Law vs Chaos | Running the Game

[@renanguillen4952]

Matthew, I began to watch this series and I'm in episode 20 something. Can't believe you are still running this till today! Your channel is helping me DM my first table and you are the reason for it. Thank you so much! Greetings from Brazil

[@deujales6029]

You're in for a treat. I'm also a fellow Brazilian, and I've been following this guy for quite a while. Check out his novels on amazon if you like his content, they're pretty fucking awesome as well.

[@gengar1187]

Hahaha do you know he also made 2million on kickstarter? Senpai is just the fukkin best man

[@Eon2641]

A chaotic good character would slow down, just in case. A chaotic evil one would speed up, just in case.

[@oz_jones]

I had to click the like think three times just so that I could like this tiwce.

[@daverevisions2843]

Video request in this series - Neutrality vs. Balance. The character who is the utter pragmatist and could take any course of action based on motivation vs. the character who actively tries to make sure all things are kept in check on all sides.

[@idavisband]

I think he has a video on that topic.

[@idavisband]

@ZoixivTheCat I think he talks about it in his wang rod video.

[@idavisband]

Or the different types of players. That's not the titles of the videos. It might be his alignment video. I'm not his glossary/index you would just have to binge his videos.

[@WraithMagus]

I'll copy this from a response I made in another video... I've often told new players that it's better to think of alignment as having two factors: Their "dogmatic alignment", and their "practical alignment". There's often a problem when people think of alignments as something that people both believe in and always act upon. In D&D, there are people who actually straight-up worship murder and think evil is best, and these are "dogmatically evil", but generally, compelling villains are dogmatically good or neutral, but do evil things because they are driven by patriotism or duty to become ruthless or even genocidal. An elf that has come to genocidally drive back both orc and human invaders to their woods is evil, but they still likely pray to a good deity and believe that good is best, just that "they did what they had to do" to protect some greater purpose, and this is "practical alignment". I most often see the problem with people talking about True Neutral, where they think that True Neutral as an alignment can only exist if someone actually worships neutrality itself, which is not at all how it generally works. Most humans are true neutral (at least practically); They may believe in good, but most people are too cowardly or selfish or parochial to actually be self-sacrificing for their beliefs. (It's perfectly normal for evil characters to be self-sacrificing for family or close relations - the point is that they're willing to do horrible things to anyone outside the couple people they care about.) Many average humans are "dogmatically Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic Good", but actually act True Neutral because they are willing to bend their beliefs depending upon what favors them or their families in the moment. --- When you talk about "Neutrality vs. Balance", you're talking about whether someone actually *believes* in neutrality as an ideal to live up to, versus whether someone has other kinds of ideals that they just don't live up to.

[@DimT670]

Neutral neutral. That's what you are describing. That alignment is the most diverse one. It can support a character who has no interest in helping or hindering others, who does not particularly care about systems of governance, and what you describe

[@warrenschoberth7710]

Alignment change! I had a player that rolled a C/N Rogue. One day she decides to assault a dwarf banker woman, loot the vaults, and leave the dwarf for dead. Everyone was shocked during the following session when I asked the rogue for her character sheet, erased the N, and wrote E. I believe this is a trick I picked up from Matt. Here's the kicker, the player is my wife :P

[@rex290]

So when she tells you to take out the garbage you obey, right? :D

[@arjunchoong8012]

One time I had my group encounter this NPC who was found chained up in a ruined tower in the middle of the swamp. When his story didn't add up, one PC wanted to cut him with a dagger to see if he bled. The "antique dealer" bard PC in my group (who would buy stuff off the other PCs at a low price and then turn a profit selling them at his store...) stepped between the other PC and the NPC in an effort to protect him, and was grabbed from behind by the NPC and used as a hostage. After the game the bard player said his character was so traumatised by the encounter, he has become distrustful, and changed his alignment from Good to Neutral.

[@oz_jones]

Totally justified. This comes actually funny when a paladin or a cleric does something out of alignment. "No powers for you!"

[@oz_jones]

@@rex290 seems to be the other way round

[@CapnShades]

I just did this to a couple of my players at once. They disobeyed local authority and "accidentally" killed two guards. I didn't push them all the way to evil, but definitely hard to chaos.

[@Zapdos7471]

You are speaking my alignment language, Matthew. I recently re-evaluated my method of assigning alignment and realized that many people determine alignment by what their character thinks is best for themselves but I think a much better metric is what values the character projects onto others. A self identified chaotic neutral player who only uses their personal freedom to be cruel and subjugate others would actually be Neutral Evil because to that character others’ freedom is without value. It helps form a more nuanced understanding of chaotic characters than the cartoonish types I’m used to seeing. My new shorthand for alignment is: Chaos - authority is internal/personal Law - authority is external/systematic Good - value autonomy and consent Evil - value subjugation and control Chaotic Evil = personal freedom exists to subjugate others. I.E. Might makes right, like in your example. Lawful Evil = the law exists to subjugate others. I.E. Class divide is natural & Slavery should be legal. If I ever need to explain what my Law/Chaos interpretation is, I can just link this video instead now. Thanks! ;)

[@nextlevel8822]

For a more direct and 'societal' view of law vs. chaos, I like to look at the settling of the wild west. People forming communities with laws based on handshake agreements and traditions, all so that they weren't saddled with the laws of the country that was spreading to their necks of the woods.

