PDA

View Full Version : Robin Hood-ish Theives...



Fualkner Asiniti
2007-08-23, 12:43 PM
My group is very interesting. By interesting, I mean insane, lying, theiving murderers that take anything that is vaugely shiny. Most definetly evil, right?

Well, I'm trying to fix that.

I've made a campaign that has 9 warring factions in a huge layered planar city called Kelsig. They are in the CG group, called the Scrivengers of Time. Their goal is to stop the Heirophant's Fingers (LE faction, directly opposing.) from enslaving the multiverses inhabitants. However, none of the gods will help them. That's right, Heironius, Pelor, Goddess of Elves, All of them. Gone out to lunch apparently. The only god that will help them is Olidamarra. He says "Steal." So they do, but only from the corrupt souls of the Heirophant's Fingers.

So, the question is: What alignment are these guys? I figured Chaotic Good, because they are ultimately helping everyone and killing the bad guys, even though they are doing it in an off-the-wall illegal sort of way. In fact, the SOT forbids the killing of ignorant guards or others that are evil, but not Heirophant Evil.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-08-23, 12:45 PM
CG seems to fit the bill.

Fualkner Asiniti
2007-08-23, 01:22 PM
Thanks Silvanos. Do you figure the alignment for the other group is good too?

AKA_Bait
2007-08-23, 01:27 PM
CG all the way for the SoT group.

For the first one... you were right. All sorts of evil. Could vary. Probably CE or NE.

Fualkner Asiniti
2007-08-23, 01:35 PM
Well, I've got two VERY chaotic players. VERY. One killed a shopkeeper because he didn't sell them potions at a very reduced price. But the other 3 are mellower players, tending to have more logical actions, but still quite chaotic.

AKA_Bait
2007-08-23, 01:37 PM
Well, I've got two VERY chaotic players. VERY. One killed a shopkeeper because he didn't sell them potions at a very reduced price. But the other 3 are mellower players, tending to have more logical actions, but still quite chaotic.

Ok, killing a shopkeeper for refusing to give a discount on potions is CE, NE at best.

kamikasei
2007-08-23, 01:39 PM
Theft is an evil because it harms the victim by depriving him of his property. How much of an evil it is depends on how great the harm. Stealing from an evil organization to deprive them of the means to do evil kind of goes into negative figures on the evil scale and becomes a good act. Similarly, it's evil to kill someone but not necessarily if you're killing them to prevent them from committing evil (though of course murder shouldn't be your first recourse).

de-trick
2007-08-23, 01:43 PM
Yep, CG, steal from the rich give to the poor, is for the greater good, so thats CG

Fualkner Asiniti
2007-08-23, 01:53 PM
They aren't giving the stolen goods away. They're using them to fund their fight against The Heirophant.

Harold
2007-08-23, 01:59 PM
the 3 melo players should be CG but the 2 not so melo characters should be CN

goat
2007-08-23, 02:06 PM
While you're discussing rogue type alignments, I wanted some opinions on a rogue I was designing for no real reason.

He's a follower of Olidamarra, aiming to "redistribute" the wealth of the world, but has huge guilt-trips whenever he's forced to kill a guard to enable his escape (being wanted for "redistributing" the wealth of several nobles, capture=probable death).

Now, to make penance for his crimes, he attempts to "re-educate" those who he thinks are even lower on the social scale than the thieves and vagabonds he normally hangs out with, namely the prostitutes. To do this, he goes out at night in a big town, finds a lone prostitute, knocks her out, ties her up and deposits her inside the walls of a local nunnery with a note explaining what's going on and a small bag of money. He has no idea what happens afterwards, never staying around to watch.

I really do not know where to put him on the alignment axis.

Tower
2007-08-24, 07:31 AM
Most likely Neutral Good, maybe Chaotic Good

Neutral on Good to Evil scale wouldn't care enough to do these
Unless he codifies his behaviour, wouldn't be Lawful
Represses personal freedom of others for good cause so probably not chaotic, Chaotic Good would be more likely to them how to fend for themselves without whoring, not knock a person out and leave them in a nunnery
So I would say Neutral Good

AKA_Bait
2007-08-24, 09:31 AM
Most likely Neutral Good, maybe Chaotic Good

Neutral on Good to Evil scale wouldn't care enough to do these
Unless he codifies his behaviour, wouldn't be Lawful
Represses personal freedom of others for good cause so probably not chaotic, Chaotic Good would be more likely to them how to fend for themselves without whoring, not knock a person out and leave them in a nunnery
So I would say Neutral Good

I'm with Tower.

