Why in the name of the Nine Hells was this done? Maybe so Orcs could qualify for the Barbarian class? The only "In-game" explanation I can come up with is that when Vecna tampered with Sigil, he screwed up the universe and made a few changes (like Gruumush's alignment). Does anybody in the game notice that Gruumush has changed, or can the alteration be considered retroactive? (A change in history...)
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
Sat, 2007-06-16 11:33
#1
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
Tue, 2007-06-19 13:11
#3
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
Keep in mind that in Third Edition D&D Lawful and Chaotic really don't mean much. The two alignments are so ambiguously written that you can usually just say someone is a given alignment, offer a flimsy justification, and move on with your life. For instance, the Player's Handbook describes a greedy paladin with a tendency to still as being acceptible for LG even though stealing is clearly an unlawful act (that's why it's called "stealing"). Elsewhere in the Player's Handbook, Mialee is described as being chaotic for the exact same reason Ember is Lawful. Sure if the alignments meant something, making Gruumsh be Chaotic would be unforgivable, but as it is, it's not worth worrying about. It's not like he actually acts differently. He's just defined less intelligently.
Mon, 2007-07-09 18:54
#4
Alignments
I agree with you that some of the DESCRIPTIONS of alignments are fatally flawed, but that doesn't mean the alignment system ITSELF is wrong! I think it's quite accurate and even applicable to real people... If a rule in the Player's Handbook contained a typo, you wouldn't conclude that the rule itself was bad, just the printing... maybe I should start a discussion of the alignment system!
Mon, 2007-07-09 22:16
#5
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
If you have ever participated in one of those threads where people try in vain to ascribe alignments to real people, you'll know that it's pretty darn subjective. There are ways to make the alignment system more intelligent (such as only basing alignments on one criterion), but you'll still wind up having stupid arguments over whether Hitler was Lawful Evil or Neutral Evil or what have you. It's best to just not take it into the real world. It's easier that way.
Tue, 2007-07-10 18:23
#6
Hitler's alignment...
I think Hitler himself was Chaotic Evil, but the Nazis under him were mostly Lawful Evil in my opinion... it IS subjective though, except for the "Evil" part!
Wed, 2007-07-11 00:39
#7
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
Nah, the man himself was clearly evil, but where he falls on the Law/Chaos spectrum all depends on how you define the two. You can easily argue he was Lawful, as he was no criminal, but he did commit many war crimes and crimes against humanity that could easily dump him in Neutral Evil territory, if you with an objective view of the law rather than a subjective one. But he was also known to be rash and impulsive, which some say makes you chaotic. He was also a bit off his rocker, which some say is the same as being chaotic, but others say is not, and then there are the people who say that such a truly awful individual can only be properly defined by the pure unadulterated evil of Neutral Evil. You can see how this sort of argument could go on forever.
Also, the average German soldier, and even rank and file Nazis weren't terribly evil. Sure many of them were callous, selfish, and willfully deluded, but they were also scared, confused, and misled. People do really monstrous things when they don't think they have any other choice. Whether that makes you evil is another topic that can be debated endlessly with no real resolution.
Sat, 2007-07-14 20:30
#8
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
So, um, do they know barbarians are rarely clerics? Do they just want to avoid thinking of orcs as a race instead of morally interchangeable foes?
Sun, 2007-07-15 07:12
#9
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
So, um, do they know barbarians are rarely clerics?
Why should that be?
Thu, 2007-07-19 10:06
#10
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
It just seems like even in a tribe of barbarian characters, literacy might create a division between them. Not that it matters, since Gruumsh could have a NE barbarian cleric and still be Lawful! Both versions of the god would place non-lawful petitioners in Acheron, but the old version has a reason and the new one is just there.
Fri, 2007-07-27 04:16
#11
Gruumush's alignment change from LE to CE
Well, one of the defining features of Gruumsh has been his war with the goblin god whose name I won't bother to butcher. Furthermore, he's a god of war and conflict, and, while chaotic, still fits in the spirit of Acheron. Don't forget, Ilsensine's (sp?) realm is in the outlands, and he is by no means neutral.
I've always found orcs to be lawful just because the rest of the goblinoids were. I don't mind the new way at all.
Yes. That's the reason.
Oh, dear god, no.
It's retroactive. Gruumsh, and orcs in general, have always been portrayed as more chaotic than goblins. The order of orcs is more like the order of a wolf pack than the strict iron discipline of hobgoblins, based on raw strength and power and subject to change as these things change. I don't consider it to be a big deal. He still officially dwells in Acheron.