Good Evil and Free Will in D&D

[Alex Warlorn]

Okay, it genarally appears that more Good race members turn neutral or evil than Evil race members turn neutral or good. With that in mind I ask, is this because Evil is stronger, Evil is easier, or that the Good alinged cultures allow for more free will?

[Randugulf]

All of the above.

[chibibar]

It all depends what you might consider "evil" now if we are talking about run of the mill murderers, burning buildings, and well... general mass destruction type...yes that is evil..

But in some culture kissing in public is consider evil, holding hands, chewing gum etc.

It is VERY hard to be constantly good. Sometimes your inner self just want to let loose and well.... be free (free will) and sometimes people lack the ability to come back to 'normal'.

Being Evil is easy.... being good takes work.

[†Seer†]

Following up..virtue is it's own reward because if it wasn't no one would bother working for it.

[Renrik]

Because the evil races in D&D are based, at least subconsciously, on racial steryotypes, and the players reinforce those steryotypes by making the monsters evil and playing all the fair-skinned good races as more human-like.

Or so claims one of the players in my group. But he also thinks that the D&D druid class is an accurate representation of the actual Celtic druids, so he's an idiot.

The real reason? We really do view the PHB races as more human, and we assign them human traits and human falibilities, including the ability to be evil, whereas we do not assignmore humanlike traits to the orcs and gnolls and goblinoids, partialy because they are so obviously nonhuman and partially because we're always fighting them and thus don;t bother thinking about their human side and what they're like at ome, and if they care about anyone. So the concept of a good orc is a little more alien than an evil elf.

[VerdugoExplode]

I say it's because the lack of evil would doubtless stop the creation of rag-tag groups of adventurers turning the already unbelievable economy into a nightmare from which there is no escape. So in doing evil deeds they are keeping the world turning.

Also to avoid constant moral dilemmas whenever attacking another sentient being. Example being:
"The goblins are attacking the village! We need adventurers!"

Moral adventurer "Well, are they attacking out of malice, or maybe necessity? They might be starving, or maybe these lands are precious to them, it depends on who was living here first, you commoners might be the invaders here. The goblins might just be products of a society that scorns them out of fear and ignorance instead of learning to coexist in a peaceful manner. You should all be ashamed!"

Normal Adventurer "So you're saying that treasure is attacking and all we need to do to claim it is to kill whoever happens to be holding it at the time, after which you will probably give us more money. Sounds good to me."

Who else would we kill then? Who!? Think of the children!
I don't think Diplomacy & Debate would be as entertaining as Dungeons & Dragons. Although weapon focus(Sharp tongue) would be interesting to say the least.

[Kompera]

Being Evil is easy.... being good takes work.

I think that evil needs to work as hard at it as good. It takes little effort to not embezzle from your company, but a lot of work to try to pull it off successfully. And look at all the work Evil Overlords have to put in. Long hours, bungling henchmen, convoluted plans for world domination, and overly complex death traps. It's a lot of work!

And as Humperdinck said

I've got my country's 500th anniversary to plan, my wedding to arrange, my wife to murder and Guilder to frame for it; I'm swamped.

[Pronounceable]

Objective evil is an extremely difficult (possibly impossible) concept to apply logic to. Sooner or later, you'll stop trying.

Because the evil races in D&D are based, at least subconsciously, on racial steryotypes, and the players reinforce those steryotypes by making the monsters evil and playing all the fair-skinned good races as more human-like...

He's right about this. Count evil DnD races which are slender, fair skinned and beautiful. Then count how many evil races there are that are bulky, dark/green/non-fair skinned and ugly. Dehumanization of enemy is a solid strategy for war that has been (and is being) used for centuries. It's only natural that we feel the need to dehumanize the opposition even on a fantasy setting.

[Dhavaer]

Then count how many evil races there are that are bulky, dark/green/non-fair skinned and ugly.

What, all of them?
...
In core, maybe hobgoblins. Maybe gnolls, too.

