Can Celia even be a lawyer and "lawful good"?

[paladinofshojo]

A lawyer can't always be "lawful" or "good" at the same time right? So how exactly is Celia "lawful good"...

[Trazoi]

A lawyer can't always be "lawful" or "good" at the same time right? So how exactly is Celia "lawful good"...
:confused:

Why not?

[paladinofshojo]

Talented lawyers aren't really the type of people one would call "lawful good"....

Since they live off of money created by defending clients who may or may not have done some immoral acts...... such as Jimmy Cockran

I doubt Celia would make a good lawyer if she really was "lawful good"

[Trazoi]

So the argument is that a good lawyer can only be lawful neutral at best? That doesn't sound right to me.

I can see a lawful good trial lawyer like Celia strongly believing in the rule of law to upholding what is good about society. I think you can still be lawful good and think potentially immoral people deserve to have proper representation in court.

[David Argall]

Lawyers are pretty much by definition lawful. And since we routinely have one opposing the other, it's hard to avoid the idea some are good.

[Demented]

"Potentially", however, a Lawful Good lawyer is going to have some moral wrestling to do when dealing with an actually immoral client. Lawful Good characters naturally insist on punishment for the "guilty"; chances are, we aren't referring to guilt determined by trial. Then again, you could interpret it that way if you wanted to.

[Chadwick]

Unlike real life, DnD has a more defined view of good and evil. So if a society is Lawful Good such as Mount Celestia, she could easily be a lawyer for it. Simply because she would fit into that society. Just like real world lawyers fit into ours.


The thing is your comparing a system of TRUE GOOD and TRUE EVIL vs one in which good and evil is subjective.

[Tempest Fennac]

Has Celia been confirmed as LG? I can't remember that being mentioned anywhere.

[Tilian]

A Lawful Good lawyer? That's unpossible! OR IS IT! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atticus_Finch)

dun dun dunnnnnn

[Arameus]

What? A glaring contradiction involving Celia's character? I thought this was old news by now. *zing*

For Argument's Sake...
--------------------------------------
Personal grudges aside, we don't really know how their legal system works. It appears to parallel our own, own a few levels, and in a few places, but is OotS-iverse Sylvan Law really a subject on which any here can claim to be authorities?

It's possible that Celia is not obligated to take up the defense of people she believes to be guilty, and she may even be allowed to drop a client if she becomes convinced of the same midway through a case.

Just because the legal system of the USA is based in impartial counsel doesn't mean Celia, probably not a US citizen, is affected by such tenets.
-----------------------------------------

But to answer your question as *I* believe it, no I don't really think so. I don't think Celia was ever intended to be a major character and jamming her in more and more often has resulted in too many asspulls for even the Giant to pull off serviceably.

I've already determined that, given her personality and the realities of her work, once she becomes a full-fledged defense attorney, she will be swiftly and mercilessly disillusioned by the grim truth of her profession's nature and either become burnt out and soured by it or simply give up the law in favor of becoming a lobbyist for some whacked-out left-wing special interest.

Bonus points if she hangs herself, which, for a flighted creature, is the most hilarious method of suicide I can really recommend short of jumping.

Or maybe she's not even LG, although all signs seem to point that way.

[Lord_Butters_I]

Hey, honest lawyers exist. They do cases for Santa and the Tooth Fairy.

[Trazoi]

A Lawful Good lawyer? That's unpossible! OR IS IT! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atticus_Finch)

dun dun dunnnnnn
I'd have nominated Sir Thomas More (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More), patron saint of politicians and statesmen, but Atticus Finch is a great example too.

[coracleboat]

Celia already refused to defend Belkar, so I think she only will take cases that she morally supports.

[Gnomish Lab]

A lawyer can't always be "lawful" or "good" at the same time right?

