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 LIVE! 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
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Multiverse is back....
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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6409961" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>The only thing you have to accept to understand this is that most believing beings (many fiends included!) have the belief that fiends are evil. If one were to take some sort of complete planar census, one would find that more believing beings believe that fiends are evil than believe that they are good. In my usual running of PS, the "What's so bad about evil?" perspective is especially prominent. "Call it evil if you like, I just think it's <em>fun!</em>", says the vrock in the middle of tearing apart an Outlands village. "Evil? I suppose so! Ah, well," says the hydroloth as she strokes the head of her mind-slave. "Yes. Evil. There is no other path to strength," says the erinyes as she takes aim with her bow. </p><p></p><p>That situation isn't permanent. If the PC's decide they want to change it, they might find the arguments of the fiends subtly changing. The amnizu lays down her whip, and raises an eyebrow. "Compassion? Friend, if life is suffering, then all compassion does is prolong that suffering, deceiving people, making them feel that life really isn't so bad. No. Better they know the truth, yes? Better they know the harsh reality than that they imagine that life can be anything but this torment. I torture people, yes, and I feel good about that, because I am reminding people of what the truth of life is. It is you delusional do-gooders who are truly the cruel, here." </p><p></p><p>It's not inherently less desirable to be called evil in PS than to be called good, so I don't see any reason why most of the uncountable numbers of fiends would have a real problem with that label. The Lawful ones might have a strict definition of what evil is that they then meet! The Chaotic ones would not object to anyone calling them anything! I don't accept the premise that more fiends believe they are good than believe that they are evil -- it's just a label in PS. </p><p></p><p>In aggregate with the rest of the reasons, I have no trouble accepting evil fiends as the current "starting point" for PS. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't accept the premise that the fiends already all think this. There's no clear reason for them to believe that they have that label. There's no reason for most them to deny the label of "evil," and thus have spells and planes know that label. They count, they just have no real reason to believe that they should be all called "good." "Good" doesn't describe anything they see as valuable, worthy, and desirable. </p><p></p><p>I also don't accept the premise that the fiends outnumber all of the other creatures in creation. They might outnumber the forces of "good," but that's a long way from outnumbering all other creatures in existence. And the influence of the belief matters, too -- maybe it's just harder for folks to accept that torture is the path to truth than it is for them to accept that being fed and happy and smiling with their friends is a path to truth, so the idea of fiends being good has little influence outside of certain groups of fiends. Functionally, in play, these numbers are all "infinite" anyway.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Whatever one believes to be good could certainly be rekindled no matter how dark the situation. If one believed that the code of the paladin created goodness, then no matter how dark the situation, that light could shine on that paladin. Heck, the idea that the paladin (and other paladins!) <em>believe</em> that to happen is nearly a guarantee that it will for the PC's. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not here to debate Plato and Nietzsche. All I can say is that PS presents a setting in which personal belief makes truth, and reality is contingent on what other people believe to be reality. The point of bringing up the notion of Greek hospitality as Chaotic Evil and then changing to not really a thing that decides cosmic alignment was to demonstrate how belief even determines what alignment is. Belief that a thing is evil makes it so. Belief that a thing is not evil makes it so. In absence of a strong belief, other people define this for you. With a strong belief (which every PS player character should have!), you get to define that for others. </p><p></p><p>In fact, the idea of a strong belief being unique to the "protagonists" in the setting is worth harping on, as it is another reason that fiends might be considered evil (and just accept it as The Way Things Are) -- most fiends don't have any more strength of conviction than most turnip farmers, and have no greater capacity to question their lot in life than any other NPC. It's the PC's (and their antagonists) that shape the planes by having beliefs that become revolutionary. That fiends are evil could be thought of as the influence of a great idea whose original proponent is long gone from the planes, but whose echoes still persist. If a fiend wants to change the belief of the planes...well, that fiend makes a good PC or antagonist in PS! <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, I don't think the alignment is definitional, but rather utilitarian. Planescape is for someone who wants to run D&D without cartoon morality, and it uses alignment to do this by showing how alignment isn't an objective truth, but rather a subjective belief. If you're coming from a typical FR or GH or DL D&D game, that's going to be an unexpected twist, and it will set you up to question other things that seem "permanent" (like, say, the map!). Planescape doesn't NEED to use alignment to do this, I feel (you can have a PS game without alignment, the most iconic PS game needn't use alignment to function, it just needs people to accept the malleability of everything), but it chooses do, and that choice is a rational one, with some benefits. And some costs -- one of the sticking points seems to be folks who aren't able to easily accept PS's re-definition of what alignment is! For me personally, I'd happily drop the alignments from a game with a player who was having trouble with them being in a setting of subjective opinion, but I certainly don't think it's a necessary prerequisite to making sense of the setting. </p><p></p><p>What it does is treat the D&D notion of "good" that prevails in the setting's starting point as something that the PC's can change if they disagree with it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Just that choosing between two good things isn't introducing ambiguity about what's good and what's evil, it's just asking what good is more important. So you will have to make some sacrifice. So you are a martyr -- sacrificing something you think as good for something you think is a GREATER good (your choice is: what is the greater good?). That doesn't really match what I'd label as ambiguous morality. It's a different aesthetic. