The Misalignment of the Gods

Bane wants an ordered civilization.

Asmodeus wants an ordered civilization.

Lots of evil gods want an ordered civilization.

Ordered Civilization, as such, does not equal LG.

LG is about using an Ordered Civilization to achieve a Good purpose.

Erathis is just about Ordered Civilization, not so much about the Good purpose.

Erathis thus is appropriate as Unaligned.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think the "WTF is that god doing there?" comes less out of developers trying to cram gods into whatever they can find and more to do with the completely arbitrary and unneccisary changes to alignment.

Word.

FWIW, though, "Good," in 4e, is really Chaotic Good. And "Evil," in 4e, is really Lawful Evil. So some of these alignments make a little more sense through that lens.

What we don't have is Pure Good and Pure Evil anymore (nor do we have Pure Law and Pure Chaos anymore).
 

LG is about using an Ordered Civilization to achieve a Good purpose.

Erathis is just about Ordered Civilization, not so much about the Good purpose.

Erathis thus is appropriate as Unaligned.

PM, I agree with your reasoning. I even think that is exactly what the writers meant. The problem is that sometimes their words support that meaning, and sometimes they don't.

For example.

We find "Erathis is the goddess of civilization" on p. 21.

We also see "Lawful Good: Civilization and order" on p. 19.

To read these two things, and then to read that Erathis is unaligned, makes me sit up and say, "Huh?"

Sure, it can be explained. But it could be written more clearly in the first place. Perhaps "Lawful Good: Civilization and order used for good purposes." As written, it creates a disconnect. I guess some people aren't bothered by it, but it bugs the heck out of me.

There are other statements that contribute to the disconnect as well. On p. 19, the subheading for Lawful Good is, "An ordered society protects us from evil." I think what the writers meant was, "An ordered society can protect us from evil." Or even, "An ordered society can best protect us from evil." But as it stands, what it says is that ordered societies, in and of themselves, protect people from evil. It's a fine distinction, and the meaning can be worried out of it - but I wish it were written to say what it meant.

Ironically, later in the same description of Lawful Good, the writers say that ordered societies can in fact be evil. That's how you know that they didn't really mean all ordered societies are good. But that's not what the subheading says as written. It's all a big muddle.
 

its a catchphrase

Each italicized headline for the alignments is written from the perspective of a person of that alignment. A LG person would phrase it as an absolute, but that doesn't mean the person is right.
 

Boy these alignments are oddly written.

LG - "Lawful Good characters believe just as strongly as good ones do in the value of life"

Of course the write up on Good makes no mention of valueing life. *sigh*

If we assume that life is good, then Order and civilization are Good whether that civilization is Kind or Mean. Civilizations always support more lives than do uncivilized cultures. If you insist that Civilizations can be evil (which I do not contest), then why not simply have Asmodeus as the Patron of Evil Civilizations and allow Erathis to be LG?

If you read the writeup in the Dragon ecology issue there is even a mention of Melora's followers egging on the war between the Tieflings and Dragonborn in an attempt to drag down the cities and restore the land to wilderness.

Does anyone really think this is a value neutral action?
 


Boy these alignments are oddly written.

LG - "Lawful Good characters believe just as strongly as good ones do in the value of life"

Of course the write up on Good makes no mention of valueing life. *sigh*

If we assume that life is good, then Order and civilization are Good whether that civilization is Kind or Mean. Civilizations always support more lives than do uncivilized cultures. If you insist that Civilizations can be evil (which I do not contest), then why not simply have Asmodeus as the Patron of Evil Civilizations and allow Erathis to be LG?

If you read the writeup in the Dragon ecology issue there is even a mention of Melora's followers egging on the war between the Tieflings and Dragonborn in an attempt to drag down the cities and restore the land to wilderness.

Does anyone really think this is a value neutral action?

Oh come now, we don't want needless symmetry! Lack of consistency is a feature, not a mistake ;p

In all honesty, a lot of the fluff feels kinda composite, as if several writers each did a different part without any of them talking to one another as to what they're doing. One writer goes "God of chaos and wilderness? Awesome, she'd totally draw big empires into a war irregardless of the consequences!" Another goes "Hmmm, wilderness and civilization, I bet that could be a neat back-and-forth between them, let's have them both be neutral."
 

Does anyone really think this is a value neutral action?
How is that relevant?

Suppose that I choose not to vote, and that candidate A is elected over candidate B by one vote. My action is not "value neutral", in the sense that, had I voted for B, A would not have won the election.

It does not therefore follow that I am aligned with candidate A.

The fact that Melora takes actions that hurt people doesn't make her Evil. 4e expressly goes with a "teams" model of alignment - ie it is all about who your are aligned with - not a "descriptors" model of alignment, which is all about trying to shoehorn the moral complexity of the ages into 9 rather arbitrary and very anachronistic categories.
 

The fact that Melora takes actions that hurt people doesn't make her Evil.

Yes, that's exactly the complaint people are having - that purposefully and maliciously killing whole swaths of innocent people and attempting to topple empires just for the sake of doing so isn't seen as evil, and that the only explination given for this is "Well, Melora doesn't have NPCs for you to kill."
 


Remove ads

Top