Comments on: Evil in D&D

By: Trevor

Trevor — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:25:07 +0000

The good players go and kill a group of goblins that may or may not have actually attacked the village to get some food however these said to be good players go and kill all goblins they run in to. if you base simple fact there evil that still does not excuse killing the goblins that did not attack the village for food becouse we think there all evil

By: admin

admin — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 10:55:39 +0000

Walter,

I like the idea of a ‘good’ king being force to be kind to all his people. There is real scope for a party of tax collectors trying to enforce a fair tax system ont he rich & powerful of the land.

Chris

By: Walter

Walter — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 21:46:08 +0000

There are inherent conflicts and contradictions in the dnd alignment system, but player interest in ethics and morals might lead them to new questions if not discussions on the relationship between subjects such as war, religion, and propaganda. For instance, is it the nature of an expanding empire to conquer weaker nations? Is there one system of values for the upper class, and another for the servants and foreigners? There is the pickle of a philosophical question of whether acts in the name of god are by definition “good”, even if they are perpetrated against defenseless civilians. Where do hypocrisy and rationalization fit into the moral code? Playing the game with straight use of the alignment system might force the game to take ludicrous turns in a purely fantastical direction, like having the god force a “good” king to be kind to all his people, and rule lawfully, honestly and good. That is quite a fantasy.

By: Chris Tregenza

Chris Tregenza — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 10:31:13 +0000

Joshua The problem with everyone being evil is that if the characters are good or neutral, how can they work for and co-operate with the bulk of the population. Doing so would violate their alignments. In fact staying in the city could be considered a violation of any good alignents. This makes being true to D&D alignments (at least how they are written) incompatible with the setting. Leaving the choice of either making alignments into something new or ditching the whole lot. Chris Chris Tregenza´s last blog post..D&D Dice

By: Joshua

Joshua — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:27:19 +0000

Why would everybody in Rome being Evil be a problem for a campaign? Presumably everybody in the entire Drow civilization is Evil, but nobody bats an eye. I'm not particularly advocating the D&D alignment system, but I just don't see why Protection from Evil being potentially very useful and Detect Evil not at all is a setting breaker. Joshua´s last blog post..Supporting the Old School

By: Zachary

Zachary — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:54:43 +0000

"On the plus side, a necromancer can be the kindest, gentlest soul on the planet who just happens to spend their time playing with dead bodies." I love this line. :) Great post! Zachary´s last blog post..Roaring 20s Cthulhu: The Silver Screen

By: Dead Orcs

Dead Orcs — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:15:04 +0000

Well, I suppose you could make the argument that everyone in Rome was evil. There are biblical scholars who believe the Revelation of John was written in a response to Roman society at the time (and not the doomsday prophesy as many people believe). You can ditch alignment (as it's very codified), but a person's actions will usually be weighted towards one philosophy of living or another. Either you get along benevolently with your fellow creatures, or you do not. I don't believe in absolutes, but I also don't believe that "well, everyone in this society thinks its acceptable, I guess it's not evil". It's a sure bet that the slaves didn't appreciate their lot (although they were helpless to do much about it). When the rules for D&D were first written, there was just Law and Chaos. It's my thought that Gygax and Arneson assumed that order and civilization (Law) were preferable to disorder and anarchy (Chaos). Therefore, one former was "better" than the latter. I don't think it was until the 1st Edition Advanced D&D rules came out was there any real codification of "good" and "evil". Just my random thoughts on the subject...excellent thought provoking post! Dead Orcs´s last blog post..Dead Orcs...Assemble!!

By: bonemaster

bonemaster — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:14:28 +0000

Alignments are one of the few things, I think most people can agree are problematic at times. Any type of historical setting, like the one you presented, make it hard to use the alignment system. The alignment system is what I would call an idealized reality. It is based on more modern concepts of good and evil and applied to all things. I doubt some of the "evil" aligned creatures in DnD would even think that they are evil. As you point out the system is really a tool and mechanic. Without it, you would have to know the point of view of what is good and what is evil for NPC or the NPC that created a magic item. Of course that might be fun as well. I think you could have some nice roleplaying opportunities in such a system/setting. bonemaster´s last blog post..The Art of the GM notebook