Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 935282" data-attributes="member: 2013">One Step Further...Here's a set of philosophical questions that just occurred to me and that I haven't seen in an &quot;alignment thread.&quot;A.) What is the &quot;source&quot; that defines a character's alignment?B.) What is the &quot;source&quot; that determines a character's actions?Usually, the argument falls into the following:&quot;Do actions determine alignment or does alignment determine actions?&quot;Might I suggest, &quot;neither.&quot;I'll throw out the following set of premises for debate:1.) Personality/core values/motivations/desires of a creature determine its actions.&nbsp; - IOW, that little spark of self-awareness - the &quot;I think therefore I am&quot; - that is behind the creature is what determines its decisions and thereby its actions.2.) There is an absolute standard of Good/Evil and Law/Chaos in a D&amp;D world.3.)&nbsp; The sum total of the decisions a creature makes over time - which are not necessarily the same as the results of its actions (due to being misguided or simply because the creature lacks capacity to perform a desired action) - may be compared with the &quot;Good/Evil&quot; and &quot;Law/Chaos&quot; axes to determine a creature's alignment.&nbsp; Thus, alignment, like actions, follows personality/core values/motivations/desires.&nbsp; (Solves the problem of a poor man who always genuinely WANTS to help, but never has the wherewithal to do so - I would count him as &quot;good&quot; even though his actions can't reflect it due to his situation).Conclusions:Actions are not determined by alignment.Alignment is not determined by actions.Actions are determined by personality/motivations/desires/core values... determined by the little &quot;I am&quot; inside each creature.Alignment is dtermined by comparing the lump sum of the decisions made by that same little &quot;I am&quot; to some &quot;cosmic standard&quot; - this cosmic standard is set by the DM in each game world.Action and alignment are thus different manifestations/results that spring from the same source, but have no control over each other.Thus, &quot;alignment,&quot; as a shorthand for the sum total of decisions to a point, can change over time as more decisions are made and the &quot;balance&quot; of the character's goodness/evilness shifts.&nbsp; However, one small evil decision does not outweigh a lifetime of good decisions.&nbsp; However, steps are always incremental - the decision to commit murder, for instance, has a lot of smaller steps leading up to it.Good/evil characters aren't necessarily the &quot;epitome&quot; of purity/darkness but rather are &quot;noticeably more pure than dark&quot; or &quot;noticeably more dark than pure&quot; while neutral characters are not &quot;noticeably pure or dark.&quot;&nbsp; IOW, there is a &quot;middle range&quot; of neutral where a &quot;lukewarm&quot; or &quot;unexceptional&quot; character stands - it is only when you start showing *noticeably* one way or the other that your alignment is called &quot;good&quot; or &quot;evil.&quot;Substitute lawful/chaotic for all of the above.I guess the big thought for me was the &quot;Alignment does not follow actions, nor do actions follow alignment.&nbsp; Rather, both follow 'motivation/desires.'&quot;--The Sigil</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Sigil, post: 935282, member: 2013"] [b]One Step Further...[/b] Here's a set of philosophical questions that just occurred to me and that I haven't seen in an "alignment thread." A.) What is the "source" that defines a character's alignment? B.) What is the "source" that determines a character's actions? Usually, the argument falls into the following: "Do actions determine alignment or does alignment determine actions?" Might I suggest, "neither." I'll throw out the following set of premises for debate: 1.) Personality/core values/motivations/desires of a creature determine its actions. - IOW, that little spark of self-awareness - the "I think therefore I am" - that is behind the creature is what determines its decisions and thereby its actions. 2.) There is an absolute standard of Good/Evil and Law/Chaos in a D&D world. 3.) The sum total of the decisions a creature makes over time - which are not necessarily the same as the results of its actions (due to being misguided or simply because the creature lacks capacity to perform a desired action) - may be compared with the "Good/Evil" and "Law/Chaos" axes to determine a creature's alignment. Thus, alignment, like actions, follows personality/core values/motivations/desires. (Solves the problem of a poor man who always genuinely WANTS to help, but never has the wherewithal to do so - I would count him as "good" even though his actions can't reflect it due to his situation). Conclusions: Actions are not determined by alignment. Alignment is not determined by actions. Actions are determined by personality/motivations/desires/core values... determined by the little "I am" inside each creature. Alignment is dtermined by comparing the lump sum of the decisions made by that same little "I am" to some "cosmic standard" - this cosmic standard is set by the DM in each game world. Action and alignment are thus different manifestations/results that spring from the same source, but have no control over each other. Thus, "alignment," as a shorthand for the sum total of decisions to a point, can change over time as more decisions are made and the "balance" of the character's goodness/evilness shifts. However, one small evil decision does not outweigh a lifetime of good decisions. However, steps are always incremental - the decision to commit murder, for instance, has a lot of smaller steps leading up to it. Good/evil characters aren't necessarily the "epitome" of purity/darkness but rather are "noticeably more pure than dark" or "noticeably more dark than pure" while neutral characters are not "noticeably pure or dark." IOW, there is a "middle range" of neutral where a "lukewarm" or "unexceptional" character stands - it is only when you start showing *noticeably* one way or the other that your alignment is called "good" or "evil." Substitute lawful/chaotic for all of the above. I guess the big thought for me was the "Alignment does not follow actions, nor do actions follow alignment. Rather, both follow 'motivation/desires.'" --The Sigil [/QUOTE]

Verification