|
How would you react if your DM came in and said, "You know, I don't think Lolth, Erelhei-Cinlu, Menzoberranzen, and drow society is CE at all. They're LE!"?
See, I've struggled with this for years now and I think I'm ready to come out of the closet and tell my players, "Drow are LE from now on!" Reading through "Drow of the Underdark" is finally convincing me to voice my argument.
I mean, look how rigid their society is. See their strict caste system, social protocol, detailed religious ceremony, rules of advancent for ambition, extremely ordered rules of engagement in combat, natural tendency for orderly and strict study of both arcane and clerical magic AND fighting.
How many drow barbarians have you EVER seen? How many Bards? What about the other Chaotic classes or PrCs? On the other hand, how difficult is it for you to picture a Drow Monk? A LE Drow Wizard?
So, I say it, "My name is Ray, and I think Drow are LE."
-W. E. Ray
So what would a Drow Succubi be?
You're right. Drow society is not chaotic evil. Drow are. Individually, drow will do anything. Their strict, rigid, and yes, lawful society is the only thing keeping their people alive and a threat. I think drow are interesting and not just another throw-away evil race because of the juxtaposition of inherently chaotic evil people living in a very regimented society.
You know, laying it out like that Molech, I don't see why they wouldn't be LE. I think their only connection to a CE alignment might be b/c they worship Lolth, who's a Demon Lord/Goddess. Well, we'll see what 4th ed. does to her. And all the other human-centric demon lords (like Graz'zt). No reason your homebrew can't make her and/or the Drow LE though.
|
How would you react if your DM came in and said, "You know, I don't think Lolth, Erelhei-Cinlu, Menzoberranzen, and drow society is CE at all. They're LE!"?
So, I say it, "My name is Ray, and I think Drow are LE."-W. E. Ray
I'm afraid i have to disagree Molech, i'm leaving for work now otherwise i would give you bullet points on the whys and wherefores.
But Drow are the epitomy of a Chaotic AND Evil race, in fact i would say they are EQUAL parts of that alignment. And while there may be some LE males out there or even some Forgotten Realm CG scimitatr wielding Drow (bleh, 1 Drow ranger fine, even inspired, 300 + fanboy clones, not so much) they are the EXCEPTION not the rule.
So in this 1st, 2nd and 3.5 ed game master's opinion, Drow = Chaotic Evil.
But as BenS indicated, there is now reason your Home Campaign Drow or a significant portion thereof could be LE.
Sometime when i have more time i'll give you my alignment prospectives of Hitler's inner circle.
The devil is a drow in a red dress.
I don't know, sounds pretty heavenly to me.
|
|
if you're the DM it's your world and your call anyway.
Well, duh, but we're all fans of D&D. I strongly disagree with a DM making a campaign alteration just because he or she likes it better than the published history, especially if the 4-8 long-time gamer group doesn't like it. Sure, I'm the DM but I shouldn't make, for example, Orcus the god of Orcs just because I like it. Now, if the other gamers don't mind and I like it GREAT, but for me to say, "I'm the DM so my way rules!" is inapropriate.
But I don't want to threadjack my own thread, so, please, more on whether drow are really CE or LE.
-W. E. Ray
|
I think one argument in favor of chaotic evil status is essentially this: regardless of the regimented nature of the society, each and every drow is essentially out for his or herself. There is no "greater good" or "greater power" to be served, besides Lolth. There is no devotion or commitment whatsoever to a common purpose for the society. Even Lolth whimsically hands out punishments, and has no goals other than serving her own pleasure. So with regards to "lawfulness," it is there, but by degrees it is a whisper on a scream of anarchic behavior.
I think a good measure of the lawfulness or chaoticness of a society is upward mobility, and security of the members on top of the heap. There is unlimited potential for upward mobility for a ruthless cunning individual, and almost no security of position in a drow society.
|
|
Thanks for chiming in, Heath!
There is no "greater good" or "greater power" to be served, besides Lolth.
