A similar issue is: "why do creatures from the frozen north always deal Cold damage? All their natural foes are resistant or immune to Cold!"I did find that amusing.
The white dragon can breathe cold and ice! To which everything around it that it would be prone to use it on (silver dragons, frost giants, winter wolves, other white dragons...) is utterly immune. I guess he can use it on the occasional polar bear, just for giggles, even though it would be wildly overkill, like killing flies with a blowtorch.
To be fair, a white dragon does use its breath for other purposes such as burying treasure, and against its normal prey (probably mammoths and whales and other arctic animals) it is plenty effective.
I think cold damage to most northern creatures is just an environmental side effect on their biology (being infused with elemental cold) that doesn't really serve an evolutionary purpose
Even with good and evil being objective, cosmic forces, I still believe that people should be punished for making evil choices, not for having evil natures.This is not how Alignment works in-universe. Not for mortals, anyway. Alignment is entirely descriptive of behavior. If you haven't done anything Evil, then you aren't Evil. It is in the doing of something Evil that you become Evil.
The lore has always been somewhat contradictory on the subject, depending on whose writing it.
For example, the old 'Helmet of Opposite Alignment' thing. If a Good person puts it on by accident, they haven't done anything evil, and yet they become Evil immediately. So their outlook has become Evil and this will cause them to commit evil deeds in the future? Is that what Evil means?
And how come, say, White Dragons are (more or less) all Evil? Do they all commit evil deeds as soon as they're hatched and then turn Evil, or are they born that way?
I tend to run it that Evil deeds (like using a Wand of Infernal Healing) cause you to turn Evil, while regular evil deeds (like fireballing an orphanage) are things you would only do if you were Evil already.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The lore has always been somewhat contradictory on the subject, depending on whose writing it.
It's really not. At least not in Pathfinder.
For example, the old 'Helmet of Opposite Alignment' thing. If a Good person puts it on by accident, they haven't done anything evil, and yet they become Evil immediately. So their outlook has become Evil and this will cause them to commit evil deeds in the future? Is that what Evil means?
The Helm is a specific magical exception and has actual language reinforcing that fact. Using it as an example of how alignment normally works is like saying flying creatures all fall slowly when knocked from the air because that's how the fly spell works.
And how come, say, White Dragons are (more or less) all Evil? Do they all commit evil deeds as soon as they're hatched and then turn Evil, or are they born that way?
White Dragons don't have any traits making them 'all' Evil any more than goblins or any other species listed in the book as such. Presumably, like other such creatures, they're culturally Evil. They clearly have a culture, and it's pretty unpleasant as described.
I tend to run it that Evil deeds (like using a Wand of Infernal Healing) cause you to turn Evil, while regular evil deeds (like fireballing an orphanage) are things you would only do if you were Evil already.
You can always do whatever you want. Burning an orphanage out of nowhere is very unlikely, but mass murder in another context might be something you were pushed to by your own rage or the like...it doesn't require having committed other crimes first to happen. Making it so that it does is weirdly divorced from any semblance of realism and not supported by the book rules at all.
I think it is: evil soul becomes an evil petitioner that (possibly) becomes a devil/demon/daemon (or whatnot). It is a fairly marginal thing: the odds are that it won't be a big empowerment of evil (most evil petitioners don't rise very high). A good soul could spend eternity singing "Joy to the World" (Jeremy was a Bullfrog version for CG) and not adding a lot to the forces of Good. On the other hand, that redeemed gnoll might end up becoming a Solar instead of a Balor.I don't believe that's true in Pathfinder (not sure if you're talking about D&D, PF, or Psychopass).Killing Evil creatures sends them to the Evil planes, thereby strengthening Evil on the cosmic scale. Better to redeem them if you can.It's only catch-22 if you equate lawful process with "good". Their execution has nothing to do with their crimes. They are being killed because they are objectively evil and killing them is a good act because the alignment based damage being used to kill them is objectively good.Mind you one thing I quite like about alignment Damage is that it could lead to a pyschopass style dystopia were cities went about actively purging evil from them with detect evil sensors and alignment damaged based turrets on every corner to mow down anyone that pings as evil, its flawless because the turrets can't hurt collateral as only evil creatures are damaged by them.There's a funny catch-22 that prevents this: executing humanoids without evidence of a crime being committed could be considered an evil act. Psycho Pass works because the system's definition of evil is inherently flawed and is frankly closer to what Pathfinder alignment would consider to be chaotic.
You're right, I thought creature meant specifically outsider in this context for some reason, not a mortal.
