# Another Lawful Good Quandry **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Tags:** rpg-dnd-wargames\ **Created:** [February 16, 2024, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632 "2024-02-16T01:50:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/41 "2024-02-16T18:11:45Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > Sometimes I miss alignment. But the last few posts have reminded me of why WotC essentially phased alignment out of existence. This thread was sort of inviting that kind of 1st ed flavor nit-picking and engaging in it can be fun (for certain values of fun). I wouldn’t do it at the table with most people and generally don’t think it’s important unless we’re discussing fallen paladins and the like. In fact, I’d argue that most things in a campaign world don’t _really_ have an alignment at all in a “Protection from Evil” sense and the harder uses of alignment should only really apply to beings who make it a strong part of their concept. Even without that, I still find it useful RP tool if only to help remind a player of what motivates them or suggesting a track to take when making a choice. I’m playing a LN wizard in a Pathfinder “Kingmaker” campaign and my primary motivations are “Is this helping the citizens of our kingdom who rely on us as their government and support?” and “Is this helping to bring civilization and order to these wild lands?” This puts me in conflict with the other characters sometimes who are all a bunch of CG hippies but, truth be told, left to my own devices I’d probably, as a player, also side with the local fairies over the lumberjacks. But my character alignment gives me a strong reason to make a case for “We were chartered to carve civilization here; the fairies can be ‘part of the kingdom’ with equal rights when they start paying taxes and acting as citizens” which adds positively to the game. ---
**Author:** ![by-tor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/by-tor/32/266_2.png) [@by-tor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/by-tor)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/42 "2024-02-16T18:57:29Z")
Thanks for all the interesting perspectives! I play a pretty rules light/house rules version of 1st edition that throws out many rules in favor of fun and flow. I am not about to have one act shift someone’s alignment and class unless it is way off the charts. I also do not use the official AD&D cosmology and conventional planes. There is a creation myth that explains good and evil as well as monsters, humans, and elves. There is a historical reason for the decline of the elves. I did not want to bore you, so I left out a lot of details. The shadow-witch is evil because she tricks wanderers with the illusion of being a good/lovely creature with a nice cottage (which is actually a hut made of bones). Then she sucks the life essence out of them and they turn to stone if they fail to escape. Just another version of Hansel and Gretel. The players would not know the truth unless they somehow figure it out and believe me, they are paranoid enough to do so. Perhaps a closer inspection of the garden statues would do. Why do they not initially know that the evil shadow-witch is an evil shadow-witch? Because they are demi-plane hopping for plot reasons. If the Great Frog simply tells them that she is an evil shadow-witch and to tread carefully around her, that will ruin the surprise. Perhaps they dispel the illusion but she does not attack them. I was then imagining the possibility that the ranger might just straight kill her anyway and take the artifact without being truly provoked or knowing of her past evil deeds. Yes, she had an illusion up and she is ugly but is that reason enough to waste her? And so I am asking myself and you: how should I, as a DM, react to that? Should there be a penalty? I have never penalized alignment errors before. I usually see alignment (when I use it) as a role-playing cue for the players to use to add personality to their characters and hopefully influence their choices. As opposed to being a straight jacket of doom that they cannot ever deviate from. I asked here because I wanted to read some varying perspectives on the matter and see how **you** would handle it. I hope that clarifies things a bit. Apologies for typos, bad grammar, etc. By the way, **some** of you sound like very fun to play with! ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/43 "2024-02-16T20:06:30Z")
If alignment hasn’t been a big part of the game so far, I wouldn’t start making it significant for this encounter. Unless the ranger starts threatening an (as far as he knows) innocent old lady to pull off her toenails and murder her dog unless she hands over the artifact, I’d likely let it slide. Something like “We’ll steal it while she’s sleeping and then return it after” or try to compensate her, etc would be good enough for me to let it go. While they may encounter her while still thinking she’s just some random woman (though meta-game knowledge would suggest that there’s no nondescript artifact owning people just loitering around) I wouldn’t work SO hard to keep the illusion that it feels like a gotcha. Despite the many stories of murderhobo players, my own experience is that most players will try to seek some sort of amicable solution to things, provided they don’t start with “You open the door and see six ogres around a stew pot; roll initiative”. ---
