My impression is that Lawful Evil afterlife is harsher than the others ( CE, NE )

[Conradine]

Chaotic Evil characters ends up as Manes in the Abyss, Neutral Evil become Larvae in Ade.
The first often become demon's food: nasty, but quick definitive demise. The second languish in the saddness of an afterlife that sips everything of strenght, will and memory. Depressing, but - somewhat - peaceful.
Both CE and NE immediately loses most of their memories, intelligence and personality; and that is an huge bliss, to not be able to undestand more than vaguely the evil afterlife and it's horrors.

But Lawful Evil characters do not lose ( immediately ) their intelligence and personality. They retain their full self long enough to be tortured, being fully conscious in the process. I can argue that, according to the source, they suffer much more intensely than a NE supplicant, much longer than the average CE supplicant, and they are intelligent enough to understand what is happening to them.


So, it's my impression or to die LE is really a bad deal?

[Gildedragon]

The CE afterlife is too C to make generalizations of what happens to one. It is awful but... personalized awful, that is to say, at the whims of the fiend that catches you: torture for the sake of it, sure; getting eaten by bits, maybe; used as an umbrella stand, certainly, only question being which hole to use...
LE looks more awful because it is codified (and thus can be talked about)

[Jowgen]

While this is a matter of opinion, I believe you are correct, and I'd like to suggest a reason behind it all.

Baator is unnatural, as far as afterlives go, due to the direct meddeling of Asmodeus and his Pact Primeval. Not only has he got the unique luxury of claiming souls that wouldn't otherwise be his by means of Faustian Pacts; but he uses the letter of the word of the Pact Primeval to purposefully torture souls to harness divine energy (which I personally think to be nothing but EXP, but I digress).

While the Abyss explicitly has a will of its own and it seems like Hades, with its entrapment trait, has at least some sort of agency; Asmodeus has basically subjugated whatever the natural order of souls in Baator is, and maximized the afterlife pain-factor to fuel his personal power. Sure, the other Evil planes use souls as food, currency and other things, but none of them draw any tangible benefit from inflicting torture upon their petitioners.

TL;DR: Baator is the most horrible afterlife on purpose because Asmodeus made it so.

[Inevitability]

Aren't Lemures mindless? I'm fairly sure they wouldn't be able to remember their former lives.

[Gildedragon]

TL;DR: Baator is the most horrible afterlife on purpose because Asmodeus made it so.
Thing is Asmodeus's 'plan' for Baator is just falling in and doing what the plane probably wants for and is itself: pure law and evil. The hierarchy, the bureaucracy, the exploitation, systematization, codification, and regularity of the awfulness there: that's what the plane was always meant to be; what it was even before asmodeus, just different.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Chaotic Evil characters ends up as Manes in the Abyss, Neutral Evil become Larvae in Ade.
The first often become demon's food: nasty, but quick definitive demise. The second languish in the saddness of an afterlife that sips everything of strenght, will and memory. Depressing, but - somewhat - peaceful.
Both CE and NE immediately loses most of their memories, intelligence and personality; and that is an huge bliss, to not be able to undestand more than vaguely the evil afterlife and it's horrors.

But Lawful Evil characters do not lose ( immediately ) their intelligence and personality. They retain their full self long enough to be tortured, being fully conscious in the process. I can argue that, according to the source, they suffer much more intensely than a NE supplicant, much longer than the average CE supplicant, and they are intelligent enough to understand what is happening to them.


So, it's my impression or to die LE is really a bad deal?

Yes and no. None of the dead, regardless of alignment or afterlife, actually maintains a memory of their mortal life as anything except vague impressions. They become petitioners (template in MotP) unless some special circumstance arises. This is just as true of those who end up on the shelves of despond as anywhere else after the cosmos sorts them.

As for the actual, likely events of their afterlife; all of the lower planes are likely to have a petitioner tormented before being changed into something even further removed from what they were and subsequently destroyed.

One that ends up in the abyss will almost certainly be eaten by a more powerful outsider but not before being chased, toyed with, and allowed to hope for escape, only to have that hope eventually snuffed out either by being caught and torn apart or from sheer despair that eventually turns to hate and from there the chaos and evil begin to reshape the petitioner into one of the least of demons. Every so often, one will hold out long enough to be gradually absorbed by the plane as do those in the celestial realms but this is rare in the extreme.

Pandemonium is as the abyss but with long stretches of wandering through the dark, screaming nothingness of the tunnels. Madness sets in well ahead of most fates unless you're caught pretty much immediately.

Carceri is a series of prisons in unwelcoming environs where the evil of petitioners (who are all very close to equal in capability with no ability to advance) is allowed to be turned upon itself. They all predate on one another, under the watchful eyes of the wardens (daemons), with no hope of actually getting ahead of one another. An entire layer is dedicated to lawyers and politicians, as I recall.

Hades is supernaturally charged with despair so great it can even consume living mortals. There is no peace here. The yugoloths use petitoners as bargaining chips and slaves whose despair utterly eliminates any chance of rebellion. They're often -sold- to the baatezu for processing.

There is no rest in gehenna. The constant tremors and endless slopes pose a constant threat of falling and being dashed to nothing but a red streak along one of the countless rock faces. Enclaves of devils and yugoloths carved into the mountainsides occasionally scoop up petitioners for their more typical uses in hades and baator.

Acheron means eternal conscription without pay or being crushed under endless marching feet in neverending wars between arbitrarily drawn factions.

Finally Baator is an eon of torturue followed by an eon of mindless conscription that -may- eventually result in promotion. It honestly strikes me as the most hopeful of the 7 afterlives that await evil souls. You'll have long-since ceased to be you but you might move up in the world eventually.


Aren't Lemures mindless? I'm fairly sure they wouldn't be able to remember their former lives.

Lemures are the end result of Baator's soul processing methods. After all the divine energy has been wrung out of a petitioner then the nigh-shapeless, utterly mindless mass of rage and hate that's left behind is a new lemure.

[ZeroiaSD]

Funny, I was just reading Hell's Rebels, which, of course, visits hell.


Later on, you run into a foe who died earlier. And he vaguely remembers his own name, and that the PCs were enemies... and that's about it. Clearly, a lot's been wiped clean, and that's after a short period, and even that much may be a bit due to the next thing.


A big plot point of it is the Soul Anchor, an artifact/effect who's purpose is, basically, to make/let people remember who they were in their new form (whatever it may be- one'd still become an Azata or Devil or Inevitable, same as they'd always be judged, be it tiny or strong, just remembering what they were), and those who use it really stand out and it's pointed out as an unnatural influence which the TN Death God's followers want gone.

[Conradine]

Aren't Lemures mindless? I'm fairly sure they wouldn't be able to remember their former lives.

Yes, almost mindless.

But, and it's a huge difference, Mane's become immediately almost mindless petitioners, while LE souls becomes Lemures only after being tortured, being fully conscious and intelligent all the while.

Yes, a Mane could be tortured and devoured, but it's described as an almost-mindless being with no memory or survival instinct. I could argue that his ability to suffer is largely inferior to that of a human ( or even a mammal like a dog or a monkey ).



Yes and no. None of the dead, regardless of alignment or afterlife, actually maintains a memory of their mortal life as anything except vague impressions.

According with Fiendish Codex ( which, yes, is contradictory with other sources ) Lawful Evil souls mantain full memory upon arrival and the guardian devils must avoid letting them touch the Stygian waters because, if they lose their memories , they will lose much of their ability to produce spiritual energy through torture.

[ShurikVch]

Chaotic Evil characters ends up as Manes in the Abyss, Neutral Evil become Larvae in Ade.Not only:
1) Neutral Evil may end in Gehenna, and Chaotic Evil - in Carceri or Pandemonium
2) Hades itself have 2 different types of petitioners: Larvae; and others are incorporeal ghostly spirits
The first often become demon's food: nasty, but quick definitive demise. The second languish in the saddness of an afterlife that sips everything of strenght, will and memory. Depressing, but - somewhat - peaceful.Actually, Larvae are also frequently eaten by inhabitants of lower planes.
For example, they are vital for reproduction of Night Hags
But Lawful Evil charactersAlso, not all Lawful Evil characters are end in Baator; even excluding setting-specific cosmologies, there is also Acheron
So, it's my impression or to die LE is really a bad deal?Yes.
:xykon:
Be a vampire, or a ghost, or an immortal with a paint-by-numbers portrait in the rec room. Hell, even a brain-in-a-jar, in a pinch.
Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below.

[Kelb_Panthera]

According with Fiendish Codex ( which, yes, is contradictory with other sources ) Lawful Evil souls mantain full memory upon arrival and the guardian devils must avoid letting them touch the Stygian waters because, if they lose their memories , they will lose much of their ability to produce spiritual energy through torture.

Petitioners still act as containers for their mortal memories (that's why the raise the dead spells can still function) but they have no direct access to them. The deleterious effects of the styx carve right through the container and eat away at the very thing that the devils want. The soul is still useable but much less potent than those that don't take a dunk.

[Necroticplague]

Um, the process of going from Hellish petitioner to lemure #789987456654123321 isn't a long process, whoever torturous it is. Fiendish codex states a process that actually seems like it only takes a few hours at most (dumped into maggot pit, eaten by the titular maggots, fished back out as a lemure). And after that, the resultant lemure can't really be considered the same person as the one who entered Hell, having neither of the memories (as they've lost there mind), nor the physical shape (as they are now in the body of a lemure) of the being they were before. So 'you' are only tortured for a little bit, while some poor sucker who's nothing like you suffers forever afterwards.