Well, doesn't the "besides Lolth" part ruin what you're saying?! I mean, In a LE dictatorship everyone's out for number one, but sheesh, the dictator (most powerful) is truely and personally feared by all and every whim of the ruler is immedietely obeyed. That's why everyone wants to move up on the hierarchy.
So with regards to "lawfulness," it is there, but by degrees it is a whisper on a scream of anarchic behavior.
Hmm, a "whisper on a scream." (Nice wording btw) I dunno; It seems the other way around to me.
I think a good measure of the lawfulness or chaoticness of a society is upward mobility, and security of the members on top of the heap. There is unlimited potential for upward mobility for a ruthless cunning individual, and almost no security of position in a drow society.
Interesting -- how much security do any of the archdukes have over their circle of Hell? How much security did Moloch or Geryon have?... How about The Hag Countess? Could you view drow society like Hell's with Asmodeus similar in authority to Lolth??
The peasantry are chaotic evil.
The heirarchy that keeps them in line is lawful evil.
The society has selection pressures toward lawful.
|
|
I'm not too sure about hell, I'll think about it.
I think a better model might be our society versus Japan. Generally speaking, the U.S. citizen tends to put more importance on the individual, hence a lean towards chaos.
Japanese (generally) tend to see the importance of serving their society a little more than we do--lawful behavior.
I really don't want to piss anyone off here by making generalizations about nationalities...
Now, what racial ideal, or nation, or hallowed thing do drow, in their selflessness, put above their own well-being or hedonistic whimsy? Surely not Lolth. She doesn't ASK for devotion, merely takes her pound of flesh.
Also, the drow have no code of conduct, nor personal honor whatsoever, no matter how warped. When I think lawful evil I think Dr. Doom. He'll kill you, but if he gives his word he'll stand by it 100%. Not so a drow.
|
|
Here's some development of my argument to consider (partly in anticipation of Baron's and others' pro CE arguments). Reading published LE and CE descriptions is prerequisite to discussion.
The PHB description of LE begins with "a LE villain methodically takes what he wants w/in the limits of his code of conduct w/out regard for whom it hurts."(105) It further states that "tradition," "loyalty," and "order" are important but not "freedom," "dignity," or "life."(105) Now, I think most of us may disagree with the "loyalty" criterion but the CE drow arguers can pounce on it. Just make sure you consider loyalty of the devils of Baator as well as barghests and rakshasas before you chime in.
Juxtapose this, now, with the CE personalties that are "arbitrarily violent," "unpredictable," "haphazard" planners, and overall, "poorly organized" societies.(106)
Which one seems more "drow-like" to you? When you play a chaotic character, is he or she often reckless? And take a look at the published texts (novel and supplement) of drow. It all leans more to LE.
Maybe there's a whisper of Chaos on the stream of Law, though.
Drow are all about tyranically ruled societies. Check page 15 of FCII for descriptions of LE societies and "Kretor: A Sample Territory" and it's like reading a description of Erenhei-Cinlu or Menzoberranzen.
Tyranny, exploitation, patience, planning, clearly defined gender roles, caste & status, social protocol, conspiracy, paranoia: these are the halmarks of the drow -- and LE. From "Drow of the Underdark": "These philosophical underpinnings result in a culture of constant scheming."(10) Even the text sounds lawful.
"Drow of the Underdark" makes it clear that the drow react to others based on their power and the potential value and/or danger to themselves as individuals, families or "groups."(10) This level of calculating thought and emotionless evil are purely LE. "This doesn't make (the drow) a wanton murderer; it simply means that (he has) no compunctions about killing" if it's the smartest action to take and he can get away with it.(10) Unlike a CE character, the drow will be patient about his vengeance and ambition when he has to.
-W. E. Ray
PS: Drizzt is LG, not CG despite the FRCS.
|
|
Individually, drow will do anything.
Not according to "Drow of the Underdark." For that matter, not anywhere. A drow will plan to do anything to climb in power. A drow will have no problem assassinating, betraying, etc. to gain power BUT the drow is methodical.
