D&D Alignment - Examples

In the following article, I present hypothetical situations, responses to them, and a discussion of the alignment of each response. In some cases, the "same" response may be categorized as falling in more than one alignment, based solely on differences in the intention and decision-making process that led to it.

Characters

Throughout these examples, we will use the same characters consistently; thus, we will see how a single, consistent, character might behave in a number of different circumstances.

The characters are:

• Boldor the Magnificent is a mighty and experienced paladin. He's unquestionably Lawful Good. He's got years of experience, but his experience has focused more on fighting evil, and protecting the innocent from real threats of harm, than on handling non-violent threats.
• Samantha the Wise is an urban priest. She has spent years working with the poor, the needy, and the helpless. She is also Lawful Good, but her experience has rarely involved true evil, only apathy. She is perhaps less naive than Boldor.
• Jorgen the Wealthy is a rich and powerful merchant. He is aware that he could be a better man, and sometimes tries, but in the end, his charity is aimed at soothing his conscience, not really at helping the poor. He is Neutral with Lawful tendencies.
• Slippery Stan is a chaotic evil sorceror of middling power. He would probably be more powerful if he were more willing to cooperate with people.
• Mathonwy is a Neutral Good wizard with some chaotic tendencies. He is strongly committed to the wellbeing of all life, but his ideals are principles, not firm rules. He will seek the wellbeing of all by whatever approach suits best, using law when it serves, and avoiding it when it doesn't. He is too clever by half.

Example #1:

A character is walking down the street, and is approached by a beggar. The beggar smells of ale, and is obviously a little hung over. He begs the character for money.

• Boldor feels pity for the beggar, but is aware that drinking cannot be doing the man any good; he gives the beggar some money, along with a stern admonishment to spend it on food, not liquor. This is Good behavior.
• Jorgen feels some pity for the beggar, but believes that it is not his problem. However, he needs some new workers, so he offers the man a job, on the condition that he sober up enough to be useful. This is Neutral behavior.
• Samantha feels pity for the beggar, but believes he will be unable to avoid drinking until he is supervised. She offers the beggar a job, on the condition that he sober up. (She doesn't know what she'll have him do, but is confident that she can find something fulfilling for him.) This is Good behavior.
• Stan feels contempt for the beggar. He believes there is fun to be had, though. It seems, from the smell of ale, that the beggar is unable to control his drinking problem. Stan gives the beggar money, with a stern admonishment to spend it on food, not liquor. He does this expecting that the beggar, having been specifically reminded of drinking, will drink himself into a stupor; Stan looks forward to repeating this until the beggar dies painfully. Stan's behavior is Evil (and somewhat Chaotic).
• Mathonwy tries to find a clever way to get the beggar some gainful employment; failing that, he tries to find an appropriate charity, get the beggar to it, and contribute some funds. If a charitable organization is not available, he will probably try to organize one — possibly drafting the beggar to run it. His behavior is Good, although it may not achieve the best results he could have hoped for.

Example #2:

A dragon threatens a village, and will probably destroy it.

• Joe Good, a novice paladin, recognizing that he has no way to stop or even slow the dragon, arranges to get as many people as he can evacuated to safety, and goes with them to protect them. He knows he can't save them all, so he saves as many as he can. He briefly considers a heroic last stance, and dismisses it as a futile gesture. This is Good behavior.
• An experienced paladin, who could probably kill the dragon single-handed, arranges to get as many people as he can evacuated to safety, going along to protect them. He considers fighting the dragon, or trying to organize the town militia to back him up; under these circumstances he is quite sure he could drive the dragon off, although he could be seriously wounded or killed, and it is more likely that he would kill the dragon. He dismisses the idea, on the grounds that his personal experience and knowledge are too important to be wasted protecting a few peasants. He is now a fighter.
• A novice paladin, full of stories of heroic bravery, does his best to fight the dragon. He is killed quickly, and the dragon is barely slowed. This was probably Good behavior, but it wasn't very clever.
• Stan can't figure out a way to move his valuable lab full of research material, which he worked long and hard to build, and those stupid peasants won't stop packing a few silvers' worth of "mementoes" to help him. In desparation, he comes up with an elaborate scheme to distract the dragon, organizes the militia, and, with their help, actually kills it. He takes full credit for his bravery, well aware that he can use this later. He tries very hard to hide his glee when it comes out that one of the people who was particularly rude about refusing to help him move his materials was killed in the fight. Stan is just as Evil as he was last time.
• Mathonwy tries to simultaneously evacuate the village and find a way to defeat the dragon; if he can't defeat it now, he ads it to his mental to-do list, and will likely come back to the problem later, if he survives. If he survives, the dragon is dead in the long run. His behavior is Good.

