What Alignment is this Character?

[Oncoming Storm]

I've been playing this character in a pathfinder campaign for a few months now, and it occurs to me that I have no idea where he should fall on the alignment spectrum. Any chance you guys can help me out?

the setting is based on an overworld/underworld, with the overworld composed of floating islands, traversed by airship, and the underworld being mainly aquatic, with rocky islands scattered across a planetwide sea. Elves mainly belong to a secretive 'order' with an unknown purpose, who erase the memories of those who are expelled.

Kaius Sarento is an elven magus of indeterminate age, having no memory of his life before the Gray Elves cast him out, a prominent brand marring his face. For some months, he traveled the overworld, filled with renewed optimism and youthful naivete, taking jobs as a mercenary to fund his travels. He took pride in aiding others, and went far beyond the limits of his contract in their defense.

While investigating the disappearance of numerous citizens from a city he had stopped over in, he came across a cult of the Blood God--a strange thing to find, as most priests of that deity occupied places of power within the capitol and heartland provinces. The missing citizens were already gone, slaughtered soon after capture. The cultists fought fiercely and with a strange desperation, but were ultimately defeated. In the sanctum of their temple, Kaius uncovered the object of their worship--a strange blade, which hummed with energy.

In his arrogance, thinking himself able to overcome any resistance the blade might give, he took up the sword, and so sealed his fate. For the black blade was none other than the prison of Vjallenholz himself, a terrible servant of the God of Blood. And he WILL have his due, whether Kaius wills it or no.

Essentially:

Kaius is a bladebound magus, with a CE black blade. He is (or at least, started) LG.

The blade, as best he can tell from research and consultation with various authorities, does in fact contain a demon, with enough power to potentially threaten the entire Prime Material Plane. The only way to keep it bound is to use the blade to kill sentient beings, sending their souls to the Demon.

A certain number of souls must be consumed each month, or the demon's influence will begin seeping through, causing the Bearer to frenzy-murder-stab-kill everyone in the immediate vicinity. Eventually, if not 'fed' for long enough, the demon will break free. It is implied that any attempt to dispose of the blade will end likewise, and any attempt to leave it behind results in it appearing somewhere on his person, inexplicably.

Kaius, under the rationale that it is better to keep the blade fed than risk losing control and slaughtering gods know how many people, has been trying to feed it the most evil souls he can find. However, if it came down to it, he WOULD kill just about anyone to prevent the demon from taking over and breaking free.

He's also working towards bringing down the priesthood of the blood god, in order to reduce the God's number of worshipers (and thus, the Demon's strength) while increasing his own, with the ultimate goal of letting the demon loose and destroying it personally. This works out well, as the priests of the blood god are implied to be involved in the World-Ending-Plot we are trying to investigate and foil.

Aside from the above extremism in pursuit of his goals, Kaius is generally a pretty decent guy, who is, tbh, pretty messed up by the situation he's in, and completely incapable of handling mentally (doesn't help that he has low wisdom) He does charity work constantly to try and ease his conscience, and works for free when he can.

However, he recently learned that two clerics of the Blood God has come to the town he was in, and had killed at least one person in order to test their macguffin (lenses which transmute positive energy to negative energy.) The way his actions played out, he ended up terrorizing their supplier for information (though leaving him unharmed) and attempting to do the same to one of the clerics. His attempts at nonlethal subdual failed, however, and he was forced resort to lethal methods when the cleric set off an alarm, killing the cleric with a lucky? critical hit. Still needing his information, he succeeded in capturing the other cleric, restrained him, and flew him outside the city walls (the city was at this point going into full-blown panic/lockdown mode) There, he interrogated the cleric, and on learning that the cleric had recognized Vjallenholz, and 'had values more aligned with the blade than he did (the blade tried to force him to kill itself) he killed the cleric in cold blood and disposed of the body.

so, my question is, what alignment is Kaius?
Normally I'd say chaotic something or other, but the character really isn't (wrote the party contract, has been keeping the rogue in check, honoring contracts even when circumstances change)
Similarly, what's the value of intent versus action here? He's done (and will probably continue to do) some extremely evil things, taken in a vacuum. But, those things are universally done with the intent to bring about the best end possible under the circumstances.
Whaddya think?

[hamishspence]

Sounds like the "Evil Antihero" type, as exemplified by Elric of Melnibone- at least, in BoVD descriptions.

"Destroying souls For The Greater Good" seems like it would fit with some variants of Evil character, more than Neutral ones.

[JusticeZero]

Lawful good. Who admittedly had a bad day there at the end, but that's a blip, not a trend. Probably couldn't pull off being a Paladin, but that speech that Roy got in the comic on being allowed into the LG afterlife seems to generally fit.

[hamishspence]

Binding souls (not destroying, just binding) is hinted to be "on the evil side of the street" in the OoTS-verse.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0399.html

Still- he does seem less selfish than Elric.

[Oncoming Storm]

Thanks for the replies!

Incidentally, the blade doesn't consume everyone killed-there is a ritual which has to be performed first. So there is that.

this kind of thing is exactly why I was asking-destroying souls (hell, even destroying evil people's souls) seems pretty much irredeemably evil. But then again, it IS his best option, and--as I said before--he's not handling it terribly well, either. It's not like he's just killing people and walking away whistling and shrugging it off as 'had to be done.'

[hamishspence]

A certain amount of "necessary Evil toward a Good end" can be compatible with a Neutral alignment according to Heroes of Horror at least.

[Spore]

LN to be honest. Evil enough to not be LG, but fair enough to not be LE. Lawful because he obeys the rules and regulations of his blade (and doesn't try to find a solution outside the box).

[Oncoming Storm]

should note that he has tried to find other solutions--but the problem is that the demon is powerful enough to make experimenting extremely risky, there are countermeasures to prevent him leaving it behind/dropping it off an island (it reappears on his person a short duration later) and the only people who really know anything are Blood Clerics (this is part of his motivation for going after the order) To the best of his (and my) knowledge, this is how things are. It IS possible that the demon cannot escape on it's own, feeding or no feeding--but it's not worth the risk of demon apocalypse and/or fugue-state mass murder to find out. He's considered trying to reinforce the prison, but the bindings were created with blood magic, which makes them susceptible to manipulation by the demon--and, in this setting, is completely antithetical to fusion with more conventional magics.

He's not stupid, he has a 20 INT, but the risk-reward continuum is too skewed to allow for any real experimentation.

It also complicates things the Clerics of the Blood God have pretty enormous pull with the nobility, which makes seeking out a high-level wizard/cleric problematic. He's currently regretting his decision to throw down the gauntlet to the entire Order--he could at least have tried to get information out of them first--but...such is the lot of a character with high Intelligence and low Wisdom.

If it makes any difference on an alignment scale, he has instructed his party that, if he dies and cannot feasibly be revived, they are to perform the ritual on him. Though even I'm not sure whether the ultimate motivation for that is altruistic self-sacrifice (sparing another person from having to have their soul destroyed) or self-destructive nihilism. Probably some of both.

[Clistenes]

An important bit: What do the Good deities of the setting say about what he's doing? Has he even tried to contact their priesthood and have Commune cast for him so he can learn their will? Or, if that's impossible, couldn't he contact some Celestials/Angels/Archons/Whatever?

If the Gods of Good say that he has no other choice but to do what he's doing, then it's kosher in my book, he can't be expected to fix a problem that even the gods don't know how to solve.

If the Gods of Good say "No. Just no. Stop doing that", then they should take responsability and tell him what to do with the sword.


Binding souls (not destroying, just binding) is hinted to be "on the evil side of the street" in the OoTS-verse.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0399.html

Still- he does seem less selfish than Elric.

It's funny, but Soul Bind is NOT an Evil spell, so you can cast it without alignment repercussions if you do it for a suitably Good reason (for example, preventing a soul from being harvested by devils).

On the other hand Deathwatch and Mindrape are Evil...it's kind of messed up. Stealing souls is Neutral, but checking the health of people around you is Evil.

