PDA

View Full Version : Assassin Alignment Question



Crow
2008-01-27, 09:40 PM
There is an Assassin in our game and I have a question. So far, he has been helping the PC's by working as a mercenary, doing scouting and such. They don't know he is/was an assassin. Last session, one of the PC's dropped a detect evil spell in his vicinity and he "blipped" up on the evil-dar.

The PC's had never fully trusted the guy, but were just beginning to consider him "one of us", but now they're freaking out trying to figure out what to do about this guy. They are convinced that he is going to turn on them.

I never bothered to stat this guy beyond the fact that he is an Assassin (the Prestige Class), but never really determined his alignment. He started a soldier, but was eventually trained to kill off enemy officers and the like. He did so without compunction, and committed other terrible acts of homocide against the "enemy". Further, he saw no problem with this, as they were "the enemy", and the end justified the means in his mind.

At this point, I was thinking he would be Lawful Evil.

Eventually, he went rogue (I havn't worked the details on this, but i am leaning towards a "left behind/left for dead" scenario.), and since then has been working as a mercenary. He has little regard for the law, and is out for himself for the most part. He will keep his word, but rarely gives it, so as to keep his options open in his mind. He will work for legitamate authorities, or for evil killers, it makes no difference to him. He will stick to a contract, but because it is better for his reputation. If offered enough, he will forfeit a contract if he thinks he can get away with it (Justifying it to himself by thinking that the people hiring him aren't saints anyways, and that doing wrong to them is OK.)

At this point I am thinking he would be Neutral Evil, though I get a Chaotic feeling from him as well.

Can you guys give me your opinion?

Zarrexaij
2008-01-27, 09:45 PM
I'd without a second thought call the guy neutral evil. He sounds suspiciously like a yugoloth/daemon. :smallwink:

Vexxation
2008-01-27, 09:46 PM
Well, he hasn't murdered his party members in their sleep for the combination of getting their stuff and the sheer joy of feeling them squirm beneath him as he stabbed them.

So I'd go with Neutral Evil, just out for a kill, unless he spouts of ideals of killing because they were weak and killing them bettered the race. Then I'd say Lawful Evil.

PlasticSoldier
2008-01-27, 09:46 PM
I think he's NE. He isn't a sadist destroying crap for fun, he's simply a
very very pragmatic egotist. And I remember the NE outsiders being described as completely pragmatic.

Talya
2008-01-27, 10:30 PM
stuff.

Your avatar is pretty. Nice city, terrible hockey team.

Lord Tataraus
2008-01-27, 10:49 PM
There is an Assassin in our game and I have a question. So far, he has been helping the PC's by working as a mercenary, doing scouting and such. They don't know he is/was an assassin. Last session, one of the PC's dropped a detect evil spell in his vicinity and he "blipped" up on the evil-dar.

The PC's had never fully trusted the guy, but were just beginning to consider him "one of us", but now they're freaking out trying to figure out what to do about this guy. They are convinced that he is going to turn on them.

I never bothered to stat this guy beyond the fact that he is an Assassin (the Prestige Class), but never really determined his alignment. He started a soldier, but was eventually trained to kill off enemy officers and the like. He did so without compunction, and committed other terrible acts of homocide against the "enemy". Further, he saw no problem with this, as they were "the enemy", and the end justified the means in his mind.

At this point, I was thinking he would be Lawful Evil.
Actually, I'd put him at LG or LN depending on his justification though "terrible acts of homocide" suggest some purposefully messy hits which would put him at LN in my book. I never agreed with assassins as an evil-only PrC.


Eventually, he went rogue (I havn't worked the details on this, but i am leaning towards a "left behind/left for dead" scenario.), and since then has been working as a mercenary. He has little regard for the law, and is out for himself for the most part. He will keep his word, but rarely gives it, so as to keep his options open in his mind. He will work for legitamate authorities, or for evil killers, it makes no difference to him. He will stick to a contract, but because it is better for his reputation. If offered enough, he will forfeit a contract if he thinks he can get away with it (Justifying it to himself by thinking that the people hiring him aren't saints anyways, and that doing wrong to them is OK.)

