Tarquin in context

[pendell]

Yes, Tarquin is lawful evil . Everyone knows that. And he's a general in the Empire of Blood.

Still... look at his rivals.

The Empire of Tears
The Free City of Doom.

Is there anyone on this continent who's not lawful evil?

I wonder just how evil Tarkin is. Is he evil because that's what being a high-ranking official in the Empire of Blood requires? Is he evil because Chancellor Goody Two-Shoes would survive perhaps ten seconds in this environment?

Or is he evil by choice? Could he have chosen a more goodly clime where a man doesn't have to be evil to live? Like, say, with Elan's mom?

Has the environment made him evil? Or did he choose this environment because he's evil and found it congenital? Did the environment make him, or did he make the environment?

A fascinating conundrum that *I* find interesting. I'd be interested in the board's collective thoughts on the matter.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

PS. The elves don't count, I think, because they're not "part of this continent". They've walled themselves off from everyone else, so they're distant observers of the events here, not participants in them.


PPS. Assuming the elves correspond to the monster manual and are actually good. As we've seen from SOD, we can't simply assume good alignment based on pointy ears and pale skin tone, nor evil alignment based on green skin and fangs.

[DeltaEmil]

He was lawful evil when he married Elan and Nale's mother, and divorced from her when he found out that she was chaotic good.
That was before he tried to conquer himself some empire on the western continent.

[Morquard]

He was evil already when he was married with Elan's mom, it was one of the main reasons they got divorced.

So I'd say he went there because he's evil, not the other way around.

It's a volatile region, with no stable countries, and conquerers just tend to be more evil than not. The few good people would eventually just be killed or flee.

[Gift Jeraff]

The Empire of Tears
The Free City of Doom.

Is there anyone on this continent who's not lawful evil?

I like the idea that the Free City of Doom is a Chaotic Evil anarchy.

EDIT: And as we've seen from Haley's discussion with V in Origins and the recent Team Peregrine comics, elves in OOTS are probably Often Chaotic Speciesist. (Though V is NS.) :smalltongue:

[sihnfahl]

I like the idea that the Free City of Doom is a Chaotic Evil anarchy.
I like the idea of the Free City of Doom as a Neutral Evil government. It's kept itself safe from an invading army for seven months, successfully, which shows a level of organization and cooperation, presumably through the lengthy siege and probably supply issues. There's no 'every man for himself' collapse.

[slayerx]

As stated Tarquin is not originally from the western continent. The ability to conquer a nation for yourself is what attracted him to the place. So he was evil beforehand.

We also know that being lawful evil was part of why he left Elan's mom... I suspect she might have had a "bad boys" phase when she was younger; Tarquin enjoyed it at first aswell... but as she grew out that phase she probably got more nagging about his evil ways... luckily for her having children might have saved her from "death by mysterious circumstances"

Malack seems like he might be lawful neutral given his opinion about gods of death... but being neutral would not stop him from allying himself with villains like tarquin. So no matter Malack's alignment i think it's safe to say Tarquin was lawful evil way back when he was still an adventurer.

as for how he got that way... well we may never really know. granted though, I would suspect it would be something more along the lines of "i'm evil because I believe the iron fist of tyranny is the only true from of order", rather than "i'm evil because I have deep emotional issues". Though he may also subscribe to "I'm evil because it's fun" based on how much he enjoys playing with star wars references

[Larkspur]

I'm not sure a sample size of three is enough to conclude the whole Western Continent is inherently eviler than the Eastern Continent.

In the East we've got Greysky and the hobgoblin civilization squarely in the Evil camp, and even the Good or Neutral Azurites have evil nobles and genocidal paladins.

In the West we have the clearly LE Empire of Blood and two ominously named neighbors. One definite and two maybes doesn't outweigh two definites and a a sorta, in my book.

[slayerx]

I'm not sure a sample size of three is enough to conclude the whole Western Continent is inherently eviler than the Eastern Continent.

In the East we've got Greysky and the hobgoblin civilization squarely in the Evil camp, and even the Good or Neutral Azurites have evil nobles and genocidal paladins.

