Just a thought

[Chayesh]

All aligns have 3 paths. They are not the same path.

To say Lawful Good and Chaotic Good are the same thing is just ridiculous.

Both do what they believe to be in the best interest of society, but they do it completely different ways. The LG uses the law and order and government. The CG uses mayhem, disruption of order. They both believe they are improving society. An LG Tribunal can easily, readily, and willingly participate in the capture and execution of a Good criminal as it is in the best interests of society to remove the criminal's influence and the pain he causes.

[Pali]

All aligns have 3 paths. They are not the same path.

To say Lawful Good and Chaotic Good are the same thing is just ridiculous.

Both do what they believe to be in the best interest of society, but they do it completely different ways. The LG uses the law and order and government. The CG uses mayhem, disruption of order. They both believe they are improving society. An LG Tribunal can easily, readily, and willingly participate in the capture and execution of a Good criminal as it is in the best interests of society to remove the criminal's influence and the pain he causes.

Agreed. But the problem is that a CG good causing the death of a LG gives the CG damnation and possible outcasting. A LG Tribunal capping for execution doesn't get damnation or outcast.

[wolfeman]

Would Robin Hood have had it coming if he were caught and executed? YES! That's the thing about responsibility, it cuts both ways. He would have had it coming because he saw what was going on and he did something about it, albeit outside the bounds of the law. That made him responsible for whatever came of it.

If Elvondril felt and acted that way, that's fine, perfectly legitimate, in fact. For the record, my character, Arand, wasn't fond of the idea of justice either. He was however, willing to play ball with them because of the stuff in the last paragraph. Of course, he was also willing to try negociating with Watcher, so he might have been just a tad idealistic.

If I am attacked and a lawful is attempting to take me in for punishment for an act I don't see as wrong...if they are participating in a system which I believe is corrupt' date=' I don't see them as a good man. They are not the same path as me, and I have no trouble cutting their worthless head from their body. I am not going to dance and pretend I think this person agrees with me, or that I believe he is a good man. He is forfeit in my eyes to the path of good. A blasphemer, a traitor and a spy, and he should die.[/quote']

Then why is it so difficult to realize that the LG Justice would see it the exact same way? You know why fighting in town is illegal, right? Did you ever see Superman, the animated series? On every episode with a villian that could fight, the property damage must have been enormous, potential civilian casualties were huge. Do you really thing that the Metropolis police department would have allowed Superman and Metallo fight in the middle of the city if they could have stopped them? In this situation the CG/NG is Superman, their victim is Metallo, and the Justice is the fellow demigod whose job it is to protect the city and its residents.

[myrek]

here's my problem with good Justices:

A Neutral Good is Good first.

A Chaotic Good is Good first.

A Good Justice is Lawful first.

[Pali]

here's my problem with good Justices:

A Neutral Good is Good first.

A Chaotic Good is Good first.

A Good Justice is Lawful first.

Well put.

[myrek]

I'd like to remind everyone that it is the criminal' date=' not the judge who is responsible for the consequences of his actions.[/quote']

I'd like to remind everyone that it is also a choice to follow the law... or is it that I wanted to remind them that it is the choice of the evil character to be evil that causes it all... or is it that it is all Virigoth's fault for making the game?

Justice, and anything that acts just like it, is overpowered... always has been and, if nothing gets changed, always will be.

[Tantangel]

I'd prefer to be sentenced to death by a goodie as a goodie rather than him sentencing me to life. Because I don't want to sit here for the life of my character.

[Warpnow]

Problem is, in the real world here isn't a simple good and evil, there many paths of good and evil which follow different dogmas, an are often at war with each other.

If it not blasphemous for an LG to hunt down, knowing that in the end he will cause the death of a CG, then why is it blasphemous for a CG to defend himself and end up killing that LG.

Myrek, that was beautifully put.

And Wolfeman, I CAN see it that way, but I just find it very very strange that chaotic good can't defend himself and killl a lawful good who is ATTACKING him because he...supposedly... is of the same path as him.

