Alignment in Eberron: Yay or nay?

[Vrylakos]

Well... I'm not sure I like the alignments in Eberron. If Sam Spade had access to detect evil, it'd be a totally different Maltese Falcon, you know? Isn't there a moral murkiness that alignments sort of make moot?

Don't get me wrong, in many setting the classic struggle for good and evil is a big theme, and alignments fit for me. But Eberron seems to go after a different feel and I wonder if alignments get in the way of it?

Of course, my ability to describe that feel is apparently limited, and it might be my perception... I might need to just sit down with the Eberron book some more.

Vrylakos

 

[MrFilthyIke]

You could easily ditch Alignment, but then you'd have to adjucate things like "Detect Evil" and Law and Chaos spells, etc would be a little tricky...

I keep alignment, and just don't play it up that much, but that's me.

 

[JPL]

I see your point.

One possible solution would be to make sure alignment-masking spells/items are available. Let the players know in advance that this is the case, and that while the paladin will still be able to pick out the bad guys nine times out of ten...it's that tenth guy you gotta worry about.

Another point is that someone who reads as "good" may nevertheless be working against you, while someone who reads as "evil" might nevertheless be an ally. I think that's typical of noir --- you stumble across allies and enemies when you least expect it.

And there's always redemption/corruption. The involvement of PCs means the stakes are high, and morality will be tested. Alignment can shift very quickly. That LG city guardsman, given the right incentive, might go LN all of a sudden...or maybe the bad guy might do the right thing [or the lesser of two evils, anyway] for a change.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Yeah, and The Maletese Falcon is one of the inspirations for the setting. Alignments and detect spells would also kind of make From Hell a little shorter too. And the ending of Raiders of the Lost Ark would be just plain weird.

BELLOQ: And now I will perform the ceremony and open the Ark!
NAZIS: Dude, I totally wouldn't do that. We're evil and this thingie here is glowing good like a radioactive christmas tree.
BELLOQ: Oh wow. Good call. OK, just shoot Indy and we'll call it a night then. Anyone up for a game of scrabble?

Of course, I just got the book and I'm still on page one. But if being knowledgeable about a topic was a hinderance to posting on internet message boards, I'd lose my will to live.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

Plus, having alignment detection is great for that moment the Paladin scans the Pit Fiend as gets a CHAOTIC GOOD or just plain "not evil" response that the facial reactions are classic.

 

[JPL]

BELLOQ: And now I will perform the ceremony and open the Ark!
NAZIS: Dude, I totally wouldn't do that. We're evil and this thingie here is glowing good like a radioactive christmas tree.
BELLOQ: Oh wow. Good call. OK, just shoot Indy and we'll call it a night then. Anyone up for a game of scrabble?

Ah, but those Nazis thought they were Lawful Good!

[I wonder if that sort of self-delusion is possible in a world where Detect Evil will tell you for certain whether you are Good or Evil. Probably the Hitlers of that world would blame their enemies for tainting their aura, or dismiss the whole notion of Good and Evil, or decide that no 1st level spell is gonna tell them what to do...]

 

[~Johnny~]

Yeah, alignment is a problematic thing when it's portrayed in D&D's black-and-white terms, which are a bit at odds with the Eberron setting. One way to handle it, which is hinted at a bit in the rulebook, is to simply reduce the entry requirements for evil. Presumably, a lot of people identified as "good" are just passively so. So why not have the same standard for evil? Take some of the folks out of the "neutral" category who have evil leanings but haven't necessarily done evil things yet. And detect evil doesn't say what's evil about them: did they kill someone, or do they just like to kick puppies? With enough evil floating around, detect evil becomes less of a mystery-solver.

Also, though this doesn't presumably apply to paladins, casing detect evil requires some incanations and hand motions. Unless you disguise what you're doing, you're clearly invading someone's privacy by casting the spell. I imagine a noble who had detect evil cast upon him by a lowly adventurer would find a way to have the spellcaster imprisoned.