At this point I am thinking he would be Neutral Evil, though I get a Chaotic feeling from him as well.

Can you guys give me your opinion?
He is definitely not chaotic. Remember that "respect for the law" does not mean chaotic, but a "lawful" character alignment-wise is one who is disciplined, honorable, and very calculating among other traits (though not all lawfuls share all of these traits, notably the honorable one). Given his disciplined background and the honor you describe (him keeping his word) as well as his need to justify breaking his word, I would say LE.

Voyager_I
2008-01-27, 10:54 PM
I'll roll with the Neutral Evil. Sounds like someone you could depend upon in general, but wouldn't especially hesitate to drop you like a sack of poo if there was something good enough in it for him. Not lawful, but not yet chaotic, and probably evil.

Zeful
2008-01-27, 11:31 PM
I'd say he's CN or LN, he shares no real traits present in Evil characters (harming others for personal gain, homicide for pleasure etc.) but has a very specific moral code that he violates occasionally.

There's no real reason for the Assassian prestige class because there are situations where the Any Evil alignment requirement cannot be met. An example is a young wo/man is raised from birth to kill for her/his parent(s). This character cannot really be evil because of the fact that s/he doesn't understand anything beyond what they've been trained to do.

SoD
2008-01-28, 03:19 AM
So would you say that someone who kills on a massive scale, like maybe an orcish general who was brought up to think that elves are evil creatures and all deserve to die a painful death...that they don't count as evil because it's how they were brought up? Or what about demons/devils? Are you saying that they're not actually evil because they don't know any different?

Oh, and to the OP, I'd probably go NE. Maybe LN if you get rid of the 'any evil' pre-req. Personally I'd say you can have an assassin for any non-good alignment. Maybe a few good aligned assassins are possible, but those would excedingly rare, only killing evil creatures, and they'd need undeniable proof about their alignment.

Crow
2008-01-28, 03:28 AM
Hey thanks for all the replies. It seems my "Neutral Evil" assessment wasn't too far off, which I suspected, but there have been some good arguments for a lawful alignment as well.

I suppose it depends on whether you consider "lawful" to mean "law-abiding". Certainly, killing people for money is not something a law-abiding person does. I am not sure if a personal code or keeping one's word is enough to justify a lawful alignment. Especially if one deliberately avoids giving their word in order to keep the issue from coming up.

I can also see the argument for Lawful Neutral while he was still a soldier. Once it is no longer "under orders", I think killing for money probably qualifies as evil.

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 06:56 AM
I'd say either LN or LE while in the army and either LE or NE as a merc. You don't have to be evil to kill, even quite messily, legitimate targets without question as a soldier. Now, if his actions at that time included hits against non-military targets that is probably something you'd have to be evil to go along with.

Mercenaries are kind of hard to pin down on alignment. Are you Lawful if you hew precisely to your word, even if it costs you your life? Or are you Chaotic because your loyalty to your employer extends only for the term of the contract, and you will take out a hit on them in turn without compunction once your employment ends? Regardless, I think pursuing a career as, not just a mercenary but a mercenary assassin without any supporting motive such as patriotism, defense of family or friends or home, etc. probably requires you to be evil.

shadow_archmagi
2008-01-28, 07:12 AM
LE or LN. Assassins are generally not chaotic, as a proper assassination requires extensive planning as well as a bond of contract. This all sounds lawful to me.

Remember, law just means you obey rules. Maybe not societies rules, but you have SOME rules you follow, and a general tendency to prefer a clockwork world.

Saph
2008-01-28, 09:38 AM
I'd agree with your call on Neutral Evil. Being willing to break an assassination contract if he thinks he can get away with it, and only keeping one for reputation's sake, is solidly NE rather than LE.

- Saph

AKA_Bait
2008-01-28, 09:45 AM
Must agree with the OP and the majority (as much as agreeing with the majority chafes) that he was LE in the army and NE as a merc.