[Riffington]

Goodness is not a simple act of will. People become good through long habit, and it's a lot easier when you get positive reinforcement.

In the US, it is easy to be good. You act hospitably, people reward this with thanks, praise, occasionally presents. You give charity: you see your friends doing the same, and praising you for it. You consider stealing, but see that it is punished severely, and that people speak disparagingly of it.
Doing evil things gives its own reinforcement though: steal, and you have more money; etc.

In Sodom/Gomorrah, it was harder. You act hospitably to strangers, your neighbors come over and demand to rape/kill your guests. Not much positive reinforcement there; hence, only Lot's family managed to be good.

So for an Orc, if you get good ideas, you get no reward for it. No gratitude, only scorn and beatings (possibly killings) from your family/friends. Secret evil has inherent rewards, but secret good does not. Orcs may have free will, but they lack positive reinforcement. Obviously, an orc raised by humans would have a much better chance of being good. Even there, racism would make it tougher.

So really, if a race has even a slight genetic predisposition to evil, this can create a culture of evil that makes it very hard to be good. Whereas even with a cultural/genetic predisposition to good, evil can be self-reinforcing.

[Riffington]

I don't think Diplomacy & Debate would be as entertaining as Dungeons & Dragons. Although weapon focus(Sharp tongue) would be interesting to say the least.

Oh, I think it would be. Provided there is alcohol.

[hewhosaysfish]

Being Evil is easy.... being good takes work.

I would have to support kompera in disagreeing with that.
[pratchett]A moralist would have said this was because sin is easier than virtue but moralists say that sort of thing all the time. In fact some sin is quite difficult, and requires specialist equipment.[/pratchett]

[Prophaniti]

Because the evil races in D&D are based, at least subconsciously, on racial steryotypes, and the players reinforce those steryotypes by making the monsters evil and playing all the fair-skinned good races as more human-like.
*snip*
The real reason? We really do view the PHB races as more human, and we assign them human traits and human falibilities, including the ability to be evil, whereas we do not assignmore humanlike traits to the orcs and gnolls and goblinoids, partialy because they are so obviously nonhuman and partially because we're always fighting them and thus don;t bother thinking about their human side and what they're like at ome, and if they care about anyone. So the concept of a good orc is a little more alien than an evil elf.

I give more human characteristics to monstrous races quite often, because it makes gameplay more interesting, for my group at least.

However, the main point I always make in these discussions is this: They are really seperate species, not races. The thought processes of an orc or goblin, once you get past the 'like food' basics, are utterly different than a humans. It's not just a cultural difference, though that can mitigate things (an orc raised by humans will obviously relate to them more than his own people, who will now seem strange to him). It is a real difference of perception.

One of the things I also try to do is enhance this aspect of ALL non-human races, espesially the player races like elves and gnomes and such. The reasoning of an elf in the party will often not make sense to us, which granted is hard to roleplay, but I find it infinitely more enjoyable than running a human with pointy ears.

[Riffington]

However, the main point I always make in these discussions is this: They are really seperate species, not races.

Except elves and orcs. They can mate with humans and create viable offspring, so they are the same species.

For your actual point: how can you roleplay something you don't understand? How can you really make orcs more than a stereotype, except by narrating them as humans with a brutish culture?

[Prophaniti]

Yes, I know, the ability to mate classifies them as the same species scientifically. This is D&D though, and not necesarily bound by the same laws of biology that we are. It's not called 'fantasy' for nothing.

Like I said, it is very difficult to roleplay beings who dont think like we do. I run into that all the time when I try to roleplay a woman!
(Please dont consider that flaming. I'm happily married and love her with all my heart, but the fact is, sometimes her actions and ways of approaching problems just dont make sense to me, nor mine to her.)

To take orcs as an ever popular example...
We as humans have long since past on the idea that the strongest among us, the best fighters and warriors, should be in charge on that virtue alone. Orcs, however, believe that quite strongly. The vast majority of them believe it and live it every day, the ones on top knowing that if they show a moments weakness they will be pulled down, and rightly so.

