What alignment would you call yourself if... [Archive]

Necroticplague

2017-01-24, 10:48 PM

Chaotic Evil. Acting nice towards people who it benefits you to have on your side is just pragmatism. Even the most Evil of creatures can know having someone who can watch your back is useful. So you're really going to have go far above and beyond the call of what being an ally entails for it to even ping on your alignment in a Goodward direction.

Zhentarim

2017-01-24, 11:51 PM

Telonius

2017-01-25, 12:05 AM

I would call myself Lawful Good (and I would be incorrect).

Stealth Marmot

2017-01-25, 07:30 AM

I would call myself Lawful Good (and I would be incorrect).

I love this.

Anyway, I would go with Lawful Evil. Reason being, you show loyalty and dedication to your group, but utter carelessness for anything else. So you have a strict code you follow, but not because of the concern over the sanctity of life and dignity of others, but instead because the group is part of your "clan."

Darth Ultron

2017-01-25, 07:45 AM

...you are lawful good to your party but chaotic evil to everybody else?

I'd point out that in D&D an individual does not get to pick there alignment just by saying so: their alignment comes from their actions. If a person does good they are good, and so on. It does not matter what a person says, what a group of people say or what anyone says....it's more cosmic then that.

The idea that you can just do ''whatever you want'' and then just say you are ''whatever you want'' is not something found in games like D&D.

SilverLeaf167

2017-01-25, 08:31 AM

I'd point out that in D&D an individual does not get to pick there alignment just by saying so: their alignment comes from their actions. If a person does good they are good, and so on. It does not matter what a person says, what a group of people say or what anyone says....it's more cosmic then that.

The idea that you can just do ''whatever you want'' and then just say you are ''whatever you want'' is not something found in games like D&D.
You may or may not have taken the phrase "call yourself" too literally here.

Red Fel

2017-01-25, 09:45 AM

...you are lawful good to your party but chaotic evil to everybody else?

Lawful Evil.

Not because of what you said after the ellipses. Because I'm Lawful Evil, irrespective of what everyone else thinks.

Psyren

2017-01-25, 10:28 AM

...you are lawful good to your party but chaotic evil to everybody else?

Post-vision Belkar?

Inevitability

2017-01-25, 10:34 AM

So this is how one can sneak CE into a game, then!

...Are you going to play this CE character but say the character is actually LG because of his attitude towards the party, then pretend like you didn't break your DM's alignment rules?

Because I strongly advise against that.

SimonMoon6

2017-01-25, 10:46 AM

Thaneus

2017-01-25, 11:29 AM

since psychopaths are not available on D&D alignment system, unfortunately, I'd say he is Evil with strong chaotic tendencies (not full CE because of the "never evil with my mates rule") but certainly not good.
Something like Hannibal from The Silence of the Lambs or Dr. Jakyl and Mr. Hyde

Psyren

2017-01-25, 11:30 AM

Also consider modern society's attitudes toward evil-doers (which admittedly is very different from D&D's attitudes):

Suppose a person commits a murder just because he felt like it. Sounds CE by D&D terms. In the real world, he would be considered a violent criminal and would be put in jail because he has done wrong.

Now, suppose that murderer is in jail and he is nice to his fellow inmates. How quickly do we forgive him for murder? How soon do we consider him a blessed saint? Okay, he *might* get time off for good behavior, but if he's been sentenced to life without parole or even a death sentence, then it doesn't matter. Once you've committed an evil enough act, you are evil, pure and simple. It doesn't matter if sometimes you're nice. You're still a murderer, end of story.

To be fair, D&D is a bit better equipped in this regard than we are. Through various divinations you can determine whether a given criminal is truly an unrepentant menace to society who deserves indefinite sequestration, or whether punishment/incarceration has succeeded in rehabilitating them. If the person is truly sorry, there's even a way to definitively clinch it. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm)

In a world where you can even redeem mindflayers and succubi, I would imagine that "lock them up and throw away the key" for humanoid offenders is actually pretty rare.

Flickerdart

2017-01-25, 11:32 AM

...you are lawful good to your party but chaotic evil to everybody else?

