Killing Paladins And Faction Changes.

[*Ceremorph]

However, I am curious about this: If killing pally's is evil, why don't we get alignment shifts to good for killing demons/devils? I have no issues with alignment shifts, but I'd appreciate some sort of consistency.

Animus has a good point, but I'd also like to point out that intent has much to do with it as well. When someone goes into any plane, it is generally for one of two purposes: "I despise the beings within, and wish to slay them in the name of my alignment/race/diety", or "I hear that if you kill the creatures within, some of them carry treasure which I can take from them, plus I will grow stronger by battling these foes". In Mercuria, neither of these can be the result of good intentions.

On the other hand, when an evil person goes into Minauros or the Abyss, it is generally for the second reason, not the first. Even the most devout worshipper of Mephistopheles would not shy from despoiling a different archdevil's realm, nor would a thrall of Demogorgon give a moment's worry for upsetting the mechanations of Graz'zt or Pazuzu. On the other hand, the paladin visiting the same setting would most likely see it as a chance to strike a blow against the forces of evil.... but evil characters would never see it as such.

Good is always more difficult than evil. The darkest of blackguards could perform a "good" deed simply because they want to or they see some personal gain in doing it, then turn around and murder some helpless victim and prove before the world that they are still evil, whereas a single evil act performed by a paladin might take years of atonement to overcome.

Look at it this way. Say Charles Manson is given parole, and winds up founding a charity to help orphans. Even after years of doing this, he would still be defined by the acts committed decades ago, and were he to suddenly murder someone, few would be surprised.

On the other hand, let's look at Mother Teresa. While she was alive, few could have doubted that she was extremely pious and "good" by our standards. But if one day she had visciously murdered a child, that entire persona would have been forgotten because of that one evil act.

[*Mr_Otyugh]

Demons kill demon and devils, yet they're evil despite them killing mostly evil (Blood War being best example... more casualties on both sides than any adventurers or good alignment will ever manage to make them)

Killing is never good act... never (it might be a mean to ensure good is done... like protecting innocents, but killing itself is not good act)... it's not always evil act either though. There's no easy ways to good. Good is selfless, good protects, good assists, good knows mercy, actions speak louder than words so their personality is irrelevant :P... good cares of other than just themselves or their friends. Even evil protects their friends (well most of times). Alignments more of represent how you act towards strangers.

Now if your do-gooder manages to turn a evil-doer to do-gooder, now thats' act of goodness <,<

[*ManyFaced]

I'm glad to see this is being taken a bit more seriously, I was getting tired of Good or Neutral characters slaughtering a few hundred paladins for sweet loot.

But, at the same time Lalette had to take that route since there was a big hole in leveling between abyss, and when Abyss became decent XP again(Carceri too). And there aren't really any comparable loot-y areas on the server(Carceri is a close second, but I don't see it being an option for most). Maybe another option for XP would be welcomed, but keeping it very good loot wise would give the greedy a fast track to evil?

[*pelhikano]

2. DM's do what they want. Back in the day I used to argue and quickly found out that does more harm than good.

Yes, we do. I'm back on the server after a long hiatus and wasn't sure if "one alignment shift ever" actually had become a rule, so I decided to revert the changes on the players because it would have been unfair under that rule (even though I had my suspicions even then and there that this couldn't be right).

However, since this is cleared up I reserve the right to set you to Evil by any damn amount I please and kill your character as much as I please without any written invitation first if I see you grinding for a new house built out of magic items in Mercuria.

[*MadPorthos]

Alignment change for the murder of paladins... makes sense of course, but does that mean then that killing PC paladins is an evil act as well? Or only the extremely holier than thou ones in Mercuria/Celestia?

In the wars between light and darkness, surely the choice to murder such a being on his home turf and attempt to defile the temple is a VERY evil definite act, especially the defiling... evil points should be docked for certain for defiling. But what if you serve a war god unconcerned with good an evil, concerned with strength, military perfection, fighting the most challenging of military opponents. Wouldn't these paladins make a worthy foe and much the case, one of the best foes? In seeking the challenge and the fight that your god emplores you to seek, you become evil, when your god's alignment and cause is one of neutrality, impassionate pursuit of challenge and tougher challenge.

Just an example there.

I'm not sure that an evil hit should be as severe for all people. Certainly if you are good and kill paladins... 10 point shifts, either per paladin, or maybe 1 point shift per paladin, since you need to at least defend yourself out of the situation that you got in, perhaps resurrecting someone dead there or the like.

But if you are neutral... is it somehow the province of the good gods to "make you evil" when your motivations and actions in context of your ethos/morals is perfectly in line?

It is the paladins way to see things as Black and White. The black guards to see things as White and Black. Unfortunately neutrality tends to remain the muddled middle ground and it remains neutrality precisely because many times actions that could be seen as right or wrong by a strongly good or evil person are choices that do not impact on the neutral character's morals in the same way. Some things like in the cases of Druids, they must remain dispassionate about. Other choices they make are necessary to thier personal ethos of neutrality, balancing things or as part of what their personal philosophy requires them do, such as the example of the worshipper of a strength or war god requiring them ever to seek greater challenge or risk, regardless of the threat or source.

Such a person under an automatic system of alignment shift that is not sensitive to the alignment of the character, would result in such a war priest or divine champion very soon be considered evil, even if they exercised exactly thier god's teaching which may be chaotic neutral or another ethos.

If scripted, alignment/reputation accounts should still try to reflect this complex situation of alignment somewhat, primarily effecting good characters for evil acts, or evil characters for outrageously good acts (Boo ssssssss! You let the hero get away, weren't you supposed to kill him and subjugate his people?!?), or only be applied in the egregious situations... good killing good, remaining in Dm control for less clear cut situations and neutrality.