Even orcs have free will, the capacity for original thought. This thought is simply different from our own, difficult to understand, and thus easy to label. The trick to an interesting world, for me, is not making other races more like humans, but rather less like them, in the sense that they will seldom come to the same conclusions given the same information.

The last point to make is this: In nearly every fantasy setting humans are the wild card, the 'most free'. When you meet and elf or a dwarf, you have certain expectations about how they will behave and what they will say. This is because these expectations are seldom countered. 90% of dwarves (in D&D and most other settings) are industrious, disciplined, patient, gruff, bluntly honest and mildly distrustful of outsiders. Their are variations of course, since dwarves are still individuals and able to form their own opinions and perceptions, but most dwarves are dwarves because of these attitudes, not just their stature.

With a human, however, there are no expectations. They can be anything from humble to proud, polite to rude, soft-spoken and thoughtful to brash and abrupt. This is, I feel, because we like to study our own contradictions and oddities. Creating other races that are more concrete in their behavior and beliefs is a way of contrasting our own nature. This is what makes most fantasy settings so enjoyable is the ability to interact with creatures and intellects fundamentaly different from our own. I personally feel it's far more enjoyable than running around in a world full of humans and our endlessly repetative differences.

[Jayabalard]

evil is the easy way; good is the hard way.

there are, of course, lots of tongue in cheek quotes that people can use as counter-examples, but their validity is somewhat lacking...

[Doresain]

Who else would we kill then? Who!? Think of the children!

i do think of the children...they always let out the best screams when you impale them...

[Riffington]

Like I said, it is very difficult to roleplay beings who dont think like we do. I run into that all the time when I try to roleplay a woman!

This is absolutely true: pretty much nobody (except certain TGs) can actually roleplay cross-gender very well. This is why the Turing test had to be revised. In fact, many good DM's don't even let people try, since they know it'll just be a failure. One imagines, elves are even more distinct than the opposite gender - but a human with funny ears is playable.

The last point to make is this: In nearly every fantasy setting humans are the wild card, the 'most free'.

This is the polite way of saying "nonhumans are walking stereotypes". Why can't elves or halflings be as adaptable as humans? Logically, they should be. As authors/storytellers, we just can't imagine what they'd do if they were. Instead of admitting our limits, we place those limits on the nonhumans. Do you have some way around this that I'm missing?

[Jayabalard]

This is the polite way of saying "nonhumans are walking stereotypes". Why can't elves or halflings be as adaptable as humans?

if they were, then elves would be, by far, the majority race, and there'd be no room for humans... we'd have beeen supplanted like the Neanderthals...

[Roderick_BR]

I'd say that it's because more kids want to be "cool" and play the "evil" ones.
An example? World of Warcraft. Lots of players like the horde better, not because of the races (except by the minotaur, maybe), but because it's cooler, and "alliance is dumb".
What do Blizzard do? They make a pretty looking race be part of the horde. And who can they use? They got the high-elves (forgotten in Warcraft 3 in favor of night elves), renamed it to "blood elves", and made them available as a horde race.
Seriously, I see no reason why they have elves in the horde. If you actually read their story,

Spoiler

Show

You find out that they are not *really* evil at all, but they accepted the horde support because the alliance turned their backs to the high elves.

@Riffington: about roleplaying other genders: So very true. We tend to roleplay them as the stereotype we know, or with they were. I played a few female characters in the past, and I'm sure no one would have been fooled XD
Girls playing men get weird too.
Then, as you said, a few people can do it well. I have this friend that can go completely fangirl-ish when roleplaying his character, but that's because he's a better roleplayer than me. He talks more, have quicker ideas, and is better at improvisation.

[Prophaniti]

No, it's not to say their walking stereotypes. It's to say they are different. They do not have the strange compulsion that humans seem to have to explore and expand and poke things. Humans, the vast majority of us, are restless and endlessly curious. This, combined with the fact that we breed much more quickly than most other races, makes humans the dominant people in most fantasy settings.

