Helm of opposite alignment

[Frosty]

how do Helms of Opposite Alignment work? The text says it changes the users alignment instantly, but that doesn't make sense as alignment is dictates purely by ones past acts (thats why babies are born neutral).

If a Good character puts on be helm and is affected, and then dies a second later, is that persons soul consigned to the lower planes despite having committed no evil acts? The helm changes the victim's mind so it wants to act evil, but if it hasn't actually done evil yet then it should still be Good right? Otherwise one can become evil by merely thinking evil thoughts, or can be redeemed by thinking enough good thoughts.

[Mystral]

how do Helms of Opposite Alignment work? The text says it changes the users alignment instantly, but that doesn't make sense as alignment is dictates purely by ones past acts (thats why babies are born neutral).

If a Good character puts on be helm and is affected, and then dies a second later, is that persons soul consigned to the lower planes despite having committed no evil acts? The helm changes the victim's mind so it wants to act evil, but if it hasn't actually done evil yet then it should still be Good right? Otherwise one can become evil by merely thinking evil thoughts, or can be redeemed by thinking enough good thoughts.

Just imagine that person's soul being utterly destroyed and another soul, with the same memories and skills, but completely different moral outlooks and personalities created in the body. That's the helm of opposite alignment.

[hamishspence]

That said, it states in the description of Baator "An evil deed is required to enter Baator - just thinking evil thoughts is not enough"

So, a CG person, who was Helmed, and then died immediately afterward, would not be let into Hell. Maybe they become a ghost?

[Frosty]

That might sort of work until Outsiders enter the picture. What happens to that succubus who fails the save? Outsiders ARE souls.

Would it be better for the Helm to only change the mental outlook instead if magically change the alignment (which still makes no sense)? So someone evil who puts on the helm now really wants to become Good, and will work exceptionally hard to atone. This makes for a much better story.

[hamishspence]

Given that redeemed fiends exist, that retain their [Evil] subtype - it could just be the personality that's "rewritten" - a redeemed fiend is a fiend with a good personality, despite the Evil energies making up their body.

[A Tad Insane]

That might sort of work until Outsiders enter the picture. What happens to that succubus who fails the save? Outsiders ARE souls.

Didn't wotc make an article about it, and how she would be a paladin?

[Mystral]

That might sort of work until Outsiders enter the picture. What happens to that succubus who fails the save? Outsiders ARE souls.

No, they are not souls, their soul and body form one unit. Which means that one can't exist without the other. Luckily, the body gets another soul right away, so it can keep on living.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Outsider_Type

And there are plenty of other evil places for a LE soul to go to despite baator.

[Mystral]

Didn't wotc make an article about it, and how she would be a paladin?

Yes, and then they made her fall. :sigh:

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a

[Mystral]

That might sort of work until Outsiders enter the picture. What happens to that succubus who fails the save? Outsiders ARE souls.

Would it be better for the Helm to only change the mental outlook instead if magically change the alignment (which still makes no sense)? So someone evil who puts on the helm now really wants to become Good, and will work exceptionally hard to atone. This makes for a much better story.

Actually, come to think of it, evil people who get helmed can still act evil, they just get negative levels. So maybe it's more like a brainwashing device that puts mental blocks in people's mind.

I don't like that item.

[Frosty]

Soul destruction seems way too powerful for this cursed item. Destruction of souls should be relegated to the most vile of artifacts and demons/fiends.

I am uncomfortable with the notion that this moderately powerful cursed item can Instantly destroy and insert a new soul into a body with just a failed will save. This is murder+.

People often get confused. You are a spirit. You happen to have a body.

[hamishspence]

No, they are not souls, their soul and body form one unit. Which means that one can't exist without the other.

That said, True Ressurrection, and Revive Outsider, bring them back if slain. According to Complete Divine, True Resurrection sifts through the substance of the plane, and reconsitutes the soulstuff which has "dissolved into it".

[Red Fel]

If a Good character puts on be helm and is affected, and then dies a second later, is that persons soul consigned to the lower planes despite having committed no evil acts? The helm changes the victim's mind so it wants to act evil, but if it hasn't actually done evil yet then it should still be Good right? Otherwise one can become evil by merely thinking evil thoughts, or can be redeemed by thinking enough good thoughts.

Try it this way. Good and Evil aren't dictated by your past acts; they're dictated by being the kind of person who would perform those acts. That is, a Good person who is in a persistent vegetative state is still Good, because if he were capable of action, he would perform Good acts; likewise for an Evil person.

A Helm of Opposite Alignment does not change your acts; it changes your mindset. A Lawful Good person becomes Chaotic Evil, not because his past has changed, but because he sees the world now in terms of freedom and power, instead of justice and selflessness. If he dies on the spot, having done nothing else, his soul is destined for the plane where it belongs - the Abyss.

Now, this only really works if you see the afterlife in terms of fitting in, as opposed to punishment and reward. If you see the Evil afterlives as a form of punishment, simply being Evil isn't enough to justify it; you have to do Evil. This creates the somewhat paradoxical result of a CE person (having been LG and then put on the helm) suddenly dying, and winding up in Celestia. But it avoids the idea of unjust punishment, where a person's actions to that point have only been righteous and compassionate.

That said, a different view (and the one I espouse in my games) is the idea of the soul going where it belongs. CE souls generally belong in the Abyss, LE in the Hells, LG in Celestia, and CG in a small, dark box, having to listen to elevator music for the rest of eternity, because that is what you get, CG, that is what you get. That's because most souls, when they pass on, become petitioners, and lose their sense of self, simply feeding into the essence of the plane; those souls which might preserve their sense of self would relish the plane, given that it embodies their views. The Abyss is a chaotic, mad power struggle, and those who value freedom, anarchy, and bloodthirst would enjoy it. Similarly, the Hells are a rigid, unrelenting hierarchy of downward-flowing abuse, and the great schemers and connivers would kill (and will try to) for the chance to claw their way up the totem pole. If you see the afterlives as the place the soul belongs, as opposed to a fitting consequence for one's actions, having someone don the helmet and get sent to the Abyss really isn't a bad outcome.

[hamishspence]

Complete Divine, as I recall, did say that alignment isn't the only factor in where a soul goes - past deeds do count as well (with extra importance placed on the character's most recent deeds).

It also took the approach that few souls actually are aligned strongly enough to become petitioners.

So - an "only just NE" person's soul might go to Hades, and not be transformed into a larva.

[Frosty]

I have to disagree. Alignment should never be based off of mental outlook alone. Smite evil shouldn't work on someone who has done nothing wrong. A good person in a vegetable state has done lots of Good in the past, before the accident.

For example, if an evildoer finally realizes the amount of pain he has caused and is genuinely sorry and guilty, he can start to work towards good but he is still evil despite wanting to be good, see? He actually needs to perform acts of atonement (pathfinder has ruled on those) in order to change alignment.

The Helm throws a wrench into all of this.

[squiggit]

Well yeah, it's a magical cursed item. They do that.

[Frosty]

Well yeah, it's a magical cursed item. They do that.

And it makes no sense from a metaphysical or story level.

[Red Fel]

I have to disagree. Alignment should never be based off of mental outlook alone. Smite evil shouldn't work on someone who has done nothing wrong. A good person in a vegetable state has done lots of Good in the past, before the accident.

And that's fair. Like I said, it's a perspective issue. Personally, since D&D/PF requires us to accept the idea of objective, cosmic Good and Evil, I find it easier to accept the idea that it's mindset-based, and that the mindset in turn dictates course of action. (Exeption: Good characters who commit Evil acts for Good reasons become non-Good. Reason: A person who would perform Evil acts is a person who believes that the ends justify the means, a decidedly non-Good mindset.)

I'm not saying that only mindset dictates alignment, but rather that a person's mindset tends to dictate his actions, and that alignment then reflects both. But the details of alignment are generally left up to the DM, and your interpretation is an entirely valid one.

