Pathfinder alignment "situation"

[skypse]

Hi everyone. I'm facing a bit of a problem here so I'm wondering what I can do about it. Here we go:

I'm playing a custom campaign right now that our DM created and I'm playing a half-orc, Barbie 4, Oracle 1 going for RP @ lvl 7. I have the dual cursed oracle feature and I have taken Lame as primary and Deaf as secondary.

The DM said he would give us our background stories and we could add anything we wanted at the begining just to spice things up a bit if he agrees too. So my story goes like this: My parents are unknown, I was raised in the woods by a tribe of druids and have nevered lived in a town or city. The druids taught me the "rule of the jungle", how to fight and how to use my magical powers. Blah blah blah irrelevant stuff, I get to meet a (probably demigot) warrior that saves my ass from a huge troll, and takes me to a place where him and some other ppl gather various kind of adventurers to unite them under a common cause.

This "town" (more like a mansion) is inside a magical barrier that no magic or evil characters are allowed. (and I have not seen any animals around) During the intoduction, the leaders of the organization gathered all of us and told us what we have to do, and sent us to our beds.

So we are off our first mission, we succeed it, we return, we sleep. All good till now. When I wake up, I ask if there are any stores around that I can buy pots 'n other stuff. I go, I buy, and after I get out of the store I see a cat. The cat talks to me but I can't hear it (I'm deaf) and I don't see its mouth moving. I use handle animal, it succeeds, and while I'm stroking her she puts her claws in my hand and deals 1 non-lethal dmg +bleed. She starts running, and when she's away she gives me the finger.(!!!) Now the important part begins. (Note here that my character is chaotic neutral)

1) An animal that doesn't intimidate me just attacked me and it made me bleed.
2) The animal is doing a human's gesture which makes me think it's magical.
3) No casting is allowed inside the mansion so the cat could be an infiltrator.
4) I cannot chase the cat (lame+medium armor=20 speed even for a barbie)
5) I get angry towards the cat so I attack it. I take out my spear, I throw it, deals 7 dmg and the DM tells me that by my character's knowledge, I understand that it's not a common cat otherwise it would have died.

So I call another attack with another spear. The DM then asks me, "Do you have the intention to kill it?", I say yes, and suddenly I vanish, take 64dmg and tells me I'm lying dead somewhere outside the mansion.

DM tells me that the intention to kill another person is an evil act so the barrier killed me and teleported me out of the safe zone of the mansion. However, due to the fact that I didn't know it (I'm newbie and I know I should know it but I can't find a list of what clearly describes the allignments (core rulebook is a bit vague)), he offered me the choise of loosing 2k xp (all the xp I have gathered from the mission) and reset the whole incident rolling back to the time where I just came out of the shop.

I told him that this is completely unfair and explained to him that the reason I attacked the "cat" was that I believe that it was an infiltrator because I have seen no other domestic animals around and I know casting is forbidden (the only person I have seen casting something is the head leader of the whole expedition.) However he is relentless and tells me that I shouldn't have acted without asking about the cat even if I acted due to the fact that I felt threatened by an animal that attacked me. He told me that the intention to kill is an evil act, and my counter argument is that being unpredictable is the key attribute of chaotic neutral alignments.

Can anyone with DM experience help me on that matter? Feel free to ask any other information you might need because I feel really bad for losing 2k xp since I have really not done anything opposite to my character's alignment and background story.


TL;DR Please read it :P It's not something that I can put in simple words

[Kudaku]

Did he shift your alignment to chaotic evil for killing the cat? Setting aside whether or not the killing was evil, the wall as you describe only keeps out evil creatures - not neutral creatures who have committed an evil act. Unless the act was sufficiently evil to shift you down to an evil alignment (which in my opinion it was not), the wall should not have killed you.

[Pink]

I don't think your unreasonable in your disagreement. Especially if you are new, the GM should be explaining things to you BEFORE doing any kinda big punishment that could, say, kill your character.

