What's up with the Afterlife, anyway?

[Kaytara]

Namely, the part where the souls of dead people get separated by alignment, as it is indicated here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html).

Afterlife - for the Good people at least - seems to equate to Paradise. What I don't understand is how it can be considered paradise if, say, a Lawful Good husband and his Chaotic Good wife will find themselves separated in death.

I could understand if it just differentiated between Good, Neutral and Evil people, that would make a bit more sense (if still pose the same problem, to a lesser extent... Let's say V's kids are Chaotic Good and V is True Neutral?). But to be so picky as to separate on the Lawful/Chaotic axis, as well?

By extension, another question. The implication seems to be that all Evil people will get what's coming to them in the Afterlife. That is, that Evil people do NOT get a paradise and are instead tormented for all eternity.
The question that begs to be asked is then "Why the hell does anyone choose to be evil?" As opposed to our own world, where nobody has yet confirmed a discriminative afterlife like that, punishment after death would actually be a successful deterrent in DnD. Logic dictates that anyone Evil either lacks the ability to grasp the concept of their punishment or has plans to circumvent it, say, by defying death. In any case, it should make true Evil-doers much rarer than they're implied to be.

[FFTGeist]

It is sad about lovers of different alignments being separated.
I cannot think of any reason or fix for that.

As far as evil people go.
Yes they are tormented in their afterlife. If their souls survive until they get promoted they are no longer the low man on the totem pole.
Then they get to subjugate or punish those below them and try to work their way up the ladder.
They get to keep on doing what they did in life. They just lose all their status and have to start over.

Isn't doing what you enjoyed in life for all eternity what you'd like in your afterlife?

[Lupy]

In the D&D afterlife, evil doers start out getting tortured, then when new people come, can torture them, in a never ending cycle. This article might explain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_planes

[silvadel]

Namely, the part where the souls of dead people get separated by alignment, as it is indicated here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html).

Afterlife - for the Good people at least - seems to equate to Paradise. What I don't understand is how it can be considered paradise if, say, a Lawful Good husband and his Chaotic Good wife will find themselves separated in death.

I.

That example is easy -- they go to neutral good heaven. That Roy could have been put in the NG file shows there is some flexibility there amongst the goods. I cant see NG refusing good people who just want to be together over their law-chaos axis.

[Kaytara]

That example is easy -- they go to neutral good heaven. That Roy could have been put in the NG file shows there is some flexibility there amongst the goods. I cant see NG refusing good people who just want to be together over their law-chaos axis.

Sounds nice. I suppose the question is.. IF Roy had indeed been put into the Neutral Good heaven, would he still be able to visit his family?

[Cúchulainn]

If a bunch of evil adventurers can visit the lawful good afterlife I'm pretty sure Roy would be able to. You'd probably need to get a visitors pass or something though.

[JonestheSpy]

Namely, the part where the souls of dead people get separated by alignment, as it is indicated here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html).

Afterlife - for the Good people at least - seems to equate to Paradise. What I don't understand is how it can be considered paradise if, say, a Lawful Good husband and his Chaotic Good wife will find themselves separated in death.

I could understand if it just differentiated between Good, Neutral and Evil people, that would make a bit more sense (if still pose the same problem, to a lesser extent... Let's say V's kids are Chaotic Good and V is True Neutral?). But to be so picky as to separate on the Lawful/Chaotic axis, as well?

Very thoughtful points there. Really, DnD afterlife cosmology kinda falls apart if you look at it too closely. It makes all the competing theories in the Planescape setting pretty understandable - they're living right in the middle of the Outer Planes, and people THERE can't agree on what's really going on...

I kinda think that Burlew is of the same mind as Kaytara, and gives a big hint about it in oh-so-contorversial strip 492:

Roy: Are you trying to make people feel guilty about sex?

Roy's Archon: Actually, yes. We've found our Lawful patrons generally expect it that way.

Now, why would the archon differentiate Lawful patrons from others, if only Lawful folks showed up? I suspect that if you looked backstage, it would turn out to be one big interconnected heaven, with different neighborhoods for those of different philosophical leanings. It's explicitly stated that the first level of the afterlife is about adjusting to being dead and working out all those earthly urges you haven't transcended yet, so it doesn't seem hard to imagine that that includes hanging around with like minded folks. It might be quite the shock for a highly lawful person to suddenly find themselves surrounded by wildly partying centaurs.