In the West we have the clearly LE Empire of Blood and two ominously named neighbors. One definite and two maybes doesn't outweigh two definites and a a sorta, in my book.
two? almost all the countries are ominously named

Dictatoria
Cruelvania
Despotonia (West and East)
Empire of Blood
Empire of Tears
Empire of Sweat
Free City of Doom
The Dark Republic
The People's Democratic Dictatorship
Tyrania (former nation)

I have trouble reading the rest... but that's a sample size of 10 current nations
Reptillia is so far the only country name that we know that isn't ominiously evil sounding (which does not automatically make it non-evil...)
Sandedge also, but that's a city not a country... though it might still count since it may be a free city and not part of any nation...


I'd also mention that, being a nation lead by paladins, Azure City is unlikely to ally itself with anyone evil; as such the 4 nations that they are allied to are likely atleast neutral if not good aligned. Cliffport is another city that comes off as beign atleast neutral... and just about any other town we have seen aside from greysky city also had no evil aspects to them and thus come off as being atleast neutral...

so ya all in all western continent is mostly dominated by supposedly evil forces, where as the east is more of a mixed bag; though most cities we've seen seem to either be neutral or lean good...

[jidasfire]

Tarquin's a tricky one, which I'm guessing is the point. We as readers are aware that he's evil, but for one thing, he's not that sort of "I'll eat your puppy just to watch you cry" evil like Xykon or Nale, or even the "it's your fault I'm killing you" style of evil like Redcloak. He simply has a job to do and he does it, though he probably does enjoy it too. He is a loving father and a devoted friend. Hence, when the other shoe drops, it won't be as simple as just good guys slugging out bad guys with no guilt or consequence. Since one of the major themes of the comic is blurring the lines between good and evil without exactly erasing them, I imagine creating a likeable evil person is the next step in that.

[GSFB]

I still have yet to see definitive proof he is lawful evil. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence. But the strongest thing we have to go on is from Nale's backstory - which was told by/remembered by Nale and is therefore subject to reasonable suspicion. The next strongest thing is his basic presence in the Empire, working for a bloodthirsty dragon after trying his hand at conquering. But mercenary work is not necessarily evil, and conquering can be a good thing if you are deposing someone a lot more evil than you. So here there is enough doubt that he could be evil or neutral. This is not to say he is NOT evil. Just that I am not convinced. And if the Star Wars meme keeps up, he may have to turn good at some point. Of course, the turn to good only makes good dramatic impact if it is the redemption of evil. Come to think of it, THAT is the best argument so far that he is currently evil.

[slayerx]

I still have yet to see definitive proof he is lawful evil. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence. But the strongest thing we have to go on is from Nale's backstory - which was told by/remembered by Nale and is therefore subject to reasonable suspicion.

The flashback that points out that Tarquin is Lawful Evil while their mother was chaotic good was not Nale's flashback... it was a narrative flashback. It was not from any one person's point of view. Even though it was in the context of a joke, it is pretty solid evidence that Tarquin is Lawful Evil

you also forgot to find excuses for the slavery, the numerous wives who died by mysterious circumstances (not to mention his quick rebounds which is evidence of a lack of care), and what he did to Gannji (which effectively killing him for making him look bad in front of his son)... Also, helping get rid of evil tyrants doesn't mean much when you are bringing rise to new ones at the same time; really, the "empress of blood"... "The tyranny of your old ruler has ended! Let a whole new wave of tyranny wash over this lazy land!"... hell they even describe their own nation as a "brutal oppressive regime"

and ya when it comes down to it, Darth Vader was VERY EVIL... doesn't matter how he started or ended, what we know is Tarquin emulates what he was like at the height of his career

[RndmNumGen]

Erm... Conquering nations just because he can? Pushing someone out a window? Sentencing two people to death because they offended him? Okay, first one might have been Neutral, but the last two are certainly Evil, and I am sure there are more examples floating around; those are just the ones that came to the top of my head.

[GSFB]

Most nations exist in their current form as a result of previous leaders conquering other nations just because they could. I would call this neutral as it relates to human history. Pushing someone out a window? In the middle of a skirmish, when people could just as easily be sliced open with swords, this again comes off as neutral to me (especially when the person is obviously a higher level PC and a fall out a window is probably not lethal). The wives? He never said he killed them. Many had bad accidents. Elan's mother was not murdered, why assume any others were? Slavery? It is evil in the context of modern society. But slavery has been an accepted part of life for many cultures. Were all the Roman, Egyptian and ancient Chinese rulers evil because they accepted slavery? Gannji? We don't know what other backstory there is there. Maybe Gannji has been a problem for a long time and now he finally made a mistake? Not enough information.

