If Planescape was real, what plane would end up in after death?
After much reflection, I realized that I'd probably end up in Gehenna.
I'd like to point out that my choice (Grey Wastes) was not based on what I percieve my alignment to be (which I generally see as non-lawful and non-evil), but rather it was based on where Planescape has placed the realm that comprises the most common afterlife destination for my religion. I should not be figured into those statistics.
But if you're talking about Hades, your alignment does figure, because from Hades you can be sent on to Elysium or Carceri or Arborea.
Niflheim? I'd rather end up as an einherjar and fight alongside Odin, personally.
Narfi Res, I wage a war of words against the Christian hegemony. If I die with a pen in my hand of malnourishment will I go to Valhalla?
Only if you somehow manage to kill a dozen englishmen in the process.
What if I kill the faith and sense of purpose of a dozen southerners?
No, I don't think the All-Father would be very impressed by that.
To the best of my knowledge it is not a matter of impressing Odin so as to get him to let you in. It is a matter of being part of conflict and battle and in doing so echoing in your actions the cosmic conflicts inherent in universe being composed of opposing forces (regarding which the belief in multiple gods is a metaphor).
First, you have to be a warrior slain in battle. This is not metaphorical; no wars of words or any of that. Second, Freya gets half of those, the other half go to Valhalla. What Freya does with her half is unknown; presumably they form her own army to fight the forces of the Jotuns
Other Gods have their halls, and people devoted to those gods more than others have a good chance of going there, but everyone else goes to Hel, which is not seen as a horrible place. There is no place in the Lore that suggests that everyone devoted to Odin goes to Valhalla, just warriors. In fact if your are a slain warrior devoted to Thor or Tyr you would probably go with either Freya or Odin. So people like me that are devoted to Odin, but are not in the millitary end up in Hel, unless there are rules not hinted at in the Lore in place.
Do you follow Odinism, Asatru, or some other branch of the Northern tradition?
Usually I just say that I'm Heathen. If I had to pick a branch It'd be Asatru, if only because the Icelandic literature has the greatest amount of source material, despite the fact that I'm Heathen because I follow the call of my ancestry which is continental Saxon. I'm definately not Theodish or any of those other "Tribal" sorts that like to recreate caste systems and be separatists; I'm way to much of a libertarian for that.
Planescape is a game. A mental exercise, a thought experiment, a way for art and amateur acting to break out of its shell.
I can't answer where, or why, I'd end up in any of the planes, because they are all simplistic representations of certain parts of our psyches.
Where does an atheist end up in a universe of belief? Nowhere?
Not when it comes to the Aesir.
I think I misunderstood your previous comment. My apologies.
Orroloth, it is abundantly clear that everyone realizes that Planescape is a game. This poll is a thought experiment to figure out where you would fit into this system. It is like asking whether you would go to heaven or hell; you don't need to believe in them to answer (I would go to hell). I disagree that the planes represent different portions of the psyche. The concepts they embody are nowhere near universal enough to be attributed to natural parts of the mind; they are a product of the culture they arose in, nothing more.
Regarding your atheistic comment; first I am an atheist or more specifically a positive nihilist. It is becoming an increasing point of annoyance for me that most atheists don't realize that they do hold beliefs and have faith. Lack of a belief in gods does not in anyway equate to a lack of belief.
Especially since there could be actual atheistic religions out there. I believe that Buddhism is more agnostic than atheistic, but there are religions, or at least there could be a religion, that believes in an afterlife, souls, and all that, without any "god" or even any sort of higher power at all. Jedism would be an atheistic religion, if it was real.
Besides, "the gods don't exist" is also a belief, no matter what some atheists like to say.
But, in Planescape, I think (I was told) that characters who don't believe enough in a god or pantheon to land in their realm, or who are Athar, just go to the plane of their alignment.
I think Narfi Ref is the only one here who stated that he'd land in a particular realm instead of his alignment plane.
Atheistic religions are not a "could be", but an actuality. Though of course this largely depends on how you define "god(s)" and how you define "religion". The different sects of Buddhism vary in their beliefs from Tibetan Buddhism that is polytheistic (and can be thought of as a merger between Buddhism and Shamanism) to a variety of sects like Zen Buddhism that are very clear that there is no God; all sects are firm that there is no creator deity and no supreme being. Confucianism is agnostic and Taoism is atheistic; and there are a variety of minor religions that are atheistic.
You are correct regarding the fate of those who worship no god.
Who would have thought that I would have been the sole bastion of law here...
I don't think you are , Knight. There's one person for Mechanus, one for Celestia, and one for Arcadia.
Hey, Bytopia and Gehenna are both fairly lawful. Then again, I think most people like to think that their morals overshadow their lawfulness, even if it isn't true.
I think I'm probably Arborea bound.
After reflecting on the discussion of defining the alignments I realized that I'd end up on the Grey Waste or possibly (less likely) Carceri.
When I put up the numbers, I counted Bytopia and Gehenna as ethically neutral. Along with Ysgard and similarly placed planes as morally neutral.
well I dunno, according to that thingy I'd belong in either Canceri or Bytopia, which is kinda ironic/weird as they are diametrically opposed.
I believe that life sucks and is not fair, but that those who work hard should be rewarded, and since life often won't reward them, society has a duty to ensure that people that are honestly trying their hardest don't slip through the cracks. People who are lazy, and expect things to be handed to them on a silver platter are doomed to fail, because life doesn't work that way, and society shouldn't waste time trying to help those people that aren't willing to help themselves, because they are a waste of time.
Also, I don't believe in any supreme power, I don't believe in the apparently common American viewpoint that the Rapture is coming, so we don't need to worry about the environment or stuff like that. I believe that we are the only ones that can fix things, and I don't believe in an afterlife, so this is the only world we get, so we'd better not fuck it up and kill ourselves because this is it.
Life is short, and often brutish and nasty, We can't avert our deaths, but we can at least try to make a mark on the world so that perhaps we will be remembered in future generations, and that's the cloest to immortality we get.
Hopefully we don't end up being remembered because we were stupid ignorant, idiots like George W. Bush. And that's another way in which life is not fair, when complete idiots like him end up in power because their family was rich and influential.
I've been reflecting on my essential nature lately, and I've come to the conclusion that I'm basically CN (G). That sounds like it'd place me in Ysgard.
Pandemonium. My madness would be crippling procrastination. I would become an emaciated, wind-resistant Pandemonium petitioner, digging my claws into the rock and never moving again. I would spend eternity surfing the voices in the winds, which are probably more interesting than the Internet ever was.
Though one...
As a DM I would go directly to Baator, no questions asked.
As a player (and only the Powers know how long that has been) I would definitely go to Mt. Celestia.
In RL I´m not so evil or as good as when I play rpgs. And as long as small offences like speeding don´t disturb my lawful side I would say (and voted) Mechanus.
I voted the Beastlands (specifically Karasuthra) because I often have an instinctive reaction to events and ideas, generally benevolent motivations but a slightly misaligned, chaotic personality, like nature (though I am not an environmentalist) and love staying out at night in forests staring at the moon. But that could also make me a lycanthrope, which means I'm going to the Abyss. According to this test I'll be off to Mount Celestia, but this one pegs me as neutrally-good. It's hard to judge oneself, really.
I value truth, trust, loyalty, compassion, honour, freedom, individuality and law (except evil laws, which must be broken). I am also guilty of jealousy, hatred, apathy, wrath, and primarily laziness.
Korchuk: you're definitely going to one of the Nine Hells. Possibly all nine in sequence.
Great poll idea, btw.
according to the offical test I am Neutral Good, according to the other I am Lawful Good.
I kind of agree with the first one more.
I retook both of those tests. According to the test by wizards, I'm chaotic evil. According to the other, better test I'm true neutral but leaning towards chaotic evil. Since I am not at all violent I would not go to the Abyss, likely leaving me to go to Carceri. So going by those tests I would either end up in Carceri or in gate town of Curst in the Outlands. If I didn't forget to bring my Manual of the Planes with me to college I'd try to pick out what layer of Carceri I'd end up in.
Are you serious, Mak? If you answered truthfully and not just to be contrarian, that's rather, uhh...disconcerting. Reprehensible, even.
It would, however, explain a lot of what happens in real life.
Both tests pegged me as Neutral Good, which was pretty much what I expected. Not really that much to elaborate on, though I have to say that I've seen some rather... disturbing positions in this thread.
Krypter, my being classified as almost chaotic evil largely just stems from the fact that I adhere to a system of values radically different than most people do and DnD has associated self-interest with evil.
I am not a person who can find joy in a life spent following my impulses or bouncing from sensation to sensation. I need, or at least want, a focus to lend continuity to my life. But look at the available options: Religions are nothing more than myth, since this reality is all we have it would be irrational to live in accordance with what is not real (especially since most western religions essentially encourage the abandonment of the potential for happiness in this life for the possibility of happiness in a next life that does not exist). Laws are nothing more than the dicates of those who have power, and almost universally intended to do nothing more than preserve and strengthen their power. I follow the laws that I agree with (such as those against rape or murder), the others are only relevant insofar as they can be enforced. All moral philosophies, whether Kant's deontology or Mill's utilitarianism, are wrought with baseless assumptions that entirely undermine their validity. When there is nothing to seperate tradition from a history of errors, it has no weight. Friendship and love are great, but you can't focus yourself on another; to do so is to rob yourself of your agency and independence, and it is insufficient as a way to live since they could always leave or die and then what would I be left with as a path except a void to be filled by finding another to submit to?
