POLL: Alignment question, again

Remove all ads!

I saw this topic on the WOTC boards and would like to consult the members of SP.

What alignment do you folks think this individual is?

A magic-user, so powerful that he has access to any spell, divine or arcane, and can cast any spell any number of times in one round. He has unlimited spells/day as well.

He can also perdict anything that will occur in the future. There are no limits on this ability as well.

For some inexplicable reason, his actions led his henchmen, cohorts, and family members into captivity by a large orcish tribe.

The magic-user is so powerful that he can single-handedly free the captives in any manner he chooses.

However, this is what he does:

He demands the release of the captives. The orcs refuse initially. After a demonstration of his power, the orcs are sufficiently cowed and are eager to comply. However, the magic-user casts a spell on the chieftain, compelling him to keep the captives in bondage.

On that pretext, he unleashes a plague of diseases upon the orcs, causing great suffering. Once again, he compells the chieftain's refusal with his magic and again on that pretext, casts a spell which kills off all the tribes's children.

Only then is he satisfied and leaves with his henchmen, cohorts, and family members.

Therefore, what alignment is this individual? Strangely, a lot of people think that he is Lawful Good.

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 24 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Alignment question, again (24 votes.)

Alignment question, again (Choose 1)
* Lawful good - 0% (0)
* Neutral good - 0% (0)
* Chaotic good - 8% (2)
* Lawful Neutral - 0% (0)
* Neutral - 8% (2)
* Chaotic Neutral - 17% (4)
* Lawful Evil - 17% (4)
* Neutral Evil - 8% (2)
* Chaotic Evil - 42% (10)

 

I think he is definitely Chaotic Evil, the slaughter of innocent children for the pure sake of pleasure, that too wicked!.. And it's a total misuse of power.

 

Okay, first of all, it's Orc and not Orcish. Just nitpicking on terminology.

The entire scenario depends on whether the orcs are evil. I'll assume that they're "average" orcs and are thus barbaric, Chaotic very Evil creatures.

The orcs had the intention of harming innocents, I assume. Therefore what they did was evil.

The magic-user protected the innocents from being harmed. Protecting innocents from being harmed for the sake of protecting them is Good, but only when they're strangers. In this case, I'll assume that the people captured by the orcs are close family and friends. Good people make sacrifices to strangers; making sacrifices for the people close to you doesn't qualify you to be good.

The magic-user, however, also caused undue suffering. Causing undue suffering is evil, but the orcs (hardly good creatures) are evil too, and presumably have the intention of harming loved ones.

The magic-user also broke a pledge (even though the orcs were Chaotic, I assume). Lawful characters keep their word. Chaotic ones don't. So this definitely seems like a chaotic act.

I'd say that it's a chaotic neutral act, but it could also be chaotic evil depending on what rules you're using to interpret alignment. In 3E, casting Contagion (which is basically what this magic-user is doing) is not evil. In 3.5E, it is.

By the way, I recognize this as something from Exodus. I suppose you could say that what God's doing is Chaotic Evil, but I'm interpreting this strictly out of the books and the example you have. I'll leave whether the situation from the Bible is evil or not to the theologians.

 

Firstly, the henchmen and family members would never have been captured if not for the magic-user's actions.

Next, the orcs would have released the captives without furhter ado upon the initial display of power.

However, the magic-user compelled the chieftain to keep them in capitvity, for inexplicable reasons.

Because of the chieftain's external compulsion, the magic-user then claims that it is grounds enough for him to devastate the tribe with plagues and death spells that target only children, which have nothing to do at all in the initial conflict.

Any paladin going out to smite orcs who have done nothing but live in their huts just because they are 'usually chaotic evil', loses his/her powers in D&D as doing so IS an evil act, just to point out your flawed initial reasoning.

Perhaps I should have used Drow in my example because almost everyone here is an elf-o-phile and no one cares about ugly orcs even though drow are a thousand times more vile.