[Deadline]

I have to disagree. Alignment should never be based off of mental outlook alone. Smite evil shouldn't work on someone who has done nothing wrong. A good person in a vegetable state has done lots of Good in the past, before the accident.

For example, if an evildoer finally realizes the amount of pain he has caused and is genuinely sorry and guilty, he can start to work towards good but he is still evil despite wanting to be good, see? He actually needs to perform acts of atonement (pathfinder has ruled on those) in order to change alignment.

The Helm throws a wrench into all of this.

It's a cursed item that effectively performs a magical lobotomy on the subject. If it makes you uncomfortable, that's actually a good thing. Of course in D&D terms, using this on an evil person is a good act. Heck, the Sanctify the Wicked spell is an Exalted spell, and it does the same thing.

I did an Iron Chef entry that dealt with this item for the Corrupt Avenger round. Magralyx (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16263127&postcount=271) is a Succubus who was whammied with a Helm of Opposite Alignment. So she becomes a Lawful Good Succubus, but she's still got the subtypes of a normal Succubus (so [Chaotic, Evil]). Imagine what kind of awful, wretched existence it must be to have a Lawful Good alignment, yet be made of the very stuff of Chaos and Evil.

[Frosty]

I'm actually playing a succubus paladin right now whose backstory involves her being tricked into wearing a helm of opposite alignment. I'm just starting the game and I'm always looking for ways to better role play the character.

Currently the way I'm playing her is that she feels she hasn't "earned" her alignment and she is terrified that if she ever loses the helm she would revert back to evil (she doesn't know how the item works. And who knows if this helm does indeed work that way?). She is vey much motivated by that fear and goes to extreme lengths of self sacrifice to help others. Sarenrae the goddess of redemption is giving her a chance to prove herself by giving her paladin (and mythic) powers.

[Deadline]

Currently the way I'm playing her is that she feels she hasn't "earned" her alignment and she is terrified that if she ever loses the helm she would revert back to evil (she doesn't know how the item works. And who knows if this helm does indeed work that way?). She is vey much motivated by that fear and goes to extreme lengths of self sacrifice to help others. Sarenrae the goddess of redemption is giving her a chance to prove herself by giving her paladin (and mythic) powers.

I went with a much darker turn on Magralyx. It's almost like she's got two personalities, and her existence causes her constant pain as the two rend and tear at each other internally. I felt it was a solid fit for the Corrupt Avenger prestige class, and if Outsiders weren't immune to the downsides of taint, she'd almost certainly have a depravity relating to it.

[Frosty]

I went with a much darker turn on Magralyx. It's almost like she's got two personalities, and her existence causes her constant pain as the two rend and tear at each other internally. I felt it was a solid fit for the Corrupt Avenger prestige class, and if Outsiders weren't immune to the downsides of taint, she'd almost certainly have a depravity relating to it.my character isn't in physical pain, but she is often comfortable mentally.

[Debihuman]

how do Helms of Opposite Alignment work? The text says it changes the users alignment instantly, but that doesn't make sense as alignment is dictates purely by ones past acts (thats why babies are born neutral).

If a Good character puts on be helm and is affected, and then dies a second later, is that persons soul consigned to the lower planes despite having committed no evil acts? The helm changes the victim's mind so it wants to act evil, but if it hasn't actually done evil yet then it should still be Good right? Otherwise one can become evil by merely thinking evil thoughts, or can be redeemed by thinking enough good thoughts.

It's a curse. See text below. The character who dons the helm has to fail a Will save (DC 15) for the curse to take effect. Once the curse takes effect, the character's alignment changes (read text below for details). Once the curse goes into effect, the helmet becomes none magical. "Only a wish or a miracle can restore former alignment, and the affected individual does not make any attempt to return to the former alignment. (In fact, he views the prospect with horror and avoids it in any way possible.) If a character of a class with an alignment requirement is affected, an atonement spell is needed as well if the curse is to be obliterated. When a helm of opposite alignment has functioned once, it loses its magical properties."

Normally, your soul goes to whatever Outer Plane your alignment corresponds to at the time of death (unless there is a Deus Ex Machina involvement). Not sure which of the books had the rule about Baator though.

In D&D, one can become evil merely by thinking evil thoughts and be redeemed by thinking good thoughts. This is how you can end up with Fallen Angels and Risen Devils. A fallen angel can keep its Good subtype but take on an evil alignment, while a risen devil still has an Evil Subtype, but has a good alignment.

Since all it takes is one evil deed: did you ever rifle the body of a dead person? That's an evil dead. Killing a baby [insert evil race] is still an evil deed. Let's face it D&D PCs are generally murderhobos. They commit all sorts of "evil" deeds on a regular basis. Squashing a bug could be considered an evil act. Baator's requirements are fairly low.

Debby

[Frosty]

I completely disagree with the assertion that ones alignment can change merely by thinking good or evil thoughts (psions excluded heh)

[hamishspence]

The DMG does give it as an example though - after listing the general rules about alignment, it says (I paraphrase):


"There are exceptions to all of the above - it is possible, though unlikely, for a despicable villain to have a massive change of heart and repentance, and immediately become good."

[noob]

Alignment have been created by super ultra horrible murder hobo in the first place to put a kill-able tag on people if you start saying that someone having an evil alignment should not be killed the error was to use alignments in the first place.

[Frosty]

Might I remind you that someone who got switched to evil via this helm is a VICTIM, deserving of aid, not death.

[noob]

I was not saying that you had to kill someone swapped but that using alignment in the first place was an error if you want to start having philosophical stuff and that you do not want brain damaged players who says "I kill the nearest thing no matter what it is" who happens if you start putting alignments tags.

[Sagetim]

A helm of opposite alignment does not destroy souls. It would specify in it's description if it had that kind of power. There's not a lot of things that outright destroy souls in dnd, and when they do, they specify that it's what they do.

From a mechanics perspective, the helm of opposite alignment sets you to the opposite alignment when you fail a will save. From an in character perspective, this is left to the players and the DM to imagine how that might play out. It's probably not a magical lobotomy, as you don't lose any memories or associated skills. It's not soul destruction, that's ridiculously potent and would specify something like that in the item description. It's probably closer to brain washing/instantaneous conditioning.

As for the succubus paladin, she was presented with two stat blocks so that DM's had two different versions to pick from, not to say that 'she totally fell no matter what'. And she was redeemed by the power of love, not a helm of opposite alignment nor the BOED spell of 'mindraping to good'.

And if someone put a helm of opposite alignment on, got swapped from lawful good to chaotic evil, then got dead immediately, they would not likely fall directly to hell. Especially if they were a paladin or cleric. Their god would want to know what the **** just happened and would likely make a celestial court case out of it. In the Forgotten Realms setting, Kelemvor would probably remove the curse before sentencing the person. Back before he got magically lobotomized by the rest of the pantheon it would have been because no one deserves to go to heaven/hell because of a curse. After magical lobotomy time it would be because you haven't earned going to heaven/hell based on wearing a cursed item. Don't forget that DND settings with gods of death tend to have the afterlife and your admittance to places thereof regulated by that god of death. That's not to say that you have to stop in at the check in station while you're using planeshift to get to one of the heavens or hells, but if you're going the normal way, you get processed there. And maybe get yelled at by a giant red ogre and his mahogany desk.


Edit:

Also, remember that most creatures don't have alignment subtypes/tags. They have alignments, which are affected by the helm of opposite alignment. You would need some kind of helm of opposite composition to change alignment tags, because they are inherent part of the creature's being.

[Segev]

Reincarnation is clearly a thing in D&D, since druids have a spell that does it and they're pretty big on the whole "don't pervert nor circumvent nature" deal. Sure, their spell isn't "normal" reincarnation, but it proves the concept exists.

