Sebastiaan --

RE: Laws

You should figure out what the laws of your province are, in a general
way. But you have to realize also that your regent didn't personally create
the laws. They have most likely been around since the founding of the
nation, although they would have gone through some changes over time. The
alignment of a province is not necessarily the alignment of its regent (as
you will see if you read through the Ruins of Empire) but rather the
alignment of its people as a whole. Over time, I would imagine that the
nation shifts toward the alignment of its regent through changes in law and
policy, but especially for a low-level regent the country can be of a vastly
different alignment than she is as a character. Yet, even a regent has to
uphold the laws of the nation -- even a lawful neutral one. For example,
you are playing a Lawful Neutral regent of Dhoesone, which happens to be a
True Neutral country: the laws are probably true neutrally aligned, and even
if you might not agree with all of them (they aren't strict enough, maybe)
you have to uphold the law. During your reign you will be able to slowly
institute changes, but for now your personally philosophy probably does not
exactally align to the code of your nation.

True Neutral laws probably allow a lot of personal freedom, but yet also
give significant powers to the government. These powers are probably for
the self-preservation of the nation itself -- they are not necessarily to
help the people directly (as they would be in a Good nation) or to glorify
the regent or give as much power as possible to the government (as they
would be in an Evil nation). I would suggest that a possible course for
your legislative changes might be to add power to the government, to make
the nation a better place through stricter laws. For example, you might try
to regulate certain kinds of trade, regulate certain behaviors, etc.
Regulation is the key here -- anything you see as potentially damaging to
your nation, or a large number of individuals (which isn't far from the same
thing), you would feel perfectly justified in regulating. This is all
assuming you're playing a "classic" Lawful Neutral character.

RE: Evil PCs.

It seems that you're playing a more reactive LN than I do -- I tend to
go out aggressively and defend the law. But your way works too, and will
lead to a better campaign in this situation. As long as they don't break
any laws, there isn't really any reason to get rid of them . . . but you
should figure out what the laws are soon, so you'll have guidelines for
them. An evil assassin is always a bad thing . . . as soon as your
character finds out that she is an assassin, it might be a good idea to
either get REALLY buddy-buddy with her, or hire some good protection.

To respond to Jaanus's comments, I would say that CG and CN would also
be dangerous to a regent, but in the context of protecting one's citizens an
evil character, even a lawful evil one, is worse. Even though a CG or CN
character might break the laws, and you would have to punish him, he is much
less likely to harm innocents in the process. So, putting things together,
a NE or CE character would be the worst in a regent's mind -- not only will
she probably break the laws eventually, but she is likely to hurt his
citizens, too. Evil characters may be useful for a regent, but he will
always have to be monitoring them, and watching his back. I would rather
have some loyal LG or LN underlings who didn't enjoy their jobs but did them
out of necessity. As a regent, it may be necessary to have some rutheless
people to do your dirty work for you. But what good is it to have "trusted"
followers who will usurp your throne if they see it in their best interest.
What's that saying? "A man who has been false once can be false twice."

Frankly, I don't see the appeal of playing evil characters or having
them as player characters at all -- certainly not in a long-running
campaign. And I don't even see them as "necessary" to do a regent's dirty
work for him. There is nothing an evil character can or will do that a good
or neutral character can't or won't -- it's just a question of motives,
really. Even paladins kill and lie if they see it as necessary for their
church, their leige, or their honor (except for the especially stuffy ones).
Look at the FBI and the CIA -- one could imagine that they might have good
motives, but yet they were able to do lots of shady things for "the good of
the country."