 

I'm also doubting between Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Evil. Leaning more towards CE than CN though.

The question is "why?". Why did he chose to do things as he did? Is he out for vengeance? Does he simply enjoy the suffering of evil beings? In both cases, I'd say he's chaotic evil. Since you said "satisfied" I'm going to assume either one is true and say it's a Chaotic Evil act.

He has the possibility of ending it any way he chooses, and he chooses the way of delivering as much pain as possible. No LG character would do that.

 

Well, you can't be blamed for accidentally getting people into trouble. What you do unintentionally doesn't affect your alignment (for the most part).

Secondly, the whole presumption in this scenario is that the orcs are Chaotic Evil. In practically any game, if the players are fighting orcs, it's because the orcs started it (by hurting innocents, instigating combat, etc.). If all the orcs are doing is sitting home and watching the Orc Channel, then there's no basis for their being evil.

Of course, if the orcs in your scenario are just nonevil orcs, then that makes the magic-user's actions a lot worse, since now he's intentionally hurting nonevil people. Then again, if the orcs captured the magic-user's family/friends because they thought they could profit from capturing them by ransoming them, killing them, sacrificing them, etc., then that just makes them evil.

In either case, it looks like the magic-user is causing undue suffering with magic that would probably be under the Evil descriptor in D&D. So I suppose I agree it's CE, but it's not as bad if you're using the evilness on a bunch of evil orcs, since at least you're not harming innocents.

 

First of all, there is not enough informaiton given to correctly determine the alignment. The magic-Users intent is unknown as are his motives. It is possible that this Magic-User chose to unduely punish an evil tribe of orcs in order to set an example for other tribes that may want to try the same thing.

I would say that the indivudual in question is neutral. He is simply trying to protect his own from further problem by using the orc tribe as an extreme example of what will happen. Taking out terrible retribution on a tribe of evil orcs seems like a good way to do so.

 

I voted CE for the reason that he dominated the Chief and then used the chief's refusul to release his captives as justifaction for continuing to attack. It really doesn't matter what alignment the Orcs are, the simple matter that he is manipulating the chief so that to others he is justified in his attacks makes him CE and he is just trying to remain undercover a while longer.

 

Somehow I feel really, realy sad when reading this... angered even.

 

Care to explain why?

 

I won't even try to guess his alignment because his reasons aren't clear enough to determine the whys of his actions.The only one who REALLY can determine his alignment is the one who conceived such character.He might be lawful good because he has the power to predict the future and his acts might make sense in the future.He might be neutral and just wanting to make a name for himself as the one who rescued his loved ones and destroyed the evil orcs.He might be evil and just wanting to make the orcs suffer, the captives might be just an excuse so the "good guys" don't come after him.Or he may just be maddened by so much power and the ability to see the future.

 

Lol Shura, naughty Christian bashing here, just to spite the Christians with some nasty parts of Exodus...

MoN, cheer up and err... sue him!

 

Shura, if you have to bash Christians, use the full info. It was not a single family, it was a tribe full of Israelis. And it was not ALL children, it was only the oldest son in each family. Also, the Farao wasn't charmed under a spell, he did what he thinks Rá said that he should have done.

And they had been captives for how long? Hell, they even were slaves.

And, Moses warned them of what would come.

 

Wrong, Exodus clearly states that God took his free will.

 

Okay, I was wrong on that one, but I still have to respond on a comment that Shura made in a PM to me:

Well, the provident I cannot respond on, because I do not know English any good, but about the leading place:
You mean that the non-native Americans should all be enslaved because they didn't live there from the beginning? That is just disturbing.

Also, on another comment:

I think this one is so called "hidden" Christian bashing, and if is not, put it in the AoDA(Tal, not a correction, only a suggestion) because we have had several similar topics before in there.

 

This poll is meant to be a discussion on the alignment system in D&D 3rd edition.

To those who are 'offended':
The world doesn't revolve around your religion just because you think so, you know?

Now, back on topic: