Alignment in 5E still causes arguments

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

ishy
Duke
Posts: 2404
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

Post by ishy »

darkmaster wrote:What about... Youkai?
I don't know. What are they?
Laertes wrote:If you write a game in which there are things called demons, people already know what that word means and so are going to become confused and annoyed if it means something substantially different here because they have to relearn that bit of nomenclature.
Yeah and when you mention orcs, people think of savage, evil raiders.
Why would challenging the perception that Demons are evil be a bad thing? You could just have religions in the game that are racist zealots that spread propaganda that all demons are evil (even though they are no more evil than humans are).
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
Laertes
Duke
Posts: 1021
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:09 pm
Location: The Mother of Cities

Post by Laertes »

Slightly off the current thread of conversation, but this just occurred to me and I think it might be interesting so I'm putting it in as a spoilered idea.
I am involved in certain political movements: feminism, secularism, liberalism, that sort of stuff. I go to groups and I go to protests and so on. There's a remarkable thing that when you hang around those places you find that there's people who have the same cause as you, and the same goals as you, but for completely different reasons.

For example, I will occasionally go on a march against the political power of the Catholic church with a bunch of other people. They all believe in taking away the Church's influence in mundane affairs. However, within that group you might have the following reasons for choosing that cause:
- A desire to protect children from their abusive parents and priests
- A desire to foster an environment in which people can choose their own philosophies
- An overriding opposition to any group that holds a central tenet which is not scientifically validated
- A hatred of women, blacks and other groups who tend to be more religious
- Political anarchism and the desire to tear down all power groups
- Pure unadulterated nihilism
- A desire to stamp out "the Irish religion"
- Solidarity with secularists even though you don't really care, because they come your group's rallies
- The desire to pick up hot activist girls
- A hatred of the church due to its institutionalised homophobia
- A hatred of the church due to its institutionalised misogyny
- A hatred of the church because you were raised to hate it
- The love of a good fight, regardless of cause
- Islamophobes (yes, really.)

Now the thing about this is that all these people are on the same side, at least for the moment. If things change then some of them might leave or might even swap sides, but for the moment they have all been led to the same cause. They might dislike each other but they're making common cause against a common foe.

You could use alignment like that. Make it not be a question of "what do I do" but "why do I do it." So if your campaign involves defending civilisation from a vast necromantic conspiracy, then some people are going to be doing it to save lives, others because they're national supremacists, others for the loot, and still others because those necromancers are dwarves and they hate dwarves. Regardless, they are all party members and are all, at least for the moment, on the same side.

What you cannot do, if you do this, is to have a world in which this form of alignment corresponds in any way to any global "Good vs Evil" or "Lawful vs Chaotic" thing. Each individual picks their own fights for their own reasons, not because they're aligned with Team Green and this is Team Green's view on the matter. You would need to be very clear on this and need to do some rules and fluff rewrites to stop people getting the wrong idea. You would also probably need to set out a deliberate campaign theme right at the beginning so that everybody can build a character who is, for one reason or another, on board with the whole thing.
darkmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 913
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:24 am

Post by darkmaster »

It's a Japanese term that's kind of similar to demon, but really it's closer to the idea of Fae, the Japanese have a lot of creatures like that.
Kaelik wrote:
darkmaster wrote:Tgdmb.moe, like the gaming den, but we all yell at eachother about wich lucky star character is the cutest.
Fuck you Haruhi is clearly the best moe anime, and we will argue about how Haruhi and Nagato are OP and um... that girl with blond hair? is for shitters.

If you like Lucky Star then I will explain in great detail why Lucky Star is the a shitty shitty anime for shitty shitty people, and how the characters have no interesting abilities at all, and everything is poorly designed especially the skill challenges.
Laertes
Duke
Posts: 1021
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:09 pm
Location: The Mother of Cities

Post by Laertes »

Laertes wrote:If you write a game in which there are things called demons, people already know what that word means and so are going to become confused and annoyed if it means something substantially different here because they have to relearn that bit of nomenclature.
Yeah and when you mention orcs, people think of savage, evil raiders.
Why would challenging the perception that Demons are evil be a bad thing? You could just have religions in the game that are racist zealots that spread propaganda that all demons are evil (even though they are no more evil than humans are).
Then have them actually have a different name, and have "demon" simply be a pejorative. Neither of us are LaVeyan Satanists, we're not interested in talking about "actual demons" in a positive light or anything. We're trying to construct worlds that are fun to play in, and part of that is naming things in ways that make sense and are intuitive within the world. As part of that, don't have the actual name for something be "demon" unless it's evil.
Last edited by Laertes on Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
TiaC
Knight-Baron
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 7:09 am

