Good becoming Evil?

[DM_Kev]

Strange topic, but true...

Some of the recent 'good deeds' of good characters have raised a few eyebrows. We have seen some characters threatening city guards and imposing their laws on outsiders. We have also seen characters attacking unarmed or defenceless characters or making unreasonable demands of people they do not even know.

Whilst your welcome to slip away to dark powers, you should be warned that you will gain evil points for such deeds. You may also notice NPCs will lose their respect for you later on.

Some things to bear in mind -

1. When you visit a city, you are NOT in charge, which is what some seem to think. You are a guest so you should do as your told.

2. Threatening and intimidating people is seen as evil

3. Attacking an unarmed or weak/defenceless person is considered evil unless they attack you.

The free people are already losing lots of ground to evil, dont let yourselves fall into disrepute too!

[SNarfel]

Yep.. it is indeed a fine line and one which one of my "characters" is going to struggle with...re Tharbad mayor ;) . Hopefully her more level haeded friend can keep her in check:)

[RichardW]

Aye, a dangerous thing this is. Don't think threatening a guard is reason enough to be considered evil (maybe a reason to get thrown into jail though) but attacking a city or anything like that would be more than evil.

For example, the other day when I threatened the guard... I didn't really have much choice, he was killing a man for no reason and saying it out loud so all could hear. I'm neutral good... bound to help anyone in danger, anywhere, without even thinking about it. I see a person in trouble, I help!

In this case however I failed and didn't save the man's life... it is too bad. Oh but one other thing, me being banished from Tharbad was completely justified! I was asking for it even!
As I said above I didn't have a choice but help and show my anger, however, I am far from being evil, I am more of a benefactor, showing his rage for failing to save a life. If I had killed/attacked the guard on the spot because I didn't like his actions... THAT would be evil! (And maybe chaotic too?)
My only concern there was that man's life, not the watchman, there are some things that go beyond any written law, to Richard Wensbane, saving a human life is one of them.

Also, the way I see it, if anyone there was evil it was the guard. Not only was he killing a defenseless and apparently innocent person in front of everyone, he was also doing it for no valid reason. If he had calmly explained things to me and given me a valid reason to act like that, I would probably have stepped down, but asking me to just move away... as much as I would want to OOC I simply couldn't walk away IN-Character.

I may be wrong though, just thought I read on the NWN's site that: "Neutral good is often described as "true good" as helping others often becomes their mission." :)

[Lorien]

I think the point has been missed here - you may not have agreed with the execution but it was done within the laws of the city - therefore you were insulting a man doing his job, and questioning the laws of his city. What Kev has pointed out is it isn't your place to oppose the laws of cities.

People even tried to get Elrond to do somthing about Tharbad - he wouldn't - bottom line Tharbad is an independant city-state with its own laws and enforcers - it has nothing to do with the Dunedain, the Rohirrim, the Elves or anybody.

We're not saying that the laws in Tharbad are perfect - but the incident in question - the execution took place within the laws of Tharbad - somthing none of the players (or almost none of the players) involved seemed to get the idea of.

On the subject of Neutral-good - its not really true good as such.

These statements are a very basic definition of good and neutral in DnD:

A good character attempts to look out for the common welfare and openly seeks to defeat evil.

A neutral character sees value in the law but believes that it must be interpreted (or critiqued) as the situation warrants.

So from these maybe what you did is in character to an extent.

Rather than going into alignments here I will post somthing in the player support thread that may help - but remember the characters are all supposed to be travellers in the world - not people of importance or impact such as the fellowship - just those who've risen slightly above the norm to do their bit. This does not give characters the Valar given right to do what they feel like when they feel like it.

[RichardW]

I believe I understand what you are saying and will take this into consideration next time. :)

[DM_Olórin]

A public execution in Tharbad surely does not require the approval of a visitor from distant lands before it goes ahead. Whatever reason the civic powers had for executing that poor fellow they are really not beholden to you to explain themselves. The reason given was that he was some "friend of the elf" not "of the Elves" as some prople wrongly surmised. This harkens back to the Tyrion incident of a few months ago. Tyrion being "the elf" in question in this case.

