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was simply trying to point out that the listed groups are defined by their actions just as much as an individual is, and that who they fight doesn't matter. I just did it lazily.
Of course it matters.
If you're bushwhacking innocent people hauling grain from point A to point B and occasionally some of them die you're a chaotic evil thug.
If you're bushwhacking slavers to free the slaves being hauled from point A to point B the same level of violence makes you a chaotic good freedom fighter.
The target says a lot about why you're doing something.
|
|
The target says a lot about why you're doing something.
I can agree with this. I think we just disagree on the cause and effect of the situation. I can imagine a chaotic evil character that frees slaves by killing slavers just as easily as a chaotic good character... He just focuses on the killing part more than the freeing. The target may speak as to why you're doing something, but in the end your own actions are still more important to alignment than who you force those actions upon.
|
|
The target says a lot about why you're doing something.
I can agree with this. I think we just disagree on the cause and effect of the situation. I can imagine a chaotic evil character that frees slaves by killing slavers just as easily as a chaotic good character... He just focuses on the killing part more than the freeing. The target may speak as to why you're doing something, but in the end your own actions are still more important to alignment than who you force those actions upon.
Its certainly possible for a chaotic evil person that likes killing to join up with Andorans Band of Merry Men and use their activities as a cover for their own sadistic bloodlust a la dexter, but that cover wouldn't work at all in the first place if shooting arrows at slavers and shooting arrows at grain merchants was the same thing. Good motives for continually shooting slavers in the back with an arrow are at least plausible. Grain merchants? Not so much.
. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat.
They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar.
So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word.”
― Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Coming into this late.
In considering how some of my characters would react to the situation :
My CN cleric of Calistra would turn the helpless BBEG over to the surviving villagers for their revenge. They get to decide the punishment. Whether that be torture or freedom.
Most of my Good characters would also do this, but they'd step in and execute the prisoner if the villagers were going to torture him to death OR let him go. He needs to die, but he should die cleanly.
This is one of the few cases where I think killing a helpless prisoner is actually justified. No authorities with jurisdiction to turn him over to, he has shown himself so evil that letting him live to kill again just isn't an option.
|
|
The Sutter Box at work. ^_^Alignment in Golarion: a world where a supposedly lawful good gold dragon can run a centuries long eugenics program on his james-bond-villain-esque island in peace.
I really like that, because most of the problems with eugenics come from the problems with putting it in the wrong hands. You put it in the right claws though... Its just so lawful that its incredibly creepy.
|
|
I really like that, because most of the problems with eugenics come from the problems with putting it in the wrong hands. You put it in the right claws though... Its just so lawful that its incredibly creepy.
Aye. It is the slickest of slippery slopes. The idea that one group of people is fundamentaly better or more human than another is the reasoning used for many of humanities worst atrocities against itself in real life. I'm not saying the fantasy version has to follow the same path, but it is all too easy to see the inevitable fall here.
|
|
Aye. It is the slickest of slippery slopes. The idea that one group of people is fundamentaly better or more human than another is the reasoning used for many of humanities worst atrocities against itself in real life. I'm not saying the fantasy version has to follow the same path, but it is all too easy to see the inevitable fall here.
He seems to have recruiters all over the place. He recruits/breeds/social engineers for talent , aesthetics, and health. While I have NO idea what a dragon considers a good looking form for a human (and I don't think I want to...:) ) I doubt he's picking along racial lines .
I dislike the idea that that has to go all overt evil. I think it does what good fantasy does and raises questions about an idea with enough distance from reality to get a good look at the fundamental questions behind it. Its harder to discuss the question when the story pushes it towards eeevil.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
The target says a lot about why you're doing something.
I can agree with this. I think we just disagree on the cause and effect of the situation. I can imagine a chaotic evil character that frees slaves by killing slavers just as easily as a chaotic good character... He just focuses on the killing part more than the freeing. The target may speak as to why you're doing something, but in the end your own actions are still more important to alignment than who you force those actions upon.
Its certainly possible for a chaotic evil person that likes killing to join up with Andorans Band of Merry Men and use their activities as a cover for their own sadistic bloodlust a la dexter, but that cover wouldn't work at all in the first place if shooting arrows at slavers and shooting arrows at grain merchants was the same thing. Good motives for continually shooting slavers in the back with an arrow are at least plausible. Grain merchants? Not so much.
. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat.
They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar.
So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word.”
― Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms
Appreciate the quote, but now I am just sad again.
And as you and others have argued, context is everything.