Also of note is this little tidbit from Fiendish Codex

Lawful evil deities do not necessarily condemn their dead worshipers to the Maggot Pit. Many, like Kurtulmak, instead allow favored followers to serve eternally at their feet in fiendish form. Each such soul retains full memories of its mortal life,along with an idealized, if horrific, version of its old appearance.
These fiends can travel freely within their native layers, but they do so warily. If they break any of Baator’s copious rules and regulations, they can be waylaid by devils and sentenced to a torture chamber, where they are disassembled like any other lawful evil soul into divine energy and a mindless lemure form
So at the very least, you can avoid that fate by making sure to suck up to the right divinity.

[weckar]

And therein lies the clincher: Hell is like a huge fraternity, and after a (major) hazing you're either done forever or well on your way to the top.

[Yklikt]

Someone who usually has very interesting insights on the LE alignment and it's corresponding afterlife is Red Fel. Red Fel has written a number of posts on the subject. Just use the search function to find posts by Red Fel.

[weckar]

Three times!! THREE TIMES!!!

*Hides between the other posts*

[Tiri]

Well, it was technically said three times, you know.

[weckar]

Yes. Which is what I pointed out...

[Tiri]

Oh. I thought you were specifying that it had to be said three times, which would be an odd thing to point out given the circumstances.

[Red Fel]

Someone who usually has very interesting insights on the LE alignment and it's corresponding afterlife is Red Fel. Red Fel has written a number of posts on the subject. Just use the search function to find posts by Red Fel.

Yeah, yeah, I'm here.

Here's the thing - I don't really feel the need to persuade the OP. Here's why.

To appreciate the LE afterlife requires a certain mindset. That mindset involves, specifically, an appreciation for meritocracy. And make no mistake, that's what the LE afterlife is.

The Evil afterlives, generally, are suited to the sort of person who arrives there naturally. The CE afterlife is an ongoing brawl where the strong dominate and the weak are crushed. The NE afterlife is a wasteland where the opportunistic are rewarded with the briefest of respites, and the ruthless have opportunities to seize.

The LE afterlife rewards industry, cunning, ambition, and politicking. For those who excel in those areas, it is a paradise. True, an LG afterlife might have similarly meritocratic advancement, but such advancement generally depends on raising yourself, not lowering your rivals. And that's what LE is - bringing yourself up by bringing others lower. Those with the skill and ambition can rise, if they know how to play to their superiors and subjugate their lessers. It works really well for a personality like that.

But yeah. If that ain't you, you just won't see it.

[Florian]

So, it's my impression or to die LE is really a bad deal?

Don´t let christians work on a rather neutral RPG. Hell and what the bible calls hell are different matters.

[ZeroiaSD]

Reading through the Neutral Evil afterlife in Pathfinder, Abaddon, it really does suck plenty.

Sure, you *may* have your soul destroyed relatively fast, but many become hunted, who live existences of betrayal and fear for a long time, before eventually they reach a state where they transform.

Going from your initial fall to becoming a daemon is a long, slow, horrible process (which sounds like it's the longest of any petitioner-to-alignment-creature process, taking centuries) where you're in a much higher state than a Lemure.

[daremetoidareyo]

OP, I think you may simply be more personally chaotic oriented, and thus can't appreciate the empire of baator. Baator is a land of SYSTEMIC EVIL. Of course it's the worst. Those two traits paired together, in the real world of life are like the worst two traits to put together.

The thing is, like Red Fel stipulated, Hell is enjoyable and makes sense to the people who are thrust there. There is security in that. You can trust your fellow petitioners to follow their scripts. And if they don't, you get to hurt them. You aren't obligated to, you get to.

The abyss is similar, minus the security of any heirarchy, kin, obligation, or other things. CE is absolution through emotional outburst. The description of the manes and the entire demon lifecycle start with absorption by the abyss. You could, theoretically understand the abyss better if you understood not as CE but as C. The evil part is just a word developed by things capable of dying. You see, the abyss has a goal: to trespass. There was literally nothing, and then there was chaos. Chaos just couldn't stand not being where it wasn't wanted. The abyss is the impenetrable quanta of mishap.

And thus, the abyss invented the universe. For all of that order and taxonomy being forced onto the entirety of existence, if the abyss didn't throw it's thermodynamic chemical X into the recipe, we wouldn't have good, evil, or law. You're welcome, guys.

From that understanding, that all barriers must fall. All definitions be muddied. All laws prove arbitrary. From that understanding, the abyss is an unharnessable engine of creation. Which is weird, seeing as the abyss doesn't create anything, it just destroys. That's why when chaos met nothing, it destroyed nothing irrevocably by creating the multiverse. The abyss has regretted it ever since.

When the CE die, they are wiped clean of memories and whatnot because those features are unnecessary. Chaos is inevitable anyway. The struggle that takes place in the abyss, the spawning of demons, is more like the generation of white blood cells. The abyss grows agents of chaos in its body that are capable keeping chaos safe. Individuals that die and enter the abyss become part of that body, like a microbe in the gut of a dire hyena. They do their self interested bit of killing, eating, sleeping, killing, and transforming resources into energy used for the transformation of other resources. But bacteria don't need identity. That stuff is arbitrary. Regardless, Eventually, certain bacteria begin evolving, and adapt to the environment of the abyss. And seeing as now there is so much creation that the abyss must now destroy, it doesn't care. So the short memories of petitioners are purged immediately. And petitioners are into it because they become one with the destructiveness of the abyss. They are a part of the grand cycle.

Some of you will look at these descriptions and think limbo is chaos incarnate. But limbo isn't alive like the abyss is. Limbo isn't invested in breaking existence itself. Limbo is dedicated to the futility of knowledge and pandemonium the futility of reason, Tarterus the futility effort. The abyss is dedicated to the futility of existence.

If the demons take over every plane, toppling mount celestia, razing arborea, teaching modrons to paint in the blood of devils, all of existence returns to a state of terrible nothingness as the fiends just extract every bit of value from those realms for their own dothraki deathcult party shenanigans. Destroying all of that reality will allow chaos itself to be content in the silence of nothingness again...for a little while. The demon death of the multiverse followed by another abyssoliptic big bang.

[Necroticplague]

OP, I think you may simply be more personally chaotic oriented, and thus can't appreciate the empire of baator. Baator is a land of SYSTEMIC EVIL. Of course it's the worst. Those two traits paired together, in the real world of life are like the worst two traits to put together.

The thing is, like Red Fel stipulated, Hell is enjoyable and makes sense to the people who are thrust there. There is security in that. You can trust your fellow petitioners to follow their scripts. And if they don't, you get to hurt them. You aren't obligated to, you get to.

The abyss is similar, minus the security of any heirarchy, kin, obligation, or other things.

Actually, the Abyss does have hierarchies. The very basic operatings of Evil require that there is one, so that one can define their own success by the movement up said heirarchy while knocking everyone else down. Just as your have Dukes and Duchesses of Hell, you have Demon Lords and Princes of the Abyss. It's simply that the Abyss has only one rule: Might Makes Right. A Demonic group is not held together by any form of trust or rules, but merely pants-s******* fear of whoever is in charge. Loyalty for a demon is not any form of respect, but an example of mutual exploitation that only lasts as long as both find the other useful. A Demonic ruler is a brutal warlord who terrorizes his own subjects to make sure the remaining ones don't have the spine or numbers to attempt a coup (which will happen, should he waver for but a moment). The emotional outburst is simply one of the many rights of the strong to lash out as they please.

[Zanos]

If you worship a LE deity, don't you go to their divine realm on your death, rather than Baator?

Some of the LE deities aren't that awful. Off of the top of my head, Hextor's isn't too bad if you're into the kind of stuff that gets you worshiping him in the first place.

[Illven]

It works really well for a personality like that.

But yeah. If that ain't you, you just won't see it.

But what if one is a chaotic sort, and hates the natural afterlives typically described in CG afterlives?

[daremetoidareyo]

But what if one is a chaotic sort, and hates the natural afterlives typically described in CG afterlives?

Go travelling. Or build a log cabin in the woods and when people get too ornery, shout at them and wag your sawed off around.

[Thealtruistorc]

To appreciate the LE afterlife requires a certain mindset. That mindset involves, specifically, an appreciation for meritocracy. And make no mistake, that's what the LE afterlife is.

The Evil afterlives, generally, are suited to the sort of person who arrives there naturally. The CE afterlife is an ongoing brawl where the strong dominate and the weak are crushed. The NE afterlife is a wasteland where the opportunistic are rewarded with the briefest of respites, and the ruthless have opportunities to seize.

The LE afterlife rewards industry, cunning, ambition, and politicking. For those who excel in those areas, it is a paradise. True, an LG afterlife might have similarly meritocratic advancement, but such advancement generally depends on raising yourself, not lowering your rivals. And that's what LE is - bringing yourself up by bringing others lower. Those with the skill and ambition can rise, if they know how to play to their superiors and subjugate their lessers. It works really well for a personality like that.

For once, I agree with Red Fel on something. The premise of sinners being tortured for their transgressions in life doesn't really carry over to a multiverse in which every god wants the best and brightest mortals working for them (think Silicon Valley companies, but on a cosmic scale).

