Lawful Good Tyranny - How would this look?

[Theroc]

Imagine a D&D version of a room full of ad execs, all seeking the Big Idea for the State, selling it to the people like energy drinks and cars: "Believe in the Leader! Then you'll be sexy and popular!"

That strikes me as propaganda or brainwashing, not outright coersion, but my definition my be flawed.

 

[FireLance]

Just forgot to mention this. Lord Vetinaries Ankh-morpork? I'm not sure if it is run in a NG, LG or CG way though...

Actually, imagine Ankh-Morpork if Carrot Ironfoundersson ever became King (or other absolute ruler of your choice). Now that would be a Lawful Good tyranny.

 

[LostSoul]

The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

edit: Which is, of course, a statement absolutely rife with conflict. You could base a whole campaign around having PCs answer that question ("Does the good of the many...") for themselves.

 

[Andor]

Why not? What about LG implies a lack of coercion?

I mean, I don't intend to turn this into an Alignment Thread (tm), but I am interested in why you think that way.

Because it's a LG theocracy with access to powerful magic and psionics. They don't need to threaten Joe Troublemaker with pain and torment to get him to behave, they just rewrite him so he isn't Joe Troublemaker anymore, sure his smile may be a little creepy now but he's productive and happy, just ask him.*

*BTW, don't for a second think I actually think this is a good society. But it fits the by the book D&D definition of good, would certainly be GOOD by it's own lights, and fits the request for how to run a LG tyranny.

 

[Orius]

Wow, lots of repsonses, more than I was expecting. That's good.

You might try Googling for EN World poster SHARK's descriptions of his campaign world, the main realm seems a lot like a sort of fascist Lawful Good tyranny, the way you describe. You can even have a Neutral Good tyranny, a soft tolitarian state where people's actions are heavily restricted and monitored to ensure they don't hurt each other - this has been dealt with in sf a lot, and I can think of a real-world example heading that way. Your ideas seem closer to the SHARK approach though. The movie '300' might provide some inspiration.

I can think of at least one or two real world NG examples too, but you know there's the whole no-politics rule so let's leave it at that.

Maybe I should check some of SHARK's stuff. He has had great ideas over the years, and there's a lot to his approach that I can appreciate. Good in my campaign isn't always overly pacifistic sitting around singing kumbaya, after all. They take strength in the faith of their convictions and stand against the darkness of evil because it's the right thing to do, because there are those who aren't strong enough to fight on their own and they need to be protected.

Law: If it's on the books, it's Law, and therefore proper. And one Law should not be held above another - this gives us the Star Trekian "Capital Punishment for the Litterbug" type extreme.

They don't go that extreme. That's Lawful Neutral Hardass anyway. They want to redeem petty criminals, show them the error of their ways, and convert them to the faith. Execution is reserved for those considered to be truely wicked and have been duly convicted of crimes. Remember this society is run by clerics and paladins, so there's some very liberal use of detect evil and detect chaos here.

...and finally there is the great catchall: It's not Evil when we do it to unbelievers.

Not in this case. The god does not preach "Convert all unbelievers by the sword" or the like, and he's still granting the rulers here their class powers.

Strict Moral Laws: "Look, I know you didn't actually commit adultery, but you were flirting with her, and that's why we have to make you a eunuch. It's OK, you won't have to worry about flirting any more! No more temptation!"

Not that strict. Yes they preach against fornication, adultery and so on, but usually it gets punished with hard labor, shotgun crossbow weddings, scarlet letters, etc. Public shaming is one way of keeping people in line.

Breaking Prisoners: "The suffering our resident torturer inflicts on you is mild, compared to the torture your soul will endure for all eternity. Now, it is light, easy, and entirely stoppable. You must simply realize that we are right, and you are wrong, and you must do as we say."

Evil.

Big Brother: "Our network of spies and diviners covers every inch of this city, into the homes and into the minds of those who live here. There are no secrets here, because we are all trusted friends and family. You will be watched. You will be judged. If you are found wanting, you will be punished. It is simply for your own good, as well as the good of our locals. No evil may pass here."

There's some of that. There is some privacy, but there also is the attitude that only sinners have something to hide.

Enhanced Interrogation AKA Torture: "If it is against sinners, and for the good of our polity, it must be done. We cannot risk exposure to sin and vice, and we cannot permit the wicked to escape. If we have hope of finding information, we must extract it through any means possible."

