Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How do Governments Align?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6789001" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>Thanks for putting aside your nerd rage. I'm well aware that it's far from a perfect system, but I find that at least within the context of D&D it's easier and usually better to make it work than to try to expunge it. Exactly what 'making it work' means varies from table to table, but I'm rather inclined to think that it always starts with a consistency that has been rather lacking in describing what alignment is even in published canon.</p><p></p><p>But, to help you imagine the idea.</p><p></p><p>Signs of a Lawful Society:</p><p></p><p>1) General distrust of oneself and of one's ability to judge their own affairs, and so a tendency to prefer the judgment of others.</p><p>2) High trust of others, and often trust of your ability to make choices for others. Consequently, a greater tendency to think you can manage other people's affairs better than your own.</p><p>3) Marked trust for authority, and in particular a tendency to defer to the judgment of trained specialists such as magistrates, lawyers, academics, judges, and priests and to disparage the tastes, judgments, preference and wisdom of the common man or of crowds or committees. A general desire to try to enumerate the solution to all problems and indeed a firm conviction that by and large this can be done. Preferences therefore for lengthy detailed laws which cover all possible situations, so that judges need only discover what the law already is rather than rely on their own judgment and interpretation.</p><p>4) A tendency to have belief in destiny or other inescapable qualities that are a matter of birth.</p><p>5) Marked distrust of private property, and a tendency to believe that the primary purpose of private property is to serve the public good and that it is in some sense not private but owned by or owed to the large society.</p><p>6) Marked distrust of individual liberty, and a tendency to describe rights in terms of socially provided benefits subject to limits of decency or custom. </p><p>7) A general belief in uniformity and conformity. A tendency to see that all people, particularly all people of a certain caste, are basically the same and have the same experiences. In other words, belief that a person's identity is simply or at least largely the collection of groups which they belong to - race, gender, sexual preference, nationality, social class, etc. A tendency to see problems as being universal and having universal solutions, and thus to be placed under the rule of a single expert. Both things and people are seen largely as being the same and interchangable, and are to be governed by universal standards. </p><p>8) The private life and the public life are the same and inseparable, and the expectation is that you have no private affairs but all decisions are made collectively or by society for you.</p><p>9) Great emphasis on the sanctity and majesty of the state and the collective it embodies, and of the wisdom of those that make up the state. A tendency therefore to prefer state regulation of everything and to see all problems as requiring state solutions. Individuals exist solely to serve and protect the majesty of the state, who in turn is in no way obligated to sacrifice their dignity to protect the individual and to the extent that they do so does so only out of rational self-interest.</p><p></p><p>The signs of a Chaotic society are therefore the opposite of these things:</p><p></p><p>1) General distrust of others and of one's ability to judge the affairs of others, and so a tendency to prefer your own judgment. For example, if the law or custom and your own consciousness are in conflict, the tendency is assume this condemns the law and not your belief.</p><p>2) High trust of self, and trust of your ability to make choices for yourself. You judge no one can make choices for you better than yourself, and in the extreme that what you believe trumps even physical reality.</p><p>3) Marked distrust for authority, and in particular a tendency to distrust to the judgment of trained specialists such as magistrates, lawyers, academics, judges, and priests and instead to prefer the tastes, judgments, preference and wisdom of the common man or of crowds or committees. </p><p>4) A tendency to believe that there are no universal solutions, but that solutions are very particular to the highly individual problems that solve. A tendency to trust distributed uncoordinated solutions made on the local or individual level over broad managed solutions.</p><p>5) A tendency to believe in choice, free will, opportunity and that a person is largely self-made rather than a product of circumstances or birth. .</p><p>6) Marked trust of private property, and a tendency to believe that the primary purpose of public institutions is to serve the individual good and that it is in some sense all public property is owned by the individual.</p><p>6) Marked trust of individual liberty, and a tendency to describe rights as inherent and inalienable. A tendency to believe that the ills caused by personal freedom, regardless of what they may be, are nonetheless preferable to giving up these liberties. </p><p>7) A general belief in diversity and in non-conformity. A tendency to see that all people are primarily individuals and cannot be judged according to the group they belong to. Or in other words, that you could list the collection of all the groups which an individual belongs to - race, gender, sexual preference, nationality, social class, etc. - and you'd still know next to nothing about them. A tendency to see problems as being particular, wicked, unique and having unique solutions or indeed no solutions. </p><p>8) The private life and the public life are distinct, and the expectation is that you will exclusively manage your private affairs.</p><p>9) Great emphasis on the sanctity and majesty of the individual, and of the wisdom and dignity of the individual. The collective, state, or society exists as an institution solely to serve and protect the individual's dignity, who in turn is in no way obligated to sacrifice their dignity to protect the state and to the extent that they do so, does so only out of rational self-interest.