So what is the intent behind brutalizing the people who are cast into the pits of damnation? The answer is to toughen them up. If you want an edge against your divine opponents, you won’t settle for a cushy spoiled LE prince who coasted by on his father’s advances, or for a lucky hoodlum who simply lasted long enough to get a couple kills under his belt. If you are going to forge an army worthy enough to challenge the planes, you need to make sure that every soul in your service has the guts, intellect, and most importantly endurance worthy of a planar exemplar.

You want to make the ultimate LE, subject them to a crushing order and make sure they understand why failure or dishonor is never an option. To make the ultimate NE, teach them that cruelty is the only thing that will offer them solace or advancement. To make the ultimate CE, teach them that nothing is worth keeping in life and that desolation is the closest thing that they will ever have to salvation. Mortals can be taught to be extreme, and pain is the most effective magister there is.

[Illven]

Go travelling. Or build a log cabin in the woods and when people get too ornery, shout at them and wag your sawed off around.

The second one. The second one sounds good.

If I had any construction knowledge.

[tadkins]

For once, I agree with Red Fel on something. The premise of sinners being tortured for their transgressions in life doesn't really carry over to a multiverse in which every god wants the best and brightest mortals working for them (think Silicon Valley companies, but on a cosmic scale).



Interesting. What about the Good afterlives though? I doubt they'd strengthen their folks with the same methods as the Evil ones.

[Tiri]

Interesting. What about the Good afterlives though? I doubt they'd strengthen their folks with the same methods as the Evil ones.

Well, they would probably do it through more Good methods, like sending them to do charity work or some other helping-people oriented activity. Things that would strengthen their motives to be Good.

[Bohandas]

Yeah, yeah, I'm here.

Here's the thing - I don't really feel the need to persuade the OP. Here's why.

To appreciate the LE afterlife requires a certain mindset. That mindset involves, specifically, an appreciation for meritocracy. And make no mistake, that's what the LE afterlife is.

The Evil afterlives, generally, are suited to the sort of person who arrives there naturally. The CE afterlife is an ongoing brawl where the strong dominate and the weak are crushed. The NE afterlife is a wasteland where the opportunistic are rewarded with the briefest of respites, and the ruthless have opportunities to seize.

The LE afterlife rewards industry, cunning, ambition, and politicking. For those who excel in those areas, it is a paradise. True, an LG afterlife might have similarly meritocratic advancement, but such advancement generally depends on raising yourself, not lowering your rivals. And that's what LE is - bringing yourself up by bringing others lower. Those with the skill and ambition can rise, if they know how to play to their superiors and subjugate their lessers. It works really well for a personality like that.

But yeah. If that ain't you, you just won't see it.

That doesn't totally scan with the baatezu's practice of reforging all new arrivals to be absolutely identical.

[tadkins]

Well, they would probably do it through more Good methods, like sending them to do charity work or some other helping-people oriented activity. Things that would strengthen their motives to be Good.

Their motives and mindset, sure, but probably not their raw power. In a multiverse where each alignment afterlife is struggling for dominance, isn't strength and power the only thing each side is aiming for?

[Necroticplague]

That doesn't totally scan with the baatezu's practice of reforging all new arrivals to be absolutely identical.

An unpleasant side effect of this whole "blood war" thing going on. Hell needs to quickly replenish it's supply of devils to keep up with the ever-spawning legions of the Abyss. Lemures are the basic grist for the mill of the war machine, the blood with which the cogs of Hell's Army are lubricated.

That being said, the fact that some lemures manage to be promoted seems to indicate they aren't absolutely identical, just relatively. There's still some spark that sets those who end up being promoted to something better that sets them apart from their millions of comrades-in-arms. Think of lemurism as a bit like boot camp: Part one is to break someone down, part two is to build them up into a more ideal soldier. In this case, lemurism is the breaking down, occurring on a nightmarishly literal level. The hellish conditions of, well, Hell perform part two, sculpting those who has what it takes into better devils. Those who don't make the cut will die in an incredibly permanent manner. If you manage to make it back from your service in the Blood War with anything left, you've proven you got what it takes to be a proper citizen of Hell.


Well, they would probably do it through more Good methods, like sending them to do charity work or some other helping-people oriented activity. Things that would strengthen their motives to be Good.


Their motives and mindset, sure, but probably not their raw power. In a multiverse where each alignment afterlife is struggling for dominance, isn't strength and power the only thing each side is aiming for?

Easy: fighting evil. The good fight the Evil for practice, the Evil fight each other for dominance. Keep in mind that one of the larger planar conflicts is between Hell and the Abyss, which does an excellent job of draining the resources of both, so the Upper Planes don't need to have massive armies of celestials like the Lower Planes have for fiends.

(And now I have the most hilarious image up some higher Celestial acting like I do while playing X-COM. "Hmmm...this looks like an easy one, I'll send in my Lantern Archons so they can get some practice. Though in case there's anything higher than a Mane, they'll be supervized by a Solar who probably could do this all on his own if she cared to.).

[Tiri]

Their motives and mindset, sure, but probably not their raw power. In a multiverse where each alignment afterlife is struggling for dominance, isn't strength and power the only thing each side is aiming for?

Well, brutalising LE's doesn't increase their raw power either, only their motive for gaining said raw power. So while the LE gets more motivation to gain power so he can stamp others into the dirt, the LG (or NG or CG) is motivated to gain power so he can fight evil or help the sick or perpetrate whatever form of good he wants to.

[tadkins]

Well, brutalising LE's doesn't increase their raw power either, only their motive for gaining said raw power. So while the LE gets more motivation to gain power so he can stamp others into the dirt, the LG (or NG or CG) is motivated to gain power so he can fight evil or help the sick or perpetrate whatever form of good he wants to.

The above poster described the LE afterlife as a "bootcamp", hardening and strengthening the ones that end up there through their harsh methods.

Just seems like, as described, LE would run roughshod all over the Gs if it came down to a confrontation. You've got an army of beaten, brutalized, but ultimately hardened merciless soldiers vs a bunch of peaceful pacifist hippies (and maybe a few paladin-types).

[Gildedragon]

The above poster described the LE afterlife as a "bootcamp", hardening and strengthening the ones that end up there through their harsh methods.

Just seems like, as described, LE would run roughshod all over the Gs if it came down to a confrontation. You've got an army of beaten, brutalized, but ultimately hardened merciless soldiers vs a bunch of peaceful pacifist hippies (and maybe a few paladin-types).

Good tends towards solidarity and selflessness: sacrificing oneself for the greater victory, personal glory and advancement isn't thought of. Evil is less prone to that sort of maneuver, and thus tends to play it safer, going for lower personal risk and greater personal glory. Yes the generals of Evil might send their hordes into the slaughtering pit, but a) they never commit fully, just in case their 'allies' turn on them and b) they don't get much involved in the fray, leaving their hordes without vital support.
The Generals of Good, on the other hand, trust that their allies won't backstab them and thus commit their forces fully (within their battle plan) and will give them all the support they need (including wading into the fray themselves).

[tadkins]

Good tends towards solidarity and selflessness: sacrificing oneself for the greater victory, personal glory and advancement isn't thought of. Evil is less prone to that sort of maneuver, and thus tends to play it safer, going for lower personal risk and greater personal glory. Yes the generals of Evil might send their hordes into the slaughtering pit, but a) they never commit fully, just in case their 'allies' turn on them and b) they don't get much involved in the fray, leaving their hordes without vital support.
The Generals of Good, on the other hand, trust that their allies won't backstab them and thus commit their forces fully (within their battle plan) and will give them all the support they need (including wading into the fray themselves).

Fair point. A LG/CG alliance would certainly be a lot more stable than a LE/CE one I'd imagine.

Just wanted to make sure both sides would be on an even footing if it ever came down to it.

[Tiri]

The above poster described the LE afterlife as a "bootcamp", hardening and strengthening the ones that end up there through their harsh methods.

Just seems like, as described, LE would run roughshod all over the Gs if it came down to a confrontation. You've got an army of beaten, brutalized, but ultimately hardened merciless soldiers vs a bunch of peaceful pacifist hippies (and maybe a few paladin-types).

Well, I think it was more intended to mean a sort of psychological abuse of the LEs. Show them why gaining power is important. After all, many LEs are physically weak and cowardly, even devils. Yet they are no less LE for it. They still have the same reason for gaining power, just that the means of getting it and usage of such power may differ slightly.

Similarly pacifist hippies are just a small percentage of Gs. Good can actually put it's recruits through just as demanding a process as Evil. Good doesn't mean nice, after all. The reasons the Good people do what they do will be vastly different, however. The Good people might be taken to help those who had suffered under Evil, and see their suffering. That would give them a reason to fight it.

[Tiri]

Good tends towards solidarity and selflessness: sacrificing oneself for the greater victory, personal glory and advancement isn't thought of. Evil is less prone to that sort of maneuver, and thus tends to play it safer, going for lower personal risk and greater personal glory. Yes the generals of Evil might send their hordes into the slaughtering pit, but a) they never commit fully, just in case their 'allies' turn on them and b) they don't get much involved in the fray, leaving their hordes without vital support.
The Generals of Good, on the other hand, trust that their allies won't backstab them and thus commit their forces fully (within their battle plan) and will give them all the support they need (including wading into the fray themselves).

Although if the Evil army is mostly LE they would probably be able to count on each other as much as most Good people. After all, Law is known for its dependability.

[Gildedragon]

Although if the Evil army is mostly LE they would probably be able to count on each other as much as most Good people. After all, Law is known for its dependability.

