Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Charity ?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 6:56:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

A Survey:

What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of religious or
pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment

give either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's, or just
directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).

Founded an orphanage?
A poorhouse?
Etc??
Beggar on the street?

(Cleric and Paladin tithes don't count)

And no, mercenary action where they charged the market rate for killing
monsters doesn't count.
Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in favor of evil because
of equipment's monetary value?

More about : charity

Anonymous
April 28, 2005 11:48:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<pjmcgurk@gate.net> wrote in message
news:fhYbe.634$pe3.476@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> A Survey:
>
> What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of religious or
> pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment
>
> give either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's, or
just
> directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).

Damned few. But then, I'm an American citizen, and we're greedy bastards.
;-)

I can only think of four of my own characters in my 24+ years of playing
that gave things away to the poor.

> Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in favor of evil
because
> of equipment's monetary value?

Probably not. It's not like said equipment and monies disappear from the
face of the Oerth.
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 12:05:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

> What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of religious or
> pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment
>
> give either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's, or
> just
> directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).
>
> Founded an orphanage?
> A poorhouse?
> Etc??
> Beggar on the street?
>

I agree with others that this is rare. On the rare occassions that I play
(rather than GM), and the character is Good, I tend to donate heavily. Any
gems or jewelry whose prior ownership can be established have their
belongings returned. Repairing any damage caused by the bad guys is paid
for out of their loot. Money and minor magic items are donated to charity.
Useful magical items are kept to further the cause of good!

With Neutral or Evil characters, things are markedly different.

Looking at my players' characters, charity is rare.

Peter
Related resources
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 1:19:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<pjmcgurk@gate.net> wrote in message
news:fhYbe.634$pe3.476@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> A Survey:
>
> What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of
> religious or
> pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment
>
> give either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's,
> or just
> directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).
>
> Founded an orphanage?
> A poorhouse?
> Etc??
> Beggar on the street?
>
> (Cleric and Paladin tithes don't count)
>
> And no, mercenary action where they charged the market rate for
> killing
> monsters doesn't count.
> Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in favor of evil
> because
> of equipment's monetary value?

As a paladin I gave gold to many beggars of my city and any city I
happened to be in at the time.
I even bought an entire house for a family who was down on their luck,
found the father a job as boatwright (Not sure if that is the proper
name for the job) he builds ships and got a cleric to check out the
family. The party also placed a fund for the family, the temple of Wee
Jas sends them a small amount of the fund each week to cover anything
they need until such time as the father can make a steady income at
his new job.


Yes I was a paladin so that isn't quite what your answer was. I was 19
and almost 20 and had gotten a large reward for saving some very
important people in the kingdom.

As a ranger I once hunted for days to collect food for a village that
had most of the men killed in war. I offered my services to patrol
their lands as well, kept a band of gnolls (15 or so) occupied while
the villages got to safety once or twice. I finally had enough of the
gnolls and decided to creep in and kill as many as I could, they
weren't my favored enemy. I managed to slay 12 before I got a near
fatal arrow wound. I escaped into the woods and did everything I could
to keep from dying. The three gnolls, the commanders hunted me for
days, just missing me on several occasions. I finally met up with the
rest of the party, and we headed toward the Gnoll tribal gathering
place. We killed nearly all the men, but left women and children alone
because I left it was wrong to kill them. I was CG.

I also had a rogue who would pickpockets in major cities and give
nearly all the cash (except living expenses) to charities, to gain
favor, and to get rid of the large sums of money he collected. That
wasn't done in the name of good, it was done for selflish aspects.
While it might have helped some people that was never really my goal.

The last character (the dwarven paladin) has picked up a pair of
kobolds and a single goblin now, or was it a pair of goblins and a
single kobold, don't remember at this second. I am hoping to take them
to my forge, teach them a skill, and domesticate them if you will.
Give them a chance to be more than just goblins, and kobolds. So far
haven't gotten back to that just yet.
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 2:10:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

pjmcg wrote: Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in
favor of evil because of equipment's monetary value?

Currently (and for 3 years now) I'm playing a NG Druid. At level 12
(when the Book of Exalted Deeds came out) I took the Vow of Poverty. It
is assumed that my money goes to those in need, charities, refugees,
public works etc.

I like the idea of the VoP from a role-playing and a powergamer POV.
It is a potent ability, quite different from the norm and really
changes how you play the game. That being said, there might be froom
for a "vow of being pretty poor" feat that isn't quite as excessive as
the full fledged VoP, but still balances (in game terms) charity with
power.

After all, this game is based on $$ and level to achieve power. I'm
currently at odds with my DM because his Epic VoP progression is 1 feat
every 2 levels (selected from the epic saves, epic ability bonuses and
a few others). With other PCs earning 900,000 this module, my 1 feat
is looking kinda weeny.

One only hopes that charity should be kept track of and "paid off" in
due time (I actually think there is an article about this in a recent
dungeon (or perhaps the BoED). Balance should be maintained to keep
things fun and not penalize charity.

Rich
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 5:04:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

pjmcgurk@gate.net wrote:
>
> A Survey:
>
> What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of religious or
> pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment
>
> give either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's, or just
> directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).
>
> Founded an orphanage?
> A poorhouse?
> Etc??
> Beggar on the street?
>
> (Cleric and Paladin tithes don't count)
>
> And no, mercenary action where they charged the market rate for killing
> monsters doesn't count.

But killing monsters, saving people and liberating slaves for free
counts? Because I think most adventurers tend to prefer that sort
of hands-on charity over giving away money that they could have used
to fund equipment for their own good works.

Hm... there's an idea. How about a fundraiser to help these selfless
heroes buy better equipment so they can continue to save the world?

> Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in favor of evil because
> of equipment's monetary value?