By extension, another question. The implication seems to be that all Evil people will get what's coming to them in the Afterlife. That is, that Evil people do NOT get a paradise and are instead tormented for all eternity.
The question that begs to be asked is then "Why the hell does anyone choose to be evil?" As opposed to our own world, where nobody has yet confirmed a discriminative afterlife like that, punishment after death would actually be a successful deterrent in DnD. Logic dictates that anyone Evil either lacks the ability to grasp the concept of their punishment or has plans to circumvent it, say, by defying death. In any case, it should make true Evil-doers much rarer than they're implied to be.

Well, all of the above is completely true, but I can see some ways around it. One is that people are just way too good at not thinking about the consequences of their actions - in real life and fantasy - and sadly deficient in the ability to really believe in te future their actions are creating. That's probably enough for the everyday sort of evil folks, like the Thieves Guild. As for the more advanced evildoers - well, demons and devils are reeeeal good salesmen, not too mention propagandists. Convincing people that the afterlife is really no big deal, it's the material world that coiunts is probably not all that hard. And then there's the line that the person they're tempting is different and special, they won't suffer like all the other rubes - they'll just get promoted to Pit Fiend as soon as they arrive. It's amazing what people will believe if you're telling them what they want to hear.

Heck, think of all the stories and folklore from Faust on down about people selling their souls. I mean, you'd think it would be an obvious Bad Idea - 'Dude, it's a devil. It's trading for your soul. This can't end well'. Of course, there's plenty of stories of people just like Varsuvius - making the deal because of horrible circumstances that appear to have no other solution. In most of those, the human manages to escape the deal - hope the pattern holds true in V's case.

[Prak]

By extension, another question. The implication seems to be that all Evil people will get what's coming to them in the Afterlife. That is, that Evil people do NOT get a paradise and are instead tormented for all eternity.
The question that begs to be asked is then "Why the hell does anyone choose to be evil?" As opposed to our own world, where nobody has yet confirmed a discriminative afterlife like that, punishment after death would actually be a successful deterrent in DnD. Logic dictates that anyone Evil either lacks the ability to grasp the concept of their punishment or has plans to circumvent it, say, by defying death. In any case, it should make true Evil-doers much rarer than they're implied to be.

Exactly. In a world, such as D&D, where about half the gods are Evil and being Evil is actually a fully supported choice by those gods, either evil is completely composed of head trauma patients, or evil gives you the good (after) life too.

[Zevox]

This type of thing is why I prefer the Forgotten Realms afterlife model to the standard D&D one. Sending dead mortals to their favored god's realm makes more sense than sorting them by alignment. There are still problems with it - not the least of which being the Wall of the Faithless and the whole category of the "False," plus some of the problems of the alignment sorting apply to it, though often to a lesser extent - but its a step up, anyway.

Zevox

[kusje]

Well, all of the above is completely true, but I can see some ways around it. One is that people are just way too good at not thinking about the consequences of their actions - in real life and fantasy - and sadly deficient in the ability to really believe in te future their actions are creating. That's probably enough for the everyday sort of evil folks, like the Thieves Guild. As for the more advanced evildoers - well, demons and devils are reeeeal good salesmen, not too mention propagandists. Convincing people that the afterlife is really no big deal, it's the material world that coiunts is probably not all that hard. And then there's the line that the person they're tempting is different and special, they won't suffer like all the other rubes - they'll just get promoted to Pit Fiend as soon as they arrive. It's amazing what people will believe if you're telling them what they want to hear.

Heck, think of all the stories and folklore from Faust on down about people selling their souls. I mean, you'd think it would be an obvious Bad Idea - 'Dude, it's a devil. It's trading for your soul. This can't end well'. Of course, there's plenty of stories of people just like Varsuvius - making the deal because of horrible circumstances that appear to have no other solution. In most of those, the human manages to escape the deal - hope the pattern holds true in V's case.

Unless alignment in real life isn't something you can actually choose! I seem to have a strong propensity towards evil. (Nope, no afterlife!)

[[TS] Shadow]

As shown here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html), the common people of the OotS world know about the alignment seperation. So I guess that they expect to be seperated in the afterlife if they have different alignments. It still sucks though.

[JonestheSpy]

Shadow;5776556']As shown here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html), the common people of the OotS world know about the alignment seperation. So I guess that they expect to be seperated in the afterlife if they have different alignments. It still sucks though.

