PDA

View Full Version : [D&D] Is the difference between alignments trivial?



Mastikator
2010-11-16, 05:08 AM
And if it is, why do we even bother? Yes, it is that time of the week ;)

Allow me to explain my question. When I read about how characters of various alignments are supposed to behave, it seems that it often becomes difficult to decide. Should a lawful evil character lie? Yes, and no. He might tell the truth no matter what as a sense of honor, me might also say it in a way that deceives, but is that really lawfulness?
Subsequently, you'd think that planning, forming long term goals, sticking to them and organized teamwork is on the lawful side of the spectrum, but apparently, Obyrith have long term plans, cults and work with them to achieve long term goals. Apparently, these chaotic beings act like devil (who are beings of pure lawfulness). The difference between lawfulness and chaos seems trivial to me.

Now onto good and evil. Now I'm sure you're thinking "ok, lawful/chaotic spectrum may be useless, but surely the line between good and evil are there".
No. And here's why.
When you read about how angels behave, how paladins behave, you'll notice that they are not that much different from how demons and devils behave. Their primary concern is not altruism or preserving the dignity of sentient beings, it's killing. It even says that angels take personal pleasure out of killing evil beings. Angels are morbid sadists, just like demons!

The difference between good and evil is that good has a light color and evil has a dark color, the same difference is with law and chaos. Because if there is any real difference in the alignment is certainly isn't reflected anywhere in the actual game.

Yora
2010-11-16, 05:56 AM
The alignment system works best if you don't think too much about it. Don't analyze if a certain action was this, or a specific oppinion is that. Just look at the character and think "Is he very orderly and plans ahead, or does he change his mind as situations change and makes his plans as he goes along?" and "Is he frequently making personal sacrifices because it is the right thing to do, or is he willing to sacrifice others if his plans require it?"
This is really all the thought you should put into a characters alignment, and then you have a system that works perfectly fine.

Set
2010-11-16, 06:15 AM
Subsequently, you'd think that planning, forming long term goals, sticking to them and organized teamwork is on the lawful side of the spectrum, but apparently, Obyrith have long term plans, cults and work with them to achieve long term goals. Apparently, these chaotic beings act like devil (who are beings of pure lawfulness). The difference between lawfulness and chaos seems trivial to me.

Check out those Drow, who have a society that is *vastly* more lawful, rigid, disciplined, authoritarian, etc. than most of their non-chaotic peers. Heck, the 'lawful' dwarves, gnomes and halflings don't even have distinctive castes, class structures or gender roles, like the 'chaotic' drow.

Any discussion of alignment is muddled by the fact that, over the last three decades, different writers have come up with wildly different interpretations of lawful, chaotic, good and evil behavior.

I mostly use alignments for the descriptors, to determine who or what is affected by detect evil, protection from chaos and unholy blight. I'm more interested in whether or not a cleric or druid is following their ethos and / or tenets of their faith, which varies wildly depending on diety served, than on parsing whether or not this lie was 'un-lawful' or whatnot.

The worst interpretations come when a GM decides that casting spell X can 'turn you evil,' since that turns the concept of alignment into some cheap meaningless mechanical thing, where one can cast Summon Monster spells to send Hound Archons to murder nuns and orphans and it counts as a [Good] spell, while casting Deathwatch to save lives in a triage situation causes one to start worshipping Asmodeus...

Reductionistic cheese.

Rasman
2010-11-16, 06:26 AM
I don't believe it's as trivial as you believe it is.

Alignment helps you understand WHO you are and gives you guidelines as to what YOU would do in that situation. Someone who is Lawful Good and Lawful Evil would do VERY different things if they were bribed by a politician. Same goes for Chaotic Good and and Chaotic Evil.

The only instance where alignment becomes "iffy" is with Neutrals, since they can swing either way.

you're also probably examining this at too broad of a spectrum, alignment is meant for individuals...classifying person based on a society is like saying "this person is a Dwarf, all Dwarfs are Lawful, so this Dwarf is Lawful" but...he just burned down a village because he wanted to..."it does not matter, he is a Dwarf, so this must have been a Lawful act...or he had a good reason...maybe to make Orphans for the Orphanage because they Orphan Matron was going to lose her job because all the Orphans had been adopted by good Law Abiding Dwarfs...err...or.........................."

