[Alignment] Would an LE or LG society convert most LN people over time?

[Coidzor]

Specifically an LG or LE society which set the social mores and the letter of the rules to reflect the LG or LE spirit behind them, rather than a less well-organized or consistent one, such as would be made over time with actual people developing and reforming their societies.

What is your take on the matter? How would an LN-type react if they picked up on the nature of the system? What other questions would this raise?

[hymer]

Answering in a general sense, I think some of them would. But it depends on specifics. If you're following rules as an end in itself, acting only G or E as the laws and societal mores dictate, then you'd be less likely to slip from neutrality. But if your LN is because you try your very hardest to fit in, to live and breathe the culture you're part of, then you may well get swayed.
It also depends on what you see LN as. Some D&D editions have set personal discipline to be lawful (which I personally consider nonsense). If it is, then the likelihood of changing drops.

So my answer, I'm afraid, is 'it depends'. I think many would, if they felt themselves slipping, move away, or take trips elsewhere to ground themselves. In this, I believe LN in general would have a harder time tolerating living in a LE society than a LG one. Okay, so they're softies, but at least they don't bend the rules for personal gain at any opportunity.

[Honest Tiefling]

I think it depends on results and the 'skill' of the society. If the LG society is run by lawful idealists who don't understand an economy, it isn't going to matter what they do with the laws. And never doubt the power of good PR!

[Themrys]

Since I'd consider looking away when evil is done evil, I do think that any evil society would make most of the people living in it evil. Even those who would be LG in an LG society, perhaps even some who were LG for a time. There'd be some few who'd oppose and be killed, and everyone else would become evil.

However, the percentage of those who'd rather die than support something evil, might be larger in D&D world than in real life, because afterlife is a known fact.

LG ... I suppose some could be swayed. But tolerating people doing good deeds doesn't make you good, so that's different.

[hamishspence]

If you go by Fiendish Codex 2 - a strongly LE society will have "coming of age ceremonies" designed to corrupt - requiring one to commit an evil act to be accepted as a adult in that society.

Plus the upbringing process will tend to encourage older children to bully younger ones even before adulthood.

As a result - 90% of citizens of the LE society end up in Baator after death.

I could see it corrupting LN or LG immigrants - with the LG ones who stay LG usually deciding to either get out or start a revolution - albeit a very organised and regularized one.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Of course. Lawful societies are lawful because order and structure are deemed the best way to organize a society and the importance of the rule of law and respect for tradition are highly regarded. Getting along in such a society will require adopting those values or at least paying lip-service to them. If you grow accustomed to thinking and behaving along those lines and do so consistently, your alignment will shift toward lawful.

Moreover, law as a concept is tied tightly to collectivism over individuality. The most successful people in a lawful society are, themselves, lawful in most cases and will discourage others from behaving in a more chaotic, individualist manner.

One of two things will happen; either law being held over chaos will make the chaotic people in society uncomfortable enough to leave (or escape, if necessary) or the lawful powers will become oppressive to the point of fomenting rebellion and the society will collapse. Often, both will occur in sequence or simultaneously.

These principles will also be applied to "morality" and push -all- members of the society toward good or evil if the power group organizing the laws arranges the laws to do so, which they typically will.

[SethoMarkus]

Kelb, while a valid point, it is missing the question posed: would a LN individual be swayed by a LG or LE society. The question assumes the individual is already Lawful, so Law/Chaos is a moot point.

However, I think the same method can be applied to the question at hand. An individual in a Good or Evil aligned society would either adapt to that way of thinking or leave (whether by choice or being forced, and whether alive or dead are separate issues). A specifically Lawful individual may see the virtue in the tradition of any customs or rites of passage, but may still disagree with teir execution. As such, I think that a LN individual may remain neutral in a LG or LE society, but it would need to be a conscious act of neutrality, I think. So an individual who is LN through devotion to rules, laws, and order could remain LN; but, an individual who is LN through devotion to routine, tradition, and societal norms would be swayed.

At least that is my take on it.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Kelb, while a valid point, it is missing the question posed: would a LN individual be swayed by a LG or LE society. The question assumes the individual is already Lawful, so Law/Chaos is a moot point.

Actually, the law/chaos aspect is -very- important. That's why I lead with it and finished with the comment on good/evil. The good/evil axis is a function of what you believe while the law/chaos axis is a function of how you express that belief, for the most part (the principles of the former tend to run deeper than the latter in most.) Lawful characters are -much- more likely to push their beliefs on others than chaotic ones.

CG believes everyone should be good and free to do as they please so long as they don't harm other good creatures. CE believes they should be free to do as they please regardless of how it affects others. LG believes that everyone should be good and organize themselves into societies that promote good. LE believes that everyone should obey them and that you must work with the system to reach its top unless you build the system yourself. Note how the latter two require others to do as they do while the former do not.

Does that clarify what I was trying to say at all?

[Liquor Box]

I think so.

People like to fit in, they like to be in agreement with the prevailing opinion, they are heavily influenced by those around them.

[SethoMarkus]

Actually, the law/chaos aspect is -very- important. That's why I lead with it and finished with the comment on good/evil. The good/evil axis is a function of what you believe while the law/chaos axis is a function of how you express that belief, for the most part (the principles of the former tend to run deeper than the latter in most.) Lawful characters are -much- more likely to push their beliefs on others than chaotic ones.

CG believes everyone should be good and free to do as they please so long as they don't harm other good creatures. CE believes they should be free to do as they please regardless of how it affects others. LG believes that everyone should be good and organize themselves into societies that promote good. LE believes that everyone should obey them and that you must work with the system to reach its top unless you build the system yourself. Note how the latter two require others to do as they do while the former do not.