Elves and dwarves are content, for the most part, to sit in their forests and halls and tend their trees and mine their ore. Of course there are exceptions, as I said before. There are restless elves and curious dwarves, but these are far less common that restless and curious humans.

Now, partly you are correct. This is a fantasy setting with made-up races. Their behavior and attitudes are in part an attempt by us to explore different aspects of our own diverse personas. We create in them what we would be like if most of us liked 'x' or believed 'y'. I've always felt that this becomes only more interesting the more we seperate the created races from the mentality of their creators(i.e. us).

Wow, I seem to just go on and on about this. Guess I like the topic.

EDIT: @Roderick: Horde != evil and Alliance != good. In WoW, Evil = Burning Legion and Scourge. Plus, a lot more people play alliance than horde (check the realm census page) which I dont really get, since only dwarves are cool on the alliance IMO. And I know they mangled backstory (they apparently love doing that) to get Blood Elves in with Horde, but nowhere near as bad as they did to get Draenei in the game at all! Personally, I really wish I could play a BE directly allied with Kael'Thas and Illidan. I want a new faction!

[Riffington]

Jayalabard: no, because of low birth rates. The elves will never supplant humans, though orcs might.

Prophanati: but halflings and gnomes are curious too (yet nonhuman). They poke their noses everywhere, and explore ideas/places/everything. And if you're gonna accept that a single race of elves gave rise to undersea elves, wood elves, underground elves, and more - then the original elves must have been rather adaptable.

More importantly: the "what I would be if my thought patterns worked like X". How do you play/DM an elven character? Just tell me some of the things you do.

There's 3 ways I can think of it working.
1. Elves are sort of in the background of the story. You don't get to really see their thought process much.

2. Elves who aren't in the background are more human. They've been around humans, are played by humans, you're gonna see human thought processes.

3. I can think like a dog or cat, because I'm so much smarter than a dog/cat that I can turn on "emulation mode". Just like your PC can emulate a Commodore 64 because it's so much more powerful. So I just put my brain in "elf emulation mode", and think like an elf who's much dumber than me.

Is there a better way? Teach me what you do.

[Jayabalard]

Jayalabard: no, because of low birth rates. The elves will never supplant humans, though orcs might.

If they have low birth rates, then they aren't as adaptable as humans (human birthrate figures into their adaptability).

[Prophaniti]

Well, first, undersea elves and wood elves and underground elves... all these are mostly arbitrary additions by people who wanted to play an elf with webbed feet-to me at least-and most of them lack significant backstory and history to truly consider them different from regular elves, save in environment and appearance. Gnomes and halflings are probably closer to human mentality than any of the other core races, which is why you see more gnome and halfling communities that are integrated with human ones, rather than seperate as most elven and dwarven ones are. They understand us better and we understand them better and thus are more able to live and work side by side.

Most of the authors who have discussed this seem to think, and I agree on this point, that the most prominent difference in mentalities and outlooks among races has to do with lifespan. An elf or, to a lesser extent, a dwarf is seldom rushed or in a hurry to see or do anything, since they know they'll have plenty of free time to do it in the next decade, or the next century even. This tends to cause a far more relaxed and patient attitude toward life in general and is part of why they can't understand and usually dislike the constant rush and hurry of life among humans.

This is just one point of difference between thought-processes, and probably the one that is most easily understood. So, its one I can focus on when roleplaying an elf or dwarf. Even an elf that is considered brash and reckless among his own people will still be seen as careful and deliberate among humans. There are other things of course, but these will vary widely depending on the setting and culture of the race. Elves in regular D&D are not the same as elves in a Tolkien setting, nor the same as elves in Dragonlance.

It's up to you to study the culture of the race you're roleplaying in that particular setting and decide for yourself: What sets elves apart from humans in this world, aside from the ears? What makes them unique? Is your character considered the norm among his own people? As an easy way out if you dont want a big rping headache, perhaps he went adventuring because he does not fit in among his people and is more comfortable among humans.

