The Curious Origins of D&D Alignment

[@KnightKashmir]

I'd suggest Bandit's Keep's video on alignment languages if you want to know more about how they could be used.

[@LuizPaiva2077]

Yes!!

[@Earthmote]

Daniel makes great videos!

[@animationlover219]

I care about alignment mainly because the Planescape cosmology, which provides the only interesting and coherent framework for official D&D lore on gods, fiends, and celestials that I have ever seen (I know that some official worlds, such as Eberron, put those beings into other frameworks, but my impression is that they have to bend their general lore to do it, and it is still a somewhat questionable fit), and that is some of the lore that most interests me. By throwing out alignment, you throw out too much world building. So yes, cosmic forces.

[@buchenrad1269]

The trouble with alignment, specifically as it pertains to PCs, is that some people act like alignment informs the character instead of the character informing the alignment. But thats true of all labels. When a label goes from being one of the outputs of the equation of who you are (or who your PC is) to being an input, the person (or PC) begins to become more one dimensional, basic, and boring and you relinquish some of your agency (or your agency over your PC) to the social systems that define that label.

[@Earthmote]

Well said!

[@strawpiglet]

Cool, I didn't play basic so I hadn't seen those alignment descriptions. I like them a lot aside from neutrality seeking balance. That's like the True Neutral in ADnD which never made sense to me. Druid: There's just too much good happening in that town, I need to go tell the orcs about this.

[@thomriley1036]

Michael Moorcock also cites Poul Anderson as a big influence in the forward of his novel 'Elric of Melniboné'. That said, if you play Module Q-1: Queen of the Demonweb Pits, you can find a magic portal that players can use to visit the very world of Caer Sidi from 'Three Hearts and Three Lions' in a direct nod to Poul Anderson. This also implies that the Pharisees from this novel were the direct inspiration for both the Melnibonéans and the Drow.

[@vaultscribe4501]

I think it’s pretty clear that the alignment system acts as an umbrella analysis tool by which cultures can be categorized. Speaking the language of law doesn’t represent a literal lettered language, so much as the sentiments that inform the formation of common tongues between adjacent or related cultures with similar beliefs on the world. The concept of a law language represents the ways in which two people from similar cultures could rhetorically come to understand one another’s beliefs-or simply that they would have more such paths, even without a literal shared lettered language, than two persons whose origins were from lawful and chaotic societies respectively. This is why the definitions in the three point system defaulted to using ideas of the “good” and the “evil” for associative clarification of boundaries between law and chaos. The authors were relying on concepts of shared world views to define their system. They were saying groups fit in one or the other if they share beliefs we commonly call good or commonly call evil. That’s classifying cultures, not individuals. Now, individuals, we know, are never one thing over enough time, but at any given time an individual can become an archetype of their culture’s beliefs and values-especially when executing the actions said values call be enacted on those in outside groups, or ‘others’. Think about how a soldier at war will be much harder to reason with than a random civilian from an opposing civilization met during a war. Both will be tense situations, but the soldier has literally been trained to reason less and rely on established rules informed by their culture’s axiomatic beliefs more. Cosmic forces then become the emergent identities who are either literally or figuratively constructed as a result of a culture’s ideas and ideals calcifying (gods made by certain beliefs or that latch onto them for the psychic energy shared with them, the more they become concentrated representatives of said beliefs). The older and more common across cultures a concept or axiomatic belief is, the more elder and possibly othering the god becomes. Meaning the more potent and archetypal the belief, the more alien and eldritch to the individual the god is-given that no individual could possibly live up to such a rigid maximalist form of their culture’s views for long (think about how lovecraft wrote the cause of madness, or the death caused by seeing the face of the divine). In this way you of course have player characters able to play a member of any species how they want as an individual, but still have a true to life reality where conflict can seem inevitable or even encouraged between and among peoples otherwise capable of reasoning out differences. Ironically, the dude saying “it’s what my character would do” is close to the mark-though they are still being a dingbat over the table. What should be said though is: “it’s what my character believes that is rationalizing and determining their behavior. It’s what their village, parents, and peers would do”. But then, that same character should either be capable of change as an individual, with enough outside pressure from the adventuring group’s own sub-culture-or they need to be jailed or exiled, like every other obstinate person in real life that refuses to play by their group’s cultural norms. All this allows for villains who can otherwise be reasonable to still commit horrible atrocities as an npc by the way. Just like how a country’s people in real life can just not care about horrible things happening because of their tax dollars-or cheer it on through rationalization-while also having in their majority population decent persons individually

