Congratulations. You found one exception for both out of the dozens/hundreds in lore. I guess angels shouldn't be Good also because there are a few Fallen Solars and Planetars around.
I am aware of BOTH of these exceptions and they are just that, exceptions.
Especially Fall-from-Grace (the LN succubus from PS:T). She changed after a long long long time in demon years. She didn't wake up one day and decide to be neutral. It took a tremendous effort of will to go against her nature.
Same with Sundar. His story says that his very strong will made him go against the vampiric nature and instincts. Also elves by nature have strong wills, because of their long years and wisdom. Especially Sun/Gold Elves.
Demons and Vampires are evil. Their very nature is evil. Extremely few might go against their nature. The very few exceptions don't break this rule.
Also this is what happened: "A vampire can be of any evil alignment, and if its alignment was not evil in life, it becomes so in undeath."
Once again, alignment is about BEING. Detect Evil doesn't detect evil creatures because they are perceived as evil. It's because they ARE, Evil. If an evil person dies, he doesn't go to the Nine Hells or the Abyss or whatever because others thought he was evil. It's because he was Evil.
Alignment is a personal thing about the personality of that being. NOT how it is perceived by others. A tyrant that is worshiped is still Lawful Evil just presenting himself in a Lawful Good way.
Just because one dog you found doesn't bark ever, doesn't mean that it is true for all dogs.
I would also advise on reading some lore and rules about demons, vampires and alignment and not use RL morality and exceptions in the FR setting.
TL;DR: These are the exceptions that prove the rule.
Congratulations. You found one exception for both out of the dozens/hundreds in lore. I guess angels shouldn't be Good also because there are a few Fallen Solars and Planetars around.
I am aware of BOTH of these exceptions and they are just that, exceptions.
Especially Fall-from-Grace (the LN succubus from PS:T). She changed after a long long long time in demon years. She didn't wake up one day and decide to be neutral. It took a tremendous effort of will to go against her nature.
Same with Sundar. His story says that his very strong will made him go against the vampiric nature and instincts. Also elves by nature have strong wills, because of their long years and wisdom. Especially Sun/Gold Elves.
Demons and Vampires are evil. Their very nature is evil. Extremely few might go against their nature. The very few exceptions don't break this rule.
Also this is what happened: "A vampire can be of any evil alignment, and if its alignment was not evil in life, it becomes so in undeath."
Once again, alignment is about BEING. Detect Evil doesn't detect evil creatures because they are perceived as evil. It's because they ARE, Evil. If an evil person dies, he doesn't go to the Nine Hells or the Abyss or whatever because others thought he was evil. It's because he was Evil.
Alignment is a personal thing about the personality of that being. NOT how it is perceived by others. A tyrant that is worshiped is still Lawful Evil just presenting himself in a Lawful Good way.
Just because one dog you found doesn't bark ever, doesn't mean that it is true for all dogs.
I would also advise on reading some lore and rules about demons, vampires and alignment and not use RL morality and exceptions in the FR setting.
TL;DR: These are the exceptions that prove the rule.
I'm not arguing exceptions. I'm arguing what alignment IS in DnD? In essence we are arguing, in DnD whether being Evil is Nature or Nurture?
You're saying that being Evil is Nature, while I'm arguing being Evil is Nurture (or at least partly).
My point is IF Alignments in DnD SOLELY about Nature, then ALL vampires and ALL demons should be aligned EVIL, regardless of their personal choices. In other words, Fall-from-Grace would be aligned evil, because her "nature" of being a Ta'nari DESPITE her choices to be good (neutral).
Once again, this is argument about Nature vs Nurture. I get your point of view.
But it looks like within Wizard of the Coast itself, with hundreds of writers, game developers, etc... there is a confusion about this issue as well. It appears Wizard of the Coast is not explicitly clear about this issue. Therefore each writers are free to include their own interpretation of what "Alignment" is in DnD. As evidence... Fall from Grace, Jander Sunstar, Drizzt, etc... were created by those writers who interpret Alignment being "Nurture". Whereas Hexxat were created by writers who are in your "Nature" camp.
I think Wizard of the Coast need to get their Sh!t together and make it clear which way the argument goes once and for all.