There was also an unjustified PvP killing by a "good" character on a character she had not met before in Tharbad. Purely because he refused to remove his hood and show his face to prove he was not Akbar. He was followed quite openly until he left Tharbad, set to dislike and killed by a character twice his level. This after making it clear that PvP would NOT be welcome.

This is unacceptable and brings to mind the Common Sense Rant in another thread.

[SNarfel]

I think threatening any individual could arguably be considered an act of evil in it self.

Even Gandalf and Galadriel were tempted by the ring... and had to pass the test.... so it is clear that even they have the capacity to do evil although they would intend to do good with the ring according to thier own morality.

So although Richards intentions were good by his own morality... it can be argued that he was throwing his weight around, it especialy came across in that light to my character because at the same time Richard was flying the banner of Rohan in an independent city. This gave the impression to my character as a by stander that he was displaying the fact that he had the might of a major regional power behind him and he could bully the guard and the independent city of Tharbad in to submission.

Just the thoughts of one bystander :-)

Usually good characters good deeds far outnumber such minor evil behaviour and they retain thier good alignement.

But if they continue time and again to repeat such actions their persona and how it is percieved by others will shift.

Path to hell is often paved with good intentions....

or something like that;)

[RichardW]

The flag acted more as a shield actually, I knew it could save my life. And I am quite sure it did, it was probably because of it that I was banned from the city and not executed or even thrown into jail.

Surely wasn't there to say: "I will come back with the Rohirrim and invade you all!". Was there more to say: "I'm not from this place so be careful before hurting an outsider.". ;)

In the end, I can understand the DMs point-of-view now and yours as well Snarfel. :)
You live and learn...

[wyrmwrath]

Seems when some people say a matter is closed they just dont mean it.

"There was also an unjustified PvP killing by a "good" character on a character she had not met before in Tharbad."

The other side of the story is that it was justified and explained. However the DM, feeling he was all knowing, decided not to investigate before acting.


" Purely because he refused to remove his hood and show his face to prove he was not Akbar."

Again, this is in error because the DM didnt know the entire story and failed to investigate before slinging accusations.


" He was followed quite openly until he left Tharbad, set to dislike and killed by a character twice his level."

Well the facts are true, but what was left out was that the PC that refused to show his face was asked to do so in a civil manner, the reason he was being asked to do so was explained, he acted in a manner that implied he was intentionaly hiding something related to the criminal sought, and was given several chances to simply show he wasnt the crimnal being sought. I will also point out that use of level to define role playing is METAGAMING. If I had looked and he had shown as impossible to me, and I changed my actions based on that OOC knowledge, I am metagaming and therefore cheating. The reverse is also true. If when Alexis had first faced Khaev, I had used the fact that he was a higher rating (dont remember if it was very diff or overpowering) to decide against fighting him, that would have been bad RP on my part.


" This after making it clear that PvP would NOT be welcome. "

This is entirely false. When the PC in question was informed that his refusal would be met with lethal action, not a single word was said to the portaganist that PVP was unwelcome. Not a single tell was sent.


"This is unacceptable and brings to mind the Common Sense Rant in another thread."

Yes I suggest the staff take a refresher read as well.



"You are a guest so you should do as your told."
" What Kev has pointed out is it isn't your place to oppose the laws of cities."

These statements are the antithisis of what goo dheroes should be about, and show a skewed paradigm on good and evil. If a law is wrong, it is in fact the duty and responsability of a good PC/personto oppose it. Just because your in a city whose laws state its ok to do something that goes against the basic laws of good moral codes doesnt mean you should just go along. Especialy in a world setting where the these battles arent won in courts, but by heroes willing to fight and die in spite of corrupt and useles city officals and guards, and in spite of what corrupt laws state.

"you may not have agreed with the execution but it was done within the laws of the city - therefore you were insulting a man doing his job, and questioning the laws of his city."

