D&D General Is This Evil? D&D Morality.

[beancounter]

I think it's a mistake to anthropomorphize aliens in any way.

The way they perceive the world around them will almost certainly be so alien to us (no pun intended) that there won't be any reasonable basis for comparison.

 

[Zardnaar]

"Clearing" the land of what? Do you mean genocide?

Cutting down forest, plowing the plains.

 

[Zardnaar]

Cosmic, not cosmetic, but sure. Hence why I said it's a talking point, rather than an actual fact. There's been a lot of grumbling from certain vocal corners of the D&D fanbase that 5e has neutered alignment, that it is destroying the foundations of the game by moving away from sapient beings that are "always Chaotic Evil" or whatever.

I find most of those people very frustrating and generally refuse to engage with them on this subject.

Na they just removed things like smite evil etc. I'm kind of neutral on it if I'm playing an older edition it doesn't bother me if I'm playing 5E I don't miss it.

Does that make any sense?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think it's a mistake to anthropomorphize aliens in any way.

The way they perceive the world around them will almost certainly be so alien to us (no pun intended) that there won't be any reasonable basis for comparison.

Conversely, I find it baffling that fundamental stuff like the ethic of reciprocity (aka the "golden rule") and basic logic should be so alien to beings native to other planets.

Barring rather unrealistic things like a true biological "hive mind" (where there is only the global intelligence somehow remotely operating individual bodies), the only way for an organic species to develop to a sufficient extent that it can pose a threat in this way--organized destruction--is for that species to...well, be able to organize. A species can only organize if it has effective ability to socialize and productively cooperate. No social structure that is built on an outright denial (or, I guess, ignorance) of the ethic of reciprocity and basic logic will be able to productively cooperate.

This isn't a matter of projecting human values, like how much we value shiny things or how our ancestors seem to have been curious and adventurous in a way that other early homininians (australopithecus and all closer relatives of modern humans.) This is a matter of prerequisites for forming anything remotely like a "society" that could be capable of the organized threat involved here.

And even if we do allow a true biological "hive mind," it'll almost certainly be super old and have learned a lot about a lot of things. It just seems fantastically unlikely that this hive mind would be incapable of conceiving of the idea that individual life forms value their independent existence!

Does that make any sense?

I suppose.

 

[Yaarel]

Cutting down forest, plowing the plains.

Use of resources is more about using them wisely and justly.

Every human ever born inherently owns every resource. We are a species on a planet. The management of a resource needs collective consent, and must benefit the most humans possible.

One can argue that capitalism is an effective way to benefit the most humans possible. But capitalism too requires permission and consent from the rest of the human species.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Cosmic, not cosmetic, but sure. Hence why I said it's a talking point, rather than an actual fact. There's been a lot of grumbling from certain vocal corners of the D&D fanbase that 5e has neutered alignment, that it is destroying the foundations of the game by moving away from sapient beings that are "always Chaotic Evil" or whatever.

I find most of those people very frustrating and generally refuse to engage with them on this subject.

I meant to say cosmic too it was a typo.

 

[Faolyn]

Do these creatures understand that humans are intelligent beings? If so, do they care? Have the looked for another solution? Are humans actually a threat, with credible evidence for it, or are they perceived as a threat?

If the answers are yes, no, no, and they just decided that humans are a threat, then I would decide they were evil.

If the aliens truly can't understand humans are intelligent--like, they're too alien to grok the concept--then I would not say they're evil. It's a communication issue.

If the aliens can't be bothered to find or implement another solution, then I'd say they're evil. If some humans are the threat but the aliens decide to kill all humans, then I'd say they're evil. If humans are a threat for anything other than truly immediate reasons (if we don't kill them right now, then they will do this terrible, terrible thing), then I'd say the aliens are evil.

 

[Zardnaar]

Use of resources is more about using them wisely and justly.

Every human ever born inherently owns every resource. We are a species on a planet. The management of a resource needs to be a collective consent, and must benefit the most humans possible.

One can argue that capitalism is an effective way to benefit the most humans possible. But capitalism too requires permission from the rest of humanity.

In this scenario there's other sentient beings who might depend o those resources or like their way of life based on those resources.

Sentient rocks might be solar powered and use the land to bask in the sun humans want to turn it into farm.

Each rock is a level 12 Druid.

Do these creatures understand that humans are intelligent beings? If so, do they care? Have the looked for another solution? Are humans actually a threat, with credible evidence for it, or are they perceived as a threat?

If the answers are yes, no, no, and they just decided that humans are a threat, then I would decide they were evil.

If the aliens truly can't understand humans are intelligent--like, they're too alien to grok the concept--then I would not say they're evil. It's a communication issue.

If the aliens can't be bothered to find or implement another solution, then I'd say they're evil. If some humans are the threat but the aliens decide to kill all humans, then I'd say they're evil. If humans are a threat for anything other than truly immediate reasons (if we don't kill them right now, then they will do this terrible, terrible thing), then I'd say the aliens are evil.

They're intelligent and sentient they are likely able to recognize the same in humans.

However complete alien mindset they may or may not have morality as humans see it. Eg humans may be a viable food source or seen as an invasive/destructive species eg sentient locusts.

What humans see as good the other species sees as bad and/or a threat to their existence. They may or may not be right in that belief mostly for the sake of discussion. Wh they may have experienced the result of human expansion in previous ages or they can see the future.

Or they may just want to eat all humans regardless. More interested in people's thoughts of various scenarios on who is right or wrong.

So e scenarios I can think of.

1. Humans are a direct threat to their existence.

2. Humans are percieved to be a direct threat to their existence.

3. Competition for resources may the strongest win.

4. Percieved competition for resources.

5. Long term threat not clear to most in present time.

6. Long term threat they percieve as real. Eg if on earth they can forsee climate change via human action. Or humans did cause immense destruction in the past.

7. Very alien mindset. They know humans are intelligent they just don't care or see them as a self aware food source.

Hell maybe they do everything humans do but are better at it eg expand faster consume faster.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Cosmic, not cosmetic, but sure. Hence why I said it's a talking point, rather than an actual fact. There's been a lot of grumbling from certain vocal corners of the D&D fanbase that 5e has neutered alignment, that it is destroying the foundations of the game by moving away from sapient beings that are "always Chaotic Evil" or whatever.

I find most of those people very frustrating and generally refuse to engage with them on this subject.

Famously, 5e just straight up removed the D section of the MM. Goes from C to E now.

 

[lall]

Thoughts?

I’d say yes.