Person_Man
2008-01-28, 10:34 AM
Well regardless of what alignment you decide on, I'd like to say that Evil people can usually be trusted. Whether or not you lie or tell the truth, whether you do what you promise or betray your word, is usually (though admittedly not always) a function of Law-Chaos, not Good-Evil.

Evil people can have a family, friends, respected jobs, a country club membership, etc. You can adventure with them for years, and never know or care that they take pleasure in killing, while you distaste it and only do it for a higher cause.

Having someone show up as Evil on a Detect Evil spell isn't that much of a reason not to trust them. A politician might be Evil, but if you pay him enough money he'll probably stay bought, lest he give himself a bad reputation and head off future bribes. A teacher might be Evil, and may openly hate all of his students but stay in his position because he's 5 years away from a pension, yet he'd never kill or molest his class. An Assassin might be Evil because he kills people for money, but he can still have trusted friends and enjoy adventuring.

A Paladin may be a jerk about it, and refuse to adventure or be friends with someone with Evil motivations. But if he just scanned a crowd of people at the local pub, a good number of them would probably show up as Evil. And most of them are just normal people, who should only be distrusted or confronted if there is some reason for doing so.

So if you want this NPC to betray the party, that's fine. Evil people do in fact do that sort of thing sometimes, especially Neutral or Chaotic Evil people. But I hope that there's some in-game logic for doing so beyond "he's Evil."

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 10:37 AM
I'd agree with your call on Neutral Evil. Being willing to break an assassination contract if he thinks he can get away with it, and only keeping one for reputation's sake, is solidly NE rather than LE.

Whoops, I managed to completely miss this part of the OP. Given that, I would agree that he is solidly NE now. He may have been LN or LE in the army, but I'd lean much more to LE, and quite possibly NE all along but in different circumstances.

Crow
2008-01-28, 01:42 PM
Well regardless of what alignment you decide on, I'd like to say that Evil people can usually be trusted. Whether or not you lie or tell the truth, whether you do what you promise or betray your word, is usually (though admittedly not always) a function of Law-Chaos, not Good-Evil.

Evil people can have a family, friends, respected jobs, a country club membership, etc. You can adventure with them for years, and never know or care that they take pleasure in killing, while you distaste it and only do it for a higher cause.

Having someone show up as Evil on a Detect Evil spell isn't that much of a reason not to trust them. A politician might be Evil, but if you pay him enough money he'll probably stay bought, lest he give himself a bad reputation and head off future bribes. A teacher might be Evil, and may openly hate all of his students but stay in his position because he's 5 years away from a pension, yet he'd never kill or molest his class. An Assassin might be Evil because he kills people for money, but he can still have trusted friends and enjoy adventuring.

A Paladin may be a jerk about it, and refuse to adventure or be friends with someone with Evil motivations. But if he just scanned a crowd of people at the local pub, a good number of them would probably show up as Evil. And most of them are just normal people, who should only be distrusted or confronted if there is some reason for doing so.

So if you want this NPC to betray the party, that's fine. Evil people do in fact do that sort of thing sometimes, especially Neutral or Chaotic Evil people. But I hope that there's some in-game logic for doing so beyond "he's Evil."

I understand what you're saying, and that makes sense.

Oh yeah, and I don't have any plans for him to betray the party. Even if they stop paying him, he'll prolly just move on to whatever job comes up for him next. It is rather entertaining to see my players flipping out and paranoid though.

Person_Man
2008-01-28, 01:58 PM
I understand what you're saying, and that makes sense.

Oh yeah, and I don't have any plans for him to betray the party. Even if they stop paying him, he'll prolly just move on to whatever job comes up for him next. It is rather entertaining to see my players flipping out and paranoid though.

Pretty standard PC behavior. The more normal a NPC acts, the more they assume its a trap. I haven't had a succubus in one of my games since 2nd ed, and my players still keep every female prisoner they find bound and gagged until they confirm that its not a demon via magical means.

osyluth
2008-01-28, 02:06 PM
Actually, I'd put him at LG or LN depending on his justification though "terrible acts of homocide" suggest some purposefully messy hits which would put him at LN in my book. I never agreed with assassins as an evil-only PrC.