Again, not saying Tarquin is NOT evil. Just that I am one of those "proof beyond reasonable doubt" guys.

[DeltaEmil]

Well, the flashback is proof beyond reasonable doubt. Just as there's a scene about Elan and Nale's mother making complicated plans for serving at a table.

[hamishspence]

It's proof that his lawyer said that he was Lawful Evil back then. A little shifting (maybe to NE or LN) is not impossible- though somewhat unlikely.

His behaviour to date has been both somewhat Lawful and somewhat Evil IMO- I'd say the in-strip evidence may be more meaningful than a 20-odd year old lawyer statement.

[Nilan8888]

Going by the notion that this may still be a reflection of the Dark Sun campaign world (think of it -- as noted before there's all the Thri-Kreen, slavery and evilness out there, but also now we have an Empire ruled by a Dragon?), the Free City of Chaos might actually be one of the lone good cities in the southern continent, as a sort of a counterpart to the city of Tyr.

Of course, that's just my 2 cents.

[GSFB]

It's proof that his lawyer said that he was Lawful Evil back then.

As we've seen, lawyers in OotS are not exactly the best source of information!

Personally, I don't believe in absolutes on alignment. I believe everyone will have some tendencies to act in certain ways, and much of what we do can contribute to an overall tendency towards an alignment. But a person can be "more lawful than not" or "extremely lawful" and still be called "lawful." Same goes for good or evil. Characters like Durkon may be far more lawful than characters like Tarquin, but both could be called lawful. Likewise, characters like Xykon can be far more evil than characters like Tarquin, but both could be called evil.

Is Tarquin lawful evil? He could be. I'm not suggesting he is or isn't. Maybe it is more accurate to say Tarquin is more evil than the average (neutral) person, but is far less evil than Xykon (based on what we know for sure about both).

[GSFB]

If only there was some sort of graph that showed how many kilonazis were were talking about here...

[hamishspence]

Personally, I don't believe in absolutes on alignment. I believe everyone will have some tendencies to act in certain ways, and much of what we do can contribute to an overall tendency towards an alignment. But a person can be "more lawful than not" or "extremely lawful" and still be called "lawful." Same goes for good or evil. Characters like Durkon may be far more lawful than characters like Tarquin, but both could be called lawful. Likewise, characters like Xykon can be far more evil than characters like Tarquin, but both could be called evil.

Even within an "Always Lawful evil" faction such as devils, there will be variance. According to The Giant, Lee of the IFCC is a "slightly less lawful devil"

How Lawful do you have to be to be Lawful aligned? Not necessarily all that lawful.

While some people say "the vast majority of D&D humans are neutral" this contradicts the PHB which says "humans tend toward no alignment, not even neutral"

So, a person could be LE, but only mildly Lawful aligned and mildly Evil aligned.

I suspect Tarquin's alignment may be a little stronger than "mildly" evil though.

[Da'Shain]

Erm... Conquering nations just because he can? Pushing someone out a window? Sentencing two people to death because they offended him? Okay, first one might have been Neutral, but the last two are certainly Evil, and I am sure there are more examples floating around; those are just the ones that came to the top of my head.Why is pushing someone out a window necessarily evil?

[Marnath]

@GSFB: Guess what? Slavery is evil, even if society says it isn't, especially in D&D world where good and evil are absolute, not objective.

@Da'Shain: You're kidding right? When would be an instance when pushing someone out a window to their death not be evil, aside from combat?

[Wou]

The Empire of Tears
The Free City of Doom.

Is there anyone on this continent who's not lawful evil?


Actually… I think the EOT may be good. Why?
Let’s start with two assumptions:
-EOB is evil.
-FCOD is EOB ally, so they’re either evil or at least neutral with evil tendencies.

What reasons for a conquest would be “misguided” for two evil military leaders (or one evil general for hire, and someone being diplomatic to get his help)? Getting more land, slaves and treasure? Not really I believe.
Wiping forces of evil from the face of the planet, overthrowing tyrants, freeing slaves etc? I think so.
Maybe they’re truly good, maybe they’re Miko-like crazy “good” crusaders, but, In my opinion obviously, it’s at least possible.

[hamishspence]

@GSFB: Guess what? Slavery is evil, even if society says it isn't, especially in D&D world where good and evil are absolute, not objective.