And once again, I'm expressing my opinion, that slapping label on a character being "Evil", "Good", or "Neutral" is essentially framing a character in a box, which is very limiting in storytelling. I hope Wizard of the Coast will one day do away with these childish labels and set their characters free.
Here's where you are wrong, I'll try to be clearer.
Alignment is neither nature nor nurture. Alignment defines what they ARE at their present state. If that's by nature or nurture or choices, is another case. Alignment is what they are the moment, not how they got there. You might be Good and become corrupted and Evil or be Evil and be redeemed in the future. This is what I mean that it's about BEING and not perception.
Angels are created to be Good incarnated, they're so by nature. Extremely few might become Fallen and Evil. Demons are created by the Abyss to be Chaotic Evil, that's their nature. Even fewer might become Neutral or Good.
Vampires are Evil by nature. When they are turned, they become Evil. Extremely few might fight the instincts and their nature. Sundar was Chaotic Neutral. Most elves are Chaotic Good.
Just because it's in their nature, it doesn't mean that it's absolutely impossible to change. It means that if they try to do it, they'll be going against their nature.
Drow are RAISED to be Evil. Their society made them Evil by a young age. But most are evil by nurture. They are still elves. If you take a Drow baby and raise it, it will be whatever you raise it to be. In fact, there are Eilistraeen societies that are like that. They are raised to be good.
Also WotC tried to change the whole alignment thing, making it far looser. They ended up with Paladins that can be of any alignment. And with MAJOR and radical changes to both rules and the setting to make things more compatible. That didn't turn out too well as both the rules and the Realms were basically unrecognizable.
Planescape depends on alignments. If you remove alignments, the Planescape setting doesn't work simply.
This is what I mean that if you change or remove the alignments, you will have to remake everything almost.
Once again: "Good and Evil are not philosophical concepts in the DnD game, they are forces that define the Cosmos." - Player's Handbook 3.5E.
Before anyone says that this doesn't apply because this isn't 3.5E, Planescape is proof of this and it's ADnD 2E.
Here's where you are wrong, I'll try to be clearer.
Alignment is neither nature nor nurture. Alignment defines what they ARE at their present state. If that's by nature or nurture or choices, is another case. Alignment is what they are the moment, not how they got there. You might be Good and become corrupted and Evil or be Evil and be redeemed in the future. This is what I mean that it's about BEING and not perception.
Vampires are Evil by nature. When they are turned, they become Evil. Extremely few might fight the instincts and their nature. Sundar was Chaotic Neutral. Most elves are Chaotic Good.
Here's where you are wrong. Let me give you a simple illustration.
RACE in DnD is about BEING. Yes? A Dwarf is a dwarf because he IS a dwarf. Regardsless if this dwarf in question, act, talk, behave or think like an elf. His/Her Race will still be Dwarf.
Yes?
You said alignment is about BEING. Believe me I get your point...
IF alignment IS about BEING (as much about BEING as RACE). Being vampires will put vampires' Alignment to be automatically EVIL. That fact is NOT supported in reality. Here we have Vampire character AND Ta'nari Character who are NOT Evil align.
My question is... Why are they NOT evil alignment??? Do they stop "being" vampire or Ta'nari when they become Neutral alignment?
IF alignment is about BEING, then instinct be damn... they can act and behave as good as they what. Their alignment SHOULD be still Evil. Because, like you said, alignment is not about instinct or actions, it's about BEING-ness.
The very fact you have OFFICIAL vampire character who is NOT evil ALIGN. One of these two things must be wrong.
Either...
A) Wizard of the Coast made a typo error, when they make Jander Sunstar's alignment to be "Neutral".
or
B ) Alignment is not about BEING-ness but more about perception.
Do you understand this logic so far?
You said "Vampires are Evil by nature. When they are turned, they become Evil. Extremely few might fight the instincts and their nature."
What does "fighting the instinct..." got anything to do with a vampire's alignment. Under your description of alignment, vampire SHOULD be aligned Evil, REGARDLESS of their actions, instinct or whatever... Or are you admitting that alignment is "partly" about actions and instincts?
