I accept your apology. Although in the future,
try to not assume that other people haven't also suffered discrimination.
So let’s start over. Do you think it would be useful to have Good and Evil alignments get their own destinies like Chaotic and Lawful? (I can see both sides to that). If yes it seems to me like you are saying a Good aligned destiny should have a different name than Devotion given the history of that word. Personally I am not in any way vested in the “good” destiny being called Devotion, I just want an destiny for my characters that want to invest in the Good alignment. Do you want to suggest some? I’m open to hearing those!
I strongly dislike absolute morality except for supernatural creatures. And even then, there should be wriggle room: fallen angels, risen demons, undead that were so strong-willed in life that they kept their previous minds despite their new form. I've done away with alignment for non-supernatural creatures in my games, just like I've done away with Always Evil Humanoids (with a very few possible exceptions, where the humanoid is also clearly supernatural, such as the skulk). While there is room in D&D for games where absolute morality is the rule, where there are completely un-ironic Evil Armies of the Empire of Evil that Our Heroes can slay with guiltless impunity, that's not a game I would enjoy playing in for very long. Nor do I want to play in a setting where poison and disease are Evil, but Good uses Ravages and Afflictions, which are
totally different so it's OK (check out the 3x Book of Exalted Deeds if you don't recognize what I'm talking about).
And quite frankly, I don't even really need alignments for supernatural creatures, since I don't do random encounters and tend to come up with motivations for all of my monsters anyway.
There have been several occasions in these packets where the writers have used Chaos and Law as major descriptors, but we still haven't received the rules as to
why yet. As a Planescape fan, I'm glad they're emphasizing Chaos and Law over Evil and Good, even if it does harken back to the old OD&D days.
So anyway, Destinies.
A major problem I'm having--which I failed to put this in my survey, more's the pity--is that they haven't truly explained what these Destinies are. Are they handed down from on high? Part of your very soul, and if you get reincarnated your new incarnation will have the same Destiny? Or are they deliberate choices each individual makes? The fact that PCs can switch Destiny suggests the latter, but is that truly the PC making a decision to change who they are, or is that simply so the player will continue having fun?
The Chaos and Dominion Destinies clearly run the gauntlet from Good to Evil. So to me, there shouldn't be Destinies that are 100% good or evil. Neither Wealth nor Revenge are 100% evil, and Wealth could be made a lot less evil if there was a Robin Hood motivation. So there shouldn't be a 100% Good Destiny either. And the fact is, Devotion
isn't totally good. All of the motivations, except for Greater Good, can run the spectrum of alignments. The only thing that's entirely good about Devotion is how you get inspiration. And that can be changed, since this is only a playtest.
Motivations I considered to be (almost) completely good?
Chaos: Liberation (assuming that the people to be liberated are truly being oppressed).
Coming of Age: Young Love (assuming that you're not trying to force your affections on someone who doesn't want them).
Devotion: Greater Good (assuming that you're actually working towards the greater good). Dominion: Justice (assuming that the tyrant is truly tyrannical) or Reform (assuming that the regime truly is unredeemable).
Knowledge: A Cure (assuming you're trying to stop an actual disease or curse).
Revenge: Lost Loved One or Restoration (assuming you're not disproportional in your revenge).
Wealth: Change (assuming that the change you're bankrolling is a good one).