I don't think so (edit: that is, I think lawyers can be lawful good).
Lawyer jokes aside, the whole concept stands for (in our world, at least, but probably also in OotS (at least at some civilizations - but Celia's especially), where lawyers are much more like our kind of lawyers then the medieval kind):

1. Every side of the argument is free to present their case.
2. Because the legal system is too complex, they would be assisted/represented by experts.
3. Trials should be fair.
4. Until the verdict is given, the accused is not guilty, so the lawyer should represent his/her costumer to the best of his/her ability.

Sounds both Lawful and Good to me.

You can both represent a scum beg and do your best to represent him/her in court AND be lawful good if you believe in his/her right for fair trial.

Of course, you can be a lawyer and not be lawful good ; it might even be easier... but not being lawful good is sure isn't a prerequisite.


And that's without talking about lawyers who don't represent criminals -
lawyers can also work only on formulating contracts, writing wills, ect.
I can't see anything that is against the lawful good alignment in that.

[paladinofshojo]

Unlike real life, DnD has a more defined view of good and evil. So if a society is Lawful Good such as Mount Celestia, she could easily be a lawyer for it. Simply because she would fit into that society. Just like real world lawyers fit into ours.


The thing is your comparing a system of TRUE GOOD and TRUE EVIL vs one in which good and evil is subjective.


Considering the fact that we're talking about a world where sentient life is treated like nothing but experience fodder by the "good" guys I'd say good and evil are even more subjective then our world.....

[paladinofshojo]

A Lawful Good lawyer? That's unpossible! OR IS IT! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atticus_Finch)

dun dun dunnnnnn



Finch is an imaginary character.....

[paladinofshojo]

I'd have nominated Sir Thomas More (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More), patron saint of politicians and statesmen, but Atticus Finch is a great example too.


A 14 century lawyer that was remembered for religious dogma isn't really a good example of an "honest lawyer" in a modern world....

[paladinofshojo]

Celia already refused to defend Belkar, so I think she only will take cases that she morally supports.


True, but that could be do to the fact that she doesn't like Belkar

[Trazoi]

A 14 century lawyer that was remembered for religious dogma isn't really a good example of an "honest lawyer" in a modern world....
Maybe, but none of you are going to know the local lawyers I've met that are good, upstanding people.

Besides which, I see Thomas More for being more remembered in taking a principled stand in what he believed in, even to the point of dying for it, which could be seen as an example as "lawful good". In his case the cause was Catholicism, but the principle is the same.

We should probably leave Thomas More as an example though, as this is skirting a bit too close to a religious discussion (which is taboo here), even though I didn't mean that to be the case :smallredface:

[coracleboat]

True, but that could be do to the fact that she doesn't like Belkar

Isn't the reason she doesn't like him is because he's overtly Evil?

[Demented]

Besides which, I see Thomas More for being more remembered in taking a principled stand in what he believed in, even to the point of dying for it, which could be seen as an example as "lawful good".

Lawful neutral and lawful evil characters can do that too. It's just the principles that are different. Neutral might die for the right to sniff flowers on tuesday, while evil will most surely die in an effort to preserve a tyrannical rule.

Chaotic characters, on the other hand, will just have to settle for unprincipled stands.
_ _ _ _ _

Anyways, what would differentiate a lawful good lawyer from a lawful evil lawyer? Ideally you couldn't tell the difference. Or could you? Isn't the ideal really for a lawful neutral lawyer, rather than a good or evil lawyer?

_ _ _ _ _

Oh, and Celia insisting on punishing Belkar for killing the gnome seems like a decidedly lawful good thing to do. He must be punished! ...Even if the punishment is completely ineffectual, and not entirely in 'our' best interests.

[NerfTW]

True, but that could be do to the fact that she doesn't like Belkar

pos, you could have put those all in one post.


Also, I agree with the theory that she just doesn't take cases of clients she believes to be evil.

[Dire Ferret]

While it is true that in reality lawyers are unable to have a Good alignment, OOTS takes place in a fantasy world and is therefor not subject to these rules.

[Sylian]

Phoenix Wright is a Lawful Good lawyer, isn't he?

Couldn't Celia just chose to not represent Evil criminals? Besides, if she doesn't like being a defense attorney, she could perhaps become a prosecutor?