While I would tend to agree that, in this situation, the act of sudden violence and attempt to kill is more on the evil side of things (though you certainly had noble intentions with it), one evil act does not make a character evil. A lawful character does not suddenly become neutral or chaotic because he shoplifts once. A GM should be much slower and respectful of a player characters alignment and not be so quick to change it. Characters are complicated, and alignment should be a general indicator of activity, not a straight jacket. You GM can note that this is an activity point that is outside the bound of the general indicator, but chances are you also have had activities of being 'good' or 'lawful' and if the GM didn't immediately adjust your alignment then, they likewise shouldn't immediately change it to evil just to show off the amazing behind-the-scene evil whammy ward in their homebrew game.

Anyway, chances are, this thread should fill up with some good sympathetic posts, and you have been rather respectful in your own posting, so best case is probably to show this thread after it's accumulated some discussion. Maybe.

[Psyren]

I'm sorry but your DM is right, what you did is evil. Resorting to lethal force immediately after getting a scratch is not good or even neutral behavior. It's compounded by the fact that (a) you knew the cat was sapient and (b) you had reason to believe it wasn't evil (i.e. because it was inside the evil-blocking barrier.)

Even if you suspected it was an infiltrator that had somehow penetrated the barrier, you have no concrete evidence of that and thus your use of force was excessive. Hell, even if you had detected its alignment as evil (which you didn't), lethal force is still an immoral response unless the cat is about to inflict imminent harm on yourself or someone else.

The fact that you even knew about the barrier makes your actions not just immoral, but not very well thought out either. If I was inside a barrier like that I wouldn't even swat a fly until I left.

[Segev]

I will say that I think the DM probably should have given you an Int or Wis check to see if you recalled the barrier IC, so he could remind you OOC, and/or asked you the ever-popular "are you SURE you want to do that, given...?" and filled in whatever he thinks you the player may have forgotten that the character would not have.

[skypse]

I'm sorry but your DM is right, what you did is evil. Resorting to lethal force immediately after getting a scratch is not good or even neutral behavior. It's compounded by the fact that (a) you knew the cat was sapient and (b) you had reason to believe it wasn't evil (i.e. because it was inside the evil-blocking barrier.)

Yeah and I also had reasons to believe that it wasn't magical because it is inside the barrier but didn't stop it from performing a human's gesture so I acted impulsively.

Hell, even if you had detected its alignment as evil (which you didn't), lethal force is still an immoral response unless the cat is about to inflict imminent harm on yourself or someone else.

How can I detect a thing if I can't cast anything??? :) Plus it is not immoral since I there is no proof that the cat doesn't have intention to inflict imminent harm on me. It had just pierced my hand while I was stroking it :) By that logic I should wait until a random encounter is ready to deliver a coup de grace on one of my party members before I attack it...

[skypse]

I will say that I think the DM probably should have given you an Int or Wis check to see if you recalled the barrier IC, so he could remind you OOC, and/or asked you the ever-popular "are you SURE you want to do that, given...?" and filled in whatever he thinks you the player may have forgotten that the character would not have.

As a player, I knew the cat was magical, I knew it was not a normal cat and I knew it had the ability to talk. But that's just metagame. My character knew nothing of these stuff. As far as I believe I shouldn't chose my actions based on the RP of the rest of my party when I am not there, but based on the RP when I am present and I have my senses.

[Psyren]

The "are you trying to kill it?" seems like it was the "are you sure" to me - though I do agree that it may have been a bit subtle for a newer player.

To account for that I would just do over the whole scene without penalties, and make the barrier's previous zapping of the Oracle be a "vision" sent by their deity or something else (even the barrier itself) as warning. "As the vision fades, you sense a warning hum that could only be coming from the barrier; you have little doubt that evil actions within its confines will be severely punished."

[Keneth]

The intent to kill is not in itself an evil act. On the other hand, being chaotic neutral is not a permission to randomly murder stuff. People too often use the "I'm CN, I can do whatever I want!" excuse which is simply not true.

[NotScaryBats]

Whether or not the action was Evil, unless you became Evil from doing it, you shouldn't have been effected by the barrier. Good people sometimes do Evil things in D&D, but unless you do lots or particularly heinous things, you don't change alignment.

I think the DM should take a step back and think about why s/he punished you so badly for this action.

[skypse]

Did he shift your alignment to chaotic evil for killing the cat? Setting aside whether or not the killing was evil, the wall as you describe only keeps out evil creatures - not neutral creatures who have committed an evil act. Unless the act was sufficiently evil to shift you down to an evil alignment (which in my opinion it was not), the wall should not have killed you.

