Americans are most likely to be 'Neutral Good'
June 13, 2022 8:48 AM Subscribe
I'm not sure what there is to take away from this other than the fact that dealing with people IRL who identify as "Lawful Good" is just as tedious and irritating as dealing with them in-game.
posted by Ickster at 8:57 AM on June 13, 2022 [27 favorites]
posted by Ickster at 8:57 AM on June 13, 2022 [27 favorites]
Hardly anyone self-describes as “evil.”
The law-chaos question at least made some kind of attempt.
posted by Mister Moofoo at 9:03 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
The law-chaos question at least made some kind of attempt.
posted by Mister Moofoo at 9:03 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
I feel like TFA is pure clickbait and illuminates nothing but the conceits of the various people involved.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 9:06 AM on June 13, 2022 [8 favorites]
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 9:06 AM on June 13, 2022 [8 favorites]
Granted, it’s kinda hard to agree on what defines good and evil without being able to contact the outer planes.
posted by Mister Moofoo at 9:08 AM on June 13, 2022 [15 favorites]
posted by Mister Moofoo at 9:08 AM on June 13, 2022 [15 favorites]
This kind of could be good, though, if you established "what does it mean to be lawful good, etc, in a real-world context" and came up with a specific set of questions around that. It would be interesting because it provides more dimensions than a lot of these American-political-identity things do.
I am an accountant - force to be lawful good, yearning to be chaotic good, probably true neutral on the "do you worry about your life a lot" scale.
posted by Frowner at 9:09 AM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
I am an accountant - force to be lawful good, yearning to be chaotic good, probably true neutral on the "do you worry about your life a lot" scale.
posted by Frowner at 9:09 AM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
As an American who has never actually played the game and is at least 95% chaotic good, this sure confirms my knee-jerk opinions. [edit: but, lawful evil is *way* underrepresented. As self-reporting will do.)
posted by eotvos at 9:18 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by eotvos at 9:18 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
But as for the tendency to readily worship false gods, and willingness to risk all for the promise of treasure, it’s got that nailed, amirite
posted by armoir from antproof case at 9:26 AM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
posted by armoir from antproof case at 9:26 AM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
Is it just me, or does the table only account for ~90%? If I add the percentages I get < 91%, meaning maybe 9% unaccountably evil? Why is the government covering this up?
posted by pulposus at 9:27 AM on June 13, 2022
posted by pulposus at 9:27 AM on June 13, 2022
They rolled with a D16 but shoulda used the D20
posted by armoir from antproof case at 9:28 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by armoir from antproof case at 9:28 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
Hrm. When I look at what it says in D&D and think about myself in those terms, I usually tend to end up LN with LG tendencies. Looking at these statements at what other people who self-identify in those blocks go for, though, nauseates me for the most part. Attitudes towards relationships is probably the only one where I could go for LG. NG with leanings away from LG for most of them.
Interestingly, my playstyle tends to go for NG with chaotic leanings, and my current character would probably be pegged as more CN but wanting to be CG (quote from the last session, "He is obviously deeply confused." "Good. That's what I'm here for.").
posted by Four Ds at 9:32 AM on June 13, 2022
Interestingly, my playstyle tends to go for NG with chaotic leanings, and my current character would probably be pegged as more CN but wanting to be CG (quote from the last session, "He is obviously deeply confused." "Good. That's what I'm here for.").
posted by Four Ds at 9:32 AM on June 13, 2022
Very few Americans identify as evil
There’s a whole lot in that statement that I could navel gaze about. Sub in any group for “Americans” and there’s going to be a lot to navel gaze about, really.
posted by Going To Maine at 9:32 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
There’s a whole lot in that statement that I could navel gaze about. Sub in any group for “Americans” and there’s going to be a lot to navel gaze about, really.
posted by Going To Maine at 9:32 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Hardly anyone self-describes as “evil.”
I don't need a d20 to know most of America secretly loves evil people, the way they say they root for the underdog but always cheer on the high school prom king. But most of America is boringly hypocritical in that way. The ones to watch out for are the few who acknowledge and revel in inflicting cruelty and suffering on others. Cheney, Kissinger, Trump. They know how to tap into and exploit that "neutral good" image people have of themselves.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:42 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
I don't need a d20 to know most of America secretly loves evil people, the way they say they root for the underdog but always cheer on the high school prom king. But most of America is boringly hypocritical in that way. The ones to watch out for are the few who acknowledge and revel in inflicting cruelty and suffering on others. Cheney, Kissinger, Trump. They know how to tap into and exploit that "neutral good" image people have of themselves.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:42 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
Very few Americans identify as evil
Well, that's only if you agree not to judge them on their words, public thoughts, or deeds.
Plenty have this switch on their back.
posted by The_Vegetables at 9:43 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
Well, that's only if you agree not to judge them on their words, public thoughts, or deeds.
Plenty have this switch on their back.
posted by The_Vegetables at 9:43 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
The methodology is absurd, and shows what a joke YouGov is. Even if you seriously wanted this data, asking the questions used would hopelessly bias the sample.
If you offer people a choice between two opposed, vague and simplistic statements or a compromise, you bias them to accept the compromise, especially if the compromise enables them to reveal almost nothing. So you can't trust the "Neutral" part of "most Americans are NG".
As for asking people if they are a good, neutral or evil person. Well...
The alignments of people's actual D&D characters would be much more informative than this horseshit. "Oh, you always play CN do you? No, we're actually OK for babysitters."
posted by howfar at 9:47 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
If you offer people a choice between two opposed, vague and simplistic statements or a compromise, you bias them to accept the compromise, especially if the compromise enables them to reveal almost nothing. So you can't trust the "Neutral" part of "most Americans are NG".
As for asking people if they are a good, neutral or evil person. Well...