Not at all, since evil people don't get this nice warm feeling in their
hearts. Besides, goodwill can also come in handy at times.


mcv.
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 7:38:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<pjmcgurk@gate.net> <pjmcgurk@gate.net> wrote:
>
> A Survey:
>
> What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of religious
> or pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment give
> either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's, or
> just directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).
>
> Founded an orphanage?
> A poorhouse?
> Etc??
> Beggar on the street?

I was about to say that I did with my last two characters, then
remembered that they did in fact have cleric levels -- one of them had
*mostly* cleric levels. In neither case was it done for religious
reasons.


Jozef was a ship captain (and priest of Manaan, god of the seas and
patron of sailors). He was also a pirate hunter; crew turnover was
pretty harsh (/fireball/ is *really* good at clearing ships' decks).
He was quite generous with crew shares. He ended up with a reputation
of being a generous -- but dangerous -- captain to sail with. "If you
come back after a trip with him you'll be rich, boy... but many don't
come back."

He ensured that the widows and orphans were taken care of because it was
his duty as *captain*, not because he was a priest. He made sure there
was a good trust fund going at the temple in case the ship didn't come
back from a mission. Again, because he was a ship's captain, not
because he was a priest.

Granted, there's a good chance he was more serious about ensuring this
was done (and more generous than necessary with the money) because of
his training and background (i.e. because he was a priest), but that's
not why he did it.

Note too that he didn't donate to 'the orphanage' for everyone, just to
the orphanage for sailors lost at sea.


Dolarn was (originally) written up as a CG paladin, then retconned to a
Bbn/Ftr/Clr (single level of cleric). Again a semi-religious character,
but that *really* wasn't his focus. He was serious about following Kord
is all.

He tended to be really generous with the poor -- alms for beggers
(though here he was more likely to bring them to the tavern for a good
meal than give them money), overpayment to the church for healing and
the like ('building up credit' was the metagame idea here, though --
Dolarn used a *lot* of healing), ensuring the town's prostitutes had a
steady income....

ahem. In any case, again it wasn't because he was a cleric (that was a
purely mechanical thing to represent his abilities -- he's met another
priest of Kord, but I don'tk now that he's never seen a temple to Kord)
or other religious type. He was like that before he got religion --
freespending, on stuff that helped people... when he's not beating stuff
up.

He's also been known to spend money on monuments (of himself); he was
trying to build up his fame. We were working through the WotC
adventures (starting with _Sunless Citadel_); he was leaving a trail of
statues and the like behind as monuments to the greatness of Kord ("see,
he made me big an' strong and lookit what I did!"). This started, IIRC,
when an out of work stonecarver refused charity... but would accept a
commission.


> Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in favor of evil
> because of equipment's monetary value?

A little bit, but not a lot. Even 10% of a PCs expected wealth -- while
it's a lot of gold -- doesn't have a lot of impact on his gear. His big
item will probably be the same, he may miss out on one of his middle
items -- something nice to have, but ultimately probably not *that*
important.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 1:12:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

pjmcgurk@gate.net wrote:
> A Survey:
>
> What fraction of player _characters_, who are not members of
religious or
> pseudoreligious organizations, but still of good alignment
>
> give either time, money, or equipment to charities supporting NPC's,
or just
> directly to NPC strangers (for chaotic types).
>
I don't know about others; but my Paladin/Rogue character (her history
explains that bit of weirdness) has founded an orphanage.
Of course, this was more than just "be nice to people because you have
to play LG"; this particular character has always wanted children but
never allowed herself to have any, since being a paladin is by
necessity
not something you can do with kids in tow--so this is her substitute.
And yes, she's a Paladin who doesn't worship a deity.

> (Cleric and Paladin tithes don't count)

She doesn't tithe actually. Hmm... d'you think she should?
>
> And no, mercenary action where they charged the market rate for
killing
> monsters doesn't count.
> Does this aspect of Good alignment unbalance things in favor of evil
because
> of equipment's monetary value?

It actually doesn't cost very much at all, when you are level ten; you
can feed one orphan on one or two coppers a day easily, if it's
well-organized.

There are so, so many more risks to being Evil than being Good, though.
When you're Evil, you spend money on making sure no one stabs you
in the back. You have to watch out for yourself. When you're Good,
you generally have Good and Neutral people (including most of the
populace)
on your side. That's half the point of the Good alignment (even CG):
You're giving to others; but other Good people are also giving to you.
It's a sort of inter-connectedness deal. For example, last session my
character managed to get the party into a bad situation (bad strategy
on my part), and only got them out by sacrificing her life. In exchange
for that, an epic True Neutral (!) cleric who'd been dispassionately
watching us for some time was so impressed that she did a True
Resurrection
on my character for free. If the character had been Evil, chances are
there would've been more deaths (because people were looking out for
themselves only, and not cooperating nearly as well); and any dead
characters would've paid for their own resurrections--and then some.

It takes a lot for Evil characters to really pull together, I think.
Love does it; so does long-term friendship of the sort that you have
a mutual agreement that it's profitable not to stab each other in the
back. And, of course, LE characters have an advantage. But, all in all,
Good is much better at cooperating; and you get back what you give out,

eventually.

So that was the long-winded way of saying: Nope, I don't think Evil
characters who don't do charity (and may I remind you that some do!)
have any sort of advantage over Good characters who do. Hey, if you
want to go to the extreme, just take a vow of poverty and never
need much of anything again!
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 2:01:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I have often seen this charity being done by good characters.

A sick house was done by one character with an additional building for
the homeless. However, the deck of many things got rid of this quite
swiftly, when all assets and possessions disappeared.


Another person constantly has their character give away items that they
think are not very useful, however a staff of illumination was sorely
missed when the next encounter was hordes of undead.
!