I think it should be coded that if one lightwalker attacks another, and the attacker died, there is no damnation or outcast.

And I clearly said it didn't matter if Robin Hood was responsible, he would have killed many, many a lawful man whom may have believed what they were doing was right in the process of escaping or doin what he thought was right.

[Chayesh]

This is a game mechanics issue more than an RP alignment issue.

Many times, I have snooped Tribunals attempting to be lenient to criminals. Problem is that the code requires something different. In some cases, Tribunals have no choice in the punishment doled out, like the infamous Seagull Execution in Miruvhor.

And I would disagree with you Myrek. Lawful goods are being good first. Their avenue for accomplishing "good" deeds is the law. By delivering criminals of any align for judgment, they are indeed throwing them on the "mercy" of the law because they believe the law to be good. If the law says they must die, it is for the benefit of all.

Now, I'm of similar opinion to several of you regarding aggressors dying and the person defending themselves getting the damnation when they never intended to kill anyone until attacked. That said, however, you can't claim "self defense" against a police officer who uses justified force to arrest you with probable cause to do so and neither can you claim self defense against a Tribunal when you are wanted or an outlaw.

[Warpnow]

And I would disagree with you Myrek. Lawful goods are being good first. Their avenue for accomplishing "good" deeds is the law. By delivering criminals of any align for judgment, they are indeed throwing them on the "mercy" of the law because they believe the law to be good. If the law says they must die, it is for the benefit of all.

That is putting the law over align...which is exactly what he said.

That said, however, you can't claim "self defense" against a police officer who uses justified force to arrest you with probable cause to do so and neither can you claim self defense against a Tribunal when you are wanted or an outlaw.

Course you can't....to the police officers, but you could in the eyes of a deity or supreme being. Course the tribunal would keep hunting you...but it doesn't mean you should be "damned" by the gods.

[Mister E]

Well put chayesh. I think it makes perfect sense that if a criminal is running and the police chases if the criminal ends up killing the cop and getting away it is only temporary because he will be in even more trouble than before. This ties in to what all goods have in common, the fact that they want betterment of society, so they go about it their own wasy, but a good knight who wants to slay evil should respect a good tribunal who wants to keep the fighting out of town, it is the goods own rp that will get him wanted and he/she should be fully prepared for the consequences.

I also think if you are a GC and your rp involves disregarding the laws then fine, you should be entitled to it, and I think that any good who is an outlaw should not have a penalty for killing a good tribunal simply because their rp decisions have led them down that path and they will probably have a hard enough time as it is without getting damned each time.

[Chayesh]

RE: Warpnow

It is NOT putting law over align. It is roleplaying PROPERLY a lawful good.

I wish you'd make up your mind whether there is one path or three, Warp, because you've said both in your posts.

I'd just like to remind everyone that there are THREE paths to each align. The RP is NOT the same.

[Warpnow]

Heh...I guess the affect of my earlier post was lost, I seperated them and made an illogical argument to make the point that there were THREE seperate paths which weren't the same.

The Point I was trying to make is that these three seperate paths shouldn't necessarily be bound together by a limitation, when they are so obviously at war with each other.

It is NOT putting law over align. It is roleplaying PROPERLY a lawful good.

Whether or not it is putting law over align is something only logic decides.

Whether it is roleplaying properly a lawful good is something you, and the rest of immortals decide.

I am only providing arguments against the first one, and whether or not the second one should be the way it is.

I am pretty sure in real life most police officers place the law over their own personal feelings.

But then again, in real life, revolutionaries who think they are doing good also do not hesitate about setting themselves against those officers.

I originally said I didn't think goods should be in Justice, I will rephrase that to say.

A system of the game should never prevent someone from defending themselves, so a good should only be allowed inside of Justice if it is realized that there are three SEPERATE paths and that a chaotic will want to, and suceed, at killing a lawful, even if they are both good.