Post by TiaC »

Unfuck your tags.
virgil wrote:Lovecraft didn't later add a love triangle between Dagon, Chtulhu, & the Colour-Out-of-Space; only to have it broken up through cyber-bullying by the King in Yellow.
FrankTrollman wrote:If your enemy is fucking Gravity, are you helping or hindering it by putting things on high shelves? I don't fucking know! That's not even a thing. Your enemy can't be Gravity, because that's stupid.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Laertes wrote:If you write a game in which there are things called demons, people already know what that word means and so are going to become confused and annoyed if it means something substantially different here because they have to relearn that bit of nomenclature. In English, "Demon" means "evil supernatural creature." That's what the word means.
I agree with the sentiment, but you're wrong about the word. The most common definition of demon in English is “evil spirit" but the moment we're talking about a tangible creature, that definition is out the window. That leaves us with definitions that include troublesome beings, extremely driven beings, and simply powerful beings. Certainly, there is nothing incongruous about “Maxwell's Demon" or the “Pinball Demon" being non-evil.

The word means something that is at least one of: evil, incorporeal, troublesome, obsessed, or merely powerful. It would not be an abuse of the English language for 'demons' to be vexing but mostly harmless tricksters in the forest, nor would it be weird for the angels of the gods of goodness to be a type of demon.

That being said, if you did want to have supernatural creatures that crawled out of their spawning pools with their black hats already affixed, then 'demon' is one of the better words you could use for that.

-Username17
Cyberzombie
Knight-Baron
Posts: 742
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 4:12 am

Post by Cyberzombie »

Occluded Sun wrote: Just like the Phoenix Wright games are really nothing like actual court proceedings and what lawyers actually do... because no one wants to play a 'game' where they behave like actual lawyers in actual trials.

As for actual cultures not fitting into the D&D alignment categories... that's just nonsense. The ancient Aztecs were clearly Evil in the D&D sense, until they were defeated by an even more Evil society. In terms of how they related to other cultures and societies, the vast majority of civilizations (past and present) have been quite Evil. What's the problem?
You can run it like that. Personally I just find it boring, since you've basically taken all the fantasy races and reduced them to Star Trek forehead aliens. I think it's more interesting to have different races with different motivations and ways of thinking. That's not to say you can't have some human-like races, but trying to do that to all of them cheapens the fantasy experience in my opinion.
MGuy
Prince
Posts: 4795
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:18 am
Location: Indiana

Post by MGuy »

Even when you say "Demons are born from Evil" what the fuck does that mean? What is the 'Evil' they are born from? In most cases it just means that the demon will do bad things but it is unclear what this mass of 'evil' they are born from really is most of the time and seems just to be a vehicle for making spiky murder/rapists that do things you don't want them to do. I especially hate it when it gets into the whole 'balance' thing some people like to throw out there where the idea that there's some sort of way to quantify 'good' and 'evil' starts getting implied. It's far easier for me to wrap my head around the idea the idea that Demons are born from some black soul goop that makes them born enjoying things we don't happen to like and are just as able to be reformed or buck the trend as anybody else born with that kind of nature. Just stack a shitty black hat culture on top of that and say things like Detect: Black can just detect the evil goop that is inherent in black goop crafted creatures like demons/devils/undead and Detect white detects the white jelly that holds together angels/archons/Constructs (cause why not?). All headaches gone, mortals detecting as Black just means they deal with Black goo and doesn't mean the paladin necessarily would be justified in cleaving their head off unless they just hate black goo and deem it a crime by association which just might mean that Paladin is an asshole.
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
If you want a game modded right you have to mod it yourself.
User avatar
deaddmwalking
Prince
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am

Post by deaddmwalking »

Occluded Sun is trying to shift goal posts and use a 'slippery slope' fallacy. He's trying to imply that if orcs can't be evil, then nothing can be evil . It's also a false equivalency. Several posters have already explained one reason 'automagically evil orcs' is offensive is in part because orcs have a life - cycle equivalent to that of humans. They're born, they grow, they die. Even if the vast majority of orcs are evil, inherent evil remains offensive (for reasons already discussed). Since demons are not born in the same way and are not born to the prime material plane, none of the specific objections regarding orc alignments apply.

So when he starts screaming think of the poor demons or if orcs can't be evil, nothing can , the proper response is to point at him and laugh.

