A very minor alignment question

[Dr TPK]

This question is important, because it might make a difference whether the PCs in my campaign gain a very powerful magical item or not.

As mentioned before in other threads, there's a major war going on in my campaign. One of the PCs, a mere lieutenant, has been a real powerhouse in the war; a truly significant factor with his spells.

It has been formally agreed that there will be a share of loot when the war is over, and the idea is to divide the magical items according to the rank. Lieutenants would get much less than the captains and other commissioned officers of a higher rank.

The commander of the forces is a noble woman who takes no part in the actual fighting. She is, however, impressed by the lieutenant's capabilities, and wants her to receive a bonus, which not been agreed before. The bonus would be the most powerful magical item found in the course of war. The general and the acting commander of the army is a paladin of Pelor. He would agree to this, of course, but warn the lieutenant about losing his honour if he's to accept a "trinket" as a bonus, which was not in the contract.

The the noble woman is Lawful Neutral.
The paladin is obviously Lawful Good.
Would they be acting against their alignments if they did as I have described?

[Sam K]

Maybe!

Lawful people can subscribe to different laws and traditions. The paladin could be following a tradition that dictates that honor and sacrifice are their own rewards, and that by accepting material rewards, you lose the spiritual growth that comes with sacrifice. Cautioning against accepting a trinket is in character for that tradition.

The noble could be respecting a tradition of meritocracy, where rewards and power (possibly even noble titles) are granted to those who distinguish themselves in service of the cause/nation/whatever. Giving extra rewards to someone who has gone above and beyond in service is in character for that tradition.

[Toilet Cobra]

The general and the acting commander of the army is a paladin of Pelor. He would agree to this, of course, but warn the lieutenant about losing his honour if he's to accept a "trinket" as a bonus, which was not in the contract.

So, is the paladin trying to say that the honorable thing to do is to refuse any reward not already agreed upon? I'm having a hard time understanding why he doesn't like his best soldier getting a bonus.

Am I right in assuming that, as the highest ranking person in the army, this item would normally be allotted to the noblewoman? If so I think the general should mind his own business, unless he wants the item for himself very badly and is scheming to get it. If it was intended to go to the general in the first place, then he might have a legitimate complaint, but even so I think a paladin would defer to his commander as a matter of course, or else seek some sort of arbitration.

Whether he or not the general thought it was dishonorable, he'd probably obey the judgment of his superiors. I personally don't think the paladin would care about a soldier accepting an additional reward for exceptional service, since everybody is getting magic items as spoils of war. Even if that means some officer down the line gets no spoils, that particular officer was demonstrably less important to the war effort than your player.

Honor is a murky concept at times, but I don't think there's anything dishonorable about accepting a reward from your commander that you didn't even ask for.

[OldTrees1]

No their alignment would not be out of character for their actions. (Remember personality is prior to alignment)



That is quite an interesting situation even if it is not very risky.

The Lieutenant has made a greater contribution than is expected for their rank. A meritocratic view would consider that something worth rewarding.

The Commander is impressed with the Lieutenant and in a position to give out bonuses. Whether the bonus is reasonably sized or not and whether the Commander knows it is/is not reasonably sized is unknown to us but would be good questions for the Lieutenant to find the answers to.

The General warns the Lieutenant that the bonus is unreasonably sized (implication that it is too large). Whether or not the General is honest or not is unknown to us but we can assume that the General is sincere in his warning since he is a Paladin (unless the Paladin code does not discourage dishonesty at your table). Whether the General is correct or not is also unknown to us. So finding out whether the bonus is unreasonably sized would be a good question for the Lieutenant to find the answer to.

Sidenote: Is the bonus taken out of the other soldier's rewards? I am going to assume it is but I could also see the Commander giving a bonus out of other sources(like the government's purse or even her own purse for instance).




Given my assumptions about the unknowns, if I were the Lieutenant I would adopt the following position:
1) I would sincerely thank the Commander for her gratitude (is gratitude the right word?) but I would be unwilling to enrich myself at the expense of my fellows in arms and I would explain my unwillingness as such.
2) If the Commander countered with offering a bonus that would not be taken from my peers, then I would politely request guidance from the wise General as to what a reasonable amount would be. For I am suspicious that the Commander thinks too highly of my contributions.
3) If a reasonable bonus is offered and would not be taken from my peers, then I would accept the bonus expressing my gratitude while remaining humble. Then I would keep the bonus to myself in case sharing it would offend the Commander, but I would use some of my normal share celebrating with my close peers (mostly the party) for good fortune should be contagious.