I would suggest that reincarnation is the result of somebody dying while their thoughts and past deeds are so in conflict that they could not 'fit in' (to borrow Red Fel's terminology) on either the plane where their alignment says they should go nor the one where their past would make them happy.

Therefore, it would be probable that a Helm of Opposite Alignment applied to somebody seconds before they die would result in them reincarnating. Now they have a chance to live a life as their new alignment dictates and earn success or failure in it appropriately.

[Red Fel]

And if someone put a helm of opposite alignment on, got swapped from lawful good to chaotic evil, then got dead immediately, they would not likely fall directly to hell. Especially if they were a paladin or cleric. Their god would want to know what the **** just happened and would likely make a celestial court case out of it. In the Forgotten Realms setting, Kelemvor would probably remove the curse before sentencing the person. Back before he got magically lobotomized by the rest of the pantheon it would have been because no one deserves to go to heaven/hell because of a curse. After magical lobotomy time it would be because you haven't earned going to heaven/hell based on wearing a cursed item. Don't forget that DND settings with gods of death tend to have the afterlife and your admittance to places thereof regulated by that god of death. That's not to say that you have to stop in at the check in station while you're using planeshift to get to one of the heavens or hells, but if you're going the normal way, you get processed there. And maybe get yelled at by a giant red ogre and his mahogany desk.

http://new2.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/5234259+_2d4596b73aa3c8c6ed8600c9f947de08.jpg

This is actually a pretty good point, though. Unless the curse persists through death (do they, generally?), I could see it as one of those effects that doesn't truly alter the soul. Although I stand by my earlier point, I would also have no problem with the interpretation that ShiniKelemvor or whomever would remove any lingering effects on the soul and, assuming it had yet to act on its new alignment, it would be restored to its state pre-curse, resulting in it going to the appropriate afterlife.

[Frosty]

I was not saying that you had to kill someone swapped but that using alignment in the first place was an error if you want to start having philosophical stuff and that you do not want brain damaged players who says "I kill the nearest thing no matter what it is" who happens if you start putting alignments tags.

I'm not sure alignment is only useful for murderhobo parties...

[Sagetim]

Don't be silly, murderhobos are all neutral evil.

[illyahr]

CG in a small, dark box, having to listen to elevator music for the rest of eternity, because that is what you get, CG, that is what you get.

Wh..why would you say something like that? :smalleek:

[Segev]

Wh..why would you say something like that? :smalleek:

I think Red Fel just thinks all bards sound like elevator music. You should show him otherwise by playing awesome music for him.

>_> <_<

[illyahr]

I think Red Fel just thinks all bards sound like elevator music. You should show him otherwise by playing awesome music for him.

>_> <_<

Wait, are you saying the CG afterlife tortures people by submitting them to bardic music? You're as bad as he is.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130901190708/legomessageboards/images/a/a3/Anime_cry_sad_rain-1-.gif

[Segev]

Wait, are you saying the CG afterlife tortures people by submitting them to bardic music? You're as bad as he is.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130901190708/legomessageboards/images/a/a3/Anime_cry_sad_rain-1-.gif

No! I'm saying it's torture to Red Fel and trying to inflict some on him.

[Red Fel]

Wh..why would you say something like that? :smalleek:

Lawful Evil. *shrug*

[illyahr]

Lawful Evil. *shrug*

Fair enough. :smallbiggrin:

[Deadline]

Might I remind you that someone who got switched to evil via this helm is a VICTIM, deserving of aid, not death.

Umm, how is a person who is lobotomized by the helm into being good not a victim as well? I'm legitimately confused. :smallconfused:

[illyahr]

Umm, how is a person who is lobotomized by the helm into being good not a victim as well? I'm legitimately confused. :smallconfused:

Double standards. Mind Rape is an Evil spell but Sanctify the Wicked, which does mostly the same thing, is not.

[hamishspence]

Double standards. Mind Rape is an Evil spell but Sanctify the Wicked, which does mostly the same thing, is not.

Mindrape has a vastly wider range of effects besides "change character alignment to that of caster" though - and works in 1 round instead of 1 year.

[Rubik]

Umm, how is a person who is lobotomized by the helm into being good not a victim as well? I'm legitimately confused. :smallconfused:Because apparently Good is good and Evil is bad, even though on an objective scale they're both parts of a balanced whole.

[Deadline]

Double standards. Mind Rape is an Evil spell but Sanctify the Wicked, which does mostly the same thing, is not.

And here I was thinking that the ends justifying the means was an Evil thing to do. :smalltongue:

[Frosty]

Umm, how is a person who is lobotomized by the helm into being good not a victim as well? I'm legitimately confused. :smallconfused:

I never said that person isn't a victim.

[Debihuman]

And like I mentioned earlier, it's up to the DM to decide what Deus Ex Machina to use if the campaign even goes to the Outer Planes. Sometimes the DM uses this as a reason to get rid of a PC and make the player roll up a new one. It's all about context.

[Mechalich]

Umm, how is a person who is lobotomized by the helm into being good not a victim as well? I'm legitimately confused. :smallconfused:

In a system with objective morality - like D&D - victimization doesn't quite apply the same way as it does in the real world.

For example, is admittance into Heaven and being spared from horrible torment for all eternity requires that you, say, imbibe the sacred blood of the holy cattle at some point in your life, and that no matter how good of a person you are, you end up in Hell if you don't do that, well, a person would be justified in forcing people to drink even if they had some sort of strict cultural prohibition on consuming any animal products.

Essentially, objective morality skews the ends-justifies-the-means and free will aspects of the modern, enlightenment-based Western moral framework in interesting ways. Talking about an objective morality framework from an enlightenment-secularist perspective just doesn't work properly, the fundamental assumptions of the two worldviews do not match.

[TheIronGolem]

In a system with objective morality - like D&D - victimization doesn't quite apply the same way as it does in the real world.

For example, is admittance into Heaven and being spared from horrible torment for all eternity requires that you, say, imbibe the sacred blood of the holy cattle at some point in your life, and that no matter how good of a person you are, you end up in Hell if you don't do that, well, a person would be justified in forcing people to drink even if they had some sort of strict cultural prohibition on consuming any animal products.

Essentially, objective morality skews the ends-justifies-the-means and free will aspects of the modern, enlightenment-based Western moral framework in interesting ways. Talking about an objective morality framework from an enlightenment-secularist perspective just doesn't work properly, the fundamental assumptions of the two worldviews do not match.

D&D doesn't have objective morality. It has two cosmic forces that happen to share names with moral concepts.

[Anlashok]

D&D doesn't have objective morality. It has two cosmic forces that happen to share names with moral concepts.

That also happen to look and act a lot like those same moral concepts.

[TheIronGolem]

That also happen to look and act a lot like those same moral concepts.

Except when they don't.

[Red Fel]

Except when they don't.

I'm with the construct on this one. You could call "Good" and "Evil" "Smeerp" and "Reepas," respectively, and define them as they're presently defined by RAW, and it would mean as much. There are some ways in which Exalted (read: ultra-Smeerp) is outright horrifying, and Vile (read: ultra-Reepas) is just kind of meh. (I mean, being deformed is Vile? Really?)

[Sagetim]

I'm with the construct on this one. You could call "Good" and "Evil" "Smeerp" and "Reepas," respectively, and define them as they're presently defined by RAW, and it would mean as much. There are some ways in which Exalted (read: ultra-Smeerp) is outright horrifying, and Vile (read: ultra-Reepas) is just kind of meh. (I mean, being deformed is Vile? Really?)

Someone should sig Red's statement here.

Hey, if you don't stop making fun of Smeerp, I'm going to have to Smite Reepas all over your face! And then how will you like it? When the mighty blows of Smeerpiness descend upon you and rend you, that your Reepas might bleed out from you and unto the ground. And then when you think you're about to die and escape just punishment, we'll cast Sanctify the Wicked on you, that you may find the truth within you and rise to join all that is right and Smeerp with the world.