"All drow are schemers."(DoU 14) Methodical planning and patience are how each drow acts so that his coup, exploitation, theft, whatever evil he wants, succeeds.
|
|
One can't argue individual drow alignments outside of drow society!
As non-Outsiders they have free will. It's the society we must look at as a whole. Though I believe individual tendencies would be LE. I'll ask again, how many drow barbarians have you heard of?
That said, look at the FEW rogue drow (outside society) published:
Liriel Baenre -- clearly Lawful
4 Rogue drow in "Hunter's Blades" Trilogy -- clearly LE
-W. E. Ray
Goodnight, folks; it's after 1 here.
|
|
My final gasp then is the arthropod/insect "totem beast" model.
If you look at a beehive, it's total organization, total rigid structure, a total lawful society. Every member of the community in service to the hive.
A spider, however, is a strict individual. When a spider lays its clutch of eggs and they hatch, they all either spread to the wind, eat eachother, or get eaten by their mother. Drow society is like this only in slower motion; it is headed ultimately towards entropy with no organized resistance, no bulwark against said entropy. There is pattern in the web, but no organized society as in a beehive.
Or maybe Lolth should be a demonic queen bee(?)
How would you react if your DM came in and said, "You know, I don't think Lolth, Erelhei-Cinlu, Menzoberranzen, and drow society is CE at all. They're LE!"?
It wouldn't bother me a bit, and if a player did complain about it, I'd say they're putting too much thought and energy into such an ambiguous concept as law and choas in the d&d world. So if LE drow make you more comfortable I say go for it.
Just do a copout, call them NE. Those that think they are really CE are not too upset because they are not LE. Those that think they are really LE are not too upset because they are not CE. Works great, focus on what everyone can agree on, they are Evil Mofos.
I don't have the time right now to readh this thread properly (it's on my To Do list...), and have skipped a lot of posts. However, my feelings are that drow are CE because of tradition more than anyhting.
Elves are supposed to be Chaotic. Drow are elves. Drow are evil elves. Thus, drow are Chaotic Evil. Lolth is the goddess of the drow. Therefore, Lolth is Chaotic Evil. But I side with you, Molech (unless you changed your position down the line and I skipped that, so, just in case: Traitor! :P ); I think they are far more LE than CE. Of course, I also think elves in general should be LG/NG, and not Chaotic (gnomes strike me as more Chaotic than elves). And, being a fairly young player, I have little vested interest in actually keeping the parts of game lore which don't make sense to me (as opposed to others, who I will posit, likely with my foot firmly in my mouth, have nostalgia as a factor which keeps them clinging to the "Old Ways").
And, if you'll remember, my drow don't even live underground anymore. Rather, they are surface-dwelling (and swamp/cold regions at that) necromantic revenge fanatics and master bribers and manipulators of other races. So, perhaps my vote is somewhat lessened on this subject, since it pertains to the traditional view of drow (although I might note here that I've kept mine Chaotic).
How would you react if your DM came in and said, "You know, I don't think Lolth, Erelhei-Cinlu, Menzoberranzen, and drow society is CE at all. They're LE!"?
See, I've struggled with this for years now and I think I'm ready to come out of the closet and tell my players, "Drow are LE from now on!" Reading through "Drow of the Underdark" is finally convincing me to voice my argument.
I mean, look how rigid their society is. See their strict caste system, social protocol, detailed religious ceremony, rules of advancent for ambition, extremely ordered rules of engagement in combat, natural tendency for orderly and strict study of both arcane and clerical magic AND fighting.
How many drow barbarians have you EVER seen? How many Bards? What about the other Chaotic classes or PrCs? On the other hand, how difficult is it for you to picture a Drow Monk? A LE Drow Wizard?
So, I say it, "My name is Ray, and I think Drow are LE."