[nedz]

LG, well assuming that you are trying to destroy the sword/demon eventually ?

[ArcturusV]

Possibly neutral evil. Here's my reasoning:

1) He took up the sword not out of some ideal of goodly duty, but in hubris.

2) He's perfectly willing, eager, to feed the demon in order to bide time. And is willing to cross the line from killing clearly evil people if need be.

3) It SOUNDS like why he's doing this isn't so much because of Good reasons (Stopping a demon rampage, etc), so much as it's about proving he's the biggest **** on the walk, and able to trounce the demon of the blade and 'win'. He's driven by a selfish, evil need to prove to himself that he's the best that's around. Instead of doing something a bit more in line with the humility of good people (Or rational behavior of neutral people), like say, questing to find some powerful celestial who perhaps can help you find a better solution to this problem. A good aligned person would probably go "Okay, I have ONE MONTH until the demon comes out... quest hard to find a grand holy being who can help me deal with this demon". A neutral person would probably go "Oh gods... anyone but me deal with this!". An Evil person looks at this situation, goes, "Pssh. I got this in the bag" and thinks they know better and will be willing to feed the evil in order to prove themselves.

[Gnome Alone]

Have you tried giving the demon sword to a bookish halfling aristocrat and his infuriatingly submissive gardener to go throw in a volcano? Good track record.

[Twilightwyrm]

The important things here seem to be as follows:

1) The Character is essentially being asked to carry out a task, guarding this blade, that is inherently morally compromising. There does not seem to be a way for anyone other than him to do so without the sword falling into the wrong hands.
2) The Greater Good calculus dictates that the result of him failing would be worse than the effects of this morally compromising task.
3) The character is taking steps to ensure that his carrying out of this task causes as little harm as possible (that is to say in crass terms, even if evil people do not deserve to have their souls devoured, better them than good people).
4) The Character feels guilt for the deeds he is essentially being forced to preform. Even if there isn't strictly a way to "make up for it", he is at least trying to tip the moral scale back in the right direction.
5) Presumably, the character is seeking a way to end these circumstances (thus minimizing their impact) and either better secure, or destroy, the demon.

All these factors being taken into play, I would say you could make an effective argument for him remaining lawful good, though I think neutral good might be a bit more accurate. You are, admittedly, walking a fine line however. If the character starts becoming desensitized to the evil deeds he must perform, or otherwise stops feeling guilty about it, then a slide into neutral, or evil depending on how bad it gets, is entirely possible. Also, just to emphasize him doing the moral, and lawful, thing, you need to keep relentlessly seeking a way to remedy the situation. You should defiantly seek out the advice of a moral authority, be these angels, gods, or simply your local good aligned archbishop. Do not accept these circumstances for any reason, because giving up leads to apathy and desensitization. Even if you need to strive right up until the day you die, you need to keep on fighting to end this morally untenable situation. Given all these things, I would say you would reasonably remain lawful good albeit a lawful good character places in a terrible situation.

[TuggyNE]

Have you tried giving the demon sword to a bookish halfling aristocrat and his infuriatingly submissive gardener to go throw in a volcano? Good track record.

Make sure you arrange for some army to provide a distraction at the crucial point, though. (What is the crucial point, you ask? You'll know when you come to it, I answer with devastating vagueness.)

[AzureKnight]

This is a hard call because of circumstances as they are. With there being an evil being inside whom needs to be ritualisticly fed souls to keep it bound and keep the world safe. It would be a goodly act to keep the world safe from the devistation of the beings release, but evil to cast any soul to keep it sated.

With the statement you made being you would off about anyone to keep the world safe sounds like an act of chaos.

So to me it sounds like the acts of a chaotic good character. In retrospec the DC comic hero batman was said to be chaotic good as well, doing whatever it takes even taking a walk on what some call evil, as lons as it was for an overall good purpose.

[123456789blaaa]

Possibly neutral evil. Here's my reasoning:

1) He took up the sword not out of some ideal of goodly duty, but in hubris.

2) He's perfectly willing, eager, to feed the demon in order to bide time. And is willing to cross the line from killing clearly evil people if need be.

3) It SOUNDS like why he's doing this isn't so much because of Good reasons (Stopping a demon rampage, etc), so much as it's about proving he's the biggest **** on the walk, and able to trounce the demon of the blade and 'win'. He's driven by a selfish, evil need to prove to himself that he's the best that's around. Instead of doing something a bit more in line with the humility of good people (Or rational behavior of neutral people), like say, questing to find some powerful celestial who perhaps can help you find a better solution to this problem. A good aligned person would probably go "Okay, I have ONE MONTH until the demon comes out... quest hard to find a grand holy being who can help me deal with this demon". A neutral person would probably go "Oh gods... anyone but me deal with this!". An Evil person looks at this situation, goes, "Pssh. I got this in the bag" and thinks they know better and will be willing to feed the evil in order to prove themselves.

I think you may be misrepresenting the character a bit. This bit:


Aside from the above extremism in pursuit of his goals, Kaius is generally a pretty decent guy, who is, tbh, pretty messed up by the situation he's in, and completely incapable of handling mentally (doesn't help that he has low wisdom) He does charity work constantly to try and ease his conscience, and works for free when he can.

Dos not make me think of a proud, arrogant jerk. He was hubristic when he picked up the sword yeah but after? And where are you getting that he's eager? To me it sounds like this is a horrible situation for him that he doesn't want to be in, but has to for the greater good (in his eyes).

[HolyCouncilMagi]

I'll throw my shoe in with the Neutral/Lawful Good camp. Quite frankly, while Book of Exalted Deeds would consider you to be a very, very evil character, any realistic interpretation of the rules combined with half a teaspoon of common sense would say that your actions aren't making you Evil. I will agree, however, with the fact that you should seek divine help, and you MUST keep trying to find SOMETHING that works till the day you die. Anyway, this makes me curious; you've mentioned spellcasting and high Int, yet you've implied you've made use of this sword on more than just random Commoners. What class combination are you?

[ArcturusV]

123456789blaaa:

That's... something I didn't really overlook. In so far as various bits of DnD Fiction, books, rules, etc, suggest... doing something very evil (Like trafficing with a demon and trying to appease it's endless hunger, becoming it's willing servant and accomplice which is pretty much the baseline definition of Evil as per PHB) but trying to 'balance the scales' with minor acts of good doesn't make you neutral, or good, but still evil. Even in other forms of fiction I can think of quite a few obviously "evil" characters who try to cover up the fact that they're evil with minor acts of good. Heck, one that leaps to mind is a speech in Doctor Who where this cannibal type tries to tell the Doctor she's reformed because she let someone go. Doctor goes into this big speech about how that's just how evil people cope with themselves, try to delude themselves that they're not evil, because sometimes they let someone go. So even the "common sense" aspect to Good and Evil points towards Evil.


He's also working towards bringing down the priesthood of the blood god, in order to reduce the God's number of worshipers (and thus, the Demon's strength) while increasing his own, with the ultimate goal of letting the demon loose and destroying it personally.

Also that suggests a deeper hubris that still comes from the "Ha, I can beat it" aspect when he first picked up the blade. He's not seeking to destroy the demon. He's seeking to do it PERSONALLY. Combined with the motivations for grabbing it originally it still hints at a "My mojo is king" motivation more than a desire to see good done.

[Oncoming Storm]

@HolyCouncilMagi: This is Pathfinder, not 3.5, so I'm a singleclassed magus (Bladebound, Hexcrafter) -basically a gish-in-a-can which can dual-wield a one-handed weapon and a spell. I don't play 3.5 much, but maybe warblade (or duskblade?) would be a decent analogue?

@ArcturusV: I'd argue that hubris and naivete are not quite the same thing. He had VERY recently (as in under 4 months) had ALL of his specific memory erased. Think of his mental state as being similar to a, say, 19 year old human. technically adult, mostly adult cognition, but the prefrontal cortex isn't quite there. He's working on it, but having a lack of experience to draw from is part of the justification for the low wisdom.