What? Get a dictionary and look up 'assassin.' Someone who kills others for money often for political reasons. How can anyone who is willing to kill for money not be evil?

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 02:10 PM
What? Get a dictionary and look up 'assassin.' Someone who kills others for money often for political reasons. How can anyone who is willing to kill for money not be evil?

A mercenary is willing to kill for money. An assassin might not be paid.

For that matter, any number of adventurers are willing to kill for money.

The sort of "killing for money" that only evil people will do is not necessarily the only sort that assassins do.

Tren
2008-01-28, 02:52 PM
Its quite possible he'll only kill (deserving) evil people, and he just happens to ask for compensation. That's solidly neutral as long as he doesn't take demented glee in it.

Dullyanna
2008-01-28, 04:07 PM
@Tren: That's true, but (Assuming I didn't misread the OP) the assassin just does it because he earns good money from it (And doesn't mind the killing, at all, in the very least).

Anyways:One could viably argue that it's just opinion at this point, but I'd say that he's very solidly neutral evil right now. He'll uphold contracts (Lawful), unless it's apparently in his best interests not to, which means honor, honesty and the like hold no intrinsic value to him (Chaotic). He used to kill because he was ordered to (lawful), but that's null and void by now.

Oh and to the OP: If your players are reactionary/zealous enough, I'd suggest throwing a situation which "tests" the assassin's loyalty to the party. Make it so some flags'll pop up for the more paranoid players, but also design the offer to be unappealing to the assassin (In other words, he wouldn't normally take it), and tell us how the players react.:smallamused:

EvilElitest
2008-01-28, 04:25 PM
I'd say he's CN or LN, he shares no real traits present in Evil characters (harming others for personal gain, homicide for pleasure etc.) but has a very specific moral code that he violates occasionally.

There's no real reason for the Assassian prestige class because there are situations where the Any Evil alignment requirement cannot be met. An example is a young wo/man is raised from birth to kill for her/his parent(s). This character cannot really be evil because of the fact that s/he doesn't understand anything beyond what they've been trained to do.

Much as i dislike the always evil nature of assasians, a girl like that would be evil, remember actions>intention. She might not understand it, but she is still commiting evil acts



A mercenary is willing to kill for money. An assassin might not be paid.

For that matter, any number of adventurers are willing to kill for money.

The sort of "killing for money" that only evil people will do is not necessarily the only sort that assassins do.
varies, if a mercenary or adventure kill innocents for money they are evil.

Assassins are a special case it seems
from
EE

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 04:25 PM
@Tren: That's true, but (Assuming I didn't misread the OP) the assassin just does it because he earns good money from it (And doesn't mind the killing, at all, in the very least).

Yes, but I think Tren was addressing the side issue that's sprung up as to whether assassins should be evil-only or whether you can have good or neutral members of that PrC.

Anteros
2008-01-28, 05:10 PM
I'd just like to point out that if you are pegging the assassin as evil for killing people, I highly doubt that your "good" PCs are innocents.

If your assassin is evil, then so is every single one of your PCs who have ever killed something for any reason besides defense of self or others.

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 05:15 PM
I'd just like to point out that if you are pegging the assassin as evil for killing people, I highly doubt that your "good" PCs are innocents.

If your assassin is evil, then so is every single one of your PCs who have ever killed something for any reason besides defense of self or others.

He's evil because he has levels in the Assassin prestige class, which requires you to be evil. Or rather: he's not evil just because he kills people, he kills people and is evil, and therefore happens to be an Assassin rather than merely an assassin.

Dullyanna
2008-01-28, 05:24 PM
@kamikasei:Looking back at the whole thing in context, I'd have to say you're right... So everybody should just ignore the first paragraph of my previous post.

@Anteros:If you're referring to the OP's assassin, then I'd have to disagree with you. The killer-in-question is literally murdering people for money, irregardless of their innocence. None of us know any of the PC's motives, but I'd have to assume that they have a pretty healthy respect for both innocent life and the greater good, since they're unnerved by the "revelation" about the assassin's alignment.

