Jowgen
2020-08-23, 02:40 AM
In D&D, alignment is portrayed as a cross-sectional dicotomy of the G/E and L/C axes.
I would like to get some thoughts on a different way of looking at the 9 alignments.
The basic premise of this school of thought is that Good is just another kind of Law (i.e. just another way to judge actions as being desireable or reprehensible), so that alignment should be understood based on how one deviates from Chaotic Evil in terms of the degree of "corruption" by moral and/or ethical law.
Lemme Elaborate
NE TN CN
LE CE CG
LN LG NG
This perspective views CE as the original/natural alignment, i.e. freedom of choice unrestrained by any compunctions, placing it at the centre of the grid. Neutral alignment components are understood as rejection of Chaos or Evil but without embracing the corrseponding type of Moral/Ethical Law.
The bottom row has the alignments of maximum rejection of CE in favour of either or both kinds of Law, sharing no common denominators with CE. I.e. the Corrupted.
The middle row, on either side of CE, has the alignments that subscribe to one of the laws, but still share a common trait with CE. I.e. the half-corrupted.
The top row has the alignments that don't subscribe to the laws, but don't embrace the core CE alignment either. I.e. The Wayward.
Looking at it by Collums, Law exerts its influence on the left from the bottom up and Good affects the left collum from the bottom. Hence why TN is at the top centre, representing a complete rejection of not only CE but both kinds of Law as well, while LG is at the bottom centre, representing rejection of CE in favour of embracing both laws.
Of course the grid could be rotated around in whatever way one chooses, with the relative relationships not changing still.
I would like to get some thoughts on a different way of looking at the 9 alignments.
The basic premise of this school of thought is that Good is just another kind of Law (i.e. just another way to judge actions as being desireable or reprehensible), so that alignment should be understood based on how one deviates from Chaotic Evil in terms of the degree of "corruption" by moral and/or ethical law.
Lemme Elaborate
NE TN CN
LE CE CG
LN LG NG
This perspective views CE as the original/natural alignment, i.e. freedom of choice unrestrained by any compunctions, placing it at the centre of the grid. Neutral alignment components are understood as rejection of Chaos or Evil but without embracing the corrseponding type of Moral/Ethical Law.
The bottom row has the alignments of maximum rejection of CE in favour of either or both kinds of Law, sharing no common denominators with CE. I.e. the Corrupted.
The middle row, on either side of CE, has the alignments that subscribe to one of the laws, but still share a common trait with CE. I.e. the half-corrupted.
The top row has the alignments that don't subscribe to the laws, but don't embrace the core CE alignment either. I.e. The Wayward.
Looking at it by Collums, Law exerts its influence on the left from the bottom up and Good affects the left collum from the bottom. Hence why TN is at the top centre, representing a complete rejection of not only CE but both kinds of Law as well, while LG is at the bottom centre, representing rejection of CE in favour of embracing both laws.
Of course the grid could be rotated around in whatever way one chooses, with the relative relationships not changing still.