-W. E. Ray
You should check out the Drow presented in the Drow War complete campaign setting by Mongoose publishing. The Drow of that world (Ashfar) are highly lawful, organized and militaristic and for some reason or another want to wage war on the surface world....go figure.
Alignment is rubbish and far too narrow at times. I would say drow are very evil, certainly not good -and thats about it. I like to think of alignment as a rough guide line but even then it sometimes dosen't cut it.
Each alignment component is open to many different interpretations and everyone has their own ideas on how they feel a certain alignment should be/represent. Swings and roundabouts –as my gran would have said, bless her.
Also what 'good' 'evil' 'chaos' 'law' etc all mean in D&D is meant to be looked at through black and white 'fantasy eyes' if you ask me. So you cant bring real world ethics and things into it really.
...Oh and in the Forgotten Realms there are an order of monks (LE) dedicated to Lolth.
|
|
I mean, look how rigid their society is. See their strict caste system, social protocol, detailed religious ceremony...
Well, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and your players don't voice any major objections to ducks, then quack on!
In this case, the duck is full of spiders though...*shivers*.
|
|
My final gasp then is the arthropod/insect "totem beast" model.
Good stuff.
I've thought a little about the real-life Nature aspect: what "alignment" are spiders? Now, the obvious cop out answer is N. So how about: What "alignment" is the CONNOTATION we have of spiders?! Evil, duh. But the Law / Chaos axis is much more tricky. Patient predators, yes. Insane cannibals, yes. Some spiders have INCREDIBLY ordered webs. Some have incredibly CHAOTIC webs. (Some have no webs at all!)
I think, considering this, we have to conclude that one CAN NOT accurately assign the real-life spider's "alignment" to the drow. But I'd certainly accept an argument if it settles the Law / Chaos problem of real life spiders first. -- And, DAMN, that would be a fun argument to read.
-W. E. Ray
|
|
The alignment system is broken.
Alignment is rubbish and far too narrow at times.
Well, of course it is! But that's not the point. This is the most fun I've had on these boards since I started 10 months ago. (Although the good "Devils" Threads are a good 2nd.)
Arguing well is one of the most important *and fun* things to develop!
-W. E. Ray
|
|
I don't have the time right now to read this thread properly (it's on my To Do list)
Well, hurry up, damnit!
My feelings are that drow are CE because of tradition more than anyhting.
This should be good. You better bring it Saern!
And, if you'll remember, my drow don't even live underground anymore. Rather, they are surface-dwelling (and swamp/cold regions at that) necromantic revenge fanatics and master bribers and manipulators of other races. So, perhaps my vote is somewhat lessened on this subject, since it pertains to the traditional view of drow (although I might note here that I've kept mine Chaotic).
Yes, I remember. I chimed in and said that a spider motif in a frozen wasteland would be REALLY creepy -- because it's so alien -- when someone suggested it be dropped. Anyway, I don't know that it's relevent to the discussion here.
-W. E. Ray
Contributor
|
I don't have drow of the underdark, but here is my small take. If a drow had to choose between themselves and their society, they would choose themselves. If a priestess of Lolth had to choose between sacrificing her own life to save Lolth, or living on at the cost of Lolth being destroyed, she would typically choose to live on.
A duergar on the other hand, would be more willing to sacrifice themselves to grease the gears of Duergar society. A duergar would take suicidal action if so ordered by a superior.
Drow are chaotic. Duergar are lawful. Both are horribly evil.
I get your point about barbarians etc. but drow are a civilized chaotic; their civilization just happens to be built upon the whims of those in power (ultimately Lolth). Lolth demands loyalty, but I'm not sure she gets any more loyalty than her followers feel is in their best interests to give her. And I've always felt that her need to demand loyalty stemmed from the understanding that this is a fundamentla lack in her people.
Barbarian societies have leaders and structure. Barbarians have concepts such as honour and loyalty. It doesn't make them lawful.
Drow and barbarians are just focused on different aspects of chaos.
An excellent summation, Rambling Scribe. Drow society is ultimately summed up by "Me me me!"
