Good and Evil in D&D

[shadzar]

Anyway, no one knows what D&D Alignment actually means

actually most people do, it is just poorly written as the 9-pocket system. thus anyone using that system will be confused, because it doesnt work in any way shape or form.

two systems were merged into one poorly, rather than leaving them separate and using them both. it is as simple as that.

D&D alignment is like asking how much red is in green, when ZERO in an unaccepted answer.

[Foxwarrior]

Unable to resist a statement about red in green, I reply: red is about 440 THz, green is about 560. I'm not exactly sure how you define a number being "in" another number, but at least I can say red is about 79% of green.

Edit: To be marginally less of a smartass (per answer, not total), I have an answer for if you're talking about the visual perception of red and green instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cones_SMJ2_E.svg As you can clearly see, for non-colorblind people, maybe 60% of red is (also) in green.

[Mistborn]

What's worse: killing, mind controlling, or surprise sexing an evil person?

How is that even a question, murder and brain jacking can justified if they committed in services of a necessary end that could not be accomplished otherwise. Rape is a crime with no acceptable justification.

[RadiantPhoenix]

Rape is a crime with no acceptable justification.

"Because of the villain's magic, the only way to end his unkillability was to rape him."

How's that?

[Omegonthesane]

Rape is a crime with no acceptable justification.

"Because of the villain's magic, the only way to end his unkillability was to rape him."

How's that?

What does that add to the plot though? Why would the villain have that kind of protection? The only example I can think of with precedent is virgin powers, at which point why can't you seduce them into consensual sex?

[OgreBattle]

at which point why can't you seduce them into consensual sex?

That sounds like it could be the solution to every D&D module.

[RadiantPhoenix]

at which point why can't you seduce them into consensual sex?

Not enough time.

[fectin]

at which point why can't you seduce them into consensual sex?

Not enough time.

Sounds like you're just not good enough.

[shadzar]

Unable to resist a statement about red in green, I reply: red is about 440 THz, green is about 560. I'm not exactly sure how you define a number being "in" another number, but at least I can say red is about 79% of green.

Edit: To be marginally less of a smartass (per answer, not total), I have an answer for if you're talking about the visual perception of red and green instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cones_SMJ2_E.svg As you can clearly see, for non-colorblind people, maybe 60% of red is (also) in green.

Maybe you should watch a Glad commercial or go to kindergarten to learn that yellow and blue make green, not red.

that is the point. by definition, red is one thing, green in another. likewise lawful is one thing, good is another. east twain east, and west twain west, and n'er the two shall meet.

there is NO red in green as per the above definition that MOST sane people would agree on, as there is neither good nor evil in lawful.

maybe having played a bit before "9 alignments" allows one to better see how to properly add the second axis, as its own thing. that way you never end up with the "Batman phenomenon".

those having only known the 9, or oddity of the 5 from 4th... may never be able to understand how alignment really works, or to understand that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the 9 to work at all. be they for players or a DMs tool.

see my alignment thread for further details on how it REALLY works, and just about the ONLY way it works to have LC and GE as alignment components.

[Prak]

Oh shadzar....

[shadzar]

aside form you just wanting to be a cock muncher, what does your little picture have to do with the fact that Gary fucked up with alignments and couldn't describe them to save his life, because he fucked up with merging two different systems into one poorly?

are you really suggesting that ANYONE out there really likes the 9 pocket system that has been and that it works better than my own view of alignments?

[TheFlatline]

Rape is a crime with no acceptable justification.

"Because of the villain's magic, the only way to end his unkillability was to rape him."

How's that?

What does that add to the plot though? Why would the villain have that kind of protection? The only example I can think of with precedent is virgin powers, at which point why can't you seduce them into consensual sex?

I stand up and walk away from the terrible, terrible DM who shouldn't be allowed to run a game, and heartily encourage the other players to do the same. Upon abandonment of said game, the villain is contained purely inside the imagination of said terrible DM for all eternity, which is probably a fate worse than death.

Or if I *really* have to play this fucking terrible idea of a game, I chain said villain to a mountain side with unbreakable chains and have a giant eagle peck his liver out and eat it every day for eternity.

[Prak]

aside form you just wanting to be a cock muncher, what does your little picture have to do with the fact that Gary fucked up with alignments and couldn't describe them to save his life, because he fucked up with merging two different systems into one poorly?

are you really suggesting that ANYONE out there really likes the 9 pocket system that has been and that it works better than my own view of alignments?

Mostly it had to do with your dismissal of the colour thing that was actually perfectly easy to understand.

