|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 2:43PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2008
|
This is probably an old subject from 3.5
CN players using their alignment as reason for whatever act the DM deems of specific alignment.
But mainly I'm having a little trouble with a player that chose to be Unaligned(4E), which is fine by me, but he purposefully kills innocent NPCs for the sake of getting their items or wealth and then either:
- Justifies himself as being unaligned, thinking that gives him the right to do whatever he pleases.
or
- Gives the NPCs a warning that if they don't give him what he wants or stop doing whatever is annoying him he will kill them.
The later usually ends in another Dead NPC also since they can't help it if they are there for a purpose...
but as he character is developing... he seems to be turning evil in my eyes, yet the player justifies himself as "neutral" or Unaligned...
Am I wrong as a DM saying that his character is turning Evil? or maybe already is?
Or
Is he right in saying that by being unaligned gives him the right to do anything as long as it is "Justified" or something of the sort.?
(This might be a little biased but, I'd like opinions or maybe plausible solutions for this veritable ticking timebomb of a plot crisis.)
He is an Unaligned
Lvl 7 human wizard
that is "decrepit?" by his standards, and seeks power, but not along the lines of an ultimate spell, but rather to be rivaled as a god. (Possible Demigod Path)
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 3:48PM
#2
|
|
|
If you're unaligned, you don't actively seek to harm others or wish them ill. But you also don't go out of your way to put yourself at risk without some hope for reward. You support law and order when doing so benefits you. You value your own freedom, without worrying too much about protecting the freedom of others.
That is the direct explaination of the unaligned alignment from the Player's Handbook. So if I were you, I would advise the player to take a closer look at the description, and if he doesn't start making some changes to not bully everyone he wants something out of, I would consider his character as turning evil.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 3:56PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2008
|
I see your point, but I still don't see a hole in his case.
seeing as how he doesn't actively seek to harm people, but if they come accross him and... say annoy him, they most likely will die. NPCs at least.
Other than that when he's not killing them he just acts like one of those classic Wizard bad guys... thinking evil things(scheaming) out loud, being racist(in game). Basically I'm looking for a valid reason to tell him he's evil, so he'll play nice for a little while.
Thanks~
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 3:57PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2005
|
I have completely removed alignment from my game for that very reason. There's no more mechanical need for alignment anyways, and I don't need players using ambiguous alignments to justify various actions.
If I were ever to need to know a character's alignment for some in-game, mechanical reason, it doesn't matter what's written on their character sheet. I decide what their alignment is for the purpose of that moment, based on their actions, intents, and general behavior.
Ever feel like people on these forums can't possibly understand how wrong they are? Feeling trolled? Don't get mad. Report Post.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 4:03PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 13, 2008
|
But mainly I'm having a little trouble with a player that chose to be Unaligned(4E), which is fine by me, but he purposefully kills innocent NPCs for the sake of getting their items
Have him try and kill the wrong guy, see where it goes.
- Justifies himself as being unaligned, thinking that gives him the right to do whatever he pleases.
or
- Gives the NPCs a warning that if they don't give him what he wants or stop doing whatever is annoying him he will kill them.
It is my right to claim what others possess.
Evil characters don’t necessarily go out of their way to hurt people, but they’re perfectly willing to take advantage of the weakness of others to acquire what they want.
Sounds alot like your player. He is literally mugging people "Gimme your stuff or you die" and that seems a wee evil.
Their could be an idea of him going chaotic evil depending on other aspects of his character:
I don’t care what I have to do to get what I want.
Chaotic evil characters have a complete disregard for others. Each believes he or she is the only being that matters and kills, steals, and betrays others to gain power. Their word is meaningless and their actions destructive. Their worldviews can be so warped that they destroy anything and anyone that doesn’t directly contribute to their interests.
The question should always be what he fits more likely as and its seems he is more evil then unaligned but other factors may change that.
The only way for him to murder like he is and stay unaligned would be if he was: Rather, they’ve chosen not to choose, either because they see the benefits of both good and evil or because they see themselves as above the concerns of morality. Problem is, from what is been said, he doesn't see the benefits of both good/evil and its hard to see the 'Gimme your stuff or die' as above morality.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 4:17PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2008
|
I have completely removed alignment from my game for that very reason. There's no more mechanical need for alignment anyways, and I don't need players using ambiguous alignments to justify various actions.
If I were ever to need to know a character's alignment for some in-game, mechanical reason, it doesn't matter what's written on their character sheet. I decide what their alignment is for the purpose of that moment, based on their actions, intents, and general behavior.
Thank you, I think this actually is a great idea
I personally had implemented a 20point system
in which you started at neutral and good actions gave you posistive points (good up to 10) and negative points on evil acts(-10 to evil)
as for chaotic and lawful
set them as extremes...
but having no alignment seems more viable and i wouldnt have players complaining as to why i took points when they killed an obviously innocent NPC.
@ rentauri:
thanks, i like that first idea a lot aswell
(I know this seems like a DM help kinda thread but, i meant it explicitly to help out my PCs char development)
tnx everyone.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 4:19PM
#7
|
|
|
Chaotic Neutral in 3.5 wasn't the 'do anything' alignment like Unaligned in 4E is.
