Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7866487" data-attributes="member: 4937">I may need to refine this some more, especially as I get more familiarity with the intentions of your terminology, but here is a first take on how alignment works in Korrel, the Crimson Realm - my homebrew game work.ObjectivityGood/Evil - Fully ObjectiveLaw/Chaos – Partially ObjectiveThe ultimate ends of good and evil are distinguishable. However the ultimate ends of law and chaos are functionally similar enough that distinguishing between the two is not possible in all situations and from all vantages. To make matters more complicated, Chaos is the belief itself that the universe is subjective, and chaos is an actual real force in the universe, so the universe is actually to some extent subjective. Even Law has to accept that the universe is subjective, it just believes that it ought not be. Conversely, chaos has to agree that there is some measure of order imposed on the universe, and in turn believes that law as it exists ought not to be. Finally, both Law and Chaos would stringently object to the above categorization, and would insist that neither Good or Evil is fully objective. I’ll return to this Exclusivity and in Facades.MythicalityFor Outsiders, Fully MythicalFor Free Peoples, mundane in the sense that actions are not predestined but mythical in the sense that Free Peoples are being influenced by and manipulating the same cosmic forces that dictate the choices of the fully mythical beings.  Not really sure how to classify this because the two choices don't strike me as mutually exclusive.ExclusivityGood/Evil – Partially ExclusiveLaw/Chaos – Partially ExclusiveI fee this is heavily tied to objectivity, in that if you can objectively know good and evil, then you have to have a way to uniquely identify them so there would have to be some level of exclusivity. However, theory and practice are different, and while good and evil are objective, because the universe is imperfect there are situations where perfection – an absolutely purity – of any cosmic force are impossible to obtain immediately. An example would be killing a person to save another person’s life. The act of saving a life is objectively good. But the act of killing is objectively bad. Thus there ends up being a situation where at times it is impossible to achieve exclusive good (or evil for that matter) because existing imperfections render any action itself imperfect. The result is that good or evil consequences can exist only in the net, and as such imperfect reasoning, imperfect foresight, and imperfect power force actions to be muddled.This is the basis of the objection by Law/Chaos that Evil/Good are not fully objective. Law and Chaos will both argue that neither Evil nor Good can exist except as ideas, and since the ideal of either is neither obtainable (nor desirable) in practice there is no such thing as good or evil. And here we would introduce arguments as to whether the tiger when it kills an antelope does good or evil.DynamismFor Outsiders and their minions, fully Static. An outsider, being actually wholly made of the mythological forces is incapable of changing its nature or even desiring to change its nature, because the desire to change its nature would require some part of its nature to be other than what it is. A good outsider is wholly incapable of being tempted. An evil outsider is wholly incapable of even wanting redemption, since the quality of wanting redemption implies some existing measure of goodness in itself.For most everything else, sliding scale of Dynamic with say deities being nearly as static as outsiders, and PC races being almost wholly Dynamic.ReliabilityI feel this is heavily tied at least in my game to Dynamism.  If something is dynamic, then it can’t also be reliable.  As a result, the answers here are an exact mirror to the above.For Outsiders, they are wholly reliable.  They act intuitively like pretty much perfect barometers, and even if you could trick one into acting against it’s nature, they’d be distressed but uncorrupted, because ultimately that was on you.For everyone else, reliability is a function of wisdom. The greater wisdom that you have, the more you are able to understand the implications of your beliefs, predict the implications of your actions, and subjugate your will so that you do act in the way you want to act instead of finding yourself doing what you didn’t want to do. High wisdom characters will tend to reliably know their own alignment, reliably know what the dictates of their alignment are, reliably understand the limits of their own understanding, and reliably act accordingly. Low wisdom characters on the other hand will not understand their own alignment, not understand what their beliefs call for, radically misjudge situations and their own comprehension of situations, and consequently will act rashly, unwisely, and without regard for or in actual betrayal of what they believe.CategoricityVery high.  Categories play a very big role, and there is a full spectrum of categories.  Here I think 3rd edition did very well with its alignment categories of ‘Often’, ‘Usually’, and ‘Always’.  Humans are often neutral, but it’s not remotely surprising to find them of any alignment.   Elves are often chaotic good, but it’s not remotely surprising to meet one that isn’t.  Manticores are usually lawful evil and when they aren’t they don’t usually drift far from that – maybe a step in any direction.  So at most you might find a Manticore that takes no special delight in tormenting and devouring people, and at worst you might find one that does and also can't be trusted to make a bargain or give you a fair break.  A Notary Fiend is always lawful evil without exception.ConsequenceDeeply consequential.  Although it’s pretty much impossible to rigorously track this, the assumption is that as mortals choose between those cosmic mythological forces they have profound impacts on both themselves and the world around them.  