Anyway, there's a lot of potential stuff to discuss. In fact, Ketih has talked about this at length:

Alignment is still a part of Eberron. Removing alignment completely would have a lot of mechanical implications and would have more of an impact on importing or exporting material to and from other settings than, say, action points. With that said, we are taking a slightly different approach to alignment. The first has already been mentioned in one of the articles, and that is that there are very few things that have mandatory alignments. Wererats aren't always evil and gold dragons aren't always good. The second is a broader look at alignment -- using more of a scale of shades of gray as opposed to pure black and white. What does it mean to have an evil alignment? One of the main elements is the willingness to put your own needs ahead of the needs of others. Well, by that definition, how many people do you know who are evil? In a big city, you're going to find an awful lot of evil people. So you're a paladin, and you discover that the innkeeper is evil. First off, you can't just cut him down where he stands; being "evil" is not a crime. The question you have to wonder is just how evil is he? Odds are, he's just greedy and selfish; he'd be happy to overcharge you for your meal, but he won't murder you while you sleep. Then again, you never know...

For more of Keith's thoughts on alignment in Eberron, click here.

 

[Hellcow]

Well... I'm not sure I like the alignments in Eberron. If Sam Spade had access to detect evil, it'd be a totally different Maltese Falcon, you know? Isn't there a moral murkiness that alignments sort of make moot?

This is discussed briefly on page 250 of the setting book, and you can find more of my opinions at http://www.coveworld.net/eberron/rules.html#alignment .
To me, it's the question of how extreme you make alignments and how strictly you interpret them. What does it mean that someone is "evil"? If evil can encompass greed and selfishness, then you might find that there are an awful lot of evil people in the world -- even if very few of these people would actually perform murder or a similar act. But the paladin can't tell the difference between the innkeeper who's hoping to add a few coppers to the bill and the innkeeper who plans to murder guests in their sleep; he just knows that both are untrustworthy and put their own desires above the well-being of others.

There's also the question of how much "evil" is accepted by society. In a cynical post-war world, it may be taking for granted that there are a lot of evil people out there. Furthermore, for some jobs -- spymaster, for example -- you may want an evil person. It's less a question of black and white and more "Can this person get the job done, or will his morals get in the way?" Even in the Church of the Silver Flame, there are evil priests; the point is that they continue to pursue the goals of the church and may even do good -- they are just willing to perform actions a good character would find abhorrent. Evil characters can do good, and good characters can do evil (extreme lawful good can be just as scary as extreme evil, in my opinion); alignment just indicates an overall view of the world and preference. As a result, a character who relies on alignment detection may be thrown off-track. And telling a city guard "that man's EVIL!" just isn't going to do much for you. It lets you know how someone may behave, and it affects smiting and such.

If you want to remove alignment in Eberron, you certainly could; the problem is the degree to which it is integrated into the mechanics of D&D. But that's your call!

As for the Maltese Falcon, Sam aside, who of the main players wasn't evil? And I'd call Sam himself a shady neutral (though not as bad as he likes people to believe). To me, the point is that Sam knew what he was dealing with. He won't play the sap for anyone!

 

[Hellcow]

Another question here is exactly how people perceive the magical concept of "evil" spotted by detect evil. I agree that most people who are evil don't see themselves that way, and if you said "Hey! You're evil!" they'd roll their eyes and say "Oh, whatever". Again, if evil can do good and good can do evil, what detect really tells you is what set of spells and effects to rely on; heck, it's almost like blood type.

Now, with that said, the Church of the Silver Flame is out to stamp out evil. But the point is that they view evil in the broader sense of its effect on the world as opposed to "what is detected with detect evil". If the evil priest serves the greater good, he gets to be part of the team (even if the paladins may keep a close eye on him and wait for him to slip up).

 

[BiggusGeekus]

if evil can do good and good can do evil, what detect really tells you is what set of spells and effects to rely on; heck, it's almost like blood type.

So, it would be more like....

BELLOQ: And now I will perform the ceremony and open the Ark!
NAZI: Dude, this thing is completly opposed to us. It'll probably melt our faces off and zap us with chain lightning.
BELLOQ: You mean to tell me that this artifact that is thousands of years old is somehow opposed to our regime on an occult scale?
NAZI: Yep.
BELLOQ: Man. Total buzzkill.