Why did the Marut cross the road?

[Talakeal]

Imagine for a moment you are a spiritual embodiment of law and order sent to a modern world to apprehend a chaotic character who is making a mockery of universal laws.
You see your target on the other side of the street, however between you and him there is a cross walk, and beyond it a big flashing sign that says "Don't walk!" in blazing red letters.
You look both ways and see that the street is deserted aside from you and your target, who has seen you and is quickly making his mistake.

Do you
A: Obey the law and wait for the signal to change?
B: Realize that it is illogical to obey a meaningless sign when the street is empty and cross against the light?


Phrased in a more general way, would a creature that is an exampler of law and order (be it a D&D outsider with the (lawful) tag, a Weaver spirit in WoD, a daemon of one of the gods of Law in Warhammer, etc.) be logical and efficient or would it be bound by tradition and feel the need to obey all sorts of laws and regulations? Both outlooks seem to be extremely "lawful" but I can't tell which one is actually more appropriate.

[Anxe]

In the specific example, I imagine a Marut would have similar powers to a police officer. The most important power being the right to ignore traffic signs when necessary. The Marut turns on his emergency lights and runs across the road.

In a more general sense, I've always separated my campaign into two types of law, mortal law and divine law. They cross over sometimes (murder is bad in both), but they aren't always the same thing. It's against divine law to ask a guest to leave, but its not against mortal laws (in most places in my campaign). There is no divine law against jay-walking, so the Marut pursues. There could be other laws that it wasn't willing to break though. Arresting the criminal in a temple for example. It follows divine law, doesn't care about mortal laws.

EDIT: My answer is influenced by my campaign being in an ancient Greek cultural setting. I imagine the answer could be different for other campaigns or for the traditional Faerun/Eberron/Greyhawk campaigns.

[VoxRationis]

The inevitable obeys the universal laws and the laws of its builders. It is a foreign agent to this land, and its very purpose (to go into other realms and apprehend citizens of those realms without subjecting them to trial in the local fashion) runs counter to local laws. It probably doesn't care much about violating local traffic laws, so long as they don't increase disorder to a significant extent.

[Talakeal]

While both of the above are true, they kind of sidestep the question.

I am really more curious about how to play a character who is the embodiment of the concept of Law.

Would they be cold, efficient, and logical or would they be extremely traditional, anal retentive, and OCD?

[Cazero]

After wasting precious minutes looking for the inexistant elephant near the sign forbidding to feed it, the Marut stops when confronted with the left-pointed arrow sign saying "go to the right". His perplexity lasts long enough to receive a well-aimed chunk of chocolate in the throat, and the inconsistency of taste and emotions felt kills it instantly.

...Aren't Maruts just like the Auditors?

[VoxRationis]

While both of the above are true, they kind of sidestep the question.

I am really more curious about how to play a character who is the embodiment of the concept of Law.

Would they be cold, efficient, and logical or would they be extremely traditional, anal retentive, and OCD?

Some combination of the two, I think. If they truly embody Law, they're not going to disobey a law that they recognize, even if it's trivial in the current context. That would come across as anal-retentive. But they'll probably be pretty logical and efficient about things as well, because of the corollary of the above. When they come across a factor that isn't part of their system of governing laws (like the emotional state of passerby), they'll likely ignore it, continuing directly on to their current objective.

[Brookshw]

A) to make sure it came to a dead end.
B) the heavy metal concert across the street needed emergency special effects so he was lending his fists of thunder and lightning.

Less joking, the Marut doesn't care. They are servants created to enforce ONE specific cosmic law, not every law. They will only focus on their appointed law and accompanying task.

In general, lawful outsiders are going to support orderly existance, tempered at times by their own bents. A Modron is quite a substantially different creature from an archon or devil. Law is more useful to understand in this context as a style rather than a robotic malady. Some are completely logical, some are emotional (iirc even Primus felt fear in Modron March before he was offed), and above all they are generally capable of changing, fallen archon, rogue modron.

[Karl Aegis]

I would make a mental note that someone created a crosswalk without a permit and tell the guys responsible for keeping track of construction permits on a cosmic level to enforce cosmic law on these wannabe crosswalk constructors. In the mean time, I need pursue this guy for the most heinous of crimes: being too old.