[Crake]

Wouldn't a promotion solve the issue? In fact, over the course of this war, if the leuitenant has been doing such a good job, why has he not been promoted yet? If it's because you wanted the players to play an active part in the ground warfare, he and his team could always be promoted to a special ops, or elite group of some kind?

[HammeredWharf]

He would agree to this, of course, but warn the lieutenant about losing his honour if he's to accept a "trinket" as a bonus, which was not in the contract.

I'm a bit confused by your choice of words. Why a "trinket"? Why in quotation marks? "The most powerful magical item found in the course of war" doesn't sound like a trinket. Does the paladin think this item is vain?

The question is hard to answer, but the one thing I'd keep in mind is that alignments aren't straightjackets. If something a character does doesn't clearly contradict her alignment, just go with it. Personalities are more important.

[Dr TPK]

I'm a bit confused by your choice of words. Why a "trinket"? Why in quotation marks? "The most powerful magical item found in the course of war" doesn't sound like a trinket. Does the paladin think this item is vain?

The question is hard to answer, but the one thing I'd keep in mind is that alignments aren't straightjackets. If something a character does doesn't clearly contradict her alignment, just go with it. Personalities are more important.

Compared to honor, all items are trinkets and vanitas vanitum, omnia vanitas. Read between the lines, my friend ;-)

[Dr TPK]

Wouldn't a promotion solve the issue? In fact, over the course of this war, if the leuitenant has been doing such a good job, why has he not been promoted yet? If it's because you wanted the players to play an active part in the ground warfare, he and his team could always be promoted to a special ops, or elite group of some kind?

There are no available positions in higher ranks. The PCs know all the higher ranking commanders by name, so it's difficult just to make them disappear. Also the lieutenant is virtually unknown and very fresh recruit.

[Sewercop]

This question is important, because it might make a difference whether the PCs in my campaign gain a very powerful magical item or not.

As mentioned before in other threads, there's a major war going on in my campaign. One of the PCs, a mere lieutenant, has been a real powerhouse in the war; a truly significant factor with his spells.

It has been formally agreed that there will be a share of loot when the war is over, and the idea is to divide the magical items according to the rank. Lieutenants would get much less than the captains and other commissioned officers of a higher rank.

The commander of the forces is a noble woman who takes no part in the actual fighting. She is, however, impressed by the lieutenant's capabilities, and wants her to receive a bonus, which not been agreed before. The bonus would be the most powerful magical item found in the course of war. The general and the acting commander of the army is a paladin of Pelor. He would agree to this, of course, but warn the lieutenant about losing his honour if he's to accept a "trinket" as a bonus, which was not in the contract.

The the noble woman is Lawful Neutral.
The paladin is obviously Lawful Good.
Would they be acting against their alignments if they did as I have described?

One important thing you have forgotten... What is the alignment of the liuetenant recieving the bonus?

And anorher important thing.. Is the General Paladin a player or npc? Depending on my alignment id say something like this in public, in front of them, the army, etc. I like playing Lawful Evil myself :D

Loyalty is important, but loyalty costs. Thats why you have bonuses to those that excel. Thats why you have promotions.
The noble is the commander, if she decides to give me more because I have done more then what is expected of me.
To honor my deeds.
Who are you to say my honor are less General? Would you not accept a gift?
Will you turn down something that could change the tide of a just war? Will you endanger the lives of innocents?

My honor is intact General, My loyalty firm. That you out of personal beliefs choose to endanger innocents in the future , that you choose
to threaten my honor, belittle my character when I have done nothing but fight with my life for you. Do you think I will accept something
that will have a better use somewhere else? I am my Commanders trusted spellslinger on the battlefield, I changed the tide of war with my fellow soldiers.
Those I had the command over will get their benefit, their share, my men, my women. My soldiers will not be accused of having no honor.

Because that is what you are saying. My actions reflect on my soldiers, as theirs reflect on me. Have they not deserved to be honored?
Have they not won the war for you? Are you not basking in the glory of others General?

I will accept the gift on behalf of my troops, my soldiers, my comrades with my head held high. I am proud of what they have done.
I could not have done it without them. This is a symbol of who we are and what we stand for. First of many standards for our troop.

If you want to take that away from us, I will accept as the humble servant I am.
But don`t you ever threaten the honor of me or mine again.
We are yours to command but our honor you can not take.

[HammeredWharf]

Compared to honor, all items are trinkets and vanitas vanitum, omnia vanitas. Read between the lines, my friend ;-)

Being obsessed with honor to that degree would be a bit weird for a paladin of Pelor. Paladins are generally forces of good, with law being a secondary objective. Pelor is even more slanted towards being a force of pure good. Being a NG deity, he is as unlawful as a paladin's deity can be.