[Warpnow]

I would also consider it nice to have an "autosurrender" where when off, you can't be put in jail, only killed...because you fight until you're very last breath.

Edit: It would balane the level of Gimpnss that has existed on Chaotic Goods since forever.

Or not even allow goods to be lawful.

You could definitely say a good man would have a limit at which he would no longer follow corrupt rules, an absolute lawful does not.

[Pali]

What if he doesn't think the rules are corrupt?

[Warpnow]

Not the point...Isn't there a point where they COULD become corrupt? If so, couldn't you say if he stayed behind the law at THAT point he would be corrupt?

Isn't there a point at which every good man will oppose a corrupt society?

If so, is he really lawful, or a neutral ethos who agrees with the current system?

[Chayesh]

If you've ever noticed, you already do fight to your last breath. You get tossed in jail as you "lose consciousness".

You can't differentiate ethos from align...they are intertwined too closely. And I'm not sure where this fallacy of preservation of all Life comes from for goods, but it's not in the help files.

HELP GOOD

Goods consider the need of others in tandem with their own. Many good-

aligns will place the well-being of others above that of themselves.

A few have been known to shun violence and war altogether, but most

Lightwalkers will fight against evil when necessary, in order to

protect themselves and others. Goods who are overly bloodthirsty

against neutrals will be reprimanded, and raising one's hand against

a fellow Lightwalker is a sure way to incite the anger of the gods.

Of all classes, paladins clerics, and healers are the ones most expect to

uphold those ideals.

See Also: HELP LAWFUL GOOD, NEUTRAL GOOD, CHAOTIC GOOD, REQUEST

LAWFUL GOOD

Peace and cooperation are to be preserved for the good of all, according

to the believes of these individuals. Pacifist are of this path almost

without exception, although most lawful goods believe that certain

situations warrant action. They also believe in preserving the peace

within protected areas for the safety of the entire citizenry, so they

uphold the laws whether Justices are present or not.

See Also: HELP GOOD

NEUTRAL GOOD

Those of this path are strong followers of the Light, above all else.

The weak must be defended, and [lawful neutrals] <---Should say neutral goods act to ensure that right triumphs over wrong, whether by assisting the law in a time of chaos, or acting against an unjust government. Even if their actions will sometimes bring about consequences to themselves, they are willing to accept this in order to do what is good and right.

See Also: HELP GOOD

CHAOTIC GOOD

Rebels and revolutionaries, these idealists strive to improve society

through upheaval. They are the over throwers of tyranny and the fighters

for freedom. They are not afraid to attack the law if they believe that

the establishment is corrupt, or if the system is protecting wrongdoers.

They believe in change for the betterment of all, even by violence if

necessary.

See Also: HELP GOOD

Based on these definitions, I've seen a lot of CG's that probably need to check their RP since they more often than not place ethos over align.

[Ex-D&Der]

Even if you're chaotic good I would think the lives of goodies, even goodies in say a justice cabal with evils or a corrupt justice cabal, should be sacrosanct. You would want to kill the evil justices, and overthrow the cabal, but not kill the goodies--rather try to save them from the corrupt system. If you were lawful good you wouldn't try to kill even an evil justice. Neutral you might depending on the circumstances.

[myrek]

AHHHHHH!!!!!! Too much to reply to!!!

Lawful goods are being good first. Their avenue for accomplishing "good" deeds is the law. By delivering criminals of any align for judgment, they are indeed throwing them on the "mercy" of the law because they believe the law to be good. If the law says they must die, it is for the benefit of all.

paladin vs shaman: shaman has killed 1.7 google people (all out of town). paladin has one kill(that shaman, inside the city). The GOOD Law Enforcement takes out the paladin in the name of good? >cough< outcast >cough< The paladin, not allowed to defend himself against the GOOD LE, runs, fleeing from battle. But over time, he gets lowered to 5 hp where a drow thief sneezes on him and kills him. And the GOOD LE has no responsibility in the death of another good? for a good, killing a good should be as wrong as severely injuring a good is as wrong as telling a baddie where a good guy is hiding. OUTCAST!