The alignments of people's actual D&D characters would be much more informative than this horseshit. "Oh, you always play CN do you? No, we're actually OK for babysitters."
posted by howfar at 9:47 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Back in 2018, I tried to figure out which figures in American politics mapped best onto the nine alignments, with the following exemplars, who still seem pretty representative:
Lawful Good: Ruth Bader Ginsburg (serving justice through more or less exclusively the application of law)
Neutral Good: Barack Obama (trending towards lawful; trying to work within established systems, although not exclusively so, for good)
Chaotic Good: Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters (working towards good ends and generally stepping outside of the norm-driven systems of politics)
Lawful Neutral: James Comey (highly rules-driven, and seemingly pathologically indifferent towards consequence) and Robert Mueller (same, less pathological)
True Neutral: Bill Clinton (and "third way" liberalism generally), or the less-crazy Republicans like Larry Hogan or Lisa Murkowski
Chaotic Neutral: Justin Amash (highly rebellious without being overtly good or extremely terrible)
Lawful Evil: Mitch McConnell (deploying letter-of-the-law legalism for evil ends)
Neutral Evil: Dick Cheney, Henry Kissinger (generally terrible with a mix of legal and extralegal approaches)
Chaotic Evil: Donald Trump (terrible and indifferent to legality or norms)
posted by jackbishop at 9:57 AM on June 13, 2022 [24 favorites]
Lawful Good: Ruth Bader Ginsburg (serving justice through more or less exclusively the application of law)
Neutral Good: Barack Obama (trending towards lawful; trying to work within established systems, although not exclusively so, for good)
Chaotic Good: Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters (working towards good ends and generally stepping outside of the norm-driven systems of politics)
Lawful Neutral: James Comey (highly rules-driven, and seemingly pathologically indifferent towards consequence) and Robert Mueller (same, less pathological)
True Neutral: Bill Clinton (and "third way" liberalism generally), or the less-crazy Republicans like Larry Hogan or Lisa Murkowski
Chaotic Neutral: Justin Amash (highly rebellious without being overtly good or extremely terrible)
Lawful Evil: Mitch McConnell (deploying letter-of-the-law legalism for evil ends)
Neutral Evil: Dick Cheney, Henry Kissinger (generally terrible with a mix of legal and extralegal approaches)
Chaotic Evil: Donald Trump (terrible and indifferent to legality or norms)
posted by jackbishop at 9:57 AM on June 13, 2022 [24 favorites]
The methodology is absurd, and shows what a joke YouGov is. Even if you seriously wanted this data, asking the questions used would hopelessly bias the sample.
Definitely a Lawful Neutral attitude.
posted by mark k at 10:02 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
Definitely a Lawful Neutral attitude.
posted by mark k at 10:02 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
My understanding of DnD alignments is that most people in a campaigns's world are true neutral. The 5e handbook describes true neutral as people who "prefer to steer clear of moral questions and don't take sides, doing what seems best at the time." In that sense, your alignment is determined much more by your actions than by vague hypothetical statements of preference.
posted by cubeb at 10:07 AM on June 13, 2022 [7 favorites]
posted by cubeb at 10:07 AM on June 13, 2022 [7 favorites]
We have been trending Lawful Evil pretty hard for at least the last six years, if not 40, and that's not even a hard call.
posted by Sing Or Swim at 10:11 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by Sing Or Swim at 10:11 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
One of the blind spots of the alignment system is that it does not account for being a passive beneficiary of a society that does cruel things. It places the emphasis on individual choice and individual point of view.
posted by cubeb at 10:28 AM on June 13, 2022 [12 favorites]
posted by cubeb at 10:28 AM on June 13, 2022 [12 favorites]
Chaotic Good: Bernie Sanders, Maxine WatersI like the model, but those particular names sure read as lawful good to me. Too lawful. (Which isn't bad, I guess by definition.) I'd argue that chaotic good is better represented by people like Guy Debord, Abbie Hoffman, Fred Hampton. Who were always unelectable.
posted by eotvos at 10:41 AM on June 13, 2022 [8 favorites]
Chaotic Good: Hunter Thompson
posted by Splunge at 10:45 AM on June 13, 2022 [5 favorites]
posted by Splunge at 10:45 AM on June 13, 2022 [5 favorites]
My understanding of DnD alignments is that most people in a campaigns's world are true neutral. The 5e handbook describes true neutral as people who "prefer to steer clear of moral questions and don't take sides, doing what seems best at the time." In that sense, your alignment is determined much more by your actions than by vague hypothetical statements of preference.
I think the most useful aspect of D&D alignments, and I'm not entirely sure that it is helpful in general, is the understanding that most people can be not good people, and that's okay, because it doesn't mean they're bad people. There's a bunch of true neutrals out there.
posted by Merus at 10:46 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
I think the most useful aspect of D&D alignments, and I'm not entirely sure that it is helpful in general, is the understanding that most people can be not good people, and that's okay, because it doesn't mean they're bad people. There's a bunch of true neutrals out there.
posted by Merus at 10:46 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Given that alignment is a horrible mechanic that needs to go die in a fire (and thankfully 5e has begun the process), this seems like an exercise in woolgathering.
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:51 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:51 AM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
Chaotic Good: Hunter Thompson
Yeah, and rappers, writers, and athletes who speak to social causes, but couldn't be elected to create laws that address the changes they advocate for.
posted by The_Vegetables at 11:06 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Yeah, and rappers, writers, and athletes who speak to social causes, but couldn't be elected to create laws that address the changes they advocate for.
posted by The_Vegetables at 11:06 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
This is a trash self-analysis, like asking a bunch of 5th graders "do you like ice cream?good people like ice cream! are you a good person?"
