A dilemma of an ethcial nature

[SixOfSpades]

How can one ethically carry out the punishment for an act that has not yet been committed (or is about to be committed)? Who is to say that an Evil wizard might not sit up nights in his study, trying to concoct a virulent new strain of germ, but instead stumble upon a cure for a crippling disease? Suppose a Good or Neutral character discovered that his neighbor had broken into his home and stolen some of his goods. While angrily plotting his revenge, the Good or Neutral character happens to catch sight of the bodacious booty of a truly comely vixen, and understandably has some deliciously lustful thoughts as a result. At this moment, would not a Know Alignment spell incorrectly interpret this character as Evil?

Match your actions to the situation--being Evil is not a crime, but doing Evil deeds is. If someone shows up as Evil, interrogate them, but take no hostile action unless circumstances warrant it.

[Olorin]

In our own society, we punish only those who perform illegal actions, not those who are motivated by "evil" desires. I think it was just yesterday or the day before that a man was executed for the murder of an abortion doctor and his bodyguard. The assasin obviously believed that his actions were just--in his mind he was executing a murderer. As a society, we punish the assasin for murder, because it is viewed as an evil act.

If you could somehow cast a detect alignment spell in our world, think of what would happen if you cast it in various places. Lawful evil in the game is defined as someone who acts for selfish reasons, and obeys the law to avoid punishment. There are lots of people in our world like this. People who wouldn't stop to help someone else if they didn't think they would be rewarded. Or people who will only give money to charity if it will gain them enough PR to justify the expense.

If you went around BG2 killing everyone of evil alignment, most in the society would view you as similar to the assasin of an abortion doctor. Though you have killed someone you knew to be evil, you did not have the authority to punish them, and in some cases, you kill people who do not break any laws.

Is a good character still "good" if they go around murdering everyone they don't like in the name of goodness?

Instead, you should work to expose the evil and unlawful _actions_ of evil people in the game, and defend yourself if they attack you for it. If you don't have confidence the local authorities to pursue certain issues (e.g. slavery) you may occasionally have to take matters into your own hands.

Also, as you pointed out, not all evildoers do things that are worthy of the death penalty. An "evil" merchant's transgression might just be that he charges high prices to gullible customers. The know alignment spell doesn't tell you anything about what they have done, so it's not a valid reason for killing someone.

An excellent book to read that explores this issue in the context of a fantasy world is _Villians by Necessity_ by Eve Forward. The premise is that Good has won, and has gone too far. If a band of villians can't restore the balance, the world is doomed.

Some questions to ponder:
Is genocide good or evil? How about when practiced on goblin tribes?
If you had a magic spell that would turn a thief or bandit into a "good" person, is that a good thing, or are you destroying their free will?
Is destroying evil necessarily a good act?

[Devv]

I like Pyrenks' suggestion of letting the Equaliser decide the exact alignment I am neutral good in real life, I play as a neutral good character most of the time but I have been guilty of killing many creature like liches for items only. This is where you need to roleplay. I do good things too, I accept quests to help people in the game out.

Why should I go kill a dragon who isn't bothering me? Sure he is evil, but he isn't doing anything evil that I know of. He might have a cool sword though so I wanna kill him for that. I have to pretend that he is terrorizing neighbouring lands and tricking the niaeve to join his dragon cult and do evil acts. By killing him I put an end to his evil and the loot is just a bonus.

I can't think of many places in the game where you have to attack without being attacked first. Some situations require some imaginative roleplaying. I assume that all Liches and Dragons I meet are evil doers who do nothing but evil. The same goes for Mind Flayers and Beholders. We are not dealing with human beings here, rather truely evil creatures who you have to kill or be killed and if you don't kill will do evil to others. They are a threat to the vunerable in the human race and by killing them you are saving some innocents lives.

Evil roleplaying is so much easier, neutral easier again. You can fuel it with things like greed and lust for power which are ever present in us, but good role playing takes some imagination [img]smile.gif[/img]

This is how I defend my actions for killing evil creatures outright and staying a good alignment.

[Assassin]

Ah, but which influences your alignment? Are you born evil, or do your actions make you evil? Or, are your actions the result of you being evil?

[Lord Lothar]

Hmmm, very good point Assassin...IMO your alignment should be due to your actions so a LG person would do good deeds while a CE person would do evil deeds. So if you're hellbent on getting rid of evil, if you kill evil people, you are doing a good deed but still it would be better if you were part of a law force or something desgined to root out evil instead of an independent operator doing justice on his own...