Also, I saw that Dr. Who episode, and the basis for the Doctor's speech was that doing 1 minor act of good does not signify change, or repentance, if you fail to acknowledge the fundamental flaw behind your past evil acts. Not that repentance is impossible. Keep in mind as well that the Doctor is not the best role model in that regard-he's not only murdered entire species (out of necessity) but is also ludicrously inconsistent in terms of morality, even within incarnations. In one episode, he'll refuse to allow anyone to carry a gun, in the next, he'll obliterate an (admittedly extremely evil and genocidal) smuggler with heat-seeking rockets.

Oh, he'd absolutely LOVE to get rid of the thing, then retire to a (village in need of healer/deserted island/edge of nearest cliff) but he's worried that someone else might be less responsible. The sword DOES have an ego score, and can influence the actions of it's bearer (he's taken iron will and will probably take improved iron will to avoid this happening) Someone else might not take it seriously, and trigger a massacre by refusing to feed it, or worse, take it to the Blood Clerics, who would probably either set the demon loose and/or start a crusade with it.

Actually, to give some insight into his mental state, he had a not insignificant freakout when the party wanted to go to a mostly uninhabited island for an unknown period of time. Just the thought that he MIGHT be forced to kill someone who doesn't 'deserve it' (the only sentient inhabitants we knew of was a couple of CG wood nymphs) caused him outright threaten to leave the party if they went through with it, with the implicit threat that if they forced him to go, he would sacrifice one of them before killing a nymph. (specifically, the CN wizard who proposed knocking him out pre-debarkation, and keeping him bound until the airship departed.)

He's somewhat foolish, inclined to overthink things and simultaneously miss obvious details (the interrogation plan involved tight coordination, intricate knowledge of building layout, and 3 different escape routes, but failed to account for "what if a cleric casts zone of truth on one of the co-conspirators?") He's self-assured, and confident in his skills as a magus in a clear-cut life-or-death scenario. He--at least initially--was confident in his ability to maintain the moral high ground (riiiight up until he had to actually feed someone's soul to the demon) He's suspicious of authority, because of what happened with the Grey Elves, and unfamiliar with the power structure outside of the Order. He's not arrogant--he's lacking in connections or any real reason to trust anyone with a potentially world-ending secret.

Incidentally, I am enjoying this debate, because the variety of responses really illustrates the issue. The only alignment I HAVEN'T seen suggested yet is CE.

[Oncoming Storm]

Hmmm. I guess this just serves to point out the flaws in the alignment matrix (as if they were not obvious enough)

[Epsilon Rose]

123456789blaaa:

That's... something I didn't really overlook. In so far as various bits of DnD Fiction, books, rules, etc, suggest... doing something very evil (Like trafficing with a demon and trying to appease it's endless hunger, becoming it's willing servant and accomplice which is pretty much the baseline definition of Evil as per PHB) but trying to 'balance the scales' with minor acts of good doesn't make you neutral, or good, but still evil. Even in other forms of fiction I can think of quite a few obviously "evil" characters who try to cover up the fact that they're evil with minor acts of good. Heck, one that leaps to mind is a speech in Doctor Who where this cannibal type tries to tell the Doctor she's reformed because she let someone go. Doctor goes into this big speech about how that's just how evil people cope with themselves, try to delude themselves that they're not evil, because sometimes they let someone go. So even the "common sense" aspect to Good and Evil points towards Evil.



Also that suggests a deeper hubris that still comes from the "Ha, I can beat it" aspect when he first picked up the blade. He's not seeking to destroy the demon. He's seeking to do it PERSONALLY. Combined with the motivations for grabbing it originally it still hints at a "My mojo is king" motivation more than a desire to see good done.

You seem to be deducting major points for him trying to actually deal with his situation. Out of curiosity, how would you have a LG paladin who got dropped into this situation act? Oh, and a quick stipulation, the gods are not helping, so no fobbing it off on the powers that be, and the only clerical order he knows how to contact is the cult of the blood god.

[123456789blaaa]

123456789blaaa:

That's... something I didn't really overlook. In so far as various bits of DnD Fiction, books, rules, etc, suggest... doing something very evil (Like trafficing with a demon and trying to appease it's endless hunger, becoming it's willing servant and accomplice which is pretty much the baseline definition of Evil as per PHB) but trying to 'balance the scales' with minor acts of good doesn't make you neutral, or good, but still evil. Even in other forms of fiction I can think of quite a few obviously "evil" characters who try to cover up the fact that they're evil with minor acts of good. Heck, one that leaps to mind is a speech in Doctor Who where this cannibal type tries to tell the Doctor she's reformed because she let someone go. Doctor goes into this big speech about how that's just how evil people cope with themselves, try to delude themselves that they're not evil, because sometimes they let someone go. So even the "common sense" aspect to Good and Evil points towards Evil.

I never said he wasn't Evil (that's debatable). I was disagreeing with your presentation of him as proud, arrogant, and eager.


Also that suggests a deeper hubris that still comes from the "Ha, I can beat it" aspect when he first picked up the blade. He's not seeking to destroy the demon. He's seeking to do it PERSONALLY. Combined with the motivations for grabbing it originally it still hints at a "My mojo is king" motivation more than a desire to see good done.

Okay...but do we know there's any other way? The player in the OP seems to be playing in a homebrewed world with homebrewed beings and gods. For all we know, destroying it personally might be the only way. He may not be able to go to anyone else for help. I think we need more info on the situation before making a judgment.

[Clistenes]

You seem to be deducting major points for him trying to actually deal with his situation. Out of curiosity, how would you have a LG paladin who got dropped into this situation act? Oh, and a quick stipulation, the gods are not helping, so no fobbing it off on the powers that be, and the only clerical order he knows how to contact is the cult of the blood god.

What about arcane magic? Can't he find anybody who can cast Contact Other Plane or Plane Shift or Shadow Walk? Isn't there any full caster in the group, or are they all under level 9? If they aren't able to cast any of those spells, they could seek a scroll of Plane Shift or Shadow Walk.

What about Incantations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm)? He could seek an Incantation that allows them to travel to a Higher Plane or contact a Good Outsider.

I dunno...Hunting the followers of the demon seems the lesser evil until he finds a way to obtain help from the Higher Planes, but he should do that as soon as possible.

[hamishspence]

It's funny, but Soul Bind is NOT an Evil spell, so you can cast it without alignment repercussions if you do it for a suitably Good reason (for example, preventing a soul from being harvested by devils).

It's one of a whole bunch of similar spells though- some with the Evil tag, some without.

Deathwatch was untagged in 3.0 - only gained the Evil tag in 3.5.

At the moment I'd say both Evil and Neutral are valid possibilities for the character- depending on how harsh the DM feels about "soul-destroying".

[Spore]

Hmmm. I guess this just serves to point out the flaws in the alignment matrix (as if they were not obvious enough)

Your intentions matter not your actions. This is why a Paladin can accidentally release a demonic prince from his slumber and still not fall. Not that I'd try and justify the alignment system but you have to distinguish between actions and intentions.

But it is also why you can't condense an entire field of the humanities to nine simple units.

[WesleyVos]

I would argue that he is still Lawful Good, but trending towards Neutral on both scales. Were I his DM, I would have been slowly shifting his alignment as follows:

1) Slightly towards Evil when he picked up the sword in his pride, thinking he could handle it. Pride is one of the seven deadly sins, and an action taken with pride as the motivation is an evil act.

2) Significantly towards Chaotic and Evil when he made the choice to sacrifice someone to sate the demon's bloodlust. Not enough shift to drop him out of Lawful Good, but only because his reason for doing so was to prevent a greater evil.

3) Slightly towards Chaotic and Evil every time he sacrifices another soul, unless he has specifically sought advice and aid daily from the higher planes. At this point, he's probably very close to true Neutral.

