Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
An Ontology of D&D Alignment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Big J Money" data-source="post: 7866203" data-attributes="member: 70533"><p><span style="font-size: 26px"><strong>Various Definitions of Alignment</strong></span></p><p>In addition to how alignment behaves, every DM and player possesses their own definition of what each of the different points on the alignment diagram mean. </p><p></p><p>These interpretations need not be merely stances that we have about alignment. They can also be beliefs that characters have about alignment. In other words, in your setting there can be a “true” definition for each alignment, as well as multiple “working” definitions held by characters that match or contradict the truth. I’m really just rehashing <em>facades</em>, from above.</p><p></p><p>I list neutrality first because I believe this clearly and immediately shows how radically different an individual campaign’s definition of the Alignments can vary from another, since often people see neutrality as simply “the middle of an axis” and give it no further thought. It’s hardly that simple (but it can be if you want).</p><p></p><p>Again, I do not claim these to be exhaustive; merely many I have encountered. Add your own to the lists below.</p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Possible definitions of Neutrality</strong></span></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">To be neutral is to not care whether one acts for good, evil, law or chaos; inevitably acting according to any of them for various personal reasons</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">To be neutral is to actively avoid being good, evil, lawful or chaotic</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">To be neutral is to work to balance out one’s own diametric* actions</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">To be neutral is to work to balance the consequences of the diametricality of others (perhaps sometimes joining one “side” or the other to maintain balance on a large scale)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">To be neutral is to have no opinion or care for others, neither positive nor negative, unless it would impact oneself (self-centeredness)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">To be neutral is to swear allegience to neutrality itself as its own “side”, and be equally aligned against the other 2 alignments (picture a ternary plot instead of a line axis; a 3-way conflict)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Neutrality is an illusion, or perhaps an untraversable void between the poles at the end of the axes</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Neutrality is best represented by more than one of the definitions above, combined (see, Dimensionality, above)</li> </ol><p>* -- The opposing poles of Law vs Chaos or Good vs Evil</p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Possible definitions of Good versus Evil</strong></span></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs Evil is going out of one’s way to aid others versus going out of one’s way to harm others</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs Evil is selflessness (helping others at cost to oneself) versus selfishness (helping oneself at cost to others)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs Evil is improving society for all its members versus making it worse for some</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs Evil is determined by judging one’s actions against a set of qualifying moral and/or ethical criteria (actions are determined to be good or evil by said criteria; ex: accepted mores of a society)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs Evil is doing what you believe to be right versus what you know to be wrong (conscience)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs evil is acting according to the angel versus the devil on your shoulders, as role-played by other players at the table</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Good vs Evil is best represented by more than one of the definitions above, combined</li> </ol><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Possible definitions of Law versus Chaos</strong></span></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is obeying versus disobeying external authoritative stricture(s) placed upon one’s actions</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is following any consistent stricture (even internal) versus following no strictures</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is consistently ordered behavior versus random behavior</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is servitude versus freedom</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is conformity versus non-conformity</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is society versus anarchy</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is inhabited territory versus wild territory</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is might versus magic</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is (wo)man versus beast</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is knowledge versus ignorance</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is conviction vs apostasy / agnosticism</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Law vs Chaos is best represented by more than one of the definitions above, combined</li> </ol><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Further