To reiterate, while alignment is pointless and usually meaningless (under the standard descriptions in D&D), even if you choose to include it as a tool does not eliminate the burden of providing 'actions' that fit the alignment. If your Elder Evil is sitting at home watching 'I Love Lucy' re - runs and biding his time until the strength of men fails, he's a pretty worthless villain. He has to be active in the world doing bad things to make people appreciate his villainy. If your bad guys aren't doing bad things, you're doing it wrong. And if your bad guys are doing bad things, it doesn't matter what it says on their character sheet.
hyzmarca
Prince
Posts: 3909
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:07 pm

Post by hyzmarca »

deaddmwalking wrote: To reiterate, while alignment is pointless and usually meaningless (under the standard descriptions in D&D), even if you choose to include it as a tool does not eliminate the burden of providing 'actions' that fit the alignment. If your Elder Evil is sitting at home watching 'I Love Lucy' re - runs and biding his time until the strength of men fails, he's a pretty worthless villain. He has to be active in the world doing bad things to make people appreciate his villainy. If your bad guys aren't doing bad things, you're doing it wrong. And if your bad guys are doing bad things, it doesn't matter what it says on their character sheet.
Of course, it's also perfectly reasonable for your villain to be Lawful Good (Hello Inspector Javier) or any other variety of Good.

Or any variety of Good, really.

Indeed, while you can totally have Evil characters do horrible things, it's just as easy, oftentimes easier, to get Good characters to do horrible things.


Most people want to do the right thing. But it's very difficult to get them to agree about what the right thing is. Conflicts against Good characters should probably be more common than conflicts against Evil characters.

After all, the demon's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience, to paraphrase Lewis.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

Most people want to do the right thing.
That isn't true in the real world, it's certainly not true in D&D, and Lewis is clearly just a gigantic asshole.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Laertes
Duke
Posts: 1021
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:09 pm
Location: The Mother of Cities

Post by Laertes »

tussock wrote:
Most people want to do the right thing.
That isn't true in the real world, it's certainly not true in D&D, and Lewis is clearly just a gigantic asshole.
Most people want to think of themselves as doing the right thing, and so will redefine "right" so that it describes what they were going to do anyway or what suits them to do. This is why if you read nineteenth century American pamphlets, lots of them talk about how the plantation owners are carrying out slavery for the benefit of their slaves. The definition of "good" is not static.
User avatar
Stinktopus
Master
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:07 am

Post by Stinktopus »

deaddmwalking wrote: So when he starts screaming think of the poor demons or if orcs can't be evil, nothing can , the proper response is to point at him and laugh.
To be fair, there are posters arguing against the intrinsic evilness of demons, too. Clearly, a number of denners are against anything sentient being "kill on sight" (outside of the slightly disturbing implication that people who disagree with you politically fall under this category).

Alignment continues to exist in it's present form largely because D&D is supposed to appeal to 15 year old Tolkien nerds and meet the approval of their parents so that people stop talking about Satan. If your idea for a section on ethics starts with "JRR Tolkien CS Lewis, and Ron Paul represent objective evil," you're going to alienate people who spend money.
darkmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 913
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:24 am

Post by darkmaster »

Okay, I'm not going to get to deep into this, because, again, down that path lies madness. But I'll just say if a sentient race's political agenda is devour all (your race here) it is actually okay in my book to have members of that race be kill on sight. Sure it isn't nice but you are literally in a war for the survival of (your race here) so while you might be killing individuals that don't personally support devouring all (your race here) but if they do you're going to be eaten if you don't fight and it's just safer to attack first. Just like while most nazis were actually just normal people with families and friends who simply got caught up in fanaticism the political agenda of their country included the murder of millions of people based on those people's physical appearance so nobody feels particularly bad for all the nazi soldiers who died during World War 2.
Last edited by darkmaster on Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kaelik wrote:
darkmaster wrote:Tgdmb.moe, like the gaming den, but we all yell at eachother about wich lucky star character is the cutest.
Fuck you Haruhi is clearly the best moe anime, and we will argue about how Haruhi and Nagato are OP and um... that girl with blond hair? is for shitters.

If you like Lucky Star then I will explain in great detail why Lucky Star is the a shitty shitty anime for shitty shitty people, and how the characters have no interesting abilities at all, and everything is poorly designed especially the skill challenges.
User avatar
deaddmwalking
Prince
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am

Post by deaddmwalking »

I'd agree with that. If a Mind Flayer can only survive on the brain of sentients, they can be Kill-on-Sight. Whether you label them capital E - Evil or whether you think of them as a lion that has begun preying on humas and simply needs to be put down, there are reasons to kill them. But once again, it is ACTIONS that you're responding to, not INHERENT BELIEFS.

