Philosophy of Evil

[Drakill Tannan]

Acording to Talir's link, i'm true neutral. ¬¬
Screw you equinox.

[Nightshadow]

D&D morality is stupid and retarded to those who don't understand it. It's a lot simpler and reasonable than most think. Someone who goes and kills goblins for fun is more likely to be Chaotic Neutral than Lawful Good, and may be evil if he is particularly cruel about it. The paladin who stabbed the thief in the face should lose his powers and drop down to Lawful Neutral, as paladins should be merciful when the situation calls on it. Someone who steals to feed his family should get chaotic points, but not evil points. Stealing is a chaotic action, not evil. The reason why you steal makes it good or evil. Breaking into some evil noble's home to steal food for starving commoners, or even your family, is a chaotic but also good act. Orcs tend to be evil, but aren't always so. Ultimately even they are individuals, and "Drizzts" do exist among all races, so good tieflings and evil aasimar do exist, though magical, divine and mundane forces are at work which try to keep them set along a certain path.

Also, animation is an act of evil, but no matter what paladins say not everyone who animates the dead is evil. Clerics of Velsharoon are not uncommonly Chaotic Neutral or Lawful Evil. Someone who enslaves a man and brainwashes him into worshipping Cyric is evil, no ifs, ands or buts about it, I don't care how many orphans he saved. As such represents working toward a very evil goal over a long period of time.

Do your best to pick an alignment fitting for your character, if you're not sure what alignment a certain concept should be, ask a DM, or another player who you think could make a good judgement. After that, go with your concept, and if you disagree with a way your alignment starts heading, speak with the DM's about it, but ultimately you shouldn't worry about your alignment after character creation, and just do what feels right.

[fizzt]

This thread and discussion has definitely been educational, and I feel the majority of us could benefit from some guidelines on alignment being posted and stickied somewhere. I'd generally write something up, but my eloquence is lacking compared to the way some of you can write, so I leave it to you, good sirs.

[PlayaCharacter]

True neutral is a horrible alignment to be honest.

True Neutral is the second most awesome alignment, second only to Chaotic Neutral. True Neutral characters are free to pursue their own personal goals unhindered by the tendencies which govern most people. They aren't necessarily "defend the Balance" types, that's just one of many possible options.

[9lives]

Those goals mostly include GSF: PHK.

[Nightshadow]

Also, on Talir's link, which I found to be very nice, I'm a level 2 chaotic good elven cleric. My stats are 11 STR, 17 DEX, 12 CON, 15 INT, 15 WIS, 12 CHA... Hrm... that's 39 points altogether. HACKS! O.O

Anyway, most common folk are True Neutral. It's not a bad alignment (not talking ethically/morally bad... >.> ), it just means someone doesn't really feel strongly one way or another on matters of good/evil/law/chaos, usually. Rarely, a true neutral person will scorn all such things, and be devoted to it philosophically, but that's pretty rare.

[PlayaCharacter]

Those goals mostly include GSF: PHK.

Wouldn't nearly any conceivable use of that spell result in an alignment change? I'm having a hard time imagining when scaring someone to death by filling their mind with unspeakable horrors is anything other than an evil act.

[Drakill Tannan]

What if you do it to make him reveal information that will save the colonists from starving? Does that add good points, or evil points?

[Ghost]

There's always huge debates over this stuff, but from a mechanical standpoint it really only matters to paladins, clerics, monks, and any other classes who lose their abilities if they deviate from a prescribed alignment range. Alignment doesn't dictate your actions, your actions (and reasons behind said actions at times) dictate your alignment, so it's far better to play your PC's personality and let the chips fall where they may.

[Giselle123]

Alignments are general life philosophies and if your character isn't generally playing theirs, that means you are playing some second character through the first's body.  Which is a truly hilarious problem if you choose evil and act neutral and then encounter a paladin.

You can't ask other players playing classes or personalities with hardcoded responses to your alignment to ignore your alignment, or understand your complete 'artistic license'.

[TheImpossibleDream]

Alignments are general life philosophies and if your character isn't generally playing theirs, that means you are playing some second character through the first's body.  Which is a truly hilarious problem if you choose evil and act neutral and then encounter a paladin.

You can't ask other players playing classes or personalities with hardcoded responses to your alignment to ignore your alignment, or understand your complete 'artistic license'.