Depends on the source. While it makes sense for it to be evil- give that it tends to show a lack of respect for life, and dignity, and normally involves "hurting and oppressing others" (and BoED calls it out as Evil, and Cityscape states "the institution of slavery should always be regarded as an evil by any good-aligned characters in a campaign")-

some other sources tend to portray it in greyer terms. Forgotten Realms has the massively slave-using (though they do have laws that protect slaves, and it's less oppressive there than most other places) nation Mulhorand- whichis ruled over by a paladin-

and Champions of Ruin suggests that in a nation where slavery is the norm, like Thay, even Good-aligned characters may possess slaves simply to fit in- though they will probably treat them far better than non-good people will.

Slavery itself is "an evil" but not every high-ranking official in a slave-using nation will be evil, and not everyone who owns a slave will be evil.

Probably falls into "a person with minor Evil traits and many Good traits can just about qualify as Good"

Not sure how the paladin pharaoh of Mulhorand copes. Since for millennia before that, the nation was ruled by the avatars of the gods, and he is the first human ruler.

Maybe, as per BoED, he "won't overthrow a nation just because it has corrupt elements" but prefers to reform it from within.

I have seen people complain that any book that says "slavery is evil" is stupid because it makes no sense in a medieval context, and D&D is supposed to be closer to medieval than modern morality.

I disagree though.

[Marnath]

I was only speaking of slavery itself, so really nothing you said refutes that, although i seriously have to question if a slave owner could be more than neutral at best. As for Mulhorand, am i missing something since i don't have the book anymore, but i thought theywere the slaves to Unther or whatever it's name is?

[hamishspence]

They, and the Untherites, were both slaves to the Imaskari. They overthrew them, and set up great empires of their own- which also kept slaves.

Unther, under the god-king Gilgeam, became very evil (to the point that Tiamat, Nemesis of the Gods, was seen as a liberator when she killed Gilgeam during the Time of Troubles). Mulhorand avoided falling that far.

That said, Mulhorand's paladins- especially the paladins of Osiris, could be a bit like the Sapphire Guard, storming cities devoted to the worship of evil gods (even if the god is a (reluctant) ally to the rest of the pantheon), and slaughtering lycanthropes (werecrocodiles) down to the last baby.

I would agree with your view that slavery should count as evil, in D&D, and I'd say Mulhorand doesn't really fit well with the rest of 3.5 alignment.

Maybe that's why in 4E, it was destroyed in the Spellplague, and the Imaskari returned, from the Underdark, only these ones prohibited slavery completely.

[Marnath]

I agree that they don't fit. No country led by a paladin could have slaves, it just doesn't work thematically. The idea of slavery flies in the face of everything a paladin believes in. Heck, they aren't even fond of maltreating prisoners of war.

[hamishspence]

Paladins have evolved a bit over time. Still, the two don't really match it- it may have been a case of trying to shoehorn an Egypt-like nation into the D&D system, and making it's ruler a paladin, despite the fact that this makes very little sense.

Here:

http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=11762&hilit=prisoners&start=75

Gygax suggests that paladins are supposed to execute prisoners if they've judged execution to be the right thing to do- and that Paladins are supposed to be judge, jury, and executioner, meting out "eye for eye" punishment.

But then, a lot's changed in D&D since then.

On the next page:

http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=11762&hilit=prisoners&start=90

executing enemy noncombatants is suggested as reasonable for LG groups, and that enslaving them is more typical of CG.

[Marnath]

Wow, things have changed i guess. Still, this is derailing into an alignment debate, which i don't think was the point here... so, Tarquin eh? :smalltongue:

[hamishspence]

I'd say, when it comes to evilness, the "I look forward to watching you die in the arena" did seem to suggest a nasty sadistic streak.

Aside from that, he's tended to come across as more pragmatic and prone to exploiting others, than actively malevolent.

[veti]

Actually… I think the EOT may be good. Why?
Let’s start with two assumptions:
-EOB is evil.
-FCOD is EOB ally, so they’re either evil or at least neutral with evil tendencies.

What reasons for a conquest would be “misguided” for two evil military leaders (or one evil general for hire, and someone being diplomatic to get his help)? Getting more land, slaves and treasure? Not really I believe.
Wiping forces of evil from the face of the planet, overthrowing tyrants, freeing slaves etc? I think so.

I don't think there's any evidence that the FCoD is "allied" to EOB. "Begging for help after seven months of siege" doesn't really equate to "staunch and loyal supporter".

