So .. this is slightly whack, but the thought occurred to me, and now I bring it onto you:
For each alignment, which type of government or style of rule do you feel is most fitting? Some feel fairly simple - a straight up authoriative dictatorship would be Lawful Evil, right? Lawful good might be a meritocrary.
But give me your opinion: What are the ideal systems of government for each alignment =)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
This is rapidly going to splatter against the wall of "nobody actually agrees what the alignments mean". That said:
Authoritarian dictatorships are, in the real world, not Lawful by most definitions of the term. When what the rules are depends ultimately on the whims of one person, much less the more accurate version of "one person, plus whoever you're currently interacting with", that's not a recipe for order.
In regards to the post though, you also have to factor in religion in to a lot of forms of government as theocracies or rigid cast systems might scew the alignment chart a bit. Indutstrial countries might be more lawful as companies seek to make rigid laws to enable them to expand, buy out competition, enforce working hours etc. I think meritocracies might be a bit more chaotic due to the competition aspect.
As the above YouGov poll indicates there is always a portion of a country that make up small and sometimes loud groups that might influence a political system so any form of government is more likely to be a chaotic affair where no one form of "alignment" fully takes hold.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
* Need a character idea? Search for "Rob76's Unused" in the Story and Lore section.
What's going on?! I didn't ask anything about the real world. I think that's not even allowed. The real world doesn't have alignments.
Also, if we're going down that road, your real world 'alignment' isn't decided by what you think or say or opine - it's defined by your actions, and charity doesn't count. By that standard, basically everyone ever is neutral. At best.
Now, back to our scheduled fantasy program! I don't need anyone to agree on what alignments would give birth to which systems of government, I'm not looking for consensus. I just want opinions. Yours is as good as mine, this is all make-believe. There are no true or false answers.
A small note on Lawful: To my mind (again, everyone has their own), Lawful doesn't have anything to do with obeying the law as written. Lawful in the context of alignment is either that - adherence to the word of the written law - or it's basically the opposite, corruption so ingrained in the system as to be a law unto itself. Like, Lawful Good would be the former, and Lawful Evil would be the latter. You might say, when the written law doesn't apply, then the Lawful alignment doesn't have anything to do with the text, but only with practice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Gnomes are typically good, and equally likely to be chaotic as lawful, in my mind. A *gnomarchy*, on the other hand, would surely be a chaotic fun society.
Generally speaking, it would be hard to come up with a chaotic system of governance, though one could consider a more free form, common law sort of system without a guiding document. Maybe a Bioshock-style anarcho-capitalist system would be chaotic, but the game's designers made clear how they think that would go.
Gnomes are typically good, and equally likely to be chaotic as lawful, in my mind. A *gnomarchy*, on the other hand, would surely be a chaotic fun society.
Generally speaking, it would be hard to come up with a chaotic system of governance, though one could consider a more free form, common law sort of system without a guiding document. Maybe a Bioshock-style anarcho-capitalist system would be chaotic, but the game's designers made clear how they think that would go.
I never agree with the books. To my mind, gnomes would typically be chaotic, and equally likely to be good or evil, but leaning mostly to neutral. They are also, quietly and below radar the most magical race of the available player races (which, in my games, is a much lower number than in the rules in general).
I think most tribal or nomadic cultures would be said to be chaotic - with very few laws other than do as the chief says, don't steal, and only kill those the chief says to kill. Or something on that order. These are imaginary tribal nomadic cultures, so no slight to real world highly organised, legally rigid tribal communities.
You mention anarcho-capitalist, a friend of mine really likes the concept of anarcho-syndicalist (ironically, cause it's literally a contradiction in terms), and there are various other types of hands-off, laissez-faire theoretical systems that one might argue. I like goblin-dom as a chaotic magocracy, with little sorcerer kings crawling over each others charred remains for the title of Goblin Overlord.
But that's a failing of the alignment system. As hard as it is to imagine a chaotic society, it's equally hard to imagine a lawful one. At least .... see, my premise is that human societies in general are sort of middling. We have rules and laws - here, where I live, we have a near-literal world record in rules and laws - but there's still chaos and corruption hiding in all the little cracks and crevices. So a truly Lawful society would need to be truly draconian to work.
Some guy stole literally hundreds of billions of our glorious currency in imaginary tax returns. Like, that's chaos in it's purest form: He just sent in tax return papers for trades that never happened. And your dollar monies are valued at - after all - only 6 times our crowns. Just imagine: No one noticed. For years on end. And when they did, they still had to like, scramble to stop it. Wasn't even a particularly Danish problem, it happened all across the EU. Laughable, in the most law bound part of the world.
That's a real world reference, but I'm hoping the legality of theft isn't ... too controversial.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I never agree with the books. To my mind, gnomes would typically be chaotic, and equally likely to be good or evil, but leaning mostly to neutral. They are also, quietly and below radar the most magical race of the available player races (which, in my games, is a much lower number than in the rules in general).
