That must have been discussed a thousand times, so I'm looking for good answer.

I'm considering a Barsoom-inspired setting ruled by evil religions (e.g., "The Gods of Mars").

There are no good religions; this is dark fantasy.

In this context, I imagined a NPC that very pious and part of a culture that requires human sacrifice.

He follows his deities with zeal but also wants the good of all people everywhere, believing sacrifices make the sun rise, the victims get eternal reward, etc. (in a dark fantasy setting, some of this might even be TRUE!).

What is his alignment?

To avoid current mainstream religions, we could also think of an Aztec setting or something of the sort (I know little about Aztecs, I'm assuming they made sacrifices because I've read it somewhere, correct me if I"m wrong). Could there be pious "good" people that believe in human sacrifice?

What about Spartans killing infants because they htought they were benefiting society? Etc.

The most common answer I got was "lawful evil", but I've got a few neutrals or "LG living in a LE society".

Could the NPC be evil without knowing?

BTW, I realized I was asking a simple answer to Plato's Euthyphro... which has been debated for more than 2000 years.

But since alignment has also been discussed innumerable times, I'd like to hear more opinions.

EDIT: If you've read "The Gods of Mars", the question I posted today is basically "what is Xodar's alignment" when Carter meets him? Does he change alignment or was he good and misguided?

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 02:33:33 PMThat must have been discussed a thousand times, so I'm looking for good answer.

I'm considering a Barsoom-inspired setting ruled by evil religions (e.g., "The Gods of Mars").

There are no good religions; this is dark fantasy.

In this context, I imagined a NPC that very pious and part of a culture that requires human sacrifice.

He follows his deities with zeal but also wants the good of all people everywhere, believing sacrifices make the sun rise, the victims get eternal reward, etc. (in a dark fantasy setting, some of this might even be TRUE!).

What is his alignment?

It depends!

QuoteBTW, I realized I was asking a simple answer to Plato's Euthyphro... which has been debated for more than 2000 years.

Ok, so I think the answer is,do you consider alignment objective or subjective?

If objective, then the societies in question are evil thinking they are doing right.

If subjective, then the traditional D&D alignment system is probably not a good fit for the campaign. You might consider the Palladium categories, or ditching alignment altogether.

The alignment sounds like a modern Marxist Socialist of the woke collegiate variety.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on August 11, 2024, 03:15:13 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 02:33:33 PMBTW, I realized I was asking a simple answer to Plato's Euthyphro... which has been debated for more than 2000 years.

Ok, so I think the answer is,do you consider alignment objective or subjective?

If objective, then the societies in question are evil thinking they are doing right.

If subjective, then the traditional D&D alignment system is probably not a good fit for the campaign. You might consider the Palladium categories, or ditching alignment altogether.

Curiously, the idea of "selfish/unselfish" came to mind. Could be something out of Palladium (which I havent played, only read).

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 02:33:33 PMThat must have been discussed a thousand times, so I'm looking for good answer.

I'm considering a Barsoom-inspired setting ruled by evil religions (e.g., "The Gods of Mars").

There are no good religions; this is dark fantasy.

In this context, I imagined a NPC that very pious and part of a culture that requires human sacrifice.

He follows his deities with zeal but also wants the good of all people everywhere, believing sacrifices make the sun rise, the victims get eternal reward, etc. (in a dark fantasy setting, some of this might even be TRUE!).

What is his alignment?

To avoid current mainstream religions, we could also think of an Aztec setting or something of the sort (I know little about Aztecs, I'm assuming they made sacrifices because I've read it somewhere, correct me if I"m wrong). Could there be pious "good" people that believe in human sacrifice?

What about Spartans killing infants because they htought they were benefiting society? Etc.

The most common answer I got was "lawful evil", but I've got a few neutrals or "LG living in a LE society".

Could the NPC be evil without knowing?

BTW, I realized I was asking a simple answer to Plato's Euthyphro... which has been debated for more than 2000 years.