[@justinselby8696]

I’m not a video-quality critic/perfectionist, but this video looks great!

[@jpfernweh7771]

I never really threw out alignment so much as we just sort of stopped using it. I really like this interpretation of Law vs Chaos though, it makes so much more sense than predictable vs not predictable.

[@jikiv694]

"It's not my fault you haven't gotten around to it." Is that a... wangrod defense I hear?

[@somethingsomethingsomethingdar]

Matt:“Do you stop at a stop sign even when literally no one is around?” Me: “I’m an agent of chaos...”

[@polishedpebble4111]

My approach to alignment: Good = NPCs well being takes primacy. Neutral = Your well being and NPCs take equal primacy. Evil = only your well being takes primacy. Lawful = defer authority to NPCs (lord, quest giver, etc). You work together. Neutral = NPCs and your authority are equally considered. You may seek them out tine to time. Chaotic = you are the law. You work alone. You will not plead to a militia or lord.

[@DimT670]

No no no. If only your well-being is primary that's neutral. If only by your well being is primarily and to the expense of everybody else, that's evil

[@patrickbuckley7259]

@@DimT670Yeah I'd have to agree. Evil isn't just putting your own needs first, it's being willing to put your own needs or agenda before the needs, or freedoms of others. An evil character might say "The ends justify the means." A neutral character might put their own want's & needs first, but they generally will try to avoid harming or even hindering others unless they see no other way, even if only to not provoke retaliation. A character who tries to put their own needs and the needs of others on a more or less even playing field, could be good or neutral depending on their law or chaos alignment, (Lawful character have a tendency towards collectivistic, and/or utilitarian altruism, as opposed to the more platonic altruism of good aligned characters, a tendency that will even carry over to Lawful Evil characters and their general "For the Greater Good" mentality.) and how far they would be willing to go to help their fellow man when push comes to shove. Furthermore as hinted at above just because someone puts the good of others before themselves does not make them necessarily good aligned. As someone who is willing to sacrifice for others may also be willing to sacrifice others for "the common good". A good character will only ever place themselves or other willing parties in danger (Especially Chaotic Good characters! who typically think the only "Common Good" is not letting any one person decide what the "Common good" is.) a lawful character might be willing to put his own life on the line, but they might not hesitate to endanger other less willing parties for the greater good. With Lawful Good aligned people being extremely reluctant to make such decisions (But ultimately willing to, if the need is great enough) , while a lawful evil character (in an extreme example) would not hesitate to burn down an orphanage via using puppies as kindling, if it meant stopping an invading army.

[@thehat222]

I’d tweak it slightly. Good=wants to make the world a better place Neutral=doesn’t care if the world changes Evil=willing to make the world a worse place Law=Make the world a more structured place Chaos=Make the world a less structured place

[@zylaji]

@@DimT670 If only your well-being is primary, that is by definition to the expense of other people. Otherwise, both your well-being and theirs are taken into consideration.

[@rateater1857]

@@zylaji not really. if you're hungry and have one apple, and come up on a starving person; if you're good, you give them half of your apple. if you're a neutral, you might or might not help them get an apple, but you will not share YOUR apple. if you're evil however, you will not only not share, but take away THEIR apple for yourself.

[@horophim]

I consider Allignment is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules (cit)

[@Kingatje]

😄 Capt Barbosa is the best.

[@delacreaux]

9:44 The talk about the Law and Chaos being universal powers/forces reminded me of Preservation and Ruin in the Mistborn Trilogy, presented much the same way

[@manuelalfredomoya]

I remember when I started playing D&D (i was 16, 22 solar cycles ago) and I always choose to play a chaotic good Ranger, it took long time to me and a bit of soul searching to to embrace my true alignment and from there learn to role play different from who I was, I learned I was Lawful Good and start playing a paladin with a lot more success for me and the party. D&D has been a great tool for my growing as a person and I truly appreciate your work Matt, I’m telling you from the bottom of my heart, THANK YOU. I’m looking forward more of your work which is great and inspired me to go and master myself again after many years away from the game.

[@UedoJP]

The balance must be maintained. Blood and Souls! Blood and Souls for my lord, Arioch!

[@timeforsuchaword]

I think my favorite description of law vs chaos is that the lawful character holds the society above the individual and the chaotic character puts the importance of the individual above society.

[@Gstrangeman96]

Think of it in terms of "systems" rather than "societies". that way it becomes much more general.

