9 Alignments Again (Hoping to make sense)
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:06 am
So I have a certain fondness for the AD&D alignment wheel, and would like to salvage a version that makes sense.
In AD&D 3rd, Law and Chaos are primarily fashion choices that secondarily relate to whether you are "rowdy" (chaos) or "uptight" (lawful). This secondary axis support two rival teams who are both good guys, and provides some ostensible reason why the different good guys don't always get along based on whether they listen to loud music after 9PM. The descriptions of why the sample PCs (especially the monk and the wizard) are their respective alignments make no sense. There's a hysterical thread on how the AD&D 3rd alignments might be parsed, which deserves a bump but I *don't* want to start rehashing that stuff.
So Law and Chaos were distinguishable when they meant Good and Evil, but when they lose that association in later Moorcock stuff they also have a tendency to be hard to distinguish:
https://readcomics.io/michael-moorcocks ... apter-7/10
https://readcomics.io/elric-the-balance ... apter-4/17
Unexpectedly, the difference is that the Lawful world-eating insect god (that's the first one) has a better and more unhinged rant. The Chaos Lord looks cooler, though.
But the term occasionally used in 3rd edition does mean something and it could sustain a meaningful alignment distinction if you cared: Good and Evil are moral alignments while Law and Chaos are ethical alignments.
Ethics may not be the same as morality, depending on your philosophical school. For the purposes of this rant, ethics may or may not be codified, but they are rules; morals, on the other hand, are a feeling, sensibility or aesthetic, and not a rule.
So Lawful characters are committed to doing what the rules say they should do; while, Good characters are committed to doing what they feel/know to be right. Lawful characters do not have to be straight-laced and Good characters do not, in fact, have to be the good guys. (EDIT) have to be on the same team as the protagonists, or allied to one another just because they are trying to be moral.
[*] So Lawful Good means you are committed to be moral, and committed to be ethical, at the same time. Probably you think it's moral to be ethical and thus Lawful Good characters don't believe in the alignment system.
[*] Neutral Good characters are committed to be moral, and would like to be ethical but aren't committed to it.
[*] Chaotic Good characters are committed to be moral, and not only aren't ethical but believe that ethics are a barrier to morality, because they provide sophists with a veneer for their immoral acts.
[*] Lawful Neutral characters like to be moral but aren't committed to it, but they are committed to being ethical.
[*] Neutral characters like to be both moral and ethical, but are committed to neither.
[*] Chaotic Neutral characters regard ethics with contempt, but aren't bad people otherwise so they prefer to avoid doing something if they feel it's wrong.
[*] Lawful Evil characters are ethical and regard morals with contempt, maybe because morals are subjective or maybe because the Lawful Evil character simply lacks a "moral compass". In any case, Lawful Evil characters view themselves as doing right and so also don't believe in the alignment system.
[*] Neutral Evil characters prefer to be ethical, maybe just for practical reasons related to maintaining mutually beneficial social relations, but either have no sense of right and wrong or ignore it, and in any case don't respect efforts to do right.
[*] And Chaotic Evil characters are sociopaths who hold feelings and codes of conduct in equal contempt.
Now, individual Lawful (and to a lesser extent Neutral) characters have to choose ethics to which they hope to adhere; or, it might be better to announce some universal ethics that matters for alignment purposes in the magical logic of fantasy-land. But, in any case, it produces the desired outputs even if it doesn't provide some feeble excuse why Elves and Dwarves don't like each other.
Alignment Conduct Wheel, version 2.0:
Lawful Good
[*] Obey the edicts of the mandate wherever they may be, unless these edicts directly conflict with the strictures of their alignment.
[*] Actively protect the innocent and vulnerable from harm, whenever they have the power to do so. Passive cowardice does not compromise a good alignment, unless taken to a great extreme.
[*] Will keep their word of honor, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*] Will tell the truth, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Neutral Good
[*] Prefers to work within the edicts of the mandate, unless these edicts directly conflict with the strictures of their alignment.
[*] Actively protect the innocent and vulnerable from harm, whenever they have the power to do so. Passive cowardice does not compromise a good alignment, unless taken to a great extreme.
