D&D General The Problem with Evil or what if we don't use alignments?

[FrozenNorth]

I go by the 4e approach. Devils want power and want to be the ones on top. Demons want to watch the world burn, either to enjoy the fire or because they are creatures of flame and want to make the world theirs and uninhabitable for its current occupants. The succubus was moved in 4e from demon to devil because they are about control and corruption. A stereotypical demon would be a Maw Beast - a walking hungry thing.

The classic demon queen is Lloth, who is of course, more about vengeance, power and control rather than burning down the world.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The classic demon queen is Lloth, who is of course, more about vengeance, power and control rather than burning down the world.

Sounds rather lawful to me...

 

[Maxperson]

The classic demon queen is Lloth, who is of course, more about vengeance, power and control rather than burning down the world.

Yeah, but I'd argue that Orcus is the face of demonic evil in D&D.

 

[Maxperson]

Sounds rather lawful to me...

Have you seen the Drow? She sows chaos in her people and expects power and might to rule, as well as cruelty.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Have you never heard about a bad or obnoxious commander getting killed "accidentally" by a lost bullet from his own company/unit? It did happen, does happen and will continue to happen. This why the military investigate any officer's death when it is possible. Because such things happen in real life combat. Is it so hard to believe that demons, the epitome of chaos and evil can do it?

And as was so often said:" Evil feeds upon itself."

That seems to be an eminently devilish way of advancing through the Nine Hells: i.e. I won’t stab you in the back for no reason, but will absolutely do so to get ahead.

So this isn’t a LE v. CE thing.

 

[Yaarel]

For sapient beings, like Drow, I am glad the alignment is gone.

But I still feel an institution can have an alignment. For example, the Drow of the Uda culture generally apply the principles of Lolth. (I view Lolth to be Neutral Evil, since there is too much collectivism to be strictly Chaotic.) But everyone who adheres to or consents to Lolth tends to behave in Evil ways during an encounter.

So, the Monster Manual could still mention Uda culture as Evil, despite the Drow lacking an inherent alignment.

 

[Maxperson]

For sapient beings, like Drow, I am glad the alignment is gone.

But I still feel an institution can have an alignment. For example, the Drow of the Uda culture generally apply the principles of Lolth. (I view Lolth to be Neutral Evil, since there is too collectivism to be strictly Chaotic.) But everyone who adheres to or consents to Lolth tends to behave in Evil ways during an encounter.

So, the Monster Manual could still mention Uda culture as Evil, despite the Drow lacking an inherent alignment.

Which is how 3e did Drow alignment. Drow were usually NE, another change from prior editions to differentiate 3e I suppose. The important part there, though, is the "usually." "Usually" just means more than 50%, so you could have almost half the Drow race be of other alignments, including good.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I wouldn't be able to speak for people in camp 1 - but camp 2 is "Alignment causes far greater problems than it provides benefits". This is not rebutted by saying that it works perfectly at some tables any more than than "nine out of ten of this line of cars don't explode in the first year" is an argument against a product recall.

I would go even further. I get that people that have no use for alignment have alignment horror stories, but even people who seem to like alignment can’t seem to agree on how it applies. (The last thread had a big disagrement between proponents as to whether Original Trilogy Darth Vader was LE or CE).

To me, it undercuts the argument that horror stories are the consequence of playing alignment wrong, when even those who play it “right” disagree.

 

[FrozenNorth]

The problem is humaniods.
Alignment works for elementals, outsiders, beasts, and plants. They have weird minds, run on base or programmed instincts, and might not even have free will.

But for free willed, thinking, humaniods, having full races being all or even mostly one alignment make little sense unless the DM is a skilled worldbuilder.

And most DMs are not skilled worldbuilders.

I would even exclude it for most beasts and plants. They don’t have an alignment, they just ARE.

 

[Yaarel]

Which is how 3e did Drow alignment. Drow were usually NE, another change from prior editions to differentiate 3e I suppose. The important part there, though, is the "usually." "Usually" just means more than 50%, so you could have almost half the Drow race be of other alignments, including good.

That "usually" is a step in the correct direction, but I still like having the implication of Evil tendency gone from the Drow.

On the other hand, when statting up a unique individual or a unique institution, alignment is appropriate. The alignment is an average for the behavior so far and-or the goals.



I remember NE being discussed for Lolth and her Drow culture, but I dont remember anything official. Officially, Lolth is a "demon" and therefore must be CE whether she actually is or not. (It is one of the difficulties that I have with the Wheel generally.)