PDA

View Full Version : Some Thoughts on Good and Evil



AKA_Bait
2007-07-09, 10:57 AM
Recently in a 3.5 game I'm playing in there have been some character conflicts about what exactly it means to behave according to particular alignments. Now, I'm not looking to start a thread bashing the alignment system here rather just to get some general opinions on what the alignment of the following actions would generally be. Anything from exalted (boed worthy) to vile (bovd worthy) is ok. Reasons would be nice too.

Here goes:

Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.

Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).

Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.

Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.

Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.

Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).

Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.

Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.

So, thoughts?

Tengu
2007-07-09, 11:09 AM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.

You haven't stated in clearly. As I read it, we give the werewolves an option to leave, they refuse, so we kill them? Not good, but not evil either.



Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).

Evil.



Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.

Neutral.



Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.

Neutral. Good if the reason for it was to get rid of the dragon, not to get loot.



Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.

Good, though probably not Paladin-style lawful.



Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).

Evil.



Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.

Neutral uncaring, probably evil. I don't know how possible is to rest when screams keep waking you up.



Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.

Seems like a plan to get rid of the vampires. Probably good.

Citizen Joe
2007-07-09, 11:32 AM
Killing things is a horrible way of figuring out the balance of good/evil. The governing question is WHY did someone do what they do.

Killing orcs to see them in agony -> evil
Killing orcs because you believe them to be irredeemably evil and a threat to your home -> good
Killing orcs because they opposed you -> neutral

Inyssius Tor
2007-07-09, 11:35 AM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.
Insufficient information given.

Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party). Insufficient information given. What were these orcs doing before you held them? If they were raiding an innocent town: sort of good (if they were doing something worse, it becomes more firmly good, but never above a certain threshold).


Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.Good.


Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.Good.


Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom. Probably good, under the assumption that I know that she has been evildoing.


Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).Evil, getting more reprehensible with the diabolicality of the torture.


Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard. It depends on your ability to fight vampires in your spell-less state.

Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires. It depends on how futile such an act might be. Good, unless you're clearly just throwing your life away.

AKA_Bait
2007-07-09, 11:38 AM
You haven't stated in clearly. As I read it, we give the werewolves an option to leave, they refuse, so we kill them? Not good, but not evil either.

Ok, just to clarify. The werewolves lair in the same mountain as the Green Dragon mentioned below. The party storms the place. The werewolves are offered a chance to leave and they refuse. (They also attack the party first but I wanted to leave that issue out.)

AKA_Bait
2007-07-09, 11:42 AM
Insufficient information given. What were these orcs doing before you held them? If they were raiding an innocent town: sort of good (if they were doing something worse, it becomes more firmly good, but never above a certain threshold).

More clarification. The orcs were raiding an innocent town under the direction of one of the BBEGs (who books as soon as the PCs arrive just leaving the Orcs as a threat). They are held before any of them can attack any of the PCs.

Pronounceable
2007-07-09, 11:48 AM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.

I'm not sure, could be anything.

Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).

CE.

Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.

CN, on account of deserting being punishable by death.

Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.

TN. Loot=bad, travelers=good.

Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.

Depends on how they did it. Probably CN.

Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).

LE. Eye for an eye.

Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.

NE if they could help, TN if they couldn't.

Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.

NG.

Ulzgoroth
2007-07-09, 11:51 AM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.
Any. Pups are irrelevant (though not what you do with them after), but just busting in on someone at random and telling them to get out of their home or die is evil, even if they are werewolves. On the other hand, you might have a Good reason.

Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).
Evil. Not because of the alignment check, but because of no effort to eliminate the threat non-lethally, when the ability probably existed.

Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.
Good, under logical assumption that just letting them go was unacceptable.

Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.
Good to neutral, unless a viable negotiated resolution was available. You can't really get to evil in exterminating a public menace without undue viciousness or unneeded force, but goodness depends on motive.

Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.
Same as the dragon, or the werewolves really.

Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).
Probably evil, though I would consider the shady end of neutral possible. Not if retribution is the actual point though.

Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.
Neutral to evil depending on whether you have a viable way to intervene.

Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.
Good, but extraordinarily stupid if you're the arcane caster of the prior example, and likely if you aren't.

Saph
2007-07-09, 12:19 PM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.

Added: Ok, just to clarify. The werewolves lair in the same mountain as the Green Dragon mentioned below. The party storms the place. The werewolves are offered a chance to leave and they refuse. (They also attack the party first but I wanted to leave that issue out.)

Attacking the party is kind of important . . .

That aside, it depends on why the party's attacking them. Probably neutral.


Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).

More clarification. The orcs were raiding an innocent town under the direction of one of the BBEGs (who books as soon as the PCs arrive just leaving the Orcs as a threat). They are held before any of them can attack any of the PCs.

Arguable. You could say it's evil, because you're not giving them a chance to surrender/flee. You could say it's good, because if they surrender they'll just end up doing the same thing again and you're protecting the innocent town in the long run. I'd split the difference and say neutral.


Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.

Could be good, could be neutral. Depends on whether you're doing it out of unwillingness to kill or just pragmatism.


Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.

Depends on why you're killing the dragon. Is it to protect the travellers? If so, good.


Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.

Depends on why you're killing her. If it's because she's doing evil things, good. If you just want to rob her, evil.


Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).

Evil.


Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.

Depends on whether you could beat the vampires without your spells.


Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.

Good, unless doing so would be suicidal.


So, thoughts?

You might notice that the word 'depends' comes up a lot in my answers. The reason is that you're not telling us the important stuff. You're only giving the resolution (party kills monster X) without the ethical aspects (emotions, motivations, circumstances, mission, presence of civilians), so there's no way to say for sure without making assumptions.

