D&D General "True Neutral": Bunk or Hogwash

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What about the Dragonlance setting/Krynn?
Wasn’t there a large chunk in the setting lore about what happened when “good” almost “won”?
(Disclaimer: I know almost nothing about that setting, and didn’t read the novels.)

The good gods also dropped a meteorite on a city, killing everyone, after a god king tried to purge the lands of evil.

Pretty rickety morality all the way around on Krynn.

 

[Voadam]

Also for Modenkainen, what sources spell out his acting for the balance?

The 1e boxed set only says he is a well-known personage from the Wild Coast and that he is an archmage who can often be found with various quasi-deities like Heward, Keoghtom, and Murlynd.

The 1e Rogues Gallery pegs him as neutral alignment and says:

A great and powerful mage, Mordenkainen spends much of his time pondering over new bits of magical research. When he does travel it is usually with the company of his high-level henchmen. On those occasions when he must venture alone, he will disguise himself as an old, poor merchant. In this manner he hopes to avoid attention while still obtaining his goal (usually some rare item for his work).
Mordenkainen should not, however, be mistaken for some weak and withered magic-user, preferring to mind his own business. He is an active and aggressive person, not failing to attempt bold, sweeping plans when the situation demands. He has skill in diplomacy, leadership, politics, and some knowledge of religion. He is thorough in his plans and will utilize whatever resources are necessary. He is stubborn and his decisions are often harsh. For all this, he is a clever and useful ally.

 

[Marc17]

I've never read any vision/explanation in 2E or earlier of what "too much Good" would actually look like, and how that would actually, legitimately be a bad thing. And Planescapian ideas of planes changing or slipping just didn't exist prior to Planescape in 1994, by which time this idea of TN or "too much Good" was decreasing in popularity.

I could certainly give you examples of "too much good", but they'd be my interpretations. However, it has been proposed that Forgotten Realms in the past has had that problem, in that there are too many good NPCs running around dealing with all the issues and incompetent evil NPCs for PCs to have anything to do. Basic problem with a world where "good has won" is that it wouldn't be a good place for a D&D game to happen in. As somebody said in another forum once, "Q: What do adventurers call a world where Sauron has won? A: A target rich environment."

I think the alignments as teams in older editions was a thing and even codified with penalties for changing alignment. I have certainly had games I was in where that was the case. One had a good versus evil thing going on to the extent that it makes the conspiracy of darkfriends in the Wheel of Time books look tame. Talk too loudly about how you have killed evil priests and their servants and assassins WOULD come to get you in the middle of the night. I even had to look it up to make sure it was inspired by that series, but the game I was in was five years before the first book came out, and it was after the PCs had demanded a campaign based on epic quest before I had joined.

 

[Scribe]

The good gods also dropped a meteorite on a city, killing everyone, after a god king tried to purge the lands of evil.

Pretty rickety morality all the way around on Krynn.

Old Testament.

Anyway, the idea that Good = pure Positive Plane, and Evil = pure Negative Plane, I think could be run with.

 

[Artamo]

It just really seems like the Too Much Good approach is ultimately too narrow a band of compelling threats at least for a D&D game.

 

[Voadam]

In the 2e City of Greyhawk boxed set it gets kind of close to a TN for Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight with a pragmatic reason of worrying about most anyone, including good individuals and kingdoms, getting too much power.

The majority of the members of the Circle of Eight are of pure neutral alignment, and do not revere one deity to the exclusion of others. Their actions are usually directed toward preventing any country, faction, or organized group from growing too powerful and overwhelming others, spreading a growing influence across the lands of Oerth. The history of this young world has taught them that great dominance arising from any quarter leads to great wars, hubris which may draw down the wrath of one or more deities, or even greater disasters. Power has corrupted the once good and great, as well as making the evil more ruthless and bloody in their rulership. If the actions and plans of the members of the Circle of Eight are more often directed to thwarting evil than good, this is because it is more often the evil powers of Iuz, the Hierarchs of the Homed Society, and others which seek conquest and dominion over the heartlands of Oerth. Opposition to evil humanoids (the Circle is fairly humanocentric) and magical research are further shared goals.