[@Subject_Keter]

For me about "Groups of creatures and alignment" I think of WoW goblins. They can be "Good" but their baseline is usually backstabbing each other, blowing stuff up, blowing up the competitions and trying to thugmax. Meanwhile like the Orcs were evil but generally do stuff to help them survive. I think knowing a entity alignment is nice to know "if they want a cookie or gem, how many warcrimes are they willing to do?" 😂

[@Earthmote]

Yes, it can help in that regard, and subvert expectations when you find "good" orcs. But I'd just be transparent about that ambiguity up front so your party doesn't just go full slaughter mode without thinking it through. Or alternatively, if they are "always evil" then they have freer reigns.

[@bobbycrosby9765]

Alignment is the biggest round peg into a square hole for D&D. It was pulled from stories without definite gods or a cosmology. Shoe horning your people and deities into it has always felt misapplied. I love the suggestion of using Law vs Chaos for campaigns you don't want to delve deeper into this stuff, it's kinda the thought I had after reading 3 hearts and 3 lions. I haven't read Moorcock, but my impression from 3 Hearts and 3 Lions was that things that were Lawful represented things that helped human society thrive - laws, order, religion, etc. And forces of Chaos were those that didn't - war, magic, barbarians, monsters, etc.

[@Earthmote]

Yeah I agree, its a bit odd when you just throw it on the system like a blanket but leave the worldbuilding a pretty blank slate.

[@BanditsKeep]

You might find Quag Keep by Andre Norton interesting. She wrote it after playing D&D with Gygax and it is set in Greyhawk- alignment is mentioned and used, what’s interesting to me is how the people in the story react to those who are neutral. Not my favorite work by Norton, but a cool insight.

[@Earthmote]

Thanks for sharing! Big fan of your videos!

[@BanditsKeep]

@ right back at you, great content!

[@michaelmullenfiddler]

I'm 60. I discovered DnD in 1982, after my senior year in high school. When I looked the Appendix N list, I went "oh, right, of course". I had already voraciously devoured books by 2/3rds of the authors on that list, probably before I even got into high school. As a youth, 3 heats and 3 lions was one of my favorite books. It's been so long since I read it, I don't know what I would think of it now. Perhaps I should reread it... Anyway, the Law v Chaos thing was in alot of books, by lot of authors. Roger Zelazny's Amber novels featured a polar reality with the perfect kingdom (law) on one "end" of reality and the Courts of Chaos on the other. Every book that Michael Moorcock wrote (Elric, Hawkmoon) included some version of the Law v Chaos duality. It was very popular in the 40-60s in pulp sci-fi and fantasy fiction. 3 Hearts eas important, but far from the only source of that mythological frame device

[@michaelmullenfiddler]

Ok, lol, you referred some of the others later in the video. Of course. Lol

[@Earthmote]

Moorcock acknowledges Poul Anderson's work as being influential on his own, which is why I consider one of the "origins". But yes, they all definitely had a hand in shaping early alignment in D&D!

[@TimothyRice-p1r]