Killing can be good, neutral, or evil - it depends on the circumstances and especially on the motivation. Is the party killing these enemies because they're preying on innocents, and need to be stopped? If so, that's good. Are they doing it in self-defence and for a reward? If so, that's neutral. Are they just killing them for the loot/entertainment and not caring about anything else? If so, that's evil.

- Saph

DeathQuaker
2007-07-09, 12:32 PM
Everyone's already answered these pretty well, and covered what I'd say about most of them.

I just wanted to point out there's a difference between "character alignment" and a single good/evil/neutral/lawful/chaotic act.

If a good-aligned character sees that vampires are killing people, but has no means of destroying the vampire until she can get her spells, then her most reasonable action is to rest to get the spells. You can argue that letting the vampires kill in the meantime is an "evil" thing to do and that the character should try to stop them--but if the character is the only one who can kill the vampire, then just getting herself killed before she can prepare the spells she needs is an act of stupidity, let alone immorality (because more people will die if she doesn't prepare that spell).

Sometimes good people are forced into a corner and have to do something "evil" or at least "less than good" to get out of it. Sometimes evil people have a moment of conscience or clarity and do something good, but may return to their dark ways before they can really be redeemed. As long as their overall actions remain consistent, their alignment isn't going to change.

The reason I point this out is because I feel that to an extent, discussions like this just needlessly overcomplicate what already are overcomplicated alignment discussions. No offense to the OP--I think the philosophical aspects of this are really cool to consider and read. But I do wonder... do they help or hinder good roleplaying and the general use of the alignment system in D&D?

Jayabalard
2007-07-09, 03:18 PM
Ok, just to clarify. The werewolves lair in the same mountain as the Green Dragon mentioned below. The party storms the place. The werewolves are offered a chance to leave and they refuse. (They also attack the party first but I wanted to leave that issue out.)

so, to clarify: the "heroes" break into their home, demand that they leave, and when they don't they kill them?

Non-good, most likely evil. It might be neutral if "heroes" had a very pure reason for confronting them. Being attacked first doesn't count; they were breaking into the werewolves home, so the werewolves were defending themselves from invaders.

Jannex
2007-07-09, 03:20 PM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.

That depends. Did this "chance to leave" include their pups, or did the adventurers expect the werewolves to abandon their children or face death? If the latter, it'd tend toward Evil. If the werewolves were to be allowed to take their pups with them, then the adventurers' actions could be Neutral or Good, depending on the reason why the adventurers were attacking.


Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).

Neutral at best, unless there were extenuating circumstances; without further information, I'd lean toward saying Evil.


Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.

Depends on the circumstances and consequences of desertion. Possibly Good, maybe Neutral.


Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.

Depends on motivations. If they wanted primarily to protect the travelers, then Good; if they mostly just wanted a dragon's hoard, then Neutral.


Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.

Depends on the circumstances of the combat, and what the cleric had done previously--in other words, if she was a threat to innocent people.


Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).

Barring pretty heavily extenuating circumstances, I'd call that Evil.


Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.

Depends on whether they could have protected those people without refreshing spells. If not, Neutral or Good. If they could have, probably Evil.


Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.

Good, unless doing so would be ultimately counterproductive to the goal of protecting the rest of the people being threatened by vampires.

ZeroNumerous
2007-07-09, 04:30 PM
Killing werewolves in their lair who have their pups in the next room after offering them a chance to leave. The werewolves detect as 'evil' with detect evil.

Neutral. You're killing evil, but you're doing it by invading their home.


Fireballing a mass of held orcs without doing an alignment check on them when they pose no real threat (think mid-high level party).

Neutral. The orcs are in the employ of the BBEG, but you're murdering them.


Offering held Orcs an option between deserting their army and death.

Neutral. As traitors, Grummush would demand they be killed. They cannot return to an Orc settlement because they did not fight to the death. You're not getting your hands dirty by killing them, but they're dead all the same.


Seeking out a green dragons lair to loot it and kill the dragon. The dragon has been praying on travelers.

Neutral. You're going out to kill an evil dragon, but you're hunting it down and invading it's home to do so.


Killing a cleric of Bane in her bedroom.

Neutral. You're murdering Evil.


Torturing a cleric of Bane to death in retrobution for all the things she has done (think bound in an acid fog or being repeatedly hit with a desk).

Neutral. You're torturing and killing Evil. Ultimately you achieve nothing.


Resting to get more spells when there are vampires preying on people close enough by that their screams can be heard.

Neutral. Their deaths would be meaningless, as you cannot defend them yourself.


Staying up all night trying to distract some of the vampires.

Neutral. You're trying to distract vampires, who can more than easily avoid you and continue feasting.

Thoughts: Ultimately, this entire exercise is meaningless, as an argument can be made for any of the alignments. What matters is that you think it's chaotic/evil/neutral/good/lawful

AKA_Bait
2007-07-10, 12:03 PM
A few thoughts of my own now.

I've noticed a bunch of people state that the intention matters. It surely does, but the reason I was asking about actions was precisley because of the issue that brought to topic up in my mind in the first place. Interparty interaction, which doesn't show characters intentions any more than interacting with other real people can. It can only show you behaviour. Hence, the questions not being overly specific about intentions (for the record the party did not all have the same displayed intentions anyway).

The reason I phrased this thread the way I did was precisley to avoid the issue of alignment shift or if one persons view of alignment is right. I just wanted to see what the range of interpretation of each of these actions was in terms of the alignment usually associated with that behaviour. This is also why I must disagree with Zero about the exercise being pointless. D&D is a group game, so one persons defintion of an alignment or actions that go with it is not all that matters. Everyone needs to negotiate with the DM and the other players as to what fits. I think the range of interpretation on some of these makes that even more interesting and I'd still love more imput as to why each action tends to go towards particular alignments.