[@MrTombombodil]

It's so perfect to me that one of the most enduring, widely known, and canonical elements of dungeons & Dragon (The alignment chart) was invented because a frustrated DM needed a solution for one of their players being a wangrod.

[@skyenyc3661]

Thank you so much for still making these videos Matt, they inspired me to begin playing and become a DM. As I felt obstacles in my DMing experiences, your insight certainly helped me hurdle those obstacles and ultimately made the bonds between my Friends much stronger. I also took a huge interest in reading history and fantasy novels. Being able to channel out my creativity really got me out of a very dark place. I’ve been DMing for almost 2 years now and I never enjoyed anything more. Thank you so much

[@birdenand]

Matt, you’ve given me a lot of joy. whenever dnd gets too complicated for me, i come back to your videos and i’m reminded of the simple fun i had at the table my first session. you remind me it’s all about having fun and you inspired me to start my favourite hobby. thanks a bunch!

[@violetsapphire952]

I threw out alignment a long time ago, I never looked back and everything's fine. There. Prophecy fulfilled. (P.S. I actually did and it actually is.)

[@ZenithArt07]

Sir, you are incredibly insightful and knowledgeable. These are traits you have always shown. However your recent content has evolved. Your videos are shorter, yet your ability to teach and express has not suffered. This is rare and it is why you are truly in a league of your own. Easily the most succinct, coherent and articulate creative mind I have had the pleasure of listening to. Talking about a subject that is close to my heart. And for that, thankyou.

[@DeGreyChristensen]

Yes, you stop, cause if you roll through, a hidden cop will chase you down and pull you over. Then you’ll have to pay $150 bucks to the Man when you are already struggling with other bills. And your insurance payments will go up. This happened earlier this month.

[@whoaitstiger]

It's such a revenue-raising racket. I feel for you. :(

[@mcolville]

There cannot be a hidden cop in the example in the video.

[@jobelche]

Think of a Oklahoma farm road stop sign... Stop sign so full of bullet holes you can barely read them. Do you roll through because your 1987 f-150 4 speed stalls instead of idles or stop because there is NO CHANCE of a cop hiding in a peanut field.

[@DeGreyChristensen]

lol. Yeah. I’d still stop though. I feel like I’m quite lawful in most situations. The cop in question seemed quite green and eager to catch some law-breakers. He kept exaggerating how utterly I broke the law, making it sound like a peeled through without even a thought to tap the breaks. In reality I had just rolled through slowly, almost stopping without making a complete stop.

[@DeGreyChristensen]

Matthew Colville awesome video, by the way! I’ve always loved the alignment system and put a lot of stock in alignment in my campaigns.

[@pedrocarmoesouza7178]

Hey Matt! Great video again. I'm binge-watching them from the beginning and they're incredibly engaging. Great stuff for DM's of all Levels. Congrats! Recently I've been thinking on the Law-Neutral-Chaos axis as "I follow the Law" - "I follow the law unless inconvenient" - "I openly challenge the law". Brings a certain punk-rockness to my games i think. Take care!

[@SkellyHertz]

Also consider the Shin Megami Tensei series for its focus on the Law vs Chaos conflict.

[@AdellRedwinters]

Triangle Mann loved SMT 4s and how you fought physical manifestations of law, chaos, and even neutrality.

[@lotus1896]

I Just ran my first campaign as a dungeon master, and I have to say, these videos have help a lot! Thank you so much!

[@WestOfEarth]

Excellent perspective on alignment. I too like the alignment system. Some of the best moments for me as a DM have happened when the players come up against their character's alignment, or when their story arc reaches a point where the character authentically changes alignment. Great stories come out of these self-imposed boundaries.

[@nickjuchau1830]

Thank you so much for the in depth look at law vs chaos. It has always been harder for me to explain to my players than it has been to explain good vs evil. Thanks for the tools to have that conversation! Love your content.

[@Marcelofer94]

Matt, can you make a video about encounters against really big creatures?

[@ConcreteMars]

Yes!!! I would love that! I just ran a few sessions where my players had to find & fight an Aboleth that was hoarding a magical artifact that was keeping them trapped in the demi-plane of said Aboleth. I thought my concept was good and all, but I felt like the actual fight against the Aboleth was lackluster.