I don't think your unreasonable in your disagreement. Especially if you are new, the GM should be explaining things to you BEFORE doing any kinda big punishment that could, say, kill your character.

While I would tend to agree that, in this situation, the act of sudden violence and attempt to kill is more on the evil side of things (though you certainly had noble intentions with it), one evil act does not make a character evil. A lawful character does not suddenly become neutral or chaotic because he shoplifts once. A GM should be much slower and respectful of a player characters alignment and not be so quick to change it. Characters are complicated, and alignment should be a general indicator of activity, not a straight jacket. You GM can note that this is an activity point that is outside the bound of the general indicator, but chances are you also have had activities of being 'good' or 'lawful' and if the GM didn't immediately adjust your alignment then, they likewise shouldn't immediately change it to evil just to show off the amazing behind-the-scene evil whammy ward in their homebrew game.

Anyway, chances are, this thread should fill up with some good sympathetic posts, and you have been rather respectful in your own posting, so best case is probably to show this thread after it's accumulated some discussion. Maybe.

The barrier is supposed to protect the mansion from any kind of casting and any evil act. Not only evil characters. That's why he killed me he says.

[Psyren]

Yeah and I also had reasons to believe that it wasn't magical because it is inside the barrier but didn't stop it from performing a human's gesture so I acted impulsively.

There are different types of magic in this game. For instance, a barrier that prevented spellcasting wouldn't necessarily stop someone from shapeshifting by other means, and even a barrier that prevented all magic would not cause a previously awakened/intelligent animal to lose their sentience either.

How can I detect a thing if I can't cast anything??? :)

It's called logic You start with your premises and arrive at a conclusion. Like this:

1) Barrier keeps out evil.
2) X is inside the barrier.

Logical conclusion from premises: X is not evil.

Assuming the barrier is faulty or has a loophole of some kind is illogical unless you have reason to believe this is the case. Being scratched by a cat, and even being flipped off, are not evil acts either.

Plus it is not immoral since I there is no proof that the cat doesn't have intention to inflict imminent harm on me. It had just pierced my hand while I was stroking it :)

1 point of nonlethal does not justify lethal force.

By that logic I should wait until a random encounter is ready to deliver a coup de grace on one of my party members before I attack it...

A coup de grace with what? Was it packing a scythe? A shotgun maybe?

Or to put it another way - do you routinely try to kill cats that scratch you in real life?

[skypse]

The "are you trying to kill it?" seems like it was the "are you sure" to me - though I do agree that it may have been a bit subtle for a newer player.

To account for that I would just do over the whole scene without penalties, and make the barrier's previous zapping of the Oracle be a "vision" sent by their deity or something else (even the barrier itself) as warning. "As the vision fades, you sense a warning hum that could only be coming from the barrier; you have little doubt that evil actions within its confines will be severely punished."

He didn't ask me if I had evil intentions in me. I killed it only on the premise of self defence and fear of the unknown.

Whether or not the action was Evil, unless you became Evil from doing it, you shouldn't have been effected by the barrier. Good people sometimes do Evil things in D&D, but unless you do lots or particularly heinous things, you don't change alignment.

I think the DM should take a step back and think about why s/he punished you so badly for this action.

The barrier protects from evil. This includes evil acts. Not only people.

The intent to kill is not in itself an evil act. On the other hand, being chaotic neutral is not a permission to randomly murder stuff. People too often use the "I'm CN, I can do whatever I want!" excuse which is simply not true.

I don't say that. I just say that I acted preemtively and this IS the attribute of a CN. It was not a cold-blooded murder. It was kind of "self-defence" if you could put it like that..

[skypse]

There are different types of magic in this game. For instance, a barrier that prevented spellcasting wouldn't necessarily stop someone from shapeshifting by other means, and even a barrier that prevented all magic would not cause a previously awakened/intelligent animal to lose their sentience either.

I get prevented from even casting create water in there. Even detect magic. And an intelligence score is not an excuse for a cat to do human gestures...

It's called logic You start with your premises and arrive at a conclusion. Like this:

1) Barrier keeps out evil.
2) X is inside the barrier.

Logical conclusion from premises: X is not evil.

Assuming the barrier is faulty or has a loophole of some kind is illogical unless you have reason to believe this is the case. Being scratched by a cat, and even being flipped off, are not evil acts either.