Tiki Snakes
2007-08-24, 04:13 PM
Risking a tangent;

In my opinion, by the way, Robin Hood? He's often used as an example of Chaotic Good, right? Well, frankly he seems a lot more Neutral Good, to me.

He robs from the rich, to give to the poor. yeah, sure. He defies the laws and so on of King John, but he does so because he doesn't agree with the way King John is doing things. It's almost as if he sees John's rule as in and of itself, Unlawful.

As soon as King Richard the Lionheart pitches back up, Robin will be all the way down with the embracing of law and order, on a practical AND philosophical level.

So, yes. A real Robin Hood type would actually, in my opinion, in-fact be the perfect example of Neutral Good; Disobeying unjust laws for the betterment of the people. Et Cetera.

also, yeah, you've a Chaotic Good party with a large Chaotic Evil faction in it, man. Seriously. ;)

Sebastian
2007-08-24, 06:27 PM
Risking a tangent;

In my opinion, by the way, Robin Hood? He's often used as an example of Chaotic Good, right? Well, frankly he seems a lot more Neutral Good, to me.

He robs from the rich, to give to the poor. yeah, sure. He defies the laws and so on of King John, but he does so because he doesn't agree with the way King John is doing things. It's almost as if he sees John's rule as in and of itself, Unlawful.

As soon as King Richard the Lionheart pitches back up, Robin will be all the way down with the embracing of law and order, on a practical AND philosophical level.

So, yes. A real Robin Hood type would actually, in my opinion, in-fact be the perfect example of Neutral Good; Disobeying unjust laws for the betterment of the people. Et Cetera.

also, yeah, you've a Chaotic Good party with a large Chaotic Evil faction in it, man. Seriously. ;)

depending on which version of Robin Hood you consider he could even be Lawful Good IMHO,for example, Kevin Costner's Robin Hood did steal money mostly to collect the ransom for his true king, in that movie king John was practically an usurper, IIRC, how fighting him was supposed to make Robin non-lawful

Vincentrose91
2007-08-25, 01:34 AM
I am confused on the topic of the robin-hood thing. Just consider these thoughts;

1. What would robin be if the "evil" king, wasn't evil? or he was actually just?
2. What if the "poor" that receive the wealth, have a reason for being poor. Like, crimes, Laziness, Stupidity, THEIR own actions.
3. What if the wealthy that were stolen from, were Good honest people.

I think that Robin hood is a Myth, and even if he isn't there is no proof that he is good at all. Call me retarded i know, but i hate robin hood. redistribution of wealth is wrong, and don't call me a spoiled brat, because i am lower-middle class myself.

Skyserpent
2007-08-25, 05:48 AM
I am confused on the topic of the robin-hood thing. Just consider these thoughts;

1. What would robin be if the "evil" king, wasn't evil? or he was actually just?
2. What if the "poor" that receive the wealth, have a reason for being poor. Like, crimes, Laziness, Stupidity, THEIR own actions.
3. What if the wealthy that were stolen from, were Good honest people.

I think that Robin hood is a Myth, and even if he isn't there is no proof that he is good at all. Call me retarded i know, but i hate robin hood. redistribution of wealth is wrong, and don't call me a spoiled brat, because i am lower-middle class myself.

It's true Robin Hood never existed, and if his life had fulfilled your criteria than yes, he would have been more of a "Robbing Hood" Which would be bad.

But if I'm remembering the story right, the poor were trying to scrape a living while the rich were taxing the hell out of them because the "just" rulership was, "out to lunch" i.e. the crusades, I won't go into that.

There's exceptions to everything, under your guidelines, Yes, Wealth Redistribution IS wrong, but I bet there are circumstances that could warrant it's use as "Right" But that's just one man's opinion.

Skyserpent
2007-08-25, 05:52 AM
While you're discussing rogue type alignments, I wanted some opinions on a rogue I was designing for no real reason.