[Mnemnosyne]

Since he's looking for a better way, he's still good, and it sounds like he's also still pretty lawful, depending on your particular view of that extremely inconsistent spectrum of alignment. So, I wouldn't hesitate to qualify him as Lawful Good. Now, he couldn't be a paladin, because paladins fall if they perform any evil acts, even for the best of intentions, but he's still normal person level Lawful Good, if you ask me.

Assuming 'looking for a better way' does mean he's exhausted every option to contact good gods/celestials/etc and he's not ignoring any really good advice, I mean. It certainly sounds like it does, but I might as well be completely clear on this. It sounds to me like if he hears a hint of a better choice, he will pursue that and try to make sure it is safe, then do it, but so far no such option has presented itself even though he's been looking.

[hamishspence]

Your intentions matter not your actions. This is why a Paladin can accidentally release a demonic prince from his slumber and still not fall.

Up to a point, maybe:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20050325a

Though a paladin must always strive to bring about a just and righteous outcome, she is not omnipotent. If someone tricks her into acting in a way that harms the innocent, or if an action of hers accidentally brings about a calamity, she may rightly feel that she is at fault. But although she should by all means attempt to redress the wrong, she should not lose her paladinhood for it. Intent is not always easy to judge, but as long as a paladin's heart was in the right place and she took reasonable precautions, she cannot be blamed for a poor result.

[Oncoming Storm]

@Sporegg:
It's not so much intention vs action I'm talking about here, but intention vs. intent. His intent is VERY much to kill people and feed their souls to the demon. His intention is, by doing so, to prevent a potentially world-ending demonic apocalypse.

@Clistenes: we're currently level 5, so options for contacting other planes is limited, within the party at least. We have a NG cleric in the party, and what divination he has been able to perform suggests that we are not being tricked. Further, the research I've been able to do suggests that the sword has been around for several hundred years at least, and passed through the hands of several noted heroes during that time. None of them were able to dispose of or destroy it-which doesn't mean I won't TRY, just that the evidence suggests that it's not worth risking setting the demon free by meddling with the bindings, etc.

Also, there are other priesthoods, but on the island we're on now, I'm currently imprisoned for murdering those two Blood Clerics, and the ONLY reason I haven't been executed (authority here is corrupt as HELL) is because I hid the sword before they could find me, and the only evidence they have is that the killer was an elf and one of my companions failed to save against Zone of Truth.

*Keep in mind that Kaius justifies lying and ducking authority by the same logic that allows him to kill people, and flee from potentially TPK situation-the alternatives are potentially much, much worse.

His god is the deific embodiment of self-improvement through struggle, and is thus not a lot of help in this situation.

@Hamishspence: the DM and I worked the mechanics out together. Normally, a black blade must be identical alignment to the bearer--but that's so BORING. Anyways, he's got an interesting view of morality-devouring souls of evil people is A-OK (they're going to hell anyways, apparently) but killing a helpless prisoner has caused me to shift dramatically towards LN. Furthermore, he kept threatening me with alignment shift to LN effective immediately when I threatened that damn CN wizard. I think it's a skewed set of priorities, but w/e. I'm more interested in the general consensus that what my DM thinks.

[Red Fel]

Sorry if I'm a little late to the game here, but here's my overly simplistic view on what is clearly a complex, nuanced question of morality and the nature of good and evil.

He's evil.

My position, as I've expressed before, with regard to D&D alignments, is that, with Good, the ends do not justify the means - there are some lines good guys simply do not cross, or at least not with any regularity. With Evil, it's the reverse - the ends always justify the means, even if it means doing acts of good to cover up for a greater act of evil.

"The greater good" calculus is often a recipe for corruption and descent into evil.

This is a character who, on a regular basis, for whatever reason, kills people and feeds them to a demon-sword. That would be pretty evil in isolated instances. But on a regular basis? Regardless of your reasoning, you can't stay good after that.

At best - at very best, he is neutral. I could possibly accept that he is trying to offset his actions by fighting the evil clerics, and so forth. "I only kill bad guys" makes you slightly less evil, but it doesn't change the fact that you're killing people and feeding them to a demon-sword.

With regard to Law/Chaos, I don't actually see where he falls on that spectrum. You've described him keeping the rogue in check, and honoring contracts, and he clearly wants to be free of the sword, but I'm not clear on his personal honor code or rigidity versus his sense of personal freedom and independence. I could see him as Lawful or Neutral on the spectrum; probably not Chaotic, from what you describe.

Ultimately, I could see this character as TN, LN, NE or LE, but not Good. Absolutely not Good.

[Epsilon Rose]

What about arcane magic? Can't he find anybody who can cast Contact Other Plane or Plane Shift or Shadow Walk? Isn't there any full caster in the group, or are they all under level 9? If they aren't able to cast any of those spells, they could seek a scroll of Plane Shift or Shadow Walk.

What about Incantations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm)? He could seek an Incantation that allows them to travel to a Higher Plane or contact a Good Outsider.

I dunno...Hunting the followers of the demon seems the lesser evil until he finds a way to obtain help from the Higher Planes, but he should do that as soon as possible.


Didn't I explicitly state that one of the conditions was that you can't fob the blade off on the higher powers?

[Oncoming Storm]

Regarding chaos vs law, the reason I'm not really sure is that, while he does have a personal code, generally follows the law and encourages others to do so , and WILL honour the party contract to the absolute best of his ability to do so (he wrote it, so he sees himself as personal responsible for being a role model for intra-party honor)

On the other hand, when it comes to anything related to the blade, his honour goes right out the window. He'll try to satisfy his honour if possible, but he firmly believes that given that he's already committing the most heinous act imaginable, he won't let anything compromise the results-least of all his own conscience, as that would render everything he's sacrificed meaningless. On the other hand, his entire moral framework is based around the fact that, as long as he follows the rules for the blade & feeds it only the most evil people he can find, he's morally alright (whatever his actual alignment, the character does believe himself to be a good person.)

[ArcturusV]

You seem to be deducting major points for him trying to actually deal with his situation. Out of curiosity, how would you have a LG paladin who got dropped into this situation act? Oh, and a quick stipulation, the gods are not helping, so no fobbing it off on the powers that be, and the only clerical order he knows how to contact is the cult of the blood god.

Seems like a lot of "Oh... umm... noooo... you can't do that!" sort of stipulations that would come around when a DM gets caught unawares and wouldn't know how to handle the plot derailment.

But Paladins? Paladins I know. I've played them, others have played them a lot in my games. I don't set them up for "Autofall" scenarios and such like the temptation often seems to be. So I've seen a lot of Paladin behavior.

And I can say other than 1 Paladin I've seen (Mostly because I think the girl who played it had some broken moral compass as she seemed to fail to realize how murdering innocents in order to draw out a badguy might be an evil act... among similar episodes), that their answer to this would almost be universally the same.

They'd resist using the sword. They have a month before the demon is Released. A month is a lot of time in adventuring. And "Find a way to deal with the demon" would be priority 1. All other quests shelved. Having party clerics use Divinations to find information while they quest to build up power, resources, contacts, tracking down any rumors of something that might deal with it (Hell, find a Sphere of Annihilation for example, you'd have players who WANT to go to the Tomb of Horrors suddenly just for that reason). And eventually? If they failed the month deadline (Not likely, a month is a lot of adventure time when you're going non-stop), they'd take their own life with the blade before feeding it to others. A Paladin would make that sacrifice over feeding a demon innocent souls. Probably look at the party good aligned cleric, say "It's up to you now" and coup de grace himself with it.

That would be how a Paladin, as I've seen them except for that one character, would probably handle it.

[nedz]

But were they innocent ?
No, they were expressly listed as EVIL.
And killing EVIL is always GOOD, at least in most D&D cosmologies.

[hamishspence]

And killing EVIL is always GOOD, at least in most D&D cosmologies.

"Soul-destroying" is a step beyond "killing" though.

In any case, Evil can vary a great deal. Killing "only just evil" people may not be Good- may in fact be Murder. Eberron at least makes a big point out of clarifying this:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20041122a

In a crowd of ten commoners, odds are good that three will be evil. But that doesn't mean they are monsters or even killers -- each is just a greedy, selfish person who willingly watches others suffer. The sword is no answer here; the paladin is charged to protect these people.

