Alignment in Erce

-
Being a write-up of how alignment works in Erce and a few ponderous notes on said write-up.

Pic unrelated.

Alignment

Alignment in Erce runs on either a 2 or 4 point axis. The most fundamental and unavoidable one is Law vs Chaos – This is an either/or disposition. If you are not Lawful you are, by definition, Chaotic – There is no in between. This alignment axis is more of an allegiance, or even obligation, than an ethical or philosophical outlook that dictates ones actions – It is most fundamentally choosing sides in a cosmic battle. An adherence to a metaphysical, but very much tangible, faction.

The other polarity is an ethical one: Good vs Evil – Unlike Law and Chaos, most people are not strongly aligned with these to be truly considered either. Though good is known and valued all across the West, the notion that people ought to be guided wholly by ethical choices is not a universal one. Being morally upright is a value that must be weighed against other values like honour, bravery, social standing and reputation as the weights on the scales of what is good in life. Many acts are committed that might not be considered morally 'good' but can be justified according to other acceptable values and as such can not be considered “evil” either.

For example, killing a person who attacked your honour in public might not be “Good”, but it would not be considered evil either, since you had good reason. Nor would killing for profit (though you could well be punished for the latter). Having someone murdered covertly for a public slight on your honour, or enjoying killing outside the battlefield for the sake of killing, would be considered reprehensible and “Evil” in most places. 

For many outside the Hearthstone Lands, a moral paradigm such as good and evil is something relative to conditions, subjective and fundamentally worldly in nature. Praiseworthy perhaps, but not an absolute value. Whereas Law vs Chaos represents more primordial values, a paradigm of cosmic import. The very nature of the Middle World, and maybe all existence, depends on the balance of power between these two forces.

When "good/evil" are secondary concerns, pretexts to do stupid shit, like fighting each other, are easier to come  by.


Lawful: A lawful person follows, or at least pays lip service to, the Conventions of Gods & Men. Oaths are something significant and breaking them is likely to result in divine retribution. Names have power, and 

A lawful person is generally opposed to Chaos of all kinds.

Chaotic: A Chaotic person has either forsaken, or never adhered to, Lawful convents. Concepts like truthfulness are secondary, or even meaningless, compared to results, 

Personal power. Freedom. Individuality. Outlaws.

A chaotic person is not necessarily opposed to law – though he could well be if it stood in the way of what he feels he should be free to have or go to. But then, the same could be said for many forces beyond Law in this world….

Good: “Good” as something that ought to be pursued above all other values is something mostly seen in the codex of the Hearthstone Church that combines its philosophy of aspiring to moral purity with a strong adherence to the cause of Law.

It is mostly only such evolved beings as angels, paladins, high clerics of the White Goddess and Heart Masters who are morally pure enough to tangibly register as Good. 

Evil: “Evil” is generally reserved for the most reprehensible of beings and people. 

The sadist torturer who also abducts innocents just to practice his craft on them, the coward who would deceive and betray his family for profit and demons of all kinds (who are known to revel in human suffering) are examples of people who could be considered genuinely committed to Evil.

This guy might be deranged enough to be "evil" in Erce.

Ponderous Notes

This outlook on alignment is strongly inspired by celtic and viking age worldviews, where things like honor, reputation and such were tangible qualities and less the vain affections they have become today.

As you can see, the law/chaos angle is one players will have to wrap their heads around, whilst good/evil is left in the optional category (in-world, this perception of good/evil as tangible forces similar to law/chaos is a modern development). 

Given that it was the gods who basically invented Lawfulness to impose some order on this part of the cosmos, alignment is defined by the perspective of law - If you are not with us, you are, per definition, Chaotic. Those who try and pass off as 'neutral' are just chaotics who deny the name.



That means Chaotic runs a pretty wide spectrum. There are factions of Chaos that probably have more in common with Law than they do many other factions of Chaos. And other cosmic themes run across these spectrums as well (primarily life/death). 

But for the purpose of the gaming setting, Law/Chaos is the pivotal axis, as it is this that defines the safe lands to protect and the borderlands and mythlands that adventurers go to adventure in - It is essentially the Raison D'etre for Erce being eminently adventurable. Some may say, a world of murderhobos shouldn't need such metaplot, but I don't agree. It's as open-ended a metaplot as you can find and takes the world exactly where it should go: From the looting sandboxy style of Keep on the Borderlands to the epic quest of Three Hearts and Three Lions. In other words, a good wide spectrum for adventure that handily avoids the issues good/evil sometimes presents for D&D adventurers.

A Song of Ice and Fire is actually a decent analogy to where I am going with this, though they are not explicit. Westeros is Lawful. Full of treacherous and selfish assholes sure, but they all follow the conventions that one obeys one lord, etc. At the very least, they pay lip service to it. And on the other side of the wall are the chaotic wildlings. They may be good and honourable (though just as likely to be perverted murderous psychopaths), but given that they bow to no ruler and acknowledge no law, simply can not be trusted. They are, a priori, "Other".

Jon Snow is a bit of an odd one out, because he doesn't actually follow this paradigm. He is simply "Good" and will align himself with any lawful or chaotic man who has similar tendencies. His battle with "Evil" makes the battle between law and chaos irrelevant in his eyes. Which of course is anathema to those who are Lawful. Jon Snow would be a Paladin in Erce and an excellent demonstration of why Paladins are not really trusted by society (and much less the clergy - Paladins are also godless)  - Their fight is not necessarily the same fight as that of all decent law-abiding folk. They are too purely "Good".