One can count that one's underlings will do as one tells them; and that one's peers will do as their master tells them, but one cannot (and should not) count on them helping one if one is in trouble... if they do it will be because one asked a higher up for aid. Aid might come, but it will be at a price: dishonor, shame, and some manner of punishment to say the least.
Hell, the aid might come just too late to save one, but early enough that the reinforcements look good and powerful; or too late to prevent defeat, but early enough to look as if the reinforcements did all that was possible (and the defeat is one's fault), all the while keeping the reinforcer's power nearly intact, and one's decimated.

[Tiri]

One can count that one's underlings will do as one tells them; and that one's peers will do as their master tells them, but one cannot (and should not) count on them helping one if one is in trouble... if they do it will be because one asked a higher up for aid. Aid might come, but it will be at a price: dishonor, shame, and some manner of punishment to say the least.
Hell, the aid might come just too late to save one, but early enough that the reinforcements look good and powerful; or too late to prevent defeat, but early enough to look as if the reinforcements did all that was possible (and the defeat is one's fault), all the while keeping the reinforcer's power nearly intact, and one's decimated.

Loyalty is not inherently Good. Evil people can be as loyal and respectful towards one another as Good people can. Evil doesn't have to be as self-destructive as you describe. Evil people can have positive relationships with each other. Not ones that work exactly as Good positive relationships do, but positive nonetheless.

[tadkins]

Similarly pacifist hippies are just a small percentage of Gs. Good can actually put it's recruits through just as demanding a process as Evil. Good doesn't mean nice, after all. The reasons the Good people do what they do will be vastly different, however. The Good people might be taken to help those who had suffered under Evil, and see their suffering. That would give them a reason to fight it.

Fair point. I think their training regiment would be more about building up than grinding down. That's more of a Good trait.

[Florian]

My impression is that some designers simply screwed things up when working on the lower planes and on some of the evil deities.

Most of us come from a cultural background where the topic of afterlife and the reward-punishment-duality are the big thing and are strictly coupled and deeply ingrained.

So the idea as supported by the great wheel cosmology that every afterlife is a reward in its own right and its a POV-thing whether it can be seen as a punishment, being based on where exactly one stands.
I guess its that fundamental thing that some designers either didn´t understand themselves or intentionally avoided based on the implication that evil will be rewarded in equal measures to doing good.
(It´s not like the satanic scare did´t happen, right?)

There´s enough stuff there that actually doesn´t make sense, like the followers of a sadistic deity being tortured for all eternity or, like the case of Hell, an alignment based on a mix of dominance and compliance being forced into a submissive role.

A rough look at other alignment afterlifes actually shows similar disparities. There´re enough there that actually don´t seem to be a reward at all.

[Necroticplague]

Fair point. A LG/CG alliance would certainly be a lot more stable than a LE/CE one I'd imagine.

Just wanted to make sure both sides would be on an even footing if it ever came down to it.

Well, for one things, as far as I know, the CG and LG forces are in a rather tense union of sorts, while the LE and CE outsiders are currently engaged in one of the biggest wars in the history of anything (The Blood War I mentioned in a previous post). So this appears to be true at least by default.

[Florian]

Well, for one things, as far as I know, the CG and LG forces are in a rather tense union of sorts, while the LE and CE outsiders are currently engaged in one of the biggest wars in the history of anything (The Blood War I mentioned in a previous post). So this appears to be true at least by default.

It would be weird if it were any different. LG would have more common ground with LN than with CG and all that.

[Bohandas]

Fair point. A LG/CG alliance would certainly be a lot more stable than a LE/CE one I'd imagine.

Just wanted to make sure both sides would be on an even footing if it ever came down to it.


Well, for one things, as far as I know, the CG and LG forces are in a rather tense union of sorts, while the LE and CE outsiders are currently engaged in one of the biggest wars in the history of anything (The Blood War I mentioned in a previous post). So this appears to be true at least by default.

As a semi-interisting aside, accprding to Fiendish Codex 1 there was at one point a CG/CE alliance until one day the Queen of Chaos (ruler of the obryith demons) got it into her head that it would be fun to hunt eladrin children for sport.


My impression is that some designers simply screwed things up when working on the lower planes and on some of the evil deities.

Most of us come from a cultural background where the topic of afterlife and the reward-punishment-duality are the big thing and are strictly coupled and deeply ingrained.

So the idea as supported by the great wheel cosmology that every afterlife is a reward in its own right and its a POV-thing whether it can be seen as a punishment, being based on where exactly one stands.
I guess its that fundamental thing that some designers either didn´t understand themselves or intentionally avoided based on the implication that evil will be rewarded in equal measures to doing good.
(It´s not like the satanic scare did´t happen, right?)

There´s enough stuff there that actually doesn´t make sense, like the followers of a sadistic deity being tortured for all eternity or, like the case of Hell, an alignment based on a mix of dominance and compliance being forced into a submissive role.

A rough look at other alignment afterlifes actually shows similar disparities. There´re enough there that actually don´t seem to be a reward at all.

I got more the impression that they were neither reward nor punishment, just a distillation of the nature of that particular alignment, with whatever consequences that may entail (with the exception of the Nine Hells which, other than the badlands outside of Baatezu control, are explicitly a place of punishment accordig to Fiendish Codex 2)


Loyalty is not inherently Good. Evil people can be as loyal and respectful towards one another as Good people can. Evil doesn't have to be as self-destructive as you describe. Evil people can have positive relationships with each other. Not ones that work exactly as Good positive relationships do, but positive nonetheless.

Yeah, there's plenty of people who are loyal to ISIS or Kim Jong Un or to the KKK.

[Seto]

Loyalty is not inherently Good. Evil people can be as loyal and respectful towards one another as Good people can. Evil doesn't have to be as self-destructive as you describe. Evil people can have positive relationships with each other. Not ones that work exactly as Good positive relationships do, but positive nonetheless.

Evil people, yeah. Evil characters that you play, because they're still human(oid) and, no matter how far off they've gone, they always have the possibility of Good left within them. They have nuance.
Fiends ain't people. They're Evil incarnate.

[Gildedragon]

Evil people, yeah. Evil characters that you play, because they're still human(oid) and, no matter how far off they've gone, they always have the possibility of Good left within them. They have nuance.
Fiends ain't people. They're Evil incarnate.

Fiends might come to develop some goodness in them: come to care for others, etc etc, just as Celestials might become tainted with evil. But that behavior is exceptional, and I expect a fiend that realizes they've started to care for the wellbeing of others tries to excise that uncomfortable, dirty, feeling from themselves as fast as they can lest it bring them down.

[ZeroiaSD]

On Good working together- they may have no backstab worries per *se*, but they do have friction.

CG may decide taking an opportunity is better than sticking to a plan, that disobeying orders may be the thing to do. They can chaff against orders, disagreements over who's in command, outright squabbles, and the knowledge that they don't generally actually *like* Archons and do clash with them in some circumstances- there's been grand Law vs Chaos wars in the past too.

And, conversely, an Evil one can be surprisingly stable because both evil hordes know their boss *wants* this and their unwillingness to risk pissing off their bosses on something major (most alliances likely to be something major). Sure, they may expect to have to turn on their allies after, but they can have it properly prioritized.

Also, it is possible for fiends to fall in twisted kinds of love and friendship with each other. A devil and demon who's portfolios overlap can respect- or maybe not respect, acknowledge?- each other's strength and brutality and get a sense *when* that other one would turn and feel somewhat comfortable with them. Now, they can guess wrong in that, but it's happened.



Actually, the Abyss does have hierarchies. The very basic operatings of Evil require that there is one, so that one can define their own success by the movement up said heirarchy while knocking everyone else down. Just as your have Dukes and Duchesses of Hell, you have Demon Lords and Princes of the Abyss. It's simply that the Abyss has only one rule: Might Makes Right. A Demonic group is not held together by any form of trust or rules, but merely pants-s******* fear of whoever is in charge. Loyalty for a demon is not any form of respect, but an example of mutual exploitation that only lasts as long as both find the other useful. A Demonic ruler is a brutal warlord who terrorizes his own subjects to make sure the remaining ones don't have the spine or numbers to attempt a coup (which will happen, should he waver for but a moment). The emotional outburst is simply one of the many rights of the strong to lash out as they please.


I wouldn't say that. Consider, Demons also have succubus rulers. Graz'zt and Baphomet are manipulators.

In the Abyss, lords are powerful because they've managed to gain power by any and all means, often physical, but can be social as well. All they care about is that you've earned your power and will exercise it, not how you earned it or what type it is.

[Tiri]

Evil people, yeah. Evil characters that you play, because they're still human(oid) and, no matter how far off they've gone, they always have the possibility of Good left within them. They have nuance.
Fiends ain't people. They're Evil incarnate.

If the traits that I mentioned were Good, then you would be right. However, they are not. Some kinds of respect, maybe, but not all. Loyalty, especially, is a Lawful trait, not a Good one, and devils (since this thread is about LE) are Law and Evil incarnate.

[Seto]

If the traits that I mentioned were Good, then you would be right. However, they are not. Some kinds of respect, maybe, but not all. Loyalty, especially, is a Lawful trait, not a Good one, and devils (since this thread is about LE) are Law and Evil incarnate.

Agreed. It's just that the "kinds of respect" that are positive and non-self-destructive (or generally destructive, really), as I see it, don't belong with the Evil side of things. I'll readily admit that Devils can be loyal, devoted, or even honorable - just not in the sense that we generally mean and accept as positive.

