How does a chaotic society function?

[chrisnd]

Here is my take, and I hate to be cliche on it, but this is just my idea.

I think that Salvatore had the D&D concept of a chaotic society precise and accurate when he was writing the "Dark Elf Trilogy". Menzoberanzan, from the viewpoint of Drizz't, is very chaotic in its structure (as is the nature of drow elves anyway). Of course, maybe I am only saying this becuase I just finished reading the trilogy a few weeks ago, but watching how everything is done in that drow city explains the chaotic nature of the drow quite nicely.

As for a non-evil chaotic society, you are on your own. Although I imagine the basic nature of a kender or elf society might point you in the right direction towards a "chaotic" bent.

It is interesting, but IIRC, the OD&D rules allowed three alignments - lawful, neutral, and chaotic. Interesting that good and evil are not choices, as though being lawful is by its very nature good, and being chaotic is by its very nature bad. Of course, I never played OD&D, so I could be completely off-track. Feel free to beat me with a stupid stick if that is the case.

 

[Cerubus Dark]

And where exactly in the rules does it say, that alignment forces a being to act in a certain way!?

Bye
Thanee

See, thats why I like to use Alignment as a starting point. Sure A gold dragon is LG when it is born, but events over the course of its life can make it bitter and evil.

blah blah blah

A good chaotic society to me would be the ones found in Mad Max and the Thunderdome, but then again thats just me.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

I've already completed dozens of posts this month on the subject of how law and chaos, as described in the rules, don't really function. One of the difficulties I find is that people come up with house rules to solve the bizarre inconsistencies of the actual rules and then claim their house rules are the actual rules. That's fine; if people want to pretend that their various ingenious fixes are the rules themselves, I don't think this thread will be harmed. If people want to read about the problems of law and chaos as actually spelled-out in the rules, flip a few pages back in the forums. And no, I don't believe that the rules' statement that alignment is not a script or straitjacket absolves the writers of all responsibility to produce alignment descriptions that actually cohere. Indeed, things open to interepretation deserve clearer descriptions, not less coherent ones.

Any chaotic evil NPC one makes, according to the rules, is severely handicapped from acting rationally in their own interest. I would suggest doing away with this; instead, focus on chaos as the NPCs' goal rather than as their method for getting through the day. Let people's goals, objectives and allies define their alignment.

Aw, come on, not that again...

A chaotic evil NPC isn't barred from doing stuff in an orderly, disciplined fashion. His alignment states that, in his past, his behaviour was mostly chaotic evil, and that he will very strongly tend to behave that way in the future. If he behaves differently, for whatever reason the DM percieves, he will do so...however, if he does so continually, he might suffer an alignment change to describe his new behavioural trend better.
It's just the same as with any player character.
And if the sum of that NPCs actions and behaviour, after he's opened the gates to the abyss, is more chaotic than lawful, he'll simply stay at being chaotic.
It's really easy. You just have to try it.

 

[fusangite]

A chaotic evil NPC isn't barred from doing stuff in an orderly, disciplined fashion. His alignment states that, in his past, his behaviour was mostly chaotic evil, and that he will very strongly tend to behave that way in the future. If he behaves differently, for whatever reason the DM percieves, he will do so...however, if he does so continually, he might suffer an alignment change to describe his new behavioural trend better.
It's just the same as with any player character.

I'm talking about play a chaotic evil NPC, not about playing a neutral evil NPC who was chaotic just before the adventure started. How does playing a chaotic evil NPC have any meaning if, in order to get things done, he behaves in a way not described by his alignment and, if he appears as a recurring character, has his alignment changed?

Yes. I suppose the rules let me play all chaotic evil NPCs as neutral evil. But don't you think that's kind of silly? Essentially, the alignment characters detect when they cast alignment detection spells on the NPC will either show chaotic evil, the alignment that informs the NPCs actions in no meaningful way or they will detect neutral evil.

And if the sum of that NPCs actions and behaviour, after he's opened the gates to the abyss, is more chaotic than lawful, he'll simply stay at being chaotic.
It's really easy. You just have to try it.

So your alignment is determined by the sum of your actions at some future time not at the time people are detecting it? How should one choose what future moment in an NPC's life the alignment detection spells pertain to?

Look: I agree with you: alignment should be about your goals not your tactics and strategies. The only thing we're disagreeing about is what the rules say. Fortunately, this thread is not about the letter of the rules, hopefully; I hope this thread is about proposing societies that can seem chaotic.

If one looks at Runequest, which does the chaos/law in a bit more of the Cold War style I like, they do a great job of chaotic societies that, while aligned with chaos, are basically ordered places, using the raw power of chaos to run the state. But at their core, they are gradually going mad; within the City of Glamour, there is more and more madness, more and more strange events, more eruptions of the chaos that the empire survives by controlling.

