Alignment in D&DN...

[Mattachine]

See, here I disagree. How can a demon and a devil do EXACTLY the same things, for exactly the same motivations, yet be considered different alignments? There's all sorts of "Planning, going to get you to damn yourself" demons in D&D.

If demons and devils can be interchangeable, then I'd say that alignment fails spectacularly at describing these creatures.

That is a problem with the design of some particular monsters. It is fixed by not having succubi as demons, pretty much.

Also, don't design demon princes as arch-devils, simply because you've limited yourself to nine arch devils for some reason.

The conflict in the flavor text of a small group of monsters doesn't seem like a reason to get rid of the alignment system.

 

[Tovec]

I missed his post, nice catch @Mattachine

See, here I disagree. How can a demon and a devil do EXACTLY the same things, for exactly the same motivations, yet be considered different alignments? There's all sorts of "Planning, going to get you to damn yourself" demons in D&D.

If demons and devils can be interchangeable, then I'd say that alignment fails spectacularly at describing these creatures.

While it is true that devils and demons are probably always trying to kill you, they aren't similar in flavour. There is an entire-blood war and (as I understand it) about 30 years of real world history to explain the differences.

Most recently, Devils are the corrupters, infiltrators, tyrants and the ones seeking to turn you over to their side and make you one of them - ostensibly to bolster their numbers and increase their hierarchy to battle demons but that is another matter. They want your soul tainted and when you die you become one of them.
Demons on the other hand, want to see you burned in one fashion or another. They want you hurt and dead and if you are maleficent enough to come back as a demon then all the better. It is true, however, that some look to make you fall or turn against friends and comrades. While this seems similar, it isn't. When they do this they are looking to break those bonds of friendship ONLY for the end of itself as opposed to make you join the dark side.

A devil is as likely to raise your child as his own - to train him to join the legions of hell. A demon is as likely to eat your child as he is to corrupt him.

To me, that difference is as big as the ones between LG outsiders and CG ones. The first group is happy, go lucky, friends of the earth. The other is holy-warriors who seek to root out evil and destroy it where they see it. That couldn't be more different.

Now... if you want to talk Yugoloths then I'm sure we can reach common ground. Where I find that devils and demons have been fairly well defined, yugoloths have many aspects of both and it has taken me years of DMing and brainstorming to come up with a tangible difference - one that isn't canon or commonly shared.

 

[Kaodi]

In some ways I think 3e was the first edition to really have a nine alignment system (or perhaps a ten alignment system). In the editions before it, I seem to recall that it was extremely commonplace to couche alignment, even of deities, with "with X tendancies" .

For one thing, I think it could be useful to bring back True Neutral as an alignment, accompanied by four new alignments: True Good, True Evil, True Law, and True Chaos. These alignments would be limited to supernatural embodiments of alignment. You could add descriptors to these to describe other tendancies, but supernatural alignmet paragons only embody one alignment, not two. So among the fiends, devils would be Lawful True Evil, yugoloths True Evil, and demons Chaotic True Evil. Only possessing a True alignment should be absolute limit your actions and motivations in some way. The alignments or mortals, on the other hand, should always be pliable and subject to change, though not without consequence. To be fully affected by powers like holy word, it shoud not be enough to be evil, you should have to be consorting with a True Evil creature in some fashion (if you pray to evil gods, or do their bidding in some way, et cetera). Or something like that. Definitely a module. (With this system, I think you would get something like... 26 alignments? (True Good, True Evil, True Neutral, True Lawful, True Chaotic, Lawful True Good, Chaotic True Good, Lawful True Evil, Chaotic True Evil, Good True Neutral, Evil True Neutral, Lawful True Neutral, Chaotic True Neutral, Good True Lawful, Evil True Lawful, Good True Chaotic, Evil True Chaotic, Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Evil))

On a slightly different note, perhaps one could think of Lawful Good as pursuing the good based on certain rules (like Deotology or Utilitarianism), Neutral Good on good qualities (Virtue Theory) and Chaotic Good as moral pluralism (Russelian morality).

 

[Tovec]

<snip>

On a slightly different note, perhaps one could think of Lawful Good as pursuing the good based on certain rules (like Deotology or Utilitarianism), Neutral Good on good qualities (Virtue Theory) and Chaotic Good as moral pluralism (Russelian morality).

Which is eseentially to add a "true" axis for EXTREMELY X creatures. It could work but it is kind of how we - the group I game with - already do it.

I had to quote you, bringing up Kant and John Stewart Mill in a discussion about alignments; issues of right and wrong - bold.

 

[Starbuck_II]

I still feel this is campaign dependent, and making the power less specific in it's nature "you sense evil nearby" as opposed to "John Johnson the town Preacher is evil." would go a long way to making the power more fair.

That's how I run the power anyway. Seems to work out and keeps my players searching.

Presumes you have few Paladins. Can't smite evil if you are smiting the wrong targets (Neutrals).

 

[Sunseeker]

Presumes you have few Paladins. Can't smite evil if you are smiting the wrong targets (Neutrals).

I think I've expounded upon my thoughts earlier, but it's a potency and range issue. I run it basically like hide-and-seek. The closer you are to the evil, the more easily you can detect if it is X and not Y.

 

[Wulfram]

I think detect/smite evil/good and suchlike should only apply to magical stuff - gods, demons, undead and suchlike. And also to the magical agents of such powers like Clerics, Paladins and Warlocks, though they'd detect as the alignment of their patron rather than their own.

 

[Zireael]

I see I really should get working on the variant I mentioned ("personality traits" + 9 alignments) for D&D...