Quote from: Sigmund;478414That's certainly a perfectly valid approach, especially in your type of case where the GM and player(s) don't entirely agree on the definitions of "good" and "evil". Another valid approach is for the GM to clearly define "good" and "evil" before the game begins, giving examples and then making judgement calls based on that. Of course, the players have to then be willing to abide by the GM's ruling... I know I would, but I also know not all players are like that

I don't believe I have ever been at a table where everyone could agree on a definition of good and evil. So when alignment needs to be used (and we don't use it in most of our games) it is just easier to let the GM say "this is good and this is evil" so we don't end up arguing. In a setting like Ravenloft we might do this, since you have to have a clear good and evil for powerschecks to be uncontrovertial.

Hey stop agreeing with one another so soon! It's a long way to go until we hit 1000 posts!

Quote from: CRKrueger;478411One possible interpretation, sure, but not the only one.

I had a campaign setting with multiple gods based losely on the Great Chain of Being. So the gods themselves and existence were bound up in the concept of good and evil. This was done so I could run a demon hunting campaign against the backdrop of a vaguely Roman Catholic church.

Quote from: boulet;478416Hey stop agreeing with one another so soon! It's a long way to go until we hit 1000 posts!

I don't know. We have over 500 posts to go before we reach 1,000. That is a long journey.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;478415I don't believe I have ever been at a table where everyone could agree on a definition of good and evil. So when alignment needs to be used (and we don't use it in most of our games) it is just easier to let the GM say "this is good and this is evil" so we don't end up arguing. In a setting like Ravenloft we might do this, since you have to have a clear good and evil for powerschecks to be uncontrovertial.

I have actually, at least for the kind of stuff that get's dealt with in a D&D game. There might have been small variations of what everyone's conceptions of good and evil were, but that's one of the DM's jobs after all. I was able to play a decent paladin that the other players appreciated though, but we all talked about it before hand, which is the key to all this stuff.

Quote from: CRKruegerYou know, you might try flexing the imagination a little more. For example. Instead of talking about the oh so supposedly interesting topic of whether some fantasy Aztec analogue sacrificing their own people is good or evil from a cultural perspective, how about addressing it from a cosmological perspective? Heresy I know.

What if the sun does stop rising if they fail to sacrifice their own? What if the only thing keeping the tzitzimine from devouring the world is the constant flow of blood? Does that make those actions Good? I'd say no, but it surely makes for interesting roleplaying.

Nicely phrased and supports into the point I was trying to make earlier. This isn't just about 'fantasy' Aztecs, historical peoples truly believed in their cosmologies too. For them to fail to propitiate, feed and follow their deities social guidelines was certainly an evil thing. For many societies what is 'culturally accepted' is 'good'.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;478367I will give another example. I am running a Roman campaign (we don't use alignment so it probably isn't the best analogue). But the characters are all Romans living with a Roman mindset from 38 AD. Some of the things they are doing I personally would find appalling. Their attitudes toward women are terribly oppressive. Their views on slavery are awful. But this is the world they live in.

When researching for BRP Rome I was amazed at just how different the moral framework for the Republic was in comparison to my modern sensibilities. It was quite shocking, but since then I've studied many other real world societies and if anything, ancient Rome is a tame beast to some of the extremes out there.

It proved to me that there is no such thing as absolute good and evil. They are always subjective, based on social status, climate, terrain, standard of living, available resources, racial memory, cosmology, diet, predation and a hundred other subtle influences. Humanity can often be very alien.

I personally like roleplaying in morally ambiguous worlds, where actions have consequence. I also consider it an enjoyable challenge (and often fascinating) to play in historical settings with different moral frameworks. Its not everyone's cup of tea however and although I'm against censoring settings and/or scenarios which stray into radically extreme moral regions, I do have my limits as to what I consider 'fun'.

Sometimes it nice just to kill the orcs and loot their bodies...