Ach, this depends on so many things. In D&D lore, gnomes place a high value on cooperation, suggesting lawfulness, but also a premium on creativity, which is somewhat chaotic. The patron god of gnomes, Garl Glittergold, is LG despite showing both of these tendencies.
Ach, this depends on so many things. In D&D lore, gnomes place a high value on cooperation, suggesting lawfulness, but also a premium on creativity, which is somewhat chaotic. The patron god of gnomes, Garl Glittergold, is LG despite showing both of these tendencies.
As much as I hate the tinker gnomes of Dragonlance (and everything else about Dragonlance), they are the model for my gnomes - or, that's unprecise, my gnomes are a mix of the gnomes of Dragonlance, minus the comic relief, and the Gnomes of Eberron, immaculately dressed little business people brimming with engineering and magic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Back to the OP, the 3.5 DMG has some guidance on how alignment interacts with local governance based on who holds the power. They have this to say:
Lawful Good: A community with a lawful good power center usually has a codified set of laws, and most people willingly obey those laws. Neutral Good: A neutral good power center rarely influences the residents of the community other than to help them when they are in need. Chaotic Good: This sort of power center influences the community by helping the needy and opposing restrictions on freedom. Lawful Neutral: A community with a lawful neutral power center has a codified set of laws that are followed to the letter. Those in power usually insist that visitors (as well as residents) obey all local rules and regulations. True Neutral: This sort of power center rarely influences the community. Those in power prefer to pursue their private goals. Chaotic Neutral: This sort of power center is unpredictable, influencing the community in different ways at different times. Lawful Evil: A community with a lawful evil power center usually has a codified set of laws, which most people obey out of fear of harsh punishment. Neutral Evil: The residents of a community with a neutral evil power center are usually oppressed and subjugated, facing a dire future. Chaotic Evil: The residents of a community with a chaotic evil power center live in abject fear because of the unpredictable and horrific situations continually placed upon them.
Back to the OP, the 3.5 DMG has some guidance on how alignment interacts with local governance based on who holds the power. They have this to say:
Lawful Good: A community with a lawful good power center usually has a codified set of laws, and most people willingly obey those laws. Neutral Good: A neutral good power center rarely influences the residents of the community other than to help them when they are in need. Chaotic Good: This sort of power center influences the community by helping the needy and opposing restrictions on freedom. Lawful Neutral: A community with a lawful neutral power center has a codified set of laws that are followed to the letter. Those in power usually insist that visitors (as well as residents) obey all local rules and regulations. True Neutral: This sort of power center rarely influences the community. Those in power prefer to pursue their private goals. Chaotic Neutral: This sort of power center is unpredictable, influencing the community in different ways at different times. Lawful Evil: A community with a lawful evil power center usually has a codified set of laws, which most people obey out of fear of harsh punishment. Neutral Evil: The residents of a community with a neutral evil power center are usually oppressed and subjugated, facing a dire future. Chaotic Evil: The residents of a community with a chaotic evil power center live in abject fear because of the unpredictable and horrific situations continually placed upon them.
And this is why I ask the question. Because these are obviously all wrong. Or maybe not, but they are very clearly highly debatable.
A lawful good society would be a terrifying and frustrating place to live for anyone of chaotic anything alignment. Rules for everything, strictly enforced, propably with harsh and rigid laws and punishments.
Conversely, we view chaotic evil societies as the worst of the worst - but really, I could argue that the vikings lived in a chaotic evil society: They had very few laws, kept slaves, and raided their better-off neighbors for gold, food and anything else they could drag down to the longboats. And yet - and yet - some might argue that viking society might be a better place to live than a lawful good nation like ... say, Demacia. If you're familiar with that place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So .. this is slightly whack, but the thought occurred to me, and now I bring it onto you:
For each alignment, which type of government or style of rule do you feel is most fitting? Some feel fairly simple - a straight up authoriative dictatorship would be Lawful Evil, right? Lawful good might be a meritocrary.
But give me your opinion: What are the ideal systems of government for each alignment =)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
This is rapidly going to splatter against the wall of "nobody actually agrees what the alignments mean". That said:
Authoritarian dictatorships are, in the real world, not Lawful by most definitions of the term. When what the rules are depends ultimately on the whims of one person, much less the more accurate version of "one person, plus whoever you're currently interacting with", that's not a recipe for order.
A slight tangent but YouGov did a poll on the UK population to determine the countries alignment, link here to the results:
https://yougov.co.uk/society/articles/21586-dungeons-and-dragons-one-three-britons-are-neutral?redirect_from=/news/2018/09/21/dungeons-and-dragons-one-three-britons-are-neutral/
TLDR: We're mostly (31%) Neutral Good.