CE. Evil people don't treat their friends the same way they treat their enemies, that would be stupid.

SilverLeaf167

2017-01-25, 11:37 AM

To be fair, D&D is a bit better equipped in this regard than we are. Through various divinations you can determine whether a given criminal is truly an unrepentant menace to society who deserves indefinite sequestration, or whether punishment/incarceration has succeeded in rehabilitating them. If the person is truly sorry, there's even a way to definitively clinch it. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm)

In a world where you can even redeem mindflayers and succubi, I would imagine that "lock them up and throw away the key" for humanoid offenders is actually pretty rare.

I've actually gone the opposite direction and decided that capital punishment is a bit more common due in part to the difficulty of making a truly secure prison. :smalltongue: You might be able to keep in low-level thugs nobody cares to break out, and for really important prisoners you might be able to afford the special treatment, but there's a pretty big middle-class of people who can and will be broken out by any number of magical means.

Besides, there may be a lot of ahistorical and anachronistic stuff around, but the death penalty isn't one of them.

Of course, that's in a setting where high-level casters are unlikely to be available for jailor duty.

Psyren

2017-01-25, 01:48 PM

I've actually gone the opposite direction and decided that capital punishment is a bit more common due in part to the difficulty of making a truly secure prison. :smalltongue: You might be able to keep in low-level thugs nobody cares to break out, and for really important prisoners you might be able to afford the special treatment, but there's a pretty big middle-class of people who can and will be broken out by any number of magical means.

Besides, there may be a lot of ahistorical and anachronistic stuff around, but the death penalty isn't one of them.

Of course, that's in a setting where high-level casters are unlikely to be available for jailor duty.

Honestly, it would probably be more effective to convert them than kill them. Send a powerful guy to hell and he's just going to be another villain later (or resource for same); trap his soul in something and fiends will conspire to break him out; destroy his soul yourself and you begin to slide towards evil too. Whereas, if you redeem him (using the redemption rules, Sanctify the Wicked or Emissary of Barachiel) you end up with a 2-for-1 swing in good's favor (the one you gained, and the one they lost) and have actually increased your own standing.

Segev

2017-01-25, 01:54 PM

Lawful Evil.

Not because of what you said after the ellipses. Because I'm Lawful Evil, irrespective of what everyone else thinks.I think he meant what you'd call the character you're playing, if the character behaved that way. Not you, personally, IRL.

I've actually gone the opposite direction and decided that capital punishment is a bit more common due in part to the difficulty of making a truly secure prison. :smalltongue: You might be able to keep in low-level thugs nobody cares to break out, and for really important prisoners you might be able to afford the special treatment, but there's a pretty big middle-class of people who can and will be broken out by any number of magical means.

Besides, there may be a lot of ahistorical and anachronistic stuff around, but the death penalty isn't one of them.

Of course, that's in a setting where high-level casters are unlikely to be available for jailor duty.

On the one hand, it also becomes more justifiable since, in theory, if exonerating evidence came up later, a death sentence is reversible if you have a powerful enough cleric available. On the other, you may want to be more careful about giving death sentences to the particularly powerful or wealthy; they could just be true resurrected later, making it a measly 11,530 gp fine (once you include cost of hiring the 17th level cleric to cast a 9th level spell with a 10,000 gp material component).

SilverLeaf167

2017-01-25, 03:41 PM

Honestly, it would probably be more effective to convert them than kill them. Send a powerful guy to hell and he's just going to be another villain later (or resource for same); trap his soul in something and fiends will conspire to break him out; destroy his soul yourself and you begin to slide towards evil too. Whereas, if you redeem him (using the redemption rules, Sanctify the Wicked or Emissary of Barachiel) you end up with a 2-for-1 swing in good's favor (the one you gained, and the one they lost) and have actually increased your own standing.

On the one hand, it also becomes more justifiable since, in theory, if exonerating evidence came up later, a death sentence is reversible if you have a powerful enough cleric available. On the other, you may want to be more careful about giving death sentences to the particularly powerful or wealthy; they could just be true resurrected later, making it a measly 11,530 gp fine (once you include cost of hiring the 17th level cleric to cast a 9th level spell with a 10,000 gp material component).

