D&D General D&D doesn't need Evil

[Demetrios1453]

Continuing with the idea of Capital E Evil, I even think the idea of "evil gods" could be excised from D&D.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but historically in polytheistic mythology (such as Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt), there aren't really "evil" gods. There are gods in conflict, and trickster gods, and gods of war, but as far as I know there wasn't an Ancient Greek God of Evil.

Eris was pretty bad; she might fall under the "trickster" category, although she's much less nice than even Loki.

Her children and most of her siblings though - yeah, they're pretty much flat out evil, being the personifications of all the woes of humanity: Lies and Murders and Pains and Lawlessness and so on...

 

[BookTenTiger]

Erie was pretty bad; she might fall under the "trickster" category, although she's much less nice than even Loki.

Her children and most of her siblings though - yeah, they're pretty much flat out evil, being the personifications of all the woes of humanity: Lies and Murders and Pains and Lawlessness and so on...

Good point, I forgot about manifestations of harmful phenomena. I think Greek Mythology had those too.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Good point, I forgot about manifestations of harmful phenomena. I think Greek Mythology had those too.

They did, and that's what I was posting about, although my autocorrect corrected "Eris" (the Greek goddess of discord) as "Erie" (one of the Great Lakes). I've corrected it now..

 

[FrozenNorth]

Sure. However, there's a huge difference between deducing that the word is apt based on evidence, and using the word as a prescriptive definition.

Exactly this. In my adventures, I try to avoid telling the characters that the opponents are evil. Instead, I try to show them why those opponents need to be stopped, and let the characters come to their own conclusions about their characterization.

I am extremely leery of the approach “rando tells you the goblins in the hills are evil, party goes and murders them and takes their stuff”.

 

[Umbran]

And this is exactly what fiends do when weighing your soul and your sins.

Because chaotic demons are going to stick to a strict sin pricing schedule? And, would celestials trust fiends to do the weighing?

And overall, I don't see how fiends are the ones weighing your soul when spells like "Detect Evil" can detect its weight in realtime while you are still alive. And in the Great Wheel, the fiends are on various alignment planes - the measure of your actions must be taken to send it to the proper plane, before any fiends see it.

The one thing that you are not accounting for is the fact that there is a DM, who actually has the objective view of he multiverse on your actions, and who plays the archons and devils you weigh your soul, in a purely factual (for them) manner.

Except, of course, the DM themselves, being human and using human morals as their baseline, are probably not being particularly objective (or, perhaps more importantly, consistent)...

 

[Mort]

I am extremely leery of the approach “rando tells you the goblins in the hills are evil, party goes and murders them and takes their stuff”.

If I'm DMing and this happens 99% of the time the rando is trying to take advantage of the party (especially if they've established any kind of murder hobo reputation)!

 

[Mort]

Except, of course, the DM themselves, being human and using human morals as their baseline, are probably not being particularly objective (or, perhaps more importantly, consistent)...

While this is true, If you're playing some kind of cosmic objective good vs. evil and actions objectively matter campaign The DM has to pretend to be objective and the players have to accept (pretend) that he is. Probably doesn't hurt to lay out some written guidelines.

And of course, in this case, I would recommend binging The Good Place which while it would show the futility of trying to lay out objective good and evil it would also show how fun it is to pretend to do so!

 

[John R Davis]

Many games don't need a big E. I like loads different games with all sorts of shades. For D&D it does need a big E. It's one of its appeals and what it's system is set up for. IMO/IME

 

[Aldarc]

If something in the game is labelled as evil its actions will reflect that. (label leads to actions). If something in the game does a series of evil acts it'll end up getting labelled as evil (actions lead to label). Chicken and egg.

Exactly, and in D&D I wouldn't have it any other way.

So not even B/X D&D?

I personally find Good vs. Evil to be boring. Law vs. Chaos is where it's at! Chaoskampf! Woohoo!

 

[BookTenTiger]

Many games don't need a big E. I like loads different games with all sorts of shades. For D&D it does need a big E. It's one of its appeals and what it's system is set up for. IMO/IME

Can you expand on why you feel D&D needs a big E Evil?

D&D's foundation is based on war games (no big E Evil) and exploring dungeons for treasure (no big E Evil).

At what point do you feel like Big E Evil became necessary for D&D?