If Mind Flayers could survive on the minds of non-sentient creatures (and many of them did), they would cease to be 'kill on sight'. They'd still be dangerous and seen as a hazard, in some cases killing or driving them off may be appropriate, but that becomes a more nuanced distinction.

The same arguments don't apply to Orcs. They have a life-cycle like that of humans. They essentially eat the same foods. They may be evil, but they don't have to be evil. The ones who are doing 'bad things' get killed and the ones who aren't doing 'bad things' are spared.

Orcs, unlike Nazis, are not part of a coordinated political machine. When you declare war on Germany, it's okay to shoot anyone in a German uniform. It's not okay to also kill the Swiss because they happen to speak German.

There are lots of ways to 'get your kill on' with orc hordes without painting the entire race of 'default Evil'. There are no benefits to making them 'default Evil'. If you're including 'bad things' along with their 'default evil', the 'default evil' is superfluous. If you're not including 'bad things', then you have failed to elucidate the types of actions that are associated with 'Evil'.
ishy
Duke
Posts: 2404
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

Post by ishy »

"The same arguments don't apply to Orcs."
Why not?

In your examples, both the mind flayers and the Orcs can choose to be evil or choose to not be evil.

And if a species are only able to derive their nutrition from human organs, then (as a human being) I do support murdering them, but I wouldn't necessarily call them evil.
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
User avatar
Stinktopus
Master
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:07 am

Post by Stinktopus »

ishy wrote:"The same arguments don't apply to Orcs."
Why not?

In your examples, both the mind flayers and the Orcs can choose to be evil or choose to not be evil.
In before more DSM copy-pasta...

The argument that seems to be embraced by DDMW, DSM, and others is that orcs breed true with humans and otherwise have a human life-cycle. Making them cognitively or morally inferior is then too uncomfortably close to real world racism.

The argument is rational and consistent, although it technically doesn't apply to orcs who get spawned in dirt uteruses under Isengard or tussock's war spirits that get periodically ejactulated by caves.

It doesn't really address the question of "Why have Orcs if Orcs are just 'other people?'"

In traditional fairy tales, anything non-human was generally used as an archetype or symbol. The human protagonist acts as the reader's vision into an unnatural/incomprehensible world. The various elves, faeries, and monsters would have some human-like qualities so a sense of motivation and personality could be established, but they were defined by some quirk that marked them as clearly inhuman. They might speak in riddles or follow some alien set of rules or have a severe moral dissonance with humans on something fundamental (cannibalism, etc.).

In RPG's, people have wanted to "play the monster races," but few are going to play some truly alien/unknowable intelligence. Default assumptions have shifted (in some circles) towards all the monsters being more sympathetic and human-like. Orcs essentially became Klingons. "You can tell I come from a different culture because of my forehead."
Last edited by Stinktopus on Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
momothefiddler
Knight-Baron
Posts: 883
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:55 am
Location: United States

Post by momothefiddler »

Stinktopus wrote:or have a severe moral dissonance with humans on something fundamental (cannibalism, etc.).
If you're going to argue that we need to quit with the mere culture-level distinctions and go back to truly alien (whether that's a real thing or not), you really shouldn't use a thing that is different between human cultures as an example of things that are fundamentally inhuman. It sort of ruins the entire argument.
User avatar
Stinktopus
Master
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:07 am

Post by Stinktopus »

momothefiddler wrote:
Stinktopus wrote:or have a severe moral dissonance with humans on something fundamental (cannibalism, etc.).
If you're going to argue that we need to quit with the mere culture-level distinctions and go back to truly alien (whether that's a real thing or not), you really shouldn't use a thing that is different between human cultures as an example of things that are fundamentally inhuman. It sort of ruins the entire argument.
Good point. It's fairly difficult to come up with something that hasn't been embraced by humans somewhere at some time. Even the more bizarre examples I could produce would probably line up with some sort of mental illness.

"That frog just croaked the national anthem! We have to decapitate an old man and kick his head into the swamp!"

