Is Chaotic evil more evil than Lawful evil?

[Steel_Wind]

Naw, he's right and you're wrong. Acts that do harm to others and aren't balanced by a countervailing good are Evil (in D&D terms); that certainly includes random vandalism (CE), foreclosure on the widow's mortgage (LE) and fraud (NE). That these are not as evil as genocide or serial killing doesn't make them Neutral acts in D&D terms.

No, sorry, I'm not wrong.

D&D has always had within it a distinction between a property crime and a crime of wanton violence and cruelty.

The idea of the neutral thief has been embraced by D&D for 30 years. Indeed, it is even possible for D&D to embrace the possibility of even a neutral good thief.

Where D&D drew the line was at violence and cruelty to other living sentient beings. The assassin in 1st edition is the classic example. That was an individual who killed for money - the "antithesis of weal" to quote EGG.

This is a sensible distinction. Legal systems throughout the industrialized world draw a vast distinction between property crimes and crimes of violence.

Put bluntly, the group of 12 year olds out egging a house are NOT engaged in a lawful good act. But this is hardly a few steps up the slippery slope from donning black runed armor and posing for a Frazzetta painting.

Similarly, the bank which forecloses on a defaulting borrower is not engaged in a lawful evil act. At worst it is lawful neutral and is even quite defencibly lawful good when taking a long view of the matter. To ascribe to the enforcement of a secured lending instrument a moral equivalency of "evil" is just something we are not EVER going to agree upon, no matter if we write messages to one another for the next 10 years, 3 times a day.

Our viewpoints on these matters are clearly just not the same. What is self-evident to you is not in the least self-evident to me.

 

[diaglo]

No, sorry, I'm not wrong.

D&D has always had within it a distinction between a property crime and a crime of wanton violence and cruelty.

The idea of the neutral thief has been embraced by D&D for 30 years. Indeed, it is even possible for D&D to embrace the possibility of even a neutral good thief.

the Original D&D assassin found in Supplement II Blackmoor is Neutral.

of course, in Original D&D there are only 3 alignments.

Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral

edit: and the thief didn't come out until Supplement I Greyhawk... it hasn't been 30 years yet for the thief. but almost...

 

[Atom Again]

CHAOTIC EVIL-INDIVIDUAL SCALE: Ted Bundy may work, but I like Osama bin Laden. He may have a message, but the message is to kill more. Kill, kill, kill. Do this and get rewarded. Evil, through and through, even if he does not see it.

Doesn't that depend which side you're on? Osama bin Laden's followers see him as a hero, as a champion of good. People all around the world cheered when the World Trade Center collapsed. They believed that Osama had struck a blow against the "evil empire" of the United States.

History is written by the winners. The only reason we call Osama "evil" is because he's on the other side.

Were the fighter pilots who atomized Hiroshima and Nagasaki evil? They killed far more people than Osama bin Laden...innocent civilians...

 

[Modin Godstalker]

Okay, here is my shot at defining the alignments.

Chaotic Evil deals with destruction for the sheer joy of it.

Lawful Evil deals with control of others for personal gain.

Neutral Evil deals with selfishness.

Chaotic good deals with personal freedom for all unless your actions inhibit the personal freedom of others.

Lawful Good deals with performing actions for a greater good. Implies that all your actions affect others therfore should be tempered for the greater good.

Neutral Good deals with doing whatever it takes make things better for people.


Neutral. Not sure how to define this one.

Lawful Neutral has to do with doing whatever it takes create an efficient running society. An ant colony would be an example of this.

Chaotic Neutral deals with personal freedom no matter what. This type of person would perform evil acts to further his own personal freedom, but would gain any pleasure out of doing so.

 

[Voadam]

Lawful Evil, methinks, presents a very different debate. While I expect this will inflame more than a few Americans, from my Canadian perspective, I cannot see slavery as anything but an organized evil.

Yes, I believe CE is more "evil" than LE as chaos itself, in human terms, is fundamentally disordered and therefore, fundamentally unjust; ergo, more evil.

Ok so organized evil = LE.

So slavery equals LE.

Wouldn't genocide therefore also qualify as organized evil and therefore LE? It is mass evil systematically directed to a purpose besides personal gratification.

Isn't organized genocide on a mass scale worse than a CE mass murder?

and if chaos is fundamentally disordered and therefore (according to you) unjust, it does not follow that lawful evil would be more just, it is simply more consistently unjust (as indicated by the fact that it is lawful Evil).