Evil.

Mind Control: "If we all work together in harmony, the world will be a better place. Since you aren't willingly going to work with us, this Slave Crown will ensure that you do."

I'm thinking more along the lines of mark of justice and [/i]quest[/i] rather than dominate person.

Here's my big idea that distils a lot of that above:

Fighting Zombies with Zombies
Within the powerful military wing of the nation, a new division is being formed by one particularly zealous cleric. Called the Ecstatics, these elite soldiers willingly submit to long-term psionic mind control, becoming literal vessels for the wills of their controllers. They willingly surrender their free will and their lives to the nation. Unfortunately, the zealous cleric who leads the formation of this new division often lets his zeal trump his compassion. Some people are not so willing -- some are found. Some are forced. Some were once criminals, but forcefully "absolved" and now placed there. Some are just poor, dumb, farm kids, who couldn't possibly know any better. Sometimes, the cleric uses these troops for his own personal vendettas -- against groups or individuals that he feels threaten him or his position (like the PC's, or perhaps an unfriendly magistrate, or...).

I'm not really considering psionics here, but even so this is not an approach that would be used. This kingdom does not go as far as mental enslavement. They may put a criminal under a quest to fight for them, but robbing someone of their free will means they haven't really repented.

Why make them all LG? Throw in a very small handful of Lawful Evil characters to do the dirty work and wetwork - in places deep enough so that the vast majority of the paladins don't know about it. The newly repented criminals aren't 100% sure why they're so repentant. They remember the sermens, the lectures, the classes...but not the part of the dungeon behind the swinging wall where the man in robes and the spellbook was. They're the "dirty little secret" of the top dogs in the church or kingdom, the people they don't like but tolerate for the sake of the greater good. Or maybe only one of the top dogs in the kingdom knows about it. The others give him the particularly nasty criminals to be reformed, but they don't ask how it gets done. And what they don't know can't hurt them, right?

A few of them might be here and there, but only so much of this can hide for so long before being caught (and then the full arm of the law would come down on them). This would definitely have to be isolated cases, because the paladins in this kingdom are not Lawful Stupid.

Another thing to consider is that I would think a heavily lawful society would focus more on duty than on freedoms. So whereas the US has a Bill of Rights, this society would have a Bill of Duties. The 10 or so duties that all citizens are morally obligated to perform.

That sounds like a good idea.

Also, to help get across how bad the society is without the typical tortures and such is to consider that a tyranny can rarely stay in power without arresting a lot of troublemakers. If those in charge are LG and aren't into executions for political crimes, simple math says that you will have a lot of prisoners. So there's not just dungeons, but entire prison camps. Maybe even a region of the country used as a prison (think the legends of historical Australia or Siberia, or the fictional Escape from New York).

The internal population for the most part isn't imprisoned or downtrodden. They share the faith of the clergy and support them. It's a very strongly moral society. There are criminals, but there are things like labor camps designed to show the wicked the errors of their ways, and because hard work is believed to build character. Even in the towns they occupy, they don't aggressively hound the average citizens unless they're engaging in crimes or insurrection, and there are plenty of cases where the citizens of the towns feel safe and protected, so don't rise up. The ones that do chafe under such rule are the free spirits who are likely CG or CN, and end up breaking a law or behaving "immorally".

Finally put propaganda everywhere. Every. Where. Sermons are magically broadcast day and night in the every town square (especially nice if there is one high priest in charge of it all, having it recycle his/her sermons to help build the mystique around him/her). Posters proclaiming the glory of service to this deity.

Sounds good.

Keep in mind that it really takes very little tyranny exerted over their characters to drive most players to violence so there is no need to over do it.

That's true. And it's fun to send them up against paladins every now and then instead of the usual bad guys.

I developed such a state on the granny and librarian model. There was no need to have Paladins on every corner, instead all "improper" actions were immediately corrected with lectures and improper speech met with a loud "Shush". If the players insisted on trying to shout down someone the NPCs would join in song to drown them out. Violence would finally bring the paladins and clerics to drag the miscreants off to rehabilitation.

That works too. The average citizens follow the moral codes and there's a lot of social pressure to be a pure and moral citizen. And people want to avoid being accused of things considered shameful.

I could imagine such a society being some what like communism, now that the 'Bill of Duties' was mentioned. Also if you do have a lot of prisoners, they can work labour camps, possibly making it possible for people to attend regular prayer sessions/sermons etc.