Then you're construing a lot of meaning into the word "misguided". More likely (I think) it's just a natural adjective to apply to someone whom you are trying to cast as a mutual enemy.

When talking of an enemy to a (potential) ally, you might use words like "wicked", "destructive", "murderous" - but terms like that are - problematic, when your "potential ally" happens to be the EOB. "Misguided" is a nice, morally neutral term. All it really means is "their aims are not compatible with our aims", which is something everyone can agree on. It's just basic diplomacy to emphasise that.

[Da'Shain]

@Da'Shain: You're kidding right? When would be an instance when pushing someone out a window to their death not be evil, aside from combat?Well, first of all it wasn't to Haley's death, as Tarquin knew full well from having overheard their plans.

Second of all, it decidedly was during combat; Tarquin was just joining the preexisting one that the Order was attempting to escape.

Third, just off the top of my head:
- Someone's about to murder someone else and is standing close to an open window.
- The stereotypical evil wizard is cackling madly as they perform their dark arcane ritual next to an open window.
- A lawful execution.

I'm sure there's more I'm missing.

[GSFB]

Enjoying sending someone to his death is not necessarily evil. Many societies have a death sentence, and a convicted criminal who has done many terrible things may be justly punished. It is wrong for a community leader in such an example to enjoy the system working? Do we know enough about Gannji and Enor to pass judgment here? I don't. Do you?

[GSFB]

{Scrubbed}

[Larkspur]

two? almost all the countries are ominously named

Dictatoria
Cruelvania
Despotonia (West and East)
Empire of Blood
Empire of Tears
Empire of Sweat
Free City of Doom
The Dark Republic
The People's Democratic Dictatorship
Tyrania (former nation)

Okay, that's a good point. I don't think we can count Tyrania, since it no longer exists, and the Empire of Sweat may just be hard workers, but the others do sound fairly ominous. Although they live in a desert; maybe the Dark Republic are just nocturnal? Or Good Drow- all those adventurers must come from somewhere. They are a republic, after all. And technically Azure City was a dictatorship, so I dunno if we can necessary check off Dictatoria as evil. But the others sound pretty bad.

[DeltaEmil]

As we've seen, lawyers in OotS are not exactly the best source of information!Tarqin did not correct the lawyer.
At that time, Tarqin was undeniably lawful evil. Just as Belkar had always been undeniably chaotic evil.

[pendell]

They are a republic, after all.


Has very little to do with alignment. Rome was a republic when it conquered Gaul and Brittania. Republics in ancient times had a long history of being for the benefit of their own citizens at the expense of their neighbors. That is consistent with neutral or evil behavior.

I would expect that in a fantasy world a democracy or republic would reflect the alignment of the majority of its citizens. So a democracy of devils would be lawful evil.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[werik]

PS. The elves don't count, I think, because they're not "part of this continent". They've walled themselves off from everyone else, so they're distant observers of the events here, not participants in them.


Saying that the elves don't count for that reason is like saying India doesn't count as part of Asia, because it's in the south with all of those mountains. Or that England isn't part of Europe because the Channel separates them.

[veti]

Saying that the elves don't count for that reason is like saying India doesn't count as part of Asia, because it's in the south with all of those mountains. Or that England isn't part of Europe because the Channel separates them.

The elves don't count when discussing the politics of the continent, because they have apparently chosen not to take part in those politics. They've walled themselves off behind the Goaway Mountains and called themselves "Elven Lands", which is a pretty clear signal that they're not interested in disputing or trading land with the humans.

I just wonder if these are the same elves who are quite willing to interfere in the politics of Azure City?

[Crisis21]

Well, first of all it wasn't to Haley's death, as Tarquin knew full well from having overheard their plans.

Second of all, it decidedly was during combat; Tarquin was just joining the preexisting one that the Order was attempting to escape.

Third, just off the top of my head:
- Someone's about to murder someone else and is standing close to an open window.
- The stereotypical evil wizard is cackling madly as they perform their dark arcane ritual next to an open window.
- A lawful execution.

I'm sure there's more I'm missing.
Well, the act of pushing someone out a window by itself, with no context, is hard to judge even if it does strike most people as an evil act.

However, in this particular context, Tarquin had overheard that V was planning to cast Feather Fall. Instead of letting V cast it on all three of them, Tarquin forced the issue by pushing Haley out the window.

