Alignment is kind of funny. Its one of those things that people fought tooth and nail to keep in 5e, but... just as many people were happy when it was completely gutted and has no mechanical implementation beyond a single fae (shorthand for personality) and the very rare divine relic (shorthand for what gods you serve). A sacred cow that exists purely for the sake of tradition and has little to do with the actual game.
Simply put: 5e has made it so you decide how important is Alignment and how it's implemented.
If your group likes it, use it.
If your group doesn't like it, don't use it.
There's no wrong way to play.
...but to the original point of the thread, the outcome is not important to me for alignment. The intent is. A bad outcome from a good intent is far more entertaining to me. Short-sighted characters are hilarious.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
The wizard said that basically just by buying the slaves is an evil act, even if the intent is to free them, now mind you this is the same wizard who in a previous campaign played a lawful Paladin who said you can’t steal from the dead, and then robbed another paladins tomb to wear his gear. I don’t think my dm minds alignment unless it’s an extreme act or continuity of *type* of acts
My party and I came across a goblin outpost that was selling slaves, our wizard said that we HAVE to fight the goblins to free the slaves and I just said we’ll buy them and set them free. He said I could not do that because slave trade is an evil act and I’m not an evil character. Thoughts? Currently I’m a chaotic neutral character and I don’t see how freeing slaves is an evil act
I'd say that financially benefitting slavers (by buying slaves from them) is an "evil" act but the act of freeing the slaves you buy is an act of good that outweighs your evil act. Killing is/should also be considered an evil act but we justify it by killing "bad" people and thus the end result is more good than evil. That's my take on it.
My party and I came across a goblin outpost that was selling slaves, our wizard said that we HAVE to fight the goblins to free the slaves and I just said we’ll buy them and set them free. He said I could not do that because slave trade is an evil act and I’m not an evil character. Thoughts? Currently I’m a chaotic neutral character and I don’t see how freeing slaves is an evil act
There have been plenty of examples in history where people have purchased slaves in order to free them. Ask the slaves if they think it is immoral. They won't.
Purchasing a slave's freedom wouldn't qualify as human trafficking. No court would convict you of slavery in that scenario. Beyond that, alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive. It describes who the character is and not who they should be.
My party and I came across a goblin outpost that was selling slaves, our wizard said that we HAVE to fight the goblins to free the slaves and I just said we’ll buy them and set them free. He said I could not do that because slave trade is an evil act and I’m not an evil character. Thoughts? Currently I’m a chaotic neutral character and I don’t see how freeing slaves is an evil act
There have been plenty of examples in history where people have purchased slaves in order to free them. Ask the slaves if they think it is immoral. They won't.
Purchasing a slave's freedom wouldn't qualify as human trafficking. No court would convict you of slavery in that scenario. Beyond that, alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive. It describes who the character is and not who they should be.
I had a thought. If slavery is illegal in this kingdom and your party doesn’t want to engage them directly, just buy the slaves, free them, then report the slavers to the queen or king in the capital city. The receipt for purchase of the slaves will be enough to convict the slavers in any court of law. The queen can send soldiers to deal with them and voila! Problem solved without using violence.
The receipt for purchase of the slaves will be enough to convict the slavers in any court of law.
If slavery is outlawed that makes the slavers criminals, and I highly doubt criminals give receipts or any paperwork tying them to the criminal act.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
The receipt for purchase of the slaves will be enough to convict the slavers in any court of law.
If slavery is outlawed that makes the slavers criminals, and I highly doubt criminals give receipts or any paperwork tying them to the criminal act.
If it is illegal, the Goblins likely do not recognize the sovereignty of the land. They're not there to trade with the regular citizens who cannot own such openly. If any documentation of ownership exists, it'll probably be some mark on the person that has meaning only to the Goblins.
Then suddenly... diplomatic nuances. Are there treaties where the recognition of each sovereignty is limited and (sadly) even tolerated? Is the Goblin trade sanctioned as long as it stays with the Goblins? Is the Goblin trade "legal" to a certain extent?
If there are treaties and such granting allowance for the trade, attacking them is the illegal act, possibly causing bigger problems in the region if there is no response to the illegal attack upon their trade. The better thing is to buy then free if an immediate solution is needed before employing a long-term solution that requires more information and consideration.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
You are choosing the non-violent solution. Murder of anyone would never be the inherently good solution.
Now-- obviously-- ideally, in addition to paying for the slaves/hostages you should also dissuade them from taking more slaves/hostages.
Also-- what are you going to "free" them to? Is your land a Monarchy and the commoners serfs? Because people who are considered an extension of the land and forbidden to leave and expected to work and give up 80+% of their crop in taxes aren't a whole lot more "free" than slaves are. The only real difference is how closely your masters is watching you.
Frankly-- I think your wizard just wants to use his nifty battle spells on someone in order to see the pretty effects and is just itching to find a target to use them on. That in and of itself is pretty evil.
Frankly-- I think your wizard just wants to use his nifty battle spells on someone in order to see the pretty effects and is just itching to find a target to use them on. That in and of itself is pretty evil.
Reminds me of an encounter where the Neutral Druid managed to get control of a Monstrosity, effectively ending the encounter, and the Warlock very nearly attacked the Monstrosity anyway because she wanted a fight... but she's decidedly "not Good" (and almost certainly Evil, but the Druid's alignment is the only one that's been openly stated).