What they expect and what actually happens don't have to be the same thing. Roy was pretty surprised by a number of elements, while the archon made it clear that a lot of elements were there just to make people more comfortable, not because they are inherent to te essential nature of the plane.

[Porthos]

Shadow;5776556']As shown here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html), the common people of the OotS world know about the alignment seperation. So I guess that they expect to be seperated in the afterlife if they have different alignments. It still sucks though.

Yes, because Elan has soooo many ranks in Knowledge (The Planes). :smallwink:

In other words, Elan could be wrong.

The easiest, and most common, solution I know of is that one goes to the realm of the god you worship when you die if you worship that god strongly enuf, regardless of alignment. I know that Zevox mentioned the FR cosmology upthread, but there's nothing in Core DnD that states that when someone dies that they can't go the realm of their patron deity.

In fact, there's an awful lot to suggest that people do go to their deities realm when they die, if they are pious enough.

To bring this back to OotSverse I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that Durkon heads to the Norse Afterlife (and all of the CG goodness it provides) even though he is very much a LG character.

So if one wants to make sure that families stick together after they die, just have them worship the same gods/pantheon. :smallsmile:

[Woodsman]

I would also like to point out that the Outer Planes border on one another, and that travel between them isn't necessarily impossible.

Of course, we don't know what Burlew is like on that, so it's really not like we'll know unless it's explained explicitly somehow.

[JonestheSpy]

"I don't have it in me to be a saint, or a devil, just a warrior with his own personal beliefs. If that means I have to fight the world, so be it; I'll gladly strike down heaven, earth and hell to be myself."

Lawful Neutral and proud of it.

Oh, and this is rather off topic, but I can't help mentioning this in the context of people misjudging their own alignments and therefore being quite surprised when they arrive in the afterlife, the above quote is one of the most purely chaotic neutral statements I've ever read - and yet is labeled Lawful? Radical individualism - caring more about one's personal code more than what the entire cosmos may have to say - is one of the defining characterisitcs of the chaotic character, IMHO.

[Warren Dew]

Afterlife - for the Good people at least - seems to equate to Paradise. What I don't understand is how it can be considered paradise if, say, a Lawful Good husband and his Chaotic Good wife will find themselves separated in death.

I think the assumption is that no one really wants to stay with their spouse forever. It's quite clear that marriages in the comic are only until death, and both of Roy's parents, for example, seem happier with this.

Now, I think that assumption is a really bad assumption for actual human beings; some marriages are like that, but some of use really would prefer "forever". Tough luck for those people in D&D style universes, I guess.


That example is easy -- they go to neutral good heaven. That Roy could have been put in the NG file shows there is some flexibility there amongst the goods. I cant see NG refusing good people who just want to be together over their law-chaos axis.


Why should neutral good be any more accepting than other alignments?

It still doesn't solve the general case, anyway. What if, instead of lawful good and chaotic good, they are lawful good and chaotic evil? Maybe the evil spouse deserves being separated from her true love in the afterlife, but how come the good spouse gets punished, too?

[Tempest Fennac]

Regarding dieties, I thought people went to the same plane as whichever god they worshiped in all settings? Also, as far as being separated goes, in most setting people tend to forget about their past lives after a while if I remember correctly, so you'd forget about a life partner after a few decades unless you were both on the same plane (not that it's less of a punishment initially, but it is slightly better then being able to remember them forever without seeing them ever again).

[silvadel]

NG is more accepting because what they mainly care about is how good you are.

LG cares about both good and law and you can fail on either.

You can be a lot farther away from lawful good than you can from neutral good on the law-chaos axis by definition just like you can be farther from the edge of a book than from the spine.

[Cúchulainn]

Oh, and this is rather off topic, but I can't help mentioning this in the context of people misjudging their own alignments and therefore being quite surprised when they arrive in the afterlife, the above quote is one of the most purely chaotic neutral statements I've ever read - and yet is labeled Lawful? Radical individualism - caring more about one's personal code more than what the entire cosmos may have to say - is one of the defining characterisitcs of the chaotic character, IMHO.

Actually my good friend the quote isn't a lawful neutral one, otherwise it would have a -, I specifically put 'lawful neutral' part underneath it and not after it to seperate them, I know my alignments quite well.

[whitelaughter]

The question that begs to be asked is then "Why the hell does anyone choose to be evil?"
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0435.html
Consider Belkar's line "I've never had karma work in my favour before!"
He'd *hate* any of the good planes.