Alleran
2010-11-16, 06:28 AM
Their primary concern is not altruism or preserving the dignity of sentient beings, it's killing. It even says that angels take personal pleasure out of killing evil beings. Angels are morbid sadists, just like demons!
"Lawful Good does not mean Lawful Nice... or Lawful Stupid."

:smallsmile:

There are demotivational posters for it, but my image folder is too big to go digging through right now.


Check out those Drow, who have a society that is *vastly* more lawful, rigid, disciplined, authoritarian, etc. than most of their non-chaotic peers.
Drow are kind of odd. They're Chaotic Evil individuals trapped in a Lawful Evil society following what is (I think) a Neutral Evil goddess.

Serpentine
2010-11-16, 06:30 AM
No, not trivial. Just on a gradient and complex. The lines between the alignments are fuzzy, subjective and depend on circumstances. And one action or deed or attitude does not make an alignment - it's the cumulative total of a character's personality, outlook, actions and intentions.

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 06:32 AM
Check out those Drow, who have a society that is *vastly* more lawful, rigid, disciplined, authoritarian, etc. than most of their non-chaotic peers. Heck, the 'lawful' dwarves, gnomes and halflings don't even have distinctive castes, class structures or gender roles, like the 'chaotic' drow.

Drow got moved to Neutral Evil in 3rd ed- though there was a reason given in earlier editions for them being unusually disciplined- the hazardous nature of the Underdark forces them to be disciplined to survive.


The worst interpretations come when a GM decides that casting spell X can 'turn you evil,' since that turns the concept of alignment into some cheap meaningless mechanical thing, where one can cast Summon Monster spells to send Hound Archons to murder nuns and orphans and it counts as a [Good] spell, while casting Deathwatch to save lives in a triage situation causes one to start worshipping Asmodeus...

Going by Heroes of Horror, it's closer ro "can turn you nongood"- the Dread Necromancer can cast [evil] spells and remain Neutral, as long as he acts toward Good ends.

And, given that the "must be Good" Healer (Miniatures Handbook), and the "must not commit evil acts" Slayer of Domiel (BoED) both get Deathwatch on their spell list, I get the impression that the writers of those thought it shouldn't have the [Evil] tag anyway.

Eldan
2010-11-16, 06:36 AM
I don't believe it's as trivial as you believe it is.

Alignment helps you understand WHO you are and gives you guidelines as to what YOU would do in that situation. Someone who is Lawful Good and Lawful Evil would do VERY different things if they were bribed by a politician. Same goes for Chaotic Good and and Chaotic Evil.

The only instance where alignment becomes "iffy" is with Neutrals, since they can swing either way.

Actually, I think that's just the way you should never do it. Don't think "I'm lawful neutral, what should a lawful character do now". Think "I'm Judge Rad-Kalaz the Implacable, what should I do now?" Actions should, I think, determine alignment, not the other way around.

Edit: and yeah, a lot of times the [Evil] descriptor makes little sense on spells. I'd ignore it and just thnk about what the player uses the spell for. If you think it causes unnecessary suffering, it can still be evil, without a descriptor saying so. And for clerics, you can still say that a certain god disapproves of certain magic.

Coidzor
2010-11-16, 06:41 AM
Alignment works to a point and then you go into belisario's maxim territory and then out to the other side which is stuff that needs houseruling to work with your game.

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 06:42 AM
Actions should, I think, determine alignment, not the other way around.

That's pretty much what the DMG says: "Actions dictate alignment, not statements of intent by players".

That said, the Evil axis gets more coverage than the Good one. In Champions of Ruin it says that repeatedly committing "many of thes acts" (acts listed from BoVD) will eventually turn you evil regardless of your intentions.

But there's no statement like that for Good, Lawful, or Chaotic.

Coidzor
2010-11-16, 06:46 AM
That's pretty much what the DMG says: "Actions dictate alignment, not statements of intent by players".

That said, the Evil axis gets more coverage than the Good one. In Champions of Ruin it says that repeatedly committing "many of thes acts" (acts listed from BoVD) will eventually turn you evil regardless of your intentions.

But there's no statement like that for Good, Lawful, or Chaotic.

Evil gets all the love, Good gets underpowered feats that can go away forever, stealing feat slots from your character and the ability to have sex with unicorns as a class feature.

Rasman
2010-11-16, 06:55 AM
Actually, I think that's just the way you should never do it. Don't think "I'm lawful neutral, what should a lawful character do now". Think "I'm Judge Rad-Kalaz the Implacable, what should I do now?" Actions should, I think, determine alignment, not the other way around.