[Red Fel]

Hey, if you don't stop making fun of Smeerp, I'm going to have to Smite Reepas all over your face! And then how will you like it? When the mighty blows of Smeerpiness descend upon you and rend you, that your Reepas might bleed out from you and unto the ground. And then when you think you're about to die and escape just punishment, we'll cast Sanctify the Wicked on you, that you may find the truth within you and rise to join all that is right and Smeerp with the world.

Son, I'm only going to tell you this one time.

http://www.bubbleblabber.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Coming_To_America_Stay_off_the_drugs.jpg

If you want to keep working here, stay off the drugs.

[Username.]

I have to disagree. Alignment should never be based off of mental outlook alone. Smite evil shouldn't work on someone who has done nothing wrong. A good person in a vegetable state has done lots of Good in the past, before the accident.

For example, if an evildoer finally realizes the amount of pain he has caused and is genuinely sorry and guilty, he can start to work towards good but he is still evil despite wanting to be good, see? He actually needs to perform acts of atonement (pathfinder has ruled on those) in order to change alignment.

The Helm throws a wrench into all of this.

You seem to have D&D cosmology confused with mainstream theology of an Abrahamic faith.

In D&D, there is no systematic celestial justice.

Souls go where their alignment dictates, which means that ruthless murderers who like treachery and murder and don't mind pain go to a place where that's all they do for eternity and, as such, are probably really happy about that.

And unremarkable but charitable, kind people who have the NG alignment can end up being turned into a blade of grass for all eternity.

D&D is a nightmare universe, one that could be called maltheistic if the gods were coherent enough to categorize.

Alignments are arbitrary misdefined prattle. They have been arbitrary misdefined prattle for over thirty years. The original point of alignments was nothing more than to provide team jerseys -- those guys in the red and black are bad, we're in the green and blue so we're good. And that purpose is the only one the alignment systems can possibly meet.

One of the best reasons to become an awesome adventurer is that you might end up not becoming a brain-slaved petitioner after death due to someone recognizing your awesomeness. Hell, the entire setting should be about that.

As for the helm: there's nothing to suggest that the curse persists after death. If a person is construed as being an animated being, the fact that "you" are off in some deity's waiting room while your body can be reanimated as a zombie suggests that all magical effects on your person have ceased to be. That said, given the fate-worse-than-death cosmology that D&D maintains, it hardly makes a practical difference.

[Sagetim]

Son, I'm only going to tell you this one time.

http://www.bubbleblabber.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Coming_To_America_Stay_off_the_drugs.jpg

If you want to keep working here, stay off the drugs.

But winner's don't do drugs (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Winners_Dont_Use_Drugs.png). And I D.A.R.E. to be different (https://img1.etsystatic.com/001/0/6992997/il_570xN.403525837_pbn0.jpg) (by not doing drugs). Are you sure I'm high and that you're not just...lacking in imaaaaaag (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A-IUgwzCcAAlTwW.jpg)ination? (http://i.imgur.com/WYtNGmy.png)

[atemu1234]

Given that redeemed fiends exist, that retain their [Evil] subtype - it could just be the personality that's "rewritten" - a redeemed fiend is a fiend with a good personality, despite the Evil energies making up their body.

Which always makes me think of a Pit Fiend going to Asmodeus and saying, "Dad, I don't want to torture the souls of the damned anymore, I just want to sing."


Didn't wotc make an article about it, and how she would be a paladin?

She became good organically though, through "the power of love" or something.


Yes, and then they made her fall. :sigh:

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a

To be fair they also say that is only one possible story.

[Frosty]

I personally think the Helm is statistically more Miley than the power of love to convert a demon. Hence why I chose that as my character gets backstory.

Once there, she is working very hard to retain that alignment. In theory, a Miracle can still her back to CE and she really doesn't want that.

I guess one basic question is: What IS alignment? Is t merely someone's outlook on life? Is it a magical component that guides ones actions or is it merely a flag based on one's actions?

[Sagetim]

I personally think the Helm is statistically more Miley than the power of love to convert a demon. Hence why I chose that as my character gets backstory.

Once there, she is working very hard to retain that alignment. In theory, a Miracle can still her back to CE and she really doesn't want that.

I guess one basic question is: What IS alignment? Is t merely someone's outlook on life? Is it a magical component that guides ones actions or is it merely a flag based on one's actions?

For people with an alignment subtype, it is literally a part of your physical makeup. For everyone else, it's more of an indicator of what kind of stuff you normally do and the way you normally do things. An overall indicator of the kind of person you are. That's not to say that a lawful good person can't pile babies into a pit and set them on fire, but it doesn't really fit their normal pattern of behavior.

[Rubik]

For people with an alignment subtype, it is literally a part of your physical makeup. For everyone else, it's more of an indicator of what kind of stuff you normally do and the way you normally do things. An overall indicator of the kind of person you are. That's not to say that a lawful good person can't pile babies into a pit and set them on fire, but it doesn't really fit their normal pattern of behavior.Unless the babies are green and/or scaly.

[5a Violista]

I think Red Fel just thinks all bards sound like elevator music. You should show him otherwise by playing awesome music for him.

>_> <_<
I love elevator music! You can do so many interesting things to it, especially when you know Bossa Nova (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJkxFhFRFDA) or basic rhythm/improv skills. Get enough musicians in that pitch-black elevator at the same time and there's nothing you can't do. (Except get bored. It's impossible to get bored when you put enough musicians together.)



It's a curse. See text below. The character who dons the helm has to fail a Will save (DC 15) for the curse to take effect. Once the curse takes effect, the character's alignment changes (read text below for details). Once the curse goes into effect, the helmet becomes none magical. "Only a wish or a miracle can restore former alignment, and the affected individual does not make any attempt to return to the former alignment. (In fact, he views the prospect with horror and avoids it in any way possible.) If a character of a class with an alignment requirement is affected, an atonement spell is needed as well if the curse is to be obliterated. When a helm of opposite alignment has functioned once, it loses its magical properties."

Since it changes your alignment, I just thought of another possible interpretation of how it works. I heard that the first DnDs used alignment as in "Your actions are aligned and further the causes of cosmic powers in groups that go by this label". If you go by that interpretation of alignment—that your actions further the cause of groups you've aligned with—then the Helm curses you with a cursed spirit or something that manipulates your actions into helping the wrong cosmic force. If you help out the wrong group long enough, you just might start to align with them mentally as well.

[Sagetim]

I love elevator music! You can do so many interesting things to it, especially when you know Bossa Nova and basic rhythm/improv skills. Get enough musicians in that pitch-black elevator at the same time and there's nothing you can't do. (Except get bored. It's impossible to get bored when you put enough musicians together.)




Since it changes your alignment, I just thought of another possible interpretation of how it works. I heard that the first DnDs used alignment as in "Your actions are aligned and further the causes of cosmic powers in groups that go by this label". If you go by that interpretation of alignment—that your actions further the cause of groups you've aligned with—then the Helm curses you with a cursed spirit or something that manipulates your actions into helping the wrong cosmic force. If you help out the wrong group long enough, you just might start to align with them mentally as well.

So the curse dumps ink all over your alignment contract and goes 'woops, let me fix that there' but gets it as wrong as possible on purpose just to be a **** before it ceases to exist as one last middle finger towards creation and existence?

[Mechalich]

D&D doesn't have objective morality. It has two cosmic forces that happen to share names with moral concepts.

Objective morality is inherently based on circular reasoning. God is good and therefore what God says you should do is good.

D&D books, however, are written by a bunch of different humans who could never quite get their ideas straight and weren't especially interested in ethically reasoning to begin with. That doesn't make it any less objective in structure (and it's not like this problem is unique, the Light Side/Dark Side situation is Star Wars has exactly the same problems).