[@Madhattersinjeans]

A simple scale for difficulty Fight going to end too soon? Increase boss HP Revive boss as some undead monstrosity once it is "killed" (or alternatively it is powered up by some other magical means) have the boss increase the number of attacks/actions it gets once it's bloodied or half hp Add in some extra pitfalls or traps around the floor, nothing too crazy but enough to slow the players down a round or two. Send in goons just before the boss dies Fight too hard and taking too long Reduce boss HP Give a few extra opportunities for the players to think their way out of the encounter, or even run away for a break if necessary to think. Have the boss fail some dex/strength check and it falls over or gets trapped on something making it easy to attack Send in allies just before the boss dies. (not necessarily pure angel allies, it could be allies of circumstance say a group of orcs come in to fight a devil because they really don't like what the devil did to their tribe a month ago) Writing help Why are the party fighting this monster? If it's a big boss creature it must serve some part of the plot. If the group just randomly come across a group of giants or something they should have an in-world reason to be there. If it's the big bad villain, make sure the creature does something evil or interesting to hook the players interest. Maybe it burned down a pc's home once. Matryoshka doll the monster. If the players think it's too easy, have the monster eaten by a bigger more powerful one and let the players try to handle that. Don't be afraid to throw something beyond the party ability to fight, just so long as they have a hint that this is actually going to be a really tough fight. You have tools available to you to alter the fight difficulty/setting. It helps to plan out a few settings depending on how well the party are doing but the basic idea is that you have a magical artifact/maguffin that the players need in order to actually kill this monster. So there's a sense of progression, that the players went through a trial in order to finally meet this thing.

[@shrike618]

2:33 end of spoilers for dune. I literally just started reading it so I just skipped until I hoped he was done XD

[@Wootzel]

Thank you!

[@helpmelearnto]

So, what did you think of the book?

[@siavashpakdel5429]

God i'm hungry for any video coming from this channel, either running the game or campaign diary. both feed me, and aid me to best plan my campaign,which the greatest inspiration for it,has been matt. this would immensely help my campaign, especially in dealing with the Town's Mafia. Thank you so much Matt.

[@Jimbo5900]

Great video. Just wanted to add my two cents. I think it is a bit reductive to say that lawful folks just follow the rules just because they are the rules. I think it would be better to say that they follow the law because they believe that the law itself is virtuous and they believe in the importance of the law and following it. I know that in essence these are really the same but using the former way to describe it is too simplistic, particularly when contrasted with how you describe chaotic.

[@angrysaber5479]

Just wanted to drop that i agree with you on this one.

[@Grillo-j9g]

Yeah. I think you’re more on the money with this.

[@noahblack914]

I wager Matt would agree with this sentiment. And my guess to why he didn't explain it as such is because people rarely have an issue understanding Lawful. The focus is way more on explaining Chaotic, because too many people think it means Random when that doesn't make much sense if you think about it for a few seconds.

[@Trigfire]

I like your interpretation of alignment! I don't really use it to any capacity in my games, but the way you describe it seems very useful for figuring out how a group/society of people acts and having a clear and easy explanation should it ever come up with my players. So, thanks!

[@harryolivar369]

@Matt Colville I used to not like lawful neutral because it seemed bland but now it is one of my favorite alignments

[@lechauvesouris2969]

The question you asked your player is a good and simple exemple, very efficient. Just sharing a thought about Dune on the other hand :)... I consider in the case of Dune that the Fremen are a Loyal society. The rules are very important. But a few things have changed. Paul Atreid is an anomaly that lead the society toward "chaos". As Liet Kynes did before him. The change in the rigid society involved by the change in environnement and a few key characters is precisely a part of the story. Liet Kynes made the change in the world but the society was still pretty much the same. Stilgar is ready to accept the combat, even at the cost of his life : it's the law. If that's not Loyal, what is ? Paul is the one who broke the old rules, opening new possibilities and teaching them that rule might not be adapted to all situation, which makes sense as the situation is changing for the first time in a loooong time. I have a hard time calling it a "chaotic society" in its core without any example of "rules might be flexible" prior to these triggers. (and later on Paul will kinda go back on his work by following the rule about blind people, at this point he has become more of a Freman than he was originally). (and the Emperor is the one who brings the society to the extreme of Law, hoping to breed perfect Chaos... I guess ? Not sure we can summarize the golden path that way, but alignment are fun to think about ^^)

[@alexigiusti9700]

Stilgar is certainly Lawful. The laws of the Freman society could be seen more as guidelines for surviving their harsh environment, given how open they are to change. They also appear to be anticipating change.

[@circlepit4598]

Thank you for sharing your light with the world Matt ❤️

[@samuelpadgett9580]

Fantastic analysis, I hadn't thought about the relevance of Stilgar to the concept of DnD Law/Chaos. Very interesting, but more importantly very practical!

[@unrealnews]

Excellent video! You went on for quite some time, but it is not without reward. Your thoughts have depth and lots of books and crannies to explore. Here is a crannie I offer in exchange: A 4x4 grid to replace the 3x3, forcing players away from the neutral options, and granting players a foothold to their character.

[@craigbainton4173]

I LOVE Law vs Chaos war. It’s amazing and as a result I love the blood war, it’s just so interesting to have such a polarising difference that isn’t “Hi I’m your protagonist” and “Hi, I guess I’m the antagonist then”

[@j2dragon109]

Definitely A Human To be pedantic, protagonist =! good guy and antagonist =! bad guy.