Who cares if the man and his job were insulted IF (since i didnt hear all the info) he was killing an innocent man? If the man was executed because of who his friends were, and the guard knew this, and not only allowed but participated, he is as evil as the one that gave the order.

"Threatening and intimidating people is seen as evil"

So threatening/intimidating/coercing somone to prevent them from commiting crimes/evil acts is an evil act in and of itself? PPffft

"Attacking an unarmed or weak/defenceless person is considered evil unless they attack you."

Great now we are to be complacent bystanders unless attacked?


The litmus being used by the DM staff to judge PC actions seems to be getting morally narrower and narrower. Just because Aragorn/Elrond might not have done "it" doesnt by definition make "it" an evil act.

[wyrmwrath]

Ah and it seems cause it was Kev playing his PC that got killed ...the apprapo response is a week banning in spite of assurences from the DM in charge of the incedent that there would be none.

Power corrupts and ablolute power corrupts abloluetly it seems. Why do I hear the phrase " its good to be the king..."

of cource this will be removed out of fear of opinions that arent identical to the owners ill bet.

[DM_Aule]

It was not Kev who was involved. I said that as far as I was concerned, this was over, but if you remember I also said this was not my decision -- such incidents must be reported to Kev, and they were.

I honestly believe I could refute every single point you make if I could be bothered to argue. But you really make it seem like there's no point.

[wyrmwrath]

there isnt, and you never said it wasnt your decision.

[DM_Aule]

That's bullsh*t, I have screenshots.

[Lorien]

Firstly the PC in question wasn't played by Kev - FACT.

Secondly - I wasn't involved or even online at the time of the incident but I have seen screenshots of your complete conversation - both with the character and DM's afterwards. It is blatantly clear you have not followed PvP rules.

Thridly - The comments about law and order in Tharbad and the like - as we have said time and time again characters are meant to be those who are just a step above the rest not heroes. They're meant to be doing their bit - not forcing their views on others - which is not a good aligned act however you may weakly try to argue it. Also the execution in Tharbad and what followed is part of an ongoin plot - people were talking of taking Tharbad by storm - and these were supposedly good aligned characetrs. This would firstly have destroyed the work being put into the Tharbad story, and secondly be an evil act.

However it seems that you are refusing to admit that any view other than yours is true - which is exactly what you are accusing the DM team of.

[wyrmwrath]

You stating arguments are weak doesnt make them so...

The PC ARE heroes, just not as epic as aragorn/gimli...if they werent heroes of thier respective faction they would be farming or standing a post not fighting dracoliches and the champion of the eye.

My refferences to the thurbad incedent were just to show a narrow view and what is good and evil. Its easy to make those judgement from an office chair behind a computer.

And no...I dont think my opinion is the only valid one, however this is an obvious overreaction to an incedent bt the DM staff out of frustration with a string of events. Dont think just because I am the only one posting that there arent others that do not share the same view...

and by the way...the screen shot button works on my computer too....

[DM_Olórin]

That's great lets see them. And if you must have a go at anyone have a go at me. You were entirely unjustified. you are just unwilling to consider that fact. Metagaming is onething, but you as a PLAYER knew that the charcater was NOT the one you sought. ALL you had to do was let him walk away and remain suspicious if you liked. A character of GOOD alignment does not walk up to a complete stranger and after a refusal to do as they ask for WHATEVER reason, offer them compliance or death... Think about it its blatantly against the spirit of the server. An excellent evening of RP with everyone that Sharga met was completely spoiled by your pig-headed indifference.

There is a reason why he does not remove his hood, it is part of his complete character.

Consider the feelings of other players who are here to enjoy themselves. Just because you cant get your own way is not lisesce to kill someone. :loony:

[thromnombulax]

Although i'm in total ignorance of this debate, i do got some good dictionary definitions here ;
Evil ; Anything which impairs the happiness of a being or deprives a being of any good; anything which causes suffering of any kind to sentient beings; injury; mischief; harm; -- opposed to good.