Severus
2008-01-28, 06:06 PM
The described assassin seems neutral evil to me. Perhaps with lawful tendencies.

Fuzzy_Juan
2008-01-28, 06:28 PM
A 'Good' assassin is just a rogue.

A PrC assasin is evil...I will have to go with the majority and say he sounds NE to me. LE would be bound by their contract unless they include clauses in there so that render the contract void if situations change...fine print and all can be a pain but such shennanigins while expected do tend to ruin reps.

Do note that Evil will pretty much always betray someone...their only true loyalty is to themselves. LE are loyal to their oaths, and to the laws they hold dear...NE are focused on what will benefit them...CE are whimsical and go moment by moment rather than long term most of the time.

A NE or LE character may know that by keeping the loyalty of a group of powerful friends he can be safe, and gain great rewards...more so that can be gained than by allying with evildoers....evildoers who don't care about him, or would betray him if it suited their ends. Maintaining friendship with such PC's is pretty much always in their own interest.

In fact...being evil is a great 'disguise'...allowing them to pass detect spells with ease as they are obviously not hiding alignment and are evil...they may even truely resent the other PC's and have ill thoughts of them that will fool detect thoughts...but to achieve their own ends...they will remain loyal to those that will profit them more in the end and keep them safe.

Saph
2008-01-28, 06:34 PM
Pretty standard PC behavior. The more normal a NPC acts, the more they assume its a trap. I haven't had a succubus in one of my games since 2nd ed, and my players still keep every female prisoner they find bound and gagged until they confirm that its not a demon via magical means.

Sure that's the only reason? :P

My group tend to be suspicious of NPCs as well, so just to throw them for a loop I once had one of the PCs be a traitor. The player's character wasn't able to join the party until later in the session, so I gave him the option of playing a traitor until then and sabotaging the group. He wasn't allowed to actually kill any of them, but creatively screwing them over in non-fatal ways was encouraged.

The look on their faces when they finally found out was hilarious. :)

- Saph

Dullyanna
2008-01-28, 06:47 PM
As an aside:Saph, mate, you throw a damn fine loop.

Idea Man
2008-01-28, 10:02 PM
My group tend to be suspicious of NPCs as well, so just to throw them for a loop I once had one of the PCs be a traitor. The player's character wasn't able to join the party until later in the session, so I gave him the option of playing a traitor until then and sabotaging the group. He wasn't allowed to actually kill any of them, but creatively screwing them over in non-fatal ways was encouraged.

The look on their faces when they finally found out was hilarious. :)

- Saph

I had the opportunity to do that in a campaign recently, also. I was spying for the extremely reclusive BBEG, and had orders to kill the party. My orders didn't say when, precisely, so I let them knock of my rivals, further my own personal goals, and aquired information and power while I traveled with them. Picked up a pretty cool NPC ally out of the deal (a dervish). Sadly, the campaign ended before I could properly reveal my treachery. :smallamused:

Edit: I would also agree that the assassin sounds neutral evil.

Yami
2008-01-29, 01:21 AM
I suppose it depends on whether you consider "lawful" to mean "law-abiding". Certainly, killing people for money is not something a law-abiding person does.
You do realize this is how all millitaries work, yes? I pay you, and if it is required, you kill for me. Sometimes it's even required (read conscription. And yes, I realize that you are not required to kill someone if your conscripted into the front line, your just lawful bound to get shot at like everyone else up there. The firing back usually comes about on it's own.)

And one a side note, I take it your PC's never get to play lawful characters?


I am not sure if a personal code or keeping one's word is enough to justify a lawful alignment. Especially if one deliberately avoids giving their word in order to keep the issue from coming up.
Here I agree with you. I think the fact that he would consider renegading on a contract would make him more Neutral.


I can also see the argument for Lawful Neutral while he was still a soldier. Once it is no longer "under orders", I think killing for money probably qualifies as evil.
Again, consider the soldier and the assasin. Same job different employer. The assasin just does it freelance.