[@craigbainton4173]

J2Dragon. That’s my point

[@zacdake1519]

Thank you for that question. Ive always had issues handling Law and Chaos in this game, and that stop sign question really made it click. Thank you for that.

[@OutrageouslyMoney]

Very well articulated. I am sometimes surprised at how some people are not able to grasp the concept between lawful and chaotic alignment. It seemed quite evident to me the very first time I picked up a D&D book.

[@freddaniel5099]

Excellent thought-provoking discussion of a very "D&D" topic that has wider societal implications. Thank you!

[@johnr7279]

Great discussion Matt. I've always been a bit of an alignment fan and, oh yeah, folks get all kinds of wrapped up in it. It's easy to drop if needed but I like to still use it. Each facet of D&D have pros and cons of course. Thankfully, it's easy to tailor the game to what players and DMs alike prefer.

[@josephbeeler307]

Super useful. How Matt describes alignment are the words I couldn't find.

[@richardneri9759]

I love the Eternal Champion series. Moorcock masterfully crafted such a unique world that I borrowed the plane of law for my campaign. Though the outer plans are the only places that are defined by alignment. Where as the people on the prime material are free to do as they wish, so their actions define their alignment. Great video as always Mr. Colville. Can't wait until the next one.

[@bengoodwin2988]

"Peace/Out" - still the best sign off on KZbin. Thank you for all the excellent advice, Matt!

[@jakeszig]

This helped me really define Law and Chaos. Thank you! Keep these videos coming!

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

Great video on a great discussion! I often correlate Law and Chaos to "Structure" and "Fluidity" in thought pattern (paradigm?) when explaining it to my Players. When the suggestion of "Chaos being random", I point out that it's better described as "fluid" or "more informal", since water is also fluid, but makes up streams and rivers... They don't adhere strictly to specialized patterns, and from nearly any scale or scope can appear quite "chaotic" and even sort of "random"... BUT the water still gathers together and moves in great mass eventually at great force... Still, you can toss even heavy stones into it and the water very informally "moves around" them... Ice is crystalline in structure, and can be very hard... BUT in all it's rules and structures, there's SOO much variety still readily available... However, throw even a not-so-heavy stone at ice and either it bounces right off, or deforms that structure permanently... ANYWAYS... themes of alignment are great if not taken TOO seriously in the RP department... and you have solid sound advice. ;o)

[@Shane-The-Pain]

Great arguments. Thank you, sir.

[@joeburke9332]

That book on the top shelf just right of Matt's head. National Geographic's "Picture Atlas of Our Universe." I had that as a kid and LOVED it. I'm off to see if I can buy another copy. :)

[@EugeneHerbsman]

I'm new to D&D and completely hooked! Thanks for such a great series of tips and tricks to pull from, I can't wait to start a campaign as DM!

[@xuetheviewer3897]

I'm glad that by both mine, my players, and now your standards I am a firmly lawful evil character myself.

[@w4iph]

I just started watching this series. I've built a campaign setting wherein the Central Tension in the universe is Law versus Chaos. I really liked the video and it gave me some awesome ideas and it totally broke my cosmology! . . . so . . . thanks for that. In the planescape, REALITY was built by the Lawful Good and Lawful Evil entities in the form of the Celestial Kingdom and Hell. Chaos seeks to destroy reality but I shoehorned the Chaotic Good entity as Death that wants to destroy REALITY to rebuild a planescape based on good with Law and Chaos as the internal forces that keep the new reality in existence while it is EVIL that they are united against. It was weak, and your take on wilderness and the WILD being Chaos makes the Corellon analog Chaotic Good and creator of the Feywild etc, and Death as Neutral on the Alignment chart being a force of entropy and the "Natural Order". Cosmology is stronger now, but I gotta rewrite that history and fix the rest of the world to make that new setup work... So yeah... I got a bunch of work to do to make my setting more better. Thanks! great work on these. =]

[@lightblckknight]

DeadAussieGamer has some videos on alignment and I like his point: "Don't swing for the fences. " Your law vs chaos world reminds me of author L.E. Modesitt, Jr. I thoroughly enjoyed the depiction and magic of that world.

[@JordonVirtue]

"Remember the story of the 'Good Samaritan.'" "...I am the ill intent."

[@carlosgarcia7377]

Still making great content 👏 I too like the Chaos vs. Law dichotomy, and commonly use it in my story writing and the games I DM.

[@justusrodriguez8896]

This is super helpful. Much more helpful than your previous alignment videos in my opinion.

[@ReconKeeper212]

Ah, a Matt Colville video to start the morning. Almost no better way

[@RhiannaAtriedes]

I think this is really quite interesting and has really made me understand d&d alignment. However I was thinking that if elves are chaotic, they would want the best person in charge, but I also don't see them fighting to the death nor caring about having the strongest person as a leader. So I wonder how elves would go about picking their leaders

[@MirskCragmaw]

Thanks for this video, it was very helpful!

[@konradknox]

Colville, you are awesome. Thank you for the inspiration.