Still, if that's the general's character, go for it. Just keep in mind that this is most likely not an opinion most paladins of Pelor share.

[Kriton]

The commander of the forces is a noble woman who takes no part in the actual fighting. She is, however, impressed by the lieutenant's capabilities, and wants her to receive a bonus, which not been agreed before. The bonus would be the most powerful magical item found in the course of war. The general and the acting commander of the army is a paladin of Pelor. He would agree to this, of course, but warn the lieutenant about losing his honour if he's to accept a "trinket" as a bonus, which was not in the contract.

The the noble woman is Lawful Neutral.
The paladin is obviously Lawful Good.
Would they be acting against their alignments if they did as I have described?

Here is how I see this:

Honor in the context of militarism, is something that was used mainly when the warrior class of a society felt it was becoming irrelevant for some reason or an other, and I'm guessing that since your campaign involves an active army it would(or should according to the way I think) not be something frequently used to justify their reasoning.

Also, I think that it doesn't take being non-lawful to come to the conclusion, that if you dangle a reward before someone for services "beyond the call of duty" and then take it away by means of social pressure, the next time you will call for their services they will make sure give you exactly the quality of service you are paying for and not a copper piece more. And that's an inefficient way to employ people, especially when your head is literally on the line(being a medieval general and all).

[Trasilor]

There are no available positions in higher ranks. The PCs know all the higher ranking commanders by name, so it's difficult just to make them disappear. Also the lieutenant is virtually unknown and very fresh recruit.

Military is not like a business - there is no set number of commanders/generals/etc. If a person distinguishes themselves on the battlefield, they may gain rank. As they gain rank, they then would lead groups of subordinates. As the army recruits, more an more people are used to 'fill the ranks'. This is how the army grows :smallamused:

Now, regarding your original question:

No change in alignment. One action does not constitute a shift.

However, I do find it odd the Noblewomen doesn't already know about the dishonor and 'trinkets'. Assuming everyone is from the same culture, she would know not only the importance of honor to the soldiers, but also what constitutes a dishonorable action (receiving the 'trinket'). And, even if she was unfamiliar with these nuances within the army - as a noblewoman who is serving as the commander of the forces - she would have advisers who would know of such details.

I only bring this up because she is the one who is putting a subordinate in a compromising position: lose honor by taking the item, disgrace the noblewoman by refusing. As a person in authority she would know better and make it so that the lieutenant can be rewarded for her actions without facing dishonor.

[Crake]

There are no available positions in higher ranks. The PCs know all the higher ranking commanders by name, so it's difficult just to make them disappear. Also the lieutenant is virtually unknown and very fresh recruit.

Honorary positions, or hell, entirely new positions, can be made to accomodate. I suppose it's hard to help exactly without knowing all the details, but there's no reason a new position couldn't be made available, especially for something like an elite squad, which the player characters could all nicely fill?

[Elkad]

A Medal and a bonus for superior performance/bravery/whatever shouldn't be an issue.

Getting the "MVP" trophy doesn't make you a slave to your new "trinket".

And in a shares system, there should be some extra shares to be distributed as awards anyway.


Regarding the promotion, that's why Warrant Officers exist. Give someone a pay bump, without moving them up in the chain of command.

[Segev]

The Paladin is being a bit of a sourpuss, but he could conceivably be that way and still be LG. He may just view mercenaries in general as bad seeds, and think that if they accept things outside the contract, they're just showing their true greedy natures. He may think it's excessive. Or he may just really think that you never, ever accept anything more or less than your contract says.

Though that latter makes me wonder if he'd view accepting a gift from anybody for any reason was bad.

The paladin general isn't refusing to cooperate. He just is saying, "I will not think you are honorable if you take this." As long as he doesn't go all Knight Templar Inquisitor on the guy afterwards, it's just a strain on whatever relationship they might have. It could change again in the future if the Paladin sees the guy behaving with what he considers honor other than the willingness to accept greater rewards than originally agreed upon.

It's not like the guy's doing anything actively illegal. He's just acting with less of the paladin's sense of honor than the paladin thinks people should.

Meanwhile, the noblewoman has no reason to see a problem with this at all. She probably thinks the paladin's being a bit stuffy, and would chide him if she saw him shooting the lieutenant dirty looks.

[jedipotter]

The the noble woman is Lawful Neutral.
The paladin is obviously Lawful Good.
Would they be acting against their alignments if they did as I have described?

A bonus is a bonus. It's not part of a contract as it's a bonus. And in this case, it is also a gift...a bonus gift.

And it's not unhonnorable to turn down a bonus gift.