And I'm not saying to quit the culture level stuff. I think it just brings it's own bit of whackiness where the you wonder why the green land-vikings have to be green, rather than just land vikings, if they're supposed to be just more humans.
sarcasmoverdose
Apprentice
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 2:58 am

Post by sarcasmoverdose »

Stinktopus wrote: The argument is rational and consistent, although it technically doesn't apply to orcs who get spawned in dirt uteruses under Isengard or tussock's war spirits that get periodically ejactulated by caves.
In traditional fairy tales, anything non-human was generally used as an archetype or symbol. The human protagonist acts as the reader's vision into an unnatural/incomprehensible world. The various elves, faeries, and monsters would have some human-like qualities so a sense of motivation and personality could be established, but they were defined by some quirk that marked them as clearly inhuman. They might speak in riddles or follow some alien set of rules or have a severe moral dissonance with humans on something fundamental (cannibalism, etc.).
In the case of 5E, though, the orcs are not defined as "genetically engineered supersoldiers" or "war spirits" or "unseelie faeries" or anything like that; they're described in a way nearly identical to how bigots describe "savage" cultures. If 5e had simply described them as violent and insane (by human standards), it wouldn't have come off as racist.
Cyberzombie
Knight-Baron
Posts: 742
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 4:12 am

Post by Cyberzombie »

Stinktopus wrote: Good point. It's fairly difficult to come up with something that hasn't been embraced by humans somewhere at some time. Even the more bizarre examples I could produce would probably line up with some sort of mental illness.
I think it's generally okay to have races embody various mental disorders as being commonplace. For instance beings from Mechanus should probably have some serious OCD tendencies, only when you talk about other races, the "disorder" may not actually be a disorder at all, but rather the norm. In fact the disordered ones among their species are the ones that don't have that particular disorder.

Obviously you don't want to just stick with assigning every race a different mental disorder, because that would get old quickly too. But different races, especially immortal planar races, should have different motivations too. Angels and devils should be more concerned for instance over the war over man's souls rather than their lives. So angels especially might seem cold-hearted towards the suffering of humans, but that's because they're more worried about the eternal life after death than the individual person's finite life. They're still good in that they care about you, but their efforts are focused in different places rather than just keeping you alive.
And I'm not saying to quit the culture level stuff. I think it just brings it's own bit of whackiness where the you wonder why the green land-vikings have to be green, rather than just land vikings, if they're supposed to be just more humans.
I feel the same way here. If you make everyone essentially human-like, you might as well just make them humans. Orcs don't even have many notable traits to the point that you'd really care if they were just feral humans.
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

Cyberzombie wrote: I feel the same way here. If you make everyone essentially human-like, you might as well just make them humans. Orcs don't even have many notable traits to the point that you'd really care if they were just feral humans.
Which is completely and totally the fault of dividing humanoids and monstrous humanoids into roughly 100 different species for bullshit reasons. Every scrap of flavor has to be spread out over dozens of indistinguishable (and worthless) wastes of space.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17350
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

darkmaster wrote:It's a Japanese term that's kind of similar to demon, but really it's closer to the idea of Fae, the Japanese have a lot of creatures like that.
Basically "troublesome, mischievous or outright evil spirit, often mixing qualities of humans and animals." Tengu, bakemono*, kitsune, bakeneko*, and yuki on na are all types of youkai. I think tsukumogami (think the awakened lanterns and umbrellas and sandals) are considered youkai as well, but I'm not sure.

*"bake" comes up a lot in japanese monster names, because it basically meant "monster." "Mono" means thing, "neko," of course, means cat, so bakemono are literally "monster-things" which are, I believe, commonly considered to be pretty close to the western idea of goblins, and bakeneko literally means "monstrous cat" and was an evil cat that would suck the life out of sleeping people, impersonate said people, and had some amount of spellcasting.
Laertes wrote:Then have them actually have a different name, and have "demon" simply be a pejorative. Neither of us are LaVeyan Satanists, we're not interested in talking about "actual demons" in a positive light or anything.
Image

No seriously, I'm actually a LaVeyan* Satanist, so I of course take great interest in this sort of stuff. In my campaign right now, I've decided that demons are basically nature spirits of various ethical compasses that the gods decided to stamp out when said gods started popping into being. The gods saw the existence of powerful spirits as a threat to their own acquisition of power, so they took their angels and what would become devils (a la Pact Primeval of Tyrants of the Nine Hells**, albeit loosely) and said "Get 'em, Ray!" The spirits were on the ropes and in their desperation accepted power from an unknown force which would allow them to fight back, without questioning what it was. This force was basically the source of evil, and it turned them into demons and demon lords. Basing things on the Pact Primeval lets me have my byronic anti-hero Satan, and it lets demons be spirits of natural concepts that were literally demonized because of the acts of the gods and angels.