@bernardchu d&d and most epic fantasy purports a essentialist world-view. morality is ontological not ethical. the exceptions are simply small ruptures in this fabric. you know, "the exception that proves the rule"
you must have heard of that...
these vampires are not evil because they are aberrations, they are impure, imperfect archetypes. tainted by virtue, you could say.
breaking these rules of what-is-what serves to reinforce both the character and the archetype itself. it's like a feedback loop.
if you don't understand this then i'm afraid there's a lot you don't understand about the underlying "philosophy" of most fantasy writer's works. you missed the general feel, the emotional power of concepts such as destiny and tragic guilt.
edit: for example, how would you otherwise explain concepts such as "true neutral" in the real world? in the real world a fundamentalist ideology of restoring "balance" and "natural order" to everything would be seen as cold and inhumane, virtually evil.
d&d and most epic fantasy purports a essentialist world-view. morality is ontological not ethical. the exceptions are simply small ruptures in this fabric. you know, "the exception that proves the rule"
I understand what DnD is trying to make alignment into. In "Theory" they want Alignment to be not about philosophical believe of what's good and what's evil, but rather but an underlying "nature" of a being. Such as Vampire and Demons are evil because they are powered by the essense of evil.
However, if Vampire is evil because they are undead being. Then, what grant a HUMAN character his Evil Alignment? He is neither undead neither a demon. The only thing that points to his "evil-ness" is his ethical believe. And THAT is philosophical believe.
I can't help to think although in Theory Wizard of the Coast "intended" alignment to be NOT about philosophy concept but in Practice, alignment come across as philosophical believe of good and evil.
For example, when Viconia and Sarevok changed their alignment from Evil to Good/Neutral. What is it about them that change, to merit a Good/Neutral alignment? The answer to that is their BELIEVE. It is their world view and perception changed, therefore their alignment also changed. This alone already against DnD rule (read below) about what Good and Evil is in DnD universe.
"Good and Evil are NOT PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTS in the DnD game, they are forces that define the Cosmos." - Player's Handbook 3.5E."
I'm pretty tired of this thread. Stop over-analyzing DnD. Most of it's rules don't make sense. Because it's made as a game, not anything else.
Why are there alignments? Why are vampires evil? Why are angels good? Why are 100+ year old level 1 elf mages, as powerful as 20 year old level 1 human mages? Why do you need to prepare spells? Why does a naked level 30 Fighter with 10 Dex have the same AC as a level 1 Fighter with 10 AC? Why haven't all the epic dragons/liches/whatever taken over the world yet if they are that powerful? Why and how dragons fly if they are too heavy and big for their wings? Why are dragons literate and speak Common? Did they go to school? Why are pixies intelligent if they have the brain size of a chicken? Why are your stats fixated if you can work out and get more intelligent?
Because game, fantasy, tradition and reasons. If you disagree with it, don't include them in your setting or make your own game. For now, this is how things work because the books say so.
However, if Vampire is evil because they are undead being. Then, what grant a HUMAN character his Evil Alignment? He is neither undead neither a demon. The only thing that points to his "evil-ness" is his ethical believe. And THAT is philosophical believe.
humans can have any alignment but when they are evil, their being evil is the same kind of thing as a vampire being evil. with vampires it's their nature of being a vampire that makes them evil, and with a human it's his nature of being an evil human being. an evil human is not evil because of what he does or believes in, but because of what he is, just like a vampire. his beliefs and actions stem from alignment, alignment isn't determined by them; it always comes first in the equation. there's nothing prior to alignment that determines it, that's why it's said that "Good and Evil are NOT PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTS in the DnD game, they are forces that define the Cosmos." - Player's Handbook 3.5E."
you you see, forces that DEFINE the cosmos, primary forces, primary causes etc.
@Archaos if you're tired, don't read it d&d can be analyzed and understood just fine, just like any work of literature can. basically d&d is a work of literature, with the exception that it isn't read but played but the template is still a certain text.
If it's up to me, I will do away with "Alignment" systems in DnD. It's really stupid to categorized people as "Good", "Evil"...
Good and Evil is a very 2 dimensional point of view, there is no depth to it. It's cartoonish, Childlike way of thinking of the world and human's actions. The world is a shade of grey! So body does good all the time and neither anybody does evil all the time. The world is full of people doing whatever they think is BEST for them.