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Since in PS, good and evil is a matter of opinion, even without alignment, the Great Wheel is still just what people think good and evil are, layed out in a map.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6409961, member: 2067"] The only thing you have to accept to understand this is that most believing beings (many fiends included!) have the belief that fiends are evil. If one were to take some sort of complete planar census, one would find that more believing beings believe that fiends are evil than believe that they are good. In my usual running of PS, the "What's so bad about evil?" perspective is especially prominent. "Call it evil if you like, I just think it's [I]fun![/I]", says the vrock in the middle of tearing apart an Outlands village. "Evil? I suppose so! Ah, well," says the hydroloth as she strokes the head of her mind-slave. "Yes. Evil. There is no other path to strength," says the erinyes as she takes aim with her bow. That situation isn't permanent. If the PC's decide they want to change it, they might find the arguments of the fiends subtly changing. The amnizu lays down her whip, and raises an eyebrow. "Compassion? Friend, if life is suffering, then all compassion does is prolong that suffering, deceiving people, making them feel that life really isn't so bad. No. Better they know the truth, yes? Better they know the harsh reality than that they imagine that life can be anything but this torment. I torture people, yes, and I feel good about that, because I am reminding people of what the truth of life is. It is you delusional do-gooders who are truly the cruel, here." It's not inherently less desirable to be called evil in PS than to be called good, so I don't see any reason why most of the uncountable numbers of fiends would have a real problem with that label. The Lawful ones might have a strict definition of what evil is that they then meet! The Chaotic ones would not object to anyone calling them anything! I don't accept the premise that more fiends believe they are good than believe that they are evil -- it's just a label in PS. In aggregate with the rest of the reasons, I have no trouble accepting evil fiends as the current "starting point" for PS. I don't accept the premise that the fiends already all think this. There's no clear reason for them to believe that they have that label. There's no reason for most them to deny the label of "evil," and thus have spells and planes know that label. They count, they just have no real reason to believe that they should be all called "good." "Good" doesn't describe anything they see as valuable, worthy, and desirable. I also don't accept the premise that the fiends outnumber all of the other creatures in creation. They might outnumber the forces of "good," but that's a long way from outnumbering all other creatures in existence. And the influence of the belief matters, too -- maybe it's just harder for folks to accept that torture is the path to truth than it is for them to accept that being fed and happy and smiling with their friends is a path to truth, so the idea of fiends being good has little influence outside of certain groups of fiends. Functionally, in play, these numbers are all "infinite" anyway. Whatever one believes to be good could certainly be rekindled no matter how dark the situation. If one believed that the code of the paladin created goodness, then no matter how dark the situation, that light could shine on that paladin. Heck, the idea that the paladin (and other paladins!) [I]believe[/I] that to happen is nearly a guarantee that it will for the PC's. ;) I'm not here to debate Plato and Nietzsche. All I can say is that PS presents a setting in which personal belief makes truth, and reality is contingent on what other people believe to be reality. The point of bringing up the notion of Greek hospitality as Chaotic Evil and then changing to not really a thing that decides cosmic alignment was to demonstrate how belief even determines what alignment is. Belief that a thing is evil makes it so. Belief that a thing is not evil makes it so. In absence of a strong belief, other people define this for you. With a strong belief (which every PS player character should have!), you get to define that for others. In fact, the idea of a strong belief being unique to the "protagonists" in the setting is worth harping on, as it is another reason that fiends might be considered evil (and just accept it as The Way Things Are) -- most fiends don't have any more strength of conviction than most turnip farmers, and have no greater capacity to question their lot in life than any other NPC. It's the PC's (and their antagonists) that shape the planes by having beliefs that become revolutionary. That fiends are evil could be thought of as the influence of a great idea whose original proponent is long gone from the planes, but whose echoes still persist. If a fiend wants to change the belief of the planes...well, that fiend makes a good PC or antagonist in PS! :) Again, I don't think the alignment is definitional, but rather utilitarian. Planescape is for someone who wants to run D&D without cartoon morality, and it uses alignment to do this by showing how alignment isn't an objective truth, but rather a subjective belief. If you're coming from a typical FR or GH or DL D&D game, that's going to be an unexpected twist, and it will set you up to question other things that seem "permanent" (like, say, the map!). Planescape doesn't NEED to use alignment to do this, I feel (you can have a PS game without alignment, the most iconic PS game needn't use alignment to function, it just needs people to accept the malleability of everything), but it chooses do, and that choice is a rational one, with some benefits. And some costs -- one of the sticking points seems to be folks who aren't able to easily accept PS's re-definition of what alignment is! For me personally, I'd happily drop the alignments from a game with a player who was having trouble with them being in a setting of subjective opinion, but I certainly don't think it's a necessary prerequisite to making sense of the setting. What it does is treat the D&D notion of "good" that prevails in the setting's starting point as something that the PC's can change if they disagree with it. Just that choosing between two good things isn't introducing ambiguity about what's good and what's evil, it's just asking what good is more important. So you will have to make some sacrifice. So you are a martyr -- sacrificing something you think as good for something you think is a GREATER good (your choice is: what is the greater good?). That doesn't really match what I'd label as ambiguous morality. It's a different aesthetic. Since in PS, good and evil is a matter of opinion, even without alignment, the Great Wheel is still just what people think good and evil are, layed out in a map. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Multiverse is back....
Top