Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Portraying fantasy societies realistically instead of on the evil/good axis
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6207997" data-attributes="member: 95493"><p>There are some creatures in the DnD multiverse that I have ZERO problems with being "EEEVIIL" They are typically not "races." In 3e those species are alignment "Always Evil" whereas races are typically "Usually/Sometimes Evil." It is rare to see a race that is full ("always") evil. There are inherent shades of grey already worked in.</p><p></p><p>Also, I would be hesitant from calling any real life governmental or political organization evil. Their views sometimes <em>we*</em> may associate as evil. But I think it is probably a step too far to say "confederates" are evil.</p><p></p><p>Now to counterpoint myself, do you enjoy games where you were to fight against confederates, or nazis? The reason for this is even though you can see them as people, they are the enemy and its good to know who you can just mow down. This can applied to essentially ALL video games to one extent or another. Applying the inverse to RPGs works, but it needs to work across a gaming group. Having one party member (or the DM) saying one thing when everyone else wants another won't work out for the odd-member.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not giving to charity = not good, not evil = neutral (individual reasons or circumstances aside)</p><p>Not helping jobless get jobs = again neutral (barring circumstances or reasons)</p><p>Abusing bodies for pleasure = usually chaotic, not evil</p><p>Wasting lives on X = swing and a miss, any alignment can "waste their lives", it is still not "evil"</p><p>They could focus on improving humanity as a whole and ending suffering = lawful good (usually), sometimes neutral good.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Who are these baby eating psychos? I mean except for demons or some such? Orcs or similar <em>races</em> (to my experience) don't generally eat their <em>own</em> babies.</p><p></p><p>And I don't get the "You need most of the population to be decent people that are oppressed by an oligarchy that treats each other mostly decently," in relation to the previous sentence. Why do we need this? How?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Oh, they certainly CAN be. They are also much easier to screw up. Just like if you are able to successfully naviagate and use the nine point alignment system effectively then it is much more exciting to explore than a good-evil one, though obviously people have confusions and issues dealing with such a system. Especially difficult is to understand the basic underpinnings of a orange-blue scale.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And what about mind flayers? Demons? Devils? Beholders? Even Drow?</p><p></p><p>Many times the races you are talking about (orcs, snakemen) are actively taught to be evil and as often punished for weakness (being good). It says so in the descriptions of these races. There are outliers, individual characters or even groups who can and do defy the norm. But as already pointed out you can do this as is and if you make EVERYTHING grey then you lose motivations.</p><p></p><p>The best thing about having an orange-blue scale is that you get to recategorize morality. The worst thing is that all creatures must fall into the new paradigm. That is all that exists already. The nine points exists to create conflict and to give deeper motivations than "he's evil, get him." That is the point. Even if you are using 4e's scale of LG-G-U-E-CE then you still have conflict and SHADES of evil. Devils (in both systems) are evil, very evil, but they are a very different kind of evil than demons who just want to eat your face/babies.</p><p></p><p></p><p>*We in North America/Europe, as standards of morality are FAR from universal.. even in North America/Europe.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tovec, post: 6207997, member: 95493"] There are some creatures in the DnD multiverse that I have ZERO problems with being "EEEVIIL" They are typically not "races." In 3e those species are alignment "Always Evil" whereas races are typically "Usually/Sometimes Evil." It is rare to see a race that is full ("always") evil. There are inherent shades of grey already worked in. Also, I would be hesitant from calling any real life governmental or political organization evil. Their views sometimes [I]we*[/I] may associate as evil. But I think it is probably a step too far to say "confederates" are evil. Now to counterpoint myself, do you enjoy games where you were to fight against confederates, or nazis? The reason for this is even though you can see them as people, they are the enemy and its good to know who you can just mow down. This can applied to essentially ALL video games to one extent or another. Applying the inverse to RPGs works, but it needs to work across a gaming group. Having one party member (or the DM) saying one thing when everyone else wants another won't work out for the odd-member. Not giving to charity = not good, not evil = neutral (individual reasons or circumstances aside) Not helping jobless get jobs = again neutral (barring circumstances or reasons) Abusing bodies for pleasure = usually chaotic, not evil Wasting lives on X = swing and a miss, any alignment can "waste their lives", it is still not "evil" They could focus on improving humanity as a whole and ending suffering = lawful good (usually), sometimes neutral good. Who are these baby eating psychos? I mean except for demons or some such? Orcs or similar [I]races[/I] (to my experience) don't generally eat their [I]own[/I] babies. And I don't get the "You need most of the population to be decent people that are oppressed by an oligarchy that treats each other mostly decently," in relation to the previous sentence. Why do we need this? How? Oh, they certainly CAN be. They are also much easier to screw up. Just like if you are able to successfully naviagate and use the nine point alignment system effectively then it is much more exciting to explore than a good-evil one, though obviously people have confusions and issues dealing with such a system. Especially difficult is to understand the basic underpinnings of a orange-blue scale. And what about mind flayers? Demons? Devils? Beholders? Even Drow? Many times the races you are talking about (orcs, snakemen) are actively taught to be evil and as often punished for weakness (being good). It says so in the descriptions of these races. There are outliers, individual characters or even groups who can and do defy the norm. But as already pointed out you can do this as is and if you make EVERYTHING grey then you lose motivations. The best thing about having an orange-blue scale is that you get to recategorize morality. The worst thing is that all creatures must fall into the new paradigm. That is all that exists already. The nine points exists to create conflict and to give deeper motivations than "he's evil, get him." That is the point. Even if you are using 4e's scale of LG-G-U-E-CE then you still have conflict and SHADES of evil. Devils (in both systems) are evil, very evil, but they are a very different kind of evil than demons who just want to eat your face/babies. *We in North America/Europe, as standards of morality are FAR from universal.. even in North America/Europe. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Portraying fantasy societies realistically instead of on the evil/good axis
Top