[*] Will keep their word of honor, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*] Avoid lies for personal advantage, but will use deceit for the benefit of others.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Chaotic Good
[*] Will generally ignore the edicts of the mandate, and do not respect them.
[*] Actively protect the innocent and vulnerable from harm, whenever they have the power to do so. Passive cowardice does not compromise a good alignment, unless taken to a great extreme.
[*] Only make promises they intend to keep, unless this conflicts with other strictures of the alignment (e.g. a false promise is needed to rescue slave children, that sort of thing.)
[*] May be tricky or deceptive, but will not tell hurtful or destructive lies.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Lawful Neutral
[*] Obey the edicts of the mandate wherever they may be; conflict with the other structures of this alignment should be rare, and may lead to indecision or unexpected behavior.
[*] Avoid actively harming the innocent and vulnerable, unless it conflicts with the other strictures of their alignment.
[*] Will keep their word of honor.
[*] Will tell the truth, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
True Neutral
[*] Prefers to work within the edicts of the mandate.
[*] Avoid actively harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Sincerely desires to keep their promises.
[*] Tells the truth unless sorely pressed.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Chaotic Neutral
[*] Ignores the edicts of the mandate and does not respect them.
[*] Avoid actively harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Breaks promises with abandon.
[*] Lies whenever it is convenient.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Lawful Evil
[*] Obey the edicts of the mandate wherever they may be, but actively seeks to subvert the edict to their own power and advantage.
[*] Has no compunction against harming the innocent and vulnerable, especially if they do not follow rules to the letter.
[*] Will keep their word of honor.
[*] Will tell the truth, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment. However, Lawful Evil characters take positive glee is deceptive truths, lies by omission, etc.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Neutral Evil
[*] Prefers to work within the edicts of the mandate.
[*] Has no compunction against harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Recognizes the value of respect and reputation, and will keep promises to maintain their reputation.
[*] Will generally avoid lies if they are going to get caught.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Chaotic Evil
[*] Ignores the edicts of the mandate and does not respect them.
[*] Has no compunction against harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Breaks promises with abandon.
[*] Lies whenever it is convenient.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
In AD&D 3rd, Law and Chaos are primarily fashion choices that secondarily relate to whether you are "rowdy" (chaos) or "uptight" (lawful). This secondary axis support two rival teams who are both good guys, and provides some ostensible reason why the different good guys don't always get along based on whether they listen to loud music after 9PM. The descriptions of why the sample PCs (especially the monk and the wizard) are their respective alignments make no sense. There's a hysterical thread on how the AD&D 3rd alignments might be parsed, which deserves a bump but I *don't* want to start rehashing that stuff.
So Law and Chaos were distinguishable when they meant Good and Evil, but when they lose that association in later Moorcock stuff they also have a tendency to be hard to distinguish:
https://readcomics.io/michael-moorcocks ... apter-7/10
https://readcomics.io/elric-the-balance ... apter-4/17
Unexpectedly, the difference is that the Lawful world-eating insect god (that's the first one) has a better and more unhinged rant. The Chaos Lord looks cooler, though.
But the term occasionally used in 3rd edition does mean something and it could sustain a meaningful alignment distinction if you cared: Good and Evil are moral alignments while Law and Chaos are ethical alignments.
Ethics may not be the same as morality, depending on your philosophical school. For the purposes of this rant, ethics may or may not be codified, but they are rules; morals, on the other hand, are a feeling, sensibility or aesthetic, and not a rule.
So Lawful characters are committed to doing what the rules say they should do; while, Good characters are committed to doing what they feel/know to be right. Lawful characters do not have to be straight-laced and Good characters do not, in fact, have to be the good guys. (EDIT) have to be on the same team as the protagonists, or allied to one another just because they are trying to be moral.
[*] So Lawful Good means you are committed to be moral, and committed to be ethical, at the same time. Probably you think it's moral to be ethical and thus Lawful Good characters don't believe in the alignment system.
[*] Neutral Good characters are committed to be moral, and would like to be ethical but aren't committed to it.
[*] Chaotic Good characters are committed to be moral, and not only aren't ethical but believe that ethics are a barrier to morality, because they provide sophists with a veneer for their immoral acts.
