Suggested fluff for explaining alignment mechanisms

[Jowgen]

The rules for how alignment and alignment changes happen are more than a little vague. In brief, all we really get is that somehow actions in conjunction with the intent behind the actions impact a creature's alignment over time (for a bit more in depth, see my sig'd Redeemery guide). Without action, there is no real chance of (mundane) alignment change by the rules. Why that is is never really explained. The mechanics are there (with a big serving of DM's-discretion), but they lack any sort of fluff-explanation.

I randomly thought of one, and would like to hear people's opinion on it. :smallsmile:

The theory

Alignment is something that is subconsciously internalized in sentient creatures. Some creature are born with mental structures that naturally fix/predisposition them to some alignment, in a genetic-memory-type manner. This subconscious alignment greatly impact's a creature's world-view and morality, skewing them in a manner that is not necessarily apparent to the creature itself (e.g. LE might think it's acting LN). As alignment is deeply subconscious, most mind-affecting magic can not "reach" it, but there are some effects that explicit can.

It is also because of the subconscious nature of alignment that one can not simply choose to change and that changing alignment is a generally slow process. The reason why alignment-specific acts are required to change alignments is two-fold. The first is that actions have a far stronger psychological impact than thoughts (mainly pertains to intentional acts). The second is the result of a phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance, in brief, describes what happens when someone does something that stands in conflict with how that someone views themselves. People have a strong psychological need for a consistent self-image, so when what they do/have done doesn't match what they think they would do, there is a dissonance that the psyche works hard to reconcile. The psyche achieves this reconciliation by forcing itself to interpret reality in a self-serving manner (e.g. "did it for the greater good") and/or changing its self-image to match reality (e.g. "I did it because I'm actually evil").

Given enough time and skill, a creature's alignment can also be changed through mundane persuasion (see Redemption rules). This functions as a form of cognitive therapy (or brainwashing), through which the "therapist" slowly works to overcome the creature's mental resistance to force the internalization of the new alignment. Creature's of an alignment subtype can not be affected in this manner, because their souls/minds do not naturally possess the capacity to conform to any other alignment.

Examples

Prince Zuko from Avatar the Last Airbender at one point decides to help the Avatar, which stands in such stark contrast to his self-image that he actually becomes physically ill and undergoes a drastic metamorphosis, resulting a change in personality.

A Lawful Good Paladin is charmed by an evil cleric and, through failed charisma checks and saves, is charmed in slaughtering a whole village of innocents. Regardless of whether the Paladin is aware of having been magically compelled, he can not reconcile his actions with his morality; so he must seek atonement and may even change in alignment, provided the evil he has committed was great enough to have the appropriate psychological impact.

A Lawful Evil prisoner is sentenced to extensive community service under strict supervision. He feeds the needy and helps other for an extended period of time. Rationally he knows that he is only doing this because he is forced, but over time the impact of his good actions creates sufficient mental strain due to the discrepancy with his own views (cognitive dissonance) that he subconsciously begins to internalize his new alignment. He essentially acts like someone else for so long that he forgets who he was before.

A Drow is captured by some exalted clerics and imprisoned. They attempt to explain the evil of his ways to him, but he proves highly resilient to their influence due to his inherited predisposition. There is a good chance that his resilience is so great that the exalted clerics may need years or even decades to change the drow to neutral, as they need to teach his mind to learn to function in a -to it- completely new way.



So yeah, that's my idea for fluffing how alignment's work. I believe it is consistent with all published material on the topic, including BoED, BoVD, FCI & FCII. Thought's anyone? :smallsmile:

[Karl Aegis]

If you are willing to slaughter a village of innocents for a friend, even if they were only perceived as a friend, were you ever good to begin with?

Paladins slaughter villages of innocents all the time, anyways. Only a small percentage of goblins raid villages and steal necessary supplies for their village. Paladins normally slaughter every goblin that gets within reach even if the goblins never committed an evil act in their life. They're adventurers, after all.

[Jowgen]

If you are willing to slaughter a village of innocents for a friend, even if they were only perceived as a friend, were you ever good to begin with?