Souls go where their alignment dictates, which means that ruthless murderers who like treachery and murder and don't mind pain go to a place where that's all they do for eternity and, as such, are probably really happy about that.

Objective morality systems have really big problems with what we generally classify as 'mental illness.' You do not take evil actions because you are insane, you are insane and therefore evil. Yes this is incredibly retrograde, probably quite harmful to young people exposed to D&D who think about it to hard, and messy to boot. however, that's how the system is designed to work. Again, it is not designed to be compatible with modern thought.

In fact, the Helm of Opposite Alignment is a curse that takes a 'normal' person and afflicts them were a terrifyingly serious combination of mental illnesses (psychopathy + something else, generally), and if applied to an already insane person it takes those away and makes them 'normal' again.

So yeah, people who are sufficiently psychopathic that they classify as Neutral Evil end up in Hades, but the fact that they're happy about it is an element of their psychosis, which, in D&D, is itself evil.


In D&D, there is no systematic celestial justice.

That's basically true, and that is pretty grimdark and not very fun to talk about, but, D&D is a game that includes the core assumption that ancient polytheistic religions are a significantly more accurate representation of celestial metaphysics than anything developed since, and the primary creative inspiration - Tolkien - was based off Old English mythology that was equally if not darker than that. Tolkien squared the circle of a moral system without any systematic celestial justice with a medieval setting whose cultural context was utterly wedded to the idea that there was by perhaps the greatest case of literary dodging in history (the afterlife in Tolkien is plenty screwed up). D&D was not nearly so well designed.

[Frosty]

So, how does Redemption and Free Will fit into this system of Objective Moralty, along with Personal Responsibility?

As a side note, in Star Wars, the Dark Side and the Sith isn't technically an evil philosophy.



Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.

Nowhere in this code talks about causing the suffering of others. However, it is an inherently SELFISH code compared to the Jedi code, and it focuses exclusively on the Self and how to master the Self and one's environments.

[Mechalich]

So, how does Redemption and Free Will fit into this system of Objective Moralty, along with Personal Responsibility?

As a side note, in Star Wars, the Dark Side and the Sith isn't technically an evil philosophy.



Nowhere in this code talks about causing the suffering of others. However, it is an inherently SELFISH code compared to the Jedi code, and it focuses exclusively on the Self and how to master the Self and one's environments.

The dark side and the sith are intended to be, by Word of God and RAW, evil. If you want to interpret that otherwise you can do so in your game the deconstruction thereof is extremely lengthy and I don't feel like getting into it right now.

I don't see how redemption is much modified from the common assumptions.

Free will and personal responsibility do take hits. The secular viewpoint is, to paraphrase Peter Watts: 'Nobody gets to chose their brain chemistry.' The D&D viewpoint isn't. If you are a psychopath, then you're probably evil, unless you live a life of nigh-constant vigilant resistance to a huge number of mental impulses and are, almost certainly, pretty miserable as a result. Modern medicine would say such a person is sick, and try to medicate them. D&D would say they have evil within them, offer coping mechanisms, and hold out the promise that, if said psychopath managed to stay on the straight and narrow through their miserable life then they would be rewarded with life in a nice plane/divine realm where they would finally be happy.

But yeah, you can be wired evil. Outsiders generally explicitly are. Fiends can become neutral or good under very rare (like frightfully unlikely 1 in Ten million chance events rare) situations, just as angels can fall, but they really don't have free will as we understand it. People who are born with the neural wiring to send them it psychopathy, or in the reverse scrupulosity, don't really get to choose their alignment. Of course, they also probably don't care. Essentially we're treating mental traits as moral conditions, rather than neuroscience. It's definitely squicky, but there it is.

[Frosty]

Redemption has to be affected, because in order to choose redemption, in order for it to have meaning. There will be free will. Anything that modifies free will modifies redemption. If fiends can not choose evil, they no more morally culpable than a savage bear mauling someone to death. Or someone mentally insane killing someone (in our society they are spared the death penalty).

So DnD basically advocates that it's ok to murder the mentally ill? By definition, fiends sound like mentally ill people with wiring that can't choose any other way, with maybe a one in a billion exception.

[Mystral]

Redemption has to be affected, because in order to choose redemption, in order for it to have meaning. There will be free will. Anything that modifies free will modifies redemption. If fiends can not choose evil, they no more morally culpable than a savage bear mauling someone to death. Or someone mentally insane killing someone (in our society they are spared the death penalty).

So DnD basically advocates that it's ok to murder the mentally ill? By definition, fiends sound like mentally ill people with wiring that can't choose any other way, with maybe a one in a billion exception.

If people had a mental illness that made them eat babies, and there was no practical way of locking even one of them up, then yes, murder these mentally ill. I can't see your problem.

[Segev]

I actually contend that the real world has an objective morality. While I am a Christian, my argument doesn't actually rely on divinity. It's simply that what we tend to identify as "good and moral" is a set of behaviors which, on the whole, lead to more prosperous societies with greater fecundity and survival rates which are better able to support the life, health, and comfort of the greatest numbers of people who are members thereof. Few, if any, societies have perfectly followed them, but those which do tend to be the strongest, so much so that their strength persists even for a time after they corrupt those practices and ignore or abandon them; the inertia of the power and wealth they'd accumulated is such that it can be pillaged by those who abandon those moral behaviors for a time before the decline is noticed. (The first sign tends to be a pause in the rise that persists an unusual amount of time.)

There are immoral behaviors which can sustain successful and powerful nations, but they tend to have that power more and more concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and to require the corruption and destruction of more and more lives to sustain that concentration of power and wealth, which is why they ultimately collapse under the weight of their own immorality.

I am passing no judgment, here; I am merely saying that morality seems to be an objective law of the universe. It's basically the set of rules that the swarm intelligence algorithm and the genetic algorithm that is human social structure is striving to find.

If there is a God (and I do believe there is, but you don't have to for this argument), and if He loves mankind as His children, it would make sense that He would give them the rules by which His creation operates. Much like parents tell their children not to touch the stove, or to eat their vegetables, or to do their homework first and then go play and strive to instill a work ethic not because they like imposing arbitrary rules to control their kids but because they know these are the best way to achieve the most and greatest happiness and success, a Heavenly Father would give "commandments" to His children which are really just the blueprint for success.

If there is not a God, there still is objective morality: it's what works. And we've had millenia of a swarm intelligence algorithm operating to discover the rules thereof. We may yet find more and better ones, but what we have are very close to the objective truth after this long exploring the options.

In D&D, the problem is that the "objective morality" is written by a lot of different men and women who mistake what it really would be for a set of semi-arbitrary rules, and who attempt to fit it to their personal worldviews while still meeting the needs of a game. Most of them are, at best, arm-chair philosophers (not that we're any better, but still). And they're writing in a small vacuum under a deadline to create a book to be used for game mechanics.

thus, D&D's objective morality is a mess if you try to take it as a whole without house ruling just the parts that you think make sense.

[illyahr]

I've always seen the Jedi as Lawful and the Dark Jedi as Chaotic. Word of God didn't say that one was good and one was evil, it was stated that the practitioners of the light side tried to live in harmony with the force and practitioners of the dark side would try to control it. The original practitioners, the Je'daii, tried to maintain balance between the two. It was only when a group of them grew to fear the dark side's power that they forbade its use.

[TheIronGolem]

Objective morality is inherently based on circular reasoning. God is good and therefore what God says you should do is good.

D&D books, however, are written by a bunch of different humans who could never quite get their ideas straight and weren't especially interested in ethically reasoning to begin with. That doesn't make it any less objective in structure (and it's not like this problem is unique, the Light Side/Dark Side situation is Star Wars has exactly the same problems).

You miss my point. I don't deny that D&D's cosmic forces of Good and Evil are objectively structured. But those forces are independent of the moral/ethical concepts of good and evil, and it's a mistake to assume they're the same just because they share names.