[@rakbel316]

This was as usual, a very helpful episode, thank you, been struggling with choosing some of my characters Alignments.

[@96Logan]

I think alignment is fantastic to determine a baseline for players. Not everything you do will correspond to your alignment and of course there will be outlier decisions that you make. Alignment feels like it serves roleplay and with personality traits, bonds, flaws, ect, your character gets framed. It gets easier to role play a fake persona when you have generalizations to grasp from.

[@Giraffozilla]

Matt, you previously and repeatedly talked about Bards in your games being a source of legitimacy for the law and for the rule and title of people. could you explain how you implement this in your game, and specifically how you go about giving this authority to a player?

[@derekskelton4187]

He's gone on at length in other video about how in most cases Bards are basically the only source of news to the commoners. Without them it's basically all word of mouth. Though I don't think that's true in capital as they have printing presses though that seems to be pretty much the only place in Matt's world that does.

[@CitanulsPumpkin]

Yeah, he pretty much said to one of his previous play groups that because there wasn't a bard present for a conversation no one would take their word over the word of the local lord. It sounds a bit clunky but it's basically the same reason why medieval lords had heralds and town criers. The guy spending his days and nights talking up the events of the week in the tavern is the only reputable news source for the local dirt farmers who probably can't even read. Basically "If a king makes a decree, and no bard is around to gossip about it, does the decree become a law?" In Matt's games, the answer is no.

[@Giraffozilla]

@@CitanulsPumpkin Ive seen the videos where he mentions it and I understand the mechanic, but I understand it maybe through an NPC bard not a player one, I'm trying to make this a mechanic to hook bard players into the world, like knighthood could for fighters and paladins, unexpected transformations could for warlocks (and maybe sorcerers), and for wizards, clerics, paladins, fighters, maybe even rogues and druids I've thought about giving them abilities related to organisations they may belong to like a clergy or a druid circle or a feudal system or a criminal organisation. My only issues are with bards, barbarians, sorcerers somewhat, and rogues somewhat as well.

[@FalkaRiannon]

Law vs chaos allways seemed more defined and logical to me as a conflict than good vs evil. Mainly cause "good" and "evil" usually are pretty vague in definition and also change from society to society. Aztec culture viewed human sacrifice as good because it nurtured Huitzilopochtli for his fight against his siblings who wanted to kill their mother and by doing so would end the world. Our modern western society would most certainly consider it evil (even though christianity is build on the story of a human sacrifice come to think of it).

[@MrSilvUr]

Maybe the Aztecs thought human sacrifice was Good because their society was actually Evil. As for Christianity, if the sacrifice you're referring to is that of Jesus, it's worth noting that he willfully sacrificed himself. So, the comparing the two is like comparing a murderer to someone who dies saving someone else. Saying, "Both instances involve someone dying, so the situations are equivalent," seems reductionist at best.

[@rateater1857]

@@MrSilvUr well, medieval western societies thought feudal systems, slavery and opressing women were good, doesn't mean the entire societies were evil by default, it just means what is considered good is subject to debate (and people do debate it. a lot. A LOT. i mean A LOT).

[@j2dragon109]

Yeah self-sacrifice and an unwilling sacrifice are too completely different things.

[@MrSilvUr]

@@rateater1857 It doesn't just mean that necessarily. It could mean that the degree of cultural corruption is on a gradient, for instance. The fact that you're bringing things up as corrupt elements in a culture implies that you have a position on those things. You seem to have a position on the moral quality of oppressing women, for instance. Why undermine your position on the matter by yielding its authority to those less certain? I agree that morality is often a nuanced and complicated thing, but I don't think that's a reason to divest your decision making power to people who can't decide. These things are important enough for me to try to find the answers myself.

[@5oundOfVictory]

Christianity (and Judaism) for that matter are not founded upon human sacrifices. Abraham and Isaac ends with a third party going "hey Abraham, you proved your faith don't kill your son please that's not what God wants." and then Jesus sacrificed himself to save all others from sin, no one sacrificed him to appease a deity

[@technoskald464]

Reading "Three Hearts and Three Lions" by Poul Anderson gave me a whole new outlook on this. In that book (without too many spoilers), the faerie world represents Chaos and the human world represents Law (or Order). One focuses on magic and emotion and whimsy and, well, fairy tales; the other on science and structured societies and the world we know today. It's one of the inspirations for the alignment system used by Gary Gygax.

[@elohdonrycor9741]

That was a super useful explanation. Thanks

[@spencerd6126]

To me, law vs chaos is about how much you follow your society’s rules, so in the dune example paul is acting chaotically. When it comes to an entire society, it would be about how well the society fits into the dominant culture, so small goblin tribe within large human kingdom

[@joshuagodwin8565]

My favorite representation of a chaotic group is the nomadic tribe with no sense of personal ownership. Fun to put players in something like that, "The big fellow you saw yesterday in the loincloth is now wearing your cloak, you left it outside and he was cold and thought it looked pretty neat." "Thr old guys by the fire are passing around your flask, for what it's worth they seem really happy you thought to bring booze."