So, better, let's talk about the SANDWICH and the SHTETL
posted by lalochezia at 11:18 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
So, better, let's talk about the SANDWICH and the SHTETL
posted by lalochezia at 11:18 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
I would very much like to see the breakdown of alignment by income bracket. Because I cannot help but think that there are a lot of billionaires in the 3 "evil" categories...
posted by caution live frogs at 11:21 AM on June 13, 2022
posted by caution live frogs at 11:21 AM on June 13, 2022
If being a Creationist is lawful good, i don't want to be good.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 11:21 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 11:21 AM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
The alignment "system" (I'm not sure what to call it, as it isn't really a mechanic anymore and is a vague, over-simplified, hand-wavy shorthand for describing a moral outlook/philosophy in the broadest of terms) in D&D has always been a difficult/problematic aspect of the game and it really shouldn't be applied to real-world discussions in any way. Alignment describes a world view (and does so poorly at that, by failing to consider the differences inherent relative to strength of the positioning on the axes - e.g., what if someone is very high on the "good", but marginally into the "lawful"? Are they still lawful good, or should goodly lawful be a possibility?), but not necessarily actions and how those actions are perceived by others - i.e., a government bureaucrat could consider themselves to be lawful good for upholding the law, but a population oppressed by that law would consider them lawful evil). In other words, it sucks as a conceptual framework for the game it was invented for, so maybe don't use it outside of its context, where it will suck even harder?
Anyways, looks like I failed my save against geeky pedantry, as always.
posted by nubs at 11:33 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Anyways, looks like I failed my save against geeky pedantry, as always.
posted by nubs at 11:33 AM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
armoir from antproof case
You need dice with 4, 6, 8, 12, and 20 sides. No more, no less.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 12:05 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
They rolled with a D16 but shoulda used the D20WTF is this thing even.
You need dice with 4, 6, 8, 12, and 20 sides. No more, no less.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 12:05 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
D&D alignment is what it is. I think it's best as a really simple role playing prompt to think about your PCs motivation. RPGs (especially non-D&D RPGs, but D&D too) tend to be a lot more narrative focused than they were in a day so alignment's superfluous, but not inherently bad.
For peak nerd-dom, bring up Philosophy and Ethics 101 thought experiments with D&D nerds and see how strong opinions are. Is Neutral Good about utilitarianism? Are deontological systems necessarily Lawful?
Forget that, people can't even agree if Batman is Lawful Good or Chaotic Good.
I would very much like to see the breakdown of alignment by income bracket. Because I cannot help but think that there are a lot of billionaires in the 3 "evil" categories...
If you drill through to the original questions and click the right links, you can see the actual questions and they do have income based breakdown.
Rather boringly, there's not much difference. People are self reporting, and on the good/evil axis they are self reporting whether they think they're evil.
This does put me in mind of Jon Ronson's The Psychopath Test, in which he notes (TBF mostly supported by anecdote) that various CEOs and billionaires share an awful lot of traits with psychopaths. He gives them the test, they check off the boxes, and if you press them on it they'll explain while those traits are good. I think people kind of wish this poll was that; it'd certainly be more interesting.
posted by mark k at 12:15 PM on June 13, 2022
For peak nerd-dom, bring up Philosophy and Ethics 101 thought experiments with D&D nerds and see how strong opinions are. Is Neutral Good about utilitarianism? Are deontological systems necessarily Lawful?
Forget that, people can't even agree if Batman is Lawful Good or Chaotic Good.
I would very much like to see the breakdown of alignment by income bracket. Because I cannot help but think that there are a lot of billionaires in the 3 "evil" categories...
If you drill through to the original questions and click the right links, you can see the actual questions and they do have income based breakdown.
Rather boringly, there's not much difference. People are self reporting, and on the good/evil axis they are self reporting whether they think they're evil.
This does put me in mind of Jon Ronson's The Psychopath Test, in which he notes (TBF mostly supported by anecdote) that various CEOs and billionaires share an awful lot of traits with psychopaths. He gives them the test, they check off the boxes, and if you press them on it they'll explain while those traits are good. I think people kind of wish this poll was that; it'd certainly be more interesting.
posted by mark k at 12:15 PM on June 13, 2022
My take on the chaotic axis in RPG play:
Claimed alignment: Chaotic Neutral
Actual behavior: Chaotic Evil
Fall-back justification for behavior: Chaotic Random (not an actual alignment)
This is surprisingly common IRL, too.
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:24 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Claimed alignment: Chaotic Neutral
Actual behavior: Chaotic Evil
Fall-back justification for behavior: Chaotic Random (not an actual alignment)
This is surprisingly common IRL, too.
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:24 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
See where it says Chaotic Evil = 1%? It's the same 1% we all refer to as "the 1%", and that's kinda the problem isn't it?
posted by OHenryPacey at 1:15 PM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by OHenryPacey at 1:15 PM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
I think this just proves that DnD alignment is like MBTI or astrology for geeks.
posted by FJT at 1:19 PM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
posted by FJT at 1:19 PM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
Back in 2018, I tried to figure out which figures in American politics mapped best onto the nine alignments
You got everyone nicely categorized from Lawful Democrat to Chaotic Republican.
posted by straight at 1:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
You got everyone nicely categorized from Lawful Democrat to Chaotic Republican.
posted by straight at 1:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Batman is Lawful Good or Chaotic Good
not all of us agree that Batman is good...
posted by supermedusa at 1:27 PM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
not all of us agree that Batman is good...
posted by supermedusa at 1:27 PM on June 13, 2022 [2 favorites]
The methodology is beyond ridiculous. But on the other hand, I just took a 40-question quiz to learn my D&D alignment, and it's, uh, Neutral Good. So.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:38 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:38 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
Chaotic Good: Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters
these are politicians who are literally part of the institutional regime lol
chaotic good would be more like John Brown or Malcolm X and definitely not a single person who says shit like 'all you have to do is vote' (as if this society hasn't been voting for the past few centuries)
posted by paimapi at 2:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
these are politicians who are literally part of the institutional regime lol
chaotic good would be more like John Brown or Malcolm X and definitely not a single person who says shit like 'all you have to do is vote' (as if this society hasn't been voting for the past few centuries)
posted by paimapi at 2:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [4 favorites]
D&D alignment escaping into the real world is really fucked up IMO - it originated as a useful system for classifying enemies so that it was clear which ones you could kill. If you think you're 'lawful good' and make any kind of decisions based off that descriptor i'm really worried. I remember reeling when this rolled across my feed: https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1011377951068311552
Now, Freebase's alignment system on the other hand:
LG [Liberal Granola]:
Knows that mass social protest is the only way to defeat THE MAN.