[virgil]

[OgreBattle]

Rape is a crime with no acceptable justification.

"Because of the villain's magic, the only way to end his unkillability was to rape him."

How's that?

"The sphinx said the Lich's phylactory was in a 'hole shrouded in darkness' that only the 'light of a paladin's sword' could pierce, hmmm..."

"Your dick has been consecrated by the cosmic forces of Law and Justice, it is a towering pillar of order against the swirling primordial storm of chaos, now stick it to that giant frog"

"He's unstoppable with that unicorn at his side..."

"I'm a flask rogue damnit, I can sneak attack with any splashing substance!!"

[Voss]

aside form you just wanting to be a cock muncher, what does your little picture have to do with the fact that Gary fucked up with alignments and couldn't describe them to save his life, because he fucked up with merging two different systems into one poorly?

are you really suggesting that ANYONE out there really likes the 9 pocket system that has been and that it works better than my own view of alignments?

Really likes it? Not many here, but there are people out in the world that do.
I'm incredibly certain that we could poke at the RPG.net forums or WotC forums and find someone willing to fall on their own sword for the D&D alignment system. That isn't even hard.

But yours? Yours is worse. You use 'willingness to live in a house and why' as the fundamental tipping point between order and chaos and good and evil. Fucking roadkill had a better idea than you.


But even if you are a fundamentally stupid person, it should be fairly evident that good and evil are not linked to intent. If I intend to end world hunger by growing more food, that is good, right? Or at least, most people would consider it good. But if my intent is still to feed world hunger, and my method is 'kill all babies to decrease demand...' Well. Sane people would say this is _not_ a good thing. In your 'system' (insane, incoherent ramblings), they are exactly the same.

[rasmuswagner]

What's worse: killing, mind controlling, or surprise sexing an evil person?

How is that even a question, murder and brain jacking can justified if they committed in services of a necessary end that could not be accomplished otherwise. Rape is a crime with no acceptable justification.

But sometimes you have to Redeem Evil. Which is totally not the same as locking people up and brainwashing them; the difference is, we're good guys doing it to evil guys, so it's enhanced interrogation redemption. And you know what tool is useful for that kind of thing? My penis. I will redeem you with my penis, and when you're ready to thank me for it, then I know that it worked.

[shadzar]

But if my intent is still to feed world hunger, and my method is 'kill all babies to decrease demand...'

no, you are jsut being fucking stupid. you use something that people would see as evil for the greater good" and most people know that such is often never good at all.

you basically could have just said you wanted to be Hitler and saying his actions would be good had they been in the interest of world hunger.

you are just fucking stupid.

you obviously cannot tell right form wrong.

also you have to look at it in context of the game world, not the real work. did Kar Drago perform evil acts by killing upstarts? not to the eyes of his people. neither was it good, nor evil. it jsut was.

you simply have to either play real world ideals, or enter the game world and leave real world views behind.

doesn't mean the game will always be PC, but it will be consistent with a world view or culture view.

also is euthanasia good or evil? Dr Kavorkian was jailed for doing jsut that to humans, but vets do it to animals all the time. so is it good or not?

is it ok for one species to kill another, yet they cannot kill themselves to end pains?

YOU have to decide the world view and culture view of the game, and go from there. this is why the 9 alignments don't work, because they assume Gary's view or the DMs view, and you need the game's view.

it really is simple. Pokemon are enslaved to fight each other. this is a GOOD thing in that world. many children at taught this and allowed to think this. why not, they are basically pets right? but is enslaving ANYTHING good?

you must stay in context and msut be capable of seeing context which is not the real world.

you however, cannot.

[silva]

But if my intent is still to feed world hunger, and my method is 'kill all babies to decrease demand...'

no, you are jsut being fucking stupid. you use something that people would see as evil for the greater good" and most people know that such is often never good at all.

you basically could have just said you wanted to be Hitler and saying his actions would be good had they been in the interest of world hunger.

you are just fucking stupid.

you obviously cannot tell right form wrong.

also you have to look at it in context of the game world, not the real work. did Kar Drago perform evil acts by killing upstarts? not to the eyes of his people. neither was it good, nor evil. it jsut was.

you simply have to either play real world ideals, or enter the game world and leave real world views behind.

doesn't mean the game will always be PC, but it will be consistent with a world view or culture view.

also is euthanasia good or evil? Dr Kavorkian was jailed for doing jsut that to humans, but vets do it to animals all the time. so is it good or not?

is it ok for one species to kill another, yet they cannot kill themselves to end pains?