But there are other options. If it is the systems fault, don't let GOODS be LE. LE is overpowered as it is. Maybe they need more enemies. Gonna have to add something to the polls section.

you can't claim "self defense" against a police officer who uses justified force to arrest you with probable cause to do so and neither can you claim self defense against a Tribunal when you are wanted or an outlaw.

PCs aren't average citizens. They are Chuck Norris in Nam saving POWs. If that's the angle y'all want though, limit their jurisdiction. You can't have a dkn in Val Miran bossing people around (or a healer in Mir).

And if you want some real world examples....

A Christian cop who arrests someone blocking an abortion clinic. Law over beliefs.

A cop arresting someone for a crime they know they didn't commit. Law over reality.

Oh and...

HELP GOOD

Goods consider the need of others in tandem with their own. Many good-aligns will place the well-being of others above that of themselves.

A few have been known to shun violence and war altogether, but most

Lightwalkers will fight against evil when necessary, in order to

protect themselves and others. Goods who are overly bloodthirsty

against neutrals will be reprimanded, and raising one's hand against

a fellow Lightwalker is a sure way to incite the anger of the gods.

Why is it okay for GOOD LE to raise their hand against a fellow Lightwalker?

CHAOTIC GOOD

Rebels and revolutionaries, these idealists strive to improve society

through upheaval. They are the over throwers of tyranny and the fighters

for freedom. They are not afraid to attack the law if they believe that

the establishment is corrupt, or if the system is protecting wrongdoers.

They believe in change for the betterment of all, even by violence if

necessary.

So why can't they kill good LE?

And...

This ties in to what all goods have in common, the fact that they want betterment of society

No they don't, not all of them. And that is where this whole argument fits in> Some goods want goodness and some want order. My point is that one is ethos and one is align.

Since it's wrong to complain without giving suggestions:

Tribunal is a world government. Icky. Make them in charge of cities only. No guards outside the gates. No arresting people outside the gates.

or

Break it down into individual cities like before. Let goods cover Val Miran under val Miran's law, etc.

Do away with the automated system. Give the players some flexibility. Give the cities the ability to enforce their own laws. Why can't Mir have a law declaring elves to be animals and allow anyone to kill them. Or val Miran ban necros.

Really look at the good vs good situation. What is the difference between a good justice arresting a good so that the "system" can kill them and a good member of cabal A mercying a good member of cabal B so that an evil in cabal A can kill them? Maybe drop the autoforsake code for PKs? Of course that would be more work for the imms. Or do the opposite: forsake them for "rasing a hand against another lightwalker".

This is really a tight argument. But in the name of balance I don't understand how "the gods" allow goods to attack a good in order to arrest them but be mad at a good for defending themselves. Why would the gods care about the laws of man?

edit: forgot an idea. Maybe we say screw good vs evil and just use religion. Some gods would allow their followers to attack one another and some would not. And, of course, fighting across religions is a given.

[Chayesh]

Because only lawful goods attach morality to order.

Other lawfuls see order as a tool to be used.

The law in and of itself isn't "good" or "evil". It just is. It is simply the opposite of chaos.

[myrek]

Other lawfuls see order as a tool to be used.

???? Wouldn't lawful neutrals be the only ones who truly believed in law? Evil would 99% of the time see law as a tool for themselves. But goods... aren't they using it as a tool also? If law isn't the end goal, why let them be LE?

[Warpnow]

He does have a point. If only goods attatched morality to order, why is order a religion for neutrals?

[Mister E]

Wouldnt the simplest solution be to let chaotic goods attack and kill lawful goods without getting punished automaticlally by the gods?

[Warpnow]

If you've ever noticed, you already do fight to your last breath. You get tossed in jail as you "lose consciousness".

Ya, but that's not realistic, which is why wanted posters used to say "Dead or Alive", if a man doesn't want to come willingly...he doesn't have to.