[MUD-Dev] Alignment...an old view

[Derrick Jones]

All this talk about alignment caused me to back-track to my first RP
exposure to the concept, so I wandered upstairs and dusted off my old
AD&D "Dungeon Masters Guide".  The following text is a slightly trimmed
cut from the book (Author: Gary Gygax, Copyright TSR, all rights reserved,
etc) from the section 'Alignment':
{{my comments are double braced}}

---

Alignment describes the broad ethos of thinking, reasoning creatures -
those unintelligent sorts being placed within the neutral area because
they are totally uncaring. {{Closer to the point, they don't know any
better.  Can't blame a fox for eating rabbits...}}  Note that alignment
does not necessarily dictate religious persuasion, although many religious
beliefs will dictate alignment.  {{snipped short bit about alignment
languages}} The overal behavior of the character (or creature) is
delineated by alignment, or, in the case of player characters, behavior
determines actual alignment.  {{alignment is both a cause and an effect of
actions}}  Therfore, besides defining the general tendencies of creatures,
it also groups creatures into mutually acceptable or at leat non-hostile
divisions.  This is not to say that similarily aligned creatures cannot be
apposed or even mortal enemies.  Two nations, for example, with rulers of
lawful good alignment can be at war.  Bands of orcs can hate each other.
But the former would possibly cease their war to appose a massive invasion
of orcs, just as the latter would mae common cause against the lawful good
men.  Thus alignment descibes the world view of creatures and helps to
define what their actions, reactions, and purposes will be.  It likewise
causes a player character to choose an ethos which is appropriate to his
or her profession, and alignment also aids players in the definition and
role approach of their respective game personae.  With the usefulness of
alignment determined, definition of the divisions is necessary.

{{Hrm...Perhaps with the absence of the orcs (pure evil), the good rulers
would soon begin to bicker then war with each other, as the small
differences in the perceived goodness of the other is magnified without an
extreme comparison.  Reminds me of the old debate whether good or evil can
exist without the other.}}

_Major_Divisions_

There are two major divisions of four opposite points of view.  All four
are not mutually exclusive, although each pair is mutually apposed.
{{Good, Evil, Law, Chaos}}

_Law_And_Chaos:  The opposition here is between organized groups and
individuals.  That is, law dictates that order and organization is
necessary and desirable, while chaos holds the opposite view.  Law
generally supports the group as more important than the individual, while
chaos promotes the individual over the group.

{{Its interesting to watch modern day politics in this light.  Left Wing
(chaos) vs Right Wing (law).  This is typically the order vs freedom
debate.  Gun control laws here in the States are a perfect example of
this, once you've stripped the issue of its politics.}}

_Good_And_Evil:  Basically stated, the tenets of good are human rights, or
in the case of AD&D, creature rights.  Each creature is entitled to life,
relative freedom, and the prospect of happiness.  Cruelty and suffering
are undesirable.  Evil, on the other hand, does not concern itself with
rights or happiness; purpose is the determinant.

There can never exist a lawful chaos or an evil good. These, and their
reverses, are dichotomous.  This is not to say that they connot exist in
the same character or creature if it is insane or controlled by another
entity, but as general divisions they are mutually exclusive parts.
Consider also the alignment graph.  If law is apposed to chaos, and good
to evil, then the radically apposed alignments are lawful neutral -
chaotic neutral, neutral good - neutral evil, lawful good - chaotic evil,
and lawful evil - chaotic good.  Lawful groups might, for example, combine
to put down some chaotic threat, for example, just as readily as good
groups would combine to suppress some powerful evil.  Basic understanding
and agreement, however, is within the general specific alignment, i.e. one
of those nine catagories.  These are defined as follows:

_NEUTRALITY_:  Absolute, or true, neural creatures view everything which
exists as an intergral, necessary part or function of the entire cosmos.
Each thing exists as part of the whole, one as a check or balance to the
other, with life necessary for death, happiness for suffering, good for
evil, order for chaos, and vice versa.  Nothing must ever become
predominant or out of balance.  Within this naturalistic ethos, humankind
serves a role also, just as al creatures do.  They may be more or less
important, but the eutral does not concern himself or herself with these
considerations except where it is positively determined that the balance
is threatened.  Absolute neutrality is in the center or fulcrum position
quite loically, as the neutral sees all other aligments as parts of a
necessary whole.  This alignment is the narrowlest in scope.

{{Its very difficult to play a true neutral well...balance is such a
relative thing with alignments}}

_NEUTRAL_GOOD_:  Creature of this alignment see the cosmos as a place
where law and chaos are merely tools to use in the bringing of life,
happiness, and prosperity to all deserving creatures.  Order is not good
unless it brings this to all; neither is randomness and total freedom
desirable if it does not bring such good.