IMO Drow are CE. Individually they are focused solely on their own gain and collectively it is the same - a house plots against another house. They will gladly take advantage of any situation to remove their rivals - even if it threatens their society (killing off a rival priestess while the city is under attack or manipulating enemies to attack their rivals). The only laws of Drow society is that the strong rule and the weak leave, die or serve. Worship of Lolth is not really voluntary either since it is mandated and enforced by the strong matriarchy which is run by the priestesses.
I think that lawfulness cannot be gleaned by whether someone is orderly. I can be a reckless individual but a meticulous groomer or have a neat home but still try to burn my neighbors house down because it blocks my view. I think of lawful societies and think that the individuals there think the laws serve to make the collective and individual stronger and better and serve some purpose. Drow manipulate any rule or law to their individual benefit. There really is no Drow law other than "Don't get caught".
Maybe the crux of the issue is more about the collective versus the individual. Drow are powerful but are rarely united in their quest for power and tend to oppose each other as often as they oppose others. But a lawful society is united to some common or higher purpose and is bigger than 1 individual - this is the antithesis of the Drow personality.
Disclaimer - I ran a society of Lawful Neutral dark elves in one of the campaigns I ran.
I don't have drow of the underdark, but here is my small take. If a drow had to choose between themselves and their society, they would choose themselves. If a priestess of Lolth had to choose between sacrificing her own life to save Lolth, or living on at the cost of Lolth being destroyed, she would typically choose to live on.
A duergar on the other hand, would be more willing to sacrifice themselves to grease the gears of Duergar society. A duergar would take suicidal action if so ordered by a superior.
Drow are chaotic. Duergar are lawful. Both are horribly evil.
I get your point about barbarians etc. but drow are a civilized chaotic; their civilization just happens to be built upon the whims of those in power (ultimately Lolth). Lolth demands loyalty, but I'm not sure she gets any more loyalty than her followers feel is in their best interests to give her. And I've always felt that her need to demand loyalty stemmed from the understanding that this is a fundamentla lack in her people.
Barbarian societies have leaders and structure. Barbarians have concepts such as honour and loyalty. It doesn't make them lawful.
Drow and barbarians are just focused on different aspects of chaos.
Ok - so thats what I was trying to say! Nice post!
I've read the R.A. Salvatore's Homelands/Exile/Sojourn books (I can't remember what the trilogy is called...), and I would think that the society is (at least among the elites) Lawful. Salvatore described the procedure of one house attacking, eliminating, and overtaking another house. One thing that really struck me was that if any noble members of the attacked house survived, a council of the drow's highest-ranking Matrons would, in a "trial," condemn the "caught" house to be destroyed.
I'm not sure if Salvatore actually said it, but the message I got from all this was that if you were caught, it was a crime that meant death for all the attackers. If you got away with it without survivors, it wasn't punished. This adherence to law and punishment, or at least a semblance of it, definitely rings "Lawful Evil" to me.
Of course, at the same time attacking other houses was actually encouraged and somewhat respectable - perhaps the Lawfulness of drow society is only on the surface...
I've read the R.A. Salvatore's Homelands/Exile/Sojourn books (I can't remember what the trilogy is called...), and I would think that the society is (at least among the elites) Lawful. Salvatore described the procedure of one house attacking, eliminating, and overtaking another house. One thing that really struck me was that if any noble members of the attacked house survived, a council of the drow's highest-ranking Matrons would, in a "trial," condemn the "caught" house to be destroyed.
I'm not sure if Salvatore actually said it, but the message I got from all this was that if you were caught, it was a crime that meant death for all the attackers. If you got away with it without survivors, it wasn't punished. This adherence to law and punishment, or at least a semblance of it, definitely rings "Lawful Evil" to me.
Of course, at the same time attacking other houses was actually encouraged and somewhat respectable - perhaps the Lawfulness of drow society is only on the surface...