[@Gstrangeman96]

That's an interesting take on the Good-Evil dichotomy. As far as I can see it, someone that does not go out of their way to alleviate suffering is not necessary evil. Rather neutral. Someone evil is someone that is willing to go out of their way cause suffering, with the lawful/chaotic dichotomy relating to the conditions under which they are willing to cause such suffering. A lawful evil character will conquer and slaughter a rival tribe if he believes it to be the best course of action for his tribe. A chaotic evil character will conquer and slaughter for fun/personal glory/lunacy, and will relish as his own men die for him. A neutral evil character is someone in the middle, the treacherous type, one who will do his tribe's best interests and so long as they do not interfere with his own. Which possibly makes them more dangerous than either extreme.

[@cloudberry_6010]

I don't think your analysis of Chaotic Evil is especially well-supported within D&D lore. For example, ever since AD&D 1st edition the Drow have been presented as a Chaotic Evil society - but the drow don't slaughter for fun, or out of lunacy, and an intelligent drow leader certainly wouldn't relish the loss of her soldiers. Even the most evil dark elves are capable of acting in the interest of others, making sacrifices to aid their family, and falling in love - and yet they are still, beyond any doubt, a Chaotic Evil society.

[@felipehonoriobs]

the best law vs chaos example in story telling is Rush's Cygnus book II

[@mandodelorian4668]

Ah, a fresh hot cuppa Colville, excellent!

[@CobaltContrast]

Aaaa. Such casual philosophy on good and evil. And here people just accept it. It's lovely. I'd love to see you talk on ethics.

[@willprotector]

This makes so much sense. Thanks Matt!

[@Zulk_RS]

This video helped a lot. I kinda never used alignment because I had no idea what any alignment is supposed to look like and "Alignment Explanation" videos and posts didn't help much either. This video helped me understand what Lawful and Chaos looks like (never going to use good vs evil though). However, now I'm wondering what the neutral alignment would be if Lawful is following laws for the sake of following laws and Chaotic is following the law when there is a reason to.

[@jkallaround]

All I use alignment for is to give players an initial thought of how to play their character. After that I only refer to it if someone asks or maybe use it to frame how characters have changed during their journey asking if their alignment has changed.

[@awlafferty]

Very good! Love this perspective!

[@bplem2007]

Great quality content and visually clean cut.

[@robertcales8544]

The most honest answer i can give to your opening question is, usually 😂

[@ronissler6398]

My campaign currently defines the alignments as the following: lawful vs chaotic as a social behavior (lawful = community over individual, chaotic = individual over community) and good vs evil as an individual behavior (good = selfless, evil = selfish).

[@Snarkwraith]

You know when I think about it there's actually a great analogy for law-chaos alignment in science. Specifically states of matter, Solid= Lawful as it has a fixed form and volume. Neutral= Water, it has a fixed volume but will freely change its form depending on container. Then there's Gas=Chaotic, it has no fixed form nor fixed volume.

[@ellentheeducator]

My favourite law vs chaos distinction is external vs internal codes. Basically, if I made my code, my personal rules, and follow them unflinchingly, I would describe myself as Chaotic (though not chaotic). Similarly, if I were to follow a set of rules someone else made, that would be Lawful, even when it contradicts other codes or laws

[@Grillo-j9g]

Due the straight-jacket problem, I see alignment now less about how your character behaves in a given scenario but more about which cosmic forces they align with. I think the original “teams” idea makes sense and keeps it from devolving into subjective (and conflicting) interpretations of alignment. In a Moorcockian sense, I don’t think a Chaotic society is possible.

[@toastghost9145]

On the notion of Good and Evil: while I agree with your definition of Good (help others for no reward and with risk, irrelevant of who they are), I'm not sold on your definition of Evil (help only members of their community). The latter definition strikes me far more as Neutral, one that is conditional or abstract. I personally would define Evil as helping others only for their own benefit. While this can overlap (community members can be useful, therefore worth preserving), I think the difference is worth pointing out.

[@pretsal4955]

"Well I know I killed hundreds of people with my own two hands, for no reason other than the sheer thrill of it... But I love my husband unconditionally, so if you think about it, I'm really True Neutral!"

[@eddyhypnotizer2481]

One of my favorite topics. lets go!

[@bluestarorion]

Heck yea, Matt! This video is just what I needed!

[@andanteinblue]

You're completely right. My girlfriend, out of nowhere, started talking about alignments. Now, I just recently introduced to her to RPGs (something very far from D&D), so it really came as quite a surprise. It turns out she had no idea it comes from tabletop RPGs at all. She's just seen the meme on tumblr all the time!