Well, as mentioned, this is in a setting where very-high-level casters are exceedingly rare to begin with, so level 9 spells are neither an option nor an issue in most cases. Obviously won't work the same way if they are. You might find Raise Dead on a city level and Resurrection on a national, but that's why most corpses the executioners really don't want resurrected might get decapitated or burnt, depending on the region. Redemption doesn't really work with uncooperative targets, either, and I don't think "afraid of death/Hell" counts as true repentance, right?

There's a reason the really dangerous world-class villains get sealed into MacGuffins or hidden demiplanes. :smallbiggrin:

That said, I don't want to derail this thread any further. It's an interesting subject, but probably not the right place.

Red Fel

2017-01-25, 08:01 PM

I think he meant what you'd call the character you're playing, if the character behaved that way. Not you, personally, IRL.

I stand by my statement.

dhasenan

2017-01-25, 09:08 PM

Through various divinations you can determine whether a given criminal is truly an unrepentant menace to society who deserves indefinite sequestration, or whether punishment/incarceration has succeeded in rehabilitating them.

Detect Evil doesn't suffice once we start talking about atoned succubi. Creatures with the Evil subtype always show as evil with Detect Evil. You can interrogate them with a Zone of Truth, though that offers a save. A Contingent Spell that triggers when someone with an Evil alignment comes within five feet of it offers no would work reliably, but it requires a level 11 wizard, so you might leave that for Evil creatures who claim inside a Zone of Truth to have atoned. It costs 60gp to get a Zone of Truth at market rates, but Contingent Spell of Dancing Lights costs 865gp.

Flickerdart

2017-01-25, 09:11 PM

Detect Evil doesn't suffice once we start talking about atoned succubi. Creatures with the Evil subtype always show as evil with Detect Evil. You can interrogate them with a Zone of Truth, though that offers a save. A Contingent Spell that triggers when someone with an Evil alignment comes within five feet of it offers no would work reliably, but it requires a level 11 wizard, so you might leave that for Evil creatures who claim inside a Zone of Truth to have atoned. It costs 60gp to get a Zone of Truth at market rates, but Contingent Spell of Dancing Lights costs 865gp.

Oh lord of murdering (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/contactOtherPlane.htm), will this person murder in the future (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/commune.htm)?

Yahzi

2017-01-26, 03:52 AM

...you are lawful good to your party but chaotic evil to everybody else?
Isn't that the definition of Lawful Evil?

Inevitability

2017-01-26, 04:02 AM

Isn't that the definition of Lawful Evil?

Definitely not.

Disregarding the good/evil part, being chaotic to everyone but your party does not make you lawful in any way.

Yahzi

2017-01-26, 04:07 AM

I've actually gone the opposite direction and decided that capital punishment is a bit more common due in part to the difficulty of making a truly secure prison.
I completely agree. And given that many trials will have the blessing of a god on their verdict (thanks to Zone of Truth/Divination/Commune), people will be very comfortable with harsh penalties.
Although it's hard to imagine the death penalty being more common than your average medieval society... :smallbiggrin:

Yahzi

2017-01-26, 04:23 AM

Disregarding the good/evil part, being chaotic to everyone but your party does not make you lawful in any way.
I confess, I have a somewhat different view of alignment.

In my system, morality doesn't change. Everyone understands you have to keep your word if you want to be trusted, that you have to be fair to others if you want them to be fair to you, that you can't attack without being attacked, etc.

What changes is who you think moral behavior applies to.

NG = everyone.
LG = everyone who follows the rules.
CG = your peer group.
LE = people who can make you a profit.
CE = people who are stronger than you.
NE = no one. I.e. psychopathy or anarchy.

This makes it easier to adjudicate alignment (IMHO) and explains a lot things. You can just use your normal understanding of what good and lawful mean; and change how you behave based on who you are dealing with.

Why do Paladins stab orcs? Because orcs are murderers who break the law. Why do orcs work together? Because they agree the strongest should be in charge and get the best goodies.