[Hinotori]

Gnomish Lab is the only one that I think has hit the nail on the head.

In the real world, the whole point of even having lawyers in the first place is that everyone, even the guilty, is entitled to counsel and defense. It's part of a fair trial. Assuming the environment Celia comes from is similar in this respect, it would make sense for someone lawfully good to defend even clients who are clearly guilty. After all, ideally (and Celia clearly is an idealist), only a fair trial can justly decide someone's guilt, and a fair trial requires both a prosecutor and a defender.

Saying that lawyers can't be "good" and successful at the same time is actually rather insulting since I know several lawyers and law students who are genuinely upstanding people who believe in the justice system, for all its flaws. That's not to say that walking the moral tightrope between becoming ethically apathetic or failing to provide an adequate defense is not a difficult one. It is, in large part, why I abandoned pursuing a career of it of my own, and why many lawyers have engendered the stereotype.

[NerfTW]

While it is true that in reality lawyers are unable to have a Good alignment, OOTS takes place in a fantasy world and is therefor not subject to these rules.

Dire Ferret, lawyers in "reality" are entirely able to reject clients they're morally opposed to defending. Many a lawyer has requested to be removed from a case when they could no longer defend a client to the best of thier ability, due to a confession or undeniable evidence.

[Forias]

The idea that clients go to their lawyers: "Oh yeah, I totally butchered that family of four - good times - now get me off the hook!" is nonsense. No lawyer would be expected to defend a client if they knew they were guilty - heck, by law they'd probably be expected to give evidence against them.

Of course, what happens a lot is defence lawyers get lied to and defend guilty people anyway. But they are simply not qualified to decide that someone is guilty based on their own opinion. They are a vital part of a process of discovering truth - if they decided they weren't going to try and defend this guy because they think he's guilty, that's when they'd be doing an injustice and failing to act "Lawful Good".

Perfectly possible for someone to be a Defence Lawyer and an extremely good, lawful human being. Lawful Good is all about following the process laid down by good laws, isn't it?

[Roderick_BR]

Hey, honest lawyers exist. They do cases for Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
And Lawful Good adventuring groups in RPG games/webcomics :smallbiggrin:

And as was already said, is Celia Lawful Good at all?

Hmm... kinda off topic... Is Phoenix Wright Lawful Good either? He looks more like Confused Good to me...

[NerfTW]

The idea that clients go to their lawyers: "Oh yeah, I totally butchered that family of four - good times - now get me off the hook!" is nonsense. No lawyer would be expected to defend a client if they knew they were guilty - heck, by law they'd probably be expected to give evidence against them.


No, by American law, anything a person says to thier lawyer is confidential and inadmissable in court. Even if they confess, show them where the body was buried, and threaten to kill again.

-edit- To clarify, the lawyer can show the authorities the body, and the body itself can be used as evidence, but they can't use the fact that the client knew where it was buried in their case.

[The Rose Dragon]

My parents are very lawful good lawyers, thank you very much. :smallannoyed:

[Nerd-o-rama]

Finch is an imaginary character.....Um...so is Celia.

How do my half-tangential comments always end up at the top of the page. Look at the previous page! There are very good points there! Much better than mine!

[DreadSpoon]

Lawyers are pretty much by definition lawful.

No, they are not. Shojo was the ruler of an entire city, the MAKER of laws, and the leader of an order of bloody paladins and he was still Chaotic!

Lawful DOES NOT have anything to do with knowing, using, liking, making, enforcing, or otherwise supporting laws. NO RELATION! Lawful the alignment relates to how a character conducts himself. It informs us that he believes order and codified behavior is a positive force on one's life. That's it. A Lawful character can be at odds with the local laws and customs. Maybe some Lawful characters do simply believe that rules should never ever be broken, but not all Lawful character characters blindly follow rules for the sake of doing whatever they're told is right.

Chaotic means that the character operates on whims. It does not mean that he hates, refuses, undermines, or otherwise ignores laws just for the sake of being an anarchist. Anarchists are almost certainly all Chaotic, but all Chaotic characters are not anarchists.