But since alignment has also been discussed innumerable times, I'd like to hear more opinions.

EDIT: If you've read "The Gods of Mars", the question I posted today is basically "what is Xodar's alignment" when Carter meets him? Does he change alignment or was he good and misguided?

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 05:19:11 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on August 11, 2024, 03:15:13 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 02:33:33 PMBTW, I realized I was asking a simple answer to Plato's Euthyphro... which has been debated for more than 2000 years.

Ok, so I think the answer is,do you consider alignment objective or subjective?

If objective, then the societies in question are evil thinking they are doing right.

If subjective, then the traditional D&D alignment system is probably not a good fit for the campaign. You might consider the Palladium categories, or ditching alignment altogether.

Curiously, the idea of "selfish/unselfish" came to mind. Could be something out of Palladium (which I havent played, only read).

Yeah, Selfish is one of the Palladium alignments. Taking the role of the Neutral D&D alignments, I think.

Chaotic people will generally claim to be rational but it's hard to say whether they believe it because they contradict themselves all the tim.  Evil people will claim to be good and might even believe it.  Good people beat themselves up and wonder if they're good.  Lawful people know they are lawful and will never, ever let you forget it.

The D&D alignment system tends to break down unless it's in that Moorcockian style of cosmology where you have Gods specifically devoted to Law/Chaos/Good/Evil. My preferred way of using the system is for that, and anyone who isn't aligned with those Gods in a metaphysical way is just Neutral.

Using alignment the way most people do, then this situation would still work better with the threefold system rather than the ninefold. I think you could comfortably slot this character into "Lawful" and have it be a natural fit.

Good/Evil is of course more difficult. I often use the good/evil axis as a measure of altruism vs. selfishness, but I don't think you can keep it that simple. I opt for what I guess is a more Aristotelian view, where a "good" person has to exercise multiple virtues in concert with each other. I guess you could say that this character has good intentions, but since they lack the wisdom and/or temperance to see past their religious fervor, they can't rise above Lawful-Neutral.

I still think that pronouncing that kind of binary moral judgment on a character is pointless and unnecessary unless it's tied into the cosmology of the setting. 

I don't know about Barsoom.  The way I usually approach those kind of questions in a setting where I want alignment is to first determine what the "cosmic forces" are in that world to which people can align. 

To use your Spartan example, we've got a conflict between Sparta, Athens, and Thebes as maybe the big movers, with Corinth in there as a spoiler and Persia looming as the big outside threat.

Persia is like aberrations in this setting.  They are this huge empire that can get people to drop alignment spats in order to survive.  Corinth is the other side--willing to be bought out, with money, power, or fame.

Then that leaves 3 "alignments".  You could just call them Sparta, Athens, and Thebes.  That's pretty much the way all the other Greek city state treated it most of the time, aligning with one or the other.  If you want to associate it with traits, then it is roughly something like:

Sparta - promote elites through population control (eugenics), militaristic focus, anti-materialism.

Athens - promote elites through refinement (sophistication or education, depending if you want to be negative or positive about it), citizen focused, wealth through trade.

Thebes - keep the elites off our backs (populism), agricultural focus, land is wealth.

If I want a 3 tier alignment, a character might have alignment: Thebes.  If I want something more complicated and flexible, then focus on the key concepts.  Then a character might have:  Sophisticated, Militaristic, Land (showing someone picking traits from all 3, would come across as "neutral" in many situations.

Quote from: ForgottenF on August 11, 2024, 06:52:03 PMThe D&D alignment system tends to break down unless it's in that Moorcockian style of cosmology where you have Gods specifically devoted to Law/Chaos/Good/Evil. My preferred way of using the system is for that, and anyone who isn't aligned with those Gods in a metaphysical way is just Neutral.

Using alignment the way most people do, then this situation would still work better with the threefold system rather than the ninefold. I think you could comfortably slot this character into "Lawful" and have it be a natural fit.