The labor camps do indeed include regular religious services that must be attended. Faith is considered an important part of redemption and it's not ignored.

Remember, in a Lawful Good tyranny, the people aren't oppressed. They may have certain individual freedoms curtailed, but nothing too major. Certain standards of behavior may be more stringently enforced, but the punishment is almost always in proportion to the crime. Persuasion is more likely to take the form of incentives for proper behavior and mild punishments for doing what is discouraged, as long as it is not actually evil.

For example, in a theocracy, worshippers of the state-sanctioned faith may get tax breaks, and the state may make an official tithe to the religion from its revenues. Open worship of other gods may be illegal, but with the exception of evil faiths, offenders are likely to be at most fined for a first conviction. Persistent transgressors may be jailed for short periods (and treated humanely while imprisoned - more to stop them from spreading their message than to actually punish them) and, in extreme cases, banished.

The state may seek to discourage certain types of behavior which it finds undesirable, e.g. drinking and gambling, by taxing them heavily. Other types of anti-social behavior, e.g. littering or making too much noise, may actually be made illegal and punishable by fines or community service.

Perhaps another identifying characteristic of a Lawful Good tyranny would be that the citizens are required by law to perform certain good (or at least lawful) deeds. Children are required by law to be educated, and the state ensures that a basic education (including a course on morality and religious instruction) is provided free of charge. Adults are required by law to be gainfully employed if they are physically capable, and the state will find a job for you if you cannot find one yourself. Citizens are required by law to provide a minimum level of service to the state or a recognized charity - a healer may spend a few hours a week taking care of the sick in a free hospital, a weaponsmith might repair the weapons of the local guardsmen for free, and a housewife could sew clothes for the local church to distribute to the poor.

These are all good (no pun intended) examples.

I think you can and should look at those historical examples.

I'm not saying I'm not looking at the historical examples, I'm saying I'm not discussing them because of board rules. Some of it does involve contemporary religion and politics after all.

A lot of the suggestions here are how to take something nasty and dress it up as Lawful and/or Good, but in an objective morality system like D&D has, those things are not, in fact, Good.

Exactly. A nalfeshnee wearing lipstick still detects as evil.

Unlike the real world, this society has access to magic and perhaps even psionics (which I haven't actvely worked into the campaign, but I'm not adverse to it). So the fear and paranoia that we see in the real world might not be as strong when the rules can use divinations to learn the truth and enchantments to help correct behavior. Torture isn't needed for interrogation when zone of truth, detect thoughts and/or read thoughts is available. This way, the interrogee can't actually lie, and may very well not be able to hide anything. You don't need to break prisoners when you can just slap a mark of justice or quest on them to get them to do what you want. You don't worry as much about criminals using technicalities and loopholes in the law when they must testify in court under the effects of a zone of truth. They methods aren't all foolproof of course, but there's no need to revert to dehumanizing cruelty either.

The descriptions of the plane of Mount Celestia from the old Planes of Law box set might contain some useful ideas for setting up a totalitarian LG society.

I'm thinking more along the lines of Arcadia and the Harmonium.

That aside I think your mistake is in looking to use the word coercion in the first place. A LG state isn't going to try to coerce anyone. The first thing they do is try to raise everyone correctly so expect to see very uniform state schooling including things like daily sermons and loyalty oaths. If that fails they don't try to coerce good behavior they simply try to correct the problem. As a LG society is more focused on the good of the society than the individual. Options include exile, mandatory enlistment in the army (Which used to be pretty popular in this country before the end of the draft) or psionically or magically rewriteing the personality of the criminal. Abhorrent as that would seem to us a theocracy might see the soul as the important bit and the individual mind... less so.

I'm thinking largely along these lines, yes.

Of course chaotic types don't see it this way. Especially the free spirits. To them this kingdom is filled with a bunch of heartless bastards who like to stomp on everyone's rights and freedoms.

And I'd say this was pretty much an alignment thread from the moment i posted it. Hell, it's even got Lawful Good in the title!

 

[wingsandsword]

Yeah, IMHO if a government truly is Lawful Good, it's no tyranny. It's far more likely to be a utopia. (This, IMHO there are very few governments which could be called Lawful Good.)

A lot of the suggestions here are how to take something nasty and dress it up as Lawful and/or Good, but in an objective morality system like D&D has, those things are not, in fact, Good.

