Law and Chaos gone? Good Riddance!

[Kunimatyu]

I think the 3x3 grid will be gone, but I doubt Slaadi will stop being personifications of pure chaos, or Inevitables will stop being enforcers of cosmic law. And really, that does the job just fine for me.

 

[The Shadow]

Are you seriously telling me that too much love, trust, cooperation, joy, health, happiness, prosperity, generosity and enlightenment is something a sane person would fight against? Are you telling me that someone other than a complete lunatic would work to bring hate, cruelty, ignorance, depravity, suffering, sorrow, pain, greed, etc. to this situation?

Preach it, brother!

And I would further ask, "Is the preservation of this supposed 'Balance' a good thing? And if so, is it merely 'good' because it is pleasant to you, or is it a matter of principle?" If the answer is the former, it's hard to see how the person can remain sane; if the latter, they're trying to be 'Good' in a spectacularly inefficient fashion.

What fantasy or mythic archetype exists who is this righteous servant of balance? I would argue that none exist. Even in D&D novels, there are no such Heroes of Moral Ambiguity. They don't exist because no one can relate to such a hero(?).

Actually, I have seen one set of D&D novels that do treat of such 'heroes'. But they're the exception that proves the rule: The 'Gord the Rogue' books by Gary Gygax. If you haven't read them, you're not missing very much, I'm afraid.

This is nothing more than a simplistic dualism rooted in a misunderstanding of the dualism at the root of much of Western Religious thought. The first great dualistic faith Zoroastrianism had two great gods Ahriman (evil) and Ahura Mazda (good). These two were in constant conflict but in the end the good god would triumph according to their prophecies.

Zoroastrianism was originally monotheistic, by the way. The dualist version came much later and was arguably a corruption. Modern Zoroastrians have largely repudiated it.

In Christianity there is always used an oft spoken statement "You cannot believe in God without believing in the devil." Nonsense. To say this is to make them equivalent cosmic forces when one (Satan/evil) is infinitely inferior to the other (God/good). Somehow the duality of equivalency crept into Christianity (and thereby Western consciousness) via the mistaken idea that God and Satan are two sides of the same coin when this is one of the most nonsensical and unsupported yet popularly believed concepts in the faith. No denomination believes this, though many people do rahter unconsciously hold this belief.

You totally lost me here. I have encountered nothing of the sort among Christians (certainly not the statement you mention), and I see no particular evidence for your assetion in history. Since it's quite off topic, perhaps we could continue the discussion in another venue?

 

[FireLance]

I do agree that tying mechanics to alignment is not a good idea unless the players and DM have generally similar definitions or are willing to broaden their definition to embrace (or at least accept) each other's.

For what it's worth, however, I tend to view the law/chaos divide as one of whether the PC looks to an external or internal source as a guide to his behavior. If the PC looks to an external source such as the laws of his country, the tenets of his religion, the norms of his culture, the teachings of his philosophy, the rules of his organization, etc., I would consider him Lawful. If he tends to make up his own mind, I would consider him Chaotic.

 

[Spell]

if their is absolutely no chance for redemption, yes. by this i mean if their evil is learned, then killing would be the wrong thing to do, but if their evil is inherent and impossible to overcome then their really are no other options but to kill it. Of course it does make for better story if you let it live though.

ah, but then we enter into theological and biological debates...
if you took a tiger puppy the day it was born, could you raise it as a cat? all the examples clearly say that no, the tiger puppy would still retain quite a bit of aggressivity, as if it was in-bulit in its genes.

can you raise a baby orc as a human? probably not. there would be always the chance (to say the least) that the evilness is in his genes, rather than in his culture. so you need to kill it, because you are good. but don't orc serve a purpose in the world, too? don't they help holding a check against smaller evil creatures, and sometimes even bigger ones (a tribe of orcs might kill a giant or a ogre)?

if joe the hero goes around killing all the orcs, wouldn't he cause more problems to the human settlement than if he had left the evil orcs (or, at least, some of them) alive? and even if joe the hero will be around to kill the kobolds, gnolls, ogres, giants, and whatever else that remains after the orcs are gone, would it be proper for a good hero like him to embark in what essentially is mass genocide?

aaaah, decisions, decisions...