As for the people who say that lawyers can't be good, what kind of crack are you guys on? What do you call the prosecuting attorneys who've made it their life's work to put scum behind bars for the pittance that prosecuting attorneys make? What about the attorneys who work pro bono for causes they personally believe in, be it the supporting victims of unfair civil suites (like defending against the RIAA's insanity), lobbying Congress over issues like the Darfur massacres, or so on? What about lawyers who go the route of the public defendant -- who get paid less than most auto workers -- because they believe that everyone should have the right to an attorney, and who put up with defending the scumbags knowing that they also get the help the poor and falsely accused who cannot afford a private lawyer?

Even a thief can be Lawful ("thief" as in someone who steals, not as in a member of the Rogue class) if his motivations for stealing are codified and adhere to a set of personal rules. A thief who steals for the sake of personal wealth, or for the thrill of breaking the rules, or for revenge is likely not Lawful. A thief who steals because he believes the law is corrupt and allowing the rich to steal from the poor could very easily be Lawful, because he is trying to subvert and destroy Evil laws in the hopes of eventually toppling the dictatorship of the self-serving aristocracy and enacting Good laws to grant all people of the realm a better life.

Think about it: if a king says the new law is to slowly torture and kill every child, what does a Lawful Good character do? Likewise, if a king says the new law is to give your life to save the lives of others, what does a Lawful Evil character do? Chances are they will break the damn law, because the written rule of law is not the driving force of a Lawful character -- their belief in rules and order as the instrument to improving the lives of others (if they're Good) or their own lives (if they're Evil) is what makes them Lawful. Breaking a law might make a Lawful character feel uncomfortable, but I guarantee you that torturing a killing a child would make a Good character feel a hell of a lot more uncomfortable than revolting against the Evil king ever would.

Thank you 4E for changing alignment rules, since 99% of the player base can't seem to grasp what alignment was meant to represent.

[Warren Dew]

The idea that clients go to their lawyers: "Oh yeah, I totally butchered that family of four - good times - now get me off the hook!" is nonsense. No lawyer would be expected to defend a client if they knew they were guilty - heck, by law they'd probably be expected to give evidence against them.

They would not be expected to give evidence against them, because of lawyer client confidentiality. However, they would also not be expected to come up with a defense theory inconsistent with the facts.

A lawful good lawyer, faced with that circumstance, would admit the facts and try to get the client off on a technicality. They're typically public defenders. A lawful evil lawyer, on the other hand, is like a famous lawyer who tells his students, "the first thing I say to every client is, 'if you're guilty, please don't tell me'!" - or like prosecutors who trump up big name cases to make headlines to further their political careers.

Celia, I would note, is pretty much a public defender in her one case so far.

I would agree that "good" lawyers are rare. On the other hand, "good" thieves like Haley are even more of a contradiction in terms to me.

[David Argall]

No, they are not. Shojo was the ruler of an entire city, the MAKER of laws, and the leader of an order of bloody paladins and he was still Chaotic!
It is not at all unusual for the maker of laws to think he is above the law, which is a chaotic attitude.
The lawyer, by contrast, knows he is not above the law, and deals with law all the time. What does the law say? is his basic question. Does the law say this? Or that? He is essentially lawful.


Lawful DOES NOT have anything to do with knowing, using, liking, making, enforcing, or otherwise supporting laws. NO RELATION! Lawful the alignment relates to how a character conducts himself. It informs us that he believes order and codified behavior is a positive force on one's life. That's it. A Lawful character can be at odds with the local laws and customs. Maybe some Lawful characters do simply believe that rules should never ever be broken, but not all Lawful character characters blindly follow rules for the sake of doing whatever they're told is right.
You are trying to make the exception the rule. Obedience to authority is a value given in the PH. The blather about personal code, etc is just there for player convenience. Note how you say "...can be at odds.." In other words, the default is that he is not. And when we talk of order and codified behavior, the law becomes the assumed standard here. Again, you say "Not all..." and again, that is acknowledging that blindly following rules is an acceptable Lawful behavior. So even you can't get away from the idea that Lawful = law.