And again I have to ask, PC's required to be evil?


As for my Verdict... I'd say you've build a damned fine TN character. I give a round of applause for that.

Riffington
2008-01-29, 08:26 AM
You do realize this is how all millitaries work, yes? I pay you, and if it is required, you kill for me.

No, I fight for you. Armies do not sally forth to kill per se. They go out to take objectives and defeat the enemy (capture>kill, all else being equal). Commanders who frequently try to maximize kills rather than take specific objectives tend to be both evil and lousy commanders.

So yeah, professional assassins* are evil. Commandos who are willing to kill if necessary during their covert missions need not be evil.

*In rare cases, an assassination mission might not be an evil act. Trying to kill Hitler would not be evil, for an extreme example. But if you get into the profession for the money, you'll have to somehow deal with the fact that the vast majority of assassination missions are evil.

Crow
2008-01-29, 12:15 PM
No, I fight for you. Armies do not sally forth to kill per se. They go out to take objectives and defeat the enemy (capture>kill, all else being equal). Commanders who frequently try to maximize kills rather than take specific objectives tend to be both evil and lousy commanders.

Agreed. In my job, you don't shoot to kill. You shoot to stop the threat, and if possible, avoid shooting at all. But then, I'm not in the military anymore either.

In my opinion (and it is nothing more than that), somebody willing to execute horrific missions for his military because it's his duty is one thing. He may have reservations about the mission, but do it because he is required to do so. It is quite another thing if the person has no compuction at all against doing it.

CASTLEMIKE
2008-01-29, 07:54 PM
There is an Assassin in our game and I have a question. So far, he has been helping the PC's by working as a mercenary, doing scouting and such. They don't know he is/was an assassin. Last session, one of the PC's dropped a detect evil spell in his vicinity and he "blipped" up on the evil-dar.


I never bothered to stat this guy beyond the fact that he is an Assassin (the Prestige Class), but never really determined his alignment. He started a soldier, but was eventually trained to kill off enemy officers and the like. He did so without compunction, and committed other terrible acts of homocide against the "enemy". Further, he saw no problem with this, as they were "the enemy", and the end justified the means in his mind.

At this point, I was thinking he would be Lawful Evil.

Eventually, he went rogue (I havn't worked the details on this, but i am leaning towards a "left behind/left for dead" scenario.), and since then has been working as a mercenary.

He has little regard for the law, and is out for himself for the most part. He will keep his word, but rarely gives it, so as to keep his options open in his mind.

He will work for legitamate authorities, or for evil killers, it makes no difference to him. He will stick to a contract, but because it is better for his reputation. If offered enough, he will forfeit a contract if he thinks he can get away with it (Justifying it to himself by thinking that the people hiring him aren't saints anyways, and that doing wrong to them is OK.)

At this point I am thinking he would be Neutral Evil, though I get a Chaotic feeling from him as well.

Can you guys give me your opinion?

LE or LN originally in most armies since army leaders want dependable assassins who obey their chain of command, basically stick to killing enemy targets without freelancing or becoming disciplinary problems for the army since most armies capable of supporting elite assassin corps are large and operate with a structured hierarchy not as mobs.

IMO is probably LE since he will work for anyone by making the contract and the forfeit can be part of the terms of his assassination contracts.

IMO it would be very rare for an assassin to contact a target about soliciting a bribe not to target them for assassination since it would be dangerous along with the credibility issue (I'm the assassin with the heart of gold hired to kill you), plus the initial heads up warning should normally make it much harder to assassinate the target and more dangerous for the assassin.

IMO it would be even rarer for a target to know they have been targeted for assassination, discover who the assassin is, learn they are amenable to a payoff and locate the assassin to pay them off instead of just having them killed which would probably be cheaper.

snoopy13a
2008-01-29, 08:31 PM
IMO it would be even rarer for a target to know they have been targeted for assassination, discover who the assassin is, learn they are amenable to a payoff and locate the assassin to pay them off instead of just having them killed which would probably be cheaper.