[Tiri]

Agreed. It's just that the "kinds of respect" that are positive and non-self-destructive (or generally destructive, really), as I see it, don't belong with the Evil side of things. I'll readily admit that Devils can be loyal, devoted, or even honorable - just not in the sense that we generally mean and accept as positive.

Well, my original point was that those qualities are what would keep a diabolic army from dissolving in a pool of Stupid Evil backstabbing, which I think those qualities would allow for.

[Florian]

I got more the impression that they were neither reward nor punishment, just a distillation of the nature of that particular alignment, with whatever consequences that may entail (with the exception of the Nine Hells which, other than the badlands outside of Baatezu control, are explicitly a place of punishment accordig to Fiendish Codex 2)

It doesn´t. Each alignment on its own should be "best" and practitioners of that alignment should gain equal reward. That doesn´t happen.

[Seto]

Well, my original point was that those qualities are what would keep a diabolic army from dissolving in a pool of Stupid Evil backstabbing, which I think those qualities would allow for.

Oh, sure, you can count on your diabolic allies to perform their military role. They'll never lose sight of the big picture like Demons might. They'll respect hierarchy, and follow your orders to the letter. They won't literally stab you in the back, they'll stand with you, withstand the assault, and win the battle.
But if they find a way to screw you over without technically disobeying you and without impacting the larger battle, they probably will. Especially if it makes you look the fool, makes them look smart, and marks them for promotion. That's why I'm challenging your claim that "they would probably be able to count on each other as much as most Good people". In a limited, military sense, that's true. But they still need to keep on eye on each other, in a way that the celestial armies would never need to.

That's the beauty of LE. They screw each other over all the time, and it still advances their cause. The whole doesn't suffer. LE is at the same time the exaltation of the self at the detriment of others (Evil) and the exaltation of the whole (Law). In a very real sense, their internal quarrels actually serve their common cause, because they're contained, but just barely, pushed to the extreme point of tension, where selfishness manifests as competition. To be as self-serving as possible while at the same time serving the Nine Hells, that is the honor of a Devil.

[Tiri]

Oh, sure, you can count on your diabolic allies to perform their military role. They'll never lose sight of the big picture like Demons might. They'll respect hierarchy, and follow your orders to the letter. They won't literally stab you in the back, they'll stand with you, withstand the assault, and win the battle.
But if they find a way to screw you over without technically disobeying you and without impacting the larger battle, they probably will. Especially if it makes you look the fool, makes them look smart, and marks them for promotion. That's why I'm challenging your claim that "they would probably be able to count on each other as much as most Good people". In a limited, military sense, that's true. But they still need to keep on eye on each other, in a way that the celestial armies would never need to.

That's the beauty of LE. They screw each other over all the time, and it still advances their cause. The whole doesn't suffer. LE is at the same time the exaltation of the self at the detriment of others (Evil) and the exaltation of the whole (Law). In a very real sense, their internal quarrels actually serve their common cause, because they're contained, but just barely, pushed to the extreme point of tension, where selfishness manifests as competition. To be as self-serving as possible while at the same time serving the Nine Hells, that is the honor of a Devil.

I agree with most of that. I was talking more about counting on each other to help achieve the army's ultimate goal, whatever it might be, which:


too late to prevent defeat, but early enough to look as if the reinforcements did all that was possible (and the defeat is one's fault), all the while keeping the reinforcer's power nearly intact, and one's decimated.

Seemed to run counter to.

[Florian]

I agree with most of that. I was talking more about counting on each other to help achieve the army's ultimate goal

Each alignment represents an ultimate cosmic truth and is, in itself, absolutely right.
You´re making the error that something like "counting on each other" is a good and positive thing for everyone and should hold true for every alignment.

[Tiri]

Each alignment represents an ultimate cosmic truth and is, in itself, absolutely right.
You´re making the error that something like "counting on each other" is a good and positive thing for everyone and should hold true for every alignment.

No, but it holds true for LE. Not so much in a personal way-little feuds and betrayals can still arise, but an army of true LEs would never intentionally do anything that would endanger the success of the army as a whole.

[Michael7123]

Each alignment represents an ultimate cosmic truth and is, in itself, absolutely right.
You´re making the error that something like "counting on each other" is a good and positive thing for everyone and should hold true for every alignment.

... I'm not so sure that this is true. Putting aside my qualms about moral relativism for a moment, much of what evil alignments do is incredibly self destructive and even damages their own causes.

Think about it. In most DND and pathfinder settings, good deities get more followers than evil ones- largely because most people like to be around clerics who can spontaneously use healing magic- and want to heal them to boot. When the other side uses items with names such as the Rod of Incarnate Treachery, that tends to put most people off a bit.

Besides, it's commonly implied or outright stated in many sources that the reason the lower planes haven't all but steamrolled the upper planes is because of the blood war- Demons can't get past their hatred of any type of order to work with the devils, and the devils have to keep pumping their Lemurs into the blood war to hold of the demons. They're hands are tied.

I was talking with one of my friends once, and the topic of removing one outer plane from the cosmology came up. I suggested the Abyss or the Nine hells, and immediately realized how awful that would be. Remove either one of those things, and the fiends will direct their attention towards the upper planes. And I would rather not have that.

This is compounded even further when you look at the abyss itself- if the entire Abyss were united, the Nine Hells- and the rest of the multiverse shortly thereafter- would likely be steamrolled. But they can never band together for long enough to do any real damage to the Nine Hells. The lord of the First manages to prevent demon incursions from ever getting past the first layer.

Chaotic evil is inherently hamstringing the goals that chaotic evil has- accruing individual power. That's why Lawful evil seems so attractive in comparison. To paraphrase wiser man than I: "A bent human can do evil than a broken one." Chaotic evil's total insistence on being utterly selfish is their own downfall.

Say what you will about lawful evil. They at least have the common sense to think "Hmmm, maybe betraying my allies- which would result in me being the king, but reduce everything we have to ashes- is a bad trade." They are willing to not have everything for themselves immediately. Sure, they want everything, of course. They're evil. But they want to have something worthwhile to rule once they ultimately wind up sitting on the throne.

[Bohandas]

Actually, the Abyss does have hierarchies. The very basic operatings of Evil require that there is one, so that one can define their own success by the movement up said heirarchy while knocking everyone else down. Just as your have Dukes and Duchesses of Hell, you have Demon Lords and Princes of the Abyss. It's simply that the Abyss has only one rule: Might Makes Right. A Demonic group is not held together by any form of trust or rules, but merely pants-s******* fear of whoever is in charge. Loyalty for a demon is not any form of respect, but an example of mutual exploitation that only lasts as long as both find the other useful. A Demonic ruler is a brutal warlord who terrorizes his own subjects to make sure the remaining ones don't have the spine or numbers to attempt a coup (which will happen, should he waver for but a moment). The emotional outburst is simply one of the many rights of the strong to lash out as they please.

I wouldn't say that. Consider, Demons also have succubus rulers. Graz'zt and Baphomet are manipulators.

In the Abyss, lords are powerful because they've managed to gain power by any and all means, often physical, but can be social as well. All they care about is that you've earned your power and will exercise it, not how you earned it or what type it is.

Well, my original point was that those qualities are what would keep a diabolic army from dissolving in a pool of Stupid Evil backstabbing, which I think those qualities would allow for.

My opinion on this is that most demon lords must have something to their authority other than the threat of retribution. Or to be more exact, they must control their minions by something other than authority. The Abyss and it's inhabitants are both chaotic and evil, and among such people in such a place any authority, whether it originates from might, from heritage, or from a vote, can extend no further than the range of the holder's longest range spell. 400+40*HD+1 feet or furtner from the lord any order issued will be answered with the middle finger. Power, influence, and control comes from accumulation of souls who are after the same ending anyway, from the accumulation of fanboys and groupies, from the willingness of others to help plans along out of morbid curiousity about wbere it's all going, and from rubberneckers who want to see the next person get killed by tgis creature, even if it means a chance that it might be them.

As for the Blood War, I see the hordes of the abyss treating it exactly as if it was a sport or a game. Going to war for the fun of it.

(You can get a rough feel for the mindset by listening to GWAR songs, especially "War is All We Know", "Go To Hell", and "The Song of Words"



It doesn´t. Each alignment on its own should be "best" and practitioners of that alignment should gain equal reward. That doesn´t happen.

Well the idea I got was that the lower planes are generally bad, but not because it's a place of punishment, but because hell is other people



Yes, almost mindless.

But, and it's a huge difference, Mane's become immediately almost mindless petitioners, while LE souls becomes Lemures only after being tortured, being fully conscious and intelligent all the while.

Yes, a Mane could be tortured and devoured, but it's described as an almost-mindless being with no memory or survival instinct. I could argue that his ability to suffer is largely inferior to that of a human ( or even a mammal like a dog or a monkey ).

IIRC some versions have it that some abyssal petitioners suffer similar deliberately conscious conversion at the hands of the Lords of Woe

[Florian]

... I'm not so sure that this is true. Putting aside my qualms about moral relativism for a moment, much of what evil alignments do is incredibly self destructive and even damages their own causes.

That is part of the problem we face in this discussion. We´re not talking about moral relativism but rather about ideologies and their status as proven to be true or untrue.

To make this work, each ideology must be true in their own methodology and successfully grow and thrive following its own tenets. The final truth can only be shown by achieving complete dominance and eradication of all other contenders, something we know cannot happen because the Multiverse will always stay in balance or immediately cease to exist.