[Red Fel]

But were they innocent ?
No, they were expressly listed as EVIL.
And killing EVIL is always GOOD, at least in most D&D cosmologies.

Killing an Evil Outsider is always, good, yes.

Except when the Evil Outsider has cast off her nature in the name of love to embrace the path of the paladin (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a). Or when that Outsider is the Native Outsider infant baby of an Evil Outsider and a native. Or when the killing is not merely the destruction of an evil creature, but the devouring of its soul by a demon.

Always... Isn't always "always."

[Oncoming Storm]

I think your reasoning is a little bit flawed, ArcturusV. Not arguing that the character is or is not evil, but not for the reasons you are saying.

Firstly, the gameworld is immensely spread out, and teleportation does not function on the islands at all (consequence of the magic holding them up) travel between destinations can take easily a month, with stopovers at various islands for provisions, etc.

The setting is as low magic as a setting with airships and floating islands can get. We have not encountered a caster exceeding CL 7-8 thus far, period.

Also,, give the DM some credit, he's trying to work a world-ending demon into a pre-existing campaign with a storyline of it's own. Fiat is to be expected, to a certain extent.

How does committing seppuku with the sword help anything? for a paladin, who is essentially forced into a kantian moral framework, absolutely. Similarly, allowing the sword to 'take over' and kill someone (or several someones) is more morally sound because at that point the character has no agency, and is essentially under a domination spell until it relents. That doesn't mean that it's what a conscientious character would do--it removes individual blameworthiness, sure, but it also removes any possibility of harm reduction. Similarly, killing yourself removes YOUR personal culpability, but would a truly 'Good' character just fob the burden off on someone else? (whether explicitly, a la willing it to a party member) or indirectly (next person who picks it up) That just strikes me a reckless and irresponsible, especially if you have no way of knowing the next bearer WON'T have the same moral fortitude as yourself, given that the blade IS a powerful artefact with the potential to wreak major havoc in the wrong hands.

[Epsilon Rose]

Seems like a lot of "Oh... umm... noooo... you can't do that!" sort of stipulations that would come around when a DM gets caught unawares and wouldn't know how to handle the plot derailment.

But Paladins? Paladins I know. I've played them, others have played them a lot in my games. I don't set them up for "Autofall" scenarios and such like the temptation often seems to be. So I've seen a lot of Paladin behavior.

And I can say other than 1 Paladin I've seen (Mostly because I think the girl who played it had some broken moral compass as she seemed to fail to realize how murdering innocents in order to draw out a badguy might be an evil act... among similar episodes), that their answer to this would almost be universally the same.

They'd resist using the sword. They have a month before the demon is Released. A month is a lot of time in adventuring. And "Find a way to deal with the demon" would be priority 1. All other quests shelved. Having party clerics use Divinations to find information while they quest to build up power, resources, contacts, tracking down any rumors of something that might deal with it (Hell, find a Sphere of Annihilation for example, you'd have players who WANT to go to the Tomb of Horrors suddenly just for that reason). And eventually? If they failed the month deadline (Not likely, a month is a lot of adventure time when you're going non-stop), they'd take their own life with the blade before feeding it to others. A Paladin would make that sacrifice over feeding a demon innocent souls. Probably look at the party good aligned cleric, say "It's up to you now" and coup de grace himself with it.

That would be how a Paladin, as I've seen them except for that one character, would probably handle it.

Those weren't arbitrary restrictions and that doesn't work.

I specified you couldn't simply ask the gods for help mainly because we didn't know why he hadn't already done that (turns out he isn't a high enough level yet), but also because they haven't acted yet. It could simply be that, as the container of a servant of a powerful deity, other deities simply aren't allowed to interact with it.

Simply not killing things and preparing to fight the demon doesn't work for two different reasons. The first is that the sword forces you to go berserk after half that time. At best this will severely hamper your preparations, at worst this results in you killing more people, this time with out the discretion to limit it to evil characters. Beyond that, the demon is powerful enough to destroy the prime material. There's a very good chance that a low level character won't be in a position to fight off that kind of threat in a month's time, especially if they have to deal with berserk rages and/or the dm uses a sane leveling time frame.

Tossing it into a sphere of annihilation is also explicitly not a solution because the op stated that destroying the blade just releases the dimension annihilating demon.

Feeding it your own life does less than nothing. It doesn't seal the demon. It doesn't by you a reprieve. It doesn't make things better. All it does is ensure the sword goes to someone else, and that someone else might simply hand it over to the powerful group of priests who deal with just that sort of thing (Note: these are the bad guys, even if they're highly placed in society) or might not take it as seriously/know what it is and fall under it's sway. In other words, that solution objectively makes things worse.

[Red Fel]

I think your reasoning is a little bit flawed, ArcturusV. Not arguing that the character is or is not evil, but not for the reasons you are saying.

Firstly, the gameworld is immensely spread out, and teleportation does not function on the islands at all (consequence of the magic holding them up) travel between destinations can take easily a month, with stopovers at various islands for provisions, etc.

The setting is as low magic as a setting with airships and floating islands can get. We have not encountered a caster exceeding CL 7-8 thus far, period.

Also,, give the DM some credit, he's trying to work a world-ending demon into a pre-existing campaign with a storyline of it's own. Fiat is to be expected, to a certain extent.

How does committing seppuku with the sword help anything? for a paladin, who is essentially forced into a kantian moral framework, absolutely. Similarly, allowing the sword to 'take over' and kill someone (or several someones) is more morally sound because at that point the character has no agency, and is essentially under a domination spell until it relents. That doesn't mean that it's what a conscientious character would do--it removes individual blameworthiness, sure, but it also removes any possibility of harm reduction. Similarly, killing yourself removes YOUR personal culpability, but would a truly 'Good' character just fob the burden off on someone else? (whether explicitly, a la willing it to a party member) or indirectly (next person who picks it up) That just strikes me a reckless and irresponsible, especially if you have no way of knowing the next bearer WON'T have the same moral fortitude as yourself, given that the blade IS a powerful artefact with the potential to wreak major havoc in the wrong hands.

I don't know that a truly Good character would hand the burden off to someone else. But he would do anything within his power to stop the demon without feeding it. That's the point.

In theory, he might even found a holy order whose sole purpose is to destroy the demon. Once a month, the current wielder would skewer himself upon the blade, rather than use it to take an innocent life, and then another member would become custodian. And so forth, until the demon was destroyed.

A Good character would not kill people and feed them to a demon. Not even if those people were evil. Not even to keep the demon from breaking out of its blade-prison. Not even to prevent an apocalypse. A good character would look for another way.

[Oncoming Storm]

@Red Fel: now THAT'S an argument I like. Would be difficult to find recruits for such an order, though, no? the demon demands 3 souls monthly, so even getting such an organization off the ground would be time prohibitive.

[Red Fel]

@Red Fel: now THAT'S an argument I like. Would be difficult to find recruits for such an order, though, no? the demon demands 3 souls monthly, so even getting such an organization off the ground would be time prohibitive.

Well, that's one option, and it's one the player would have to implement himself. Right now, the character is facing the same sort of dilemma Arcturus was describing with Paladins. The DM gives you a scenario where it seems you're likely to fall - you either feed people to a demon-sword (evil), or go berserk and slay them (evil), or, even if you can avoid both, a demon emerges and eats the planet (bad ending). Although the character in question isn't a Paladin, he still has to avoid the "fall" choices if he wants to remain Good. This means he has to make an option for himself, like the one I suggested above. Is it easy? Absolutely not. But nobody said being Good was easy; in fact, it's kind of the opposite, isn't it?

The character, if he wants to remain Good, will have to come up with some sort of solution. The "Sacred Order of the Keepers of the Bloody Sword" (or whatever you might call it) is one option. Another is to encase the character and/or the sword in Quintessence, sealing it away from the passage of time until a solution can be found. For an inventive player, there are always other options - you just have to come up with them. And if the DM is good, he'll work with the inventive player on producing creative alternatives.