LN [Liberal Noncommittal]:
Buys bumper-stickers against THE MAN on occasion, and would like to rise up against his oppressors and end this cruel reign of tyranny, but prefers Dead shows.
LE [Liberal Establishment]:
Sells bumper-sticks against THE MAN and T-shirts for Dead shows; pretending to be part of the movement for social change, yet profiteering off his fellow brothers and sisters, finally becoming part of the System that has forced our children to go to die in 'Nam.
NG [Noncommittal Granola]:
Bought a couple of shirts, thinking this helps, but only practices Iron Butterfly riffs in the garage while the gears of government run by fascist weapon industries crush his remaining freedom.
TN [True Noncommittal]:
Is happy to live in whatever Orwellian hell is presented to him, unknowingly disposing of his own, and hence others, right of choice.
NE [Noncommittal Establishment]:
Buys into the propaganda machine of his mom's Rosie the Riveter days, and does not question the Draft, though it will mean his end.
CG [Conservative Granola]:
Blindly puts faith in other's power to change the world he is increasingly shackled by.
CN [Conservative Noncommittal]:
Voted for Tricky Dick because he liked his speaking voice.
CE [Conservative Establishment]:
THE MAN.
posted by xiw at 3:00 PM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
Now, Freebase's alignment system on the other hand:
LG [Liberal Granola]:
Knows that mass social protest is the only way to defeat THE MAN.
LN [Liberal Noncommittal]:
Buys bumper-stickers against THE MAN on occasion, and would like to rise up against his oppressors and end this cruel reign of tyranny, but prefers Dead shows.
LE [Liberal Establishment]:
Sells bumper-sticks against THE MAN and T-shirts for Dead shows; pretending to be part of the movement for social change, yet profiteering off his fellow brothers and sisters, finally becoming part of the System that has forced our children to go to die in 'Nam.
NG [Noncommittal Granola]:
Bought a couple of shirts, thinking this helps, but only practices Iron Butterfly riffs in the garage while the gears of government run by fascist weapon industries crush his remaining freedom.
TN [True Noncommittal]:
Is happy to live in whatever Orwellian hell is presented to him, unknowingly disposing of his own, and hence others, right of choice.
NE [Noncommittal Establishment]:
Buys into the propaganda machine of his mom's Rosie the Riveter days, and does not question the Draft, though it will mean his end.
CG [Conservative Granola]:
Blindly puts faith in other's power to change the world he is increasingly shackled by.
CN [Conservative Noncommittal]:
Voted for Tricky Dick because he liked his speaking voice.
CE [Conservative Establishment]:
THE MAN.
posted by xiw at 3:00 PM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
so, self-identified lawful goods find:
- faith is super important (christian, i'm presuming, given the one of the next questions)
- family over everything (which makes sense, they limit who is in that in-group)
- are proud to be american (i'm sensing a pattern here)
- majority believe in creationism
this set of traits correlates strongly to right-wing evangelicals and conservatives, meaning:
self-identified "lawful goods" thus also are probably likely to believe:
- the election was stolen
- trans people and gender identity are at fault for everything awful
- queer folk are all groomers
- climate change is a hoax
- undocumented people deserve have their families split, with children being dumped into the christian child trafficking industry
so running with the yougov poll, "lawful good" apparently means "fascist and fascist-adjacent"
posted by i used to be someone else at 3:04 PM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
- faith is super important (christian, i'm presuming, given the one of the next questions)
- family over everything (which makes sense, they limit who is in that in-group)
- are proud to be american (i'm sensing a pattern here)
- majority believe in creationism
this set of traits correlates strongly to right-wing evangelicals and conservatives, meaning:
self-identified "lawful goods" thus also are probably likely to believe:
- the election was stolen
- trans people and gender identity are at fault for everything awful
- queer folk are all groomers
- climate change is a hoax
- undocumented people deserve have their families split, with children being dumped into the christian child trafficking industry
so running with the yougov poll, "lawful good" apparently means "fascist and fascist-adjacent"
posted by i used to be someone else at 3:04 PM on June 13, 2022 [3 favorites]
Looking up what alignment actually is on Wikipedia, I came across this quote:
"a party of good characters will chop and char a tribe of orcs to so much smoking hamburger without the slightest hesitation or regrets"
That does sound like what some Americans would do.
posted by FJT at 3:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
"a party of good characters will chop and char a tribe of orcs to so much smoking hamburger without the slightest hesitation or regrets"
That does sound like what some Americans would do.
posted by FJT at 3:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
D&D alignment is what it is. I think it's best as a really simple role playing prompt to think about your PCs motivation.
You're putting more thought into alignment than Gary did, which is illustrative of why alignment is a trash mechanic that belongs in the trash. It's worth remembering that alignment started as a simple Law/Chaos continuum (you get three tries to guess where that came from, and the first two don't count), and good/evil wouldn't be added until AD&D 1st Edition. I'd call alignment a kludge, but that would be demeaning to honest ugly hacks.
Stemming from that, what does alignment tell you about your character? The answer is simple: very little. It's basically "what do you generally think of two moral axes?", with little consideration beyond that - and yet it's treated as a major element of a character's moral outlook. Not to mention that it's also provided the D&D creators a veritable field of rakes to step on, such as "let's make our dark skinned elves innately evil" - a position charitably described as yikes. It's telling that when other RPG systems start stealing mechanics from D&D, alignment gets left in the box.
