AtwasAwamps
2010-06-04, 09:36 AM
So, I’m taking a little flak from my group for some recent actions. It’s not a big deal, but it had me curious as to what other people might think, as my group tends to have extremely narrow concepts of alignment.
I am playing a Lawful Good paladin5/crusader1 who tends to be more laid-back than expected, in a party of mostly LN/CN characters who have been working for the “common good” to save the world. After a long journey, we’ve arrived at a town that is basically cover for an insane asylum. The town is mostly abandoned due to the possibility of an oncoming war. All that’s left are some guards and a single noble who is “putting her affairs in order”. The party’s goal is to find out what has happened to an acolyte of the Church of St. Cuthbert.
As we talk to the gate guards, they act evasively when we ask them about someone named Rose passing through. They get more and more agitated when the questions are asked. Since our questions are getting nowhere, we move into town and search around a bit, finding nothing, until we get to the noble’s home. Chatting with her also yields us nothing.
Heading to the asylum, we encounter guards there. Guards who have a few dire wolves in cages, hoping to train them as guard dogs. If that doesn’t set off alarms, an interview with the guards tells us that yes, someone named Rose is in the asylum. In that, she showed up with mysterious people garbed like some of the villains we had previously met were garbed and checked herself into the asylum as insane. When we’re asked if we can see them or see someone in charge, we’re told “The Doctor” would have to let us talk to them, but that he was in the middle of his experiments and wouldn’t be able to talk to us immediately…as in, for another 1-3 days. Our sense motive checks indicate that he, too, is giving us the run-around.
So…we know the acolyte is in there. We know she was sane when she left. We know she has been exposed to the villains of our story. We know the asylum has had dealings with the villains of our story.
At this point, my paladin simply shakes his head, and begins walking…past the guards…to the doors of the asylum. As I’m walking, my DM allows me to prepare my maneuvers, which include Mountain Hammer…IE, can opener. It’s very clear I’m going to bust down the door. The LN Monk, who is quite reckless, comes with me. We are stopped by the LN cleric, who reasons us down. This is all fine with me…I had started the action as something my character would do, knowing that at least one other player would find a reason to stop me. It was a calculated risk to create a fun roleplaying session and in fact, it did…the LN Cleric gave an impassioned speech about how he understood my motivations but believed that reason would see us through here, not action. To be frank, the scene worked out better than I could have thought it would have and I was happy my actions led to fun RP.
The issue occurred afterwards…where the DM referred to the LN as stopping a “paladin’s evil actions”. My hackles went up. I don’t think anything I did goes against the actions a Lawful Good Character would take. He said that I had to believe in authority and couldn’t go breaking and entering and begin slaughtering people left and right. I pointed out that I wasn’t going to kill anyone, that I was planning on sticking to NL damage if it came to that, and that I was in a position to believe that whatever authority being exerted here was being abused and was incorrect. Nothing about my actions was evil, nor was any of it not in line with being lawful good as I perceived an abuse of the law.
I understand that my actions were “borderline” but I think calling them “Evil” is WAY out of line. What do you folks think?
I am playing a Lawful Good paladin5/crusader1 who tends to be more laid-back than expected, in a party of mostly LN/CN characters who have been working for the “common good” to save the world. After a long journey, we’ve arrived at a town that is basically cover for an insane asylum. The town is mostly abandoned due to the possibility of an oncoming war. All that’s left are some guards and a single noble who is “putting her affairs in order”. The party’s goal is to find out what has happened to an acolyte of the Church of St. Cuthbert.
As we talk to the gate guards, they act evasively when we ask them about someone named Rose passing through. They get more and more agitated when the questions are asked. Since our questions are getting nowhere, we move into town and search around a bit, finding nothing, until we get to the noble’s home. Chatting with her also yields us nothing.
Heading to the asylum, we encounter guards there. Guards who have a few dire wolves in cages, hoping to train them as guard dogs. If that doesn’t set off alarms, an interview with the guards tells us that yes, someone named Rose is in the asylum. In that, she showed up with mysterious people garbed like some of the villains we had previously met were garbed and checked herself into the asylum as insane. When we’re asked if we can see them or see someone in charge, we’re told “The Doctor” would have to let us talk to them, but that he was in the middle of his experiments and wouldn’t be able to talk to us immediately…as in, for another 1-3 days. Our sense motive checks indicate that he, too, is giving us the run-around.
So…we know the acolyte is in there. We know she was sane when she left. We know she has been exposed to the villains of our story. We know the asylum has had dealings with the villains of our story.
At this point, my paladin simply shakes his head, and begins walking…past the guards…to the doors of the asylum. As I’m walking, my DM allows me to prepare my maneuvers, which include Mountain Hammer…IE, can opener. It’s very clear I’m going to bust down the door. The LN Monk, who is quite reckless, comes with me. We are stopped by the LN cleric, who reasons us down. This is all fine with me…I had started the action as something my character would do, knowing that at least one other player would find a reason to stop me. It was a calculated risk to create a fun roleplaying session and in fact, it did…the LN Cleric gave an impassioned speech about how he understood my motivations but believed that reason would see us through here, not action. To be frank, the scene worked out better than I could have thought it would have and I was happy my actions led to fun RP.
The issue occurred afterwards…where the DM referred to the LN as stopping a “paladin’s evil actions”. My hackles went up. I don’t think anything I did goes against the actions a Lawful Good Character would take. He said that I had to believe in authority and couldn’t go breaking and entering and begin slaughtering people left and right. I pointed out that I wasn’t going to kill anyone, that I was planning on sticking to NL damage if it came to that, and that I was in a position to believe that whatever authority being exerted here was being abused and was incorrect. Nothing about my actions was evil, nor was any of it not in line with being lawful good as I perceived an abuse of the law.
I understand that my actions were “borderline” but I think calling them “Evil” is WAY out of line. What do you folks think?