possible definitions for either, or both, of the axes</strong></span></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The axis poles are opposed ideals one aspires to</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The axis poles are opposed “sides” in a greater conflict that one pledges allegience to; whatever side you are on is the “right” side</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The axis poles are opposed magnets one is inexorably drawn to</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The axis poles are inherent, innate and opposed properties of beings (see Mythicality, above)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The axis poles require each other (necessary paradox)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">There is no axis; the poles are not in opposition, but rather different perspectives</li> </ol></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Big J Money, post: 7866203, member: 70533"] [SIZE=7][B]Various Definitions of Alignment[/B][/SIZE] In addition to how alignment behaves, every DM and player possesses their own definition of what each of the different points on the alignment diagram mean. These interpretations need not be merely stances that we have about alignment. They can also be beliefs that characters have about alignment. In other words, in your setting there can be a “true” definition for each alignment, as well as multiple “working” definitions held by characters that match or contradict the truth. I’m really just rehashing [I]facades[/I], from above. I list neutrality first because I believe this clearly and immediately shows how radically different an individual campaign’s definition of the Alignments can vary from another, since often people see neutrality as simply “the middle of an axis” and give it no further thought. It’s hardly that simple (but it can be if you want). Again, I do not claim these to be exhaustive; merely many I have encountered. Add your own to the lists below. [SIZE=5][B]Possible definitions of Neutrality[/B][/SIZE] [LIST=1] [*]To be neutral is to not care whether one acts for good, evil, law or chaos; inevitably acting according to any of them for various personal reasons [*]To be neutral is to actively avoid being good, evil, lawful or chaotic [*]To be neutral is to work to balance out one’s own diametric* actions [*]To be neutral is to work to balance the consequences of the diametricality of others (perhaps sometimes joining one “side” or the other to maintain balance on a large scale) [*]To be neutral is to have no opinion or care for others, neither positive nor negative, unless it would impact oneself (self-centeredness) [*]To be neutral is to swear allegience to neutrality itself as its own “side”, and be equally aligned against the other 2 alignments (picture a ternary plot instead of a line axis; a 3-way conflict) [*]Neutrality is an illusion, or perhaps an untraversable void between the poles at the end of the axes [*]Neutrality is best represented by more than one of the definitions above, combined (see, Dimensionality, above) [/LIST] * -- The opposing poles of Law vs Chaos or Good vs Evil [SIZE=5][B]Possible definitions of Good versus Evil[/B][/SIZE] [LIST=1] [*]Good vs Evil is going out of one’s way to aid others versus going out of one’s way to harm others [*]Good vs Evil is selflessness (helping others at cost to oneself) versus selfishness (helping oneself at cost to others) [*]Good vs Evil is improving society for all its members versus making it worse for some [*]Good vs Evil is determined by judging one’s actions against a set of qualifying moral and/or ethical criteria (actions are determined to be good or evil by said criteria; ex: accepted mores of a society) [*]Good vs Evil is doing what you believe to be right versus what you know to be wrong (conscience) [*]Good vs evil is acting according to the angel versus the devil on your shoulders, as role-played by other players at the table [*]Good vs Evil is best represented by more than one of the definitions above, combined [/LIST] [SIZE=5][B]Possible definitions of Law versus Chaos[/B][/SIZE] [LIST=1] [*]Law vs Chaos is obeying versus disobeying external authoritative stricture(s) placed upon one’s actions [*]Law vs Chaos is following any consistent stricture (even internal) versus following no strictures [*]Law vs Chaos is consistently ordered behavior versus random behavior [*]Law vs Chaos is servitude versus freedom [*]Law vs Chaos is conformity versus non-conformity [*]Law vs Chaos is society versus anarchy [*]Law vs Chaos is inhabited territory versus wild territory [*]Law vs Chaos is might versus magic [*]Law vs Chaos is (wo)man versus beast [*]Law vs Chaos is knowledge versus ignorance [*]Law vs Chaos is conviction vs apostasy / agnosticism [*]Law vs Chaos is best represented by more than one of the definitions above, combined [/LIST] [SIZE=5][B]Further possible definitions for either, or both, of the axes[/B][/SIZE] [LIST=1] [*]The axis poles are opposed ideals one aspires to [*]The axis poles are opposed “sides” in a greater conflict that one pledges allegience to; whatever side you are on is the “right” side [*]The axis poles are opposed magnets one is inexorably drawn to [*]The axis poles are inherent, innate and opposed properties of beings (see Mythicality, above) [*]The axis poles require each other (necessary paradox) [*]There is no axis; the poles are not in opposition, but rather different perspectives [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
An Ontology of D&D Alignment
Top