As a mental exercise I have decided to take the two axes of alignment and reframe them in a morally ambiguous manner inspired by Stormbringer and Nine Worlds. The alignments of good, evil, law and chaos translate respectively to Nine World's urges of cosmos, chaos, order and discord.
Cosmos is essentially good and neutral, or at least the side trying to keep the universe hospitable to life, but isn't perfect and often makes questionable decisions. It's the cosmic balance from Stormbringer.
Order and Discord are as they are in Stormbringer, being extremes that are insane by human standards and hostile to life as we know it, but they genuinely believe they're the good guys and aren't out to cause pointless suffering (that would be Chaos).
The new Chaos is the closest thing to evil, I suppose, as it includes lots of destruction, demons and paradoxes. Some of its adherents are pitiable, even heroes in their own right. Examples of this would be the "god hates orcs" meme whereby inflicting suffering is framed as an act of compassion, or the Infernum setting's demons that must feed on the suffering of damned souls to survive.
The addition of a fourth faction is less elegant compared to a two or three faction model, but that's the challenge of the exercise. Advice? Critique?
I think you want to stick with moral ambiguity, you should just keep the original Chaos, Law, and Neutrality. While it's true that Chaos was almost always regarded as "evil", it wasn't necessarily the case (as with law and good). By adding a clearly evil Chaos (discord as you call it) you're taking away that ambiguity for chaos only, while leaving it in for neutrality or law.
I agree. This doesnt really add anything and just muddies an allready contested setup.
Quote from: JeremyR;959848I think you want to stick with moral ambiguity, you should just keep the original Chaos, Law, and Neutrality. While it's true that Chaos was almost always regarded as "evil", it wasn't necessarily the case (as with law and good). By adding a clearly evil Chaos (discord as you call it) you're taking away that ambiguity for chaos only, while leaving it in for neutrality or law.
Chaos and Discord are two different things in this scheme. It is the same difference between Nazi Germany and the Fair Folk.
Quote from: Omega;959849I agree. This doesnt really add anything and just muddies an allready contested setup.
It is identical to the four cosmic factions from Mage. It seems to work fine there?
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;959853Chaos and Discord are two different things in this scheme. It is the same difference between Nazi Germany and the Fair Folk.
It is identical to the four cosmic factions from Mage. It seems to work fine there?
It doesn't seem like you actually want any input or criticism.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;959839Advice? Critique?
Err don't have alignments?
Describe your setup as if you existed within the setting. Don't worry about pegging it to axes or scales.
Quote from: estar;959855Err don't have alignments?
Describe your setup as if you existed within the setting. Don't worry about pegging it to axes or scales.
This. I've run games with no alignments at all. Actions have consequences. If you want to do something morally ambiguous, you better be smart and not get caught or at the very least, leave no witnesses.
Sorry Box Canyon hit the wrong button and wound up editting your post. Not sure how to get back to your original. I will pay better attention next time. I restored what I quoted.
Rob Conley
=====================
The formians want to enslave everyone to the hive because this free will thing is too painful and destructive. The discordians think everyone would be happier with anarchy and subjective reality. The demons feast on our suffering and taxidermy our souls into furniture. The angels and druids want to stop all that nonsense.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;959839As a mental exercise I have decided to take the two axes of alignment and reframe them in a morally ambiguous manner
I'm really not sure what this even means.
The AD&D 1st Ed 9 alignment system had defined law as promoting the group as necessary to achieve great things, chaos as promoting the individual first and foremost. Good was defined as a respect for "human rights" enumerated as entitlement to life, relative freedom, and the prospect of happiness, whereas evil is NOT simply a mirror image of good but rather for evil purpose is determinant. The purpose or goal of an evil character might even be of noble and moral quality or altruistic in nature--making sure everyone has plenty to eat, for example. What makes it evil is the character places that goal above and beyond the three enumerated human rights.
Within this framework, there is PLENTY of moral ambiguity. As mentioned, an evil's purpose may itself be a noble one but will ultimately conflict with human rights. For a Good character during a quarantine, there is the question of whether persons can be held prisoner or cast into exile just for being the victim of some illness. Law & Chaos definitions given don't strike me as addressing moral concerns at all.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;960190The formians want to enslave everyone to the hive because this free will thing is too painful and destructive. The discordians think everyone would be happier with anarchy and subjective reality. The demons feast on our suffering and taxidermy our souls into furniture. The angels and druids want to stop all that nonsense.
Sounds like a good starting point to me. Remember when it comes to people it about the culture that surrounds a philosphy and/or religion. The religion/philosophy may have b/w lines but culture that surrounds it will be very fuzzy at the edges and possibly incorporating elements from other philosophies and religions.
To be clear what I am talking about for the purpose of a tabletop roleplaying campaign culture is about how people interact with each other and why. It useful to know because it provides a baseline for roleplaying NPCs from that culture. But remember it is a baseline the NPCs will vary from that base line.
People also influenced by more than one culture. The most straightforward way to think about it is that a person will have the culture of their nationality/race combined with their religion.
The moral ambiguity comes from the fact that culture is fuzzy at the edges. Think mob boss who goes to church on a regular basis and other hybrid and twists.
Now when it comes to sentient supernatural beings for some culture is black and white for example angels and demons.
It's part of a much larger attempt to deconstruct the generic D&D 5e setup. I take issue with a number of genre or mechanics conceits. Believe me, it would be much easier to work with 13th Age or Dungeon World, but I seem to be a masochist.
I have loads more to say about metaphysics, monster design, plane hopping and space travel. I've considered starting a blog to keep track.