[Lord Torath]

This is the first thing that came to mind: Don't Walk. Hope that link works, I can't test it at work)

I would expect the Marut to live by the laws on its plane, and not those in the land where it's quarry is currently residing. That being said, he's more of a multi-planar policeman, rather than a PC with the Lawful Neutral alignment.

I rather like Mark Hall's take on Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil:

My definition, my litmus test, is that good and evil are about people, and law and chaos are about property and ideas. Good and evil are things that help or harm people, while law and chaos are about supporting or disrespecting property and ideas.

Theft is, when removed from other contexts, disrespecting people's property (as is vandalism). So, too, would be disrespecting others ideals or religious prohibitions (not in that you fail to follow them yourself, but that you actively conspire to make them break them... i.e. tricking a vegetarian or vegan into eating meat, or someone who avoids alcohol into drinking). Lawful acts involve respecting property and ideals, even if they are not your own. You might work to change them... you might even violently oppose them. But lawful means you don't actively disrespect that those beliefs are real, or that the property belongs to the person who owns it.

An action can have multiple alignment impacts, of course; the theft in the Train Job had consequences for people that made it an evil act as well as a chaotic act, whereas the theft in Ariel can be seen as purely chaotic... "They'll be restocked within hours." Freeing slaves by cutting their chains is chaotic good, whereas keeping slaves is lawful evil, at best... placing a concept of property above people.

It's a flexible way of viewing actions and their consequences that lets you classify most things once you understand their impact.

[Mastikator]

Not all laws are equal, Marut's quest to bring order trumps street sign. Go over. Completely lawful.

[Vitruviansquid]

Law comes in hierarchy, and the lawful are obsessed with it. As such, the Marut will likely prioritize the enforcement of higher laws over lesser laws, and ignore laws not made for it.

So the Marut would ignore the traffic laws made by petty humans in order to follow the greater law of destiny that demands Bob die at this exact moment in time, and it might ignore the law of destiny in order to follow the physical laws that say left must remain the opposite right.

Would they be cold, efficient, and logical or would they be extremely traditional, anal retentive, and OCD?

So in answer to this question, the Marut would be both because cosmic law is not so imperfect that it doesn't have guidelines and contingencies for these situations. A very lawful mortal might not have the benefit of understanding cosmic law as well as a Marut would, but would also strive to be both, and might choose either the option of jaywalking and not jaywalking in this situation without being considered unlawful.

[Flickerdart]

There's a term for beings that follow every direction literally and without fail. It is not Lawful, it is Mindless.

[DigoDragon]

It's a Marut. Just dimension door to the other side.

[Gracht Grabmaw]

The correct answer is to destroy the sign so technically you don't break any rules.

[Elderand]

Would they be cold, efficient, and logical or would they be extremely traditional, anal retentive, and OCD?

Well for one, they couldn't be OCD at all because OCD is not lawful in any way shape or form. Unless you're talking about the pop culture version which is really OCPD, obsessive compulsive personality disorder.

OCD is pretty chaotic. You do nonsensical rituals to excorcise anxiety about illogical and nonsensical invading thoughts. It's insane troll logic personified

[Bronk]

After due consideration... the Marut would 'dimension door' to the other side.

[Joe the Rat]

Why did the Marut cross the road?
Because the punchline was Inevitable.

Literalist interpretation: Don't Walk. So Run.

Understanding of sign's intent: Cross. The flashing Don't Walk (or Count Down Hand) means "Signal changing, clear intersection." Can I clear intersection in time [Y/N]? If Yes, proceed. If No, find loophole.

Practical considerations: Dimension Door. Relative value of adhering to mortal regulations for foot traffic to ensure safety and flow vs. Completing your mission, and given that you're basically an implacable man stalker of pure order that can go full-on Kool-Aid Man as it tracks down those pesky not-dying-on-time folks, I think it would ignore a traffic sign.

[Talakeal]

Well for one, they couldn't be OCD at all because OCD is not lawful in any way shape or form. Unless you're talking about the pop culture version which is really OCPD, obsessive compulsive personality disorder.

OCD is pretty chaotic. You do nonsensical rituals to excorcise anxiety about illogical and nonsensical invading thoughts. It's insane troll logic personified

That is kind of my point. Society is full of "rules" which are really just illogical rituals. For example saying "Bless you" after someone sneezes it literally an illogical ritual caused by ancient superstitious beliefs about the metaphysics of sneezing. But still, if you don't say it you are being rude and violating social mores.