He's a follower of Olidamarra, aiming to "redistribute" the wealth of the world, but has huge guilt-trips whenever he's forced to kill a guard to enable his escape (being wanted for "redistributing" the wealth of several nobles, capture=probable death).

Now, to make penance for his crimes, he attempts to "re-educate" those who he thinks are even lower on the social scale than the thieves and vagabonds he normally hangs out with, namely the prostitutes. To do this, he goes out at night in a big town, finds a lone prostitute, knocks her out, ties her up and deposits her inside the walls of a local nunnery with a note explaining what's going on and a small bag of money. He has no idea what happens afterwards, never staying around to watch.

I really do not know where to put him on the alignment axis.

This would be one of those "In a sense" lawful Neutral characters. What he's doing isn't so much upholding benevolence so much as he's trying to balance social order. Similarly to the terrorist druid who wantonly ignores "city-folk" laws in order to uphold a different form of balance, this rogue is ignoring laws in order to create a more social balance. So I'd say Lawful Neutral with the hopes of being Lawful Good, but a lot of precepts leaning towards evil. So good intent, awkward execution, middle-of-the-road status.

CasESenSITItiVE
2007-08-25, 11:26 AM
I am confused on the topic of the robin-hood thing. Just consider these thoughts;

1. What would robin be if the "evil" king, wasn't evil? or he was actually just?
2. What if the "poor" that receive the wealth, have a reason for being poor. Like, crimes, Laziness, Stupidity, THEIR own actions.
3. What if the wealthy that were stolen from, were Good honest people.

I think that Robin hood is a Myth, and even if he isn't there is no proof that he is good at all. Call me retarded i know, but i hate robin hood. redistribution of wealth is wrong, and don't call me a spoiled brat, because i am lower-middle class myself.

you have to remember what time period these stories took place. in today's society, many of the poor have real reasons to be poor, as today's society does it's best to reward those who work for what they got. but this certainly isn't the case in the medieval world. in those days, society actually worked towards keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. you were born into the class you were likely to stay in the rest of your life, no matter how hard you work

Rex Blunder
2007-08-25, 11:35 AM
in today's society, many of the poor have real reasons to be poor, as today's society does it's best to reward those who work for what they got.


This may be a more controversial statement than you think, but this is not the place to debate it.

So what would Robin of Locksley do if he was LG, when Prince John usurped the throne? Maybe raised an army? or run off to germany to try to free King Richard? he probably wouldn't have just hung around Sherwood Forest, having a great time, having parties and occasionally robbing from some bishops.

fractal_uk
2007-08-25, 07:19 PM
I am confused on the topic of the robin-hood thing. Just consider these thoughts;

1. What would robin be if the "evil" king, wasn't evil? or he was actually just?
2. What if the "poor" that receive the wealth, have a reason for being poor. Like, crimes, Laziness, Stupidity, THEIR own actions.
3. What if the wealthy that were stolen from, were Good honest people.

I think that Robin hood is a Myth, and even if he isn't there is no proof that he is good at all. Call me retarded i know, but i hate robin hood. redistribution of wealth is wrong, and don't call me a spoiled brat, because i am lower-middle class myself.

In the medieval setting of the robin hood tales, this logic is stretched to breaking point and is still extremely tenuous in a modern setting - perhaps a small percentage brought it upon themselves but the vast majority did not. In the middle ages if you were a serf you were a serf, if you were noble you were noble - there was no crossing between the two, irrespective of how hard you worked. The level of wealth you could ever hope to achieve was determined to a large extent by the circumstances of your birth.

If the wealthy that were being stolen from were truly good and honest people they would reward fairly those working for them, rather than let them live in poverty so they could slightly be richer.

In this case, redistributing wealth to the poorest is helping to feed impoverished victims of circumstance, an altruistic act and therefore "good." How you go about it will determine whether it is lawful or chaotic, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor being the chaotic good method, convincing King John to tax his subjects more progressively being a more lawful good approach.

Matthew
2007-08-26, 01:47 PM
Not quite true. There was some social mobility with Medieval Society, it was just very limited. A Serf could certainly become free and even be made a Knight. His chances of acquiring Nobility would be limited, but it would not be impossible. Several Medieval writers, even as late as the fifteenth century, considered nobleness to be a quality one earned, rather than being born with. It depends which Medieval authority you ask; certainly, though, it was not a frequent occurence.