_NEUTRAL_EVIL_:  Similar to the neutral good alignmnt, that of neutral
evil holds that neither groups nor individuals have great meaning.  This
ethos holds that seeking to promote weal for all actually brings woe to
the truly deserving.  Natural forces which are meant to cull out the weak
and stupid are artificially suppressed by so-called good, and the fittest
are wrongfully held back, so whatever means are expedient can be used by
the powerful to gain and maintain their dominance, without concern for
anything.

{{Warning labels not to use the hair dryer in the shower would be a good
example of preventing the weeding out of stupid people.  Imagine how easy
the comute to work would be if morons would be denied drivers liscenes.}}

_LAWFUL_GOOD_:  Creatures of lawful good alignment view the cosmos with
varying degrees of lawfulness or desire for good.  They are convinced that
order and law are absolutely necessary to assure good, and that good is
best defined as whatever brings the most benifit to the greater number of
decent, thinking {{, voting}} creatures and the least woe to the rest.

{{Karl Marx was lawful good...think about the bad rep he's gotten...}}

_LAWFUL_NEUTRAL_:  It is the view of this alignment that law and order
give purpose and meaning to everything.  Without regimentation and strict
definition, there would be no purpose in the cosmos.  Therefore, whether a
law is good or evil is of no import as long as it brings order and
meaning.

{{A place for everyone and everyone in their place.  The stereotypical CIA
agent would be a perfect example of a lawful neutral.  Also, LN characters
make _very_ good soldiers, allbeit anal retentive ones...}}

_LAWFUL_EVIL_:  Obviously, all order is not good, nor are all laws
benificial.  Lawful evil creatures consider order as the means by which
each group is properly placed in the cosmos, from lowest to highest,
strongest first, weakest last.  Good is seen as an excuse to promote the
mediocrity of the whole and suppress the better and more capable, while
lawful evilness allows each group to structure itself and fix its place as
compared to others, serving the stronger but being served by the weaker.

{{The Borg are LE creatures.  I would also personally add that LE
creatures feel that there is strength in organization and see order as a
means to better the positions of the truly deserving creatures.}}

_CHAOTIC_GOOD_:  To the chaotic good individual, freedom and independence
are as important to life and happiness.  The ethos views this freedom as
the only means by which each creature can achieve true satisfation and
happiness.  Law, order, social forms, and anything else which tends to
restrict or abridge individual freedom is wrong, and each individual is
capable of achieving self-realization and prosperity through himself,
herself, or itself.

{{Flower Power!!!}}

_CHAOTIC_NEUTRAL_: This view of the cosmos holds that absolute freedom is
necessary.  Whether the individual exercises such freedoms chooses to good
or evil is of no concern.  After all, life itself is law and order, so
death is a desirable end.  Therfore, life can only be justified as tool by
which order is combatted, and in the end it too will pass into entropy.

{{anarchists}}

_CHAOTIC_EVIL_: {{a.k.a. mother-in-laws}}  The chaotic evil creature holds
that individual freedom and choice is important, and that other
individuals and their freedoms are unimportant if they cannot be held by
the individuals through their own strength and merit.  Thus, law and order
tends to promote not individuals but groups, and groups suppress 
individual volition and success.

{{CE creatures are very difficult to control unless you can 'break' them.
This is also the creedo that many hardcore Pk-ers live by.  A CE creature
can rationalize killing you with the explaination that you had no right to
breathe its air.}}

Each of these cases for alignments is, of course, stated rather
simplistically and ideally, for philisophical and moral reasonings are
completely subjective according to the acculteration of the individual.
You, as Dungeon Master, must establish the meanings and boundries of law
and order as apposed to chaos and anarchy, as well as any divisions
between right and good as apposed to hurtful and evil.  Lawful societies
will tend to be highly structured and rigid, well-policed and bureaucratic
hierachical.  Class, rank, position, and precedence will be important, so
they will be strictly defined and adhered to.  On the other hand, chaotic
areas will have little government, acknowledging leaders as equals serving
those who allowed them to assume leadership.  Obedience and service in a
chaotic society is given only by those desiring to do so, or by dint of
some persuasion, never by requirement.


----End cut ---

Whew...that was rather long.

I tried to keep my own comments to a mimimum.  I just wanted to toss out
an older accepted view of how to treat alignments.  I was particually
impressed by the bit of logic defending evil.  Most places treat evil as
the creature accepting that what they do is wrong, but simply not caring,
or getting a perverse rush out of the suffering of others.

derrick