Good; That which possesses desirable qualities, promotes success, welfare, or happiness, is serviceable, fit, excellent, kind, benevolent, etc.; -- opposed to evil.
Advancement of interest or happiness; welfare; prosperity; advantage; benefit; -- opposed to harm, etc.

Coercing or seeking to coerce someone (causing them unhappiness) for whatever reason is evil i reckon.

[DM_Aule]

Fine. I know I shouldn't argue, you said yourself it was no use. Perhaps it will help other readers of this thread know what is being referred to.


Originally posted by wyrmwrath
Seems when some people say a matter is closed they just dont mean it.

"There was also an unjustified PvP killing by a "good" character on a character she had not met before in Tharbad."

The other side of the story is that it was justified and explained. However the DM, feeling he was all knowing, decided not to investigate before acting.

I'm sorry, no. There is no other side. We have full screenshots of the entire incident. I'm not concerned with whether you think your character had a justified reason. Your character asked another to reveal his face, was refused, and threatened death. You followed your victim around Tharbad with your weapons drawn and killed him without further thought outside. I fail to see where on earth you think that killing was justified for your victim.



" Purely because he refused to remove his hood and show his face to prove he was not Akbar."

Again, this is in error because the DM didnt know the entire story and failed to investigate before slinging accusations.

As I said, there was no more to the pre-killing RP between your character and your victim. FACT. Please don't dispute that.



" He was followed quite openly until he left Tharbad, set to dislike and killed by a character twice his level."

Well the facts are true, but what was left out was that the PC that refused to show his face was asked to do so in a civil manner, the reason he was being asked to do so was explained, he acted in a manner that implied he was intentionaly hiding something related to the criminal sought, and was given several chances to simply show he wasnt the crimnal being sought.

Civil manner? Perhaps at first. Do you always immediately threaten death when someone refuses a "civil" request? Unfortunately for you, the character in question has undisputable RP reason not to show you his face. Those who have taken the time to actually interact with him know that. No matter if you threaten death or not, that character cannot show his face and remain who he is. You say "the facts are true", thank you for that at least. The facts are what we acted on.


I will also point out that use of level to define role playing is METAGAMING. If I had looked and he had shown as impossible to me, and I changed my actions based on that OOC knowledge, I am metagaming and therefore cheating. The reverse is also true. If when Alexis had first faced Khaev, I had used the fact that he was a higher rating (dont remember if it was very diff or overpowering) to decide against fighting him, that would have been bad RP on my part.

All very well, but you are probably the highest level character on the server; there is no other that can threaten you. Particularly when he's walking (not running) away from you with no weapons out. Whether or not you looked at his challenge rating is not an issue. It was clear you would win hands down.



" This after making it clear that PvP would NOT be welcome. "

This is entirely false. When the PC in question was informed that his refusal would be met with lethal action, not a single word was said to the portaganist that PVP was unwelcome. Not a single tell was sent.

Perhaps it's just me, but starting to walk away from you after you issue a death threat doesn't strike me as saying "Oh, please come kill me, I want to die". No action of that character indicated he was ready or willing to participate in PvP. He did not draw his weapons or threaten you. He walked away. Unarmed. Even your common sense should have suggested that they were not interested.



"This is unacceptable and brings to mind the Common Sense Rant in another thread."

Yes I suggest the staff take a refresher read as well.

*speechless*


"You are a guest so you should do as your told."
" What Kev has pointed out is it isn't your place to oppose the laws of cities."

These statements are the antithisis of what goo dheroes should be about, and show a skewed paradigm on good and evil. If a law is wrong, it is in fact the duty and responsability of a good PC/personto oppose it. Just because your in a city whose laws state its ok to do something that goes against the basic laws of good moral codes doesnt mean you should just go along. Especialy in a world setting where the these battles arent won in courts, but by heroes willing to fight and die in spite of corrupt and useles city officals and guards, and in spite of what corrupt laws state.