(Yes, I have Opinions on alignment as a mechanic.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:24 PM on June 13, 2022 [7 favorites]
You're putting more thought into alignment than Gary did, which is illustrative of why alignment is a trash mechanic that belongs in the trash. It's worth remembering that alignment started as a simple Law/Chaos continuum (you get three tries to guess where that came from, and the first two don't count), and good/evil wouldn't be added until AD&D 1st Edition. I'd call alignment a kludge, but that would be demeaning to honest ugly hacks.
Stemming from that, what does alignment tell you about your character? The answer is simple: very little. It's basically "what do you generally think of two moral axes?", with little consideration beyond that - and yet it's treated as a major element of a character's moral outlook. Not to mention that it's also provided the D&D creators a veritable field of rakes to step on, such as "let's make our dark skinned elves innately evil" - a position charitably described as yikes. It's telling that when other RPG systems start stealing mechanics from D&D, alignment gets left in the box.
(Yes, I have Opinions on alignment as a mechanic.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:24 PM on June 13, 2022 [7 favorites]
FYI even a first-level Paladin or Cleric can cast Detect Evil And Good, so this poll says a lot more about what resources YouGov has access to than anything about the American people.
posted by grobstein at 4:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by grobstein at 4:23 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
... ok i googled the joke and i discovered the spell doesn't actually check alignments, and 5e doesn't actually have a lot of powers that directly check alignment, although there are some, implying that it's still metaphysically possible. Previous editions had stuff like "Detect Alignment" (first-level spell); I think there has been a movement over the years to put less mechanical weight on the alignment system.
posted by grobstein at 4:26 PM on June 13, 2022
posted by grobstein at 4:26 PM on June 13, 2022
'Chaos' is scarcely to be bettered as a term to conjure with, and whatever power over people’s imagination this exercise may have, the potent invocation of 'chaos' is what I’m inclined to attribute it to.
Here's a very interesting short talk by Sabine Hossenfelder claiming that Classical chaos violates Bohr's correspondence principle and "falsifies" quantum mechanics.
Chaos rules, indeed.
posted by jamjam at 4:38 PM on June 13, 2022
Here's a very interesting short talk by Sabine Hossenfelder claiming that Classical chaos violates Bohr's correspondence principle and "falsifies" quantum mechanics.
Chaos rules, indeed.
posted by jamjam at 4:38 PM on June 13, 2022
"a party of good characters will chop and char a tribe of orcs to so much smoking hamburger without the slightest hesitation or regrets"
Which is all well and good when characters are clearly assigned good vs evil characteristics in advance. In real life, though, individual characters assign good vs evil to other characters based on vague and irrelevant factors (eg 'is not white male from money' = 'evil'). This is where the two-axis alignment falls down, because it assumes people actually act in a manner consistent with how they identify. People that identify as lawful good quite often act in a way I would consider to be lawful evil, simply because we have different ideas on what good and evil look like.
Life would certainly be simpler if everyone was forced to act in a way consistent with their own image of themselves.
posted by dg at 4:42 PM on June 13, 2022
Which is all well and good when characters are clearly assigned good vs evil characteristics in advance. In real life, though, individual characters assign good vs evil to other characters based on vague and irrelevant factors (eg 'is not white male from money' = 'evil'). This is where the two-axis alignment falls down, because it assumes people actually act in a manner consistent with how they identify. People that identify as lawful good quite often act in a way I would consider to be lawful evil, simply because we have different ideas on what good and evil look like.
Life would certainly be simpler if everyone was forced to act in a way consistent with their own image of themselves.
posted by dg at 4:42 PM on June 13, 2022
America is Lawful Neutral, on a good day.
posted by rodlymight at 6:22 PM on June 13, 2022
posted by rodlymight at 6:22 PM on June 13, 2022
America is Lawful Neutral, on a good day.
Well, a Lawful Neutral day, anyway.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:40 PM on June 13, 2022
Well, a Lawful Neutral day, anyway.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:40 PM on June 13, 2022
For peak nerd-dom, bring up Philosophy and Ethics 101 thought experiments with D&D nerds and see how strong opinions are. Is Neutral Good about utilitarianism? Are deontological systems necessarily Lawful?
I posit that this is the only way to think about the good / evil spectrum. You could argue Utilitarianism (press the button on the Trolley problem) vs Deontological systems (don't press the button on the Trolley problem) but I think in reality, it's pretty much settled that deontological systems are how modern society works - with the concept of universal human rights and all.
In a utilitarian world, the government would be morally obliged to kill a healthy human and harvest their organs if it would save the lives of 5 other humans, and no one wants to live in that dystopia. (Forced organ harvesting is something we attribute to the bad guys...). Though it sounds like a pretty good fictional setting for a story or a game...
Hence we would describe Elon Musk as Chaotic Evil. Chaotic because he regularly flouts the law (eg the SEC dramas around his tweets) and Evil because he pursues an overriding goal (humanity to Mars so he claims) and uses everything and everyone around him as a stepping stone to get to that goal, even if none of them agree with it at all. I feel good vs evil is a matter of consensus vs selfish personal desire - if you think you're doing something that you think is good for everyone (humanity to Mars) and you don't care at all to ask whether it's something they need or want, then you're probably not good. You starving people want food? Treatment for TB? Nah you don't need that. We go to Mars instead trust me.
Also, many parents who want to do the "best" for their (older) children by forcing them to do / not do certain things and removing any personal autonomy... that's evil, not good, even if they believe they have good intentions.
Batman is almost certainly Evil. Does he talk to any of the poor people in Gotham and ask them what they really want or need? Public housing perhaps? Nah, he's just got this vendetta against the bad guys and goes around beating them up, because that's his thing.