**Author:** ![Knowed\_Out](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/knowed_out/32/7380_2.png) [@Knowed\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knowed_Out)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/44 "2024-02-16T22:07:32Z")
I don’t understand your quandary. Are you anticipating that the ranger will go ahead and attack a pretty woman in case she’s a witch in disguise, which she really is? Sometimes players want to break the cliché because they don’t want to be suckers. Making it an alignment issue just adds to the quibbling and rules-lawyering, which ruins the story. You could always have a decoy, like a doppleganger, playing the pretty woman instead of the swamp witch herself. That way if the ranger immediately attacks her, it won’t potentially shorten the meeting. The swamp witch could be hidden or invisible nearby and attack with surprise in case that happens. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/45 "2024-02-16T23:22:59Z")
Any 1st ed adventurer worth their experience points knows full well that every “pretty woman” in a swamp, cave, dungeon or other wild place is a trap. That’s, like, a solid 10% of the Monster Manuals. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/46 "2024-02-16T23:24:41Z")
Gygax had issues. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/47 "2024-02-16T23:31:17Z")
Maybe, but most of them were drawn from myth/folklore/fiction predating D&D. Gygax didn’t invent dryads and medusae and kelpies and sirens and succubi and… Of course, he also didn’t have to ADD them either. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2024, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/48 "2024-02-17T07:06:26Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > his Lawfulness was a direct result of his strict following of The Code & Measure Is that written anywhere? The Measure itself goes on at some length about Loyalty to higher powers and authority, but I don’t see where it says that _confers_ Lawfulness on anyone. _All_ Knights are supposed to follow the Code and Measure, but they can be _any_ good alignment (being cavalier variants, not ordinary fighters) (_Dragonlance Adventures_ pg 13): _Knights of Solamnia who begin as Knights of the Crown have their moral alignment set for them initially as good._ Nothing about Lawful there. (_Dragonlance Adventures_ pg 17): _Knights of the Crown are variants of cavaliers as described in Unearthed Arcana._ Cavaliers must be Good but can be any flavour of Good. In fact, the actual game materials say some interesting things about alignment in Dragonlance in general (_Dragonlance Adventures_ pg 13, my emphases): > **Alignment in Krynn has important effects that are very different from a standard AD&D campaign**. The types of spells available to a magic-user or cleric and the abilities of a Knight of Solamnia are all affected by the character’s alignment. In most AD&D® campaigns. the player chooses the alignment of his PC and then tries to act accordingly. Alignment in Krynn is handled differently. **The alignment of a PC is determined by his actions, not the other way around**. To me, Sturm seemed LG because he was a classic straight good guy (unlike, say, Tanis or Tasslehof), nothing more. I mean, Caramon is _also_ LG from the get-go, and he’s not a Solamnic or particularly rules-bound. Just a classic good guy. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2024, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/49 "2024-02-17T07:21:47Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > If alignment hasn’t been a big part of the game so far, I wouldn’t start making it significant for this encounter. Agreed. Given the OP’s further explanation, I’d just let it slide. This doesn’t seem like a morality-concerned game overall. ---
**Author:** ![ParallelLines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/parallellines/32/3575_2.png) [@ParallelLines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParallelLines)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2024, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/50 "2024-02-17T07:35:02Z")
So, just to summarize so we can move on, different AD&D campaign settings (such as Dragonlance, or, to another extreme Ravenloft [duh]) handle alignment differently (double duh!). Which, once again, turns everything back over to our DM, @by-tor. By our OP and statements, alignment has not been a big deal in the game to date, and as I and others have cautioned, making it into a straightjacket at the coming cusp-point is probably going to work against the intended fun, rather than for it. So, I remind our OP of what they stated in the OP, as -my- answer to the problem: > [@by-tor](#): > > He is not a paladin, so he will not fall from grace. He does not have a lawful good deity to answer to. In the first edition rules, if you have a change of alignment after 3rd level, then you lose a level. But I do not think that one breach is enough to shift your alignment. Bolding the next to avoid manipulating the original quote: **But I do not think that one breach is enough to shift your alignment.