I think that the difference comes into their opinion of systems. Demons hate systems more complex than "I am more powerful than you; you will obey me." They live at the whim of their betters, and have only four options in a bad situation: obey, escape, kill their oppressor, or die. Devils love their system, and view themselves as important parts of it. They will do what they can to get as high as they can, preferably to the top, but they will not deliberately do anything to undermine their system. When they are put in a bad position, they will suck it up, try to ensure that their superior gets the blame if things go sideways, try to blackmail their way out of it if they have something sufficiently compelling, or go over their superior's head if they think they have a case. They may even try assassination, if they think they can pull it off. They won't directly disobey.
Well then, it also says:
"Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability.
On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, self-righteousness, and a lack of adaptability.
Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should."
While a Devil doesn't necesserly adhear to all of this (neither does a Paladin or many of the lawful deities), they do defenetly lean towards this compared to what is also said about Chaotic in comparison.EDIT: To pick this apart a bit more:
Tell the truth: Check (though probably not from your point of view).
Keep their word: Check (as writen in the contract).
Respect authority/obedience to authority: I'm sure they respect some authority, just like how a Paladin doesn't respect all authorities.
Honor tradition: Check.
Judge those who fall short of their duties: Oooh yes! A BIG check here!
Honor: Remember that this doesn't mean "being nice". They also do not act in dishonor (unless they're juding you).
Trustworthiness: You can trust them to stay true to what has been agreed upon. Nothing more. On the other hand, the treacherous Paladin isn't trustworth a bit when you hire him to kill.
Reliability: They do not display the opposit. Far from it, actually. But to the limit of their evil.
The big seller for me on Law vs. Chaos especially in respect to devils and demons is that if you ask a Lawful creature "Why did you do that?" they will give you a reason. Whereas a Chaotic creature will mostly fall back on "Because I wanted to." Even a snap judgement from a devil is implied to be very goal oriented and thought out, but even the demons with high Int are shown to mostly fall back on raw instinct.
Admittedly by this perspective most players lean towards Chaotic during play even if their characters are Lawful, especially after the dice start turning against them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TOZ's post above has a great view on the topic. Like any matter of morality, ever, discussion of it has to be in a context or it breaks down under the arguing of/for 'absolute rules', for which IMO there never can be.
In many a court of law, for example, killing someone is perfectly legal for certain reasons if they can be proven. Self defense for example. Kill someone in self defense you are not going to jail. Kill the same person in the same manner to steal their lunch money and your spending a long time in prison. Someone was killed in both scenarios but the REASONS make the difference, the details.
It has been my impression that those of a lawful view generally stress the status of the many as more important than the status of the individual in the long haul. They do not discount the individual but in the long run they believe that society at large is best served with organized structure and their lives are generally lived to reflect that belief.
To contrast the above those of a chaotic view generally stress the status of the individual as more important than the status of the masses in the long haul. They do not discount the masses or society completely but in the long run they believe that individuals have a more important placement in existence than society and their lives are generally lived to reflect that belief. Their view is more aimed at personal interactions.
Neutrals generally discount a need for an overriding process altogether and will pursue whatever means will meet their beliefs, evil, good or balance/non interference. If no organization works then great, enhance the individual to the max. If society works then great enhance society to the max. If a mix works then great, go with the flow. If destroying them all works then great, make balance.
Now I have bolded generally a lot but that is becasue the statements I made are not to be looked at as absolutes. Characters follow those alignments as a goal but sometimes they will act outside that standard as individual cases arise. That is what makes them people and not robots with programmed action trees.
Exceptions can and will exist for each character and that is OK as long as those exceptions can be explained, do not become the standard for their actions and are not so antithetical to their core beliefs as to be absurd.
The above has served me well in almost all the games I have played over the years and I find most GM's I have played with agree with me. Where there has been difference we talked it over and came to a consensus. The key is to respect those you play with and communicate.
But in general I have found that using the above guidelines serves me well and works pretty good at any table I have played at.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Modern Japan is my yardstick for a RL Lawful Neutral society
Group > Individual
Tradition > everything
Always obey the letter of a law as much as possible
Reliability is the highest virtue
There are no excuses for failing in your duties
There is no harsher fate than being excluded from the group
Obey those above you. Expect obedience from those below you
Trust those inside the group. Distrust outsiders
And so on
All this seems well and good, to be honest. (No good/evil check intended.) And ... now it falls a little apart because what happens when you get that warrior from a primitive tribe who can trace her tribe's history back to Starfall, maintains a code of honour to the point paladins think she's a stick in the mud, devotes herself entirely to protecting the tribe ... and does so by going into a rage when they're threatened? At least, until the gods think she's getting too lawful for her own good?