In regards to the post though, you also have to factor in religion in to a lot of forms of government as theocracies or rigid cast systems might scew the alignment chart a bit. Indutstrial countries might be more lawful as companies seek to make rigid laws to enable them to expand, buy out competition, enforce working hours etc. I think meritocracies might be a bit more chaotic due to the competition aspect.
As the above YouGov poll indicates there is always a portion of a country that make up small and sometimes loud groups that might influence a political system so any form of government is more likely to be a chaotic affair where no one form of "alignment" fully takes hold.
What's going on?! I didn't ask anything about the real world. I think that's not even allowed. The real world doesn't have alignments.
Also, if we're going down that road, your real world 'alignment' isn't decided by what you think or say or opine - it's defined by your actions, and charity doesn't count. By that standard, basically everyone ever is neutral. At best.
Now, back to our scheduled fantasy program! I don't need anyone to agree on what alignments would give birth to which systems of government, I'm not looking for consensus. I just want opinions. Yours is as good as mine, this is all make-believe. There are no true or false answers.
A small note on Lawful: To my mind (again, everyone has their own), Lawful doesn't have anything to do with obeying the law as written. Lawful in the context of alignment is either that - adherence to the word of the written law - or it's basically the opposite, corruption so ingrained in the system as to be a law unto itself. Like, Lawful Good would be the former, and Lawful Evil would be the latter. You might say, when the written law doesn't apply, then the Lawful alignment doesn't have anything to do with the text, but only with practice.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Gnomes are typically good, and equally likely to be chaotic as lawful, in my mind. A *gnomarchy*, on the other hand, would surely be a chaotic fun society.
Generally speaking, it would be hard to come up with a chaotic system of governance, though one could consider a more free form, common law sort of system without a guiding document. Maybe a Bioshock-style anarcho-capitalist system would be chaotic, but the game's designers made clear how they think that would go.
I never agree with the books. To my mind, gnomes would typically be chaotic, and equally likely to be good or evil, but leaning mostly to neutral. They are also, quietly and below radar the most magical race of the available player races (which, in my games, is a much lower number than in the rules in general).
I think most tribal or nomadic cultures would be said to be chaotic - with very few laws other than do as the chief says, don't steal, and only kill those the chief says to kill. Or something on that order. These are imaginary tribal nomadic cultures, so no slight to real world highly organised, legally rigid tribal communities.
You mention anarcho-capitalist, a friend of mine really likes the concept of anarcho-syndicalist (ironically, cause it's literally a contradiction in terms), and there are various other types of hands-off, laissez-faire theoretical systems that one might argue. I like goblin-dom as a chaotic magocracy, with little sorcerer kings crawling over each others charred remains for the title of Goblin Overlord.
But that's a failing of the alignment system. As hard as it is to imagine a chaotic society, it's equally hard to imagine a lawful one. At least .... see, my premise is that human societies in general are sort of middling. We have rules and laws - here, where I live, we have a near-literal world record in rules and laws - but there's still chaos and corruption hiding in all the little cracks and crevices. So a truly Lawful society would need to be truly draconian to work.
Some guy stole literally hundreds of billions of our glorious currency in imaginary tax returns. Like, that's chaos in it's purest form: He just sent in tax return papers for trades that never happened. And your dollar monies are valued at - after all - only 6 times our crowns. Just imagine: No one noticed. For years on end. And when they did, they still had to like, scramble to stop it. Wasn't even a particularly Danish problem, it happened all across the EU. Laughable, in the most law bound part of the world.
That's a real world reference, but I'm hoping the legality of theft isn't ... too controversial.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Ach, this depends on so many things. In D&D lore, gnomes place a high value on cooperation, suggesting lawfulness, but also a premium on creativity, which is somewhat chaotic. The patron god of gnomes, Garl Glittergold, is LG despite showing both of these tendencies.
As much as I hate the tinker gnomes of Dragonlance (and everything else about Dragonlance), they are the model for my gnomes - or, that's unprecise, my gnomes are a mix of the gnomes of Dragonlance, minus the comic relief, and the Gnomes of Eberron, immaculately dressed little business people brimming with engineering and magic.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Back to the OP, the 3.5 DMG has some guidance on how alignment interacts with local governance based on who holds the power. They have this to say:
And this is why I ask the question. Because these are obviously all wrong. Or maybe not, but they are very clearly highly debatable.
A lawful good society would be a terrifying and frustrating place to live for anyone of chaotic anything alignment. Rules for everything, strictly enforced, propably with harsh and rigid laws and punishments.
Conversely, we view chaotic evil societies as the worst of the worst - but really, I could argue that the vikings lived in a chaotic evil society: They had very few laws, kept slaves, and raided their better-off neighbors for gold, food and anything else they could drag down to the longboats. And yet - and yet - some might argue that viking society might be a better place to live than a lawful good nation like ... say, Demacia. If you're familiar with that place.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.