I would describe myself as Lawful Evil, because to me following the law is extremely important, but evil because if there's something that will allow me an advantage within the law, I'm going to take it. For example, consuming pirated media is not against the law where I live - the distributor of the media is breaking the law, not the consumer, just the same way when AirBNB or Uber started their operations by breaking / skirting the law, only they were liable for fines, not their consumers. In particular, even in the US streaming media can't be considered piracy (infringement requires distribution, reproduction, or public performance) and it's not something that any rights holders are eager to test in court in case they lose and set a lasting precedent...
posted by xdvesper at 7:28 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
I posit that this is the only way to think about the good / evil spectrum. You could argue Utilitarianism (press the button on the Trolley problem) vs Deontological systems (don't press the button on the Trolley problem) but I think in reality, it's pretty much settled that deontological systems are how modern society works - with the concept of universal human rights and all.
In a utilitarian world, the government would be morally obliged to kill a healthy human and harvest their organs if it would save the lives of 5 other humans, and no one wants to live in that dystopia. (Forced organ harvesting is something we attribute to the bad guys...). Though it sounds like a pretty good fictional setting for a story or a game...
Hence we would describe Elon Musk as Chaotic Evil. Chaotic because he regularly flouts the law (eg the SEC dramas around his tweets) and Evil because he pursues an overriding goal (humanity to Mars so he claims) and uses everything and everyone around him as a stepping stone to get to that goal, even if none of them agree with it at all. I feel good vs evil is a matter of consensus vs selfish personal desire - if you think you're doing something that you think is good for everyone (humanity to Mars) and you don't care at all to ask whether it's something they need or want, then you're probably not good. You starving people want food? Treatment for TB? Nah you don't need that. We go to Mars instead trust me.
Also, many parents who want to do the "best" for their (older) children by forcing them to do / not do certain things and removing any personal autonomy... that's evil, not good, even if they believe they have good intentions.
Batman is almost certainly Evil. Does he talk to any of the poor people in Gotham and ask them what they really want or need? Public housing perhaps? Nah, he's just got this vendetta against the bad guys and goes around beating them up, because that's his thing.
I would describe myself as Lawful Evil, because to me following the law is extremely important, but evil because if there's something that will allow me an advantage within the law, I'm going to take it. For example, consuming pirated media is not against the law where I live - the distributor of the media is breaking the law, not the consumer, just the same way when AirBNB or Uber started their operations by breaking / skirting the law, only they were liable for fines, not their consumers. In particular, even in the US streaming media can't be considered piracy (infringement requires distribution, reproduction, or public performance) and it's not something that any rights holders are eager to test in court in case they lose and set a lasting precedent...
posted by xdvesper at 7:28 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
To be clear, this reveals where Americans self-identify as falling on the classic D&D alignment table which probably has very little to do with where they actually would fall if there was a way to correctly and consistently apply such values to people.
Indeed. In my experience, in practice most folks actually seem to range from “Neutral Benevolent” to “Lawful Selfish”.
posted by darkstar at 10:26 PM on June 13, 2022
Indeed. In my experience, in practice most folks actually seem to range from “Neutral Benevolent” to “Lawful Selfish”.
posted by darkstar at 10:26 PM on June 13, 2022
In a utilitarian world, the government would be morally obliged to kill a healthy human and harvest their organs if it would save the lives of 5 other humans
I'm sure we're getting pretty off topic, but I've always found it weird that deontological systems get imagined with near infinite nuance and complexity and utilitarian ones are assumed to be outrageously stupid. How on earth would do people arrive at the idea that a utilitarian would come to the conclusion that giving government the power to arbitrarily murder people would be a good outcome?
It's almost like you know that's not true, but are saying it just to get the result you want in a philosophical argument isn't it?
posted by Infracanophile at 11:07 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
I'm sure we're getting pretty off topic, but I've always found it weird that deontological systems get imagined with near infinite nuance and complexity and utilitarian ones are assumed to be outrageously stupid. How on earth would do people arrive at the idea that a utilitarian would come to the conclusion that giving government the power to arbitrarily murder people would be a good outcome?
It's almost like you know that's not true, but are saying it just to get the result you want in a philosophical argument isn't it?
posted by Infracanophile at 11:07 PM on June 13, 2022 [1 favorite]
In D&D, alignments are just cosmic gang colors. With which of the outer planes do you want to throw in your lot? If you'd rather join the Titans than the Ki-rin, you're Chaotic Good. If you admire Asmodeus more than Demogorgon, you're Lawful Evil. If you'd rather help Bahamut recover stolen treasure from Tiamat's lair than plot to assassinate Bahamut with Tiamat's venom, you're Lawful Good.
Democrats think themselves Chaotic Good and Republicans Lawful Evil. Republicans think themselves Lawful Good and Democrats Chaotic Evil.
posted by straight at 1:25 AM on June 14, 2022 [5 favorites]
Democrats think themselves Chaotic Good and Republicans Lawful Evil. Republicans think themselves Lawful Good and Democrats Chaotic Evil.
posted by straight at 1:25 AM on June 14, 2022 [5 favorites]
A big problem with trying to D&D map alignment onto society is that, generally speaking, almost all the people in the world at any given time* see themselves as on the side of good because most extant real-world philosophies hold that, whatever moral framework they use, doing well on that framework is a good thing. D&D takes place in a universe where fully a third of the creatures powerful enough to be worshipped (and which are actually known to exist, unlike in the real world) endorse the exact opposite, holding that increase in suffering and morally reprehensibility is a desirable thing.
Out here in the real world where we do not have (to the best of our knowledge) Evil Gods, the wide part of the moral continuum runs from "unselfishly good" to "self-interested with occasional moments of charity", with a right turn into "holds a skewed enough moral compass to believe that morally harmful acts actually do good in some way" (with the caveat that different moralities will bicker over what fits a definition of "moral harm"). "Do evil acknowledging it to be evil" has not, as a rule, been a popular human moral stance.