Well, that's my 2... no, 10 cents.

- Madporthos

[*Product of Void]

Shiv has a logical reason....




"they scream well". :lol:


oh oh what if your athar and believe there are no gods so those paladins are a bunch of jerks?

j/k

Seriously this is how it is, adventures are evaders seeking riches, adventure, and slaughter.

Due to this thing called "Gear", and "XP". Players will seek to have their characters do a lot of slaughter. Taking it IC or OOC. When it goes OOC folks forget the lore or reason for realms.

Grey waste is full of undead. No one really cares if you kill some, the realm always makes more and undead rarely complain.

Ice plane - Gaints might be pissed though that only matters if you give a damn what they ice giants have to say.

Beastlands -horny nymph's seek a mate kill them fast they have cooties.

Abyss- It is the realm of evil, truthfully just going there folks should have nightmares or need therapy. stab anything that moves and keep running.

Under sigil - its the sewer full of things folks seek to forget and smells that your armor will for ever remind you.

Astral plane - Its old golem relics...NEAT lets take one home as a pet or just chop one up and collect the whole set.

Paladin place - its a good realm makes you feel warm and fuzzy....then dizzy and pain as the paladins smack you for going were you do not belong.

To me most places seem Neutral, Paladin area is GOOD, and Nymph area could be CG. Though who wants to disappear for 100 years having a nymph create a litter and chain you to a tree.

[*Ravel's Heart]

I have been lurking and following this conversation for a while, and while several people have touched upon what I think is the most important point, I wanted to expand on it just a little.

The main thing that alignment reflects upon with regard to any specific action is the PC's intent.

Killing is never good act... never.

I think that I disagree with this statement. I have seen enough suffering to think that there are times when, for example, euthanasia is humane and or when a state execution is justice. I am not trying to ignite a conversation about the morality of these things. I am just saying that there are times when they are at least arguably good.

As a specific example, imagine that my mother is riddled with metastatic cancer. Pathologic fractures in several bones compress nerves in her spine, leaving her in constant agony despite the best analgesics medicine can provide. She has lost the ability to eat or even breathe unassisted, and relies on caretakers to clean her when she eliminates. Each moment is torture for her, and her time is short. Despite this she remains lucid and begs me to end her life for her because she cannot do so herself.

If I decide to accede to my mother's wishes out of love for her and a desire to end her misery, I would argue that this is a good act. If I decide to end her life in an effort to hasten my inheritance, or because I am weary of being her caregiver, then it is an evil one.

It is my intent that determines whether the exact same action is good or evil.

The same is true, I think, in Mercuria.

I have also confronted people as a solar in Mercuria. I usually try to confront them either right as they are leaving the Temple or inside the Temple itself. This means that they have climbed the mountain and obviously found a temple dedicated to goodly powers. The encounter always starts the same way:

*The solar surveys the carnage around him, staring sadly at the torn and broken bodies of his friends and allies before turning his ancient, expressionless eyes onto you. He speaks a single word.* Explain.

What happens after that varies. But I think the important thing is that the PC has the opportunity to tell me exactly what his intent was. No one has yet convinced me that they were being anything other than lawless, evil, or both. (Which surprises me, to be honest. I can think of one very straightforward lawful justification...though it is still evil.)

I think there are several points here:

1) It's imortant to RP an interaction to establish exactly why the PC is doing what she's doing;
2) Grinding alone or in a group is not an OOC action. My PCs always have a reason for going where they go. (And the reason is never, "I wanted to test myself and get some stuff." You can do better than that, I know you can!);
3) If it never occurred to you that going into heaven and killing its inhabitants would be considered an evil act, it should have.

[*Mr_Otyugh]

Killing is never good act... never.

I think that I disagree with this statement. I have seen enough suffering to think that there are times when, for example, euthanasia is humane and or when a state execution is justice. I am not trying to ignite a conversation about the morality of these things. I am just saying that there are times when they are at least arguably good.

Granted ;P if you live by just machines, uncapable to think, brains smooshed, constantly in pain etc... then it's better off dead <.<

[*Xynisto]

I go with Ravel's heart that the intention of the person who commits the act to judge whether an act is good, neutral or evil.

There can be many examples why killing paladins is NOT evil.

1. Rogue argument - jink is everything, blood not necessary.
* you want to get riches and you let nobody stand in your way. You rather not kill them, but if you have to, to save your life and your riches, then the choice is easily made.
2. Primer argument
You just arrive in Sigil and do not know (yet) this is Mercuria and you defend yourself when you are being attacked.
3. Force/deception
Someone convinced you (lying, magics, good persuasion, anything else) the paladins are
* not paladins but evil creatures, or
* under control of an evil mage.priest/monster so they do not know what they are doing when they attack you. You have no choice then to seek for the evil to save them. Killing them is a necessity, since they will be saved afterwards;
* (almost) no choice - good person is blackmailed to go in Mercuria kill the archmage, to save his wife/freind from being murdered etc. Either the lives of the paladins or his beloved.
* etc.

[*pelhikano]

I go with Ravel's heart that the intention of the person who commits the act to judge whether an act is good, neutral or evil.

There can be many examples why killing paladins is NOT evil.

1. Rogue argument - jink is everything, blood not necessary.
* you want to get riches and you let nobody stand in your way. You rather not kill them, but if you have to, to save your life and your riches, then the choice is easily made.

What? How is killing someone while committing a robbery NOT EVIL?