So a core problem here is having a hard time showcasing how sticking to an ideology actually is advantageous to that ideology. For example, we generally lack the knowledge of what the cited self-destructive tendencies of Evil will have as overall gains by being true to itself.

(Continued with the next quote)


Well the idea I got was that the lower planes are generally bad, but not because it's a place of punishment, but because hell is other people

Take a look at the common themes of the alignments axises:

L: "Together, we stand".
N: "Adaptive, we thrive".
C: "Divided, we grow".

G: "Common goals serve everyone".
N: "What happens, happens.".
E: "My goals serve everyone".

The truth of the "lower planes" is that they´re equality right as the "upper planes" or any other alignment axis until the final victory of one sides would prove otherwise.

The problem we face is that we lack the means to integrate that cosmic truth into the game because we a) ought to play the good guys and b) model things based on game balance instead of cosmic balance.

Stuff like the Blood War simply showcase a bad case of moral bankruptcy. The moment you fail to explain why LG is not equal or better than CE or CG is not equal or better than LE, you actually do have a problem.

[Bohandas]

1.) I disagree with that assesment of the theme of evil

2.) Silling doesn't work without the victims

[Florian]

1.) I disagree with that assesment of the theme of evil

2.) Silling doesn't work without the victims

Do yourself the favor and get comfy with both, abstract philosophy and real politics. For example by reading Plato, Confucius, Nietzsche and Machiavelli.

By mentioning victims, you work on a ready-made cultural bias that is ideology-based and has yet to be found true. Unless you can give irrefutable proof on that, drop it.

[Bohandas]

Defining evil as "my goals serve everyone" is a straight up Big Brother level contradiction, on par with "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery"

[Michael7123]

Take a look at the common themes of the alignments axises:

L: "Together, we stand".
N: "Adaptive, we thrive".
C: "Divided, we grow".

G: "Common goals serve everyone".
N: "What happens, happens.".
E: "My goals serve everyone".


I'm going to disagree with most of these assessments

L: This is mostly true as a base statement, but fails to take into account concepts such as discipline, orderliness, and other aspects of being lawful

N: I'll grant you this as being fairly accurate.

C: Even chaotic are capable of standing together. It might be better to characterize C as "to each their own". Even that allows for people to work together should the situation call for it.

G: This is kind of true, but every alignment can be willing to work to common goals when it does truely benifit them. A better maxim would be "For the wellbeing of others, regardless the cost to the self."

N: like the other N, I agree with you here.

E: This is way off the mark. Admittedly, they often use this argument as a justification, but it's nothing more than a cover. What would best describe an evil alignment is "My goals serve me. I care not about the rest." Any benifit gained by others as a result of evil (well, at least neutral evil) is incidental. Even in cases of a NE just giving someone a gift is because the other person has somehow, against all odds, made their happiness a prerequisite for the happiness of the giver.

As a cavieat to this, this does not mean no evil person is capable of acts of goodness or self sacrafice when it doesn't benifit them. But this is a deficiency in their evil, not an example of it. Just like a otherwise good person who walks by a homeless child on the street doesn't become NE if he doesn't give her money- he might not get an alignment shift from that act, but that act in of itself is not good.


The truth of the "lower planes" is that they´re equality right as the "upper planes" or any other alignment axis until the final victory of one sides would prove otherwise.

Okay, I'm going to have to ask you to define what exactly you mean by truth here.


The problem we face is that we lack the means to integrate that cosmic truth into the game because we a) ought to play the good guys and b) model things based on game balance instead of cosmic balance.

Stuff like the Blood War simply showcase a bad case of moral bankruptcy. The moment you fail to explain why LG is not equal or better than CE or CG is not equal or better than LE, you actually do have a problem.

I guess the crux of the matter would be this then: do you think it's possible to even explain why any moral view is superior to another? I for one think the argument is faily self apparent.


Do yourself the favor and get comfy with both, abstract philosophy and real politics. For example by reading Plato, Confucius, Nietzsche and Machiavelli.

By mentioning victims, you work on a ready-made cultural bias that is ideology-based and has yet to be found true. Unless you can give irrefutable proof on that, drop it.

As someone who has read some works by 3 out of 4 of those individuals, I can assure you that at the very least, Plato was not really an advocate of what you consider "abstract philosophy". If by "abstract philosophy", you mean moral relativism. If that's not what you mean, by all means correct me.

As for politics, well, that's my major. May I reccomend Aristotle and (to a lesser extent) Kant as counterpoints to Nietzsche and Machiavelli? The idea of ruling that actually benifits those who are ruled - and that there don't have to be any victims in the first place- has been around for a very long time.

[Florian]

Defining evil as "my goals serve everyone" is a straight up Big Brother level contradiction, on par with "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery"

And they have yet to be found wrong. That is the underlying problem here, our POV and upbringing that we want them to be wrong.

[Michael7123]

And they have yet to be found wrong. That is the underlying problem here, our POV and upbringing that we want them to be wrong.

Alright, I can give a example of why defining evil as "my goals serve everyone" is blatantly wrong.

Say you were to walk out of your house, go to your neighbors house, and kill everyone inside. I'm faily certain this would fall under the category of an evil action by DND standards, assuming your neighbors aren't truely wretched people. And even then, this action would likely not be justified.

Would this serve your neighbors in any way? Of course not. You killed them.

If by "everyone", you mean all human beings, this statement is false. Beacause your goals (engaging in bloodlust for the hell of it, clearly an evil act) would not serve to benifit those who you enact bloodlust upon.

[Florian]

@Michael7123:

Answering that bottom to top will provide you with an answer, I think.

The main difference will alway be between the "hard" and "soft" way. Both are true but showcasing the worth of the "soft" way will always be harder than showing the "hard" way.

We live in what can only be termed "evil" societies. Don´t fool yourself at that point, it simply is that way and this forum simply is not the place to discuss this further.
That´s why using real life experience as a neutral data point for this discussion will always prove wrong, as it can only create very distorted pictures concerning "up" or "down" from that point on.

You disagree because I say that under those conditions, say, Fasciscm might be the way to go and prove to be the right thing. The problem at that point is that the system as a game offers some reward mechanics that are divorced from the next higher level and fail to showcase the truth that should be rewarded at this level.

[Michael7123]

Answering that bottom to top will provide you with an answer, I think.

The main difference will alway be between the "hard" and "soft" way. Both are true but showcasing the worth of the "soft" way will always be harder than showing the "hard" way.

Agreed. I just think the "soft" way is truly better, and shows more strength than the hard way is ever capable of.


We live in what can only be termed "evil" societies. Don´t fool yourself at that point, it simply is that way and this forum simply is not the place to discuss this further.

I have no doubt about this. I just think that this can be changed, or at least mitigated, and that people have the obligation to support this process- however few of them actually fulfill it.

Put simply: "Some states of affairs are better than others, and we should work to bring them about."


That´s why using real life experience as a neutral data point for this discussion will always prove wrong, as it can only create very distorted pictures concerning "up" or "down" from that point on.

You disagree because I say that under those conditions, say, Fascism might be the way to go and prove to be the right thing. The problem at that point is that the system as a game offers some reward mechanics that are divorced from the next higher level and fail to showcase the truth that should be rewarded at this level.

Hmmmm.... I'm still not entirely sure what you mean. Are you trying to argue that the only way to discern truth is by looking at the power such beliefs bring about? And as such, since in game lawful goodness doesn't bring about higher levels to it's followers than chaotic evilness, that neither philosophy can be viewed as true?

If I'm wrong in understanding what you're saying, please correct me. Just trying to understand the point your arguing.

[Florian]

@Michael7123:

I´m just pointing out that each alignment-based ideology is fundamentally right and should be treated as equal. When talking about this level of game reality, the sentence of "evil is self-destructive" is fundamentally wrong and should find itself be negated by the rules.

We do have a problem when besides needing to color an alignment-based ideology bad, we do need to have something like the Blood War to explain why the Staus Quo still stands.

[Bohandas]

Plato was not really an advocate of what you consider "abstract philosophy".

He sort of was were it not for his bizarre insistence on the physical existence of things that anyone else would consider abstract.




Now as for the correctness of the alignments, none of them are statements of fact, so they lack a defined truth value. In terms of pragmatism, of what's effective, each is equally correct but this correctness varies across space, working well on their own plane but falling rapidly into fatuousness as distance from the plane increases. The lower planes are unpleadant because they are constructed to allow sadists to freely pursue their vocation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPEbruCZIho), with the necessary result of widespread pain and suffering, even if said suffering is effectively canceled to a neutral balance by fun and excitement. The upper planes are bad too however, because if you take good to an equal extreme you get looneys like this guy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Pearce_(philosopher)), whose writings quite frankly scare me a lot more than anything written by the Zodiac or the Son of Sam

[Red Fel]

Defining evil as "my goals serve everyone" is a straight up Big Brother level contradiction, on par with "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery"

First, obligatory:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-aeN8J48o74A/U00DbB33e6I/AAAAAAAAB6k/Jr4mKSSp9tU/s426/Kill_la_Kill_18_Satsuki_Kiryuuin.jpg

Moving on: Lawful Evil can be about the "greater good." Allow me to offer an example:

http://i.imgur.com/aFhWSah.gif

The town council has arranged multiple murders, and disposed of bodies, in order to keep their town the peaceful, beautiful, utopian village it's always been. And to win the annual competition, of course.