For example: in 3.x, Zombies are Evil. Creating them is an Evil act. They detect as Evil, and anyone who spends enough time creating them will eventually detect as Evil too. You can make a Bluff check to say you're doing Good by creating them, but you cannot make a Diplomacy check.

Pretty much this.

I believe that you cannot truly have a LG tyranny (or any truly good aligned tyranny). You can have a tyrannical regime that publically espouses LG ideals and propaganda, and has many LG servants that are genuinely LG and believe in things, but at the heart for it to go to the point of being a tyrannical regime the virtues of Good like tolerance and mercy have gone right out the window, and you're at least at LN.

I'd say a "Lawful Good Tyranny" is actually a Lawful Neutral (or maybe even Lawful Evil) government on the whole, that publicly espouses Lawful Good virtues and even may have LG-sounding propaganda posters and such around, but try being somebody who isn't in lock-step with the government ideals and parroting the official ideology and obeying even the most inane laws and you'll find out real quick it isn't really LG.

I'd think that Undetectable Alignment type-effects to keep Paladins and such from ever seeing what was going on would be pretty common in a lot of upper levels of rulership and among certain operatives of the government that exist to ensure everybody is nice and happy and thinking it's all on the LG up-and-up.

Think of the Harmonium from Planescape. They call themselves Lawful Good, and espouse LG ideals, but they managed to take a layer of Arcadia into Mechanus because they are so LN (but thinking they are LG) that they accidentally slipped their home plane down one notch on The Wheel. Harmonium is definitely a Lawful Neutral Tyranny that thinks it's Lawful Good and would describe itself as Lawful Good (and even have Paladins saying it's LG as they cite Harmonium beliefs), but the multiverse would disagree.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

I'm not sure what it would look like, but I think the theme song would be "It's a Small World After All."

 

[Clavis]

As a game mechanic, I regard Alignment as a designation of essence, not a description of behavior. Good people can do bad things, while evil people do occasionally do the right thing. Being "Good" as an alignment means that you intend to do good, not that you always succeed. Nor does it mean that you are always in the "right" with regard to the Universe. Likewise, being "Evil" in alignment means that your intentions always return to ones that are detrimental to others, but you could still be capable of "good" actions.

There is some tendency among D&D players to regard Lawful Good as the "right" alignment. This need not be so at all. "Lawful Good" merely means that people intend to do good things, and believe that it is not possible without the creation and maintenance of an ordered society. Lawful Good characters could easily create or support a tyranny, if they (rightly or wrongly) regard the alternative as worse. They would still be Lawful and Good in essence, but doing the wrong thing. This leaves open the possibility of a Cleric actually being surprised by their Detect Alignment spell:

"My Lord, at first I thought you evil, but now I know in my heart that you are a good person. Why are you doing these awful things?"

"Because otherwise the forces of darkness will destroy all that is good and holy. I am even willing to risk my own salvation to ensure that of others. I love the eternal souls of my people too much to jeopardize them by being too soft on their bodies"

 

[Ferret]

As a game mechanic, I regard Alignment as a designation of essence, not a description of behavior. Good people can do bad things, while evil people do occasionally do the right thing. Being "Good" as an alignment means that you intend to do good, not that you always succeed. Nor does it mean that you are always in the "right" with regard to the Universe. Likewise, being "Evil" in alignment means that your intentions always return to ones that are detrimental to others, but you could still be capable of "good" actions.

There is some tendency among D&D players to regard Lawful Good as the "right" alignment. This need not be so at all. "Lawful Good" merely means that people intend to do good things, and believe that it is not possible without the creation and maintenance of an ordered society. Lawful Good characters could easily create or support a tyranny, if they (rightly or wrongly) regard the alternative as worse. They would still be Lawful and Good in essence, but doing the wrong thing. This leaves open the possibility of a Cleric actually being surprised by their Detect Alignment spell:

"My Lord, at first I thought you evil, but now I know in my heart that you are a good person. Why are you doing these awful things?"

"Because otherwise the forces of darkness will destroy all that is good and holy. I am even willing to risk my own salvation to ensure that of others. I love the eternal souls of my people too much to jeopardize them by being too soft on their bodies"

I think we have a winner here. This does sound about right, in terms of what was asked for, and what I think of alignments.

 

[Kaodi]

Instead of using "tyrannical" and "oppressive", if you want to use a word with the correct connotation (at least as far as I can tell), you should use "stiffling".