Example #3:

A law providing for the death penalty for unrepentant murderers is proposed, and several notable figures are discussing it.

• Boldor argues that such a law is appropriate, as long as it is clear that only people who admit to their own guilt, or whose guilt is established through totally incontrovertible means, are to be killed. He believes that this law will have several key benefits:
  • It provides a powerful deterrent to future murders.
  • It allows the resources available for taking care of prisoners to provide better care for prisoners who are more deserving.
  • It meets his order's understanding of justice.

  Boldor's behavior is Lawful Good.

• Samantha argues against the law. She feels that it is impossible to be sure that the murderers wouldn't repent later, and that they must have this chance. She is also concerned about the possibility that the law will result in more murderers who are actually not ready to repent claiming they have repented, making it harder for priests to counsel them effectively. Samantha's behavior is also Lawful Good.
• Jorgen argues in favor of the law. He would like to see murderers hanged, all of them, but considers the law a good step in the right direction. He wants to be assured that no innocent people will be killed, but he believes in "an eye for an eye". Furthermore, he believes that, if fewer prisoners are kept, his taxes may go down. Jorgen is Neutral.
• Stan, who is an unrepentant (but not yet caught) murderer, argues against the law. He uses many of Samantha's arguments, but doesn't believe a word of it; he just wants to be sure that he, personally, will not be killed if he is ever caught. If he were more confident of his ability to avoid being caught, he might argue for the law, because he likes a good hanging. Stan is, as always, Evil.
• Mathonwy tries to weigh the percieved benefits of the law against the expected harm done — he doesn't expect a government to reliably not kill the wrong people. Unless he can get the law amended to require substantial verification, such as commune spells, he will argue against it. He may find himself supporting some of Boldor's points. His actions are Good, with Chaotic tendencies.

Example #4:

Stan's mentor, a famously evil old wizard, has snapped, and has taken a cute little girl hostage; he threatens to kill her if someone doesn't give him a thousand gold pieces.

• Boldor looks for an opening to attack the man. He believes that, if he negotiates this time, he is creating an incentive for future hostage-taking activities. He is worried about the life of the girl, but is just as worried about the lives of other people who may be taken hostage. If he can, he will kill the old wizard on the spot, because he knows the man has a history of evil behavior, and has resisted all attempts at redemption. Boldor's behavior is Lawful Good. (It is not very lawful unless he legally has the right of summary justice, but he probably does, with his background.)
• Samantha tries to calm the man down, while seeking a way to get money. She puts her "lucky gold piece" in with the treasure, knowing that she can track him down later by scrying it, and feeling quite confident that she can capture him once the hostage is safe. Samantha's behavior is Lawful Good.
• Jorgen hems, haws, pretends to relative poverty, and grudgingly hands over a little money, claiming it is "all" he can spare. In fact, he has close to two thousand gold pieces worth of money and gems on his person. If no one else comes up with any money, Jorgen will eventually come up with the whole amount, but he will try to get someone to reimburse him. Jorgen's behavior is Neutral.
• Stan will likely stay uninvolved. He may try to arrange for his master's capture, hoping to get the old man's treasure or valuables. He may laugh and hope the old man kills the girl. Most likely, though, he will try to take advantage of the occasion to sneak off and steal something while people are distracted.
• Mathonwy does his best to outwith the crazy old man, but not before he has a contingency plan. If he screws up and the girl dies, he will do his best to have her resurrected. He is willing to take some risk of screwing up, because he believes that this gives him the best chance of saving the girl's life. His behavior is solidly Chaotic Good.

Back to the Alignment Page

Comments about this page may be sent to seebs@plethora.net.