The point is, Evil can have objectives that benefit everyone. What defines Evil, in part, is the methodology it justifies in pursuing those objectives. Anyone can seek to benefit the world; Evil (and in particular, Lawful Evil) will probably do so in a manner that sickens, disquiets, or disturbs people at the best of times. For example, protecting the nation from plague by completely annihilating all neighboring populations, thereby creating a barrier of empty space through which the pestilence cannot travel. Good goal, horrifying methodology. Or, have another example from media.

The Anti-Spirals are a race of beings who discovered Spiral Power - the ability of all natural lifeforms to advance and evolve - and discovered that it would accelerate the heat death of the universe. In an attempt to save all of existence, the Anti-Spirals came to every world capable of supporting Spiral-based life and offered them a choice - become subjugated, keep the population underground and unable to move forward, or be annihilated by the Anti-Spirals. The protagonists live on a world where the former choice was taken, and if the population ever rises above a certain threshold, the Anti-Spirals will return to annihilate them. To save existence.


Alright, I can give a example of why defining evil as "my goals serve everyone" is blatantly wrong.

Again, the point is that "my goals serve everyone" doesn't necessarily define Evil. It can. The same way it can define, frankly, anybody.

Evil may or may not care if its goals serve everyone. But it's not impossible for Evil acts to have positive consequences, intended or otherwise.

[Florian]

Both, Abyss and Hell, are very good examples for showcasing the power behind "my goals serve everyone". At their core, they´re both pure meritocracies where the best and brightest will naturally end up filling the position where they´re best suited for and being in turn replied when someone better or brighter shows up. This way, the right to rule will always fall to the most capable being at wielding it.

Every being has the constant duty to try and rise as high as possible in the food chain. How else can suitable leaders be found and overall greatness be achieved?

Should the Abyss or Hell ever achieve dominance, this would be a natural law for the multiverse.

... and is actually one of the things they either constantly get wrong or don´t manage to properly explain when it comes to "evil". The old Book of Vile Darkness might have been the worst offender in this regard.

[Seto]

Again, the point is that "my goals serve everyone" doesn't necessarily define Evil. It can. The same way it can define, frankly, anybody.

Evil may or may not care if its goals serve everyone. But it's not impossible for Evil acts to have positive consequences, intended or otherwise.

Or, for a meta-forum example: the way you serve the community by providing detailed, delicious posts on Evil, while at the same time spreading knowledge and acceptance of the LE ways, and getting people to unwittingly form a mystical bond of loyalty to you by chanting your name three times. :smallbiggrin:
But I see through your game, Red. I see through your game.

[ZeroiaSD]

Both, Abyss and Hell, are very good examples for showcasing the power behind "my goals serve everyone". At their core, they´re both pure meritocracies where the best and brightest will naturally end up filling the position where they´re best suited for and being in turn replied when someone better or brighter shows up. This way, the right to rule will always fall to the most capable being at wielding it.

Every being has the constant duty to try and rise as high as possible in the food chain. How else can suitable leaders be found and overall greatness be achieved?

Should the Abyss or Hell ever achieve dominance, this would be a natural law for the multiverse.

... and is actually one of the things they either constantly get wrong or don´t manage to properly explain when it comes to "evil". The old Book of Vile Darkness might have been the worst offender in this regard.


The thing about them is they're meritocracies that make those most 'suitable' for ruling the ones who can do best on their terms of ruthlessness, oppression, violence, willing to kill to get ahead, etc..


I think pretty much every alignment race is a meritocracy, in their own various ways. Lawful Good, you work you way up through following laws, accomplishments of merit, etc.. Neutral good, consensus building and cooperation. Lawful Neutral, obedience and skill in both giving and following orders.

[Necromancy]

The idea that the dead just float off and become denizens on the plane of their alignment seems lazy and badly thought out to me.

Firstly I recall that Realms canon has the dead being picked up from the fugue plane and being transported to the domain of their diety to serve them directly. Who the heck is going to worship Bane faithfully so he can become a dretch?

Secondly I feel that the notion that demons are just dead murderhobos cheapens their whole existence. By that rationale, it makes the multiverse appear to "revolve around" the prime, a notion I find ridiculous.

Thirdly, wouldn't this apply to all alignments then? Did my beloved King die and become a Modron? Wtf?

[Bohandas]

Thirdly, wouldn't this apply to all alignments then? Did my beloved King die and become a Modron? Wtf?

Technically he would become a formian. The modrons are self-contained and self-recycling, arising always and only from the souls of dead modrons.

[ZeroiaSD]

The idea that the dead just float off and become denizens on the plane of their alignment seems lazy and badly thought out to me.

Firstly I recall that Realms canon has the dead being picked up from the fugue plane and being transported to the domain of their diety to serve them directly. Who the heck is going to worship Bane faithfully so he can become a dretch?

Secondly I feel that the notion that demons are just dead murderhobos cheapens their whole existence. By that rationale, it makes the multiverse appear to "revolve around" the prime, a notion I find ridiculous.

Thirdly, wouldn't this apply to all alignments then? Did my beloved King die and become a Modron? Wtf?


In Golarion, souls go to the Boneyard where Pharasma sorts them to be sent to their planes.

What *happens* then varies. Sometimes they become alignment beings, other times they more become part of the plane and then said beings emerge from the plane itself. In some cases, people of an alignment do X *unless* their god picks them out- So your Bane worshipper would get special treatment and be made directly in a higher form, if Bane felt them worthy.

Some alignment beings reproduce, some emerge, some are pure converts.


Though... the universe revolving around the prime (not any particular world, but the collective prime) is fairly implied in planescape and so on. Or I should say, the alignment planes revolve around Life, whereever it is, often the prime.

[Necromancy]

I only know planescape from 2nd and most of the denizens never even mentioned any prime material planes in passing. I don't remember it being given a lot of thought in the lore either. (all of them supposedly touch the planes)

[Florian]

The idea that the dead just float off and become denizens on the plane of their alignment seems lazy and badly thought out to me.

Firstly I recall that Realms canon has the dead being picked up from the fugue plane and being transported to the domain of their diety to serve them directly. Who the heck is going to worship Bane faithfully so he can become a dretch?

Secondly I feel that the notion that demons are just dead murderhobos cheapens their whole existence. By that rationale, it makes the multiverse appear to "revolve around" the prime, a notion I find ridiculous.

Thirdly, wouldn't this apply to all alignments then? Did my beloved King die and become a Modron? Wtf?

I´m actually a fan of how this topic is handled with Golarion.

A soul is the spiritual core of a being, but does not contain things like personality or memory.
You die, those things die along with you.

Souls move to the Boneyard first, to get sorted (not judged, important) by Pharasma and sent to the plane they should belong to (or to the person you sold your soul to..).

There, a soul either directly merges with the plane, helping it grow in its entirety or emerges in the domain of a deity that the soul had a direction connection to in the previous life.

So each plane is actually one huge spiritual creature that exemplifies how the cosmos would look like if that alignment would have "won", with the layers and domains showing variations thereof.

The various outsider races can be created directly by the plane and absorbed back into at at any time.

As a side note, there´s a whole Adventure Path that deals with someone trying to find a way that the soul retains his memory and personality when passing on.

[Knight Magenta]

I find a good explanation of alignments are the Magic the Gathering colors.

Good = White
Evil = Black
Chaos = Red
Law = Blue
Neutral = Green or colorless

In this case evil, lawful and chaotic become reasonable position to take. Consider:

Red means: Empathy, being driven by your passions. A barbarian is Chaotic/Red because rage is a pure expression of passion. A bard is chaotic because his buffs stir the soul and drive the listener to greater efforts.

Blue means: Planning, logic, and a careful accounting of the consequences. A monk is lawful because his life is spent in contemplation and planning. He fights well because he knows himself.

Black means: Ambition, sacrificing others, and a belief in the individual's right to fight for themselves. True, many villains are Evil, but sometimes you need to make hard choices and sacrifice others to win. The Operative from the serenity movie is a good example of a sympathetic Evil character.

White means: Unity, self sacrifice, and a belief that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. However, white is also the color of dogmatism and tyranny. The society in 1984 is very White but you would not want to live there.

[Gildedragon]

I find a good explanation of alignments are the Magic the Gathering colors.

Good = White
Evil = Black
Chaos = Red
Law = Blue
Neutral = Green or colorless

In this case evil, lawful and chaotic become reasonable position to take. Consider:

Red means: Empathy, being driven by your passions. A barbarian is Chaotic/Red because rage is a pure expression of passion. A bard is chaotic because his buffs stir the soul and drive the listener to greater efforts.

Blue means: Planning, logic, and a careful accounting of the consequences. A monk is lawful because his life is spent in contemplation and planning. He fights well because he knows himself.

Black means: Ambition, sacrificing others, and a belief in the individual's right to fight for themselves. True, many villains are Evil, but sometimes you need to make hard choices and sacrifice others to win. The Operative from the serenity movie is a good example of a sympathetic Evil character.

White means: Unity, self sacrifice, and a belief that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. However, white is also the color of dogmatism and tyranny. The society in 1984 is very White but you would not want to live there.
What... Nonono
Yes they have aspects of that but white is also Law: a tendency to authoritarianism and tyranny
Blue is also chaos, indicating reversal, destabilization, espionage, theft, flaunting the laws
Black is neutral because of its all-encompassing all-consuming entropic nature (like the NEP)
Law is best represented by the blind obedience of colorless (usually constructs)
Etc etc
Point is MTGs isn't an ideology/moral-alignment system but an elemental/value-descriptive system...