A neutral action has no effect on alignment. An evil person taking many neutral actions will never change from evil to neutral. Only good and evil points actually effect the scales. A neutral person is someone who has not gained enough good or evil points to shift either way. Or has gained enough good points to negate his evil points and vice versa.

Alignment is not set in stone for any one character. If you're alignment says EVIL you are evil. You have not done enough good to even become neutral.

Acting good while evil, may gain you some good points, but if you still read as evil, you are still evil until you have fully attoned (gained enough good points to become neutral.)

if a paladin detects you as evil. You are evil. I really cannot understand why people seem to think there is more to it than this and try to make a really simple basic system overly complex with thier opinions and justifications.

EVIL = BAD
NEUTRAL = NOT BAD OR GOOD
GOOD = GOOD

If you do many good things while aligned as evil GASP you become neutral eventually.

If you do many evil things as good SHOCK you become neutral eventually.

If you continue to do good or evil you shift to the appropriete alignment.

If you are evil a paladin will oppose you.

When you create a character you -choose the most appropriete alignment- here's a simple guide on choosing a starting alignment, which in no way effects how you play your character AFTER choosing the alignment:

In your characters history count the number of evil acts he has already commited in his life. Now count the number of good acts he has commited. Substract the good from the evil. If the number you get is 0 you are neutral. If the number is -1 or lower you are good. If the number is 1 or higher you are evil.

Simple.

Done, dusted.

/Rant

Again I'll say these type of threads rarely result in anything but the same stuff being repeated for the 5646546468546 time.

Edit: Oh and there are no grey areas in D&D only Good, Evil and Neutral acts. Law, Neutrality and Chaos also factor in. But those are prefixed onto the actions alignment.

[Bearic]

I thought there were grey areas; hence the whole 100-0 scale. Some people are 100 evil and pillage and murder for fun, and some are 75 evil and do it to get by.
 
I think Intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores really matter too for what kind of good or evil you are; a 6 cha, 8 int, 100 evil guy would probably reek of evil, and be so obvious they would be struck down in a day in the ziggurat, but a 17 cha, 14 int, 100 evil guy could probably convince people that he was only doing evil to get by, or at least hide it better.

[TheImpossibleDream]

Doing something evil unwittingly still earns you points towards evil in D&D. Even if you didn't mean it you still need to atone for what you have done.

Example accedentally conjuring a demon would gain you evil points, killing said demon and trying to mend the damage it caused would earn you the same amount of good points as you lost. Where as abandoning the cause and leaving the demon to run amok would shift you even further towards evil.

There is no ambigious good and evil in D&D there is only what is a GOOD action, what is an evil action and what is neither. They fit into those boxes to keep things simple.

Your character's stats have no effect on how his alignment changes. A 3  int ogre is evil, even if he deosn't understand that stomping babies  into dirt is wrong and just likes to see the funny little things go  squish.

It's only when you try to look at it from the perspective of real life that it becomes overly complex and hard to understand.

[tspawn35]

Frankly evil is evil, There is no getting around it.. Good is good at the end of the day if you pick evil for an alignment you are claiming that you feel that you will do what ever it takes to get by. you don't care who you hurt to do it. you only char about yourself and the law means very little. you only follow the law if it suits you. that's more or less evil. you can be a crazy and do crazy things you can be calculating.. there are some villans who's entire goal is to take over the world for no reason other then tey wanted too.. There are some who are evil because they are pissed that there was no cure for there loved one and they want to take it out on the world.. and then there are some who are in charge of a mofia family or cartel who has people under them do the dirty work while they get paid big for being the mastermind.. all evil all for different reasons all to different degrees.

[Bearic]

I suppose, I was more talking about how evil acts can be done though, or the amount of evil one can be, instead of just "evil, neutral, good", it's more "Most evil, more evil, kinda evil...", and then the whole ability scores throw in a twist to why the evil is being done, or the lack of twist.
 
Considering DMs are the only ones that can shift the scales, though, evil might be a little grey is they don't all agree on what is D&D evil; other wise yeah, you're right. Plots are usually more complex than just smashing babies, though, so it makes it a little difficult some times. ^_^
 
 There's also how evil acts are, with the number system. Donating 10 gold to a library is a little good, but won't offset burning down said library, or smashing babies for that matter; hence the whole numbering system, I think.