Thank you 4E for changing alignment rules, since 99% of the player base can't seem to grasp what alignment was meant to represent.
The 4e rules changes do nothing to make the definitions of alignment clearer. In fact they make them less so. About all 4e has "improved" in this sense is taking a step towards abandoning the whole idea.

[busterswd]

Um...so is Celia.

This. This this this.

[Porthos]

So lawyers can't be good, eh? Nice stereotyping. I think I'll have to mention that to all of my friends who are lawyers and gamers. :smallamused:

Next you'll be telling me that politicans or the police can't be good either. :smallyuk:

[NerfTW]

So lawyers can't be good, eh? Nice stereotyping. I think I'll have to mention that to all of my friends who are lawyers and gamers. :smallamused:


Are you saying gamers can't be evil? :smallconfused:

[Stormageddon]

Lawyers work within a system of ethics. These ethics do not always fall under what most people consider normal morality (or DnD Good v. Evil; Chaotic v. Lawful.) So it's hard to say what their aliments are just by the job they do.


Plus not all lawyers defend criminals. Some do stuff like probate, real estate, employment law, ext... ext...

[silvadel]

The problem is the whole system of legal ethics occasionally forces lawyers to commit evil acts. This does not mean an active lawyer can't be good, but it does kind of preclude them from being Good.

IE It would be kind of hard to have levels in expert(lawyer) and paladin at the same time.

[Trazoi]

The problem is the whole system of legal ethics occasionally forces lawyers to commit evil acts.
It depends a bit on what acts are considered "evil". I don't see defending an evil person in court to be necessarily an evil act. If you're a lawyer, it can be seen as part of being lawful.

However, it might be seen as associating with an evil person. I'm not too versed in D&D rules, but I don't think there's a restriction on lawful good in general associating with evil in principle.

It is however a problem for paladin lawyers, although I suppose they could be in-house attorneys for good organisations or work in contract law. Does "detect evil" work on contracts? :smallamused:

[archon_huskie]

As a joke I did play a Lawful Evil character with ranks in Profession: Lawyer. My goal was to build him up from a level one adventurer to an Evil Chancelor.

[Querzis]

Ok this thread is really offensive. I dunno if you guys heard too many lawyers jokes or never actually met a lawyers in your freaking life (probably both) but yes, a lawyer can totally be Lawfull good and the very idea behind lawyers: that everyone deserve a fair trial is a Lawfull good idea in the first place.

I would also say that there is a lot more lawfull good lawyers who believe in the idea of a fair trial and then lawfull evil lawyers who try to get away with everything (though most are still probably Lawfull neutral).

By the way, Phoenix wright is more neutral good since lawyers in the phoenix wright universe dont seems to have to know and uphold the law as much as just find a minor contradiction in the witness testimony and point their finger.

[brilliantlight]

No, they are not. Shojo was the ruler of an entire city, the MAKER of laws, and the leader of an order of bloody paladins and he was still Chaotic!

Lawful DOES NOT have anything to do with knowing, using, liking, making, enforcing, or otherwise supporting laws. NO RELATION! Lawful the alignment relates to how a character conducts himself. It informs us that he believes order and codified behavior is a positive force on one's life. That's it. A Lawful character can be at odds with the local laws and customs. Maybe some Lawful characters do simply believe that rules should never ever be broken, but not all Lawful character characters blindly follow rules for the sake of doing whatever they're told is right.

Chaotic means that the character operates on whims. It does not mean that he hates, refuses, undermines, or otherwise ignores laws just for the sake of being an anarchist. Anarchists are almost certainly all Chaotic, but all Chaotic characters are not anarchists.