 

[bonethug0108]

ah, but then we enter into theological and biological debates...
if you took a tiger puppy the day it was born, could you raise it as a cat? all the examples clearly say that no, the tiger puppy would still retain quite a bit of aggressivity, as if it was in-bulit in its genes.

can you raise a baby orc as a human? probably not. there would be always the chance (to say the least) that the evilness is in his genes, rather than in his culture. so you need to kill it, because you are good. but don't orc serve a purpose in the world, too? don't they help holding a check against smaller evil creatures, and sometimes even bigger ones (a tribe of orcs might kill a giant or a ogre)?

if joe the hero goes around killing all the orcs, wouldn't he cause more problems to the human settlement than if he had left the evil orcs (or, at least, some of them) alive? and even if joe the hero will be around to kill the kobolds, gnolls, ogres, giants, and whatever else that remains after the orcs are gone, would it be proper for a good hero like him to embark in what essentially is mass genocide?

aaaah, decisions, decisions...

You missed an important part: orcs aren't listed as always evil.

Take the orc out and put in something that is always evil and can have babies. Is their even anything like that in the mm? Aren't the always evil things like devils and such? As far as I know devils don't have babies, or at least not with each other.

Time for research!

 

[Khuxan]

You missed an important part: orcs aren't listed as always evil.

Take the orc out and put in something that is always evil and can have babies. Is their even anything like that in the mm? Aren't the always evil things like devils and such? As far as I know devils don't have babies, or at least not with each other.

Time for research!

If you're serious about this research, you can use this to filter all the evil creatures. You'll have to open each one individually to see if it's Always Evil, though.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

--- edit ---

 

[Wyrmshadows]

You totally lost me here. I have encountered nothing of the sort among Christians (certainly not the statement you mention), and I see no particular evidence for your assetion in history. Since it's quite off topic, perhaps we could continue the discussion in another venue?

I'm not saying that its a supportable belief or an official belief. It's not. If anything the idea that God and Satan are two tides of the same coin or that if you believe in one you must by necessity believe in the other is like a wierd meme among some Christians who never actually examined that kind of thinking just fell into it somehow. I'm not saying this belief is everywhere, but it does exist.

The idea that there can be no good without evil is a common misconception of duality in Western thought even though it isn't supported in any thoughtful examination of our myths and religions.



Wyrmshadows

 

[Najo]

I think the best approach to alignment (and the one I can see them doing) is having the alignments of Lawful, Good, Evil, Chaotic and Unaligned. You choose one of these.

A character who is Lawful follows a personal code and prefers structure, a good character strives to protect the meek and stand against the wrongs in the world, a evil character is self serving and doesn't care about the consquences on others, a chaotic character prefers to live by their whims and seeks to live by personal freedom and an unaligned character doesn't choose one of these extreme ethical/ moral philosophies.

This seems to reflect the real world without creating the unusual 3x3 relations within the old system. Unremarkable or "nuetral" type characters are unaligned, while many of the mover and shakers probably are aligned to one of the four ideals. A marauding orc warlord may be chaotic. A divine champion who seeks to bring the kingdom of their god to the world may be lawful. The ploting lich who seeks to become a god and corrupt the world is evil. The heroic paladin who crusades against evil and saves the helpless villagers is good. The rogue/barbarian who rose to power through opportunity and becomes a king unaligned.

 

[bonethug0108]

If you're serious about this research, you can use this to filter all the evil creatures. You'll have to open each one individually to see if it's Always Evil, though.

Eh, I had already finished before I saw this. Thanks, though.

These are the creatures in the mm that can reproduce and are always evil(no templates):
Achaierai(Evil, Extraplanar, Lawful)
Barghest(Evil, Extraplanar, Lawful, Shapechanger)
Chromatic Dragons
Hellhound(Evil, Extraplanar, Fire, Lawful)
Howler(Chaotic, Evil, Extraplanar)
Xill(Extraplanar)
Yeth Hound(Extraplanar, Evil)


Now forgive me on this, but devils and demons don't appear to reproduce amongst themselves, so I left them off the list. Most of the always evil creatues were undead and extraplanar.

If you want to argue a few that I left off feel free. I don't think I missed any, but you never know.

So of these 7 always evil reproducing creatures only the Xill have humanoid forms(1). Half(4) were dog like. One(1) was a bird like creature. Then you have the evil dragons(1).

Out of all of these creatures, only the dragons are not extraplanar.

So that means the only time on the material plane you'll really encounter the dilemma of whether or not killing an evil creature's baby(or egg in this case) is with dragons. Once they hatch I imagine they will commit evil. So now really it comes down to whether or not killing an unborn thing is good or evil. I won't be arguing that.