If you like havoc, destruction and cruelty, then the evil planes will be more to your liking that the good planes. And besides, the people who can make an informed decision are those who can also set things up to have a better afterlife, greasing the right palms and so forth. (And many people would choose evil simply because the thought of a plane where bribery isn't standard would terrify them - they wouldn't know how to cope).

And of course, large numbers of evil clerics with high charisma and spells will be persuading people that Evil Is Cool.

[Optimystik]

Yes, because Elan has soooo many ranks in Knowledge (The Planes). :smallwink:

In other words, Elan could be wrong.

Whatever else he may be wrong about, he is right about the separation:

LG - Celestia
NG - Elysium
CG - Arborea

LN - Mechanus
TN - Outlands (Sigil)
CN - Limbo

LE - Baator
NE - Hades
CE - The Abyss

Now the question is, would Arborea's Eladrin allow Roy to come down the mountain and visit? Would Celestia's Archons allow the reverse?

[Ancalagon]

If you already have a hard time discussing LG and CG, how about, let's say, a LE guy who falls in love with a CG or CN lady? As long as they love each other and he does not do (to her visible or feelable evil things which are bad enough to counter the love) everything should be fine in the mortal plane.

Someone LG could surely get the allowance to visit someone CG in their life (or rather vice versa). But the stuff mentioned above... why settle for the simple things in discussions?

[Kish]

If you already have a hard time discussing LG and CG, how about, let's say, a LE guy who falls in love with a CG or CN lady?
Exactly that (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html) kind of Irreconcilable Alignment Differences is grounds for divorce in the OotS universe.

[Prak]

Yes, because Elan has soooo many ranks in Knowledge (The Planes). :smallwink:

In other words, Elan could be wrong.

Doesn't need Kn (The Planes), he has bardic knowledge and quite possibly Legend Lore.

[King of Nowhere]

I don't see any problem with the afterlifes giing permissions to visit your loved ones. Especially the chaotic afterlives, where I don't expect the rules will be strongly enforced.
And in the evil afterlifes you can probably bribe someone.

About "why people shall choose to be evil", remember that in the middle age europe hell was a certainty to most people as it is, say, quantum theory to most people today (something you never saw, but you have in good autority that it is true). Yet there were plenty of evil people.
Don't ask me why. Lot of people is totally irresponsible regarding the consequences of their actions.

[Rotipher]

What if, instead of lawful good and chaotic good, they are lawful good and chaotic evil? Maybe the evil spouse deserves being separated from her true love in the afterlife, but how come the good spouse gets punished, too?

Perhaps, as part of his posthumous acclimatization, the LG spouse's archon would show him proof of his wife's moral failings, and help him come to terms with the idea that she truly deserves her fate. He'll still miss her, but will gradually come to realize that he couldn't have changed her for the better, and will accept their separation as a sad necessity.

Eternity's a loooooong time. Give people that much time to work things over, and they ought to adjust to most things, even if their memories aren't wiped.

[Rotipher]

The implication seems to be that all Evil people will get what's coming to them in the Afterlife. That is, that Evil people do NOT get a paradise and are instead tormented for all eternity.
The question that begs to be asked is then "Why the hell does anyone choose to be evil?" As opposed to our own world, where nobody has yet confirmed a discriminative afterlife like that, punishment after death would actually be a successful deterrent in DnD.


How many people IRL smoke tobacco, knowing the consequences? How many drive drunk, shoot heroin, or have unprotected sex with numerous partners? How much of a behavioral deterrant is it to a twenty-year-old, if you tell them that what he or she does today is bound to kill a fifty-year-old stranger (i.e. themselves) thirty years from now? Self-indulgent people, by definition, are mainly concerned with their present enjoyment; paying the tab in the future is something they either just avoid thinking about, or expect to weasel their way out of at the last minute (e.g. by making fat bequests to charity on their deathbed).

[Warren Dew]

Perhaps, as part of his posthumous acclimatization, the LG spouse's archon would show him proof of his wife's moral failings, and help him come to terms with the idea that she truly deserves her fate. He'll still miss her, but will gradually come to realize that he couldn't have changed her for the better, and will accept their separation as a sad necessity.

The thing about long term married love is, one isn't trying to change one's spouse any more. One is past that, past the "loving them despite their faults" stage, and to the "loving them for their faults" stage.

I do agree with you that's likely the best that could be done. It still doesn't sound like heaven, though.