The following is my take on the alignment system and hiw to make sense of it as a system for beeing something certain crwatures are inheritely are and as a expression of a creatures free will:
I think there are kind of two types od alignments. The "absolute" alignments which are represented by some sort of good, evil, chaotic and lawful energy. They dictate what a detect alignment spell shows. What alignment restricted items and spells domeone can use. Negative energy is just a plain evil thing. Vampires are powered by that sort of energy. Therefore anyone that is turned into a Vampire turns evil and would need a lot of willpower to resist that.
Now the other form of alignment. This is the one how characters behav and probably the rwason why the alignment system was created. To give players a framework to play their characters consistently. It is basically a crutch that helps people who are not so good at roleplaying to play a character consistently but for everyone else it creates a barrier to play a character that isn't extremely black and white. This subjective alignment influences the absolute alignment. If you do good things your character is infused with good energy and you can use artifacts or spells that are restricted to good absolute alignment. Now something like a Vampire that is fueled by negative energy and was created by the infusion of negative energy is forced to behave evil by that energy unless it manages to resit. In the case of resistance we got another problem. If the vampire resists the negative energy it will be infused with less of the negative energy and with positive energy. Now this could lead to two thinsgs.
a) the vampire needs negative energy and therefore is weakened or even destroyed by the lack of negative energy and the for it poisonous influence of positive energy.
b) a Vampire does not need negative energy but some sort of energy in general. The psotive energy could substitute for the negative energy. This would lead to the change of the vampirws abilities. A vampire that is not infusednwith negative energy can not level drain because he lacks the negative plane touch. It would probably have a touch that would be restorative instead.
These two cases are not mutually exclusive. Fall from Grace falls into category b since she has speels associated with positive energy. While case a seems to be more likely for a vampire. They are adter all turned by good aligned priests. That would mean that good aligned vampires would be extremely rare and that they would be much weaker than normal vampires.
The difference would be that vampires existance is based on the negative energy while demons only have their abilities based on the energy form.
By differentiating between te absolute and relative alignment we can create a system that allows more varied characters that are not black and white through the relative alignment and still keep the absolute system that dictates certain spells and restricts item usage.
Comments
Congratulations. You found one exception for both out of the dozens/hundreds in lore.
I guess angels shouldn't be Good also because there are a few Fallen Solars and Planetars around.
I am aware of BOTH of these exceptions and they are just that, exceptions.
Especially Fall-from-Grace (the LN succubus from PS:T). She changed after a long long long time in demon years.
She didn't wake up one day and decide to be neutral. It took a tremendous effort of will to go against her nature.
Same with Sundar. His story says that his very strong will made him go against the vampiric nature and instincts.
Also elves by nature have strong wills, because of their long years and wisdom. Especially Sun/Gold Elves.
Demons and Vampires are evil. Their very nature is evil. Extremely few might go against their nature.
The very few exceptions don't break this rule.
Also this is what happened: "A vampire can be of any evil alignment, and if its alignment was not evil in life, it becomes so in undeath."
Once again, alignment is about BEING.
Detect Evil doesn't detect evil creatures because they are perceived as evil. It's because they ARE, Evil.
If an evil person dies, he doesn't go to the Nine Hells or the Abyss or whatever because others thought he was evil. It's because he was Evil.
Alignment is a personal thing about the personality of that being. NOT how it is perceived by others.
A tyrant that is worshiped is still Lawful Evil just presenting himself in a Lawful Good way.
Just because one dog you found doesn't bark ever, doesn't mean that it is true for all dogs.
I would also advise on reading some lore and rules about demons, vampires and alignment and not use RL morality and exceptions in the FR setting.
TL;DR: These are the exceptions that prove the rule.
You're saying that being Evil is Nature, while I'm arguing being Evil is Nurture (or at least partly).
My point is IF Alignments in DnD SOLELY about Nature, then ALL vampires and ALL demons should be aligned EVIL, regardless of their personal choices. In other words, Fall-from-Grace would be aligned evil, because her "nature" of being a Ta'nari DESPITE her choices to be good (neutral).
Once again, this is argument about Nature vs Nurture. I get your point of view.
But it looks like within Wizard of the Coast itself, with hundreds of writers, game developers, etc... there is a confusion about this issue as well. It appears Wizard of the Coast is not explicitly clear about this issue. Therefore each writers are free to include their own interpretation of what "Alignment" is in DnD. As evidence... Fall from Grace, Jander Sunstar, Drizzt, etc... were created by those writers who interpret Alignment being "Nurture". Whereas Hexxat were created by writers who are in your "Nature" camp.
