that doesn't seem CE?

[detrevnisisiht]

i was just looking through the demonweb pits and i realized that graz'zt seems to be LE
any1 else care to elaborate.

[Knight_Of_Twilight]

He seems to be LE because he's fairly meticulous and clever- he's a demon, and thus his nature is chaotic.

I look at it this way- he is only orderly when he knows it benefits him. He's smart enough to know when to restrain himself.

[Nerd-o-rama]

He's not Lawful. He's just very smart and manipulative, a trait he shares with more devils than demons.

I've noted before that he's just got so much more...panache than say, Orcus or Demogorgon. Doesn't make him any less insane.

[brian c]

Haven't read that book, but the "panache, but is still insane" comment reminded me of something. What alignment would you say that Hannibal Lecter is? He's crazy, but he's still very smart. His cunning might make you think that he's LE, but overall he's probably still Chaotic.

(I don't mean to start a debate about Hannibal Lecter, just using that as an example)

[13_CBS]

Well, being CE doesn't necessarily make you less cunning, or even dumb. It merely means that you're evil, and that you have little to no respect for rigid structure and order unless it is more powerful than you are.

Take the drow for example. Scheming and being cunning is pretty much what the nobles do all day (almost literally). But they're CE.

[Svethnika]

If the drow scheme all day shouldn't they just be considered evil lawful then? What makes them chaotic?

Edit: Spelling

[Dhavaer]

If the draw scheme all day shouldn't they just be considered evil lawful then? What makes them chaotic?

They're typically neutral evil, actually.

[13_CBS]

Really? IIRC drow are under CE in Monster Manuals and stuff O_o

I think the drow society as a whole is chaotic mostly because "structure" is only barely maintained by those in power, and the main reason why that structure is maintained is because the Drow know that if things get too wild, they'll wipe themselves out (or at least that's what Lolth thinks). Otherwise, however, IIRC drow societies are very non-centralized, with cities being more like city states run by various noble houses.

[Xuincherguixe]

Even non centralized city states would generally be lawful though wouldn't they?

[Zincorium]

If the draw scheme all day shouldn't they just be considered evil lawful then? What makes them chaotic?

The fact that they are constantly working to kill everyone above and around them for personal gain no matter how much it hurts their own society?

Generally speaking, if a drow can kill another drow without being killed themselves in revenge, and they don't have much to gain by not killing them, they will. Or at least they're supposed to.

Scheming isn't lawful, it circumvents the existing societal structure for personal gain, it works against civilization in general by weakening the people at the top.

[BardicDuelist]

In Drow of the Underdark, drow are described as being NE in groups (as some order is necessary to survive), but CE individually. I think this is similar to how most citys are described as LN (for humans) but most humans are N when left to their own devices.

I think the easiest way to demonstrate the difference between a demon and a devil (and thus intelligent CE an LE) is this:
Both will make offers in hopes of corrupting individuals. Devils incorporate loop-holes and fine print so as to make the deal in their favor. Demons just break the contracts.

Graz'zt creates meticulous schemes but is impulsive. Dispater also has meticulous schemes, but is not impulsive.

Graz'zt does not weigh the odds, only seeks to find a path to gratification and will take the first or quickest one rather than the most likely to succeed. he is also prone to breaking such a plan for no real reason.

Dispater (the example archdevil) would calculate all odds and take the safest bet, waiting for an oppertune moment rather than acting immediately. He wants the end gratification, but will not risk what he allready has unless it is reasonably sure. Once a plan is started, he will not deviate from it unless a circumstance changes the odds (such as a group of adventurers getting in the way).

Graz'zt has an idea and goes for it. Dispater has an idea and sees if there is a better one.

Graz'zt also hates organization while Dispater would not.

I hope that makes sense...

[Svethnika]

Ah that makes sense.

[MrNexx]

Even non centralized city states would generally be lawful though wouldn't they?

It's a matter of how those states are maintained.

In a lawful society, they're maintained through law. There are laws to cover what can and cannot be done, and violating them means official sanction.

In chaotic society, they're largely dependent upon coercion and choice. The drow society is chaotic because, while they have a few laws and traditions, most of those are enforced by coercion... break with these and we'll break your legs. The Matron Mothers maintain strict power, and oppress the rest of society, but they still rely on force to do so... if you get too free with breaking the edicts of the Matrons, Lloth will take an interest. Feel free to kill each other, but don't upset the structure so badly that the drow do not continue.

[Nerd-o-rama]

"I had a plan."
"You, a plan?"
"Yeah. I had a good plan. A smart plan. Carefully laid out."
"What happened?"
"I got bored. All that watching, waiting, standing around. My legs cramped up."