As for the people who say that lawyers can't be good, what kind of crack are you guys on? What do you call the prosecuting attorneys who've made it their life's work to put scum behind bars for the pittance that prosecuting attorneys make? What about the attorneys who work pro bono for causes they personally believe in, be it the supporting victims of unfair civil suites (like defending against the RIAA's insanity), lobbying Congress over issues like the Darfur massacres, or so on? What about lawyers who go the route of the public defendant -- who get paid less than most auto workers -- because they believe that everyone should have the right to an attorney, and who put up with defending the scumbags knowing that they also get the help the poor and falsely accused who cannot afford a private lawyer?

Even a thief can be Lawful ("thief" as in someone who steals, not as in a member of the Rogue class) if his motivations for stealing are codified and adhere to a set of personal rules. A thief who steals for the sake of personal wealth, or for the thrill of breaking the rules, or for revenge is likely not Lawful. A thief who steals because he believes the law is corrupt and allowing the rich to steal from the poor could very easily be Lawful, because he is trying to subvert and destroy Evil laws in the hopes of eventually toppling the dictatorship of the self-serving aristocracy and enacting Good laws to grant all people of the realm a better life.

Think about it: if a king says the new law is to slowly torture and kill every child, what does a Lawful Good character do? Likewise, if a king says the new law is to give your life to save the lives of others, what does a Lawful Evil character do? Chances are they will break the damn law, because the written rule of law is not the driving force of a Lawful character -- their belief in rules and order as the instrument to improving the lives of others (if they're Good) or their own lives (if they're Evil) is what makes them Lawful. Breaking a law might make a Lawful character feel uncomfortable, but I guarantee you that torturing a killing a child would make a Good character feel a hell of a lot more uncomfortable than revolting against the Evil king ever would.

Thank you 4E for changing alignment rules, since 99% of the player base can't seem to grasp what alignment was meant to represent.

They changed it in the wrong way IMO. They should have been good,evil, lawful and chaos or good and evil or no alignments at all. Chaotic evil is no more evil then LE. The Nazis and Stalinists were LE and they were as evil as you can get!

[xyzzy]

I, personally, intepret this as Celia being "merciful" --- even a criminal deserves a fair trial, and a good lawyer, and it wouldn't be good to refuse to help someone whom you're well-equipped to help simply because you disagree with their code of ethics. A truly good character is compassionate toward all people; O-Chul is a fantastic example of this. He doesn't agree with Redcloak's methodology, but rather than refuse to work within his system, he treats him with respect and doesn't go out of his way to anger and manipulate him.

Celia is basically the same in her lawyering; there certainly are lawyers who only care about winning their trials --- Mr. Jones' 5-0 record is proof of this. But Celia is okay with evil taking place around her --- as long as she's not forced into involvement.

[Kish]

They changed it in the wrong way IMO. They should have been good,evil, lawful and chaos or good and evil or no alignments at all. Chaotic evil is no more evil then LE. The Nazis and Stalinists were LE and they were as evil as you can get!
OT (but yes, the topic of this thread really is offensive), but 4ed doesn't paint Chaotic Evil as more evil than Evil or Lawful Good as more good than Good. Indeed, the impression I get is that they're trying to say that by default, evil is obsessed with control and good fixated on freedom.

[Joran]

As for the people who say that lawyers can't be good, what kind of crack are you guys on? What do you call the prosecuting attorneys who've made it their life's work to put scum behind bars for the pittance that prosecuting attorneys make? What about the attorneys who work pro bono for causes they personally believe in, be it the supporting victims of unfair civil suites (like defending against the RIAA's insanity), lobbying Congress over issues like the Darfur massacres, or so on? What about lawyers who go the route of the public defendant -- who get paid less than most auto workers -- because they believe that everyone should have the right to an attorney, and who put up with defending the scumbags knowing that they also get the help the poor and falsely accused who cannot afford a private lawyer?


Quoted for the absolute truth here. As for Celia? She's probably Lawful Good with a good amount of Stupid Good thrown in there.

[The Giant]

The Voice of Mod: The premise of this topic is offensive to anyone who is themselves a lawyer, as has been noted by many people, as well as skirting both political and religious subjects. Closed.