A note on the article to follow: Read into "Lawful" the following terms: ordered, regulated, regimented, structured, conforming, obeying, following, supporting, upholding, and so forth. Lawful Evil's laws allow lies that promote the propagation of its ideology. Lawful Good's laws allow for slow death to those who violate its laws, particularly if this will cause repentance. "Neutrality" can mean disinterested as well as uninterested. A disinterested judge, for instance, is to be desired, as a ruling for justice is preferable to that of the letter of the law. Don't be constrained by the denominative terms used to describe alignment, as they are broader than the single word used. Gary Gygax Practical Alignment: Practically Unheard Of! By Randy Richards Lawful Good, Lawful Neutral, Lawful Evil True Neutral, Neutral Good, Neutral Evil Chaotic Good, Chaotic Neutral, Chaotic Evil What do they all mean? We all know the nine alignments used in many role-playing games, but what do these alignments really mean for game play? Does your Chaotic Evil character kill, maim, and violate everyone he meets? Do paladins become obsessed with Lawful Good to the point of impracticality? Does your True Neutral character embody apathy? An alignment tends to ignore those suttle nuances that make an individual complex and deep. Attempting to fix real world images within the context of role playing terminology is problematic. All game representations have to be taken in two dimension, whereas a real person exists in three dimensions. This revelation has given rise to a faction of players who shun the entire alignment system. One example of this simplification, is a typical "strength" score as a rating for a character's body mass and the ability to use it. The human body is much more complex than this, being susceptible to cramps, aches or other disfunctions. The strength could even be unbalanced (a boxer will have stronger arms, a runner stronger legs). This doesn't mean real life analogies are invalid, nor does it imply a DM should chuck the whole system. Imagine a DM telling you "don't bother rolling for your character's strength. Real life muscle systems are much more complex than that, so I don't use it." But this can leave some questions hanging. Can a Lawful Good person steal food if he will starve to death? Can a Chaotic Evil character rescue a drowning infant? How does a DM make these determinations? These are the very questions that have haunted dungeon masters and players alike since the inception of an alignment system. This means we need a more comprehensive definition of alignment that better reflects the practicality of human behavior. In addition, the DM should look at a given behavior in context, and deduce from what he knows, without player input, what the character's motivations must have been. Otherwise, if players can alter the scales with the right argument (perhaps the player is a moral pragmatist), they become "alignment lawyers", barristers for their characters in some unending legal process, and the original purpose of alignment as an unbending and unswayed measure of motivation and personal belief is lost. Remember that Good, Neutral, and Evil are the conflicting goals, but either side can have Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic members seeking these goals. Let's take alignment apart, piece by piece, and see what we find, but remember, there is always an exception to every alignment guideline..... _________________________________________ THE MEANS LAWFUL Considered to be the purview of a "civilized" society, Lawful tends to get a bad rap as "too constrictive" for game play. This perceived hindrance branches from the belief that the definition of Lawfulness be taken in literal context. Too often this extreme manifests itself as a character who becomes a self righteous pest, proclaiming every perceived breach of conduct as a reason to challenge his fellow characters to a fight of honor. It is correct that the extreme of the Lawful individual likes order and organization, seldom desires random determination or gambling, and will obey all laws regardless of seeming insignificance. He will not knowingly tell a lie nor show extremes of emotion, and tends to misunderstand metaphors and other deeper meanings, such as irony. If individuality suffers for the sake of the organization, that is a price worth paying. This radical position, however, is not where Lawful characters should begin. Many definitions of alignment give this fanatical viewpoint to emphasize specific ideals. Indeed, a character who upheld the epitome of the Lawful lifestyle would be hard pressed to function in society, seeing even his closest friends and family as traitors, should they violate the most basic of rules. Like the real world, fantasy world Lawfuls create and enforce laws, rules, and codes of behavior both in government and religion. Even in a social environment there are norms of behavior (i.e. courting a mate, marriage, manners) that indicate our predisposition toward Lawfulness. You can see why the Lawful alignment is hard to pin down - its complexity of definition, and the scope of all it affects, permeates every aspect of society. Although laws change from community to community, the reality that there are laws, does not. It is up to the player to determine how far his character takes this extreme. It is possible for a Lawful character to be a slob, or a jaywalker, or rude and obnoxious. Too often the definition for Lawful is taken to its exaggerated end, and does indeed become "too constrictive". CHAOTIC Too often this alignment has been associated with Evil, or in any event, misconduct. Consistently referred to as the easiest alignment to play, Chaotic attracts a great deal of players. This assumption comes from the belief that "less rules means less restrictions". Though few would argue this, it may surprise you that Chaotics do have restrictions. Unlike Lawfuls, Chaotic characters live by there own rules. An extreme description of this alignment would border on anarchy, but this is not necessarily so. A Chaotic character has his own moral compass that may not conform to the rest of society, or those around him (but he may be very good at hiding this fact). Radically Chaotic creatures will usually follow whatever whim strikes them at the moment, whether beneficial or not. They may appear unreliable, as they view laws, rules, or codes as constricting and unnecessary. They love games of chance, and are likely to enjoy gambling as a form of recreation (an excellent diversion when confronting an intelligent demonic creature "I will wager my soul I can jump through that portal from here...."). It is hard for a character of Chaotic nature to live in groups, since groups have rules of behavior necessary to interact with others, and Chaotic individuals are lacking these interpersonal skills. This is by no means to imply a being of the Chaotic persuasion cannot behave in a civilized manner; he simply doesn't desire it under normal circumstances. In many instances, you'll find Chaotic creatures embracing the philosophy "the end justifies the means". If the group suffers due to individuality, it is a price worth paying for the freedom. Chaos is not necessarily "every man for himself", although it can be. It's more like "live free or die", "think for yourself", or "question authority", but, as usual, not necessarily so. It is possible for a Chaotic character to be neat and tidy, one who is polite, or even suave and sophisticated (like a vampire masquerading as an aristocrat). _______________________________________ STUCK IN THE MIDDLE NEUTRAL Neutral is the most misunderstood alignment, and deserves separate contemplation. Part of the confusion stems from the multiple uses of this alignment in game play. Neutral can be the buffer between Lawful & Chaotic, the partition dividing Good & Evil, or it can be an alignment unto itself. Regardless of which part of alignment it is used for, the definition remains virtually the same. The first category of Neutral is the alignment used for creatures incapable of moral reasoning and acting purely on instinct or programming. Whether animals, golems, zombies, or children, it doesn't matter, their minds are not capable of moral reasoning, and therefore simply "Neutral". The second type of the Neutral alignment (or the "True Neutral" if used by itself) is the philosophical view, the more enlightened version. These creatures believe that balance and moderation are correct, and any unbalancing of power in either direction is wrong. Often characters with this belief are called "fence sitters". A Neutral character is not necessarily an apathetic individual, although he may indeed be so. Neutrality is a state of balance between the forces, whether Law/Chaos or Good/Evil, a balance necessary for the safety of all. This balance may often seem one-sided, as frequently, Neutral characters will align themselves with Lawful and Good characters. This is not a conscious effort on the part of the Neutrals. These characters know what will benefit them, and Chaotic or Evil creatures tend to be destructive and dangerous - something to be avoided if possible. However, if the Neutral character believes a pact with Evil or Chaotic individuals will benefit himself, he has no moral qualms with this arrangement, since ethics are not his concern. True Neutral, the term used for "Neutral Neutral" characters, is considered the ultimate expression of Neutrality. One excellent example of the True Neutral alignment is the druid. His view branches from the standpoint that any attempt to change the world is arrogant and dangerous, because nature is perfect the way it is. If you are Good, you'll soften up, ruining nature's "survival of the fittest". If you are Evil, you may harm yourself or others, as all creatures are ecologically linked. Too Lawful, and you will restrict nature, which must be allowed to evolve and grow. Too Chaotic, and you'll be put back into your place, because no one can escape the laws of nature. Some liken Neutrality as analogous to one of Sigmund Freud's divisions of the psyche, specifically the Ego. The Ego is not only the most dominant division of the psyche, but the mediator between the two extremes (the Id and the Superego). With Neutrality comes the recognition that some personal desire is important, but not with some restraint as well. _______________________________________ THE GOALS EVIL You would think Evil would be the easiest to define, but it is not quite that simple. Although, it should be noted that unless you want implausible game play, the exact definition of Evil should be consistent in every aspect of your game universe. It will be necessary to make a "list of Evil acts" for both DM and players to refer back to, in case of doubt. The DM may allow mitigating circumstances to influence the interpretation of the list, and thus allow a character some leeway, but only in extreme cases. Given a perusal of the many gaming products on the market today, you will find they generally adhere to the following guidelines concerning Evil acts in role playing: Killing an innocent sentient individual Animating undead creatures Conjuring an Evil, or demonic, being Using an Evil magic item, or spell Stealing for selfish reasons (Robin Hoods are OK) Causing unnecessary pain to someone (sadism/torture/rape) Destroying a Good magic item, or spell Unwilling to prevent an Evil act by another, when easily able Knowingly consorting with Evil, or demonic, beings Note that Evil is a subjective term, and characters seldom believe they are Evil, nor do they see their acts as Evil. They are more likely to say they are "right", and you are "wrong". A world on which there is little water may consider "wasting water" an Evil act. Some also liken Evil as synonymous to one of Sigmund Freud's divisions of the psyche, the Id. The Id is ruled by personal desire and need. Personal desire is all important to the Id, and the desires, or torment of others, is of no concern. There are no "Evil morals" just as there are no "Chaotic laws". GOOD This alignment can be even more ambiguous than Evil, but a simple definition might be "empathy". Since creatures are considered born innocent and Good, they remain so unless they commit an Evil act. Having "Evil thoughts", or Evil parents, doesn't make you an Evil person, but Evil acts do. So what is Good, but "not-Evil". However, in antithesis of the Evil list above, and in order to allow those of past Evil to repent, some points can be made, as follows: Protecting an innocent individual, or his property Destroying undead creatures Banishing an Evil, or demonic, being Using a Good magic item, or spell Giving joy or hope to someone Preventing an Evil act Destroying an Evil magic item, or spell Consorting with Good, or angelic, beings Helping others accomplish their goals Good is a subjective term, and must be defined before the players sit down for their first session of role-playing. A world on which undead are revered may consider "animating undead" a Good act. For further contemplation, Good can also be likened as correlating to one of Sigmund Freud's divisions of the psyche, the Superego. The Superego is that which restrains personal desire (the Id). It is the reason there are codes of ethics, such as commandments, that are incorporated into a Good belief system - to restrain instinctual desires, usually for the benefit of the whole. In combination, these alignments simply change the method (Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic) one uses to obtain his goal (Good, Neutral, Evil). A simple example for each alignment combination can vaguely sum them up, for quick reference in a pinch: Lawful Good The Intolerant Paladin "Follow the rules, or you're unacceptable." Neutral Good The Good Samaritan "I'll help you, no matter what they say." Chaotic Good The Freedom Fighter "The end justifies the means." Lawful Neutral The Lawyer "Forget what's right or wrong, talk to me about what is legal." True Neutral The Traitor "No side should gain too much of an upper hand, not even my own." Chaotic Neutral The Con Man "Laws are for those who need them." Lawful Evil The Mob Boss "We're going to play by the rules -- MY rules." Neutral Evil The Opportunistic Merchant "I'll work in the system when it serves me, otherwise I'll work around it." Chaotic Evil The Pirate "That which does no kill me, makes me stronger."