*ish... the guy was a dick, who was far from practicing what he preached, but the book has ...some good points.

**
The best way to understand devils and their ways is to listen to the stories they tell about themselves. The most famous of these tales have propagated as myths throughout all the worlds of the Material Plane, becoming familiar to mortals of all sorts. But as is often the case with legends, contradictions abound. For example, the tale of the Pact Primeval is the accepted version of the multiverse’s creation. But an alternate story claims Asmodeus as the fallen creator of the universe.

Countless cultures have their own versions of the Pact Primeval legend. The names of the deities featured in it change depending on where it is told, but the names of the devils are always the same. Perhaps this fact is what inspired Philogestes, the accursed philosopher of evil, to pen his famous proverb: “The gods exist in multiplicity, but Asmodeus is unique.”

As is the case with any myth worthy of the name, the following tale is true—whether or not it actually happened.

In the beginning—and even before—chaos was all that existed. Out of it came demons—the living manifestations of chaos. Time had not yet been invented, so the demons fought each other continuously in a vortex of disorder over an immeasurable period.

A state of raw chaos was intolerable to the universe, so a force arose to combat it—the power of law. From this principle of abstract order, a number of beings coalesced to combat the demons. These new deities of law suited themselves in gleaming armor made of pure stability and took up weapons forged of ideal thought. Then they waded into battle against the demons. After the battle had raged for uncounted eons, the law deities felt the need to track their progress. They created numbers, to record the enemies slain, and time, so they could see how long victory would take.

Gradually, however, the deities of law began to suspect that the supply of demons was infi nite. Weary of battle, they wished to move on to other projects, such as the creation of worlds and intelligent beings. So they made beautiful winged warriors to serve them and wield their divine magic, both in the endless war against the demons and in the worlds yet to be created. These beings, glorious in their diversity, were called angels.

The bravest, toughest, fiercest, and most beautiful of the angels was Asmodeus. He slew more demons than any other of his kind—more even than any deity. But as the eons wore on, Asmodeus and the members of his magnificent and terrible company began to take on some of their enemies’ traits, so as to fight them more effectively. Gradually, their beauty turned to ugliness, and the deities and other angels began to fear them. Eventually, the inhabitants of the celestial realms petitioned the great gods to banish Asmodeus and the most fearsome of his avenging angels. So Asmodeus was put on trial before Heironeous, the god of valor.

The darkest of the angels responded readily to the charges, reading from the great tablets of law that he had helped to carve. “The first duty of law is to destroy chaos,” he argued. “I have performed this duty better than any.”

“You have made war, and made it well,” Heironeous agreed. “Yet you and your company have poisoned yourselves in the process. Can you not go elsewhere, lest we become contaminated too?”

Asmodeus smiled, and the smoke of a thousand battlefields rose from his lips. “As Lord of Battle,” he pointed out, “you should know better than any that war is a dirty business. We have blackened ourselves so that you can remain golden. We have upheld the laws, not broken them. Therefore, you may not cast us out.”

The gods huddled together to discuss what they had heard. Great was their consternation when they could find no counters in their tablets of law to Asmodeus’s arguments. The dark angel knew the laws better than they did and could wield their clauses like a knife.

With the passage of time, Asmodeus and his warband grew ever more alarming in aspect. Fangs jutted from their mouths, their tongues grew forked, and they wreathed their bodies in mantles of fire. The deities built new citadels to escape them, but Asmodeus and his followers penetrated these as well. They sued the gods under their own laws, demanding full access to all the privileges accorded champions of order. The deities were distressed but could find no lawful way to stop them.

So the gods retreated to their great project—the creation of mortals, and of verdant worlds for those favored beings to live on. But when demons invaded these worlds, the warbands of Asmodeus were called upon to stop them. Although the voracious hosts of the tanar’ri were no easier to vanquish on the new worlds of the Material Plane than they had been on the battlegrounds of the Outer Planes, Asmodeus and his dark angels generally succeeded in driving them back. Together, the gods and angels created barriers on the Material Plane to keep the demons at bay. They erected walls, threw up ranges of mountains, covered portions of their worlds with icy wastes, and buried the entrances the demons had used under vast oceans. Thus were the newly created worlds, like Asmodeus and his lot, scarred and made ugly for the greater benefit of law.