It also fits in with Kohlbergs' theories of moral development. :smallsmile:

Zanos

2017-01-26, 04:33 AM

That doesn't sit very well with me, considering that it allows CG characters who are literally just wanton murderers as long as they have at least a handful of friends they treat morally, and makes tyrannical empires LG if they only oppress those who are breaking the rules, that can be as twisted as they care to make them As distant as the normal definition of good is from Good, this is even more so.

SirNibbles

2017-01-26, 05:42 AM

If you're a human but you disguise yourself as a dwarf, are you a dwarf?

Mordaedil

2017-01-26, 05:45 AM

...you are lawful good to your party but chaotic evil to everybody else?

These are meaningless descriptors. Give us some meat to go on here, what does it mean to be lawful good to your party members? You obey their rules and treat them benevolently? What do you mean by acting chaotic evil to everyone else? Are you rampantly murdering people, causing havoc and burning down village for the fun of it? Are you feeding people their own entrails, in an endless loop just because it seemed like it would be fun? Are you hanging peoples faces in balloons and making it fly across the fields while your party stares in awe at the horrors of your actions?

Come on, give me something to base the descriptors on, otherwise they are just that, describing basic attributes that say nothing about the character.

Coidzor

2017-01-26, 05:52 AM

Well, being that jumbled up would be a point towards chaos.

Wanton murder and the like would tend to outweigh holding close associates to fair and honest contracts and agreements that benefit everyone.

Red Fel

2017-01-26, 10:03 AM

Definitely not.

Disregarding the good/evil part, being chaotic to everyone but your party does not make you lawful in any way.

Agree to disagree. Per the handbook by yours truly, entry on "The Alien":

The Alien is a being whose actions seem mad and incomprehensible to us. It appears to most observers quite Chaotic in nature. But this could not be further from the truth. The Alien is in fact bound by extremely strict rules. It is simply that these rules are so bizarre and alien as to seem random at first blush. Nonetheless, this character is so intrinsically tied to its rules and regulations that it is in many ways severely L.

The illustration is of Queen Mab, from The Dresden Files. Fey in Dresden are precisely as I describe. They are intrinsically Lawful creatures, formed from and bound by rules which govern their existence. They cannot freely cross thresholds without certain penalties, they cannot break vows or contracts, and they absolutely cannot tell lies. Nonetheless, how they interpret what they can do is what makes them appear so mad and chaotic. This is the Alien, in its simplest essence. Its rules are absolute, but its logic borders on the incomprehensible.

Seeming "Lawful Good" to your party means that you act for their benefit, and can be relied upon to follow your rules. Seeming "Chaotic Evil" to the world means that you act with cruelty or caprice towards anyone not in your party, and that you don't appear to follow any rules that they understand. The difference is that your party knows you, and thus understands that you do have rules, they're just super weird.

Hence, LE.

Stealth Marmot

2017-01-26, 10:36 AM

Hence, LE.
Oh gods...I agree with Red Fel...

Is this my Start of Darkness story?

Inevitability

2017-01-26, 10:39 AM

Agree to disagree. Per the handbook by yours truly, entry on "The Alien":

Seeming "Lawful Good" to your party means that you act for their benefit, and can be relied upon to follow your rules. Seeming "Chaotic Evil" to the world means that you act with cruelty or caprice towards anyone not in your party, and that you don't appear to follow any rules that they understand. The difference is that your party knows you, and thus understands that you do have rules, they're just super weird.

Hence, LE.

Fair point, but I'm not too convinced this character's strange LG/CE schism is based on any strict set of rules at all, rather than being mere convenience (I like these people, they help me kill stuff, let's aid them).

I suppose if Qwanch told us some more about the character's personality and behavior their alignment could be judged better. 'LG to some, CE to some' can refer to an awfully great number of characters.

Flickerdart

2017-01-26, 10:41 AM

Agree to disagree. Per the handbook by yours truly, entry on "The Alien":

While that's a fine and fanciful description, actual monster entries for Fey have them as Chaotic (nymphs, satyrs, dryads) or Neutral (sprites, hoary). Your "alien" is not Lawful in 3.5.