If a payoff is an actual possiblity then neutral evil assassin would probably take the payoff and then try to kill the target anyway.

That's why I never understand most bribes. What is keeping the person being bribed from taking the money and then refuse to help out?

Yami
2008-01-29, 09:32 PM
@ Riffington, Crow

I suppose that is a important distinction. Your point is well put.

Of course, I have always assumed that evil meant they enjoyed killing, causing pain or watching the suffering of others; whereas someone who was indifferent would be neutral. From that view point, I was trying to show that he wasn't doing anything different than when he was a military assasin. He's merely doing the same job, only now he's freelance.

Edit:

If a payoff is an actual possiblity then neutral evil assassin would probably take the payoff and then try to kill the target anyway.

That's why I never understand most bribes. What is keeping the person being bribed from taking the money and then refuse to help out?
Honor. Even CE of characters can have honor, and even LG characters can be backstabbing bastards.

Stephen_E
2008-01-30, 02:07 AM
Re: OP - I'd consider him NE or N (Note by the DMG you have to be E to enter the Assiassin class, You don't need to stay evil).

I'd need to know more about what missions he'd taken and what, if any, he'd refused.

Re: Soldiers/killing/evil. I don't see killing or killing for money/politics as automatically evil, but if you do, then Military Snipers would have to be considered evil. So would bomber aircrews. Both these subsets of the military are paid to kill. No if, buts or maybes. As a general rule soldiers who join up voluteerly to the military, assuming reasonable forthought, should be aware that part of the job they're signing up for is to go and kill people that they no stuff all about simply because someone in authority, who they may've know mothing about when they signed up, tells them to kill that person. You don't shoot to wound. You shoot to kill. Short of using non-leathal ammunition, anytime you shoot someone you're likely to kill them unless they have top of line body armour and/or quick nearby medical aid, and even then death is a likely possibility. If you think assassin must be evil due to them killing for money then you have to consider soldier evil, unless you want to apply extreeme double standards.

Personally I consider serving in the military, unless you have good reason to beleive that you won't have to shoot someone except in direct clear defense of your country/neighbours, then you're in a very dodgy area ethically. Not evil per se, but in an area that it's very easy to do/become evil. In large part because you make an oath to hand over the moral/ethical decision of you killing people to unknown authorities.

Stephen

Crow
2008-01-30, 08:32 PM
There is a difference between a soldier doing his job (which happens to be killing), and an assassin that does so. A sniper is not an assassin in the D&D sense of the word. A sniper is another type of soldier. A sniper will generally not be asked to kill somebody's innocent family, while an assassin may very likely be contracted for this type of job.

A situation where this might come up would be as the "follow through" of a coercion attempt. "Do this or we take out your family."

While the sniper would certainly have the skills to do so, he may not want to follow through on such a mission. Even if he is "neutral", he may have some compunction against doing so. The subject in question will do things like this without compunction because they are "the enemy".

Let's not compare this situation to present-day military politics, please. If you haven't been involved in a deadly force situation, please don't give your opinion on the motivations of ones who have. It is different for everybody, and different in every situation. This is D&D, and there is always the possiblility of "common soldiers" working for "evil" people. As I said earlier, I never fully fleshed this guy out. We could be talking about going out an killing an entire village of innocents to coerce other villiages. Doing something like this, I would probably mark as evil, even if he was "just following orders".

Stephen_E
2008-01-30, 09:56 PM
There is a difference between a soldier doing his job (which happens to be killing), and an assassin that does so. A sniper is not an assassin in the D&D sense of the word. A sniper is another type of soldier. A sniper will generally not be asked to kill somebody's innocent family, while an assassin may very likely be contracted for this type of job.


And you neatly identify WHY Assassins often are, or become evil. They take on that contract to kill an innocent family just because someone is paying. Of course an important point to note is that it isn't generally innocent victims that an assassin is getting paid to kill. The target is ussually far from savoury.

The NPC you're talking was basically a military sniper/special forces person (and mechanics wise a sniper/special forces person does fit the Assassin class quite well. Alignment is fluff).