*Alas, not always. "The cruelty is the point" is having a moment in America today.
posted by jackbishop at 6:25 AM on June 14, 2022 [5 favorites]
Out here in the real world where we do not have (to the best of our knowledge) Evil Gods, the wide part of the moral continuum runs from "unselfishly good" to "self-interested with occasional moments of charity", with a right turn into "holds a skewed enough moral compass to believe that morally harmful acts actually do good in some way" (with the caveat that different moralities will bicker over what fits a definition of "moral harm"). "Do evil acknowledging it to be evil" has not, as a rule, been a popular human moral stance.
*Alas, not always. "The cruelty is the point" is having a moment in America today.
posted by jackbishop at 6:25 AM on June 14, 2022 [5 favorites]
While explicit pro-suffering positions are rare in the real world, I think many people agree with variations of "the government shouldn't bail people out from suffering the consequences of their poor life choices" and "low end jobs are supposed to be poorly-paid and degrading to motivate people to improve themselves" and perhaps even "social stability requires an immiserated underclass to encourage the others to be economically productive".
posted by Pyry at 10:22 AM on June 14, 2022
posted by Pyry at 10:22 AM on June 14, 2022
So the big problem with the alignment system is that it's an ehtics system that's explicitly claiming to be based on deontologically/teleologically motivated - i.e. do you believe in the right of other beings to exist and how do you treat them? - and then mapping that onto universes which, Eberron excepted, are very clearly implicitly dualistic.
And there's a distinct problem when you world build enough so much that orcs and drow are no longer abstract representations of vice and evil but people in societies that can make choices based on the consequences of their actions. Because if you're born on team dark, all those third of gods that are "good" are also gods of murder who want you dead. And might as well add deceit, too, since they are pretending to be universally good.
Really, by modern ethics a dualistic universe like that is a grimdark world caught up in a feud between teams "light" and "dark" with much of both of them being genocidal and violent. If anything, team light might be more genocidal. I mean, tell me honestly who is worse: a dragon queen who just wants to lounge on expensive things and be showered in adoration and will even come help you out if you give her a big enough present, or a dragon god who just wants you to go out and kill everything that's the wrong color? Really, if you happen to be caught away from your "team" in the Forgotten Realms, the ruthless Red Wizards of Thay are some of the nicest, friendliest people out there, because at least they'll deal with anyone if there's profit in it.
It's kind of a problem if you dig into the morality too much. You kind of have to accept some pretty implicitly racist thinking if you take the world at face value. As much as I am nostalgic for and love D&D, I'm not sure how you even fix it.
I mean, my first couple real drawn out campaigns were in Eberron anyway, which has a more steam punk but with magic aesthetic and modern moral sensibility - evil and good are actions, not heritage. Being based on pulpy action adventures, it has some colonialist baggage in the tropes it inherits, but at least the cosmology doesn't start with, "Well first let's assume racism is morally justified..."
posted by Zalzidrax at 10:23 AM on June 14, 2022 [1 favorite]
And there's a distinct problem when you world build enough so much that orcs and drow are no longer abstract representations of vice and evil but people in societies that can make choices based on the consequences of their actions. Because if you're born on team dark, all those third of gods that are "good" are also gods of murder who want you dead. And might as well add deceit, too, since they are pretending to be universally good.
Really, by modern ethics a dualistic universe like that is a grimdark world caught up in a feud between teams "light" and "dark" with much of both of them being genocidal and violent. If anything, team light might be more genocidal. I mean, tell me honestly who is worse: a dragon queen who just wants to lounge on expensive things and be showered in adoration and will even come help you out if you give her a big enough present, or a dragon god who just wants you to go out and kill everything that's the wrong color? Really, if you happen to be caught away from your "team" in the Forgotten Realms, the ruthless Red Wizards of Thay are some of the nicest, friendliest people out there, because at least they'll deal with anyone if there's profit in it.
It's kind of a problem if you dig into the morality too much. You kind of have to accept some pretty implicitly racist thinking if you take the world at face value. As much as I am nostalgic for and love D&D, I'm not sure how you even fix it.
I mean, my first couple real drawn out campaigns were in Eberron anyway, which has a more steam punk but with magic aesthetic and modern moral sensibility - evil and good are actions, not heritage. Being based on pulpy action adventures, it has some colonialist baggage in the tropes it inherits, but at least the cosmology doesn't start with, "Well first let's assume racism is morally justified..."
posted by Zalzidrax at 10:23 AM on June 14, 2022 [1 favorite]
I think many people agree with variations of "the government shouldn't bail people out from suffering the consequences of their poor life choices" and "low end jobs are supposed to be poorly-paid and degrading to motivate people to improve themselves" and perhaps even "social stability requires an immiserated underclass to encourage the others to be economically productive".
Oh, yes, in the real world, "the greater good" is used to justify a lot of morally problematic positions, which is part of the problem of mapping real-world ethics into D&D terms. Real-world ethics is often ambiguous and there can be disagreement (in good faith, or otherwise) between people all claiming to be on the side of good. In a world where the gods unambiguously exist and unmistakably talk to people occasionally, any reasonably long-running ethical disagreement is going to end with one participant calling up Tyr and asking, "hey, we disagree here, who's right?" and following his reasoning (or, alternatively, calling up Bane with the same question, and following the opposite of his reasoning). This means nobody's standing at the doors of a Temple of Cyric and saying, "Hey, come on in and learn why murder and strife are actually good things" so much as "Hey, would you like to murder people and generally be an asshole? Come join Team Cyric and you can without endangering your immortal soul." And while some (OK, a lot) people in the real world cite "the greater good" to cover for a bad-faith immoral position, moral clarity is a lot harder to come by here than in a D&D gameworld. I think in D&D worlds people who cite the greater good for systems of oppression are canonically Lawful Good (it's one of the ways paladins are regularly typecast, for instance, as indifferent to the negative effects of their hidebound and intolerant systems).