One comment on these events. In their society, drow follow rules only when someone above them forces them to do so. The Matron Mothers have handed down a list of decrees that maintain the semblance of society. Why? Well, ignoring the obvious pleasure of bossing around their inferiors, they do so because the drow, as a race, have annoyed any number of Underdark races. Standing united is necessary for survival when illithids, duergar, aboleth, kuo-toa, and any number of other races want you dead or worse. So society exists because of a mandate from the top and to permit them to survive as a race. Given the choice, the drow will consistently choose their own individual plans over their fellow elves. They stay together because they grudgingly admit that for all their power they cannot stand alone. But as others have posted, they'll stab one another in the back if they can do so without getting caught. It's a balancing act, of sorts.
Okay, I've sat down and read the thread. And I do understand the arguments for Chaotic drow. But I still see them more as LE, or perhaps even the so-called cop out NE (in that they waver heavily back and forth between the two extreme concepts and thus fall soundly in the middle... but I'd rather have an L or C in their descriptor, too :P ).
The problem is that, for all that drow are supposed to be about this or that element of Chaos, are supposed to behave in this or that way, they don't (at least in the Salvatore I've read, although that's mainly limited to the Dark Elf Trilogy; however, it's a fairly good source for info on the race). They often don't demonstrate, on an individual level, anything that really screams Chaotic to me. Rather, there are very definite Lawful overtones to their society (all of which have been previously mentioned: the rigid castes, the careful, plotting, diabolic [as in devil-like] scheming, etc.). There are definite swings of power and upsets and overturns in drow society, when one house conquers another. But these are always planned out meticulously, and are executed with order and precision. Compare this to what a host of tanar'ri are likely to do (which could be virtually anything destructive, but certainly nothing bearing the descriptor "orderly").
No, I think that the drow betray themselves in their portrayed actions to be LE far more than they are CE.
And another thing- spiders. What gives with drow and spiders? Other than Lolth being a spider-demon and lots of spider pictures thrown around drow cities, and the occaisional token monstrous spider, the drow don't use enough of the damned things! They certainly don't emulate spiders in any way, shape or form.
Now, before going into that further, let's return to the interesting question of what spiders "mean." Now, it's fairly universal in Western culture that they represent Evil. But what about Law vs. Chaos? Well, as was pointed out, some spiders have amazingly ordered webs, while others have extremely unordered webs, and some have no webs at all. Some are patient and let their webs do all the work, some ambush from their webs, and some are active predators.
But Molech hit on a point earlier- the question is not what spiders actually are (Lawful or Chaotic) in D&D terms (in which they are Neutral); the question is (as I touched on above) what the connotation is. And anytime a spider is invoked symbolically beyond simply being an agent of evil, it is invoked as sitting in its web, planning, scheming, waiting. "Oh, what tangled webs we weave!"
In D&D terms, spiders are symbollically LE.
Thus, drow should be Lawful Evil. But they aren't. And they don't really have all that much to do with spiders either. Look at drow "cavalry;" they ride lizards. Why? Well, because lizards can walk upside down, presuming they're like a gecko. Well, so can a spider. A spider would have worked just fine for the drow cavalry, and it would have completed a thematic link. Instead- lizards, which have no symbology with the drow whatsoever. There goes an excellent opportunity to add more depth and sense of realism to a fantasy culture, and an excellent roleplaying embellishment, completely out the window because someone (Salvatore!) couldn't figure out a spider can walk upside down, too; or perhaps he was just so blind, busy as he was with his miserable attempt to create a sense of depth and angst within his clone-spawning star character, that he didn't even realize what was being lost. But that's a personal beef I have with most of D&D and their utter lack of believable and interesting demihuman cultures.
Which is why I changed the drow. I looked at how I wanted them to function in my world, yes, but I also looked at the hype surrounding them of how they were supposed to act and changed them accordingly so they came in line with that. (And, btw Molech, my ice-dwelling drow will definitely keep the spider motif because, as you say, it's just so creepy!)