Tarquin has no idea how high a level Haley is, as he uses the threat of not having ordered is men to take her alive to get the others to surrender, while Haley is actually just fine and has already killed all of the guards that were attacking her.

This particular tactic is a variant of holding someone hostage that your opponent cares about and you do not. Tarquin clearly does not care whether Haley lives or dies, but he is well aware that both Elan and V do. Tarquin is willing to have Haley killed so that he does not have to personally engage either V or Elan.

This is classic Lawful Evil strategy.

[Gift Jeraff]

I just wonder if these are the same elves who are quite willing to interfere in the politics of Azure City?
Going by the Azure City tourist guide at the end of War & XPs, yes. "Elven Lands" seems to be the only elven land/nation.


I like the idea of the Free City of Doom as a Neutral Evil government.
I like thinking the Dark Republic and the People's Democratic Dictatorship are Neutral Evil. The Free City can still be NE, I suppose.

[Crisis21]

I like thinking the Dark Republic and the People's Democratic Dictatorship are Neutral Evil. The Free City can still be NE, I suppose.
No, the People's Democratic Dictatorship is Oxymoronic, not Neutral Evil.

[Joerg]

Saying that the elves don't count for that reason is like saying India doesn't count as part of Asia, because it's in the south with all of those mountains. Or that England isn't part of Europe because the Channel separates them.

Well, India is actually a subcontinent (tectonically not a part of Asia). And in England, people sometimes talk about the 'continent', meaning the rest of Europe. :smallwink:

[pendell]

Saying that the elves don't count for that reason is like saying India doesn't count as part of Asia, because it's in the south with all of those mountains. Or that England isn't part of Europe because the Channel separates them.

It's not the geography so much as their policy that makes them 'not count'. Because they're not interested in getting involved in the politics of the southern nations. They simply walled themselves off but continue to send observers, presumably because they're not such fools as to not collect intelligence on their next door neighbors.

The original question essentially boiled down to 'are there no non-evil players in the game of politics on the southern continent?' The elves aren't players in that game, but observers thereof.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Undead Prince]

Is there anyone on this continent who's not lawful evil?

I'm sure some of the other nations, as well as various possible non-state entities, are Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil. The Empire of Tears, who apparently declared war on everyone, look chaotic evilish to me. Doomies may be Neutral Evil or even Neutral (not an empire or dictatorship, but a "Free City" traditionally associated with trade and mercantile profit; very small territory so not much conquering done).


I wonder just how evil Tarkin is. Is he evil because that's what being a high-ranking official in the Empire of Blood requires? Is he evil because Chancellor Goody Two-Shoes would survive perhaps ten seconds in this environment? Or is he evil by choice?

He's been doing bloody conquest for decades. Nobody forced him to, it was his thing.

He is absolutely at ease being in charge of an empire based on slavery and (openly admitted) oppression of its people. It's a state he and Malack built from scratch and now run (the Empress evidently doesn't involve herself in affairs of the government), so he's fully responsible.

He brought up Nale to be "efficient and ruthless", and feels it to be perfectly natural that Nale tried to kill him - his father - in a bid for power.

And let's not forget the "mysterious circumstances" which caused the death of his ninth wife. Bluebeard, anyone?

He's also highly intelligent, so perfectly understands the consequences of his actions.

...Yeah, I'd say he's evil by choice. Sure, environment may have had some role to play, but the same can be said of any villain.



Could he have chosen a more goodly clime where a man doesn't have to be evil to live? Like, say, with Elan's mom?

Of course he could. At this point he's probably rich enough to live anywhere in the world. He doesn't want to, though.


PPS. Assuming the elves correspond to the monster manual and are actually good. As we've seen from SOD, we can't simply assume good alignment based on pointy ears and pale skin tone, nor evil alignment based on green skin and fangs.

Based on what we've seen of the elves so far, their society is ordered and with little tolerance for evil. They're likely Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral (with good overtones).

[Gift Jeraff]

I like to think that the elves aren't ordered so much as they are able to unite and agree on the fact that they are all not non-elves.

[Crisis21]

I like to think that the elves aren't ordered so much as they are able to unite and agree on the fact that they are all not non-elves.

How very Redcloak of them.

[Kranden]

Because its nearly impossible to mix, class, taste, bad ass color schemes and running a corrupt aristocracy/dictatorship/whatever that benefits you instead of the common people (aka the ones that don't matter to you) when you're lawful good instead.