Does that clarify what I was trying to say at all?

What I mean is that as it is a given that these individuals are Lawful, Chaos does not need to be mentioned. Your point could still be made and still be valid without introducing the other side of the spectrum. Simply presenting the point that Lawful tends to be evangelical with their beliefs is enough.

[Kelb_Panthera]

What I mean is that as it is a given that these individuals are Lawful, Chaos does not need to be mentioned. Your point could still be made and still be valid without introducing the other side of the spectrum. Simply presenting the point that Lawful tends to be evangelical with their beliefs is enough.

Both alignment axes' components exist only in contrast with one another. Law exists only in relation to chaos, good exists only in its relation to evil, and vice versa in both cases. To understand why lawful characters are evangelical, it is useful to understand what lawful actually means and you can't really understand what it is to be lawful without examining what it is to be chaotic as well. These are not mutually exclusive ideas, they are interdepent.

For completeness sake, neutrality does exist as two points between the extremes of both alignment axes. In both cases, neutrality exists as either a position wherein a character sees merit in both chaotic and lawful ideas or both good and evil ideas (in either case, they rarely classify their ideas by their alignment axiom) or they lack the necessary sapience to consider morality and ethics.

[Kyberwulf]

I don't think so. Given time, I think that given no external influences, that a Lawful Good, or Lawful Evil society would eventually start falling into some sort of Lawful Neutral zone. Which I think that would be a better question.

[goto124]

or they lack the necessary sapience to consider morality and ethics.

[nitpick] I thought that's being alignmentless. To be fair, that may not be much different from being Neutral. [/nitpick]

[JCAll]

Following your society's rules and cultural norms because it's easier and you don't want to get in trouble, rather than actually caring about the ideology, would be in my mind a textbook case of Neutrality. So I don't think they would turn.

[goto124]

Following your society's rules and cultural norms because it's easier and you don't want to get in trouble, rather than actually caring about the ideology, would be in my mind a textbook case of Neutrality. So I don't think they would turn.

The Lawful Neutral is quite likely to do the above without actually changing their ideology. Okay, they could shift slightly towards the alignment of the people around them, but how much they shift depends on my factors such as their personality beyond their alignment, as well as the exact situations that can differ from person to person within the same society.

Also, societies tend to be a lot more complicated than a single alignment. Even singular people can't be described as an alignment, nevermind a group of lots and lots of people. Going further would be against forum rules.

[2D8HP]

When Gygax added the Good - Evil axis to the existing D&D Law - Chaos alignment axis in the article in the;
Strategic Review: February 1976 , he wrote:

As a final note, most of humanity falls into the lawful category, and most of lawful humanity lies near the line between good and evil. With proper leadership the majority will be prone towards lawful/good. Few humans are chaotic, and very few are chaotic and evil.

The question then remains with "improper" leadership, do the majority remain "lawful neutral" or do they slide down to "lawful evil"?
Bear in mind that the end game in early D&D was not to become an "Epic" comic book style superhero at level 20, but instead to build "strongholds" in the "wilderness" at level 9 and higher. And to rule it with "followers" of mostly the same alignment!

[Frozen_Feet]

My opinion is that LG society would be more likely to convert LNs. Why? Because LE is more likely to want "fall guys" who don't actually share all values of society, but rather a different kind of morality that makes them unlikely to strive for the top. If Evil folks can benefit from underclass of N or G people, they will create such a class.

[Kelb_Panthera]

[nitpick] I thought that's being alignmentless. To be fair, that may not be much different from being Neutral. [/nitpick]

Alignmentlessness is a concept introduced in a later version of the game than I play. If your preferred edition has alignmentlessness () then animals and insects probably fall under that, yes.

[veti]

I've always had difficulty with the concept of "society alignment". How do you cast "Know Alignment" on a society?

If the concept of "LE society" means anything, it seems to me, it can only mean "a society in which LE behaviour and attitudes are encouraged more than other alignments". So by definition, yes, it will convert "most" people over time. If it doesn't, then I don't see what you can mean by calling it an "LE society".

[GAZ]

I don't think so. LE and LG are (along with the chaotic corner alignments) sometimes refereed to as extreme alignments and people don't usually go for extremist positions. If presented with the benefits of a society run in accordance with LG goals and methods, a LN citizen would probably say something like "That's nice. Glad somebody's doing something about it," and then go about the rest of their day. A similar response to a LE run society might be "That sucks. Glad it wasn't me." I feel like most LN citizens would live their lives in accordance with the rules without ever really engaging with the Good or Evil aspects of those rules.

[Mando Knight]

If you assume an evenly-distributed spread across the nuances of a particular alignment (such as being Neutral), then you're also essentially assuming the answer to the question: they're evenly distributed, and so they would have a roughly even conversion rate.

While it's generally granted to be more comfortable living in a Lawful Good society than a Lawful Evil one if you're not living at the top, Good implies a set of higher moral standards that would generally seem inefficient or irrational to a Lawful Neutral character: for example, why spend resources on being charitable to those unlikely to ever reciprocate? Neutral people would be likely to chafe at the societal expectations to go above and beyond what they believe is their civic duty, even if they might eventually be convinced of the benefits of doing so.

However, while a Lawful Evil society can be brutally oppressive to those under the heel of the leadership, the obvious personal benefits for climbing to the top are enticing. The oppressive structures, while being obviously disagreeable to most Neutral people, would eventually impress its aggressive beliefs on the populace: it's better to go with the flow than to be crushed underfoot by it, and it's disturbingly easy to accept atrocities when you're being conditioned not to question orders.