You are (a) misinterpreting the statements you quote, and (b) relating them to yourself when they weren't meant to. All we are saying is that you're perfectly welcome to fall off to the dark side, but that you should realise certain actions will accomplish that. As I said, this is about another RP thread that is coming along just fine, without you trying to interpret what's happening there (I don't think you've been present at any of the events relating to it).


"you may not have agreed with the execution but it was done within the laws of the city - therefore you were insulting a man doing his job, and questioning the laws of his city."

Who cares if the man and his job were insulted IF (since i didnt hear all the info) he was killing an innocent man? If the man was executed because of who his friends were, and the guard knew this, and not only allowed but participated, he is as evil as the one that gave the order.

Again, you're misinterpreting things because you weren't present at the incident. Richard's actions resulted in an alignment shift and him being banned from Tharbad. We are not saying they are contrary to the rules, we are not even saying it's bad RP. We're saying it will affect how you are viewed in the world.

From Kev's original post, "Whilst your welcome to slip away to dark powers, you should be warned that you will gain evil points for such deeds. You may also notice NPCs will lose their respect for you later on." You sound like you never read that bit.


"Threatening and intimidating people is seen as evil"

So threatening/intimidating/coercing somone to prevent them from commiting crimes/evil acts is an evil act in and of itself? PPffft

Again, read before you criticise. "is seen as evil" -- of course the guard you threaten sees it as evil. Also, the population of Tharbad, all around you, sees it as evil. Hence, your reputation gets damaged, your alignment gets shifted towards evil. We are not saying this is unacceptable -- we are pointing out it is the case.


"Attacking an unarmed or weak/defenceless person is considered evil unless they attack you."

Great now we are to be complacent bystanders unless attacked?

Umm. No. Orcs attack weak and defenceless bystanders all the time. Make an orc and do it. As long as you stay within the rules (particularly for PvP), that's fine by me.


Ah and it seems cause it was Kev playing his PC that got killed ...the apprapo response is a week banning in spite of assurences from the DM in charge of the incedent that there would be none.

That's factually wrong, Kev didn't know about the incident until it was reported to him. Admittedly you did have the bad fortune that the PC you chose to victimise was a DM, and, as such, had a good grasp of the rules.


Power corrupts and ablolute power corrupts abloluetly it seems. Why do I hear the phrase " its good to be the king..."

I will not be drawn into flame fests and personal slurs. Thank you very much.


It was not Kev who was involved. I said that as far as I was concerned, this was over, but if you remember I also said this was not my decision -- such incidents must be reported to Kev, and they were.

there isnt, and you never said it wasnt your decision.

You're being funny. If you maintain that I am lying, I will provide evidence in the form of screen shots. I said "As far as I'm concerned this is over. Though in the end it isn't my decision.".


Your last posting contains no points worth commenting about.


----------------

Hope this clears up a few things. Not for Wyrmwrath, who I doubt will ever admit he could have been wrong. But perhaps for others.

[Argon Balros]

boy i think this threads steaming off topic

[Argon Balros]

in my opinion not respecting the law would make you chaotic not evil

[DM_Olórin]

Aside from anything else I was personally very disappointed in you Wyrmrath, your RP and party play was improving very nicely. But, when it comes down to it you care little for anyone elses opinions here even when those opinions are in the spirit of the world.

Argon: Disrespecting the Law yes, unprovoked murder no.

[DM_Kev]

I take great offense at this. I was not even awake when this incident took place. Any players who would like to know who was the owner of this character can ask me and I will tell them. They can even have a live demonstration.

The fact that you personally accuse me of abusing my power as admin with no proof whatsoever makes this look worse on you. You grief killed a player - thats a ban in all cases. But since you pushed this over the line, im going to have to change this ban. You leave me no choice.

Whoever you were, im glad you told me not to appoint him as a DM should something like this happen...

Thread closed.

[DM_Kev]

*** I have now had a forum ban applied + a server perm ban. If the staff and I are sent a personal apology I may consider lifting these bans. ***