 

[Darkness]

I've always wanted a Chaotic and a Lawful equivalent to the BoVD and the BoED (the game books, not the in-game books).

 

[drnuncheon]

Yep. The rules state that having individual rights is chaotic and having a bill of rights is lawful. Thus, the only means by which a chatoric good society can actually come into existence is inherently anti-chaotic.

Whoah...are you saying that one can't have individual rights unless it's written down in a bill of rights? What about the 9th amendment, then?

J

 

[jmucchiello]

While I agree with the group/individual axiom championed above, there is this alternative. A chaotic society could be one where there are lots of laws but those laws are not enforced. A declining empire would almost certainly become chaotic.

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

As an in game practice, look to an old cliche'.

Orc societies are often portayed as chaotic, but every once and a while a great leader gets multiple groups together and rolling in one direction.

A chaotic society could have any number of lawful individuals, with traditions and practices of their own, and your standard freedom at all cost types. The society could be bound by a set of guidelines with leaders that are elected in an orderly fashion, but are themselves chaotic. An evil society would funtion as desribed by others early, with laws being enforced on a whim. In a good society, the leaders would use the laws just as ruthlessly, to grant freedoms and to give to the individual what they want at the cost of the whole. Not too far off from real world extreme liberalism.

 

[leporidae]

A Chaotic Nation or a Nation of Chaotics

To talk about a nation/society having an alignment is mostly meaningless and more than a little confusing. Unless it is solely inhabited by beings with a hive mind, any nation/society is composed of many individuals who will (generally) have different beliefs and motivations (based on my existentialist interpretation of D&D alignment - no disrespect to those who take an essentialist approach to alignment in their campaigns).

I can think of three, sometimes conflicting, sometimes overlapping, ways to interpret the idea of an nation with an alignment:

1. A large majority of the population shares that alignment.

2. The most powerful and influential group in the society shares that alignment and enforces it on the rest of the population.

3. The general state of 'law and order' in the society. (Though I believe this conflates the idea of a chaotic situation with Chaotic alignment. For example, imagine a society entirely composed of lawful individuals engaged in civil war - the nation might be chaotic, but not Chaotic, in my opinion.)

The way I interpret the difference between Lawful and Chaotic alignments in my campaign (which I hope isn't too far from the orthodox interpretation) is the degree to which behavior is influenced by loyalty to abstract principles. (Silveras' post earlier in the thread has some concrete examples of what I'm trying to say here). Chaotic individuals can be loyal/kind/generous/self sacrificing to friends, family, tribe, or just people they meet. They may even be lawabiding, either in the case that the laws of the land happen to agree with their inclinations, or if law enforcement is strict enough (and they are sensible/afraid enough) to prevent them from doing as they wish. But Loyalty, Obedience, and Faithfulness as abstractions would seem either ridiculous or meaningless.

In my campaign (similiar to what NewJeffCTHome mentions) the chaotic nation was a continent-wide but ramshackle common law Republic created by a union of meritocratic Orcish tribes (plus demi-human allies) with an association of small Human democracies (along with allied self-ruling Dwarven and Halfling colonies). Most individuals in the Republic are loyal to their own family/neighborhood/village/tribe, each province has its own assembly and laws, with numerous exceptions for groups who are self-ruling, or obey the laws of a neighboring province out of tradition. The whole collection is held together by three things:

1. Loyalty to Gruumsh, (who makes personal appearances and isn't just an abstract figure to his worshippers - in addition he decided to become Chaotic Good, and accept worshippers of all species, not just Orcs) holds together the military.

2. Ancient and revered tradition holds together the provincial and national assemblies (though these probably attract a much higher proportion of lawful persons than the general population.)

3. Money holds together the merchant class, who are prospering under the general peace, and even though they may individually tend to be neutral or chaotic, see little benefit in trying to break up the Republic.

 

[Jesus_marley]

Here is my take, and I hate to be cliche on it, but this is just my idea.

I think that Salvatore had the D&D concept of a chaotic society precise and accurate when he was writing the "Dark Elf Trilogy". Menzoberanzan, from the viewpoint of Drizz't, is very chaotic in its structure (as is the nature of drow elves anyway).

I disagree here. The drow, while worshipping a Goddess of Chaos, are , in their twisted way, a Lawful society. There are hard a fast rules that are adhered to within Drow society and any who dare break those laws face severe punishment.
I'll use as an example the method of gaining House Status. For a Drow House to directly "move up the line" they have to eliminate a House that is "above" them. In eliminating a House, the victor must be able to kill the ENTIRE Noble family. If even one member survives the attack, they can bear witness to the "crime". At this point the offending house is dealt swift justice by the rest of Drow society. If the attack is successful, however, everyone turns a blind eye as there is no witness to the alleged "crime".
In fact, The Drow in their own way, are probably even MORE lawful than a lot of human societies in D&D.