1) Barrier forbides any kind of magic.
2) X is inside the barrier and is using magic.

Logical conclusion from premises: Something's wrong here Watson...

1 point of nonlethal does not justify lethal force.

I'm really confused with this. Ok he tells me it's non-lethal so I have to believe him. But how does this transfer to my character. How can a half-orc understand that his bleeding wound is no threat. And how can my character know that this will have no continuation. Should I just wait and act when the DM says the cat dealt lethal dmg? Or should I start punching it while raging as long as I say "non-lethal" at the begining?

A coup de grace with what? Was it packing a scythe? A shotgun maybe?

C'mon it's a random encounter... It could even have nuclear missiles.

Or to put it another way - do you routinely try to kill cats that scratch you in real life?

I can't say that if killing cats was a legal sport I wouldn't try it out. I find it more challenging than foxes for once... :P

[Kudaku]

The barrier is supposed to protect the mansion from any kind of casting and any evil act. Not only evil characters. That's why he killed me he says.

This is information you should add to the original post - the OP only stipulated that it kept out evil characters.

[Keneth]

1) Barrier keeps out evil.
2) X is inside the barrier.

Unless it's an all-powerful barrier by DM fiat, one's alignment is incredibly easy to spoof.

[Psyren]

I get prevented from even casting create water in there. Even detect magic. And an intelligence score is not an excuse for a cat to do human gestures...



1) Barrier forbides any kind of magic.
2) X is inside the barrier and is using magic.

Logical conclusion from premises: Something's wrong here Watson...

As I explained above, "you can't cast spells" is not quite the same as "you can't use magic."

But, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you didn't know that. The proper course of action would still be to go back to your allies as quickly as you can and let them know there is a strange creature inside the barrier. Raise the alarm - don't immediately resort to stabbing.

The kind of behavior you displayed is why so many DMs hate Chaotic Neutral characters.

I'm really confused with this. Ok he tells me it's non-lethal so I have to believe him. But how does this transfer to my character. How can a half-orc understand that his bleeding wound is no threat.

If a cat scratched you in real life, how would you know it's not life-threatening? Simple, because it's a scratch. Your character would react the same way.

I can't say that if killing cats was a legal sport I wouldn't try it out. I find it more challenging than foxes for once... :P

...Well, unless you have some deep-seated hatred against cats personally, in which case my advice is to try and keep it out of the game as much as you can.

Unless it's an all-powerful barrier by DM fiat, one's alignment is incredibly easy to spoof.

And that would be relevant if the cat had done anything evil. Otherwise it's a leap of logic to assume the thing isn't working, especially if you have empirical evidence that it does function (i.e. can't cast spells.)

[Oliver Veyrac]

Guess we will go through my vile checklist :

LYING - Nope
Cheating - Nope
Theft - Nope
Betrayal - Nope
Murder - Murder is the killing of an intelligent creature for a
nefarious purpose: theft, personal gain, perverse pleasure, or
the like.
VENGEANCE - Yes, you fall under the guidelines for that. But you don't fall under the evil guideline. An act of vengeance does not
have to be evil, but the evil mindset usually redefines the
concept as “revenge at any price.” such as teleporting into the tavern and throwing lightning bolts into the crowd to get the cat.
WORSHIPING EVIL GODS AND DEMONS - Nope
ANIMATING THE DEAD OR CREATING UNDEAD - Who here hasn't played a lawful neutral necromancer, oh wait, look at wee jas. LN Necromancer goddess.
CASTING EVIL SPELLS - We are not Jozan the holy priest of pelor that casts symbol of pain and walks over his allies.
DAMNING OR HARMING SOULS - Nope
CONSORTING WITH FIENDS - That cat might count.
CREATING EVIL CREATURES- uh nope.
USING OTHERS FOR PERSONAL GAIN - did you sacrifice the cat?
Greed - Did you try to steal the cat's cat food?
BULLYING AND COWING INNOCENTS - umm no
BRINGING DESPAIR - debateable.
TEMPTING OTHERS - yeah right.

There's my evil exam. If you are chaotic neutral you wouldn't even put a dent into it. In fact, the most accurate alignment changing system was back in ravenloft, and even that wouldn't phase your alignment too much.