Tiri

2017-01-26, 10:43 AM

While that's a fine and fanciful description, actual monster entries for Fey have them as Chaotic (nymphs, satyrs, dryads) or Neutral (sprites, hoary). Your "alien" is not Lawful in 3.5.

It's the description of an archetype. D&D 3.5 Fey don't necessarily have to conform to that archetype.

Flickerdart

2017-01-26, 10:44 AM

It's the description of an archetype. D&D 3.5 Fey don't necessarily have to conform to that archetype.
D&D 3.5 fey play by invisible rules and yet are chaotic. That's my point. In this game, the activity described in the OP is classified as chaotic. Full stop.

Tiri

2017-01-26, 10:46 AM

D&D 3.5 fey play by invisible rules and yet are chaotic. That's my point. In this game, the activity described in the OP is classified as chaotic. Full stop.

Most of the ones that I've seen in the MMs don't have descriptions that support them doing that.

Zhentarim

2017-01-26, 10:58 AM

Fair point, but I'm not too convinced this character's strange LG/CE schism is based on any strict set of rules at all, rather than being mere convenience (I like these people, they help me kill stuff, let's aid them).

I suppose if Qwanch told us some more about the character's personality and behavior their alignment could be judged better. 'LG to some, CE to some' can refer to an awfully great number of characters.

I will, soon.

Kelb_Panthera

2017-01-26, 11:09 AM

So this is how one can sneak CE into a game, then!

Don't try to sneak stuff past your GM. It's not clever or productive, it's just an ass-hat thing to do.

Now if you mean to say that you do this in a game but your sheet clearly says CE and you've told your DM that you're playing CE then it's not "sneaking," it's just playing CE smart, a.k.a. the only way to do it generally speaking.

WbtE

2017-01-26, 11:23 AM

I tend to agree that the character is evil and probably chaotic under most interpretations of alignment.

Of course, I tend towards that old school "alignment is the people with whom you are aligned" definition. Being Chaotic Evil doesn't necessarily make a person crazy and malevolent, it just means that they're working for the Abyss. Your notion of a person who acts honourably towards their peers but stomps on the rest of the world fits my take just fine, but other folks are going to differ because they have a different idea of alignment.

Segev

2017-01-26, 11:56 AM

Oh gods...I agree with Red Fel...

Is this my Start of Darkness story?

Nah. Agreeing with somebody because they are right doesn't mean you agree with their moral choices.

Red Fel is often quite CORRECT in his facts. And amusing in his presentation of them, for which I applaud him.

Stealth Marmot

2017-01-26, 12:03 PM

Nah. Agreeing with somebody because they are right doesn't mean you agree with their moral choices.

Red Fel is often quite CORRECT in his facts. And amusing in his presentation of them, for which I applaud him.

Oh good, then I don't have to go through with my world domination plans.

*Opens trap door* "FALSE ALARM FELLAS!"

*hundreds of oddly pitched voices* "Awwwwww..."

Zanos

2017-01-26, 01:02 PM

Nah. Agreeing with somebody because they are right doesn't mean you agree with their moral choices.

Red Fel is often quite CORRECT in his facts. And amusing in his presentation of them, for which I applaud him.
Often, but not in this case. A Chaotic code of conduct is a thing, considering that Chaotic faiths and Chaotic paladins both exist. A creature that follows a code so bizarre that it's inscrutable by "normal" folk and seems random is almost certainly Chaotic in 3.5 even if it's behavior is technically based on an underlying set of principles.

Stealth Marmot

2017-01-26, 01:20 PM

Often, but not in this case. A Chaotic code of conduct is a thing, considering that Chaotic faiths and Chaotic paladins both exist. A creature that follows a code so bizarre that it's inscrutable by "normal" folk and seems random is almost certainly Chaotic in 3.5 even if it's behavior is technically based on an underlying set of principles.

In reality, everything is set by a code of law, specifically the laws of physics and biology governing how our synaptic patterns decide our actions.

But that gets into a whole new level of pedantics.

Zhentarim

2017-01-26, 01:27 PM

In reality, everything is set by a code of law, specifically the laws of physics and biology governing how our synaptic patterns decide our actions.

But that gets into a whole new level of pedantics.

