Bigoted alignments?

[Terraism]

In working on the setting for a new campaign, I'm trying to stay somewhere standard D&D, though tweaking the races by some amount. Elves, in particular, have become beaurocratic nobles obsessed with their own self-worth. A far cry from the carefree elves presented in the PH, they tend to look down upon non-elves. In most cases, they view them with pity - for not being blessed by being an elf, of course - but in the case of dwarves - ancestral enemy; long story - and halfbreeds, they are intolerant to the point of hatred. Half-orcs are bad, obviously (from their view,) and half-elves are abominations. Now - what alignment would you suggest? I'm certain to include Lawful as one component - their society is rigid, demanding, and codified. But on the other side of things, I'm not sure... I'm sure that an argument could be made as to their "good" nature, regardless - with the exception of a few glaring prejudices, they do try to act "for the best of all concerned," - but I'd doubt that to be the case. On the other hand, my gut reaction is to coin a bigot as "evil." Don't really want to do that, either... that doesn't seem it to me. That leaves LN, and... I guess I'm just hoping someone with better logic than myself might help point me in the right direction.


[Ok, guys - this can be a touchy subject. Let's all be good, because I really want the info without having the thread closed. Or any fights, anyway.]

 

[boxstop7]

Well, it depends on how you define "good". Right now, LN seems the way to go. It accounts for the rigidity in their society, but allows the "moral flexibility" needed for prejudice and hatred. But you could make an argument for "good". A character of "good" alignment doesn't have to be perfect. Most of us would consider ourselves "good" people, but no one among us is without fault. If your elves value the purity of their race as highly as you state, any taint would logically be considered an abomination. It all depends on how far you take it. Do the elves strive to erradicate thost abominations, or do they simply look down upon them? As for the issue with Dwarves, I think it's perfectly justified. The Europeans and the Moors were both good people independently, but when they got together some pretty nasty things happened. Hope this helped at least a little...

~Box

 

[Victim]

I'd agree on LN.

 

[SylverFlame]

If you ask me, it all depends on the reasoning behind the ideas.

Lawful Good can occur with a bigoted society, they just don't worry about the ramifications of the bigotry because it doesn't affect (or does positively affect) their society. Also, they won't go out of their way to make life hell for the non-pure-elves they target.

If Lawful Neutral they would justify their reasoning with fact. Elves are better because of whatever reason, and that determines the worth of other races. The big thing with LN is that the reasoning is justified. LN always has a reason and purpose. Also, think double standard. Look at real world society and think how humans treat kids different from adults.

Lawful Evil is much like Lawful Good, with the major difference being a full-out, intentional attack against non-pure-elves within Elven borders. Think of what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, Communists and just about everyone else.

 

[Kaji]

Howdy,

I guess I would say that having a limited view of the world which allows this kind of bigotry is actually pretty lawful neutral. I think. Your elves aren't really evil, they're just typical. Lot's of societies have good and bad features, and this racist attitude is theirs. Historically, racism/slavery was widely accepted by peoples all across the world as simply part of life, but these same people worked hard to feed their families and were kind to their children. Using that sense of balance, I think LN is right on.

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

Now - what alignment would you suggest? I'm certain to include Lawful as one component - their society is rigid, demanding, and codified.

I'm going to throw a cat (non pirate variety) among the pigeons. I think the culture which you've described could easily be chaotic.

The society is rigid and codified you say, but the individual's need not be. It could be the case that the codified appearance is only a facade. Something that everyone pays lip service to but no one truly respects. And even if they do respect it, the real power could all be favours, patronage, manoevering and privilege.

It could be a civilisation in decline, like Melnibone, with decadence and iconoclasm being the norm. In fact, if its bureaucratic enough, the rules could be so complex that multiple different individuals could rightfully claim to have authority over the same issue - such as several different bureaucrats warring over a particular part of a city, because, depending on which legislation you think is more pertinent, they all have the rights to control it.

2c, paid in full.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I don't think alignment is an issue. A man could be good, defend the weak, contribute money and time to those less fortunate, fight for his country, love his family, help his neighbors, yet detest a certain race or class (class as in nobility not rangers/paladins, etc). He may just look upon them as being less than human. Take orcs for example. You don't have to be evil to be predjudiced.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I think you need to consider what you want "good" to represent within your campaign... is it "namby pamby goodness", or "tough love" goodness? Is it seen in the way that they treat prisoners, the way that they treat their own society and people, the way that they treat all nations and races?

The reason that I ask this is that occasionally people lay upon "Lawful Good" a burden which couldn't be borne by saints

Why not just forget alignment and describe how they work as a society? It sounds like you'll have a much more interesting set-up that way, and you can merge together things which would be inconsistent within the alignment system while being completely comprehendable in real-world terms.

Cheers

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

You don't have to be evil to be predjudiced.

You sure about this? At the very least I think you'd have to say that you can't be good and prejudiced.

 

[Dremen]

Alignment sucks don't use it.

Take a look at some modern day people.

NOTE: The following is not an attack agains Christians just some of my observations. If there are any Christians on this board this is NOT directed at you. You've proved to have an open mind.

I come from a fundamental Christain background, which most people would agree is Lawfull Good for the most part. Some of my obersvations follow what you have stated about the elves.

1.This people strive to be good and follow God's will.
2.They uphold moral standards they belive are divinely inspired.
3.They only grudgingly accept change.
4.They belive they are the choosen ones and are blessed beyond others and that they have some sort of divine protection.
5.They belive any other religion is satanic.
6.They treat non-christians as lesser people to varying degrees
7.They in some cases even disown their kids if the kids choose other paths or make mistakes.
8.They can be out right bigoted about anything they belive as non-christian and there fore satanic.

Granted this is a gross generalization but fits the old of the elves you described. And individuals vary. Some of the best people I have ever met are Christians, and also some of the worst people I know hold the same beliefs.
-D

edit:
This above list only shows negatives and is Not meant as a comprehensive list in any way shape or form and is not intended to insult, and is not representative of all Christians. After all I haven't met all of them yet . This was intented to highlight a darker side of what most people could agree on as Lawful Good. It was not meant to 'dis' Christains or Christianity, nor pointing fingers at any particular person or group. And if you are reading this, and are a Christian, then you are already cool in my book!