Remember, it's supposed to be a game, and fun, so use your imagination and really work hard to stop yourself from reacting instinctively to a situation. If you react instinctively, your just rping yourself. Sit back for a second and really think about what someone from this particular culture and background would do. Sometimes you're running a character who truly believes violence is the most expedient solution to a given problem, even if you dont, or vice versa.

Man, I ramble on. Can't think of a good wrap-up for this post.

EDIT: I realized that I am wandering a bit far afield here. To answer the original question of the post: I agree with two. 1) 'good' cultures (in the D&D world where good is a real and concrete force) do tend to allow more free will and disagreement than evil ones.
2)Evil is usually an easier path to follow than good, with more short-term and tangible rewards for tasks less arduous- if you can ignore your consience at least.
But Evil is not more powerful. Not in the real world, not in D&D, not even in Star Wars!

[Kompera]

I'd say that it's because more kids want to be "cool" and play the "evil" ones.
An example? World of Warcraft. Lots of players like the horde better, not because of the races (except by the minotaur, maybe), but because it's cooler, and "alliance is dumb".

You're kidding, right? You have this exactly backwards. On most servers the Alliance outnumber the Horde 4:1 or more. Why? Because the Alliance races are those of classic literature, and because their chicks are hawt. The number of "kids" who "want to be cool" and play Undead Rogues is vastly, vastly outnumbered by the number of people who want to look at an avatar with a nice butt or who want to play a Legolas clone.

[Idiotbox90]

In basic D&D, your average nonhuman is not much different than a human raised in a foreign culture. In my games, I try to change this.

Your average dwarf finds the human thought process to be strange and alien. Humans tend to think the same of dwarves.

***

Also, what's wrong with playing a character of a different gender? In the average game, very little occurs where a male or a female would react differently. As long as one avoids romance and follows a few simple groundrules, one should do fine.

[VerdugoExplode]

Also, what's wrong with playing a character of a different gender? In the average game, very little occurs where a male or a female would react differently. As long as one avoids romance and follows a few simple groundrules, one should do fine.

Well, the main reason in our group is that they don't sell mental bleach, and if some of the people in my group, me included in all likelihood, ever said something along the lines of "I use my feminine wiles on him" I would need some. Actually, I would probably need a lot as my imagination would run screaming into the vast depths of the abyss. That and the fact that I've seen others do it and they didn't seem to find any balance point between promiscuous hedonist and vicious ice queen. I say leave females to the professionals.

[Riffington]

In the average game, very little occurs where a male or a female would react differently.

Your games don't include conversation?

[Ravyn]

This is absolutely true: pretty much nobody (except certain TGs) can actually roleplay cross-gender very well. This is why the Turing test had to be revised. In fact, many good DM's don't even let people try, since they know it'll just be a failure. One imagines, elves are even more distinct than the opposite gender - but a human with funny ears is playable.

Well, the main reason in our group is that they don't sell mental bleach, and if some of the people in my group, me included in all likelihood, ever said something along the lines of "I use my feminine wiles on him" I would need some. Actually, I would probably need a lot as my imagination would run screaming into the vast depths of the abyss. That and the fact that I've seen others do it and they didn't seem to find any balance point between promiscuous hedonist and vicious ice queen. I say leave females to the professionals.

I beg to differ; it just takes a bit more effort and a touch more research. I've seen no less than three of my male friends play highly believable female characters (two twice, no less), and I.... well, I was playing a male character in a chat-game for about a year, and it took half a year for one of our latecomers to figure out that I-as-player was a girl despite the occasional reference to me by the appropriate pronoun on the part of the players who'd known me before.

...of course, then there was the ST we couldn't stop complaining about because every female NPC he played was one if not both of the stereotypes... but there's a few in every batch. Most of the players and GMs I've seen have been much better than that.

[Riffington]

I beg to differ; it just takes a bit more effort and a touch more research. I've seen no less than three of my male friends play highly believable female characters

Figure out what your group is doing and how to teach it to others, and you can get a PhD and/or a $300/hr job out of it.