One of the things I find fun and interesting about RPGs is the way they provoke deeper philosophical discussions, for example on ethics and metaphysics. Whatever its other strengths and weaknesses, the D&D alignment system is good for sparking these sorts of discussions, because of the different views players have about the definitions of Good and Evil, and the complexity of weighing Lawfulness vs Chaos, and the relationship between the D&D alignment system and the Great Wheel cosmology. For example, the Great Wheel metaphysics of D&D seems to gives equal power to Good and Evil, and to me this implies that a third of the NPCs in the general population must be Evil. If there were fewer, it would mean Evil isn't pulling its weight at attracting followers. So what are a third of the population seeing in Evil? It can't just be a love of kicking puppies, right? How does society hang together if a third of everyone you meet is Evil? The conclusion you need to come to is that, given the metaphysics, there must be very sensible reasons why characters in D&D could be drawn towards Evil alignments. Unlike some definitions of Evil in the real world, it's not just a matter of ignorance or error, for in D&D evil does have real teeth; there must be a question of, which of the powers of the outer planes does a person most sympathize with, and why? What does it mean that, of everyone with WIS 20 and INT 20, one third of them have "sympathy with the devil"? I imagine that Good resonates with people who believe that humility and compassion are the paths to a happy life, and Evil resonates with those who regard the most effective path to happiness as a combination of indulgence and the realization of personal ambition. Drawing the line in this way doesn't mean Good people can't be ambitious, and doesn't mean that Evil people can't be compassionate; instead it means some people weigh one side more strongly than the other. If a player sees their character as ambitious and indulgent at the expense of humility and compassion, I'd rather they just be honest about their character's Evil alignment. I'd prefer an honest player who wants to play an edgy character, than a hypocrite who slaps the Good brand on their character as an excuse for ruthlessly slaughtering everything which they perceive to be "on the other side."

[@RobertWF42]

I wouldn't conclude a third of the NPC population is evil - the vast majority of humans are lawful & a smaller % are neutral. Very few humans are chaotic or evil. More likely, a third of all intelligent humanoids and creatures (including monsters like Orcs, dragons, etc) are evil. However, I'm not certain why good and evil should be allotted equal power?

[@Phhhht]

I started playing in 82 when it was important. That said I only saw it come into play once when a paladin almost lost lawful good status. We only used it as a guideline, lawful only ment you were more predictable or had a plan. Chaotic less predictable, neutral.....shrug and ect. Good and evil I feel are a bit easier to quantity. Myself I played good characters but who could be absolutely ruthless in pursuit of a goal. Always with a plan. Lawful neutral? Hard to say, hence the problem. Love the content

[@DCdabest]

I always thought it was more explicitly something lifted from The Elric of Melniboné stories and the Moorcock Universe in general.

[@LordStJohn-nq4np]

I use three point alignment as cosmic forces: Law which is creation and natural law, Chaos that which seeks to degenerate, pervert, destroy, and Neutral which seeks balance between the two. Law is generally Good as Man naturally creates communities based on the family unit and communities coalesce to create nations; creation is given capacity with orderly social structures. Chaos is hell bent on eradicating Law and its components. It tends to be Evil as within its campaign to destroy it brings about harm to communities and individuals. Neutrals tend to be ambivalent towards the cosmic struggle between Law and Chaos; only a few neutrals are dedicated to Neutrality as a cosmic force of Balance. Like those of us in real life who sublimate selfish, short term, personal gratification into discipline, self improvement and order, PCs can regulate their behaviour without surrendering agency. Controlling one's behaviour through a dedication to one's tenets and showing internal consistency is not limiting. I see the alignment language of Law similar to something like Latin, a common linguistic currency endowed by the Lords of Light. Chaos is a debased tongue that reflects corruption and degeneracy itself, understood by beings devoted to the Great Old Ones or similar.

[@FortunaMajorACappella]

I've been a fan of the AD&D alignment graph for as long as I've known about it. Rather than an even 3x3 square, you have oblong shapes within a square graph that allow for interesting placements if you look at it like an X/Y axis where sliding along either side can reflect a different alignment. Because of that, you can get really interesting interactions between alignment and character actions. A Lawful Good character, for instance, could be less "Good" than a Lawful Neutral character who is too far to the extremes on the Lawful axis. True Neutrality is also a very small bullseye, so it can make playing into that alignment a challenge (and, hopefully, a fun challenge).

[@Earthmote]

Interesting way of thinking about it. Thanks for sharing!

[@nutherefurlong]

I wind up making new systems, usually a choice feels substantially different-- I guess anyone can more succinctly define law and chaos in their world if they want, but I've made a simple flip of expectations and suggest that chaos means freedom of action, law means a rigid set of rules that is rigorously imposed on the world. Another would be a selection of religious views, or lack thereof, that define what the players might start with I think alignment languages stemmed from the original more monotheistic idea GG had in mind. Like Lawfuls could speak something akin to Latin since they were all faithful. Something to that effect, I half remember it now

[@Earthmote]

Interesting way to change it up! Thanks for sharing

[@Redlock_youtube]

I have been an adamant anti-alignment person in my short time playing D&D, but this gave a fresh perspective to me thanks! I think I got some new things to try with my players.