[Keneth]

And that would be relevant if the cat had done anything evil.

I'm not trying to excuse his actions, I'm just saying that in a world where barriers such as that one can be erected, hiding your alignment should be near trivial.

[skypse]

Guess we will go through my vile checklist :

LYING - Nope
Cheating - Nope
Theft - Nope
Betrayal - Nope
Murder - Murder is the killing of an intelligent creature for a
nefarious purpose: theft, personal gain, perverse pleasure, or
the like.
VENGEANCE - Yes, you fall under the guidelines for that. But you don't fall under the evil guideline. An act of vengeance does not
have to be evil, but the evil mindset usually redefines the
concept as “revenge at any price.” such as teleporting into the tavern and throwing lightning bolts into the crowd to get the cat.
WORSHIPING EVIL GODS AND DEMONS - Nope
ANIMATING THE DEAD OR CREATING UNDEAD - Who here hasn't played a lawful neutral necromancer, oh wait, look at wee jas. LN Necromancer goddess.
CASTING EVIL SPELLS - We are not Jozan the holy priest of pelor that casts symbol of pain and walks over his allies.
DAMNING OR HARMING SOULS - Nope
CONSORTING WITH FIENDS - That cat might count.
CREATING EVIL CREATURES- uh nope.
USING OTHERS FOR PERSONAL GAIN - did you sacrifice the cat?
Greed - Did you try to steal the cat's cat food?
BULLYING AND COWING INNOCENTS - umm no
BRINGING DESPAIR - debateable.
TEMPTING OTHERS - yeah right.

There's my evil exam. If you are chaotic neutral you wouldn't even put a dent into it. In fact, the most accurate alignment changing system was back in ravenloft, and even that wouldn't phase your alignment too much.

Well I did a murder in terms of self preservation and vengeance but if the cat had left my sight I wouldn't have bothered to start chasing it around. However if it had gone inside the store, I would most certainly get in in order to find what the heck is going on and demand compensation.

So what is the outcome cause I didn't get it??

[grarrrg]

[Insert Video Clip]Rambo: They drew first blood, not me...They drew first blood.[/Insert Video Clip]

The cat is definitely a Richard, and considering that D&D is known as a game filled with Murder-Hobo's, I'd say you were well within your rights to attack the cat.


As for planning on going Rage Prophet, THAT is inexcusable behavior, and needs to be punished.

[skypse]

As I explained above, "you can't cast spells" is not quite the same as "you can't use magic."

But, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you didn't know that. The proper course of action would still be to go back to your allies as quickly as you can and let them know there is a strange creature inside the barrier. Raise the alarm - don't immediately resort to stabbing.

The kind of behavior you displayed is why so many DMs hate Chaotic Neutral characters.[/QUOTE]

Exactly! which means that an evil creature could have casted the spell on itself, and afterwards get inside the mansion! Which means we have an infiltrator, which means I have to do something about it! Act upon it and not start making illogical sounds to gather attention (deaf persons don't know what words sound like so they can't really speak)

If a cat scratched you in real life, how would you know it's not life-threatening? Simple, because it's a scratch. Your character would react the same way.

It's called tetanus in real life... Plus if a cat scratched me in real life I would most probably harm it. (still not kill it but anyway)

[skypse]

As for planning on going Rage Prophet, THAT is inexcusable behavior, and needs to be punished.

Please elaborate.

[squiggit]

You were assaulted by a strange, magical and hostile creature and fought back. Maybe excessive force, but overreaching isn't necessarily evil in and of itself.

Sort of funny he's taking such a hard line stance on what is or isn't evil then turns around and melts your character. Attacking a perceived threat is evil but frying your brain and dumping your corpse in a field without any investigation is good and wonderful?

[Oliver Veyrac]

The finality is, you didn't do something to justify an alignment change, let alone an evil act. Now if you sacrifice the cat to fix your cut that's another story. Or to cure "Cat scratch fever"

[skypse]

You were assaulted by a strange, magical and hostile creature and fought back. Maybe excessive force, but overreaching isn't necessarily evil in and of itself.

Sort of funny he's taking such a hard line stance on what is or isn't evil then turns around and melts your character. Attacking a perceived threat is evil but frying your brain and dumping your corpse in a field without any investigation is good and wonderful?