** There’s your answer IMHO. If the players get there, and if they aren’t paranoid enough to catch any clues, and IF they refuse to bargain/recompense the NPC, and if they end up taking a pragmatic method to get the MacGuffin then evaluate it in light of their activities prior to this point (or after). If the ranger had repeatedly taken an expediant (non lawful, non good) path on other issues up to that point, it’s time to shift. If they were good up to that point, compromise their ethics once, and then continue to hold them high, as you rightly point out they’re not beholden to a code or god. Anyone (other than a Pally) can slip a few times and still hold to their alignment and role. Of course, as I stated earlier, if they compromise their morals with the witch and _then continue to do so after_ then they’ve obviously had a change of heart and once again by-tor should consider changing the alignment. Two sub points that are again, entirely IMHO. First, you can use your knowledge of the upcoming event and forshadow the conflict between their alignment and the real world. You can have a sub-story where they are asked to be a jury as it were of a crime commited by fellow travellers, a cleric can discuss a past experience, or they can event be given a quest to investigate a reported wrong doing buy some other party as they plane-hop. If you do this, and the ranger is harsh _in character_ about people who slip it such categories, then taking a harsher stance later on (if even needed again) will make the event so much sharper. Second, if you DO end up having to change the alignment, I advise lowing your stated rules penalty. My house rules for D&D state that when having a level loss that is NOT recoverable by in-game magic, that rather than losing a level, my players loose ALL progress in the current level instead (note, this does not apply to things like undead level drain, but again, in most campaigns that can be recovered by high level magic). So if they’re level X, which runs from 10,001 EXP to 20,000 exp (making numbers up), and lose a level from alignment change, they drop down to 10,001, rather than X-1. Depending on how far they’re into a level, it can be nearly as painful, granted, but it also makes bookkeeping easier, as they aren’t losing HP / proficiencies / etc (or in later editions, feats, skill points, and other abilities that might need to be completely recalculate or guessed at). ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2024, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/51 "2024-02-17T09:12:18Z")
> [@ParallelLines](#): > > > But I do not think that one breach is enough to shift your alignment. I definitely don’t agree with this, when the once-off breach is something big, like murder or similar. There’s no “I’m Lawful Good - except for that _one_ daterape”. I mean, not that I’d let a player do that in-game at my table, anyway. ---
**Author:** ![ParallelLines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/parallellines/32/3575_2.png) [@ParallelLines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParallelLines)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2024, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/52 "2024-02-17T17:36:09Z")
You’re free to disagree, which was how my whole post started. But AD&D, especially in it’s earlier incarnations, pulled very heavily from a Western Medieval tradition, complete with spells like Atonement, as well as mythology where the literal gods (depending on campaign) can and will offer ways to seek redemption. So yes, I think it’s entirely in keeping with first Edition that nearly any -individual- crime could be redeemed, given sufficient effort or sufficient justification. Do I think any game written with 2024’s evolving standards would make the same claim, if it bothered with alignment at all? Hell no. And almost certainly for the better. But the heroic fiction and mythology on which the game blatantly called upon was from an era that was much more forgiving on jusifiable violence, sadly, often including sexual violene. REPEAT - I am not endorsing this, I’m being a contextualist as it were. Back to the specifics of the complaint, in the section you quoted, which in turn was a direct quote from the OP I explicitly was stating that said SINGLE action SHOULD be considered in light of the actions the character performed before AND after any expediant acts against the witch. IE it should be taken in light of the entirety of the morality the character embraces, rather than determined by a single, possibly desperate act. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632/54 "2024-02-18T09:53:23Z")
> [@ParallelLines](#): > > spells like Atonement “Deliberate misdeeds and acts of knowing and willful nature cannot be atoned for with this spell” (_PHB_, pg 49). 1st Ed. is set up for all kinds of _involuntary_ alignment changes and ways of clearing those. But deliberately acting contrary to your alignment isn’t catered for by redemption spells. It’s catered for by changing your alignment. Of course you could always drag direct divine intervention into it. But that’s outside the scope of the PHB and DMG rules. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-lawful-good-quandry/997632.md?page=2)