He then leaves the military through some mechanism and starts taking on missions on contract. Even if the NPC was asked to kill some innocent family (as I mentioned this doesn't seem particuly likely) he still hasn't stepped over the line unless he takes the job on. As you mentioned he has no problem with breaking a contract if he thinks he can get away with it because he knows the people hiring him are scum. As a general rule most of his target probably are as well.

David Gemmel's "Waylander" is a good case of a ex-soldier who became an assassin for quite valid reasons and orginally only took contracts against people who deserved it. Eventually he stopped caring and stepped over the line. Much of the book is based on his realisation that he has done so and his decision to atone, and the effects thereof.

My personal problem with the alignment restriction of the Assassin class is that assassins are basically a skill set for killing by stealth/ambush. Skill sets don't come with alignments. Who you kill, why you kill, those are ethical issues, and determine your alignment.

Thus back to your NPC. Has he taken on contracts to kill innocent people, knowing they were innocent, and carried them out simply for the coin. If he has done so, or would do so, and has no problems with this he's evil. NE most likely. If he hasn't and/or has qualms about doing so, then he's probably Neutral.

The parties response reminds me of a current game. A player recently started a new PC who's NE. Almost the 1st opportunity his PC got she stole from the party. She got away with it but considering my NE Druid has a maxed spot with Wis 22 (20+2 from item) at 8th level, along with the Wildshape feat that give an additional +8, it's a stupid thing to do, but his concept of "evil" is screw with the party. Your players sound like they have similiar attitudes.

Stephen

Saph
2008-01-31, 09:11 AM
My personal problem with the alignment restriction of the Assassin class is that assassins are basically a skill set for killing by stealth/ambush. Skill sets don't come with alignments. Who you kill, why you kill, those are ethical issues, and determine your alignment.

As far as I can tell, the Assassin class is designed specifically to represent a professional, freelance assassin; someone who murders for money. The 'assassin's guild' type. Hence the 'you must kill someone for no reason other than to join the assassins'. You can be an assassin without being an Assassin, in the same way that you can be a samurai without being a Samurai.

It's a very specific class, unlike the Rogue, which is as un-specific as they get.

- Saph

DrizztFan24
2008-01-31, 01:46 PM
Actually, I'd put him at LG or LN depending on his justification though "terrible acts of homocide" suggest some purposefully messy hits which would put him at LN in my book. I never agreed with assassins as an evil-only PrC.


He is definitely not chaotic. Remember that "respect for the law" does not mean chaotic, but a "lawful" character alignment-wise is one who is disciplined, honorable, and very calculating among other traits (though not all lawfuls share all of these traits, notably the honorable one). Given his disciplined background and the honor you describe (him keeping his word) as well as his need to justify breaking his word, I would say LE.

I'll second that motion.
I don't agree with the whole evil only deal. Currently I'm playing a Beguiler/assassin as CG, follow his own laws all the time and your laws only when they are the same as his.

It sounds like he gained assassin not by being evil but through training. Giving me a decent reasoning for the whole not needing evil thing.


besides, doesn't everyone carry around lead sheets with them?

Stephen_E
2008-01-31, 03:56 PM
As far as I can tell, the Assassin class is designed specifically to represent a professional, freelance assassin; someone who murders for money. The 'assassin's guild' type. Hence the 'you must kill someone for no reason other than to join the assassins'. You can be an assassin without being an Assassin, in the same way that you can be a samurai without being a Samurai.

It's a very specific class, unlike the Rogue, which is as un-specific as they get.

- Saph

Indeed the Fluff is (fluff includes alignment and most "special" prereqs).

The Crunch has nothing specific to a freelance or guild type assassin that I can see.
Average BAB, good Reflex Save, d6 HD, 4 skill pts/lev, class skills appropriate for a sniper/special forces soldier, but no Professions skills that you'd expect a Guild society to have, good Reflex save, limited spells primarily aimed at sneaking without trace, poison use (the main non-magical quick kill DnD possibility) and sneak attack.

Stephen