The core of my question is: There are many illogical rituals that have become demanded by society. Would it be more lawful to always obey societies rules or to do the logical and efficient thing and ignore them as the stupid superstitions they are.

[Joe the Rat]

It would be more Lawful to obey the silly rules, unless there's a better reason not to. Lawful is about respecting, if not actually obeying, the rules. A stupid rule deserves acknowledgement, even though it's stupid. A stupid rule should be obeyed unless doing so in some way increases disorder / chaos / entropy

[Hiro Protagonest]

Because it was inevitable.

[Raimun]

Yes.

The Marut, an agent of divine vengeance wouldn't cross the road, as long as the sign says "Don't Walk!"

In fact, it would stand still and wait for the sign to either change or go out. No matter how long it would take. It wouldn't even walk somewhere else as the sign does say "Don't Walk!", let alone find an alternative means of travel or otherwise a means to circumvent the road with the sign.

It should also go without saying that the Marut wouldn't certainly activate Air Walk or Dimension Door as using them would disrespect the intent of the law that prohibits jaywalking.

You should remember these principles if you ever play a lich and build signs that increase traffic safety.

[Mr Beer]

I see no reason to play Lawful =/= Pendatic and Stupid

There are numerous fair ways to play this but none of them involve a Marut helplessly trapped by a mere road-sign. Or more broadly, lawful =/= pendatic and stupid

[Cluedrew]

I actually just see it waiting the 30 seconds for the sign to change. First because that follows the law and so is fits with the creature's nature. Secondly because it is dramatic. Even if the Marut itself is incapable of appreciating the drama of the moment (which it probably will, unless it is completely mindless) as the target desperately tries to get its head start, the author and reader/viewer whatever will. Who says order means no fun? (Narrow minded chaotic types I guess.)

That being said teleporting across of flying over are also options, not only do they not contradict the sign but they also hold with its intent (not breaking the flow of traffic). Similarly if the traffic sign is a "tie breaker" in case there are both cars and people then ignoring in when there are no cars is not an issue.

For the other part of the question a being of pure law... would be a program. Where the computer is simply the universe it exist in. It wouldn't really make any decisions it would simply act as it was instructed to. Hence forth what it would do in this situation would depend entirely on what the parameters it was given ahead of time plus its currant inputs. From that perspective the very fact it bothered to check for incoming cars suggests that the information will be used in making a decision, in this case "is it alright to ignore the sign because of the amount of traffic". If traffic = 0 then yes.

[Maglubiyet]

That is kind of my point. Society is full of "rules" which are really just illogical rituals. For example saying "Bless you" after someone sneezes it literally an illogical ritual caused by ancient superstitious beliefs about the metaphysics of sneezing. But still, if you don't say it you are being rude and violating social mores.

The core of my question is: There are many illogical rituals that have become demanded by society. Would it be more lawful to always obey societies rules or to do the logical and efficient thing and ignore them as the stupid superstitions they are.

You mean follow the spirit of the law as opposed to the letter of the law? I see obeying the letter of the law as being the more Lawful path. The spirit of the law, the intent behind why the law exists in the first place, is usually more in line with the Good/Evil axis.

Especially in the case of a Construct, like a Marut. Even though it's fairly intelligent, it may not be able to make the mental leap to try to determine what was going on in the minds of the lawmakers in the context of a given society. If the crosswalk says "Don't Walk", it can only go on the concrete information it has, which is only "don't walk", not "don't walk unless..." The "unless" is the path to chaos and madness.

[HunterOfJello]

The more powerful Inevitables in the Fiend Folio are written as possessing reality breaking powers that they use to apprehend reality breakers. Their rules don't apply to themselves even though they should.

I think that the inevitables are like any lawbringers who go around breaking laws wherever they like if they think it will get things done.

[goto124]

That being said teleporting across or flying over are also options, not only do they not contradict the sign but they also hold with its intent (not breaking the flow of traffic).

So that's why Maruts have dimension door!

[Lord Raziere]

Because I'm good enough to tick it off! and badass enough to take it out. /Chaotic

[Raimun]

*Sarcasm mode off*

Marut would freakin' destroy its target! That's it. It's the frickin' prime directive, baby!