And rule systems

Red Fel

2017-01-26, 01:36 PM

Oh gods...I agree with Red Fel...

Everyone does, in time. Death, taxes, and agreeing with Red Fel, as the saying goes.

While that's a fine and fanciful description, actual monster entries for Fey have them as Chaotic (nymphs, satyrs, dryads) or Neutral (sprites, hoary). Your "alien" is not Lawful in 3.5.

I didn't said "All Fey are Lawful Evil." Specifically, in my description, I use the Fey in Jim Butcher's novels as an illustration of LE that appears Chaotic.

It's rare in D&D that Fey are presented as following some kind of rule set or laws. There are some excerpted or DMag materials, of course, but I don't generally recall seeing "Follows an elaborate set of rules" in most Monster Manual entries on creatures with the (Fey) subtype. D&D Fey are different, and I'm pretty sure I acknowledge that someplace in the handbook.

Following a code of conduct, even when you don't want to, is not a Chaotic action. It is a lawful action. Now, in theory, if Fey all wanted to follow some sort of Fey code of conduct - like it was all some sort of game, and the one who chafed the most under the burden earned the most points - that might be consistent with Chaotic tendencies. But the definition of Chaos is a fiercely independent streak that will balk at obeying a rule that forces the character to engage in involuntary self-denial.

WbtE

2017-01-26, 01:37 PM

In reality, everything is set by a code of law, specifically the laws of physics and biology governing how our synaptic patterns decide our actions.

Two points on this; humans used to be considered naturally lawful creatures because we look at the world that way, and those claims may not be correct in a world with no magic.

Segev

2017-01-26, 01:49 PM

Zanos

2017-01-26, 01:52 PM

Following a code of conduct, even when you don't want to, is not a Chaotic action. It is a lawful action. Now, in theory, if Fey all wanted to follow some sort of Fey code of conduct - like it was all some sort of game, and the one who chafed the most under the burden earned the most points - that might be consistent with Chaotic tendencies. But the definition of Chaos is a fiercely independent streak that will balk at obeying a rule that forces the character to engage in involuntary self-denial.
This is explicitly not true. Chaotic Gods have dogma and rules their clerics must follow or lose their powers. Chaotic is not just the "I do what I want" alignment. Because Chaotic clerics exist and don't constantly violate their own alignment by following their deities dogma and paladins of freedom/slaughter exist, you're wrong. All of those classes have codes of conduct.

Inevitability

2017-01-26, 02:02 PM

It's an open question whether Dresdenverse Fae are capable of breaking their code of laws, any more than, say, a magic-less human is capable of breaking the law of gravity.

Is it "lawful" if you lack agency in the matter?

This would be a very valid point in the real world, but in D&D 'free will' and 'moral value' appear to be two disconnected concepts. There's dozens of mindless creatures who have an alignment and behave according to its tenets.

So yes, they're still lawful, because their actions are.

Two points on this; humans used to be considered naturally lawful creatures because we look at the world that way, and those claims may not be correct in a world with no magic.

Replace 'laws of physics' with 'laws of magic' then. Sure, they are vast laws that leave room for choice, but in the end each action can be described with them.

This is a RAW discussion about the game detailed in a series of books, after all. Everything we're talking about is something that can be described within a set of rules.

This is explicitly not true. Chaotic Gods have dogma and rules their clerics must follow or lose their powers. Chaotic is not just the "I do what I want" alignment. Because Chaotic clerics exist and don't constantly violate their own alignment by following their deities dogma and paladins of freedom/slaughter exist, you're wrong. All of those classes have codes of conduct.

This. Chaos can still have a code, as long as said code obeys chaotic values. It's most definitely not the 'I do what I want' alignment. Chaotics wouldn't be so dangerous if it was.

Necroticplague

2017-01-26, 02:07 PM

I completely agree. And given that many trials will have the blessing of a god on their verdict (thanks to Zone of Truth/Divination/Commune), people will be very comfortable with harsh penalties.
Although it's hard to imagine the death penalty being more common than your average medieval society... :smallbiggrin:

However, consider that criminals who are killed can spontaneously arise as undead (morhgs being one of the more obvious examples). In real life, deaths penalties exist because we know that would be the end of it. In the DnD world, that's not a guarantee. For all you know, that serial arsonist you set aflame (delicious irony factor!) just comes back as an incorporeal shade of malevolence and fire. Even destroying bodies still allows for various incoporeal undead to form.