[Seto]

White means: Unity, self sacrifice, and a belief that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. However, white is also the color of dogmatism and tyranny. The society in 1984 is very White but you would not want to live there.

You just described Law, not Good.


Point is MTGs isn't an ideology/moral-alignment system but an elemental/value-descriptive system...

Alignment is a value-descriptive system, though... That said, I don't really know MTG, and I've heard it said oftentimes that the color system doesn't match the alignment system in content, which your post is a good example of.

[Florian]

Point is MTGs isn't an ideology/moral-alignment system but an elemental/value-descriptive system...

Alignment is a value descriptive thing and in principal calls into question the potential value of free will.

Using the MTG colors is a good example to show that this brooks no arguments and isn´t open to debate. You either are or are not aligned to a "color" and that´s pretty much it.

[Red Fel]

Alignment is a value-descriptive system, though... That said, I don't really know MTG, and I've heard it said oftentimes that the color system doesn't match the alignment system in content, which your post is a good example of.

The color system constitutes a variety of opposing spectra.
Red versus Blue is passion versus logic.
Blue versus Green is order versus chaos.
Green versus Black is life versus death.
Black versus White is evil versus good.
White versus Red is healing versus destruction.
Or something to that effect. Basically, there are a bunch of dichotomies all going on at once. There are a few strong general tendencies (White and Blue are generally Lawful, Red and Green are generally Chaotic, Black is generally Evil) but nothing is set in stone.

[Florian]

The color system constitutes a variety of opposing spectra.
Red versus Blue is passion versus logic.
Blue versus Green is order versus chaos.
Green versus Black is life versus death.
Black versus White is evil versus good.
White versus Red is healing versus destruction.
Or something to that effect. Basically, there are a bunch of dichotomies all going on at once. There are a few strong general tendencies (White and Blue are generally Lawful, Red and Green are generally Chaotic, Black is generally Evil) but nothing is set in stone.

The overall implication simply is that things have a binary nature, even when apparent neighbors share some common overall themes. The thing itself is the definition for itself and that is not open to debate.

[Clistenes]

I´m actually a fan of how this topic is handled with Golarion.

A soul is the spiritual core of a being, but does not contain things like personality or memory.
You die, those things die along with you.

Souls move to the Boneyard first, to get sorted (not judged, important) by Pharasma and sent to the plane they should belong to (or to the person you sold your soul to..).

There, a soul either directly merges with the plane, helping it grow in its entirety or emerges in the domain of a deity that the soul had a direction connection to in the previous life.

So each plane is actually one huge spiritual creature that exemplifies how the cosmos would look like if that alignment would have "won", with the layers and domains showing variations thereof.

The various outsider races can be created directly by the plane and absorbed back into at at any time.

As a side note, there´s a whole Adventure Path that deals with someone trying to find a way that the soul retains his memory and personality when passing on.

Those rules should encourage people of power to seek immortality by any way it could be achieved. Kinda like in Eberron and Athas.

Are there any Spirit or Deathless-like templates in Pathfinder? Or any way to become an Elemental? Because I know I would sign for those.

[GrayDeath]

As a side note, there´s a whole Adventure Path that deals with someone trying to find a way that the soul retains his memory and personality when passing on.


Which one?
nd is it done well, because I`d love to play that....

[ZeroiaSD]

Which one?
nd is it done well, because I`d love to play that....

Hell's Rebels. It's a solid path all in all.

[Boogastreehouse]

*

A generally accepted concept in many D&D settings is that Evil afterlives are places of *punishment*. There are two big issues (and numerous smaller issues) in this assumption that really stand out as not making sense to me:

1) This enforces the idea that Good somehow has more cosmic authority or divine favor than Evil, and that Good beings are granted rewards and allowed to stay up past bedtime while Evil beings are sent to their room. This may be the nature of the universe in some settings; Good is the ultimate or default force, and evil is merely a deviation or rebellion from the correct way of things.

This arrangement makes any war versus Good and Evil seem less perilous to me, though, as Evil appears to be a lesser force that was either created by the Good force, or otherwise somehow strayed from it like a wayward child. The stakes don't feel as high if the ultimate force in the universe is Good, and this force *allows* Evil to exist, for whatever reason.

More dramatic, I feel, is a universe where the universal forces of Good and Evil are at odds with one another, and either side could ultimately win because they are in fact peers. Rather than a rebellious subordinate, the forces of Evil are a true threat to the existence of the Forces of Good.

In such a universe, I feel that it makes less sense for the residents of evil planes to punish evildoers for being evil. To my mind, evil planes should be set up to only punish evildoers if they aren't evil enough.

2) In a universe where there is actual evidence of gods and devils and demons, and the afterlife includes punishment and the eventual annihilation of identity for evildoers, who but the insane would ever choose commit evil acts?



Okay, with all of that established, this is the take on the afterlife that I have used for some of my campaigns:

Yes, there are still evil afterlives—the Abyss, Hell, Hades; whatever—and they are full evil people and demons and stuff. But these places aren't necessarily for everyone.

Let's say you're a mortal and that you have evil inclinations. Maybe you're really fond of killing or being cruel to others. Maybe you take a quiet pride in manipulating others for your own ends. Whatever. You're not stupid, and there is evidence of a terrible place in the afterlife and you know that you might end up there.

Luckily for you, there is a goddess of murder, and she likes your style. As long as you dedicate your murders to her, she gains power and she continues to favor you and act as a patron. When you die, she takes you to her realm, where you get to continue murdering in her name (and helping to maintain her power). Your Evil Afterlife is actually pretty great, as far as you're concerned. It's like an evil Valhalla; when you're not kicking back, you spend a great deal of your time engaged in your favorite pastime; murder. Sometimes you kill enemies of your patron goddess when her priests summon you back to earth. Sometimes you get to roam the afterlife realms unsupervised, killing when you can get away with it, until you get killed yourself. Sometimes, for fun, you and your fellow killers kill each other, but that's okay because whenever you die, your patron just lets you wake up in her plane again later. Your goddess isn't even terribly worried if you fail sometimes, because your commitment is giving her power, as well as your actual killings.

Commitment is the key to having a "good" evil afterlife. If you are committed to the ideals that give power to your patron, that patron keeps you around. If you start to doubt, however, you're in trouble. The goddess of murder has no use for a murderer who hesitates to kill, just because your intended victim reminds you of your mother. If you start developing a conscience, you're gonna lose your sweet evil afterlife.

Disgusted by your lack of commitment, the goddess of murder dumps you and your offensive conscience into Hell or the Abyss or whatever. These places are awful because the people there are *conflicted* about the evil that they do. They are tortured because they weren't evil enough. In such a plane, your evil alignment itself is the anchor that ties you to the place, and you are forced to commit atrocities while the last shreds of your conscience might finally be burned or flayed away. After smelting away the impurities of your evil soul, you might be able to rise in the infernal pecking order, or you might convince the goddess of murder to give you another chance. Of course, in a place like this you might also find the strength to defy Hell and embrace your conscience, struggling to redeem yourself. As you become less evil, Hell has less of a hold on you, giving you better opportunities to escape the evil planes altogether.

As you might guess, I've been giving a lot of thought to the idea of campaigns that take place largely or entirely in the realms of the afterlife.


*

[charcoalninja]

In D&D you have the added issue of good's forces are simply flat out more powerful. A Pit Fiend is nothing to a Solar, and is even hard pressed IMO to deal with a Planetar due to it casting as a 14th level cleric in addition to just being awesome.

So the idea that the plans are all equal sorta falls flat when you look at how easy it is for good to curb stomp everybody.

[ZeroiaSD]

The reason why the lower planes punish people is quite simply: They're evil even to each other. They aren't simply 'team evil,' they're made up of betrayers, sadists, those who enjoy holding power over others and using it.

Now, in pathfinder, they *also* seem to be the only ones to steal souls, which in a universe where that's how you process more planar beings, is a serious worry!


In D&D you have the added issue of good's forces are simply flat out more powerful. A Pit Fiend is nothing to a Solar, and is even hard pressed IMO to deal with a Planetar due to it casting as a 14th level cleric in addition to just being awesome.

So the idea that the plans are all equal sorta falls flat when you look at how easy it is for good to curb stomp everybody.

Conversely, though, there seems to be fewer uniquely powerful celestials than there are unique fiends (IMO a missed opportunity), and Solars are split between all the good planes.

Pit Fiends are sometimes used in quantity, something I've never seen of Solars.

[Florian]

The reason why the lower planes punish people is quite simply: They're evil even to each other. They aren't simply 'team evil,' they're made up of betrayers, sadists, those who enjoy holding power over others and using it.

And they become stronger and stronger by that, leading to final victory for their side.

Make no mistake: "Team backstab" is equally strong as "Team Teamwork".

[ZeroiaSD]

And they become stronger and stronger by that, leading to final victory for their side.

Make no mistake: "Team backstab" is equally strong as "Team Teamwork".

Right, that's why there's more unique fiends. The power gets *concentrated*.

If you can hack it despite the treachery and pain or, in Abaddon, the attempts to literally eat your soul, it pays off.

[Red Fel]

If you can hack it despite the treachery and pain or, in Abaddon, the attempts to literally eat your soul, it pays off.

In other words...

http://66.media.tumblr.com/7eec610c67b58b0989f101fb96901d5d/tumblr_o6xcq8Pd9z1umhw46o1_500.gif

I can get behind that.