[Optimystik]

By extension, another question. The implication seems to be that all Evil people will get what's coming to them in the Afterlife. That is, that Evil people do NOT get a paradise and are instead tormented for all eternity.
The question that begs to be asked is then "Why the hell does anyone choose to be evil?" As opposed to our own world, where nobody has yet confirmed a discriminative afterlife like that, punishment after death would actually be a successful deterrent in DnD. Logic dictates that anyone Evil either lacks the ability to grasp the concept of their punishment or has plans to circumvent it, say, by defying death. In any case, it should make true Evil-doers much rarer than they're implied to be.

It does seem irrational, doesn't it? Here's Fiendish Codex 2 has several paragraphs on the subject, so I'll summarize.

Very few evildoers - even devil cults - have accurate information about Baator. The devils work hard at keeping the truth limited. Most LE villains know about the torture of souls that happens there, but think that their personal influence with this or that devil will keep them from the same fate. High-ranking evildoers universally regard themselves as being "special." Even the ones that know they'll be turned into devils think they will zoom to Pit Fiend status with their memories and personality intact. None of them give any thought to the first stage of that process - being completely stripped of identity through eons of torture and turned into a pathetic lemure for still more eons.

This is not to say that NOBODY can skip the torture bit and instantly become a high-ranking devil with their mental faculties intact. It can happen; it is just much, much rarer than evildoers believe it to be.

[Arachu]

1) If I were setting up alignment afterlives, I would count them under the "other" category (those who don't follow a deity)

2) If a cleric is a cleric to a cause, what afterlife does he get, anyway?:smallconfused: Maybe one of those "other" ones...

3) Evil afterlife doesn't mean Bad afterlife, if you have the right friends Take Erythnul, for example. Judging by what I've heard of him, it would be quite a bit of a waste if he just tossed all of his followers into the inferno instead of, say, giving them an axe and saying 'GO!". Just saying...

4) I also think that the Neutral-ethics afterlives would care more about morals than ethics, on grounds of:

Lawful without something to be lawful to doesn't have to be as committed

And chaotic means party, be free, kill if you're evil, do whatever, and I doubt that neutral-ethics afterlives would keep you from that


EDIT: What if you changed alignment while you were dead? Say if you were in some Lawful afterlife and you somehow became Chaotic. Would you remain, be relocated, or be forced to stay? I realize that going from Evil to Good isn't going to do you any good in, say, the Abyss, but what would happen if, say, Roy somehow became chaotic during his stay in Celestia. Would he be taken out and shipped to the other afterlife, or would he stay were he was?

Also, why is it that everyone considers Law to be better than Chaos? LE can be way worse than CE and CG can help more than LG, in certain conditions...
Meh, I'm just trying to argue with why CNs go to Limbo :smalltongue:

[hamishspence]

I suspect, that strong devotion to an evil deity would allow you to skip the torments, get reincarnated as a Fiendish wotzit, and you can start rising in the deity's court (Kurtulmak and Sekolah, in the Nine Hells, do this)

in OOTS, it seems more like Great Wheel than Faerun style- no Wall of the Faithless for guys like Roy who weren't followers of any particular deity- normal trip to plane that matches his alignment (Celestia in this case)

[Zerg Cookie]

If you sort afterlives by deities it's all good.
But if you sort them by alignment you should have something like "Pure good afterlife" (Not talking about NG), where every good character can get into.
Same for "Pure evil", "Pure lawful" and "Pure chaotic". "Pure neutral" is much like TN, so there is no need for such afterlife.
Maybe we can make an afterlife that anyone can go to, like the mortal planes :smalltongue:

[JonestheSpy]

Actually my good friend the quote isn't a lawful neutral one, otherwise it would have a -, I specifically put 'lawful neutral' part underneath it and not after it to seperate them, I know my alignments quite well.

Sorry about the public misinterpretation there, Cuchulainn. I can only plead that there seems to be a lot of folks who thinks that adhering to ANY code, personal or societal, is inherntly lawful, and chaotic = random, not individualistic. Holdover from the old 2nd Ed equation of chaotic neutral = insane, I expect.

[Shatteredtower]

Evil beings can take a number of views of the afterlife. For example:

1. Wait, what am I doing here? There's been some kind of mistake -- I specifically ordered the True Neutral afterlife package! I wasn't that bad.

2. Life sucks. Then you die. Then things find new and interesting ways in which to suck some more.

3. Hey, my resume's in order; shouldn't be that hard to find a good entry level position with these credentials.

4. If I can't be running the place inside a fornight, I'll deserve what I get.

5. So tell me more about these undying options...

As for the separation of marriages and families after death, there's a saying that applies: You can't take it with you.