I agree that this was written by people who were not terribly interested in ethical reasoning; that's exactly why their creation should be regarded as orthogonal to ethics and morality.

I also agree that Star Wars has this same problem, and my point applies equally to that universe - the Light and Dark sides of the Force are not actually "good" or "evil" despite the heroes' and villains' respective preferences.

[Frosty]

You mean Good and Evil in DnD isn't good and evil because for example Sanctify the Wicked is a Good act?

[illyahr]

You mean Good and Evil in DnD isn't good and evil because for example Sanctify the Wicked is a Good act?

There is a lot of overlap between evil and Evil and good and Good, but not enough for them to be the same. A Good spell (Sanctify the Wicked) forcibly changes a person's very nature. I have a character who uses Animate Dead, an Evil spell, to set up a tireless militia to protect his village from attack and perform manual labor. These are good things, though not Good things.

[Frosty]

Then how does the afterlife make sense? If one is supposed to go to the afterlife that one agrees with philosophically, but casing Animate Dead to help a village will turn you evil, it seems to break down. You are Altruistic but might get sent to the abyss or Baator

[Red Fel]

You mean Good and Evil in DnD isn't good and evil because for example Sanctify the Wicked is a Good act?

Not just Good - Exalted.

That's the point. You can argue that D&D alignments bear some resemblance to their real-world counterparts, but in many ways they're still fairly alien. That's why you can't approach them from a wholly familiar perspective - you have to approach them in a vacuum, as you do with all D&D mechanics.

Otherwise, you wind up in the same place as the people who argue D&D physics.

[Frosty]

Not just Good - Exalted.

That's the point. You can argue that D&D alignments bear some resemblance to their real-world counterparts, but in many ways they're still fairly alien. That's why you can't approach them from a wholly familiar perspective - you have to approach them in a vacuum, as you do with all D&D mechanics.

Otherwise, you wind up in the same place as the people who argue D&D physics.But approaching them in a vacuum and implementing the alignments as written breaks the moral consistency and logic of the (my?) game world and some character motivations.

[TheIronGolem]

Then how does the afterlife make sense? If one is supposed to go to the afterlife that one agrees with philosophically, but casing Animate Dead to help a village will turn you evil, it seems to break down. You are Altruistic but might get sent to the abyss or Baator

It doesn't make sense at all, if you assume (as many real-world religions do) that the afterlife is supposed to be a reward/punishment for the way you lived. You need to apply Rule Zero if you want your world to work that way.

It makes more sense if you view the various realms as buckets that souls get dropped into by a dispassionate filtering mechanism, according to the metaphysical properties bestowed on them by alignment.

[Necroticplague]

It doesn't make sense at all, if you assume (as many real-world religions do) that the afterlife is supposed to be a reward/punishment for the way you lived. You need to apply Rule Zero if you want your world to work that way.

It makes more sense if you view the various realms as buckets that souls get dropped into by a dispassionate filtering mechanism, according to the metaphysical properties bestowed on them by alignment.

Yes, but then we must come back to the question: why was the filter set up this way?

Saying its to try and punish evil doesn't make much sense when you consider that Evil gods and Evil diety-like creatures exist. Why would they want to punish people who are basically on their side (as much as evil can be said to be a side)? Meanwhile, why would Good gods provide a mechanism by which evil people can return to the world (as fiends, like they do currently). It makes marginally more sense if you go for 'the mechanism is supposed to be a reward no matter how you were in life'. CE people are ruthless people who value personal power above all else, believing that the only rule is what you can enforce. They are therefore sent to a place where the only thing between you and what's basically godhood is all the other SoBs you gotta fight for it. CN people value their freedom above all else, and are thus sent to a place where almost everything is possible. Ect., Ect.

Of course, the mechanism is imperfect. How someone acts and thinks can go in different directions, thus leading them the end up in a place they don't philosophically agree with based on their actions. This is an unpleasent fate, but fortunately a not too common one.

[Taelas]

Might I remind you that someone who got switched to evil via this helm is a VICTIM, deserving of aid, not death.

They (perhaps even violently) disagree.

They had their minds changed for them, but it is very much made up on the subject. They still have free will, they just choose evil instead of good.

It's a tragedy, and while they do deserve pity, there's really nothing you can do to aid rhem that they would accept.

[atemu1234]

They (perhaps even violently) disagree.

They had their minds changed for them, but it is very much made up on the subject. They still have free will, they just choose evil instead of good.

It's a tragedy, and while they do deserve pity, there's really nothing you can do to aid rhem that they would accept.

... Nonlethal damage and a remove curse spell is something you cannot do?

[Taelas]

... Nonlethal damage and a remove curse spell is something you cannot do?

Remove curse does nothing. The curse on the helm is discharged when it goes into effect. There is nothing for it to affect.

You explicitly need wish or miracle to reverse the change.

Even that is against the wishes of the victim, though. You would just be putting them through what changed them in the first place, again. if that doesn't bother you, you could also just find a new helm of opposite alignment.

[illyahr]

Yes, but then we must come back to the question: why was the filter set up this way?

Saying its to try and punish evil doesn't make much sense when you consider that Evil gods and Evil diety-like creatures exist. Why would they want to punish people who are basically on their side (as much as evil can be said to be a side)? Meanwhile, why would Good gods provide a mechanism by which evil people can return to the world (as fiends, like they do currently). It makes marginally more sense if you go for 'the mechanism is supposed to be a reward no matter how you were in life'. CE people are ruthless people who value personal power above all else, believing that the only rule is what you can enforce. They are therefore sent to a place where the only thing between you and what's basically godhood is all the other SoBs you gotta fight for it. CN people value their freedom above all else, and are thus sent to a place where almost everything is possible. Ect., Ect.

Of course, the mechanism is imperfect. How someone acts and thinks can go in different directions, thus leading them the end up in a place they don't philosophically agree with based on their actions. This is an unpleasent fate, but fortunately a not too common one.

The afterlife in D&D isn't a reward/punishment system for that very reason. Why would anyone follow a deity who will show no gratitude for your deeds? You aren't rewarded or punished when you die in D&D, you simply graduate to the major leagues and are provided rank based on how much your deity likes you. The only difference between going to Celestia and going to the Abyss is what concepts you are fighting for. The only reason the Abyss is full of pain and suffering is because that's what its inhabitants believe in.

[Taelas]

Given that the vast majority of the inhabitants of the Lower Planes are those that the powerful exercise power over, I would maintain going there is a punishment for everyone but the few that rise higher--and even they are under the thumb of someone else, usually. I agree that it is the philosophy that those souls agree with, it just doesn't work out very well for the most of them.

[illyahr]

Given that the vast majority of the inhabitants of the Lower Planes are those that the powerful exercise power over, I would maintain going there is a punishment for everyone but the few that rise higher--and even they are under the thumb of someone else, usually. I agree that it is the philosophy that those souls agree with, it just doesn't work out very well for the most of them.

Exactly. What it eventually comes back to is that the Lower Planes don't punish, its inhabitants punish themselves.

[Segev]

Exactly. What it eventually comes back to is that the Lower Planes don't punish, its inhabitants punish themselves.

"Hell is other people."

[Frosty]

Exactly. What it eventually comes back to is that the Lower Planes don't punish, its inhabitants punish themselves.doesnt the Fiendish Codex 2 contradict that a bit, or am I mis-remembering how the Pact Primeval works? Also Erinyes are described as carrying people off to their deserved fates. If the souls agree philosophically the they wouldn't need to be lasso'ed by Erinyes right?

[TheIronGolem]

Yes, but then we must come back to the question: why was the filter set up this way?

That question presumes that it was "set up" at all, rather than being the natural consequence of the same impersonal forces that result in things like gravity, inertia, and the Cubs being terrible.