Things become “tainted” by the after effects of those choices, so that the ground is literally cursed or blessed by the infusion of substance that results from seemingly mundane action.   A kind act could literally cause the ground to soften the next time someone falls on it.  A harsh act could do the reverse.  The world reacts in sympathy to what the players do, and great powers can gain or lose control over an environment as a result mundane actions.  A city of great iniquity soaks in it, and one of great purity and mercy bathes in that, each becoming an anathema to the other.  Order makes more order and chaos makes more chaos.DimensionalityAt some level these things are single dimensional.  But that simplicity is actually beyond the ability of mortal minds to understand, and so they try to understand it by way of analogies.  These analogies are inherently imperfect.  An intelligent mortal can make more perfect analogies, but only someone with superhuman intelligence can speak on these things as they actually are.   As a result, in the mortal sphere there can be numerous attempts to discuss things which sound different, but are actually all imperfect descriptions of the thing itself coming at it from different directions.  These different descriptions though at first they sound dissimilar are actually just facets of the same underlying truth.TransparencyHigh but not perfect. There are aspects of the alignment system that reflect my own personal bias which I attempt to avoid communicating as ‘word from on high’. For example, I will attempt to explain that Law and Chaos won’t agree that Good and Evil are objective without actually trying to resolve for the PC’s whether the powers and potencies and philosophers are right or wrong. This is because I want to leave open for the players to play with what their character beliefs without having word from on high certainty that the character is wrong with respect to the nature of the world.Likewise I don’t give the players continual feedback as to whether every act was right or wrong. This is particularly true if the players aren’t playing an emissary of one of viewpoint such as a cleric or champion. I’ll leave it up to a rogue’s player to decide whether he’s actually good, or evil, or somewhere in between, while keeping my own views close to my chest until something comes up that might disclose the reality of the situation as I see it.FacadesTons of these. It’s an important point of the setting that no one in character fully agrees or has full understanding of the alignment system. Even the gods argue over the details and what everything means – otherwise what would there really be to contend over? So I’m continually throwing up facades that are some viewpoint character’s take on how it all works. Neither the players nor especially the characters is expected to know the deep lore of the setting. This document itself would be treated as a campaign level secret. It’s not at all unusual for NPCs, especially low wisdom NPCs to not have a clear understanding of their own alignment. And even if they do have a clear understanding of their own alignment, there are plenty of Lawful Evil characters who will honestly espouse that lawful evil is the right and morally correct way that one ought to live one’s life. In other words, plenty of people will claim with sincerity that their particular point of the 8 sided star is actually the right and good way. Villains will believe that they are doing the right thing, even if it is labelled ‘Evil’. Humans are usually ‘neutral’, but invariably most of them will describe themselves as ‘good people’.In particular, the players are unlikely to always encounter the below definitions of law/chaos/good/and evil, but could encounter definitions in texts and from scholars and other 'experts' that match many of the proposed definitions that you offer. It's not necessarily the case that this definitions are even wrong or incompatible, they are just different attempts to clarify and practically apply what is meant by the things below.Definition of GoodLife/Health/Creation and that which promotes it.  Or as Gygax put it, Weal.Definition of EvilDeath/Harm/Destruction and that which promotes it.  Or as Gygax put it, Woe.Definition of LawAdherence to an external shared rule or standard, or Collectivism.  Law imagines the universe as being made of particles which have no particular character except that they react to forces or rules that govern them.  That is, everything is defined only in relationship to something else, and things only have meaning and identity in relationship to other things.  Ones apparent identify is in fact the result of outside forces.  Note that seen this way Law encourages selflessness but not necessarily compassion.  Consider a lawful evil axiom like “My honor is loyalty”Definition of ChaosAdherence to one’s internal nature, or Individuality.  Chaos imagines the universe as being made unique differentiated particles that behave according to internal rules.   All external observations are actually the result of these unique interactions.   Note that seen this way Chaos encourages self-centeredness but not necessarily selfishness.  Consider a chaotic good axiom like, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”Definition of NeutralityAny attempt at balance between the above competing principles whether through indifference to them or conscious effort.  For example, a Neutral Good character could either be indifferent to the concerns of individuality versus collectivism and consider such questions to be actively missing the point, or they could be actively trying to balance such concerns by seeing both as necessary or beautiful.  The assumption of the system is that either viewpoint will in practice tend to produce for a given degree of wisdom similar results.  Whether a person is indifferent or actively engaged in balance tends to be product of their intelligence, with low intelligence persons tending toward indifference and high intelligence beings preferring a more rigorous, thought out, and structured approach.</blockquote>

Verification