Lawfulness and shame?

[Jon_Dahl]

We can all agree We cannot agree that lawful individuals, like paladins, don't willingly commit unlawful acts, but I'm just thinking: what if they willingly commit acts that are considered culturally shameful?

Let me give you an example: In my game, lumis in the positive energy plane have an important mission in a certain minor positive-dominant zone. Entering these zones are regarded shameful in lumi culture and having to serve in the minor positive-dominant areas is given to individuals who have failed in their duties. (Compare with being forced to eat barley instead of the usual grain ration in the Roman army.) However, since the mission is important, one of the decorated captains of the lumi army takes the mission and gathers a small force of soldiers with poor disciplinary records plus some able volunteers (very few come, but just because they admire the captain). The important mission is a success, but everyone will remember that this guy actually went to a place that is very shameful even to mention out loud.

[False God]

Depends on how strongly you want to portray the cultural side of things. It may result in them getting poor service or even refused service at local merchants, people may avoid sitting near them or change what side of the road they're walking on, or just generally getting dirty looks.

It also depends on how much the people know about the mission. Some cultures may make exceptions for people who do important tasks that would normally be considered taboo. Some cultures may not. It depends on how taboo it is, exactly. I don't get the feeling from your writing that this is taboo enough to warrant death, but certainly they may get the cold shoulder from people.

[GrayDeath]

We can all agree that lawful individuals, like paladins, don't willingly commit unlawful acts, but I'm just thinking: what if they willingly commit acts that are considered culturally shameful?


No, we cant. They will willingly commit unlawful acts, but usually not Acts that run counter to THEIR specific brand of Lawfulness.
Again, Lawful =! Law abiding, and neither are all lawful people the same and follow the same principals, Laws, Traditions and personal codes.

Now with that out of the way:




Let me give you an example: In my game, lumis in the positive energy plane have an important mission in a certain minor positive-dominant zone. Entering these zones are regarded shameful in lumi culture and having to serve in the minor positive-dominant areas is given to individuals who have failed in their duties. (Compare with being forced to eat barley instead of the usual grain ration in the Roman army.) However, since the mission is important, one of the decorated captains of the lumi army takes the mission and gathers a small force of soldiers with poor disciplinary records plus some able volunteers (very few come, but just because they admire the captain). The important mission is a success, but everyone will remember that this guy actually went to a place that is very shameful even to mention out loud.

So it is a local tradition that it is shameful, but neither forbidden nor considered unlawful or evil, to go there.
Unless the particular type of Lawful the character is puts a higher value on following traditions than orders (or being succesful) it wont have any major effect on how he sees himself/his lawfulness.

Others might disagree vastly, however.

[gkathellar]

Lawful alignments are about consistency and adherence to a set of norms, not necessarily the local legal code or the norms of the majority culture where they happen to be.

If your hypothetical lumi captain's code of behavior places a high value on face, then yes, his action might be non-lawful.

[KillianHawkeye]

If it's a mission, and as you say, important, then I don't see what the problem is. If anything, it makes the captain all the more impressive. "He went to the place that people don't want to go because this thing was so important and he did the thing and he saved everyone!" is a pretty great story that people will remember for being great, not shameful.

Like, maybe the captain has to retire or change careers because he technically shamed himself, and maybe he'll be looked down on by the uptight lumi nobles or whoever, but the common folk will probably understand that he did the thing that needed to be done for others at his own expense, and they'll like him for it. And it's a good way to get people to start questioning why going places is even shameful at all. Viva la revolution!

[denthor]

I was following orders.

Would you? If the answer is yes. Then others can feel smug, snort or even disdainful knowing deep down they would also go and do the mission. Those with problems are forced can feel shame in order to adhere (become better).

Now the real question is how many of this society are alive and what percentage has done it. There maybe an entire community that has banned together and help one another. This could be why certain individuals are better equipped.

[Red Fel]

We can all agree We cannot agree that lawful individuals, like paladins, don't willingly commit unlawful acts, but I'm just thinking: what if they willingly commit acts that are considered culturally shameful?

Then you bear the shame proudly, knowing that you were willing to tarnish something as ephemeral as reputation to serve your sacred duty.

Think about all those film clips, shows, and movies that showed a soldier having his medals ripped off, his uniform rent, his saber snapped in half - all while he stood at silent, regal attention. He did not sob. He did not flinch. He took his public shaming with dignity.

Now think about a person undergoing that same public shaming who knows he did the right thing to earn it. He's not being shamed because he failed, he's being shamed because he did what was needed. There is honor and dignity in that kind of shame.

In your example, this commander brought shame on himself, but he did it for an important mission. A mission which, I assume, helped his people. Something that had to be done.

Is it culturally shameful? Yes. But his duty - both lawful and Lawful - demanded that it be done, and that he do it. And despite the public shame, he should feel no private shame for his conduct. Only pride that he was willing and able to stain his reputation for the good of his people.

[denthor]

I was following orders.

Would you? If the answer is yes. Then others can feel smug, snort or even disdainful knowing deep down they would also go and do the mission. Those with problems are forced can feel shame in order to adhere (become better).

Now the real question is how many of this society are alive and what percentage has done it. There maybe an entire community that has banned together and help one another. This could be why certain individuals are better equipped.


Then you bear the shame proudly, knowing that you were willing to tarnish something as ephemeral as reputation to serve your sacred duty.

Think about all those film clips, shows, and movies that showed a soldier having his medals ripped off, his uniform rent, his saber snapped in half - all while he stood at silent, regal attention. He did not sob. He did not flinch. He took his public shaming with dignity.

Now think about a person undergoing that same public shaming who knows he did the right thing to earn it. He's not being shamed because he failed, he's being shamed because he did what was needed. There is honor and dignity in that kind of shame.

In your example, this commander brought shame on himself, but he did it for an important mission. A mission which, I assume, helped his people. Something that had to be done.

Is it culturally shameful? Yes. But his duty - both lawful and Lawful - demanded that it be done, and that he do it. And despite the public shame, he should feel no private shame for his conduct. Only pride that he was willing and able to stain his reputation for the good of his people.

Your thinking is rubbing off on me. As usual your logic is more accurate than mine.

You are changing my thought process. At least toward lawful