Obviously, a given DM can decide that this is the case in their own world, but then this whole line of questioning becomes moot as the answer is always "whatever the DM says". But in the absence of such a ruling, nothing in the rules states that any particular entity is responsible for this arrangement, so logically we must fall back on the null hypothesis that no particular entity is. This leads back to Good and Evil being impersonal metaphysical phenomena, with little connection to the moral concepts of good and evil beyond sharing names.

[illyahr]

doesnt the Fiendish Codex 2 contradict that a bit, or am I mis-remembering how the Pact Primeval works? Also Erinyes are described as carrying people off to their deserved fates. If the souls agree philosophically the they wouldn't need to be lasso'ed by Erinyes right?

Assuming all the lore agrees with itself, which it doesn't. The writers never bother to check their notes so you can get three different explanations on how the afterlife works in a single book. There is a general trend, but how it works is up to the individual setting and how you want it to work.

[Rubik]

That question presumes that it was "set up" at all, rather than being the natural consequence of the same impersonal forces that result in things like gravity, inertia, and the Cubs being terrible.They're the Chudley Cannons of baseball.

[Eldonauran]

doesnt the Fiendish Codex 2 contradict that a bit, or am I mis-remembering how the Pact Primeval works? Also Erinyes are described as carrying people off to their deserved fates. If the souls agree philosophically the they wouldn't need to be lasso'ed by Erinyes right?

Funny thing about that. If you were an evil creature and you absolutely knew (believed) that what was waiting for you on the other side was pain and suffering for all your evil deeds (whether or not that was actually true), wouldn't you try and run too? I know I would. Screw this eternal torture bull crap.

Whatever philosophy you believe in as an evil character, it is almost universally true that they believe that they are the sole exception to those rules and everyone else deserves to be the victim. Whether or not that person is willing to admit it or not. They might even believe they are no exception but will take great pains to ensure that they become that exception. When they are eventually faced with the truth ... Hell yeah, they are going to run if given the chance.

[Frosty]

So you are saying every evil character is self delusional?

[Red Fel]

So you are saying every evil character is self delusional?

Not exactly.

Every Evil character aspires to greatness. How they define it varies. Some want to be explicitly on top of the pile. Some want to be the voice in the ear of the guy on top. Others just want to be the guy who causes suffering and gets away with it.

The point is, many - not all, but many - believe that, with the right combination of guile, strength, and influence, they can get the better of any situation. This includes the afterlife. Those who are aware of what awaits them - and not everyone is, remember that not everyone has invested in Knowledge (the planes) or (religion) - generally either believe that they'll be among the few who crawl out of the muck to become powerful in the afterlife (e.g. demons/devils/etc.), or have resigned themselves to that fate in exchange for enjoying the life they have now.

Not every dead Evil makes a break for it. Some are determined to win without letting anyone see them weak. Others are determined to take their punishment. Still others are simply too cowardly. Don't assume that just because there are Outsiders tasked with retrieving escapees, that everyone tries to escape.

[Mechalich]

Not exactly.

Every Evil character aspires to greatness. How they define it varies. Some want to be explicitly on top of the pile. Some want to be the voice in the ear of the guy on top. Others just want to be the guy who causes suffering and gets away with it.

The point is, many - not all, but many - believe that, with the right combination of guile, strength, and influence, they can get the better of any situation. This includes the afterlife. Those who are aware of what awaits them - and not everyone is, remember that not everyone has invested in Knowledge (the planes) or (religion) - generally either believe that they'll be among the few who crawl out of the muck to become powerful in the afterlife (e.g. demons/devils/etc.), or have resigned themselves to that fate in exchange for enjoying the life they have now.

Not every dead Evil makes a break for it. Some are determined to win without letting anyone see them weak. Others are determined to take their punishment. Still others are simply too cowardly. Don't assume that just because there are Outsiders tasked with retrieving escapees, that everyone tries to escape.

Indeed.

I would add that its important to remember that moving on to the Outer Planes means moving into a situation where reality works the way you believe it is supposed to work.

A useful example is Arcadia, plane of Lawful Neutral Good. It is, basically, a communist paradise. This defies our understanding of how communism interacts with conventional human nature only until you realize that only a certain subset of people with a specific mindset actually end up there.

So for the evil people, their perceive the lower planes as how reality should work. The Nine Hells are a brutal meritocracy with ironclad rules where the strongest, most ruthless, and best at distorting the spirit of the law to stand behind the letter rise (slowly) to the top. Even if they aren't one of the ruthless best, they believe this sort of twisted meritocracy is the ideal world. Deep down they believe that the weak should be punished, even if they turn out to be one of the weak.

[Anlashok]

most ruthless, and best at distorting the spirit of the law
Which is weird, given that one of the defining traits of the lawful alignment is honor and trustworthiness and ethics.

Come to think of it, most devils are probably more realistically NE and just happen to like using the illusion of rules to push their agenda.

[Necroticplague]

Which is weird, given that one of the defining traits of the lawful alignment is honor and trustworthiness and ethics.

Come to think of it, most devils are probably more realistically NE and just happen to like using the illusion of rules to push their agenda.

They do have all 3. Their just perverted by being Evil in addition to Lawful. A devil's word is as good as a promise, and they do what they say. It's just the unfortunate many others who don't pay close attention to what the devil promised ("I said this way was safe. I never said to whom it was safe.")

[Segev]

Which is weird, given that one of the defining traits of the lawful alignment is honor and trustworthiness and ethics.

Come to think of it, most devils are probably more realistically NE and just happen to like using the illusion of rules to push their agenda.


They do have all 3. Their just perverted by being Evil in addition to Lawful. A devil's word is as good as a promise, and they do what they say. It's just the unfortunate many others who don't pay close attention to what the devil promised ("I said this way was safe. I never said to whom it was safe.")

The thing is, "Law" can ONLY be defined in terms of the words explicitly used. The whole point to lengthy agreements is that the "spirit" of the agreement may not truly be obvious to all involved parties. Worse, they may think they all understand what's meant, when later they would find out that it's not at all what other parties thought.

Thus, Lawful people seek to spell out these agreements as clearly as possible and with all contingencies covered, because that way, everybody knows where they stand and knows what they're getting into.

Lawful Evil is just about making sure that the deal benefits them the most, and that they know every loophole and have the contingencies written to cover THEIR hides, and if others aren't clever enough to do the same, that's their problem.

[Anlashok]

The problem is, in response to both posts, is that that flies in the face of being honor, trustworthiness and reliability. All of which are, according to the SRD, defining traits of a lawful alignment. At best you can argue that they're technically telling the truth... even though a lie by omission is still a lie. Even then that's hardly honorable or reliable behavior.

[Necroticplague]

The problem is, in response to both posts, is that that flies in the face of being honor, trustworthiness and reliability. All of which are, according to the SRD, defining traits of a lawful alignment. At best you can argue that they're technically telling the truth... even though a lie by omission is still a lie. Even then that's hardly honorable or reliable behavior.

Depends on what you mean by 'honor'. They honor every agreement they make, insofar in that they will try and see it through to completion. They are also honorable in the more traditional sense, in that don't lie or go back on their word. They simply aren't very open about what exactly their word is. The same deal for the other two. If you know what a devil actually says (and not merely what you assumed it said), it's more trustworthy and reliable than the ground under your feat. And if you're trying to hold him to promises he never made, he can't really be blamed for that, can he?

They may not be benevolent, but they do have those traits.

[hamishspence]

So for the evil people, their perceive the lower planes as how reality should work. The Nine Hells are a brutal meritocracy with ironclad rules where the strongest, most ruthless, and best at distorting the spirit of the law to stand behind the letter rise (slowly) to the top. Even if they aren't one of the ruthless best, they believe this sort of twisted meritocracy is the ideal world. Deep down they believe that the weak should be punished, even if they turn out to be one of the weak.