[@Earthmote]

I don't use it a lot in my games, but I think it'd be fun to play a campaign that leans hard into it.

[@kevinm3428]

I thoroughly enjoy the usefulness of alignment, but have only encountered players since 1E that hate the pigeonhole effect it has. I prefer to pose problems in campaigns that pit Civilization (Law) vs Nature (Chaos) to my players, and noting the choices the player’s actually make. Actions, as opposed to thoughts, demonstrate their alignment in these situations. My best campaigns have been Planescape-setting games, which wholely revolved around alignment.

[@Earthmote]

That's cool! I'd love to design a game that leans hard into the alignment (as cosmic forces) sometime.

[@michaelmullenfiddler]

The author Gordon R Dickson had an interesting cosmic frame: in an otherwise fluffy and forgettable series called the Dragon and The George (don't get me wrong: it was fun, but not very deep) they call Law "History" and Chaos is called "Chance". And too much of either is a bad thing. Basically, the good guys always end up basically as Neutral. Too much Chance (Chaos) is bad for obvious reasons: anarchy, destruction, death, etc. But too much History (Law) was a problem in two ways: 1 things became stratified and nothing changed, so, for example, a bad ruling family would never be deposed. The 2nd bad consequence of overweaning Law was tyrants, despotism, etc. To me, that's a useful way of looking at the problem for DnD

[@Elohist2009]

I think alignment should be used as a prompt for role-play similar to a character’s background traits. In the same way that a character’s flaws will not remain unchanged for the entirety of a campaign, A character alignment doesn’t always inform their actions or behaviors every time, even in similar situations. For example, the lawful paladin may express regret for killing someone instead of refusing to do so. Or an evil character may spare the life of an enemy if deemed “unworthy” of death. Alignment isn’t just what my character would do, but also how my character thinks feels and interacts with the world and the people in it. If you want your character to feel more like a living, breathing person, one’s alignment should be played as your character’s moral tendencies or philosophical leanings, instead of a binary set of static interactions (either “this” or “that”).

[@Earthmote]

Well said!

[@Mr0tin]

The Amber series is very much worth the read. Also note that there is a diceless RPG based on them that is also a great game to play

[@Earthmote]

I've read all of the Amber series, I agree its great! Haven't played the RPG system though.

[@Mr0tin]

@@Earthmote it's worth tracking down, two main books to cover pretty much every thing needed to play. With the right group it is a truly epic experience.

[@pzalterias5154]

I think you should check the Kane serie from appendix N, but I heard it's hard to find a complete edition in the US. Each short story is a great inspiration to create a dnd adventure. I did this with "reflections for the winter of my soul", and I really think the "wolfwere" was inspired by this short story. Funnily enough, the alignement in this universe is "bad vs worse"

[@Earthmote]

I haven't read Kane yet, I'll have to try to get a hold of some of the material!

[@emrek99205]

So glad that I got away from the D&D alignment system and went with the GURPS disadvantages. This allows each character to be unique and not get lumped-sumed into some catchall concept - which incidentally doesn't catch all.

[@aliquida7132]

I like to use the concept of cosmic forces, but not "you have to pick a team" A "lawful" act will increase the power of "lawful" cosmic forces. A "good" act will increase the power of "good" cosmic forces... etc. An individual person will do what it needed based on the circumstances. They don't have to "take sides". BUT their actions still increase the strength of the cosmic forces. Then you can have some monsters that are defined as always being from a certain alignment, because they draw their power _from_ that cosmic power. They exist to spread that alignment. To create chaos, to enforce law... etc. The more evil acts that take place, the stronger and more plentiful these creatures get... it could become a feedback loop if not kept in check. And you can have Clerics who really care about the cosmic balance and take a side (based on their god). They might want to convince other mortals of the benefits of "good" acts at all times, since it strengthens the "good" cosmic power. They also preach against any act that could be considered "evil" to weaken that cosmic power. But your average adventurer would say "I'm sure this ONE questionable act won't tilt the balance of power, I'm not going to worry about it. I typically act in a way that supports the proper cosmic power, don't I?"