Well... The barrier is supposed to be extreme measures so I don't think it is an intelligent being. More like a security system. From what I understand, it judges good and evil on the surface and acts upon it the way it is created to act. An alarm system will go off even if it's the owner who just entered the house.

[skypse]

The finality is, you didn't do something to justify an alignment change, let alone an evil act. Now if you sacrifice the cat to fix your cut that's another story. Or to cure "Cat scratch fever"

So you say killing someone under the circumstances that I did it was not an evil act right? cool :P I didn't even managed to kill that bitch... Only by "having the intention to kill it" I died. :D

[ElenionAncalima]

I would guess that the DM is trying to curtail the murder hobo attitude early on. He does have a point that killing something you know is sentient, without even talking to it, just because you think it might be a spy...I don't know if I would call it evil...but its not a good idea.

However, I do agree that the DM's punishment is way over-the-top. That kind of punishment would be harsh for veteran player...agaisnt a new players it seems far too extreme. Personally, I would have explained that there will be in game consequences for killing instead of capturing someone, especially for this degree of uncertainty...and I would have explained that before you decided to kill the cat. If you still decided to do it I would have let you face consequences accordingly...although I still wouldn't have killed you.

Also, I agree with other posters that the act itself probably wasn't evil enough to justify the punishment. Its seems like you made the decision thoughtlessly, but not maliciously.

[Psyren]

@Oliver: I notice attempted murder is not on your list. Worse, the OP did admit to intent.

I'm not trying to excuse his actions, I'm just saying that in a world where barriers such as that one can be erected, hiding your alignment should be near trivial.

If they're widespread/have been around for awhile, sure. But we don't know enough about the setting to know that is the case.

Exactly! which means that an evil creature could have casted the spell on itself, and afterwards get inside the mansion! Which means we have an infiltrator, which means I have to do something about it! Act upon it and not start making illogical sounds to gather attention (deaf persons don't know what words sound like so they can't really speak)

You're still starting from the assumption that the thing is evil and then working backwards from there to try and justify your use of force. If I was your DM I wouldn't buy it for a minute.

Also, you're deaf, not mute... you can presumably still make sounds, even if you don't know what words are.

It's called tetanus in real life... Plus if a cat scratched me in real life I would most probably harm it. (still not kill it but anyway)

But why wouldn't you kill it? Evidently that is reasonable behavior for you Basically, if something would stop you there, why is it a reasonable course here?

And even if a cat gave you tetanus from a scratch (which isn't very common anyway), killing it would not do anything to prevent that. It's just being vindictive.


To be clear, I'm not saying the DM's response (barrier fries you and you lose an entire session's worth of XP or have to reroll) was warranted. But I don't think there should be zero consequences either.

[Yanisa]

You were assaulted by a strange, magical and hostile creature and fought back. Maybe excessive force, but overreaching isn't necessarily evil in and of itself.

Sort of funny he's taking such a hard line stance on what is or isn't evil then turns around and melts your character. Attacking a perceived threat is evil but frying your brain and dumping your corpse in a field without any investigation is good and wonderful?

I suspect the barbarian killed a plot relevant character by overreacting.

I too dealt with a Chaotic Neutral Barbarian Newbie and his character's interpretation has a vile streak. He liked to overreact, had a lust for vengeance and general was looking for a fight. It's hard to deal with sometimes as a DM. I often asked him out of game to tone it down, and we as a group explained the difference between neutral and evil. It also helped we had a paladin in the group that balanced out the barbarian. The barbarian had respect for the paladin because of the paladins power, and the paladin was a hard boiled egg type and not stick in the ass type so while he wouldn't agree with the barbarian he wouldn't try to arrest him either. He would stop the barbarian when things went to far, and in the end the player has become a better role player with a better understanding of chaotic neutral. Or at least our groups interpretation of chaotic neutral.

As to the OP. At the one side you kind off overreacted and you probably screwed some of the DM's plans. At the other side your DM is really closed off and really mean spirited about it. My advise to talk with the DM to try to learn how he's sees alignment, because that is really depend on the person. But also try to make clear that you are new and that harsh punishment isn't fun and you feel kinda cheated for it. The do over option sounds decent, especially because that saves the DM's plot, but try to gauge with the DM what he expects of you both as a player and as a chaotic neutral barbarian.