Quote from: CRKrueger;478411One possible interpretation, sure, but not the only one.

Quote from: Sigmund;478422*snip*
but we all talked about it before hand, which is the key to all this stuff.

Interesting to see everyones thoughts on this.
so many great replies...IMO these sum it all up nicely.
(99.9% of the time this seems to be "the answer")

The game is yours, do with it as you will. If the players show up with enthusiasm and leave having had a good time (including some discussion on the moral ambiguities, if present in the game world, hopefuly in character) then you are doing something "right" and GAME ON BROTHER!!


There is plenty of room for all types of games and groups.
Play and contribute to the ones you enjoy!

Quote from: Sigmund;478383If it's ok to define demons, undead, and red dragons as irredeemably evil, why not orcs? After all, I haven't seen anyone go on for page after page arguing over the "morality" of killing dragon babies.

Sure, go for it. My problem may not be with a GM defining somethign as an absolute, but on how hard is to keep things internally consistent. If you get it to work, go ahead, sure.

QuoteI haven't always agreed with MDBrantingham's method of expression, but I do agree with the idea that each DM is perfectly capable and within their rights to set the parameter's of what's "evil", how, why, and what's acceptable to do about it. Whether you (and not you Imperator, but the collective "you" ) like it or not, that fact that D&D is just a game is truth, and it's filled with logical impossibilities and fantasic shit and if anyone wants to tack on one more by making orcs psychopaths is their choice and doesn't automatically equal them being racist in the sense we think of it in the real world.  

Absolutely. As Krueger said, you can rule that if there are no blood sacrifices to the Sun, the Sun won't rise. In your world, gods may have that effect.

What is more difficult to categorize and make work is things like alignment, because what is Good and Evil is cultural. Heck, maybe the Aztec priest doesn't love to rip heart out but hell, what are you gonna do. It's that or no Sun and everyone dies. Hardly his fault. In other culture (like ours) that is nauseating. So is the Aztec priest good or bad?

My problem won't be with a setting featuring such strange realities. My problem is with alignments, because you're bound to find inconsistent situations.

QuoteDo ya'all really expect to arrive at some "solution"? I'm not saying we can't discuss the merits or lack thereof of different approaches, but such emotion and vitriol over imaginary morality seems a little unwarranted to me.

Totally. That is why the OOP is idiotic, and the outrage about the OOP equally so.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;478415I don't believe I have ever been at a table where everyone could agree on a definition of good and evil.

Same here.

QuoteSo when alignment needs to be used (and we don't use it in most of our games) it is just easier to let the GM say "this is good and this is evil" so we don't end up arguing. In a setting like Ravenloft we might do this, since you have to have a clear good and evil for powerschecks to be uncontrovertial.

The only solution I have found around this topic is to make the spells culture - specific. So you detect people who are good or evil according to the ethics of the culture you belong. Not perfect but well, is that or ditching alignments for me.

Quote from: Pete Nash;478426Nicely phrased and supports into the point I was trying to make earlier. This isn't just about 'fantasy' Aztecs, historical peoples truly believed in their cosmologies too. For them to fail to propitiate, feed and follow their deities social guidelines was certainly an evil thing. For many societies what is 'culturally accepted' is 'good'.

And that is why detect alignment always will produce wonky results.

Again, bashing orcs without further dilemma is 100% OK for me.

Quote from: Pete Nash;478426When researching for BRP Rome I was amazed at just how different the moral framework for the Republic was in comparison to my modern sensibilities. It was quite shocking, but since then I've studied many other real world societies and if anything, ancient Rome is a tame beast to some of the extremes out there.

It proved to me that there is no such thing as absolute good and evil. They are always subjective, based on social status, climate, terrain, standard of living, available resources, racial memory, cosmology, diet, predation and a hundred other subtle influences. Humanity can often be very alien.