Plenty of evil characters don't know they're evil, though. Seeing things in terms of "the weak" and "the strong" might be common in evil characters, but not universal.

[Segev]

Again, the point of Law is to establish agreed-upon terms and stick to them.

LE is trustworthy...in that they will do exactly what they say they will. There are those who have an LE alignment who are actually totally trustworthy even insofar as they explain what their goals are, what they think the contract means, etc. They tend to do this because they like people WANTING to sign contracts with them. If there's a "gotcha" clause in it, they'll TELL you; they use them to enforce compliance. They will do their best to leave the fault penalties on them minor, but they will tend to accept fault penalties that are totally within their control being as severe as you like: they won't ever default on purpose, so they know they won't suffer those penalties.

There are also the dirty dealing LE types who will deliberately obfuscate their intentions, who will try to convince you to sign without reading. These are actually closer to NE than most, though they're still on the LE side. Gehenna insteaad of Baator.

Devils, the quintessential LE types, tend to have their untrustworthy, traitorous actions be restricted to "we never said we wouldn't..." Think Ursela from Disney's Little Mermaid: she actually wanted the penalty term, not the supposed bargain. She didn't hide anything in fine print, she didn't lie about the terms. She lied about her motives, and she lied about what she wanted out of the deal, but she included it openly. She just...then sought to ensure that Ariel would not manage to execute the clauses that didn't lead to what Ursela wanted.

[illyahr]

Devils, the quintessential LE types, tend to have their untrustworthy, traitorous actions be restricted to "we never said we wouldn't..." Think Ursela from Disney's Little Mermaid: she actually wanted the penalty term, not the supposed bargain. She didn't hide anything in fine print, she didn't lie about the terms. She lied about her motives, and she lied about what she wanted out of the deal, but she included it openly. She just...then sought to ensure that Ariel would not manage to execute the clauses that didn't lead to what Ursela wanted.

Ursula is actually a very good example. Ariel knew what Ursula wanted when she signed the contract. Ursula, while not outright stating it, obviously enjoyed the thought of Ariel failing. Ariel assumed that Ursula wouldn't interfere but that was never stated. Ursula abided by the contract that was signed, Ariel just wasn't smart enough to keep up.

For example: Ariel could have gotten help. She could have sent Flounder or Sebastian to explain the situation to her father or one of her sisters and have them tell the humans for her. They would have helped her rather than letting Ursula win.

[Eldonauran]

So you are saying every evil character is self delusional?

No, not every single one of them. The majority of them? Sure. Like it was mentioned in an earlier post, most evil characters don't know they are evil. It takes a 1st level cleric of an evil deity, someone who is utterly devoted and gets spells directly from the source, to even register as a 'faint' source of evil on a Detect Evil spell. The odds of a commoner to even have access to that spell and to even glow with much more than a 'dim' blip, is fairly low. They are most likely ignorant of their true alignment.

More powerful evil characters, with direct access to magic, knowledge of the planes and religion, that deal with the outsiders on a more consistent basis? They have much greater odds to realize exactly what they are dealing with and to plan accordingly.

[Sagetim]

There is a lot of overlap between evil and Evil and good and Good, but not enough for them to be the same. A Good spell (Sanctify the Wicked) forcibly changes a person's very nature. I have a character who uses Animate Dead, an Evil spell, to set up a tireless militia to protect his village from attack and perform manual labor. These are good things, though not Good things.

And as I understand it, dnd would classify the evil act of casting animate dead as neutralized by the good act of protecting innocent people with said undead.


But approaching them in a vacuum and implementing the alignments as written breaks the moral consistency and logic of the (my?) game world and some character motivations.

Then houserule it. Give your players a heads up that you think that the alignment system is not consistent with the kind of story you want to tell and that you'll be using one based on a more consistent morality system. Then, at least at the start of the campaign so everyone can get the hang of it, notify players of what kinds of alignment effects their choices line up with so they get an idea of what you'll rule in the future.


It doesn't make sense at all, if you assume (as many real-world religions do) that the afterlife is supposed to be a reward/punishment for the way you lived. You need to apply Rule Zero if you want your world to work that way.

It makes more sense if you view the various realms as buckets that souls get dropped into by a dispassionate filtering mechanism, according to the metaphysical properties bestowed on them by alignment.

I still contend that many dnd settings have a god of death that actually does their job and sorts souls into various locations with some amount of judgement. Forgotten Realms has Kelemvor, Greyhawk has WeeJas, Dragonlance has...whatever their god of death is. Or maybe a triumverate of death gods of each alignment. Darksun has nothing and likes it. And I can't remember if Birthright even has an afterlife. Anyway, if your setting has a god of death, it's reasonable to assume that they have the job of sorting souls, or have divine flunkies to do it for them (like King Yemma in DBZ).


The afterlife in D&D isn't a reward/punishment system for that very reason. Why would anyone follow a deity who will show no gratitude for your deeds? You aren't rewarded or punished when you die in D&D, you simply graduate to the major leagues and are provided rank based on how much your deity likes you. The only difference between going to Celestia and going to the Abyss is what concepts you are fighting for. The only reason the Abyss is full of pain and suffering is because that's what its inhabitants believe in.

For Forgotten Realms: The Wall of the Faithless was a powerful stick element for a long time. If you didn't worship a god/have a patron deity, when you died you were stuck in the wall of the faithless after a certain period of time (before the max time limit on true rez, even). Then began the slow process of torment that would eventually result in you being homogenized into a nonsentient wall of soul matter, with new layers of faithless being stuck to you to cover up the blank spot that used to be your writhing soul-matter self. When Kelemvor first became god of death, he was good aligned, and said 'that's insane.' and got rid of the Wall of the Faithless. In fact, he made his realm pretty okay. And that wound up causing a crisis for a lot of the other Forgotten Realms Gods, who are *******s, because they were losing worshippers in droves since the wall of the faithless was gone. So the gods got together and collectively bitched enough that Kelemvor was lobotomized to a more neutral alignment.

When it comes to if someone knows they are evil or not, I think most people assume they are good, or in the right. Maybe not good like a saint, but generally good. They're not necessarily correct in this assumption based on DND alignments, but lacking any evidence to the contrary I think most people prefer to think of themselves as the good guy. Now, if some jackass kicked down your door while you were relaxing and said that you were evil because their evil vision granted by their god said so, you would feel fully justified in taking another drag of your (insert illegal drug of choice here) and blowing their head off with a shotgun. Because by law they just broke and entered and declared an intent to harm you, and you were lawfully defending yourself on your own property. It doesn't matter that at the time you might have been operating a human trafficking ring or utilizing illegal drugs to get your mellow on.

[Eldonauran]

When it comes to if someone knows they are evil or not, I think most people assume they are good, or in the right. Maybe not good like a saint, but generally good. They're not necessarily correct in this assumption based on DND alignments, but lacking any evidence to the contrary I think most people prefer to think of themselves as the good guy. Now, if some jackass kicked down your door while you were relaxing and said that you were evil because their evil vision granted by their god said so, you would feel fully justified in taking another drag of your (insert illegal drug of choice here) and blowing their head off with a shotgun. Because by law they just broke and entered and declared an intent to harm you, and you were lawfully defending yourself on your own property. It doesn't matter that at the time you might have been operating a human trafficking ring or utilizing illegal drugs to get your mellow on.

And this here nails on the head one of the unspoken reasons why so many people have trouble coming to grips with the D&D alignment system. They don't like to be told that certain things they do, or believe in real life, are considered 'evil' by the game design. This is not the sole reason, of course, nor is it applicable in every case with every person that finds fault in the alignment system. I know it was applicable to my own interpretation of the alignment system until I learned otherwise. Also, I've come to accept that I would most likely be classified as True Neutral using said alignment system despite my best wishes to be Lawful Good. Still working on that one ...
Excellent post. :belkar: