Explaining Aligniment

[EvilElitest]

Well my thesis in my essay was that good and evil aren't right and wrong so much as too opposing forces that envelope everything.  But the titles good and evil fit the label just as well as any other name, and considering the theme of each i think they are quite apporate.  True i'm bias because i agree generally with the morality of the D&D good, as i reject utilitarianism, but within the context of D&d the them fits.  Techinically speaking "Good" is in fact three seperate forces, Good/Evil, Negative/Positive, Holy/Unholy, with Law/Chaos being thrown in.  But the thing is, good and evil will always been hard to define, but i'd rather have them named absolute than say right or wrong.  It also figts the general themes of D&D, so i wouldn't argue semantics
from
EE

[Steerpike]

I see what you mean, and you're right about those names/forces fitting DnD's themes.  I suppose I just don't find those themes appealing.

[Scholar]

just to throw in my 2cp as a late comer:
EE, i have a hard time understanding your point. when good and evil are absolute, und you split it down into law/chaos, positive/negative (i suppose you mean planar energy) and good evil, what exactly is the good choice in the first two cases?
in dnd terms, there are such things as evil positive energy beings. there are lawful good entities that would snuff out humanity for being untidy (gotta love the inevitables, right?).
those beings, most of the time are what we would call "divine". do you submit to them? are we beholden to arbitrary judgement? if i was to say "i want to lead a good life" and the end of said life i'm being told that i haven't and someone(thing) points out where i failed - okay. that i understand. but if some higher concept judges me by standards i never agreed to adhere to, i feel a bit, well, cheated? "you just lost the game" "what game?" "asking means losing it." "WTF?"
of course, there are somethings that are universal, even for me. "do not kill, do not rape, etc." this falls under "do unto others" at least in my opinion. i know, i'm talking about christianity here, which is always difficult in an rpg context, but it is our benchmark for good and evil, at least where i live. but using the ten commandments as "good" what does it make me, when i say "one through five... yeah, mostly. six is no choice, imo, but the rest? hm... i guess that makes me 6/4." so i'm good-ish. or am i evil? neutral? can i quantify my goodness?
what about nr 6 in specific? "you shall not murder." okay. does that aply to murdering things that don't agree with the rest of the rules? no, it doesn't. killing infidels is a-okay, bellum iustum all the way. there goes the absolute moral.
gorram, now i have a headache. and violated nr 3.

@ur-topic: your essay is a good read, except for my aforementioned troubles. and some typos. ;)

[Steerpike]

I pretty much agree with all your points, Scholar.[blockquote=Scholar]of course, there are somethings that are universal, even for me. "do not kill, do not rape, etc."[/blockquote]It's interesting that you mention the ten commandments later... has anyone else noticed that any prohibition against rape, one of those now universal things (though I suppose far from universal a few thousands years ago) is conspicuously absent from the ten commandments?  Not making a point (and not trying to disturb anyone's religious beliefs!), just always struck me as a little odd when judged from the modern context (especially when people start citing the commandments today as a set of moral tenets).

[Nomadic]

I pretty much agree with all your points, Scholar.[blockquote=Scholar]of course, there are somethings that are universal, even for me. "do not kill, do not rape, etc."[/blockquote]It's interesting that you mention the ten commandments later... has anyone else noticed that any prohibition against rape, one of those now universal things (though I suppose far from universal a few thousands years ago) is conspicuously absent from the ten commandments?  Not making a point (and not trying to disturb anyone's religious beliefs!), just always struck me as a little odd when judged from the modern context (especially when people start citing the commandments today as a set of moral tenets).

Just a minor nitpick to throw out but... While the "ten commandments" themselves don't contain a do not rape command. Other parts of the Law of Moses do have sections on forbidding rape (and what is to be done to rapists).

[Steerpike]

Fair enough.  Just always struck me as odd that in a list of the big 10, coveting your neighbor's wife (i.e. not even actual physical adultery, but even just contemplating adultery) takes priority over non-consensual sex, as does not keeping the Sabbath holy or taking the Lord's name in vain.  If the 10 are intended as like the most vital, never-break-these Rules (which usually they seem to be), it seems that saying "Goddamn it" or fantasizing about your neighbor's hot wife makes it to the list whereas forcing yourself on someone sexually doesn't.  *Shrug*

I'd better not start poking holes in the Bible though or I'll never stop, and I'll end up offending people... caused enough trouble on this thread already.

[Scholar]

Just always struck me as odd that in a list of the big 10, coveting your neighbor's wife (i.e. not even actual physical adultery, but even just contemplating adultery) takes priority over non-consensual sex, as does not keeping the Sabbath holy or taking the Lord's name in vain.  If the 10 are intended as like the most vital, never-break-these Rules (which usually they seem to be), it seems that saying "Goddamn it" or fantasizing about your neighbor's hot wife makes it to the list whereas forcing yourself on someone sexually doesn't.  *Shrug*

i always thought rape fell under the "no adultery" bullet point. of course, you *can* rape your spouse, but in the sctrict blood's-up-after-battle-rape sense, you are with someone that you are not married to -> adultery.
also, i must apologize for turning a discussion over a game into a discussion of real-life belief. i don't see myself as a mute, obedient subject of the dominant moral discourse, but i respect other peoples' point of view. for me, at the end of the day, the first rule is not doing something to others that i wouldn't accept them doing to me. trickery is excempt from this, as it is a matter of skill. and i'm good at it. ;)

[Steerpike]

Well, the commandment specifically states that "You shall not covet your neighbour's house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour," (New Revised Version).  It's a prohibition against coveting someone else's property, which included spouses in that time; the wife thing is lumped in with oxen, slaves, etc.  It doesn't say "thou shalt not lie with thy neighbor's wife," or actually prohibit rape.  You could make the argument that by extrapolation the commandment frowns on rape, but its emphasis is on property rather than something as new-fangled as human rights or the idea of consent.  As Nomadic pointed out, though, some of the other laws in other parts of the Bible (I'm guessing Duetoronomy but its been a long time since I read those sections) do specifically single out rape as wrong... but the commandments themselves don't go there per se.

I agree that the golden rule is a good rule to live by, and that trickery is fun ;).

[Scholar]

so, in a world governed by absolutes, is this what happens when you stray from the path:

Connor: Now you will receive us.
Murphy: We do not ask for your poor, or your hungry.
Connor: We do not want your tired and sick.
Murphy: It is your corrupt we claim.
Connor: It is your evil that will be sought by us.
Murphy: With every breath we shall hunt them down.
Connor: Each day, we will spill their blood till it rains down from the skies.
Murphy: Do not kill, do not rape, do not steal, these are principles which every man of every faith can embrace.
Connor: These are not polite suggestions, these are codes of behavior and those of you that ignore them will pay the dearest cost.
Murphy: There are varying degrees of evil, we urge you lesser forms of filth not to push the bounds and cross over, into true corruption, into our domain.
Connor: For if you do, one day you will look behind you and you will see we three. And on that day, you will reap it.
Murphy: And we will send you to whatever god you wish.
Connor, Murphy, Il Duce: And shepherds we shall be, for Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee, and teeming with souls shall it ever be.
Il Duce: In nomine Patri.
Connor: Et Fili.
Murphy: Et Spiritus Sancti.
[*BLAM*]

this impressive scene (from boondock saints) is what always comes to my mind when i hear "lawful good" and "paladin". do you guys agree?

[LordVreeg]

Fair enough.  Just always struck me as odd that in a list of the big 10, coveting your neighbor's wife (i.e. not even actual physical adultery, but even just contemplating adultery) takes priority over non-consensual sex, as does not keeping the Sabbath holy or taking the Lord's name in vain.  If the 10 are intended as like the most vital, never-break-these Rules (which usually they seem to be), it seems that saying "Goddamn it" or fantasizing about your neighbor's hot wife makes it to the list whereas forcing yourself on someone sexually doesn't.  *Shrug*

I'd better not start poking holes in the Bible though or I'll never stop, and I'll end up offending people... caused enough trouble on this thread already.

This thread has caused me to say, "Enough, already!" more than any thread in months.

I know alignment has a place in many games, and does not in others.  

Once we start debating morality in this mud ball we actually live on, that's not about alignment any more.