Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - True Neutral, The Balance, and GH
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    True Neutral, The Balance, and GH
    Author Message
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:21 am  
    True Neutral, The Balance, and GH

    First, something to set the tone:


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k8ws_APXilE




    For purposes of this thread, I am defining True Neutral as the Gygaxian "Balance" alignment, the one described in pseudo-philosophical language in the AD&D rule books.

    I am considering it apart from what I will simply call Neutral, but what 4E terms Unaligned. That is, neutrality as a muddled, middle of the road, wishy washy moral position.

    IMO, True Neutral works for Druids, if they remain focused on nature rather than human society and morals. It also makes sense for certain apathetic or fatalist cults, like Istus and Boccob.

    But beyond that? I would prefer to marginalize True Neutral.

    Thus I have considered dropping what some have called termed "Militant Neutrality" from GH. Does this seem like a major change? If so, does it seem to you like a good change or a bad change?
    Neutral, or Unaligned, alignment would still be common enough. But it would not be a philosophy, a faction, or a cosmic force.

    (I have assumed the nine alignment, dual axis system. I have no issues with neutrality on the three alignment, Law-Neutral-Chaos set up of D&D.
    If you post comments assuming the three point or five point systems, please add a note explaining the context. Otherwise we will get confused very quickly)
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Sun Dec 20, 2015 4:50 pm  
    Re: True Neutral, The Balance, and GH

    CombatMedic wrote:
    IMO, True Neutral works for Druids, if they remain focused on nature rather than human society and morals. It also makes sense for certain apathetic or fatalist cults, like Istus and Boccob.


    If you add influence from outer planar beings (rilmani, etc.), that seems to cover the major sources of this philosophy in the game. Even the Circle of Eight are mostly worshipers of Boccob, so that's already covered.

    The primary faith of the town of Narrion in Dragon #37 is the Temple of Apathy, which might work as a Boccobite sect.

    I'd make it more of a Boccobite thing than an Istusite thing, personally.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:39 pm  
    Re: True Neutral, The Balance, and GH

    rasgon wrote:
    CombatMedic wrote:
    IMO, True Neutral works for Druids, if they remain focused on nature rather than human society and morals. It also makes sense for certain apathetic or fatalist cults, like Istus and Boccob.


    If you add influence from outer planar beings (rilmani, etc.), that seems to cover the major sources of this philosophy in the game. Even the Circle of Eight are mostly worshipers of Boccob, so that's already covered.

    The primary faith of the town of Narrion in Dragon #37 is the Temple of Apathy, which might work as a Boccobite sect.

    I'd make it more of a Boccobite thing than an Istusite thing, personally.



    Temple of Apathy does sound fitting for Boccob.

    Your reference to the rilmani makes me think of Planescape. And that reminds me to ask:
    You are Rip Van Wormer, right?
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 24, 2008
    Posts: 126


    Send private message
    Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:18 pm  

    I think your distinction of the actively "True Neutral" and the neutrality of those who just don't really care is pretty accurate.

    As you have pointed out, True Neutral could be rare - druids, the odd "balance" philosophy, and particular deities.

    Perhaps the real question is whether the vast majority of creatures should be aligned beyond the apathetic form of neutrality?

    What if almost nobody had an alignment other than the apathetic version of neutrality? Sure most people want to do "good" in the campaign world - but perhaps what they are really saying is that they want to avoid trouble for not conforming to societal norms (which could vary greatly between different societies). Perhaps most humans aren't good and most orcs aren't evil - they just don't care about it as much as fitting into their respective cultures. Clerics and other divine magic users would be deeply aligned of course, but how many in a temple congregation are there because its simply what people do on a Godsday in Greyhawk?
    There would be significant consequences for the use of alignment-dependent magic like detect evil, etc.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 28, 2006
    Posts: 336
    From: Barony of Trellwood, The Great Kingdom

    Send private message
    Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:09 pm  

    Neutral vs. "True" Neutral? I think it is a trap. Why split hairs on one alignment out of nine? I also think that defining Chaotic Neutral as either "crazy" or "selfish" is also confining. I see alignments as a tool and trying to define them with big, bright, blue lines is not something that helps the game or Greyhawk.

    Now if you want to talk about how different philosophical and moral beliefs might fit under the term Neutral, I am game. That is interesting to me. That is something that could lead to interesting conflicts in a game. The Circle of Eight is going to have a much different take on neutrality than The Old Faith. Same alignment, different beliefs.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:15 am  

    What I am trying to articulate is that militant True Neutral makes little sense. I mainly mean the insistence on maintaining neutrality between good and evil as an ideological position.

    This kind of character is not a moral relativist. He sees the difference between what is objectively good and what is objectively evil. He really does believe in the existence of definable, opposed, very much real good and evil. But for some reason he thinks both are equally desirable.
    And he is not a realist about human nature.
    He seems to think of evil as a purely external force. It won't get on without his intervention. People won't just keep making bad choices because of their imperfect nature. Thus, he must act to maintain an artificial 'balance' between good and evil. He kicks a beggar this week because he helped a goose girl last week. Murders a paladin because he had banished a Balor.

    So basically he's stupid or crazy. Possibly both.

    I realize this argument is far from new.
    People have probably been making it since 1978 or so.
    Evil Grin

    Is Neutral a cosmic force in GH? Is 'the Balance' a thing?
    I much prefer it as the middle ground, occupied by muddled and ambiguous types, but not a thing in itself.

    3E swings hard that way, I think, with significantly less writing about the necessity of a Balance and all that.
    4E seems to go all the way, renaming Neutral as Unaligned.