</p><p></p><p>Of course, real societies are often complex and you may see a culture that predominately can be described using the above as lawful, but in some areas they have attributes that seem to favor chaotic beliefs. And different cultures will take different points above to different extremes, so that a society that on the whole seems chaotic on point #3 may not be nearly as extreme on that point as another one. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is correct in as far as it goes, but a word of caution. You've defaulted to a contrast between Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil motivations in your rulers, and this has the tendency to confuse people into thinking that certain aspects of Law are inherent aspects of Good and conversely certain aspects of Chaos are inherent aspects of Evil. An Evil King need not necessarily have self-centered and selfish motivations in order to be evil. You can have an Evil King who lives like an aesthete monk, and who takes no comforts or selfish pleasure at all, nor whom burdens the treasury with his personal wants and needs. Likewise, you can have an Evil King who is without corruption, nepotism, or favoritism, and who would never use soldiers to enforce mere personal whims or vendettas but who is indeed always acting in what he believes is the best interests of securing the territory. Destroying monsters and executing bandits are not the sole province of benevolent sovereigns; evil kings are perfectly happy to destroy such pests and scourges as well. </p><p></p><p>The other danger in your contrast is that it forgets that Evil can be quite popular, and populist, and perceived as working in the public good.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well sure, but there is a difference between a society where charity is valued and one where support of the public good is compulsory. One is good, and the other is lawful. The society where people are both charitable because they wish to be and because they must is lawful good, but if people are compelled to assist others whether they will it or not, we can't necessarily say it is good.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is certainly true, even in a Lawful Evil society, but its worth again noting that much like charity in a lawful good society, in lawful evil society genuine respect for authority both exists and is compelled to exist through fear and intimidation.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Whether you are willing to extend charity, compassion, and benevolence beyond your 'in group' or self is a big marker of the difference between a 'good' culture and an 'evil' one. Of course Lawful Evil cultures generally at some level desire what is good for their 'in group', and of course Chaotic Evil cultures generally at some level desire what is good for their self. But a good culture would not generally think that raiding others and making war was a honorable or desirable thing, even if regrettably the ill will and violence of the other culture made war a necessity. The classic example here (or at least a non-political one) is organized crime, as shown in various Hollywood movies, where you have a person who desires ordinary good and even laudable ends for his own family, but whose affairs are marked with violence, vendettas, crime, corruption, and predation upon the weak (gambling, narcotics, prostitution, extortion rackets, etc.) with the justification that they are deserving of it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6789001, member: 4937"] Thanks for putting aside your nerd rage. I'm well aware that it's far from a perfect system, but I find that at least within the context of D&D it's easier and usually better to make it work than to try to expunge it. Exactly what 'making it work' means varies from table to table, but I'm rather inclined to think that it always starts with a consistency that has been rather lacking in describing what alignment is even in published canon. But, to help you imagine the idea. Signs of a Lawful Society: 1) General distrust of oneself and of one's ability to judge their own affairs, and so a tendency to prefer the judgment of others. 2) High trust of others, and often trust of your ability to make choices for others. Consequently, a greater tendency to think you can manage other people's affairs better than your own. 3) Marked trust for authority, and in particular a tendency to defer to the judgment of trained specialists such as magistrates, lawyers, academics, judges, and priests and to disparage the tastes, judgments, preference and wisdom of the common man or of crowds or committees. A general desire to try to enumerate the solution to all problems and indeed a firm conviction that by and large this can be done. Preferences therefore for lengthy detailed laws which cover all possible situations, so that judges need only discover what the law already is rather than rely on their own judgment and interpretation. 4) A tendency to have belief in destiny or other inescapable qualities that are a matter of birth. 5) Marked distrust of private property, and a tendency to believe that the primary purpose of private property is to serve the public good and that it is in some sense not private but owned by or owed to the large society. 6) Marked distrust of individual liberty, and a tendency to describe rights in terms of socially provided benefits subject to limits of decency or custom. 7) A general belief in uniformity and conformity. A tendency to see that all people, particularly all people of a certain caste, are basically the same and have the same experiences. In other words, belief that a person's identity is simply or at least largely the collection of groups which they belong to - race, gender, sexual preference, nationality, social class, etc. A tendency to see problems as being universal and having universal solutions, and thus to be placed under the rule of a single expert. Both things and people are seen largely as being the same and interchangable, and are to be governed by universal standards. 