Attack first and consider other options later isn't a very "Good" act.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Okay. If not an actual receipt, maybe record the transaction using a Wizard Eye or something like that. Like they do with undercover cops and drug buys irl.
Okay. If not an actual receipt, maybe record the transaction using a Wizard Eye or something like that. Like they do with undercover cops and drug buys irl.
Cops have spells now? Shhh-i-i-i-t! :O
Jokes aside, reporting them to the government seems like an awesome idea. I also like the suggestion of asking the wizard in-game why it's evil to buy people's freedom.
Okay. If not an actual receipt, maybe record the transaction using a Wizard Eye or something like that. Like they do with undercover cops and drug buys irl.
Cops have spells now? Shhh-i-i-i-t! :O
Jokes aside, reporting them to the government seems like an awesome idea. I also like the suggestion of asking the wizard in-game why it's evil to buy people's freedom.
Thank you. I would love to Like your post but I can’t find the Like button lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Alignment is kind of funny. Its one of those things that people fought tooth and nail to keep in 5e, but... just as many people were happy when it was completely gutted and has no mechanical implementation beyond a single fae (shorthand for personality) and the very rare divine relic (shorthand for what gods you serve). A sacred cow that exists purely for the sake of tradition and has little to do with the actual game.
All the drama, none of the bite.
Simply put: 5e has made it so you decide how important is Alignment and how it's implemented.
If your group likes it, use it.
If your group doesn't like it, don't use it.
There's no wrong way to play.
...but to the original point of the thread, the outcome is not important to me for alignment. The intent is. A bad outcome from a good intent is far more entertaining to me. Short-sighted characters are hilarious.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
@Mephista I totally agree with you. If I ever ran a D&D game, I wouldn’t use alignment at all.
The wizard said that basically just by buying the slaves is an evil act, even if the intent is to free them, now mind you this is the same wizard who in a previous campaign played a lawful Paladin who said you can’t steal from the dead, and then robbed another paladins tomb to wear his gear. I don’t think my dm minds alignment unless it’s an extreme act or continuity of *type* of acts
I'd say that financially benefitting slavers (by buying slaves from them) is an "evil" act but the act of freeing the slaves you buy is an act of good that outweighs your evil act. Killing is/should also be considered an evil act but we justify it by killing "bad" people and thus the end result is more good than evil. That's my take on it.
There have been plenty of examples in history where people have purchased slaves in order to free them. Ask the slaves if they think it is immoral. They won't.
Purchasing a slave's freedom wouldn't qualify as human trafficking. No court would convict you of slavery in that scenario. Beyond that, alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive. It describes who the character is and not who they should be.
Thank you! You said exactly what I was thinking.
I had a thought. If slavery is illegal in this kingdom and your party doesn’t want to engage them directly, just buy the slaves, free them, then report the slavers to the queen or king in the capital city. The receipt for purchase of the slaves will be enough to convict the slavers in any court of law. The queen can send soldiers to deal with them and voila! Problem solved without using violence.
If slavery is outlawed that makes the slavers criminals, and I highly doubt criminals give receipts or any paperwork tying them to the criminal act.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
If it is illegal, the Goblins likely do not recognize the sovereignty of the land. They're not there to trade with the regular citizens who cannot own such openly. If any documentation of ownership exists, it'll probably be some mark on the person that has meaning only to the Goblins.
Then suddenly... diplomatic nuances. Are there treaties where the recognition of each sovereignty is limited and (sadly) even tolerated? Is the Goblin trade sanctioned as long as it stays with the Goblins? Is the Goblin trade "legal" to a certain extent?
If there are treaties and such granting allowance for the trade, attacking them is the illegal act, possibly causing bigger problems in the region if there is no response to the illegal attack upon their trade. The better thing is to buy then free if an immediate solution is needed before employing a long-term solution that requires more information and consideration.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
You are choosing the non-violent solution. Murder of anyone would never be the inherently good solution.
Now-- obviously-- ideally, in addition to paying for the slaves/hostages you should also dissuade them from taking more slaves/hostages.
Also-- what are you going to "free" them to? Is your land a Monarchy and the commoners serfs? Because people who are considered an extension of the land and forbidden to leave and expected to work and give up 80+% of their crop in taxes aren't a whole lot more "free" than slaves are. The only real difference is how closely your masters is watching you.
Frankly-- I think your wizard just wants to use his nifty battle spells on someone in order to see the pretty effects and is just itching to find a target to use them on. That in and of itself is pretty evil.
Reminds me of an encounter where the Neutral Druid managed to get control of a Monstrosity, effectively ending the encounter, and the Warlock very nearly attacked the Monstrosity anyway because she wanted a fight... but she's decidedly "not Good" (and almost certainly Evil, but the Druid's alignment is the only one that's been openly stated).
Attack first and consider other options later isn't a very "Good" act.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
That sounds like a great opportunity for some roleplaying.
In-character, ask the wizard character, "Why do you think buying slaves to free them is an evil act?"
Keep it in-character and have some fun as you explore the motivations and moral codes of the characters (and maybe learn a few surprising things).
Okay. If not an actual receipt, maybe record the transaction using a Wizard Eye or something like that. Like they do with undercover cops and drug buys irl.
Cops have spells now? Shhh-i-i-i-t! :O
Jokes aside, reporting them to the government seems like an awesome idea. I also like the suggestion of asking the wizard in-game why it's evil to buy people's freedom.
Thank you. I would love to Like your post but I can’t find the Like button lol.