Edit: and yeah, a lot of times the [Evil] descriptor makes little sense on spells. I'd ignore it and just thnk about what the player uses the spell for. If you think it causes unnecessary suffering, it can still be evil, without a descriptor saying so. And for clerics, you can still say that a certain god disapproves of certain magic.

yes...but it's not something to be forgotten, IMO, since it's the basis of your character, because,

if you really wanted to get down to it, ALL characters should start as a True Neutral and then, as the game progresses, their alignment becomes apparent

Eldan
2010-11-16, 07:03 AM
Not really. After all, you already write a backstory, think about what your character did before the game started, have some idea how you will play him. So, you don't really start from a blank slate.

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 07:20 AM
Evil gets all the love, Good gets underpowered feats that can go away forever, stealing feat slots from your character and the ability to have sex with unicorns as a class feature.

Actually, Vow of Chastity (the baseline of Beloved of Valerian) specifies "can't get intimate with anything"- no exceptions for unicorns.

Good does have some unusually powerful items, or spells, though.

Rasman
2010-11-16, 07:45 AM
Not really. After all, you already write a backstory, think about what your character did before the game started, have some idea how you will play him. So, you don't really start from a blank slate.

I don't think you read the "SHOULD" in my statement, but...

...arguably, but this all ends up leading to the "is a baby evil or good or neutral when they're born" argument and that's a WHOLE other topic

and even though you say "you already write a backstory" then doesn't that mean that their actions and environment determine if they're LG or LE or LN or whatever alignment they are, even though it's something that happened in the past?

Eldan
2010-11-16, 07:56 AM
I don't think you read the "SHOULD" in my statement, but...

...arguably, but this all ends up leading to the "is a baby evil or good or neutral when they're born" argument and that's a WHOLE other topic

and even though you say "you already write a backstory" then doesn't that mean that their actions and environment determine if they're LG or LE or LN or whatever alignment they are, even though it's something that happened in the past?

That's getting really complicated, but:
Your environment determines your actions, even in the real world, which influences how you turn out, which basically is your alignment. So, yes?

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 08:00 AM
If as per PHB "Alignment is general moral and personal attitudes" then they can be shaped a lot by the character's environment and upbringing.

Acts might also shape the character's personality a bit- if their society demands they mistreat prisoners, and they do so in order to fit in and not be punished-

the repeated mistreatment of prisoners, might give them an "attitude" of lack of concern for life, and lack of respect for dignity.

So, the more evil a character does, the easier it becomes, and the more their personality changes.

Rasman
2010-11-16, 08:11 AM
That's getting really complicated, but:
Your environment determines your actions, even in the real world, which influences how you turn out, which basically is your alignment. So, yes?

lol...you sound unsure...I'd argue it's a mixture of Environment and Upbringing.

Your Society dictates "the norm" and people, fearing the inability to not fit in, tend to stick to the norm. If the norm is...



...their society demands they mistreat prisoners, and they do so in order to fit in and not be punished - the repeated mistreatment of prisoners, might give them an "attitude" of lack of concern for life, and lack of respect for dignity.

So, the more evil a character does, the easier it becomes, and the more their personality changes.

but parental influence, or lack there of, can conflict with this and lead to Moral contradictions to the norm of society.

"These are prisoners and everyone else mistreats them, so I should mistreat them, but mother has always told me that, even though they are our prisoners, that they have a family just like I do somewhere and they should be treated like I would want to be treated if I were being held captive by their people."

Ultimately it depends on which is positively reinforced the most and what the rest of the individual's environment is like.

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 08:14 AM
but parental influence, or lack there of, can conflict with this and lead to Moral contradictions to the norm of society.


true- if the character is lucky enough to have a parent who disapproves of the way their society behaves.

Even characters like Drizzt, could arguably have gotten a hefty share of their moral compunctions from being raised by "not so evil" drow (Vierna is far less vicious than Briza, and Zaknefein did a lot to instil morality in Drizzt).

Rasman
2010-11-16, 08:18 AM
true- if the character is lucky enough to have a parent who disapproves of the way their society behaves.