[@edwardgurney1694]

I always enjoy your alignment videos, Matt. I disagree with you about a lot of it, but I can't articulate exactly why- which is good because makes me think my own views on the topic through more. For me Law vs Chaos is more about how characters act and think about their actions than how they relate to external systems of authority- ie, a Lawful person makes plans, tends to care about keeping things organised, craves order and structure in their lives and the world around them, but can be hostile to change, a disciplinarian Myrmidon; whereas a Chaotic person is the opposite- spontaneous, impulsive, doesn't like being tied down, likes and welcomes change, doesn't want to inconvenience others, but doesn't plan ahead or organise themselves or their lives. So I guess I'd say that I see the conflict more as Order vs Disorder.

[@crossguard263]

I have to say, this has changed my stance. Bravo, sir.

[@WhamBamTySam]

In college, I was to write a paper on ethics. I wrote about a very similar stop-sign experience. However, in my case, it was a red light on a regular street being intersected by a one way street which was closed on the oncoming side for roadwork. Nobody covered the traffic light, but there was no logical or moral reason to stay stopped. I stopped and waited the full time anyway, questioning my decision the whole time, because I'm a lawful sap.

[@stevenneiman9789]

I don't like alignment because there are characters for whom it fits well but there are also characters for whom it fits poorly, or for whom there's a lot of ambiguity associated with it. My way somewhat around that in my current game is that alignment's effect on the soul comes from the way that cultures contextualize the world around them. Planes associated with life, death, the four elements, good, evil, law and chaos don't exist because they are fundamental to the nature of reality but because they were shaped by minds and cultures which broke up their understanding according to those concepts. I'm definitely looking forward to the video on betraying the party. I can say from personal experience that it can be awesome. The best campaign finale I've been part of involved a one member of our VtM coterie turning on the rest of the party, driving them out of the city and installing his sire as Prince of San Francisco.

[@steegen101]

Fremen code = tangible proof-backed rule irl (USA) law = invisible, honor-backed, punishment-enforced rule

[@keegansullivan1571]

"Justice is equilibrium" I go Moorcock with it on a cosmic level (I enjoy that aspect as well) and I treat it more like a political compass on a person to person level. With the randomness/unrestrained growth only for Demons and Slaad. Unchanging and unmovable only for Inevitables and Angels.

[@KhaosTy]

I was about to watch this video, then you mentioned Dune, and I'm literally two-thirds of the way through the book and don't wanna get spoiled, so I'm gonna go ahead and wait until I finish the book before coming back to this.

[@johanneshermansson7630]

I've dabbled in interpreting Law and Chaos as Deontology and Utilitarianism, or alternatively tradition and modernity. I think there are lots of ways that law and chaos can be interpreted and in so doing, used to illustrate the important axis of a setting.

[@labshire]

I think in addition to laws it is important to recognize the response it authority. A society can have many rules and still be of chaotic alignment (IMO) if it's a society of equals and not of the rulers over the ruled

[@AliasDrakes]

Thanks matt. I'm playing a "noble son" kobold barb/rogue, chaotic neutral, and I've been struggling with a Lawful Good cleric because he doesnt understand how my character could want to work with the party. It's created strain in the group because the cleric is perpetually focused on what my berserk backstabber is going to do next. Maybe this video will help him.

[@sakisaotome6753]

I only wish he included neutral alignments in this video. I thought his example of Tom's good vs evil question for example to be more of a neutral response than an evil one. And does slowing down a bit and/or making a pretense of stopping count as chaotic since you didn't stop, lawful because you still slowed even if you didn't blow past it at full speed or neutral because you essentially compromised neither stopping or ignoring it.

[@jordanbarber6376]

Wonderful video Matt!

[@TyphosTheD]

Of course as Matt said the video would prompt discussion, but I'd like to point out an observation - which perhaps I may just be misunderstanding. Matt describes the Fremen as Chaotic because how they determine a leader is by trial by combat. But fundamentally what distinguishes trial by combat from a democratic vote? Trial by combat only works as a system for them because they all agree that this is the way it should be done. In other words, everyone agrees that "those are the rules". Everyone acknowledging that Paul was stronger wasn't enough for him to lead, he needed to follow the rules to become leader. When looking at Matt's comparison with Tom and Copper, Copper being lawful because he'd follow a duly elected (if incompetent) leader "because he followed the rules) seems exactly the same as the Fremen. In other words, if the Fremen would follow Paul if he followed the rules, and Copper would follow the leader if he followed the rules, what makes one side Chaotic and the other Lawful?

[@paulsauvage499]

Yep. I was convinced by Matt's point but confused by the fremen example. They follow an ancestral rule that never changed even if it means loosing their (almost) strongest : to me, they're lawful. Paul Atreide choose whatever line makes best practical sense to him : HE is chaotic .

[@TylerTechUTube]

I watched this until 3 mins in before I realised it wasn't about the video game Chaos: Reborn (what I searched for and this was the first hit) still enjoyed!