Zanos

2017-01-26, 02:14 PM

This would be a very valid point in the real world, but in D&D 'free will' and 'moral value' appear to be two disconnected concepts. There's dozens of mindless creatures who have an alignment and behave according to its tenets.
Not entirely, although this is fairly inconsistent. Creatures without the mental capacity to make moral decisions that aren't animated by an aligned force are considered neutral. This includes constructs, vermin, and animals. But not paladins with dominate person cast on them, which is where the inconsistency comes into play. And mindless undead being evil despite the negative energy plane not being aligned.

So being able to choose matters, except when it doesn't.

However, consider that criminals who are killed can spontaneously arise as undead (morhgs being one of the more obvious examples). In real life, deaths penalties exist because we know that would be the end of it. In the DnD world, that's not a guarantee. For all you know, that serial arsonist you set aflame (delicious irony factor!) just comes back as an incorporeal shade of malevolence and fire. Even destroying bodies still allows for various incoporeal undead to form.
Eh, random jerks getting back up as undead spontaneously is a fairly rare occurrence, and tends to only happen in the worst cases. And if you are having problems with it, some low level cleric magic at your execution site(consecrate) can take care of it for you. Just hang all your criminals at the same time to save on silver costs.

Keltest

2017-01-26, 02:28 PM

It's an open question whether Dresdenverse Fae are capable of breaking their code of laws, any more than, say, a magic-less human is capable of breaking the law of gravity.

Is it "lawful" if you lack agency in the matter?

Dresdenverse fae spend their off hours compiling lists of ways to subvert laws and agreements. They are, by their very nature, unwilling to commit to something concrete and straightforward. Their laws are written with this in mind. Its practically a reflex that if you force them to give their word on something, the find a way to get around it without breaking their word.

Segev

2017-01-26, 02:28 PM

Hm. On the one hand, yes, some mindless creatures are inherently evil (mostly undead). But so are certain spells (many which create or control undead). It could be that the evil here is "different." It's where the D&D magic has really caused the definition to diverge from any sense of real-world. Or, put another way, it's a point at which malevolence has gained its own sort of sentience.

On the other, even alignment-subtyped creatures have agency. Free will. I would argue that they simply find it incredibly hard to make the choice that is opposed to their alignment, both spiritually (due to urges and drives which encourage the aligned action) and physically. The physical difficulty comes in two sources: their powers are inherently difficult to use in ways opposed to their alignment subtype(s); and, being literally made of their alignment, acting too much against it could possibly be like a human taking poison. It makes them sick. It weakens them. It eats away at their essence as their choices literally undermine their very beings.

Necroticplague

2017-01-26, 03:25 PM

Not entirely, although this is fairly inconsistent. Creatures without the mental capacity to make moral decisions that aren't animated by an aligned force are considered neutral. This includes constructs, vermin, and animals. But not paladins with dominate person cast on them, which is where the inconsistency comes into play. And mindless undead being evil despite the negative energy plane not being aligned.

So being able to choose matters, except when it doesn't.

Just a minor nitpick about the NEP: it is aligned. Like all inner planes, it is mildly neutral aligned.

Zanos

2017-01-26, 03:47 PM

Just a minor nitpick about the NEP: it is aligned. Like all inner planes, it is mildly neutral aligned.
I don't see it on the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm) page. If that's true through it makes channeling negative energy and undead being Evil even stupider.

I personally just treat undead as neutral but highly disapproved of for general squick in most cultures. Deathless are gone, because **** 'em.

Inevitability

2017-01-26, 04:08 PM

My personal theory for undead being evil is that, because practically all outer planes near the NEP are evil-aligned, energies from the NEP drawn to the material are forced to move past said outer planes, which taints them with evil.

Of course, it doesn't really mesh with the tons of negative energy spells that aren't [Evil], but it's not like WotC's explanations are any better.