This all assumes one thing, of course - it assumes that the character is (or wants to be) Good.

If he doesn't need to stay Good, this is a non-issue. You could strive to make him Neutral - only using the blade against the evil cultists, for example, and atoning for his actions through acts of heroism. Or you could simply embrace the fact that he's doing Evil. There are plenty of archetypes of heroes who become monsters in order to fight monsters. Despite doing good, their actions are evil, so they become Evil. (Evil can still fight Evil, you know.)

[TheDarkSaint]

It sounds that more and more, the character is starting to have to have the ends justify the means.

"First, I'll just kill really evil people. Well crap, got caught. Have my friends lie to cover up my murders when we got caught. "

This is the slow slide the blade is looking for (if I was a demon blade looking on corrupting someone..which I'm not. *sighs*) It wants the murder to happen. It wants its user to be desperate and willing to do *anything* to stop an End of the World Scenario. The more murder the user commits, the more likely he is to do more and dig himself deeper into a hole.

Your character may think of himself as a good person, but I feel he has slid into neutrality and is on his way to Neutral Evil.

The ends justify the means. By any means necessary.

[hamishspence]

Your character may think of himself as a good person, but I feel he has slid into neutrality and is on his way to Neutral Evil.

The ends justify the means. By any means necessary.

It's a common form of corruption in D&D settings. Eberron Church of the Silver Flame example:

The most common form of corruption is when zealous devotion causes a priest to set aside mercy and compassion. Such a priest may be a pillar of his community and an admirable man who has absolute dedication to the Church. But if he must sacrifice the innocent in pursuit of the greater good, he will. He will torture and kill without remorse. He will not glorify these actions, and will not torture needlessly -- but he will not shirk from using dark methods to win the battle against evil.

[Clistenes]

Didn't I explicitly state that one of the conditions was that you can't fob the blade off on the higher powers?

Well, if that's the case, if you can't seek powerful magical help, my answer is: That's a situation in which you simply can't be a paladin. His options are:

1.-Killing evil people to feed their souls to the sword. That's a voluntary, conscious evil act which means a fall from grace.

2.-Not killing people, which will make him go berserk and kill innocent people, which counts as committing evil acts under a hostile mental influence, meaning fall from grace until he atones. And he couldn't atone, because there aren't any good clerics of a high enough level around.

3.-Not killing people, and prevent himself from killing people while going berserk, having the others strand him at a desert island, for example. Which would eventually release the demon and destroy the world. He would probably die a paladin, but he would have damned the world to oblivion in order to preserve his paladinhood.

His options would be Fall, Fall, and World Destruction. This looks like the typical Autofall situation. The character could just have fallen the second he touched the sword, it would be just the same.

Now, with paladinhood removed from the table as a viable option, all the character can do is choose the Lesser Evil and hope to find a solution in the long term. His choice is like that of a man who can stop a zombie apocalyse nuking a city full of still living and healthy people...committing a "small" genocide vs allowing the extinction of the human race.

Hunting the worshippers of the demon and of the Blood God seems like the less Vile of his options, and he could maybe remain sort of Good for a time, but as murders pile up he should eventually end becoming Neutral.

Fortunately the character from the OP isn't a paladin, so he can just roleplay him as a good man pushed into a situation in which being good just isn't a posibility. So long as he only kills the evil worshippers of the demon and of the evil god, he should be able to atone somehow someday. Maybe.

[nedz]

Is it just me who is expecting the following plot-twist ?

There is no demon, there is just an intelligent evil sword with a high Bluff skill.

[Clistenes]

Is it just me who is expecting the following plot-twist ?

There is no demon, there is just an intelligent evil sword with a high Bluff skill.

That make his DM a real *******. The adventure wouldn't even be a tragic tale, it would be just a colossal practical joke. The character, in which the player has obvioulsy invested quite a lot of interest, would end being the greatest and most murderous fool ever.

[Artillery]

I would place the character as Lawful-Neutral. Being good means that you believe all life is valuable. This person being sensible can recognize that by doing lesser acts of evil it will prevent a much larger act of evil. That is pretty much the expectation for a neutral player, to keep a balance between the two.

Killing an Evil outsider is always a good act, killing an outsider always results in the utter destruction of their being because the soul and body are one for outsiders. So killing outsiders is worthless to the sword because no soul to give.

So depending on how things go the character may slide into Lawful-Evil eventually, but it would be more as a hunter of his own kind than a tyranny thing. He would become a well intentioned extremist. He isn't a bad person, he just has to do bad things to stop worse things from happening.

[123456789blaaa]

That make his DM a real *******. The adventure wouldn't even be a tragic tale, it would be just a colossal practical joke. The character, in which the player has obvioulsy invested quite a lot of interest, would end being the greatest and most murderous fool ever.

I wouldn't recommend a DM do it but...that would be pretty hilarious.

[Epsilon Rose]

Well, if that's the case, if you can't seek powerful magical help, my answer is: That's a situation in which you simply can't be a paladin. His options are:

1.-Killing evil people to feed their souls to the sword. That's a voluntary, conscious evil act which means a fall from grace.

2.-Not killing people, which will make him go berserk and kill innocent people, which counts as committing evil acts under a hostile mental influence, meaning fall from grace until he atones. And he couldn't atone, because there aren't any good clerics of a high enough level around.

3.-Not killing people, and prevent himself from killing people while going berserk, having the others strand him at a desert island, for example. Which would eventually release the demon and destroy the world. He would probably die a paladin, but he would have damned the world to oblivion in order to preserve his paladinhood.

His options would be Fall, Fall, and World Destruction. This looks like the typical Autofall situation. The character could just have fallen the second he touched the sword, it would be just the same.

Now, with paladinhood removed from the table as a viable option, all the character can do is choose the Lesser Evil and hope to find a solution in the long term. His choice is like that of a man who can stop a zombie apocalyse nuking a city full of still living and healthy people...committing a "small" genocide vs allowing the extinction of the human race.

Hunting the worshippers of the demon and of the Blood God seems like the less Vile of his options, and he could maybe remain sort of Good for a time, but as murders pile up he should eventually end becoming Neutral.

Fortunately the character from the OP isn't a paladin, so he can just roleplay him as a good man pushed into a situation in which being good just isn't a posibility. So long as he only kills the evil worshippers of the demon and of the evil god, he should be able to atone somehow someday. Maybe.

Then I think we're mostly in agreement. However, I'd like to point out the original premise of this exercise. Originally, you were decrying the character as evil for trying to deal with the problem, but you were unable to offer a standard for what good would do once "make it someone else's problem" was taken off the table.

[Angelalex242]

Here's my option, as a guy who normally plays a Paladin (and often, the Fist Of Raziel prestige class):

Let the demon out, then fight him. Kicking a demon's ass is what Paladins do for a living. There's no reason whatever to feed the blade. Even if it's a Balor in there, you're still better off valiantly trying to kill it then feeding it.

[Clistenes]

Then I think we're mostly in agreement. However, I'd like to point out the original premise of this exercise. Originally, you were decrying the character as evil for trying to deal with the problem, but you were unable to offer a standard for what good would do once "make it someone else's problem" was taken off the table.

I didn't say that the character was evil, you are mistaking me for some other poster. I told both the OP and you that the character should seek powerful angelic/divine help as soon as possible, because this doesn't seem like a problem he can manage on his own and can only end either with the destruction of the world or with his own soul's damnation.


Here's my option, as a guy who normally plays a Paladin (and often, the Fist Of Raziel prestige class):

Let the demon out, then fight him. Kicking a demon's ass is what Paladins do for a living. There's no reason whatever to feed the blade. Even if it's a Balor in there, you're still better off valiantly trying to kill it then feeding it.

The character is still level 5, and the demon is an Archfiend powerful enough to destroy the whole world, and who is the favoured servant of an evil god. It probably eats Balor for dinner.