-Chaotic Evil vampire planning. Graz'zt's a bit more patient, being completely immortal.

[MrNexx]

LOL! Great example, Nerd-o-rama.

[BardicDuelist]

"I had a plan."
"You, a plan?"
"Yeah. I had a good plan. A smart plan. Carefully laid out."
"What happened?"
"I got bored. All that watching, waiting, standing around. My legs cramped up."

-Chaotic Evil vampire planning. Graz'zt's a bit more patient, being completely immortal.

Couldn't have said it better myself (and I tried..)

[Thoughtbot360]

He seems to be LE because he's fairly meticulous and clever- he's a demon, and thus his nature is chaotic.

I look at it this way- he is only orderly when he knows it benefits him. He's smart enough to know when to restrain himself.

Which is funny, because a Paladin cannot choose to be evil or chaotic (but mostly evil) in the slightest when it "benefits" him, or his cause. But it does make sense that Gra'azt would be intelligent (he has to be just to survive, in fact, because the Abyss is the ultimate divided state), just so he can compete with the devils, celestials, overreaching demologists, plane-travelling heroes and other demons. So if his alignment gets in the way, screw chaos! Actually, evil can get in the way too, and I doubt that any outsider society would survive if they truly were devoid of the capacity for even the most marginal act of goodness.

Really, when would a demon say "We've got to stop this explosion and save the Abyss, even at the cost of our lives!" when he could also say "Screw the Abyss! I'm taking this portal to Outland and sealing it off to escape the destruction! And then I'm going to the Topless Tropical Island demiplane to molster (South Park reference! ) some beach girls!"

[Matthew]

That is because Paladins fall when they commit an Evil Act. It is a Base Class restriction and completely separate from being a Lawful Good Character.

[Devils_Advocate]

It's important to distinguish between things that merely correlate with an alignment and the alignment's definitive characteristics. Lawful means conforming and/or honest; Chaotic means independent and/or dishonest. That's it. Go reread the alignment section of the PHB if you don't believe me. But keep this in mind: Those descriptions they give of characters of each of the 9 distinct aligments? Yeah, those don't count. It specifically says that each "depicts a typical character of that alignment" (emphasis mine). And thank the gods, because otherwise a character could, say, be both Chaotic and Evil and yet Neutral Evil. In fact, they seem to have chosen a description of a coolheaded, badass sociopathic type CE to describe Neutral Evil. What's up with that? (For what it's worth, I'd describe a typical Neutral Evil character as someone who's quite willing to follow the rules, obey authority, and work with others so long as doing so benefits her, and also quite willing to break the rules, defy authority, and betray her allies as soon as doing any of those benefits her. "Whatever works" Magic: The Gathering Black style ruthless opportunism.) The definitive qualities are given in the "LAW VS. CHAOS" section.

Scheming, organization, and inflexibility may be more common amongst Lawful beings, and caprice, disorganization, and adaptability more common amongst Chaotic beings, but they're not the definitive qualities. So you can have a Chaotic guy who is hesitant to depart from his elaborate, well-thought-out, long-term plans, and you can have a Lawful guy who's constantly rethinking things as changes occur and reacting to things as they happen. Really, you can. So long as the Lawful dude is an upstanding, loyal member of his organization, and the Chaotic dude is treacherous and focussed on maintaining his own personal power and autonomy, you're golden.

Conflating the typical attributes of a character of a given alignment with the definitive attributes of that alignment is, sadly, something that WOTC seems prone to doing all the friggin' time. This, in my estimation, is pretty much the main reason that alignment tends to generally suck. To illustrate this, let me point out one of the rare instances where they got it right: In the PHB II, they basically tell you "You can make a Lawful Good Beguiler if you want, but he'll be weird." Why on Earth couldn't they have given the bard, barbarian, monk, et cetera the same treatment?

Frankly, I'd as soon ditch the honesty/dishonesty aspect. For starters, breaking a promise is something that's clearly often going to be a Good/Evil isssue: It's generally a jerk thing to do someone, but there may be instances where it's OK, and in some cases, it's just some bastard getting exactly what's coming to him. In short, it's like violence, which it's understood that characters of every alignment can sometimes use, although obviously they'll use it under different circumstances depending on alignment. Granted, that's because D&D is a game largely about beating things up and taking their stuff, but still... Lying is, like, the one specific sort of act that's given a specific place in an otherwise broad, general ruleset. That just doesn't fit.

The other thing is that... how can I say this? {Conformity, Honesty} and {Independence, Dishonesty} aren't even examples of traits that merely correlate! So far as I can see, they pair up the opposite way as often as not. Why defeat the purpose of having more than a single alignment axis in the first place?

