D&D 5E A different take on Alignment

[doctorbadwolf]

That society would probably look at our current society as barbaric, prisons as evil. But we don't have that utopian treatment so we do the best we can; there has to be some consequence to crime. If you eliminate the option of prisons, there are only so many options left.

You don't need sci-fi medicine to not use prisons to deal with crime. We are barbaric and a bit evil in our treatment of criminal "justice", here in the 21st century. I say "we" because so few nations make use of the science that's been done on crime and reformation.

 

[Manbearcat]

I think we've got the mileage we're going to get out of our discussion so we can just cordially disagree and leave it at that @doctorbadwolf !

 

[Umbran]

You don't need sci-fi medicine to not use prisons to deal with crime. We are barbaric and a bit evil in our treatment of criminal "justice", here in the 21st century. I say "we" because so few nations make use of the science that's been done on crime and reformation.

This is not the place for discussion of real-world current issues.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This is not the place for discussion of real-world current issues.

Not my intention, nor was I the one that brought them up.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

This is such an odd conversation, and yet this always comes up when talking about alignment.

D&D is a game. It always has been. It has always dealt with abstractions.

Moreover, it is a fantasy game. A telling quote can be found as far back as the 1e DMG:

A few brief words are necessary to insure that the reader has actually obtained a game form which he or she desires. Of the two approaches to hobby games today, one is best defined as the realism-simulation school and the other as the game school. AD&D is assuredly an adherent of the latter school. It does not stress any realism (in the author’s opinion an absurd effort at best considering the topic!). It does little to attempt to simulate anything either. ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS is first and foremost a game for the fun and enjoyment of those who seek to use imagination and creativity.

And in terms of alignment:

Alignment describes the broad ethos of thinking, reasoning creatures - those unintelligent sorts being placed within the neutral area because they are totally uncaring. ... The overall behavior of the character (or creature) is delineated by alignment, or, in the case of player characters, behavior determines actual alignment. Therefore, besides defining the general tendencies of creatures, it also groups creatures into mutually acceptable or at least non-hostile divisions. This is not to say that groups of similarly aligned creatures cannot be opposed or even mortal enemies. Two nations, for example, with rulers of lawful good alignment can be at war. Bands of orcs can hate each other. But the former would possibly cease their war to oppose a massive invasion of orcs. just as the latter would make common cause against the lawful good men. Thus, alignment describes the world view of creatures and helps to define what their actions, reactions, and purposes will be. It likewise causes a player character to choose an ethos which is appropriate to his or her profession, and alignment also aids players in the definition and role approach of their respective game personae.


Ignoring the metaphysical for a minute (law and chaos, good and evil, the outer planes), we see the purpose of alignment- it's a game tool. A fantasy game tool. Nothing more, nothing less.

The problem that people have is when then are trying to translate their fantasy game tool into the real world- "How can you classify people by D&D's alignment system? How does these real world- ethical dilemmas work in the alignment system? How does a nine-point alignment system handle the trolley problem? Is D&D's alignment more Kantian or utilitarian?" Meh.

How about ... none of those? It's like any of the other issues- "Did you know that levels don't exist in the real world? Did you know that classes don't either?" When you understand it, "alignment" isn't some advanced D&D debate- it's just, "are hit points meat or not," except spiffied up because it seems more complicated because people can get their hackles up.

Alignment is a game tool. It is useful to the extent you want a gameworld with more easily categorized NPCs and creatures (or a more defined "law / chaos" or "good / evil" aesthetic). It is helpful for giving some players a definition and role. Some prefer to have mechanical tie-ins (evil can use X, while good can use Y magic items, etc.). But in the end, it is only a game mechanic for fun.

Not the real world.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't know that you can separate the punishment from the crime and be able to tell if the punishment is fitting, and therefore good or evil. Jean Valjean, after all, was sentenced to servitude. It didn't kill him - he came out quite strong. So... Lawful Neutral? But he went in for stealing a loaf of bread, and in the meantime, iirc, his sister and niece died without his financial support. 5+ years of servitude and two people dead over bread... does not sound neutral any more, now does it?

Their deaths were not directly caused by the imprisonment and I don't think they can modify whether his going to prison was LN or not. Those women may have had other options that they chose not to engage in. Also, perhaps if he had not tried to escape and lengthened his prison time, they would have survived.