To conclude, I feel that drow are CE because that's what whoever made them (Gygax, I assume; and don't cite drow in mythology- I'm aware of the name existing previous to its use in D&D, but it was really nothing like what we've got now, so when I refer to their creation, I mean in the form we all know and love to hate)- whoever made them wrote down "Chaotic Evil," and it's been that way ever since for no other reason than D&D players tend to be of the same mindset as those who got upset when some Jedi has the wrong colored lightsabre in one of the prequel movies. Essentially, there's no good reason for it whatsoever.
|
|
Alright!
(Sorry I had to leave the discussion earlier; I'm back for a little while)
If a drow had to choose between themselves and their society, they would choose themselves.
Drow society is ultimately summed up by "Me me me!"
In other words, egoism and selfishness are traits on the Law/Chaos axis and not the Good/Evil axis!? I don't know that that's true. Would an individual CG elf sacrifice himself for his community?!!!!! Or just a LG dwarf for his community?
|
|
I don't have drow of the underdark
I don't think you need it. I mean, you know drow and you know D&D. That's sufficient.
A duergar on the other hand, would be more willing to sacrifice themselves to grease the gears of Duergar society. A duergar would take suicidal action if so ordered by a superior.
This is a good argument.
However, we don't have too much fluff on the Duergar to know if this is accurate. It's one of those things where each DM, group or campaign would have decide, isn't it? How many Druergar societies are there detailed to the degree of being able to address this?
Certainly, to make any "Druergar will sacrifice himmself, willingly, for the betterment of his society" argument, you need a published text to use as evidence.
One could easily (perhaps more easily) argue that a Duergar would NOT make a utilitarian self-sacrifice.
|
|
Individually (drow) are focused solely on their own gain and collectively it is the same.
Again, I think this is more on the Good/Evil axis, not the Law/Chaos.
The only laws of Drow society (are) that the strong rule and the weak leave, die or serve. Worship of Lolth is not really voluntary either since it is mandated and enforced by the strong matriarchy which is run by the priestesses.
This is precisely how LE is defined in the PHB and FCII
BOO-YA
I think that lawfulness cannot be (determined) by whether someone is orderly. I can be a reckless individual but a meticulous groomer or have a neat home but still try to burn my neighbor(')s house down because it blocks my view. I think of lawful societies and think that the individuals there think the laws serve to make the collective and individual stronger and better and serve some purpose.
Definetly. No rebuttal, here. I will say, though, that this is the whole "D&D alignment is broke" syndrome. There are, ultimately, SO many ways to view the Chaos/Law axis.
Maybe the crux of the issue is more about the collective versus the individual. Drow are powerful but are rarely united in their quest for power and tend to oppose each other as often as they oppose others. But a lawful society is united to some common or higher purpose and is bigger than 1 individual - this is the antithesis of the Drow personality.
Ugh. You were doing well before this. An individual (non-Outsider) has free will and can choose ANY of the 9 alignments! We must look at the societies as wholes to discern alignment predispositions.
Whether Menzoberranzen is CE or LE there will ALWAYS be a (perhaps large) number of individuals who are different.
FURTHERMORE, you argue that "a lawful society is united to some...purpose." This is what many folks on the boards are giving as why the drow are LAWFUL -- because to do otherwise would mean their doom from Duergar, Ilithid, Aboleth and Kuo Toan societies.
In other words, egoism and selfishness are traits on the Law/Chaos axis and not the Good/Evil axis!?
Um, I wasn't commenting on alignment in general. Just that drow society always seemed to put the individual first, to the point of selfishness, as I see drow society.
|
|
I'd rather have an L or C in their descriptor, too :P )
Yeah, otherwise it's just crap.
Compare (drow "activity") to what a host of tanar'ri are likely to do (which could be virtually anything destructive, but certainly nothing bearing the descriptor "orderly").
A-MEN. I was wondering when someone would bring this up. However, even here we run into problems because of Graz'zt and perhaps others.