Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 359009" data-attributes="member: 4937">Bragg: I agree that there is, and always has been, alot of disagreement over what chaos and law mean.  In fact, I'd say that the continuing discussion over alignment in D&D always comes down to one of two points: 'What is the meaning of law and chaos?' and 'Does everyone have to be a paragon of thier alignment all the time to have an alignment?'.  The law and chaos confusion is really EGG's fault, I'm afraid.  Or rather, it was the fault of latter players for trying to thrust Good and Evil into a moral system that already (supposedly) had an absolute axis.  But, that's really an excuse, because I'm not sure that it is possible to define an absolute moral axis for Law and Chaos because (even if we were to believe that Good and Evil were subjective) we are forced to admit when examining that they are highly subjective.  For example, one problem readily arrises when we note that 'law' refers to a broad body of equally 'lawful' behaviors that are in direct conflict with each other.  One man's lawfulness is another man's (in a different society) law breaking.OF COURSE, to be fair, some people see the same problem with the good evil axis.  For instance, Weis & Hickman in the DL stories seem to indicate (rather strangely to my mind) that absolute good is the same as absolute evil, because the Cataclysm occured not because someone was evil, but because someone was 'too good'.  For my part, I tend to see absolute good and evil as being poles apart, whereas absolute law and chaos are very nearly the same thing. You bring up a very good example of the latter when you say, "I have seen both Darth Vader and Palpatine listed as CE alot here... how? They both maintain a huge Empire, which is by its nature lawful."  I disagree.  Heading a lawful organization is not proof in and of itself of lawfulness.  To a chaotic evil person, there is nothing better in the universe than having an entire organization of lawful loyal types doing your every whim.  Note that I put Hitler for example as Chaotic Evil, whereas I put some of his more important cronies as Lawful Evil.  I also elsewhere in the thread suggested that Hoover was CE despite heading the law enforcing agency the FBI.  In fact, I'd go so far as to say that this is a common synergy between any 'lawful' and 'chaotic' group.  Lawful groups easily fall into the trap of being lead by ambitious men whose principal interest is in themselves not the organizations ideology or the organization, and don't notice because loyalty to the superior is an unquestioned and defining trait.  Simmerally, chaotic societies typically are 'lead' (to the extent they are lead) by a lawful subelement that believes the interest of the whole would be much better served if everyone would be just a little more lawful.  Because in any unorganized state, the lawful group is going to be the enherently the most influential, it is easy for them to have disproportionate influence.  But of course, at the top of these lawful subelements you are likely to find chaotic heads.  This exercise leads one to a greater understanding of American politics if it serves no other purpose.To be fair though, I agree that neither Darth Vader or Palpatine where CE.  Vader is clearly motivated both in the original trilogy and in the prequels by a desire to 'make the system work' and 'restore order to the galaxy' and it is clear that at some point he comes to believe that the only way to do this is be ruthless and Machiavellian.  Palpatine is I think motivated by no other desire than to see the most damage done to the most people for the longest period of time using either chaos or law to suit his purposes, and as a 'satanic figure' I place him as NE.</blockquote>

Verification