I think Wizard of the Coast need to get their Sh!t together and make it clear which way the argument goes once and for all.
And once again, I'm expressing my opinion, that slapping label on a character being "Evil", "Good", or "Neutral" is essentially framing a character in a box, which is very limiting in storytelling. I hope Wizard of the Coast will one day do away with these childish labels and set their characters free.
Here's where you are wrong, I'll try to be clearer.
Alignment is neither nature nor nurture. Alignment defines what they ARE at their present state.
If that's by nature or nurture or choices, is another case. Alignment is what they are the moment, not how they got there.
You might be Good and become corrupted and Evil or be Evil and be redeemed in the future.
This is what I mean that it's about BEING and not perception.
Angels are created to be Good incarnated, they're so by nature. Extremely few might become Fallen and Evil.
Demons are created by the Abyss to be Chaotic Evil, that's their nature. Even fewer might become Neutral or Good.
Vampires are Evil by nature. When they are turned, they become Evil. Extremely few might fight the instincts and their nature. Sundar was Chaotic Neutral. Most elves are Chaotic Good.
Just because it's in their nature, it doesn't mean that it's absolutely impossible to change. It means that if they try to do it, they'll be going against their nature.
Drow are RAISED to be Evil. Their society made them Evil by a young age. But most are evil by nurture. They are still elves.
If you take a Drow baby and raise it, it will be whatever you raise it to be.
In fact, there are Eilistraeen societies that are like that. They are raised to be good.
Also WotC tried to change the whole alignment thing, making it far looser.
They ended up with Paladins that can be of any alignment. And with MAJOR and radical changes to both rules and the setting to make things more compatible.
That didn't turn out too well as both the rules and the Realms were basically unrecognizable.
Planescape depends on alignments. If you remove alignments, the Planescape setting doesn't work simply.
This is what I mean that if you change or remove the alignments, you will have to remake everything almost.
Once again:
"Good and Evil are not philosophical concepts in the DnD game, they are forces that define the Cosmos." - Player's Handbook 3.5E.
Before anyone says that this doesn't apply because this isn't 3.5E, Planescape is proof of this and it's ADnD 2E.
RACE in DnD is about BEING. Yes?
A Dwarf is a dwarf because he IS a dwarf. Regardsless if this dwarf in question, act, talk, behave or think like an elf. His/Her Race will still be Dwarf.
Yes?
You said alignment is about BEING. Believe me I get your point...
IF alignment IS about BEING (as much about BEING as RACE). Being vampires will put vampires' Alignment to be automatically EVIL. That fact is NOT supported in reality. Here we have Vampire character AND Ta'nari Character who are NOT Evil align.
My question is... Why are they NOT evil alignment??? Do they stop "being" vampire or Ta'nari when they become Neutral alignment?
IF alignment is about BEING, then instinct be damn... they can act and behave as good as they what. Their alignment SHOULD be still Evil. Because, like you said, alignment is not about instinct or actions, it's about BEING-ness.
The very fact you have OFFICIAL vampire character who is NOT evil ALIGN. One of these two things must be wrong.
Either...
A) Wizard of the Coast made a typo error, when they make Jander Sunstar's alignment to be "Neutral".
or
B ) Alignment is not about BEING-ness but more about perception.
Do you understand this logic so far?
You said "Vampires are Evil by nature. When they are turned, they become Evil. Extremely few might fight the instincts and their nature."
What does "fighting the instinct..." got anything to do with a vampire's alignment. Under your description of alignment, vampire SHOULD be aligned Evil, REGARDLESS of their actions, instinct or whatever... Or are you admitting that alignment is "partly" about actions and instincts?
d&d and most epic fantasy purports a essentialist world-view. morality is ontological not ethical. the exceptions are simply small ruptures in this fabric. you know, "the exception that proves the rule"
you must have heard of that...
these vampires are not evil because they are aberrations, they are impure, imperfect archetypes. tainted by virtue, you could say.
breaking these rules of what-is-what serves to reinforce both the character and the archetype itself. it's like a feedback loop.
if you don't understand this then i'm afraid there's a lot you don't understand about the underlying "philosophy" of most fantasy writer's works. you missed the general feel, the emotional power of concepts such as destiny and tragic guilt.
edit: for example, how would you otherwise explain concepts such as "true neutral" in the real world? in the real world a fundamentalist ideology of restoring "balance" and "natural order" to everything would be seen as cold and inhumane, virtually evil.