[Oncoming Storm]

Yeah, fighting it as a lvl 5 character is not going to cut it. We here talking about 'pride' and 'hubris' earlier? that's kind of the definition of hubris right there-I gamble the world on being able to defeat a demon which has world-destroying potential, at level 5.

that is actually the basis of his ultimate plan, however. Gods in this setting have their power directly linked to their number of worshipers, and SO DO THEIR DEMONS/ANGELS/whatever. Hence his plan of destroying the Blood Cleric Order-he gains power for himself (allies, xp, items) and simultaneously reduces the demon's power. For a demon this powerful, I imagine 3 souls a month is ALREADY starvation rations, so he hopes to gather the strength to feasibly defeat the demon. It's just that he's going to need to gain FAR more levels than he can in a month, or even a year or adventuring. It's still prideful, and the morality of gambling with the world PERIOD is debateable, but it's a heck of lot less irresponsible than just saying screw it and suiciding a proto-demon of Blood (or whatever it is, exactly.)

Speaking of, what's your stance on the morality of executing Blood Clerics? If it's for both the sword (incidentally, I love the karmic justice of feeding a blood cleric to his own god) and for the end of reducing the demon's power to a mortal-can-do-something-about-this level? incidentally, the sword DID try to take control and stop me when I killed the second cleric, so I do take that as an indicator that it's the right thing to do.

[Spore]

He IS LAWFUL NEUTRAL. We have enough arguments for both evil and good to secure him a place in the ranks of the indecisive.


@Sporegg:
It's not so much intention vs action I'm talking about here, but intention vs. intent. His intent is VERY much to kill people and feed their souls to the demon. His intention is, by doing so, to prevent a potentially world-ending demonic apocalypse.

I am sorry but I am not good enough in English to grasp the difference between intent and intention.

[Angelalex242]

Ah. I thought the character was a reasonable level for the CR.

Is there ANYBODY high level around? My instincts kind wanna go mano a mano with it, world destroying demons are pretty standard fare for a video game final boss, but you generally do have to level grind to be ready for him.

[Oncoming Storm]

We-ell, I've heard of precisely ONE epic level NPC thus far (there are a few other potentials) He'd be great for taking out a demon, except, of course, for the fact that he's the Grandmaster of the Order of the Blood God.

Also videogames tend to offer you infinite lives. thus the only ultimate outcome is victory. This is not the case in DnD.

[Epsilon Rose]

I didn't say that the character was evil, you are mistaking me for some other poster. I told both the OP and you that the character should seek powerful angelic/divine help as soon as possible, because this doesn't seem like a problem he can manage on his own and can only end either with the destruction of the world or with his own soul's damnation.



The character is still level 5, and the demon is an Archfiend powerful enough to destroy the whole world, and who is the favoured servant of an evil god. It probably eats Balor for dinner.
Ah, sorry about that, you have similar avatars.


Ah. I thought the character was a reasonable level for the CR.

Is there ANYBODY high level around? My instincts kind wanna go mano a mano with it, world destroying demons are pretty standard fare for a video game final boss, but you generally do have to level grind to be ready for him.

He said they haven't run into anyone with a cl higher than 8.

[Phelix-Mu]

Alright, just a few things that I think might help clarify the situation:

1.) How does the character know the requirements of the sword? How was the "3 souls a month" diet established? And the berserk mechanic? What has been used as proof that this all is the case? This is crucial; anyone with even a vague pretense of being good has to be clear on the motivation for doing questionable stuff.

2.) How precise are the records of previous owners? If this pattern has continued from owner to owner for hundreds of years, it's rather suspicious that sheer bad luck never had the demon fed less than that often (especially given the unusual geography of the world), or having a previous owner suicide or otherwise try to destroy the blade (by tying weights to my ankles and jumping into the sea, by diving into Mt.Doom, by feeding it to the tarrasque, by flying my airship into the sun/cyclone/lightning storm...all of which reportedly result in the demon getting out).

Plus, how did the previous owners learn about the sword's feeding habits? I'm still seeing a pretty disturbing likelihood that at least some of the information is unreliable.

Some simple math tells us that, if we take it to be 200 as the minimum for "hundreds" and a minimum of 36 souls a year, that's at least 7200 souls. Likely many more, as owners that descended into evil or madness would just start randomly feeding it, and any of the Blood cult would feed it as often as possible. It seems extremely unlikely that the blade has been around so long without the demon getting out (maybe the demon doesn't want out).

Now, here's my verdict:

He's LE. Maybe, LN. More blood for the Blood God, and the Blood God is happy (even if it's the Blood God's servants...most Blood God's are oblivious like that).

But, as the whole conceit of the plot seems to have practically forced evil or bad-end (suiciding can't really be a solution in a game that is supposed to be fun), that really doesn't mean much. Evil people can accept that good may be part of being evil. Good people can not accept that evil is part of being good. Good is pretty simple, and rigorous, in that respect.

Now, the happy news is that it's also in the nature of good for redemption to always be possible. As an elf, should the character survive this whole demon-world end plot thingummy, the character will have a long, and difficult road to repentance. Good luck.

However, and I must repeat myself for emphasis, there is a strong element of fishy going on here, in my mind. As a DM, I would never force a character into a lose-lose situation, as in "you must be evil to save the world." Are you absolutely sure of the facts as you've stated them? There is huge possibility here for something to be amiss; given the character's plan, evil looks like it wins, even if the Blood God loses. A good character is corrupted, even if the demon is slain.

Not all DMs game that way, and maybe this specific character isn't wise enough to ask the right questions at the right time. I generally like how the OP is playing it, though; the character sounds very dynamic and engaging.

As for the good option: I did like the cult dedicated to feeding itself to the blade while searching for a way to destroy the demon. But the startup time for such an endeavor makes it impractical. I really don't know what I would do if this were my character, but I would rage hard against going with the demon's plan ("FEED ME"). I find it hard to accept that it's all as clear cut as the lose-lose situation suggests.

Just my two cents, though.

[Oncoming Storm]

His information:
1. A detailed vision on coming into contact with the blade, showing its creation and the lives of past bearers, viewed from the blade's perspective, and generally fragmentary.
2. A search of the lore he has come into contact with (libraries, etc.) have revealed that this sword shows up in numerous references over the past several hundred years. At least one of the references matches the vision, which speaks to its veracity.
3. the blade DOES visit anyone touching the blade with a brief vision of a horrible, demonic maw. Souls dedicated to the blade are harder to res (not impossible, so maybe 'soul destruction' is the incorrect term. Which does leave the possibility of freeing them by destroying the demon
4. The two Blood Clerics he met referred to him as 'the Bearer' and showed deference to him (or possibly the blade)
5. He has tested the blade, once, nearly to the limit of his ability to contain it. So he knows that the blood frenzy is an actual thing.
6. Why the demon hasn't escaped over hundreds of years? I really don't know. The blade was created by SOMEONE, maybe there's a failsafe to ensure the sword always finds a new bearer? I know it can reappear randomly on my person, so it's not TOO far-fetched to think it has some enchantment "If sword approaches 90% critical mass, teleport to nearest creature with adventuring levels." Does need more research.
7. Above all, Kaius experienced the vision, it felt real, and everything he's seen points towards what he's seen being true. He will look for another way, but he implicitly believes what he's seen. Again, naivete maybe? failing to question fundamental nature of things? His training as a magus would have been rigorous, and the Gray Elves are implied to be HIGHLY regimented, so I've been playing him as someone who, while highly creative and intelligent within a set of premises, capable of seeing connections few others can, is not good at all at thinking outside the box.

The character concept was my idea, and the DM has been VERY good at accommodating it. So it is not as though I've been FORCED into this situation a player, and I'm really enjoying playing someone as psychologically complex as Kaius.

OOC, I fully expect him to meet an unpleasant end at some point. His goals and mindset have already led him to recklessly declare war on the Order of Blood God, so I imagine that'll catch up with him sooner or later. Of course, then there's a soul-eating demon sword for the rest of the party to deal with.