You were ethically aligned to Chaos and you were open to either a good or evil morality.
This is an anarchist. One that believes law is an unwanted and artificial construct to promote weaker entities over naturally selected stronger ones. In other words, Chaos allows the best to rise to whatever authority they can grab for however long they can hold it, While Law promotes a strict set of rules that disrupts this natural selection of the best and most fit to rule.
If you let your players play CN as crazy or worse, Unaligned you were to blame for their poor play.
Unaligned in 4E on the other hand is completely without function and defines itself by what it does not support which is a negative assertion.
Chaotic Neutral wasn't broken, Unaligned is.
BTW, Neutral was an alignment of balance. You saw a need for both Ethics and Moralities. It still isn't as broken as the cop-out alignment 'Unaligned'.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 4:27PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2008
|
Chaotic Neutral in 3.5 wasn't the 'do anything' alignment like Unaligned in 4E is.
You were ethically aligned to Chaos and you were open to either a good or evil morality.
This is an anarchist. One that believes law is an unwanted and artificial construct to promote weaker entities over naturally selected stronger ones. In other words, Chaos allows the best to rise to whatever authority they can grab for however long they can hold it, While Law promotes a strict set of rules that disrupts this natural selection of the best and most fit to rule.
If you let your players play CN as crazy or worse, Unaligned you were to blame for their poor play.
Unaligned in 4E on the other hand is completely without function and defines itself by what it does not support which is a negative assertion.
Chaotic Neutral wasn't broken, Unaligned is.
BTW, Neutral was an alignment of balance. You saw a need for both Ethics and Moralities. It still isn't as broken as the cop-out alignment 'Unaligned'.
Oh that I know, we used to play 3.5EB
and the same player was a CN Rogue that basically justified every act as...hmmm... how can I put this...: "Because I can." at least as power ideals went, he never tried anything purely evil for the hell of it, was just mostly... eh... random? but upheld by the principle of ... "I'll take what is yours, because you're too weak to own it." or something along those lines.... but thats all off topic, sorry.
however I do Agree some people do take advantage of the new Unaligned 'alignment', pardon redundancy... if any.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 4:52PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2007
|
Am I wrong as a DM saying that his character is turning Evil? or maybe already is?
Or
Is he right in saying that by being unaligned gives him the right to do anything as long as it is "Justified" or something of the sort.?
This is the same problem people had with CN in 3e.
People fail to understand that one of the defining attributes of evil people is their ability to come up with self serving justifications and rationalize their actions away.
If somebody annoys you and you decide to attack them, it isn't necessarily evil (but easily could be if you are too easily annoyed). But if you decide to attack somebody and then look for a reason to do so, it is evil.
4e unaligned goes further then 3e's neutral alignments in what you can do before your alignment shifts to evil. But from what you have said, this guy seems to have crossed the line.
Jay
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2008 - 4:57PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2006
|
Oh that I know, we used to play 3.5EB
and the same player was a CN Rogue that basically justified every act as...hmmm... how can I put this...: "Because I can." at least as power ideals went, he never tried anything purely evil for the hell of it, was just mostly... eh... random? but upheld by the principle of ... "I'll take what is yours, because you're too weak to own it." or something along those lines.... but thats all off topic, sorry.
Isn't that the definition of Chaotic Evil from 3.5?
A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. Thankfully, his plans are haphazard, and any groups he joins or forms are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.
Chaotic evil is sometimes called "demonic" because demons are the epitome of chaotic evil.
Chaotic evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents the destruction not only of beauty and life but also of the order on which beauty and life depend.[/quote]
Yeah, your player sounds exactly like Chaotic Evil.
I had the same problem with a player about two years ago. He was a Chaotic Neutral Halfling Rogue who had no problem killing party members (that player's personal PK body count in my games alone is 2, it's higher with other DMs), stealing for innocent civilians, selling out the party, stealing from the party and trying to destroy the Maguffin (the soul of a dead paladin trapped in a staff) because she tried to talk him out of doing the things he did. That was his regular attitude during the game, and he would always justify it by saying that "Chaotic Neutral" was the "do anything I want alignment" and for awhile I went with it, since he made the game interesting. Then, he murdered a shop keeper because he was racist against halflings. Then, he stole the dead shopkeepr's stuff to placate the other party members (who were tired of him stealing from them). The final straw was, after a small town was hit by a magical disaster (directed by the Big Bad), he decided to steal what little cash remained in the town. I tallied things up, and realized he was much, much worse than the Neutral Evil Cleric of Nerull, and that guy had murdered people in front of the party (and, away from the party).
Finally, I stood up to him and told him he was full of crap. He didn't like it, but I persisted in telling him he was playing Chaotic Evil. The moral is to just stand up to your player. Set up an objective standard of good and evil and make sure your players know what it is, and make sure it's based on the alignment system you're using. If they start playing an evil character, tell them, and don't take their crap.
----------------
Now playing: [url=http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/flogging+molly/track/black+friday+rule]Flogging Molly - Black Friday Rule
via FoxyTunes
|
|
|