Even characters like Drizzt, could arguably have gotten a hefty share of their moral compunctions from being raised by "not so evil" drow (Vierna is far less vicious than Briza, and Zaknefein did a lot to instill morality in Drizzt).

yeah...it's all pretty much circumstantial, and as you can tell, I'm very much in the "Born Neutral" side

...and luck...sometimes you need lots of luck...or a natural 20...

I'm going to assume Drizzt is a good example, I've never broken down and read the books, so I'm not sure, but it sounds like it's in the ballpark

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 08:29 AM
I tend to agree with "Born Neutral"- even for drow. They live in a society with extremely forceful pressures toward evil behaviour- but sometimes those pressures aren't quite forceful enough- or the character, thanks to an atypical upbringing, wasn't subjected to quite so much of it.

The Dark Elf trilogy is quite entertaining- even if there is a bit too much angsting by Drizzt.

Alleran
2010-11-16, 08:34 AM
Even characters like Drizzt, could arguably have gotten a hefty share of their moral compunctions from being raised by "not so evil" drow (Vierna is far less vicious than Briza, and Zaknefein did a lot to instil morality in Drizzt).
(A lot of the following is speculation based on what is seen in-universe rather than the fact that Drizzt and co. are protagonists, but onward!)

I've always thought of Drizzt, Vierna and his father Zaknafein as being... anomalies, for lack of a better term. Liriel Baenre and even Gromph Baenre (as well as Sosdrielle Vandree, Liriel's mother) would also fall under the category.

Essentially, I see them as genetic and psychological throwbacks, to when the drow were more akin to other faerie elves and before the many centuries/millennia of corruption and change infused them and their society.

They're not like other drow, on even the most fundamental level. You can see it with how Drizzt has an "innate morality" (or kindness, or "spirit" or whatever) that many of his kin lack. It also exists in his sister Vierna. When he was a boy, Briza once set him a task, to clean the walls of a room with just a spoon. It was an impossible task, but in an act of kindness, Vierna gave him an enchanted spoon that allowed him to finish it much quicker, to help him and keep him from punishment. Some of what was seen from her perspective in the books even implied that she cared for her brother, quite odd for a drow elf in light of their general society. Drizzt muses on how she was kind to him in one of those moralising essays later on in the series (when he's comparing himself to Artemis Entreri), that she wasn't a brutal taskmistress but much more like a... well, a mother.

Part of it, I think, also came from Zaknafein (as mentioned), who mused once on why he was different from other drow, why his mindset was such that he hated the drow and Lolth (it was only his supreme skill with weapons that kept Matron Malice from having him sacrificed). Drizzt and Vierna both inherited that. Vierna, unfortunately, wound up going to the Academy, where she was pretty much entirely brainwashed by the priestesses there, and resulted in Zak "losing" her to Lolth. Even despite that, though, she was still different. She was quieter, more loving, and still more caring of Drizzt than were her sisters (Maya and Briza - Briza in particular was kind of... well, a typical drow).

Vierna did make a pass at Drizzt during his graduation, but it seems that even in sex, she was more akin to the "sweet 'n tender lovin'" kind of individual to the "rough angry mememe" stuff that most drow females engaged in (not sure if that breaches censors or anything, so if it does, then a moderator can rephrase it - essentially, Vierna was still kind to an extent even after her time in the Academy and promotion to High Priestess rank, a kindness that shows itself in her behaviour, attitude and - to an extent - morals [sort of! :smalltongue: ]).

And, of course, when Vierna died, she finally overcame the brainwashing of Lolth, and "Zaknafein's daughter" emerged once more, in her final moments. The kind daughter, the one who could, if given time, quite probably become much like Drizzt in outlook (likely a priestess of Eilistraee, if she was still going to be a cleric). The Spider Queen got to her before Zak could, though. Drizzt, being male, slipped under the radar until events obviously played out as you see in the books.

A similar case exists with Liriel. She's bright, full of life and laughter. In fact, she's practically a faerie elf with dark skin. Her eyes, like Drizzt's, are different. She has that spirit, love of life and living and adventure that most drow lose. And, of course, she wound up switching from Lolth to Eilistraee and then to Mystra. She probably got a lot of it from her mother (who was described as being unusually quiet and "too caring" by other drow), but some from her father, too. Gromph even had the quiet and peace of mind/soul to take his rest in Reverie during his early centuries of life, until he was so steeped in the foulness of drow life that he lost it.