[Angelalex242]

I think a truly good character would jump into a volcano with the thing, since he can't 'cast it back into the fire in which it was made', he'll just have to go in with it. Item saving throws for total immersion in lava are pretty steep.

(and if that doesn't work, the demon destroys the universe, and the GM has to come up with a new campaign. Screw you, GM.)

[Mnemnosyne]

I think a truly good character would jump into a volcano with the thing, since he can't 'cast it back into the fire in which it was made', he'll just have to go in with it. Item saving throws for total immersion in lava are pretty steep.

(and if that doesn't work, the demon destroys the universe, and the GM has to come up with a new campaign. Screw you, GM.)
Unless the character has some reason to think that will work - and so far, Oncoming Storm's description tells us the character has had no hints that would be at all a beneficial outcome - then not only would I very much expect a bad end to happen, I would consider the character very much evil for intentionally triggering that bad end, because he had absolutely no reason to believe that his information was inaccurate.

When all the evidence available says X will result in Y, yet a person doesn't take that result seriously, without any actual reason to back it up other than 'I don't like it if X results in Y' then they are A: insane, and B: maliciously indifferent to the consequences of their actions.

[Angelalex242]

There is a reason to believe it'd work...

Mostly, the Cult of the Blood God never tried that last time they had the sword. Of course they'd want to free their master by the most expedient means possible, and they don't have any qualms about sacrificing followers for that purpose.

So if throwing yourself into a volcano with the sword would free him, they'd have done it already.

Thus, it must do something other then what the Cult has in mind.

[Epsilon Rose]

Mostly, the Cult of the Blood God never tried that last time they had the sword. Of course they'd want to free their master by the most expedient means possible, and they don't have any qualms about sacrificing followers for that purpose.


That's actually a pretty big assumption. There's no indication that this is an apocalyptic cult, meaning they might simply be interested in garnering power from their 'masters' but have no desire to actually loose them on the world. There's also the possibility that the item is relatively new; perhaps it is not actually a prison but a transport and that particular type of form was the only way to smuggle such a powerful creature onto the prime without the direct an immediate reprisal of every other divine faction.

The fact that the disappearances were a recent occurrence and that the cultist were terrified could support either of those scenarios. That said, we have pretty good evidence that they weren't trying to free it: we already have a confirmed way to free the demon, if that was their goal they'd give it to some poor schmuck and lock him in solitary.

[Phelix-Mu]

His information:
1. A detailed vision on coming into contact with the blade, showing its creation and the lives of past bearers, viewed from the blade's perspective, and generally fragmentary.
2. A search of the lore he has come into contact with (libraries, etc.) have revealed that this sword shows up in numerous references over the past several hundred years. At least one of the references matches the vision, which speaks to its veracity.
3. the blade DOES visit anyone touching the blade with a brief vision of a horrible, demonic maw. Souls dedicated to the blade are harder to res (not impossible, so maybe 'soul destruction' is the incorrect term. Which does leave the possibility of freeing them by destroying the demon
4. The two Blood Clerics he met referred to him as 'the Bearer' and showed deference to him (or possibly the blade)
5. He has tested the blade, once, nearly to the limit of his ability to contain it. So he knows that the blood frenzy is an actual thing.
6. Why the demon hasn't escaped over hundreds of years? I really don't know. The blade was created by SOMEONE, maybe there's a failsafe to ensure the sword always finds a new bearer? I know it can reappear randomly on my person, so it's not TOO far-fetched to think it has some enchantment "If sword approaches 90% critical mass, teleport to nearest creature with adventuring levels." Does need more research.
7. Above all, Kaius experienced the vision, it felt real, and everything he's seen points towards what he's seen being true. He will look for another way, but he implicitly believes what he's seen. Again, naivete maybe? failing to question fundamental nature of things? His training as a magus would have been rigorous, and the Gray Elves are implied to be HIGHLY regimented, so I've been playing him as someone who, while highly creative and intelligent within a set of premises, capable of seeing connections few others can, is not good at all at thinking outside the box.

The character concept was my idea, and the DM has been VERY good at accommodating it. So it is not as though I've been FORCED into this situation a player, and I'm really enjoying playing someone as psychologically complex as Kaius.

OOC, I fully expect him to meet an unpleasant end at some point. His goals and mindset have already led him to recklessly declare war on the Order of Blood God, so I imagine that'll catch up with him sooner or later. Of course, then there's a soul-eating demon sword for the rest of the party to deal with.

I'd really be terribly suspicious of most of what is going on. Demons lie. It's part of their schtick. I know you want to play your character somewhat naive, which is cool. But somewhere along the way, as his sanity starts to get ground down by constantly rolling over at night and thinking how long he has until he needs a new person body with a soul to feed to the demon, he's likely ask the big "WHY?" While smart, but foolish people can be foolish, they shouldn't be stupid; if he happens across insufficient proof or what seems like massive gaps in the evidence, he should notice something.

But that's pretty much all down to your role playing. If you are intending to have him more focused on doing ANYTHING to prevent the demon escaping, then the evil alignment just fits more and more. The less you consider the consequences and aim for the end product, the more that sounds like textbook evil. As I said before, he's sounding LE, possibly LN, with the rule he is upholding being a responsibility to protect the "greater good," making him nominally more lawful than neutral on the law-chaos axis (the rule is more important than his own feelings or preferences, an example of law if ever there was one).

[claricorp]

Hey its the DM of this campaign here, my player here pointed me to this thread. Id be willing to answer a few questions about the campaign, but only stuff that the characters should explicitly know.

A few things.

About casters. The party has encountered a cleric who has used raise dead on a once slain member of the party. The party has also come across a merchant vessel selling all sorts of relatively powerful magical equipment for high prices. The party has encountered someone(NPC) who has acquired a potion of stone to flesh, which is so far the highest level spell the party has encountered thus far. There is also a large metropolis at the "center" of my world which is known to have powerful magic users, on the scattered islands surrounding the metropolis there are not many powerful magic users.

About deities. The deities in my campaign are relatively few that are central to the world, however characters are encouraged to create their own minor deities if they wish to worship them. Among the primary deities are the 6 elemental deities, one of which is the god of blood. The deities are all neutral, with two being true neutral and the others filling the remaining four neutral alignments. Coles notes of these deities is below.
NG: Ember, deity embodies health, community and philanthropy.
LN: Iron, deity embodies industry, civilization and technology.
CN: Change, deity embodies evolution, nature and freedom.
NE: Blood, deity embodies ambition, legacy and magic.
N: Horizon, deity embodies growth, farsightedness and mind.
N: Sand, deity embodies balance, destruction and beauty.

Kaius often meditates to horizon during his "off" time.

The relationships between these gods can be difficult to gauge, even for the more devout. The elemental deities of opposed alignments can act as often together as they are in conflict.

The other gods I have made are the "old" gods of the bird folk who seem to be the original inhabitants of the islands. These gods are nameless and typically referred to by title. Most of them are gods of the sky: clouds, sun, stars, moon, darkness etc..
The deities of this pantheon are much more often at odds with each other and most compete for each other openly for followers.

The remaining deities are mainly local deities whose power ebbs and flows with the number of their followers.

[Serpentine]

Without reading anything except the first post (so it is entirely likely that I have missed something crucially important), I would say that this is a LG character that has started slipping steadily towards CE. If I were playing this character, with my alignment table, I would have it currently on the very edge of Lawful Good, about to slip into Neutral Good or (in my opinion, more likely) Lawful Neutral.

Remember: one deed does not instantly change one's alignment; intent counts for a lot (but not all); how one feels about one's deeds and situations and how one responds are also important (i.e. if he just shrugged and went "the blood sword gets what the blood sword needs" he would very quickly slip from LG; his anguish over it means a lot - the question is, how long will it be before it stops being a big deal, or even starts being fun?); and alignments are more about averages overall than specifics.

[Haarkla]

LG, well assuming that you are trying to destroy the sword/demon eventually ?
I agree Lawful Good.

He is trying to make the best of a very bad situation.