Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gadget" data-source="post: 7126554" data-attributes="member: 23716">I see this as being more of a problem with D&D's alignment system than anything.  Alignment has always been more about what color of jersey you're wearing than anything.  Those committing the atrocities always seem to cloak themselves in a role of 'good' by some definition.  But you are right, these things are not morally good by any sane definition.In their own eyes, they may have been (though that is debatable).  Even the 'heretics' you mention as a real world example were the traditional Religious Authorities of the day, and were persecuting the aforementioned Religious Figure for what they thought of as Heresy and Blasphemy.  I think the point of the tale is that those who claim to work for 'good' can, over time become corrupted and loose their way, in which case they are no longer capital G 'Good', but still have the mantle or cloak about them representing 'good'.  But that cloak is torn for all to see who bother to look.  The slow loss of divine power from the clerics over time is evidence of that, all while their political power increases to (at least partially) replace it.  Though why the Kingpriest and some of his Inquisitors would still be granted power is a bit of plot hole.  This may be more explainable in later editions where the system has backed away from the cleric getting power directly from the deity and more by a grant at the time of call or ordination, etc.     The whole concept of Free Will and choice would come into it, one would think.  What did the mortals do with the power granted them?  Abuse it.  Become corrupted.  It was not limited to the Kingpriest and his cronies, though they were of course, the center of it.  This is classic Old Testament 'Rain down fire on the wicked' stuff.  They were unrepentant and ignored the warning signs.  It could be argued that those warning signs should have been more clear, especially in a setting where the 'gods' sometimes wander around in the guise of befuddled old men and interact with people, but perhaps this falls under the whole 'Free Will' thing again.  I think this reflects less on the authors' moral compass than rather the limitations of the D&D alignment system when any type of philosophical depth is attempted with it.  Especially with the presence of inherently 'evil' races or groups such as goblins and ogres and such.  The need for some sort of 'Neutral', or cosmic balance makes less sense unless you view 'good' and 'evil' as two teams in different colored jerseys in need of a referee to hold them in check.  I agree that 4e & 5e did well in reducing mechanical ties to the alignment system, though I'm somewhat disappointed by 5e's return to the cartesian coordinate alignment system.  I miss 5e's 'unaligned' designation.</blockquote>

Verification