YOU have to decide the world view and culture view of the game, and go from there. this is why the 9 alignments don't work, because they assume Gary's view or the DMs view, and you need the game's view.

it really is simple. Pokemon are enslaved to fight each other. this is a GOOD thing in that world. many children at taught this and allowed to think this. why not, they are basically pets right? but is enslaving ANYTHING good?

you must stay in context and msut be capable of seeing context which is not the real world.

you however, cannot.

Amazing post.

/ thread.

[OgreBattle]

Koumei's ninja is incapale of criminal sexing, as the rules specify that a "good time is had by all"

[ishy]

Even if all had a good time, it can still be rape.

[Voss]

But if my intent is still to feed world hunger, and my method is 'kill all babies to decrease demand...'

no, you are jsut being fucking stupid. you use something that people would see as evil for the greater good" and most people know that such is often never good at all.
.

Yes. That is the point- if it can be proved trivially false with a simplistic example, it is _entirely_ false. That you don't see a problem with the fact that it can and does produce results that contradicts with all sorts of moral beliefs, yet still believe it is somehow a workable reflection of morality is fucking baffling.

Your system is incompatible with any real world system or any 'fantasy' system, let alone any combination. Its inconsistent with itself and completely unworkable, whether you're dealing solely with real world morality, 'fantasy' morality or any combination of anything.

[shadzar]

no, what i have proven is that you have to have a consistent world or cultural view within the game itself that leaves the real world behind.

is it good or bad that men are slaves and puppet in Drow society? WHO has the right to decide for them? the Zhentarim? Cyric? Elmister?the fighter character's player?

like most of the game, it requires agreement from the group of players. in the most direct way it requires what the DM decides.

when it comes to players, they pick a race and a class as "packages" as it seems everyone loves, so they are also bound by the morals of those packages if present as well. no single player will get to define human ideas of good or evil, but together with the DM can figure out who (deity) they have to answer to. this is why NO deity was never placed into the game prior to WotC so that people could make up their own minds even to have "nameless ones". so the fighter player's character follows his lesser deity that he and the DM agreed upon and know what constitutes good for him in the eyes of his deity as well as lawful, evil, or chaotic.

then you jsut have to ask those 2 questions, one for each axis.

was this something his deity would see as good?
was this something his deity would see as lawful?

answering those two questions gives you all the information you need to judge any and every action in the game based on the game world's view.

YOU as a group decide if you will allow rape as seen to be a good act, or to ban the concept from the world view of the game. no two tables will share the same idea, nor should they on how exactly alignments work, as that is a part of playing with like-minded people.

or you just trust the DM to do the right thing, but around here you are all so buttsore from playing with or being bad DMs that you still forge weapons for the DM v player war and cannot in any way shape or form trust ANY DM/GM for any game.

as i said, you cannot understand how to see the game world as something not of this earth, and leave behind the real world while in the game world. the concept just escapes you.

[fectin]

Sure, why not:

The nine-pocket alignment system is great for DnD. Remember, this is a game about going into someone's basement, then stealing and/or killing everything you find. If you want a deep morality engine, you're really, really in the wrong place.

Within that, the good-evil, law/chaos grid is an extremely simple way to both model many source material stories, and also to tell stories about good intentions leading to evil acts (tyranny of paladins, zombie-based industrial revolution, etc.). On top of that, and this may be the most important, it lets you just play the damn game. If you really want to have an Objectivist debate before you can enter the goblin warrens, be my guest. Otherwise, check "good" on your character sheet, note that goblens are purple Drazi, and go to town.

[Voss]

like most of the game, it requires agreement from the group of players. in the most direct way it requires what the DM decides.
...
was this something his deity would see as good?
was this something his deity would see as lawful?
...
answering those two questions gives you all the information you need to judge any and every action in the game based on the game world's view.
...

as i said, you cannot understand how to see the game world as something not of this earth, and leave behind the real world while in the game world. the concept just escapes you.

Irrelevant. Even if we accept, rather absurdly, that there is zero overlap between real-world morality and fantasy morality when most of the same issues apply (and while referencing basic issues-in-common like murder, rape and slavery), your system still falls apart. You're trying to claim a single POV for the game world (moral absolutism), absurdly different views of good/evil by deity (moral relativism) and putting it up for a vote to the players, with possibly a veto or even fiat by the DM. That is utterly irreconcilable, and fucking stupid.

or you just trust the DM to do the right thing, but around here you are all so buttsore from playing with or being bad DMs that you still forge weapons for the DM v player war and cannot in any way shape or form trust ANY DM/GM for any game.

What I don't understand why this suddenly comes up in the discussion at all. It isn't relevant in any way.