This becomes more complicated with Law and Chaos thrown in, since they're much less defined and from what I've seen do depend on the character's views (or are there acts that are universally chaotic/lawful that a normal person might perform?).
Keep in mind that lawful isn't always literally about following the law - it can be just that you have a very set Black/white worldview and are very inflexible - you can absolutely be a lawful evil criminal or a lawful good vigilante for example (this is how you can end up with a paladin breaking the party rogue out of prison or fighting against an evil tyrant who is technically legally sanctioned)
Sometimes the law that you respect is a personal code, and the actual literal legal system is secondary to that.
|
|
Keep in mind that lawful isn't always literally about following the law - it can be just that you have a very set Black/white worldview and are very inflexible - you can absolutely be a lawful evil criminal or a lawful good vigilante for example (this is how you can end up with a paladin breaking the party rogue out of prison or fighting against an evil tyrant who is technically legally sanctioned)
Sometimes the law that you respect is a personal code, and the actual literal legal system is secondary to that.
Way I see it, based on my experience of Japan, which I consider as a RL Lawful culture, what matters is not if the law is aligned with your tastes but if it is compatible with the traditions of your culture.
Refusing to obey the law because you disagree with it is not the first thing a Lawful person will do.But if the law goes contrary to your cultural tradition, then the Lawful person will adhere to their tradition while trying their utmost to respect at least the letter of the law. Because openly disrespecting a law is pretty foreign to the Lawful mindset.
Tradition > local law > personal preferences
Of course a Lawful person can still do Neutral acts or even Chaotic acts, but only in rare circumstances.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This becomes more complicated with Law and Chaos thrown in, since they're much less defined and from what I've seen do depend on the character's views (or are there acts that are universally chaotic/lawful that a normal person might perform?).
I find the easiest way to tell the difference between lawful and chaotic individuals is how important to them it is that their belief system be also believed and acted upon by others.
A lawful evil person, is evil and might break the law occasionally for their own good(just as a LG person might break the law occasionally for other's good), but any line they aren't personally willing to cross they will strongly judge others for crossing.
a chaotic person won't try to impose their beliefs on others, only their outcomes. they'd rather beat someone up for breaking their beliefs than pressure them to conform. strongly chaotic people will probably also take issue with people imposing their beliefs on others in tyrannical manners such as slavery or rigid caste systems.
like when dealing with a slaver, a LG person would probably try to get the slaver into a different business and lecture him on how having a skilled workforce can be more beneficial, a CG person would just try to free the slaves.
i guess at it's basest I consider the difference between lawful and chaotic is how much you feel the opinions of your culture or neighbors matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A similar issue is: "why do creatures from the frozen north always deal Cold damage? All their natural foes are resistant or immune to Cold!"I did find that amusing.
The white dragon can breathe cold and ice! To which everything around it that it would be prone to use it on (silver dragons, frost giants, winter wolves, other white dragons...) is utterly immune. I guess he can use it on the occasional polar bear, just for giggles, even though it would be wildly overkill, like killing flies with a blowtorch.
This is exactly why the remorhaz - or as my players call it, "the fire dragon of the ice cave" - is one of my all-time favorite monsters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tradition should definitely take precedence over local law.
As an example: A kingdom is ruled by the whims of a chaotic monarch. It does not matter whether this monarch is good or evil -- his arbitrary inconsistency would almost certainly provoke a revolt by any lawful neutral nobles under him. It would not matter that they are violating his (current) local laws when they do it.
Its also just common sense, most societies are made up of ordinary people just going with the flow - evil regimes happen more due to a small group of evil individuals taking advantage of the majorities neutral indifference (or good, but not brave enough to go against the grain).
Your average Chelaxian is probably not pulling the wings of flies and kicking puppies for fun, they are probably just living their life and doing what they are told.
Granted that this is a fantasy setting with entire races that are inherently evil (or damn near) it is no way common sense. If you look at the entry of several nation/states/kingdoms in Golarion they have alignments. That can either be the alignment of Ruler(s) or its a "average" alignment of the inhabitants. Possibly policies of said nations. Problem is when Rulers alignment and the nations don't add up (Taldor prior to Europia)
So unless you have a source on that its likely opinion.
Doing what you are told is literally what plenty evil folks say (I was just following order) IRL. Its not a very "good" (see what I did :D) expression when discussing evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to view the Law/Chaos axis more like Order/Chaos (or Order/Freedom). I think this tends to be more helpful since “lawful” often confuses players and GMs in my experience since the alignment doesn’t really have all that much to do with following the law.
Lawful characters tend to value laws and following the law, but that’s because they believe in a structured society.