However, if Vampire is evil because they are undead being.
Then, what grant a HUMAN character his Evil Alignment? He is neither undead neither a demon.
The only thing that points to his "evil-ness" is his ethical believe. And THAT is philosophical believe.
I can't help to think although in Theory Wizard of the Coast "intended" alignment to be NOT about philosophy concept but in Practice, alignment come across as philosophical believe of good and evil.
For example, when Viconia and Sarevok changed their alignment from Evil to Good/Neutral.
What is it about them that change, to merit a Good/Neutral alignment?
The answer to that is their BELIEVE. It is their world view and perception changed, therefore their alignment also changed. This alone already against DnD rule (read below) about what Good and Evil is in DnD universe.
"Good and Evil are NOT PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTS in the DnD game, they are forces that define the Cosmos." - Player's Handbook 3.5E."
I'm pretty tired of this thread.
Stop over-analyzing DnD. Most of it's rules don't make sense. Because it's made as a game, not anything else.
Why are there alignments?
Why are vampires evil?
Why are angels good?
Why are 100+ year old level 1 elf mages, as powerful as 20 year old level 1 human mages?
Why do you need to prepare spells?
Why does a naked level 30 Fighter with 10 Dex have the same AC as a level 1 Fighter with 10 AC?
Why haven't all the epic dragons/liches/whatever taken over the world yet if they are that powerful?
Why and how dragons fly if they are too heavy and big for their wings?
Why are dragons literate and speak Common? Did they go to school?
Why are pixies intelligent if they have the brain size of a chicken?
Why are your stats fixated if you can work out and get more intelligent?
Because game, fantasy, tradition and reasons.
If you disagree with it, don't include them in your setting or make your own game.
For now, this is how things work because the books say so.
This is why Hexxat is evil. /thread
I'm out.
you you see, forces that DEFINE the cosmos, primary forces, primary causes etc.
@Archaos
if you're tired, don't read it
d&d can be analyzed and understood just fine, just like any work of literature can. basically d&d is a work of literature, with the exception that it isn't read but played but the template is still a certain text.
I think there are kind of two types od alignments. The "absolute" alignments which are represented by some sort of good, evil, chaotic and lawful energy. They dictate what a detect alignment spell shows. What alignment restricted items and spells domeone can use. Negative energy is just a plain evil thing. Vampires are powered by that sort of energy. Therefore anyone that is turned into a Vampire turns evil and would need a lot of willpower to resist that.
Now the other form of alignment. This is the one how characters behav and probably the rwason why the alignment system was created. To give players a framework to play their characters consistently. It is basically a crutch that helps people who are not so good at roleplaying to play a character consistently but for everyone else it creates a barrier to play a character that isn't extremely black and white. This subjective alignment influences the absolute alignment. If you do good things your character is infused with good energy and you can use artifacts or spells that are restricted to good absolute alignment. Now something like a Vampire that is fueled by negative energy and was created by the infusion of negative energy is forced to behave evil by that energy unless it manages to resit. In the case of resistance we got another problem. If the vampire resists the negative energy it will be infused with less of the negative energy and with positive energy. Now this could lead to two thinsgs.
a) the vampire needs negative energy and therefore is weakened or even destroyed by the lack of negative energy and the for it poisonous influence of positive energy.
b) a Vampire does not need negative energy but some sort of energy in general. The psotive energy could substitute for the negative energy. This would lead to the change of the vampirws abilities. A vampire that is not infusednwith negative energy can not level drain because he lacks the negative plane touch. It would probably have a touch that would be restorative instead.
These two cases are not mutually exclusive. Fall from Grace falls into category b since she has speels associated with positive energy. While case a seems to be more likely for a vampire. They are adter all turned by good aligned priests. That would mean that good aligned vampires would be extremely rare and that they would be much weaker than normal vampires.
The difference would be that vampires existance is based on the negative energy while demons only have their abilities based on the energy form.
By differentiating between te absolute and relative alignment we can create a system that allows more varied characters that are not black and white through the relative alignment and still keep the absolute system that dictates certain spells and restricts item usage.