 

[Umbran]

Not my intention, nor was I the one that brought them up.

Whatever the intention, it took up most of the semantic content of the post, so it caught my attention.

I was trying to give people a chance to back away from current issues, no-harm, no-foul, before red text had to come out. If you want to argue with me until red text comes out, you can do so, but I don't expect it'd make you happier, so can't say I'd recommend it.

 

[Umbran]

Moreover, it is a fantasy game. A telling quote can be found as far back as the 1e DMG:

A few brief words are necessary to insure that the reader has actually obtained a game form which he or she desires. Of the two approaches to hobby games today, one is best defined as the realism-simulation school and the other as the game school. AD&D is assuredly an adherent of the latter school. It does not stress any realism (in the author’s opinion an absurd effort at best considering the topic!).

Yeah, but the line between "realism" and "plausible enough that I can suspend disbelief" is not nearly as clear as Mr. Gygax may have hoped.

The problem that people have is when then are trying to translate their fantasy game tool into the real world- "How can you classify people by D&D's alignment system? How does these real world- ethical dilemmas work in the alignment system? How does a nine-point alignment system handle the trolley problem? Is D&D's alignment more Kantian or utilitarian?" Meh.

How about ... none of those?

You do realize that one of the small number of ways humans come to understand things is by analogy, right? And you are asking them to not make analogies. Another way we come to understand is to analyze, and you seem to be saying "meh" to that too.

You seem to be tossing our the ways that a table can come to a practical, mutual understanding of what the thing is supposed to be. I am not sure that's a functional approach.

Way, way upthread, I noted that the system might as well be ditched because for decades it has failed to actually make its point in a consistent way - and you are showing us exactly why that is.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Yeah, but the line between "realism" and "plausible enough that I can suspend disbelief" is not nearly as clear as Mr. Gygax may have hoped.

Everyone has a different line; the point being that this is not a simulation, but a game. Looking to a fantasy game to solve real-world ethical concerns is probably not a great way to go through life, and I do not believe that Mr. Gygax intended it to be so.

You do realize that one of the small number of ways humans come to understand things is by analogy, right? And you are asking them to not make analogies. Another way we come to understand is to analyze, and you seem to be saying "meh" to that too.

You seem to be tossing our the ways that a table can come to a practical, mutual understanding of what the thing is supposed to be. I am not sure that's a functional approach.

Way, way upthread, I noted that the system might as well be ditched because for decades it has failed to actually make its point in a consistent way - and you are showing us exactly why that is.

I am showing you nothing, and it is bizarre that you would take what I wrote as evidence for what you want to be true.

The alignment system is perfectly consistent for what it wants to do; it simply does not do more than that. This is neither more nor less than saying, "The hit point system does not consistently model real-world combat and damage," or, "The XP and level system does not consistenly model real-world learning and growth," or, "The magic system does not consistently model the real-world awesome magicks of Criss Angel Mindfreak."

Regardless, you seem to both profoundly misunderstand my posts, yet consistently argue that what I say supports your position; not things I enjoy discussing.

 

[Oofta]

"Relatively recent" and "all but a very few" is not terribly specific, and maybe not terribly functional when we are speaking of fictional worlds. The dynamic there is not difficult to see - courts for all but people of politically important status are rarely a high priority in monarchies.

Louis XIV turned the Bastille into a prison. From 1659 onwards, it served as a penitentiary. And there's a long history of using sanitariums as a form of imprisonment when someone was inconvenient. And, Queen Guenevere being sent to a convent is a very polite form of imprisoning her, but since Lancelot went to rescue her, we ought to call it what is was, no?

The Romans had the Mamertine prison in 640 BC. Galley slavery had you chained to the boat, which is certainly imprisonment.

And, for crying out loud, the "dungeons" in "Dungeons and Dragons" are named for places people were imprisoned!

Well, my extensive and absolutely thorough five minute google search begs to differ. I'm referring to jails as a place to be kept while awaiting punishment, according to this site prisons were not widespread until the 19th century.

Obviously you can do whatever makes sense for a specific campaign, for my campaign I don't assume prison or even a reliable judicial system in many areas.