I personally like roleplaying in morally ambiguous worlds, where actions have consequence. I also consider it an enjoyable challenge (and often fascinating) to play in historical settings with different moral frameworks. Its not everyone's cup of tea however and although I'm against censoring settings and/or scenarios which stray into radically extreme moral regions, I do have my limits as to what I consider 'fun'.

Sometimes it nice just to kill the orcs and loot their bodies...

Ah. Now that might not be a point of view I entirely agree with (the question of the existence of absolute good and evil, which could be very different from what various cultures and religions make of it in this or that historical, sociological, etc. context), but that is sensible, in a way that leaves room for others to add their cent like I did.

On G+ I wrote:

Basic premise that annoys me: "Using absolute evil orcs in your campaign means that you are using profundly racist colonial stereotypes. I don't think you're doing it on purpose, you just don't know any better. So here's how I fix it in my game so you know how to not validate racist ideologies yourself: I don't use any absolute evil racial stereotypes at all. You shouldn't either."

Basic premise that would NOT annoy me: "Whenever I play a game where there are absolute evil orcs, I can't help but be reminded of some really bad stereotypes that were used against real people. I don't mind if you're not seeing it the same way I do, associate it with completely different themes, or do not worry about such things at all. It's just something I found easier to deal with in my game by not having absolute evil racial stereotypes at all."

I think the entire problem can be summed up by this statement, about 3/4s into the blog post...

Quote from: Adam DrayThe biggest rationalization is "It's fantasy, so I don't need to worry about it." I am at a point in my life where I can't say that anymore.  

Then he is at the point in his life that psychiatric evaluation sounds like a good idea.

Worrying about acting politically correct towards imaginary monsters? This is like moralizing over using bombs in a game of Stratego.

Quote from: TristramEvans;478439Then he is at the point in his life that psychiatric evaluation sounds like a good idea.

Worrying about acting politically correct towards imaginary monsters? This is like moralizing over using bombs in a game of Stratego.

You don't get it because you aren't playing the game right: you aren't immersed enough

Quote from: jibbajibba;478370Because they might as well be playing WOW.

Actually...WoW is your game.  The non-evil minotaurs, the non-evil orcs, the non-evil trolls.  Everything is a cultural difference of opinion and everyone is redeemable.  Hell even the undead arent inherently evil.

But you misunderstood my question.

Why?

What is it about pseudonymed Jibbajibba guy that makes him worry about whether another GM considers the "hows and whys" of alignment.  When pushed, that's what you keep coming back to.  You just want to make sure other GMs understand the decision they are making and make it with that full realization.  That's all you want.  You just want them to be sure they see that.

My question to you is: "Why?"

What is it about you that has you on this crusade of enlightenment?

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;478418I don't know. We have over 500 posts to go before we reach 1,000. That is a long journey.

Fuck you! Your post is shit and I won't bother telling you why!

(There. We must have matter for a few more posts with this. )

Quote from: MDBrantingham;478444Actually...WoW is your game.  The non-evil minotaurs, the non-evil orcs, the non-evil trolls.  Everything is a cultural difference of opinion and everyone is redeemable.  Hell even the undead arent inherently evil.

But you misunderstood my question.

Why?

What is it about pseudonymed Jibbajibba guy that makes him worry about whether another GM considers the "hows and whys" of alignment.  When pushed, that's what you keep coming back to.  You just want to make sure other GMs understand the decision they are making and make it with that full realization.  That's all you want.  You just want them to be sure they see that.

My question to you is: "Why?"

What is it about you that has you on this crusade of enlightenment?

You obviously misunderstood me I want good and evil and gaps in between

As for why I care , hmmm good question why do you care to question why?

Mostly its because we are on a web site discussing rpgs, outside that I do care. I love rpgs and I want to share that love to help everyone I am just like ben in that regard just coming from a different place.

Quote from: jibbajibba;478446I do care. I love rpgs and I want to share that love to help everyone I am just like ben in that regard just coming from a different place.

And your different place is telling people that they are having badwrongfun?