Good/Evil is of course more difficult. I often use the good/evil axis as a measure of altruism vs. selfishness, but I don't think you can keep it that simple. I opt for what I guess is a more Aristotelian view, where a "good" person has to exercise multiple virtues in concert with each other. I guess you could say that this character has good intentions, but since they lack the wisdom and/or temperance to see past their religious fervor, they can't rise above Lawful-Neutral.

I still think that pronouncing that kind of binary moral judgment on a character is pointless and unnecessary unless it's tied into the cosmology of the setting. 

IIRC Moorcock didn't have good/evil-aligned deities, only law/chaos.

I agree about he binary judgement part. It is tricky and confusing.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 11, 2024, 07:22:50 PMI don't know about Barsoom.  The way I usually approach those kind of questions in a setting where I want alignment is to first determine what the "cosmic forces" are in that world to which people can align. 

To use your Spartan example, we've got a conflict between Sparta, Athens, and Thebes as maybe the big movers, with Corinth in there as a spoiler and Persia looming as the big outside threat.

Persia is like aberrations in this setting.  They are this huge empire that can get people to drop alignment spats in order to survive.  Corinth is the other side--willing to be bought out, with money, power, or fame.

Then that leaves 3 "alignments".  You could just call them Sparta, Athens, and Thebes.  That's pretty much the way all the other Greek city state treated it most of the time, aligning with one or the other.  If you want to associate it with traits, then it is roughly something like:

Sparta - promote elites through population control (eugenics), militaristic focus, anti-materialism.

Athens - promote elites through refinement (sophistication or education, depending if you want to be negative or positive about it), citizen focused, wealth through trade.

Thebes - keep the elites off our backs (populism), agricultural focus, land is wealth.

If I want a 3 tier alignment, a character might have alignment: Thebes.  If I want something more complicated and flexible, then focus on the key concepts.  Then a character might have:  Sophisticated, Militaristic, Land (showing someone picking traits from all 3, would come across as "neutral" in many situations.

This is an interesting take, if alignment is strictly "factions" and not "personality".

This is the crux of the matter, I think; is alignment a "side" or a personality trait?

Can you be "aligned" with evil and still sacrifice yourself for someone your love? Or be so loyal to Evil that you sacrifice yourself for a greater demon? Conversely, someone that hates the evil FACTION but only serves it for self-interest (or to save an innocent relative etc) is the same alignment despite opposite motivations?

I think D&D never quite solved this, and now that I'm writing a setting ruled by demons it becomes even more confusing.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2015/03/on-alignment-part-i-alignment-origins.html

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 08:49:59 PMIIRC Moorcock didn't have good/evil-aligned deities, only law/chaos.

Yeah, I really just meant the idea that the alignments are cosmic principles that have a metaphysical reality to them and agents working consciously in their service. I guess you could potentially put Tolkien in the category of doing that with Good and Evil, though he's nowhere near as explicit about it.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 08:53:35 PMThis is the crux of the matter, I think; is alignment a "side" or a personality trait?

I think for alignment to have the kind of mechanical force it has in D&D, it has to be a "side". Having a "Protection from Selfish Dickheads" spell would be funny but a hassle to adjudicate. Personal preference, but in my games Protection from Evil only works against beings that are in some essential in their very essence.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 11, 2024, 08:53:35 PMThis is the crux of the matter, I think; is alignment a "side" or a personality trait?

Not all opposing factions are the same.  If it's this team or that team (as in most sports), then it's probably just factions or a side.  In fact, the players have more in common with each other than they do with the fans. 

Other factions, picking the faction is a personality trait.  Spartans aren't just another city state.  And even though it often survives in a modern simple sense of "Athens==good, Sparta==bad", that's not the way it was viewed at the time.  And people forget about Thebes altogether.  Yet, at the same time, in the sense of opposing Persia, Sparta was another city state.  So whether something is more side or personality also invokes the sense of scale.

Alignment in the D&D sense is cosmic scale.  In this setting, the universe works that way, with those consequences. It's not, however, required that alignment be cosmic to function in a setting.