[*] Lawful Neutral characters like to be moral but aren't committed to it, but they are committed to being ethical.
[*] Neutral characters like to be both moral and ethical, but are committed to neither.
[*] Chaotic Neutral characters regard ethics with contempt, but aren't bad people otherwise so they prefer to avoid doing something if they feel it's wrong.
[*] Lawful Evil characters are ethical and regard morals with contempt, maybe because morals are subjective or maybe because the Lawful Evil character simply lacks a "moral compass". In any case, Lawful Evil characters view themselves as doing right and so also don't believe in the alignment system.
[*] Neutral Evil characters prefer to be ethical, maybe just for practical reasons related to maintaining mutually beneficial social relations, but either have no sense of right and wrong or ignore it, and in any case don't respect efforts to do right.
[*] And Chaotic Evil characters are sociopaths who hold feelings and codes of conduct in equal contempt.
Now, individual Lawful (and to a lesser extent Neutral) characters have to choose ethics to which they hope to adhere; or, it might be better to announce some universal ethics that matters for alignment purposes in the magical logic of fantasy-land. But, in any case, it produces the desired outputs even if it doesn't provide some feeble excuse why Elves and Dwarves don't like each other.
Alignment Conduct Wheel, version 2.0:
Lawful Good
[*] Obey the edicts of the mandate wherever they may be, unless these edicts directly conflict with the strictures of their alignment.
[*] Actively protect the innocent and vulnerable from harm, whenever they have the power to do so. Passive cowardice does not compromise a good alignment, unless taken to a great extreme.
[*] Will keep their word of honor, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*] Will tell the truth, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Neutral Good
[*] Prefers to work within the edicts of the mandate, unless these edicts directly conflict with the strictures of their alignment.
[*] Actively protect the innocent and vulnerable from harm, whenever they have the power to do so. Passive cowardice does not compromise a good alignment, unless taken to a great extreme.
[*] Will keep their word of honor, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*] Avoid lies for personal advantage, but will use deceit for the benefit of others.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Chaotic Good
[*] Will generally ignore the edicts of the mandate, and do not respect them.
[*] Actively protect the innocent and vulnerable from harm, whenever they have the power to do so. Passive cowardice does not compromise a good alignment, unless taken to a great extreme.
[*] Only make promises they intend to keep, unless this conflicts with other strictures of the alignment (e.g. a false promise is needed to rescue slave children, that sort of thing.)
[*] May be tricky or deceptive, but will not tell hurtful or destructive lies.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Lawful Neutral
[*] Obey the edicts of the mandate wherever they may be; conflict with the other structures of this alignment should be rare, and may lead to indecision or unexpected behavior.
[*] Avoid actively harming the innocent and vulnerable, unless it conflicts with the other strictures of their alignment.
[*] Will keep their word of honor.
[*] Will tell the truth, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
True Neutral
[*] Prefers to work within the edicts of the mandate.
[*] Avoid actively harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Sincerely desires to keep their promises.
[*] Tells the truth unless sorely pressed.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Chaotic Neutral
[*] Ignores the edicts of the mandate and does not respect them.
[*] Avoid actively harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Breaks promises with abandon.
[*] Lies whenever it is convenient.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Lawful Evil
[*] Obey the edicts of the mandate wherever they may be, but actively seeks to subvert the edict to their own power and advantage.
[*] Has no compunction against harming the innocent and vulnerable, especially if they do not follow rules to the letter.
[*] Will keep their word of honor.
[*] Will tell the truth, unless it conflicts with other terms of the alignment. However, Lawful Evil characters take positive glee is deceptive truths, lies by omission, etc.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Neutral Evil
[*] Prefers to work within the edicts of the mandate.
[*] Has no compunction against harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Recognizes the value of respect and reputation, and will keep promises to maintain their reputation.
[*] Will generally avoid lies if they are going to get caught.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]
Chaotic Evil
[*] Ignores the edicts of the mandate and does not respect them.
[*] Has no compunction against harming the innocent and vulnerable.
[*] Breaks promises with abandon.
[*] Lies whenever it is convenient.
[*]
[*]
[*]
[*]