posted by jackbishop at 11:11 AM on June 14, 2022
Oh, yes, in the real world, "the greater good" is used to justify a lot of morally problematic positions, which is part of the problem of mapping real-world ethics into D&D terms. Real-world ethics is often ambiguous and there can be disagreement (in good faith, or otherwise) between people all claiming to be on the side of good. In a world where the gods unambiguously exist and unmistakably talk to people occasionally, any reasonably long-running ethical disagreement is going to end with one participant calling up Tyr and asking, "hey, we disagree here, who's right?" and following his reasoning (or, alternatively, calling up Bane with the same question, and following the opposite of his reasoning). This means nobody's standing at the doors of a Temple of Cyric and saying, "Hey, come on in and learn why murder and strife are actually good things" so much as "Hey, would you like to murder people and generally be an asshole? Come join Team Cyric and you can without endangering your immortal soul." And while some (OK, a lot) people in the real world cite "the greater good" to cover for a bad-faith immoral position, moral clarity is a lot harder to come by here than in a D&D gameworld. I think in D&D worlds people who cite the greater good for systems of oppression are canonically Lawful Good (it's one of the ways paladins are regularly typecast, for instance, as indifferent to the negative effects of their hidebound and intolerant systems).
posted by jackbishop at 11:11 AM on June 14, 2022
Come on. It's right there in the 1st Ed. DMG, page 24: "It is of importance to keep track of player activity with respect to their professed alignment." PC actions trump professions of alignment and if minor actions consistently go against alignment, or there's a major alignment violation, DMs are supposed to change a PC's alignment.
Clearly, the DM of the USA Campaign has failed to do this and, instead, just let the players do whatever while professing themselves of good alignment.
That said, maybe that should come as no surprise, seeing as St Gygax of the DMG, PHB, MM trinity thought "nits make lice" an appropriate motto for Paladins and even seemed to think John Chivington, of Sand Creek Massacre infamy, behaved in a Lawful Good manner.
Therefore, in summary: alignment is broken and always has been!
However... much as I am from the ditch alignment camp, I am intrigued by the use of Helms of Opposite Alignment in the USA Campaign. They seem more common than +1 Daggers.
posted by house-goblin at 11:25 AM on June 14, 2022 [1 favorite]
Clearly, the DM of the USA Campaign has failed to do this and, instead, just let the players do whatever while professing themselves of good alignment.
That said, maybe that should come as no surprise, seeing as St Gygax of the DMG, PHB, MM trinity thought "nits make lice" an appropriate motto for Paladins and even seemed to think John Chivington, of Sand Creek Massacre infamy, behaved in a Lawful Good manner.
Therefore, in summary: alignment is broken and always has been!
However... much as I am from the ditch alignment camp, I am intrigued by the use of Helms of Opposite Alignment in the USA Campaign. They seem more common than +1 Daggers.
posted by house-goblin at 11:25 AM on June 14, 2022 [1 favorite]
In a utilitarian world, the government would be morally obliged to kill a healthy human and harvest their organs if it would save the lives of 5 other humans
People love to say this but never think of questions like "how much utility is created or destroyed by every human being living with the knowledge that they may, at random, be selected for organ harvesting?" because the argument was shallow to begin with. It's like the whole argument of "raising wages raises the cost of labor, therefore reducing the amount of labor purchased, therefore a higher minimum wage will cause inflation and there's nothing more complicated than that"- more a thought-terminating cliche than an argument.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:49 AM on June 14, 2022 [5 favorites]
People love to say this but never think of questions like "how much utility is created or destroyed by every human being living with the knowledge that they may, at random, be selected for organ harvesting?" because the argument was shallow to begin with. It's like the whole argument of "raising wages raises the cost of labor, therefore reducing the amount of labor purchased, therefore a higher minimum wage will cause inflation and there's nothing more complicated than that"- more a thought-terminating cliche than an argument.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:49 AM on June 14, 2022 [5 favorites]
The other thing is, deontology doesn't mean "basically your moral intuitions", it means that morals are based on rules rather than on outcomes. The rules could very easily state (and, in real-world cases have been claimed to state) that minority groups should be exterminated, or that only men are really people, or any other combination of horrors to shock the conscience. You could come up with any number of deontological rules that amount to "you have to push the button".
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:52 AM on June 14, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:52 AM on June 14, 2022 [1 favorite]
generally speaking, almost all the people in the world at any given time* see themselves as on the side of good because most extant real-world philosophies hold that, whatever moral framework they use, doing well on that framework is a good thing
I don't think I agree with that. I don't think the great problem of morality is people having different definitions of what is good and evil. I think the great problem is getting people to care more about good and evil than they do about their own personal comfort and desires.
There's a few crackpots who go around claiming selfishness is good, but most people just wanna claim they're not really being selfish because...reasons.
posted by straight at 3:54 PM on June 14, 2022
I don't think I agree with that. I don't think the great problem of morality is people having different definitions of what is good and evil. I think the great problem is getting people to care more about good and evil than they do about their own personal comfort and desires.
There's a few crackpots who go around claiming selfishness is good, but most people just wanna claim they're not really being selfish because...reasons.
posted by straight at 3:54 PM on June 14, 2022
everyone is the hero of their own story. the problem with applying the d&d framework to real life is that real life has no DM. there is no objective arbiter to tell you what counts as good or evil, or what counts as a rule to follow, or who created it. games are fun. games are approximations of life without the hard parts where you have no idea what's going on or who's the good guy. life isn't a game. trying to make it one leads to bad outcomes.
posted by wibari at 10:52 PM on June 14, 2022
posted by wibari at 10:52 PM on June 14, 2022
« Older Every now and then you play a concert that feels... | scientific enterprise is biased even if scientific... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by jacquilynne at 8:56 AM on June 13, 2022 [40 favorites]