I was just looking through the Demonweb Pits, and I realized that Graz'zt seems to be LE. Anyone else care to elaborate?

(You leave out basic punctuation and capitalization (Except where you use a period in place of a question mark. Why do people do that?), yet you include the apostrophe in "Graz'zt"? Man, only on the internet. )

I would note that just tossing out an opinion doesn't contribute much to a discussion. Of course, here, you're starting a thread, so it's acceptable simply to open the topic, but it's helpful to start things going by giving your own thoughts.

Or, to rephrase that in the form of a question: Why do you think Graz'zt is LE?

Which is funny, because a Paladin cannot choose to be evil or chaotic (but mostly evil) in the slightest when it "benefits" him, or his cause.

Paladins are specifically prohibitted from committing Evil acts, but they are not prohibitted from committing Chaotic acts.

Really? IIRC drow are under CE in Monster Manuals and stuff O_o

Depends on which Monster Manuals you're talking about. They may have once been Always Chaotic Evil, but they're Usually Neutral Evil in the 3.5 MM. I feel that this fits them better; a racist, sexist, highly hierarchal society of people obsessed with social station hardly screams "Chaotic" to me. Sure, it would be easy to say that you can never trust a drow, but the fact is that you generally can trust a typical drow... to ruthlessly act in her own self interest, in whatever way advances her power, station, and/or safety. So you can count on a dark elf to serve you so long as doing so benefits her, and you can count on her to stab you in the back as soon as she's in a position where that would benefit her. Drow are reliable like that. You can get them to act loyal, but not to genuinely be loyal. They try to avoid "misbehaving" in ways that they can't get away with, but have no compunctions against doing anything they can get away with. And in a society where underhandedly breaking the rules and defying authority in order to advance oneself is expected and, to a degree, promoted, just where does the boudry between Law and Chaos lie? Lolth's greatest preistesses are not the most obedient ones. Indeed, those so foolish as to blindly follow their goddess's every command will quickly perish...

Interestingly, the 2nd Edition Drow of the Underdark notes that perhaps as many as 15% of drow would be considered "good" by other races. Groups of dark elves cut off from the main drow cities and Lolth's influence, it says, tend to "exhibit natures no more good or evil than the general run of humankind." (Which implies that their Evil, just like their sensitivity to light, is not intrinstic but wholly a product of their environment!) So I guess there really are that many renegade non-Evil drow running about.

...Except that it sounds like most of them aren't "renegades" per say, but were born and raised in communities separate from the main drow population. And they aren't all Chaotic Good -- most of these "good" drow are Neutral on the moral axis, e.g. pretty good for a drow. So please don't take this as a good reason to make a Drizzt clone, saying "Hey, guys like this are all over the place."

(I understand that they'll be doing away with mechanical alignment for 4th Edition. There may still be cosmic forces of Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos, but they won't be intimately tied to every being in the cosmos, as well as numerous classes, spells, and magic items, for no compelling reason. About time.)

In chaotic society, they're largely dependent upon coercion and choice. The drow society is chaotic because, while they have a few laws and traditions, most of those are enforced by coercion... break with these and we'll break your legs.

So, in contrast, a Lawful society is one in which people don't choose, so laws don't need to be enforced? Or are somehow enforced in a non-coercive fashion? I'm not quite sure that I understand the distinction you're making here. Do you mean that Lawful persons will tend to conform to the rules simply because they are the rules, even if there's no threat of punishment?

Even non centralized city states would generally be lawful though wouldn't they?

Well, the alignment of an individual is basically a summary of how she interacts with other individuals. But what does it mean to speak of the alignment of a city? There are several possible meanings that I can see.

1. The alignment of a group is the alignment most common amongst its individual members. In that case, it just comes down to the alignment of individual drow. Which means that it's not so much a matter of the society that those individuals find themselves in, but how they each choose to deal with that society.

2. The alignment of a group is a summary of how it interacts with other groups. In this case, a group may be differently aligned that its individual members. For example, a nation could ruthlessly exploit its neighbors at every opportunity and break treaties and alliances whenever they became inconvenient, while its people worked harmoniously together in a genuine spirit of brotherhood and mutual cooperation. Such a nation would be CE, but its individual members would be LN.

Drow cities are very much the opposite of Lawful in their interactions with other communities.

3. A governement's alignment is the alignment that a single person who dictated all of that government's activities would have (regardless of whether such a person actually exists). Do drow rulers generally seek the approval of others and/or consistantly enforce specific, well-established rules, or do they govern by whim and through fear, with their main "rule" being "Don't piss us off"? I'm thinking that they lean more toward the latter.