8) The private life and the public life are the same and inseparable, and the expectation is that you have no private affairs but all decisions are made collectively or by society for you. 9) Great emphasis on the sanctity and majesty of the state and the collective it embodies, and of the wisdom of those that make up the state. A tendency therefore to prefer state regulation of everything and to see all problems as requiring state solutions. Individuals exist solely to serve and protect the majesty of the state, who in turn is in no way obligated to sacrifice their dignity to protect the individual and to the extent that they do so does so only out of rational self-interest. The signs of a Chaotic society are therefore the opposite of these things: 1) General distrust of others and of one's ability to judge the affairs of others, and so a tendency to prefer your own judgment. For example, if the law or custom and your own consciousness are in conflict, the tendency is assume this condemns the law and not your belief. 2) High trust of self, and trust of your ability to make choices for yourself. You judge no one can make choices for you better than yourself, and in the extreme that what you believe trumps even physical reality. 3) Marked distrust for authority, and in particular a tendency to distrust to the judgment of trained specialists such as magistrates, lawyers, academics, judges, and priests and instead to prefer the tastes, judgments, preference and wisdom of the common man or of crowds or committees. 4) A tendency to believe that there are no universal solutions, but that solutions are very particular to the highly individual problems that solve. A tendency to trust distributed uncoordinated solutions made on the local or individual level over broad managed solutions. 5) A tendency to believe in choice, free will, opportunity and that a person is largely self-made rather than a product of circumstances or birth. . 6) Marked trust of private property, and a tendency to believe that the primary purpose of public institutions is to serve the individual good and that it is in some sense all public property is owned by the individual. 6) Marked trust of individual liberty, and a tendency to describe rights as inherent and inalienable. A tendency to believe that the ills caused by personal freedom, regardless of what they may be, are nonetheless preferable to giving up these liberties. 7) A general belief in diversity and in non-conformity. A tendency to see that all people are primarily individuals and cannot be judged according to the group they belong to. Or in other words, that you could list the collection of all the groups which an individual belongs to - race, gender, sexual preference, nationality, social class, etc. - and you'd still know next to nothing about them. A tendency to see problems as being particular, wicked, unique and having unique solutions or indeed no solutions. 8) The private life and the public life are distinct, and the expectation is that you will exclusively manage your private affairs. 9) Great emphasis on the sanctity and majesty of the individual, and of the wisdom and dignity of the individual. The collective, state, or society exists as an institution solely to serve and protect the individual's dignity, who in turn is in no way obligated to sacrifice their dignity to protect the state and to the extent that they do so, does so only out of rational self-interest. Of course, real societies are often complex and you may see a culture that predominately can be described using the above as lawful, but in some areas they have attributes that seem to favor chaotic beliefs. And different cultures will take different points above to different extremes, so that a society that on the whole seems chaotic on point #3 may not be nearly as extreme on that point as another one. That is correct in as far as it goes, but a word of caution. You've defaulted to a contrast between Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil motivations in your rulers, and this has the tendency to confuse people into thinking that certain aspects of Law are inherent aspects of Good and conversely certain aspects of Chaos are inherent aspects of Evil. An Evil King need not necessarily have self-centered and selfish motivations in order to be evil. You can have an Evil King who lives like an aesthete monk, and who takes no comforts or selfish pleasure at all, nor whom burdens the treasury with his personal wants and needs. Likewise, you can have an Evil King who is without corruption, nepotism, or favoritism, and who would never use soldiers to enforce mere personal whims or vendettas but who is indeed always acting in what he believes is the best interests of securing the territory. Destroying monsters and executing bandits are not the sole province of benevolent sovereigns; evil kings are perfectly happy to destroy such pests and scourges as well. The other danger in your contrast is that it forgets that Evil can be quite popular, and populist, and perceived as working in the public good. Well sure, but there is a difference between a society where charity is valued and one where support of the public good is compulsory. One is good, and the other is lawful. The society where people are both charitable because they wish to be and because they must is lawful good, but if people are compelled to assist others whether they will it or not, we can't necessarily say it is good. This is certainly true, even in a Lawful Evil society, but its worth again noting that much like charity in a lawful good society, in lawful evil society genuine respect for authority both exists and is compelled to exist through fear and intimidation. Whether you are willing to extend charity, compassion, and benevolence beyond your 'in group' or self is a big marker of the difference between a 'good' culture and an 'evil' one. Of course Lawful Evil cultures generally at some level desire what is good for their 'in group', and of course Chaotic Evil cultures generally at some level desire what is good for their self. But a good culture would not generally think that raiding others and making war was a honorable or desirable thing, even if regrettably the ill will and violence of the other culture made war a necessity. The classic example here (or at least a non-political one) is organized crime, as shown in various Hollywood movies, where you have a person who desires ordinary good and even laudable ends for his own family, but whose affairs are marked with violence, vendettas, crime, corruption, and predation upon the weak (gambling, narcotics, prostitution, extortion rackets, etc.) with the justification that they are deserving of it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How do Governments Align?
Top