Comments

Post a Comment

Top 6 most viewed posts in the last 12 months

The Difficult-to-Believe Case of Zak Smith's Innocence

-
I honestly did not imagine myself to be writing a piece like this on this blog. But I feel morally obligated to do so, given that I previously wrote a piece based on the firm assumption of his guilt . Yesterday,  Jeff Rients shared a link to an article based on an upcoming research paper  by Dr. Clio Weisman. I'd encourage anyone who has, or has had, some interest in the OSR community and/or held some sort of opinion on the case of Zak Smith, to read it after reading this one. tl;dr - The article is about the utterly bizarre lying, harassing and slandering behaviour that has somehow become prevalent in certain sectors of the Rennaisance-Formerly-Known-as-OSR. And Zak Smith sat at the heart of it, as its principal recipient. Dr. Weisman thus chose him as her case study.  Long story short, Dr. Weisman lays out a meticulous and researched case that shows Smith to be targeted by OSR trolls for many years with a series of slanderous harassment campaigns, and also to be the victim of who
Read more

Addendum: Why "Roll under" Ability checks really are the best of checks

-
Image
My recent meditations on roll under ability checks and rant against the D20 unified mechanic has generated a bit of commentary and further clarified my own thinking on the matter. This post is an addendum to my  Using Ability Checks in B/X  article, seeking to further explicate why the "Roll Under" ability check truly is the best of ability checks. Earlier today, during my delvings into the blogosphere, I came across this box from  Quarrel & Fable , a Fighting Fantasy spinoff: First thing that struck me was how similar it was to my proposed resolution for Ability Checks . And secondly, it combined those thoughts with my memories of the old Fighting Fantasy  [FF] gamebooks and set my mind spinning into that cross section and how much I always liked the elegant simplicity of the FF mechanic. The best part about doing a post involving Fighting Fantasy is the chance to showcase some of the brilliant art in the gamebooks Now, I've given reasons already in previous posts
Read more

The 3 Mile Hex - The Natural Unit for Exploration

-
Image
There will be interludes between the AD&D Appraisal series, to keep my own writing motivation going. I was going to do a 3-mile hex post outlining the virtues of it, but turns out Silverarm did that already and stole all my points  (even down to the "Outdoor Survival also uses 3 miles") and added more points I wasn't aware of myself. So go read that excellent piece and come back here. What I instead want to talk about is how the 3 mile hex is a very close fit to our natural sense of distance and visualisation and how the that makes the 3-mile hex the perfect blend between immersion and usable game artifact and how to actually bring that into your game.  Minaria hexmap. Scale: 1 hex = 50 miles. Not what we're going for here. A while back, Noisms contemplated the difficulty of creating a sense of wonder in journeys . The difficulty with journeys in RPGs is the scale of it. It becomes too big, and thus too abstract, to visualize, to immerse oneself into.  I tried, un
Read more

In Praise of "Black Box" D&D

-
Image
when it comes to non-Advanced D&D, The internet, and in particular the OSR blogosphere, has deserved praise galore for the B/X sets for D&D. And whilst not quite as enthusiastic, the Mentzer editions for those Basic and Expert sets also get plenty of praise for its art and way of introducing the game. The Holmes set also has its fair of passionate fans. And of course the original brown booklets themselves. Of newer releases, the Rules Cyclopedia also has a large following of fans. One release that hardly ever gets a mention is the 1991 'black box', by Timothy B. Brown and Troy Denning. Actually, the Rules Cyclopedia was published as a sort of companion to this set. Together  they represents the fifth and final edition of non-advanced D&D. "The New Easy to Master Dungeons & Dragons Game" also labelled "Classic Dungeons & Dragons" It's short, 64 page booklet, so much the same as its predecessors, comes with a simple dungeon m
Read more

How Difficulty Class and the D20 engine ruined roleplaying

-
Image
It seemed revolutionary at the time. 3e came out and made a unified mechanic. Roll 1d20 against a target number to see if you succeed. In combat, AC is the target number. For everything else, it's a Difficulty Class [DC]. That's it.  Some of those DCs are calculated as a function of level, opposing ability score etc. But what we also got from this system was a way of ad hoc determining the difficulty of something and then simply saying "roll against that target number to succeed".  In its core form, this is wonderfully simple and intuitive. All you need to internalise is the size of the numbers on a d20 in relation to overall difficulty and then you can resolve basically anything with it. The part about size of numbers has proven to be a bit of an achilles heel for d20 over the years, but that is a different point I will address further below. No, the real point here is that there's an unintended side effect to DCs as a unified mechanic. There are other downsides
Read more

The Fighter Across All Editions of TSR D&D

-
Image
Ok, it's time to get back to elf-games. And why not look at the class that is simultaneously the most beloved and under-appreciated class in the history of D&D? I was going to include assessments of WotC fighters too, but honestly, they end up being so different, and embedded into different systems, that it's like comparing apples and oranges. I would still like to look at the 3e fighter, as that has at least a little continuity with TSR D&D but I think that's for a different post on why feats aren't so bad after all and have a place in all versions of D&D... Moving ON , let's dig in: OD&D : Fighting-Men, as they are called. They get d6 hit die like everyone else, but they start at HD 1+1 and gain more HD as they level than clerics or magic-users (at level 10, the fighter has 10+1, cleric 7+2 and and magic-user 7). They have no armor or weapon restrictions. For weapons, this only matters in regards to which weapons are typically magical (swords, figh
Read more