Charm person actually has an often ignored clause for making people do things that they wouldn't ordinarily do. Opposed charisma. Accroding to Rules Compendium, they also get a new save if that something is a thing they're violently opposed to. This scenario obviously assumed all fails on the side of the paladin.

As for general goblin-oid racism... *shrug*

[Honest Tiefling]

I think this is an interesting idea, but no interesting idea has ever survived contact with PCs.

Firstly, as there is a lack of genetics (At the point you have half-dragons, there are no genetics), another mechanism needs to be around for this generational memory stuff. Two of the most evident options are souls, or magic. Magic leads itself to far too many ways for wizards to diddle around with a race's memory until they find wizards incredibly trustworthy, competent, deserving of worship and sexy.

The other option might lead us down the road of Sanctify the Wicked, or 'Evil, but Good!" in that you are rewriting a person's very soul. That...Cannot be a good idea. The Charm Person idea? Yeah, you're...Forcing someone into goodness by taking away their freedom? That's a bit weird. Makes sense for evil people to do it, but not the reverse. (The original post did not mention this, but it did not imply it could not happen). The prisoner idea...Really has issues as well. People aren't good because of empathy or a concern for others, they're good because brainwashing! Just get someone to do a task they hate repeatedly, day in and day out until they conform to your way of thinking. They won't gain it, they just forget the person they were before! The person hasn't changed core beliefs, they just act as they have been forced to act, not being able to recall their previous life, motivations or attachments!

Then, we have the issue that every race (other then humans, presumably) have a reason never to listen to...Well, reason. Their minds can't comprehend that not commandeering the village's booze supply in the name of the Dwarven king because you tall skinny folk stole the secrets of brewing from honest folk is somehow a good idea. They can't comprehend that the strongest among them should't rule by force. They cannot comprehend that someone chopping down the woods and butchering animals has a reason to live. It is literally an idea their minds do not have and cannot understand.

[Ettina]

The prisoner idea...Really has issues as well. People aren't good because of empathy or a concern for others, they're good because brainwashing! Just get someone to do a task they hate repeatedly, day in and day out until they conform to your way of thinking. They won't gain it, they just forget the person they were before! The person hasn't changed core beliefs, they just act as they have been forced to act, not being able to recall their previous life, motivations or attachments!

I know it seems weird, but that method actually does work if done right. The key is that the coercion must be just barely enough to make them do the act, but not enough that they can say to themselves 'I'm only doing this because of X'.

The classic research study demonstrating this asked college students to do several pages boring math problems. One group of students were paid 10 dollars for completing the problems, another group were paid 50 dollars. After paying them their money, the researchers asked the students how much they enjoyed doing the math problems. The group that was paid less were more likely to say they'd enjoyed it.


Then, we have the issue that every race (other then humans, presumably) have a reason never to listen to...Well, reason. Their minds can't comprehend that not commandeering the village's booze supply in the name of the Dwarven king because you tall skinny folk stole the secrets of brewing from honest folk is somehow a good idea. They can't comprehend that the strongest among them should't rule by force. They cannot comprehend that someone chopping down the woods and butchering animals has a reason to live. It is literally an idea their minds do not have and cannot understand.

Morality isn't reasonable. A psychopath's moral reasoning is actually more logical than a normal person (specifically, they tend to be utilitarians (http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/7/6/708.long)). It's been shown that people will make illogical moral choices based on how different scenarios affect their feelings of empathy - for example, being more willing to kill an innocent from a distance than up close.

And psychopathy also has a strong genetic component (http://www.socialbehavior.uzh.ch/teaching/semsocialneurosciencews07/Vidingetal_2005JCPP.pdf). So theoretically, it would be possible to have a race of people who have a substantially stronger genetic predisposition to psychopathy than other races. (It hasn't happened on our Earth, but it is possible.) This race would have trouble understanding why we place so much importance on not harming others, because they aren't hardwired to respond to the suffering of others. Research has shown that adult psychopaths have trouble even successfully faking harm-based moral reasoning (http://www.subjectpool.com/ed_teach/y5_ID/personality/psychopathy/Blair_1995_MCD.pdf), because it's just so alien to them. And these are psychopaths who've grown up in a non-psychopathic society, and therefore encountered people with harm-based morality every day. And yet they still don't understand it well enough to know how to fake it properly.