We usually identify that "it" as "money", but the big thing you have to let go of is more accurately described as status. Married or single, pillar of the community or hermit, lord or peasant, child or centenarian, lone orphan or product or a huge family; all of these are as much status as your holdings and annual income. They're all part of the life you've left behind. You don't have to play at them any more, though it may take some time before that becomes clear.

Besides, if a love is forever, it shouldn't require the other person's presence. Check the last verse of "Daisy a Day" for a lovely example of that. Then consider that a bond that doesn't end at death is one that binds folk to a spouse lost in their much younger days -- and the alternative to those 60 year celebrations would involve either a more foolhardy standard for living or an outright willingness to go to the grave or pyre with the passed spouse. Knowing you might not be together after death isn't the same sorf a burden as having a loved one taken away by death, so I'm not sure why people have an issue with the possibility of separate afterlives for deceased couple. Eternity is going to be more of a trial for those who resist being part of that in an effort to hold onto the elements of a lost mortal lifetime than those willing to become part of a greater union than one between two or more people.

[Cúchulainn]

Sorry about the public misinterpretation there, Cuchulainn. I can only plead that there seems to be a lot of folks who thinks that adhering to ANY code, personal or societal, is inherntly lawful, and chaotic = random, not individualistic. Holdover from the old 2nd Ed equation of chaotic neutral = insane, I expect.

Not the first or last time I'm going to get called out on it but even if I seperated it with a line or two I suspect it would still confuse some people, I'll think of a way to have my cake and eat it too one of these days. :smallwink: Anyway I agree with you about the misunderstandings of proper lawful and chaotic behaviour, but I mean it's becoming more and more like the good and evil debate, 'oh well if it's not good it must be evil', so if I'm not 100% lawful I must be chaotic. Anyway not the time or place so moving on.

[hamishspence]

Fiendish Codex 2 makes it so that if you have done enough Evil, no matter how Good you are, your afterlife (assuming you are Lawful) will be Nine Hells.

Also, if you have done enough Lawful acts, no matter how Chaotic your personality, your afterlife (assuming you are Evil) will be Nine Hells, it suggests.

So, instead of "if you're not 100% lawful you're Chaotic" its the other way round- if you've been too Lawful in your acts, even if you're Chaotic Evil in every other way, you'll be treated as Lawful Evil when you get to afterlife.

Interesting way of doing it.

When it comes to characters who are Chaotic in alignment, there is a great deal of flexibility. Drizzt, derided as "a paladin in drow skin" by Entreri, is CG. Sir Gareth, the fallen paladin who never tells a lie, in Waterdeep, is CE. Chaotic characters don't have to show every trait of Chaos.

[JonestheSpy]

If you sort afterlives by deities it's all good.


Except for the folkis who aren't religious, e.g. Roy.

The more this goes on, the more I'm thinking reincarnation with maybe some reward/punishment is the appropriate planes between lives is the way to go.

[Gez]

If a celestial horse can visit as much as he is able (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html) his former Paladin, then surely interplanar visas are also available to people.

It's obviously not the case in OotS, but in many D&D settings it's said souls forget all of their earthly lives, so you couldn't visit loved ones as you wouldn't know they existed, nor how to recognize them.

[Optimystik]

EDIT: What if you changed alignment while you were dead? Say if you were in some Lawful afterlife and you somehow became Chaotic. Would you remain, be relocated, or be forced to stay? I realize that going from Evil to Good isn't going to do you any good in, say, the Abyss, but what would happen if, say, Roy somehow became chaotic during his stay in Celestia. Would he be taken out and shipped to the other afterlife, or would he stay were he was?

I'm curious about this myself, especially since I don't consider Eugene to be very Lawful at all. Perhaps he'll realize it officially and go to Arborea or Elysium instead of Celestia when Roy fulfills his oath, which would allow him to both keep his promise to Roy and enjoy his afterlife without his family.


Also, why is it that everyone considers Law to be better than Chaos? LE can be way worse than CE and CG can help more than LG, in certain conditions...
Meh, I'm just trying to argue with why CNs go to Limbo :smalltongue:

What's wrong with Limbo? From what I hear of Mechanus, a CN type would go out of his mind with boredom over the endless routine there. A plane whose very stuff depends on your thoughts seems way more fun to me, especially one that PCs keep invading.