[@gavinruneblade]

A missing point of the story is found in the story of the Great Svenny, Greg Svenson's long running character in Dave Arneson's Blackmoore games. In the first dive under Castle Blackmoore in 1971 Arneson had the players find a magic sword that they didn't know was intelligent. One after another they tried to wield it and were rejected by it, being struck down for their failure. Svenny was the last one and realizing that if he also failed, they would likely all die. So instead he bundled up the sword and carried it out of the dungeon, later selling it for 50 gold. In Dave's way of playing Alignment was secret from the players, it was his own read on how their character acted. All of the knights were chaotic except Svenny who was lawful and the sword was lawful. Ironically, the only person who could have safely wielded it was too lawful to try given the circumstances and never found out. Technically, this is the first application of Alignment in the game's history unless something happened related to alignment before the Blackmoore dungeon, but there are very few surviving accounts of those earliest adventures.

[@LuizPaiva2077]

I think alignment language is mechanically very fun, adds another layer of gameplay. The sad part is that it doesn't make any sense in the diegesis of the narrative 😅😅😅 (that's kinda hilarious in my opinion)

[@Earthmote]

Yeah I agree, it has this mechanical value from the game stand point. But from a worldbuilding stand point, it seems to have less congruity.

[@torinmccabe]

DnD is about fighting bad guys. Alignment is an easy way of tagging who the bad guys are that you can/should right. Some people want to be the edgy sometimes bad guy in the group of otherwise good characters and that usually fails ("it's what my character would do"). Realistic personalities and divided loyalties are complex so proceed with caution.

[@Subject_Keter]

For me, i created my main character to be such a horrible good gal that she is netural. She is willing to do anything for peace including torturing her attackers, steal their souls, ruin bad guys lives and render them stuck in eternal life with constantly rebreaking bones. The people that usually make edgy or grey characters want them to be edgy, not the kinda of person who will break her arm to stop the bad guys.

[@Earthmote]

Yeah, I think it can definitely be applied that way!

[@emrek99205]

8:52 Odd that you show House of the Dragon as GRRM has touted the GURPS system as the inspiration for his characters instead of D&D. When you read the books or watch the show with GURPS understanding you can easily see how each character was created and what the driving force behind their personalities are. This is why the characters are so easily understandable by even the layperson who has never interacted with a TTRPG. This is something you cannot do with any of the D&D alignment or even class systems as most of it simply will not fit. I do not know, but I strongly believe that GRRM has made full character sheets in GURPS for each of the characters and that his story writing is him sitting down and playing each of them simultaneously against each other. In my own 25 year D&D experience Alignment never played a part in the game except when certain spells (Detect Evil/Good) or certain items (intelligent swords) came into play. The rest of the time we ignored the alignment system as much as we could.

[@turtlecheese8]

Alignment coming from a WWII isekai story is about as shocking as when I learned feats in 5e was an optional rule. I still don’t believe it.

[@luxuriousturnip181]

Yup, because almost everyone uses them, they're allowed in adventure league, and they weren't optional in previous editions. Multi classing is also optional, and feels pretty similar.

[@turtlecheese8]

@@luxuriousturnip181 I still don't think I'd allow multiclassing, it was kind of wacky the first time my table used it.

[@nicolaskupernobrega7123]

I suppose this is gonna make the story come full-circle for a lot of newer fans that started playing after one or another D&D-themed anime xD

[@thomriley1036]

There's an episode of the old Dungeons & Dragons cartoon called "The Time Lost" where a Luftwafe pilot from WWII is transported into the world of D&D and realizes that his actions will tip the balance of the scales when he returns to Earth. I always assumed that this was one of several nods that Gary Gygax made to the works of Poul Anderson.

[@Subject_Keter]

​@@turtlecheese8 I havent run a campaign so take what I say with salt but Subclass and Multiclass should come around in the campaign or br expressed beforehand. Like it kinda weird if the Rogue suddenly become the soul stealing wraith with no build up but like if they trained, had a interest in stealing souls or found a haunted amulet.. that good. Same for multiclasses but I would want to award them levels if they train or find items that boost it. Like the baseclass is Fighter and they get a book on hexxing and use it? Bam warlock level and it ranks up the more they use it.