I'm not saying evil races in D&D are necessarily psychopaths, but it is plausible that they could have some form of hardwired tendency to evil, which is really hard to overcome. For example, wererats might be hardwired (or re-wired due to lycanthropy) so that feelings of empathy depend on the person having the right smell - a smell only wererats have. This would make them react to non-wererats the way humans react to arthropods (which, unlike mammals, do not set off our instinctive empathy systems, despite definitely feeling emotions such as fear or curiosity). Sure, some wererats could learn to feel empathy for non-wererats, just as some people feel empathy for arthropods (especially pet arthropods), but it's not the norm. Even knowing why I feel no empathy for insects, I can still drown a beetle in my bathtub and feel absolutely nothing. If I were hardwired to empathize with beetles, I'd have to work at feeling nothing, just like farmers have to train themselves not to feel empathy for food animals. Instead, I find it tough to even force myself to empathize with an arthropod.

[Jowgen]

Firstly, as there is a lack of genetics (At the point you have half-dragons, there are no genetics), another mechanism needs to be around for this generational memory stuff. Two of the most evident options are souls, or magic. Magic leads itself to far too many ways for wizards to diddle around with a race's memory until they find wizards incredibly trustworthy, competent, deserving of worship and sexy.

I simply assumed that generational memory stuff worked under the same mechanism that racial bonuses to abilities and skills work. Drow make a lovely example here. They've been struggling to murder and not be murdered by each other for so long, the Intelligence and Charisma needed to have a shot at survival has literally been bred into them; and it's no stretch to say that being Evil is similarly vital and thus has also been bred in (all the way to always evil). Having a drow with non-evil alignment would thus be similar to a drow with the pathetic flaw to his int and/or cha.

Personally, I would prefer to link alignment predisposition to cultural heritage, but by the rules, a green dragon raised by gold dragons from an egg is technically still "always evil". So racial sterotyping it is.



The other option might lead us down the road of Sanctify the Wicked, or 'Evil, but Good!" in that you are rewriting a person's very soul. That...Cannot be a good idea. The Charm Person idea? Yeah, you're...Forcing someone into goodness by taking away their freedom? That's a bit weird. Makes sense for evil people to do it, but not the reverse. (The original post did not mention this, but it did not imply it could not happen). The prisoner idea...Really has issues as well. People aren't good because of empathy or a concern for others, they're good because brainwashing! Just get someone to do a task they hate repeatedly, day in and day out until they conform to your way of thinking. They won't gain it, they just forget the person they were before! The person hasn't changed core beliefs, they just act as they have been forced to act, not being able to recall their previous life, motivations or attachments!

The idea is to provide a consistent fluff-mechanism for how this kinda stuff works. And I can assure you, by the rules, alignment-raping people in this manner works by the rules. Check out my Redeemery handbook if you want to see how terrifying the unstoppable march of exalted good can really be :smalltongue:


Then, we have the issue that every race (other then humans, presumably) have a reason never to listen to...Well, reason. Their minds can't comprehend that not commandeering the village's booze supply in the name of the Dwarven king because you tall skinny folk stole the secrets of brewing from honest folk is somehow a good idea. They can't comprehend that the strongest among them should't rule by force. They cannot comprehend that someone chopping down the woods and butchering animals has a reason to live. It is literally an idea their minds do not have and cannot understand.

I would imagine it to be like how hard it was for any cold-war American to even consider any non-capitalist economical system. The absolute vast majority of them never even got close until it was all over, but there was a minority that defied the consensus. Obviously, American's were indoctrinated rather than genetically bred to dislike communists, but then again I don't think they got a +4 to their will-saves against conversion because their statblocks said "always capitalist".


@Ettina

Interesting study you got there. I think the theory can also tie in with cognitive dissonance, in that accepting a low reward for a disliked task is harder to reconcile with having that dislike than a larger reward is.

I also agree with your argument for hardwiring alignments *fistbump*