One short story describes Liriel's Blooding, the rite that allows her to be considered an adult in drow society. At its conclusion, she recognises in her father's eyes the thing that "lessens" the drow, that hangs over them like a shroud: despair. She also recognises some spark in her father that was once, many centuries previous, like her - the life and spirit that has bled out of him over the years since then. She, luckily, escaped before drow society could bring that crushing despair to bear.

Even Jarlaxle has some elements of this, though he's much closer to Gromph than he is to Drizzt, or even Zak. Still "evil" (by whatever means you apply the moniker), but he has elements of that adventurous spirit (which characterises Liriel and Drizzt) to him.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts on the Drizzt issue, and the possibility for drow to not be quite as evil as they're always made out to be, specifically the oddities that spring up every now and again. Some speculation, some interpretation, but I like talking about it from time to time. :smallsmile:

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 08:44 AM
question is- is the cause of the anomalies "genetic" or "upbringing" or a bit of both?

The priesthood of Eilistraee frequently try to redeem drow- offer them the possibility of living a life away from the standard drow society. It's not clear how often they succeed though.

And in The Orc King, one of the drow who was Obould's advisors, ends up teaming with Drizzt, and in the epilogue, it's clear he's married a surface elf, and become a long-standing good guy.

That said, Jarlaxle's alignment in 4E Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, is listed as Evil rather than Unaligned- so even if he's less evil than the typical drow, he still qualifies as Evil.

Alleran
2010-11-16, 08:51 AM
question is- is the cause of the anomalies "genetic" or "upbringing" or a bit of both?
I'd say a bit of both, generally. While they may have the "spirit" that leans towards good/neutral, if their upbringing doesn't help it spark and grow then they'll wind up being evil in the end as a result of drow society, albeit evil that isn't quite beyond "redemption" (so to speak). Gromph fits pretty much perfectly into that category, I think. Zaknafein less so (he was less "evil" than Gromph, but still bitter, cynical and twisted by Menzoberranzan).

hamishspence
2010-11-16, 08:54 AM
It's interesting to note that, while during the Crown Wars, a large number of Green Elf supporters of the Dark Elves, were transformed along with them, there is no connection between this, and the "spirit" that some drow might have.

Drizzt is specified as a descendant of the Dark Elves (Illithyri) and this is why, in The Orc King prologue and epilogue, he looks as he's always done.

Whereas, in the Lady Penitent trilogy, all drow of Green Elven descent, were transformed back into Green Elves.

(Also, I think there were suggestions, in Evermeet, and later in the Lady Penitent trilogy, that the Illithyri dark elves became "demon-tainted"- by the balor Wendonai- and Drizzt is one of those. This "demon-blood" might partially account for any genetic tendency toward evil of the drow).

Alleran
2010-11-16, 09:07 AM
I'm generally of the opinion that the odd throwback that pops up (Drizzt, Liriel and co.) is less to do with the Crown Wars and the changes wrought on the drow and has more relation to some innate quality that the drow themselves have, deep in the "mists of history" (well, at least within FR - I don't know a whole lot about other settings beyond Feist and maybe Wheel of Time if its counted).

The tendency towards good is obviously rare and doesn't show up particularly often, but it does emerge every now and again. Without somebody to encourage it and help it grow (Drizzt: Vierna, Zaknafein, Belwar, Bruenor and so on; Liriel: Fyodor, Danilo, Qilue Silverhand), it'll probably sputter and die. It might even show up much more often, but wind up resulting in, well... a Gromph, one who had the spark but has lost it.

Gromph and Liriel both muse independently on the drow and their attitude towards Reverie. It's something that the drow could once do, but has slowly begun to fade from their society until it's gotten to the point where it's quite rare, because the drow no longer possess the "inner calm" or whatever that allows them to take their rest within Reverie as opposed to normal sleep.

(Galaeron from the Return of the Archwizards trilogy doesn't count as far as loss of Reverie is concerned, owing to his lack being a result of his disconnection from the Weave proper.)

Yora
2010-11-16, 10:33 AM
(Also, I think there were suggestions, in Evermeet, and later in the Lady Penitent trilogy, that the Illithyri dark elves became "demon-tainted"- by the balor Wendonai- and Drizzt is one of those. This "demon-blood" might partially account for any genetic tendency toward evil of the drow).
But almost at the same time, there was also Malkizid, who did the same thing with the Sun Elves. In their case only the most evil noble houses were destryoed, but the rest of the race spared.