D&D General Alignment: the problem is Chaos

[Aging Bard]

The differentiation as given there wasn't copied from a published source, it's one I posted in another recent thread as being something I thought as useful if one is keeping both alignments for characters and extraplanars.

It allows for discriminating for things yours doesn't. And I think they are things that should be discriminated between.

Is it that bad that the elves as a society are only "chaotic" and not "CHAOTIC"? ;-)

Yes, I understood your source. I think what you are calling LAWFUL and CHAOTIC are pretty close to Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil, but not exactly. What's missing is the cosmic enmity between the two that your example is capturing. It's fine if you want to play that up in your setting, but I don't think it's essential (though it's a cool dynamic). Frankly, I don't think your quoted source entails my definition of Chaos at all, but that's fine. To be specific, I'd be happy to play in a campaign using your quoted source's alignment system and I'd know what to do and I'd have fun.

 

[guachi]

I agree that trying to define a CG society in a way that actually functions is hard. CG elves are just really weird. Maybe it's a continuum of how much order and structure there is in society and an individual.

As an example from my favorite D&D world, Mystara (D&D only had L/N/C but I think it's a good example): The Dwarf gazetteer had standardized city block map plans in the book and all the major cities had maps laid out according to this plan. If the DM wanted, he could photocopy these and make a map of any city in Dwarf-land.

On the other hand, the thought of doing this for Elf-land would be rejected out of hand by elves. Roads are where people wander, not pre-determined. Houses are built where the trees grow, not where you deliberately place stone.

 

[Aging Bard]

While there may not be many chaotic governments or organizations, I do think there are chaotic people around.

Yes indeed, and I do think my definition of Chaos allows for this, along with crazy "charismatic democracies" like the elves.

 

[Sithlord]

As much as I think paladins should be lawful good I do like oaths or a code of conduct to clarify what is expected by them because alignment is a big box containing many different philosophies.

 

[Aging Bard]

I agree that trying to define a CG society in a way that actually functions is hard. CG elves are just really weird. Maybe it's a continuum of how much order and structure there is in society and an individual.

As an example from my favorite D&D world, Mystara (D&D only had L/N/C but I think it's a good example): The Dwarf gazetteer had standardized city block map plans in the book and all the major cities had maps laid out according to this plan. If the DM wanted, he could photocopy these and make a map of any city in Dwarf-land.

On the other hand, the thought of doing this for Elf-land would be rejected out of hand by elves. Roads are where people wander, not pre-determined. Houses are built where the trees grow, not where you deliberately place stone.

Boy is this a great post--thanks!

 

[Sithlord]

I agree that trying to define a CG society in a way that actually functions is hard. CG elves are just really weird. Maybe it's a continuum of how much order and structure there is in society and an individual.

As an example from my favorite D&D world, Mystara (D&D only had L/N/C but I think it's a good example): The Dwarf gazetteer had standardized city block map plans in the book and all the major cities had maps laid out according to this plan. If the DM wanted, he could photocopy these and make a map of any city in Dwarf-land.

On the other hand, the thought of doing this for Elf-land would be rejected out of hand by elves. Roads are where people wander, not pre-determined. Houses are built where the trees grow, not where you deliberately place stone.

I really kind of disagree. To me a Jeffersonian or libertarian philosophy would be chaotic a good. Not that I have ever seen one in my lifetime.

 

[Aging Bard]

I feel that true Lawful stances are very rare. It would mean a kind of conformity that is lethal and oblivious to the reality of a situation.

In the polarity between Law and Chaos, I view their respective populations to hug close to the center, with outliers at either extreme being quite weird, and even difficult to imagine.

Very glad you posted this, thank you. As long as we don't view alignment as cartoonishly intense (Dudley Do-Right, anyone?), I think the average walking around person is Lawful Good. They obey most laws, and they grant their fellow agency (or certainly don't interfere with it). I happen to disagree with interpreting lack of intensity as Neutral, but that's a choice.

 

[Aging Bard]

I really kind of disagree. To me a Jeffersonian or libertarian philosophy would be chaotic a good. Not that I have ever seen one in my lifetime.

I'll just say that libertarians are NOT Chaotic Good and leave it at that.

 

[Aging Bard]

As much as I think paladins should be lawful good I do like oaths or a code of conduct to clarify what is expected by them because alignment is a big box containing many different philosophies.

I totally get this for modern play. For an old like me, you have paladins and anti-paladins, and fighters and cavaliers can fill in the spaces in between.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I'm really glad you posted this! Because this is what I'm trying to decouple from Evil. I think Evil wants to be the problem. I think Chaos ultimately wants to avoid being told what to do.

Causing trouble isn't always evil. From a good old fashioned hippy freak out to a protest movement about real societal ills, Chaos (capital C) is happy to stir the pot. Of course Chaos intersects with Good and Evil which gives different flavours of Chaos which leads to different types of pot stirring; something your hard core Chaotic (hello slaads) is happy to see.

Now out here in the real world I don't think alignment serves any purpose. (I don't think it serves much purpose in a game world either.) So please don't take what I'm saying as some sort of personal manifesto. I'm just mucking about with the concept.

Also: I'm on board with all of what Cadence said in their post #9 above.