    Using that take on things, the neutral aligned Circle of Eight wizards would not care a fig about 'The Balance.'
    No, they would be shady characters who seek magical power and lore over commitment to any high ideals. Not villains, but hardly heroes. The kind of guys who might free Iuz in an attempt to destroy him, not considering the consequences.
    Evil Grin


    Last edited by CombatMedic on Mon Dec 21, 2015 8:57 am; edited 2 times in total
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Mon Dec 21, 2015 7:36 am  
    Re: True Neutral, The Balance, and GH

    Quote:
    Your reference to the rilmani makes me think of Planescape. And that reminds me to ask:
    You are Rip Van Wormer, right?


    Yes.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Mon Dec 21, 2015 7:46 am  
    Re: True Neutral, The Balance, and GH

    rasgon wrote:
    Quote:
    Your reference to the rilmani makes me think of Planescape. And that reminds me to ask:
    You are Rip Van Wormer, right?


    Yes.


    Coolios.

    I don't get on Planewalker or similar boards very often, but I recall enjoying your posts there.
    It's been a long time.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 28, 2006
    Posts: 336
    From: Barony of Trellwood, The Great Kingdom

    Send private message
    Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:06 pm  

    5e takes it a step further, Neutral is for beings that have the frontal lobes to consider law vs. chaos and good vs. evil, while beasts are unaligned. I guess this depends on what edition of the alignment system is your point of reference.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Wed Dec 23, 2015 7:05 am  

    Saracenus wrote:
    5e takes it a step further, Neutral is for beings that have the frontal lobes to consider law vs. chaos and good vs. evil, while beasts are unaligned. I guess this depends on what edition of the alignment system is your point of reference.


    Indeed.

    Here I refer to the AD&D nine point alignment system.

    But, as noted above, I am familiar with all the pre"5E" alignment systems.

    A five point set up, a la Holmes Basic or " 4E" (or WHFRP 1st edition , if non D&D systems are brought in--- it's pretty clearly the same set of concepts) might work just fine for GH.

    GH did not have nine alignments in its early, home game stages, yeah?
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Sat Dec 26, 2015 10:32 pm  

    I have always seen the two types of Neutrals that you described above, CombatMedic: the Militant Neutral that actively works to maintain a balance, and the Passive Neutral that thinks of themselves as good, but is not above committing an evil act now and then if they think they can gain by it and get away with it.

    Examples of Militant Neutrals would include druids and neutral deities, of course, but also the likes of Mordenkainen. Actually, I believe that most other high-level mortals would either fall into the Passive Neutral category, or they would eventually slide into a more extreme alignment, based on their personality and life choices.

    Examples of Passive Neutrals may include the family farmer that is helpful to strangers and good to his family, but will steal a few cows from a neighbor that he had an argument with about the property line and sell those cows in a town a few leagues away where the theft can't be traced back to him. Or, a merchant that sells honest wares to the locals, but has no qualms about gouging traveling strangers.

    In my campaign, Militant Neutrals are extremely few and far between.

    SirXaris
    _________________
    SirXaris' Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/SirXaris?ref=hl
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 11, 2009
    Posts: 228
    From: Gulf Breeze, Florida

    Send private message
    Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:35 am  

    I admit True Neutral isn't the easiest alignment to wrap your head around and having NPCs follow it correctly, much less PCs is difficult, at least for me. Sometimes I look at neutrality as not trying as much to keep the balance, but instead focusing more on serving their own interests above all else. I think it's very hard to remain impartial in all cases because human nature being what it is, we have opinions, biases, and prejudices that influence our actions and decisions. For instance a judge is supposed to remain impartial and follow only the law, but I think history has proven this is very hard to do. Perhaps balance is much harder to follow than simple good or evil.

    I like SirXaris' examples of Militant Neutral and Passive Neutral, and again they made me think about Mordenkainen. He is probably the first person that comes to most people's minds when the topic of a neutral character is mentioned. I definitely think Mordenkainen acts to serve his own best interests, whether that means evil or good actions, but his belief in maintaining the balance is questionable in my opinion. Much has been written about his adherence to maintaining the balance, but I am dubious of his contributions, factual or hinted at. From what I remember it's hinted that Mordenkainen was the one who provided Robilar with the magical swords that's ultimately released Iuz from his magical prison under Castle Greyhawk. Why would he do that? How did releasing Iuz help the balance? If anything it pushed the scale toward evil in a big way. It's not like good had conquered Oerth and evil was down to a few minions hiding in a cave. I guess I just have a problem with understanding Mordenkainen's ultimate goals and in him usually being used as the poster child for neutrality. However, he is an Arch-Mage though, so his goals and actions may just be beyond standard mortal comprehension.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:53 am  

    I think the issue with a neutral serving his own interests above all else is that he then becomes neutral evil.

    But maybe that is what just what happened with Rary?

    And Mordenkainen may be deluding himself with all his "Balance" nonsense, while the corruption grows in his heart...
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Mon Dec 28, 2015 7:34 pm  

    CombatMedic wrote:
    I think the issue with a neutral serving his own interests above all else is that he then becomes neutral evil.

    But maybe that is what just what happened with Rary?

    And Mordenkainen may be deluding himself with all his "Balance" nonsense, while the corruption grows in his heart...


    I agree, CombatMedic. And, that's exactly what I meant when I said,

    Quote:
    Actually, I believe that most other high-level mortals would either fall into the Passive Neutral category, or they would eventually slide into a more extreme alignment, based on their personality and life choices.


    SirXaris
    _________________
    SirXaris' Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/SirXaris?ref=hl
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 255


    Send private message
    Mon Dec 28, 2015 8:57 pm  

    Going for the chrome dome Anton LeVay look is a clue to Mordenkainen's creeping alignment shift.
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.32 Seconds