Worth noting though that Gygax was already years out of the picture when this view of Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight was published in 89.

 

[Voadam]

For reference here is the 1e PH and DMG descriptions of True Neutral

True Neutral: The “true” neutral looks upon all other alignments as facets of the system of things. Thus, each aspect — evil and good, chaos and law — of things must be retained in balance to maintain the status quo; for things as they are cannot be improved upon except temporarily, and even then but superficially. Nature will prevail and keep things as they were meant to be, provided the “wheel” surrounding the hub of nature does not become unbalanced due to the work of unnatural forces — such as human and other intelligent creatures interfering with what is meant to be.

NEUTRALITY: Absolute, or true, neutral creatures view everything which exists as an integral, necessary part or function of the entire cosmos. Each thing exists as a part of the whole, one as a check or balance to the other, with life necessary for death, happiness for suffering, good for evil, order for chaos, and vice versa. Nothing must ever become predominant or out of balance. Within this naturalistic ethos, humankind serves a role also, just as all other creatures do. They may be more or less important, but the neutral does not concern himself or herself with these considerations except where it is positively determined that the balance is threatened. Absolute neutrality is in the central or fulcrum position quite logically, as the neutral sees all other alignments as parts of a necessary whole. This alignment is the narrowest in scope.

Mostly things will take care of themself naturally unless unnatural forces throw the big picture out of whack.

It starts to get more extreme in micromanaging a balance in the 2e PH:

True Neutral: True neutral characters believe in the ultimate balance of forces, and they refuse to see actions as either good or evil. Since the majority of people in the world make judgments, true neutral characters are extremely rare. True neutrals do their best to avoid siding with the forces of either good or evil, law or chaos. It is their duty to see that all of these forces remain in balanced contention.
True neutral characters sometimes find themselves forced into rather peculiar alliances. To a great extent, they are compelled to side with the underdog in any given situation, sometimes even changing sides as the previous loser becomes the winner. A true neutral druid might join the local barony to put down a tribe of evil gnolls, only to drop out or switch sides when the gnolls were brought to the brink of destruction. He would seek to prevent either side from becoming too powerful. Clearly, there are very few true neutral characters in the world.

 

[Alzrius]

Also for Modenkainen, what sources spell out his acting for the balance?

There was a great deal said about it in Living Greyhawk Journal Vol. 1 #0:



This position was also reiterated in the Epic Level Handbook:

Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.

 

[Artamo]

In the 2e City of Greyhawk boxed set it gets kind of close to a TN for Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight with a pragmatic reason of worrying about most anyone, including good individuals and kingdoms, getting too much power.

The majority of the members of the Circle of Eight are of pure neutral alignment, and do not revere one deity to the exclusion of others. Their actions are usually directed toward preventing any country, faction, or organized group from growing too powerful and overwhelming others, spreading a growing influence across the lands of Oerth. The history of this young world has taught them that great dominance arising from any quarter leads to great wars, hubris which may draw down the wrath of one or more deities, or even greater disasters. Power has corrupted the once good and great, as well as making the evil more ruthless and bloody in their rulership. If the actions and plans of the members of the Circle of Eight are more often directed to thwarting evil than good, this is because it is more often the evil powers of Iuz, the Hierarchs of the Homed Society, and others which seek conquest and dominion over the heartlands of Oerth. Opposition to evil humanoids (the Circle is fairly humanocentric) and magical research are further shared goals.

Worth noting though that Gygax was already years out of the picture when this view of Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight was published in 89.

I think the problem with Greyhawk’s view on it is that it substitutes good and evil with a fantasy equivalent of military and political alliances. Good and evil just become pieces of a Cold War and none of the countries are really “good” - they are at best a form of neutral as well.

For that matter, what unequivocally neutral act has Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight done that constitutes acting against Good aligned forces or kingdoms? I know his positions have been stated but I can’t recall seeing an example.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Old Testament.

Tough to respond to this within board rules, but some of Gygax's views about good and evil definitely have antecedents.