Then the deities of order made a horrifying discovery. The mortals they had created—their pride and joy—immediately set to work tearing down these barriers. They scaled walls, climbed mountains, and traversed glaciers to let the demons back in. Upon returning to the Material Plane, the demons ran riot, destroying one earthly paradise after another.

The deities were angry but also confused. “Why did my sweet halflings do this to me?” cried Yondalla, who had created them.

“I invented mountains and set my clever dwarves as their protectors!” thundered Moradin. “Why did they tunnel under them and into the demon crypts?”

The gods wailed and lamented until Asmodeus came to them with the answer. “Your mortals are taking these actions because you gave them minds of their own.”

“Of course we did!” said the deities. “Without free will, the choice to follow the law means nothing.”

“Indeed,” replied Asmodeus, crushing a small insect that had crawled out of his neatly trimmed red beard. “They are curious creatures, these mortals, and the demons have promised them freedom. Soon they will learn that the liberty dangled before them is that of absolute anarchy, and that in a demon realm, they are free only to be destroyed. But by then, it will be too late for them. You might create more worlds and more mortals to people them, but I promise you, the same folly will recur eternally.”

When the gods realized the truth of the dark angel’s words, they were downcast. They rent their garments and wailed in despair.

“I have the solution that eludes you,” said Asmodeus, “one that will allow your precious mortals to retain the free will you have so beneficently given them. The problem is this,” he continued. “Your law is one of voluntary obedience. You command the mortals to abjure chaos, but what happens when they disobey you?”

The deities had no answer. “We are their creators,” moaned Yondalla. “Of course they should heed us.”

“Indeed they should,” replied Asmodeus, bowing gallantly to the fair Yondalla. “But they do not, because there can be no law without Punishment.”

“Punishment?” muttered the host of deities and godlings. “What is this Punishment of which you speak?”

Asmodeus pulled it from its sheath. At this time, Punishment was shaped like a mighty sword, though it has taken on many forms since then. “I have invented this item for you as the ultimate weapon of law. When laws are broken, the wrongdoers must be made to suffer as a warning to others. Thus, mortals can choose between the paradise of rightful action and the torment of wickedness. A few will suffer Punishment so that the majority can see the consequences of lawbreaking.”

The gods were disquieted by this pronouncement, but as usual, they could find no flaws in their champion’s logic. How could mortals be expected to choose virtue if evil went unpunished?

At last, one of the godlings stepped forward and said, “Yes, retribution is the basis of all law.” These words transformed him on the spot into the greater deity now known as St. Cuthbert.

On that day, the deities began to see that law and chaos were not the only principles in the universe. Good and evil were natural forces in the cosmos as well. So the gods separated themselves from one other on that basis. Deities such as Hecate and Set offered patronage to Asmodeus’s poisoned angels, while Heironeous and some of the others drew back from them still more.

So the deities handed down their new laws and sent their clerics through mortal lands to announce that the punishment for sin would be torment. The gods were pleased with the arrangement. They truly thought that everyone would obey and that no one would actually be punished.

But as mortals died, some souls trickled into the celestial planes who bore the stink of transgression. Asmodeus, aided by Dispater, Mephistopheles, and others of his dark brigade, set about their lawful punishment. They flayed these sinners, and burned them, and placed them on racks.

The shrieks of the damned reverberated throughout the heavens, and the flowers in the gods’ idyllic gardens dripped with blood. The deities of law tried to shut their ears, but they could not abide the horror. So they put Asmodeus in chains and again charged him with high crimes against them.

“I have merely done what I said I would, under the laws you drafted,” said Asmodeus. Again, the gods had to admit he was right.

“But I have a proposal for you,” the grim champion continued. “You wish to see the law upheld, but you do not care to witness its ranker consequences. So to preserve your delicate sensibilities, my followers and I will take our project elsewhere. We will build a perfect Hell for you. You will gain from its existence but need never lay eyes upon it. We shall put it . . . there.” And he pointed to an empty land, which is now called Baator.

“Yes, yes!” said all the deities. “You must move your Hell there, forthwith!”

“Nothing would please me more,” said Asmodeus. He extended his hand, and a ruby rod of power appeared in it. “But first, we must make a pact.”

“A pact?” asked Moradin suspiciously.

“Yes, indeed,” said Asmodeus, producing a document with a wave of his hand. “It is to your benefit to ensure that we, who labor for you in a place you will not venture, continue to carry out your will. This agreement specifi es the fate of damned souls. In exchange, it allows us to draw magic from these souls, so we can fuel our spells and maintain our powers.”

