CruelSummerLord said:
This is a thread about the differences in morals and norms between our real world and the game world. Namely, what should be done about differences between them. How should we as DMs and players handle these sorts of things?
IMC there is no distinction between real-world morality and in-game morality. If something is labelled Evil in the real-world, then it's just as Evil in-game. And if a character wishes to retain a Good alignment, he has to act accordingly.
That said, I don't provide a clean black-and-white world. Characters, settings and situations are complex, and the PCs therefore have to deal with problems where it is not clear what is right and what is wrong. Unfortunately for Paladins in my games, the bad guys tend not to wear black hats, the good guys are not always entirely pure, and everyone has an agenda.
(I do match that with a charitable view of character morality. If you make a mistake and trust the wrong person, then the setting might respond, but you won't get an alignment shift right away... you need a pattern of behaviour to change alignment. Also, you can't be 'accidentally' Evil. You need to consciously choose to perform Evil actions to become Evil. Of course, you might not recognise the act as Evil, but you do have to consciously choose to do it.)
1) Paladin is part of an adventuring band clearing out a goblin hold. The adventurers win out and finally have the goblin women and children cornered, and the paladin persuades his companions to let them go.
The next morning, the paladin prays for his spells, and is refused them. He is informed that he has sinned by allowing the goblin women and children to live. They are not humans or halflings-goblins do not deserve the same considerations.
Not IMC. Slaughtering the women and children would be more likely to cause a fall from grace.
2) The mercenaries guild in town denies admittance to women, elves and halflings because of their perceived physical weakness. The mintworkers guild denies admittance to dwarves because of their supposed lust for precious metals. Dwarf-run taverns deny admittance to elves, humans and half-orcs. Other taverns only allow male humans on the premises. Women are not allowed to join the armed forces or hold positions in government.
Some or all of these can be found in some or all cultures in my setting. Those cultures are generally mistaken in their actions, but that doesn't prevent them holding them... just like in the real world. Whether their attitudes and actions are Evil or just a rather unpleasant Neutral depends on how far they take them.
3) The buying and trading of slaves in the kingdom of Nyrond is illegal, except when it comes to Aerdi. Aerdi soldiers taken prisoner in the Greyhawk Wars, and Aerdi civilians brought back by Nyrondese troops, have caused the slave markets to boom. Proud noble knights and wealthty young debutantes might now find themselves reduced to digging ditches or staffing brothels, with the appropriate treatment.
My campaign draws a clear line on this one: slavery is the very definition of Lawful Evil. Paladins are expected to not own slaves, and to oppose the practice of slavery where they encounter it. If this practice is a blight on an otherwise Good society, the Paladin must tread carefully, because he has to use Lawful means to try to persuade the culture to change. If it's a feature of an otherwise Evil society (as is more common), the Paladin is free to forment revolution, to change the entire structure at the top.
Note that while I say that a Paladin is expected to oppose slavery, it does not follow that the Paladin must do so
right now, or to the
exclusion of other goals. If the Paladin is engaged in a desperate quest to destroy the artifact that will give the Dark Lord unending dominion, he's a bit busy to take on the local slave-trade. It's a battle for another day, and although he won't like doing it, he will have to leave it.
(Caveat: there is a theoretical scenario where a person might sell himself into slavery, either as payment of his debts or as a punishment imposed by the judicial system. In this case, the slavery might not be considered Evil, probably depending on the treatment of the slave. This is one of those areas where things get murky. In such a case, the Paladin is entitled to follow his own course, as long as he does so consistently.)
If you were to introduce these types of gray morality into your setting, how would you handle it if one of your players protested?
My players have never protested. If one did, I suspect my response would be that perhaps this isn't the game for him.
and come mainly from my desire to make a more evocative and grimmer setting. Such things as racism, sexism and slavery are obviously disgusting and abhorrent in real life, but our real world is not as enlightened and forward-thinking as it should be, so why should a pseudo-medieval fantasy world be any different?
I don't like the idea of not calling things that we consider to be Evil, Evil. Either these things are Evil, and should be recognised as such, or they are not, and we should adjust our thinking. And just because the vast majority of inhabitants of the setting consider something to be Good doesn't mean it is good - it can also mean that the vast majority of inhabitants of the world are deluded.
So, while slavery exists in my world, and while the vast majority of inhabitants of my world consider it to be both okay and a facet of the status quo, that still doesn't make it anything other than Evil.