You have eliminated minor issues from your definition of evil so the question is whether evil done in a lawful alignment manner not as bad as that done in a chaotic fashion. Wouldn't the rational ordered application of evil be worse than a chaotic application by that type of definition?

 

[WayneLigon]

Before someone replies by saying, "No, just more chaotic", let me make it clear what I'm asking. Is a chaotic evil person a "worse" person than a lawful evil person?

It depends on what is worse: immediate or far-reaching evil. But, really, neither of them.

The Chaotic Evil guy is likely to be more personally destructive, less constrained by any sort of sense of society or that society's laws (especially the unwritten ones). He'll probably win the award for 'most hideous multiple chainsaw murder involving kids, puppies, and nuns'. He'll certainly give into excess and revel in his acts against society to a degree that few can (or would want to) match.

The Lawful Evil guy is worse on a grander scale. His evil will likely be vastly more structured. He's not going to bother with individual acts of murder unless he's just indulging himself. He's going to create plans and institutions that move against entire societies at a time. He won't be as savage as the Chaotic guy but his overall effect on the world at large will be much worse. He'll create plans that gnaw away at a Good institution for years.

Who do you have to watch out for? Neither of them. The Neutral Evil guy is the worst of the lot, since he has the planning ability of the Lawful guy but isn't constrained. He has the potential for savagery that the Chaotic guy has, but with more finesse. He doesn't have the extra baggage of the chaotic or lawful outlook on things. He just wants to advance the cause of Evil and it doesn't matter how he does it.

 

[Particle_Man]

1) Trying to base D&D alignment on real life is tricky, at best. Many people think that there is no objective way of describing "good" and "evil" in real life, while there is an objective alignment in D&D. Aside from which, as noted above, the concepts of lawful and chaotic may have contradictions within them.

2) So, looking at them in game terms, all LE, NE, and CE are (or can be) equally evil. As for which is the most dangerous? Well, each is listed in the PHB (104-5) as being "the most dangerous alignment you can be", and the only way they could each be the most dangerous is if they were all equally dangerous.

3) There is a difference between being evil and being committed to the spread of evil, within each alignment, as listed in the PHB.

4) It seems that there are two lines that can be crossed in alignment. One is the "care about everyone" (good)/"care only about yourself, friends and family" (neutral)/"care only about yourself" (evil). The other deals with what you allow yourself to do to those that your don't "Care about". Thus a merchant who does not give money to a beggar is neutral, because he does not care about him. A merchant who tortures beggars for fun is evil.

5) In game terms, CE opponents tend to be more "in your face" than LE opponents, who deal with the pc's through minions, etc. Thus which the pc's despise more depends on their attitude towards their opponents. Do they prefer their opponents to "face them" or do they like the illusory peace of not being bothered by their opponents until it is (almost) too late?

and of course, YMMV.

 

[Drifter Bob]

Your own alignment gets in the way

The chaotic nature of CE makes it more anthema to truth, justice and weal and the common good, by any measure.

Moreover, I would add that Lawful Evil can easily be rationalized in past societies and civilizations. Many would add that it can be found in current society and civilization as well.

Not so with CE.

You are half right. Lawful evil is a fairly common alignment in RL. Your basic redneck "kick their ass and take their gas" ultra conservative US citizen, your hardline Communist party member in China or North Korea.... Nazis, Fascists both old and new (ala Serbia, for example), Right wing death squads in Latin America.

But chaotic evil is equally prevalant. If Lawful evil is typified by the cruel and callous meanie Cop, sticking to the letter of the law and using it to hurt and harm, chaotic evil is the reckless "gangsta" gang banger type, the outlaw biker who rapes and breaks heads without a care, the Cholho who, along with his 15 friends, stomps a mudhole in the behind of anyone who looks at him 'funny'.


It's really pretty simple. Folks who think chaotic is more evil or law is more evil are betraying their own prejudices. Did it ever occur to you that you think that way because of your own alignment


DB

 

[Nightfall]

Ari,

I can't believe you use all these "real world" people and yet you refuse to use someone that is as hardcore CE as Vangal OR LE minded as Chardun. You really need to work those in my friend.

 

[Anabstercorian]

Well, if you're Lawful in alignment, you'll view Chaotic Evil behavior as more evil than Lawful Evil behavior. You'll probably even find Chaotic Neutral behavior to be evil. Vice versa if you're chaotic, naturally.