“I’m not sure I like the sound of that,” said the flinty Moradin.

“Your concerns are entirely understandable, O Maker of Dwarves,” said Asmodeus in his most reassuring tone. “But since we will be separated from you, we will not be able to draw our powers from you, as we always have. You would not wish to make us gods independent of yourselves, would you?”

“Assuredly not!” huffed Moradin, appalled at the thought.

“So instead, take this lesser measure, and simply sign this pact,” he said with a smile. Thus, the law deities signed the agreement that determined the boundaries of Hell and the rules for the transmission of wicked souls. Today, mortals know this document as the Pact Primeval.

Once it was signed, Asmodeus, Mephistopheles, and Dispater decamped to Baator, which was then a bleak and featureless plain. With them went a host of other dark angels that called themselves erinyes.

“What have you gotten us into?” Mephistopheles moaned.

“This place has nothing!” Dispater complained.

“Just wait,” said Asmodeus. Then he explained his plan.

The deities of virtuous law reveled in their newly purified celestial domains, now free of the cruel angels’ degradation for the first time. It was not for many years, in mortal terms, that they discovered an alarming drop in the number of souls being transmitted to their various heavens. Upon conferring with their clergy, they realized that devils were corrupting mortals and ensuring their damnation by turning them toward evil.

The deities formed a delegation, which set off immediately for Baator. To their surprise, the once-featureless plain had been transformed into nine tiers of monstrous horror and torment. Within its confines, they found countless souls writhing in pain. They saw these souls transformed, first into crawling, mindless monsters, and eventually into an army of powerful devils.

“What goes on here?” Heironeous demanded.

“You have granted us the power to harvest souls,” replied Asmodeus. “To build our Hell and gird our might for the task set before us, we naturally had to find ways to improve our yield.”

The war deity drew forth his longsword of crackling lightning. “It is your job to punish transgressions, not to encourage them!” he cried.

Asmodeus smiled, and a venomous moth flew out from between his sharpened teeth. “Read the fine print,” he replied.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.

You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Voss wrote:
Cyberzombie wrote: I feel the same way here. If you make everyone essentially human-like, you might as well just make them humans. Orcs don't even have many notable traits to the point that you'd really care if they were just feral humans.
Which is completely and totally the fault of dividing humanoids and monstrous humanoids into roughly 100 different species for bullshit reasons. Every scrap of flavor has to be spread out over dozens of indistinguishable (and worthless) wastes of space.
But they are only wastes of space because there isn't anything interesting written for them. When a monster race gets into a monster manual, it gets about one page if we're going by a sane format rather than the crappy crap in the 3e mm5 or the 4e format. Ideally, that's a quarter page picture, a quarter page of game stats for a typical tribal warrior, a quarter page of special rules and tactics, and a quarter page to describe physical and anthropological quirks to make them interesting.

In a standard coffee table book sized monster manual, that gives you about 250 words to describe why people should care about Bullywugs or Gnolls. Bullywugs never know who their parents are because they start life as r type tadpoles and only become k type people if they survive long enough to grow legs. That seems kind of interesting, and it took a lot less than 250words to say.

And let's be honest, monster manuals have become bloated, but noone is surprised by a 300 page book anymore. It would not be unreasonable to give each of the races two pages while chimerae and giant goats get just one. You'd want to spend some of that extra page on an extra sample character or two and maybe some rules for playing one, but you could still fit in five to seven hundred words of physical and anthropological flavor to make the races seem interesting and flavorful.

This is not an insurmountable task. There's no reason for the Forest Kith Goblins to not be interesting and unique, they just happen not to be.

-Username17
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

Maybe, but when they actively fill pages with things like:
orogs - even more bigger orcs, because they're half ogre, but different from ogrillions (because which species is which parent apparently matters) and totally different neo-orog, which is somehow a different way of crossbreeding the two species.

norkers - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norker
totally a goblin, but related to hobgoblins in an unspecified way, and have the 'interesting' distinction of breeding more slowly than goblins.

Then there are xvarts and tasloi, which are essentially goblins, fill the same role, and are distinct by dint of being blue and jungle-dwelling.

I still have to puzzle over the difference between gibberlings and grimlocks, and as far as I can tell grippli exist only to spit the eyes of bullywugs.

Really, though, the giant pile of unfleshed bullshit doesn't help out the game. Pick a couple dozen sapient races and call it a day. Fighting (or talking to) Not-A-Goblin #1 isn't any more interesting than interacting with Not-A-Goblin #2.
Post Reply