The most logical center for one's life is oneself. It is undeniably real and as long as one lives it will exist. As such I devote myself to endless self-improvement and throughout my life I will strive to impose my vision upon the world. Am neither cruel nor malicious, but in a conflict between my needs or wants and those of another I will put my own first unless there is a clear rational reason not to.
I value independence, creativity, intelligence, rationality, determination, open-mindedness, competence, truth, bravery, freedom, pragmatism, realism, and the willingness to carve one's own path regardless of the expectations or condemnations of others.
You don't have to be violent to go to the Abyss. There are, in fact, a number of relatively non-violent layers, including Azzagrat, Twelvetrees, Death's Reward, the Swallowed Void, and Shaddonon.
Meanwhile, many of the inhabitants of Carceri are extremely violent - the plane is the home of sociopaths, fratricides, matricides, regicides, and patricides. The difference between Carceri and the Abyss is not violence, but merely that the inhabitants of Carceri tend to be more evil than those in the Abyss, and less chaotic.
Sounds like you're gonna end up in Pandemonium, Mak.
You know, I think you're confusing the D&D-system a bit with real life here. The basic premise of a question like the one regarding in what Outer Plane you'd end up basucally presupposes that the afterlife functions exactly like it does in Planescape. Scientifically very valid theories concerning the genealogy of religions in a naturalistic setting become prectically obselete in a Planescape-ish multiverse.
Moral codes like kantian deontology or even nicomachean ethics may be based on wonky and unstable pillars at the very least, but this does not strip them of their value completely, either scientifically of philosophically. Just like these general theories, the ideals that are connected to them have value. You said yourself that you believe in the importance of terms such as rationality and autonomy, creativity and bravery. The mere fact that you believe in the importance such things already hints at there being something more then the mere striving for self-preservation (which has been mentioned rather carelessly throughout the thread).
Ideals usually work in such a way that, even though you (and lots of other people) attach great value to them, those values are not always brought into practice: they should be brought into practice, but that does not mean that they are put into practice. Social-political laws are indeed often established by those in power, and they offer the greatest protection to those who need it the least in way too many cases, but that does not mean that laws are in principle a bad way of governing a nation (or of governing in general).
I'm not really looking to get into a deeply philosophical discussion here, but I think that you're seeing things a bit too bleak for the wrong reasons. And I know I'm sounding just a tad idealistic over here, but hey: at least I'm getting into shiny, shiny Elysium 
Rip, you are of course correct that comment was largely an oversight on my part. But Carceri is generally thought of as a plane of repressed rage, in contrast with the Abyss. And repressed rage is of course less violent than rage that is allowed to flow free.
Elethius, I wrote the question and started this thread. My question essentially was that if you took your mode of living and system of values in the real world and transferred them to the DnD multiverse, how would they be interpreted within the framework of alignments and the planes. My values and mode of living is interpreted as chaotic evil, or close to it, within the alignment system which would land me in one of the lower planes of chaos. Krypter expressed that that is reprehensible, so I explained my real world system of values in terms that made, hopefully, readily understandable in how they would be understood as chaotic evil within DnD. A system of values cannot be divided from its origins so I explained what lead me to my system of values.
My describing things in a bleak way is more because of sleep deprivation than anything else, but partially for the sake of making my path look desirable by degrading the alternatives. I agree that faulty premises do not rob a theory of its value completely, but a philosophical moral system can be used in two ways: 1. You can entirely adhere to it and live your life by it. 2. You can incorporate into yourself what "works" and toss away the rest. Faulty premises does not at all impair a theory's ability to be used in the second way, and I do incorporate elements of utilitarianism and the nicomachean ethics into my life (but they always kept secondary to self-interest); but faulty premises, in my eyes, should prevent a theory from being used in the first way since if you adhere to a set of principles that are not rooted in reality you will inevitably live in a way incongruent with reality (which I view as "bad").
I do not believe my values have any value in and of themselves. Their importance to me are entirely created by me or inherited from my culture. They say nothing of reality. I have never said that there is nothing important besides self-preservation; even self-preservation is not important in and of itself and a life in which the only goal is to stay alive is rather pointless in my eyes. The ideal life in my eyes is a life of continous creation and growth; but this growth should be in accordance with your own values which you must create for yourself. And you cannot assume the role of a creator until you free yourself of the creations of others (laws, religion, tradition, presently existing codes of morality), and center yourself. Your values are clearly different than mine, but they are equally correct in that both have no basis in absolute reality.
Laws are the only way of governing. A nation without laws is a nation that is not governed. I am not at all opposed to the existence of laws, society could not exist on a scale of over a hundred people without them or something comparable to the point of being effectively indistinguishable. But I feel no obligation to follow them when they cannot be enforced and to follow a law simply because it is a law is pointless and displays either the mentality of a slave or the lack of a capacity for free thought.
Nah, that's apathy. I'm not apathetic at all.
That's not to say that procrastination has any particular tie to Pandemonium - it's only the particular configuration procrastination taken to the extreme of madness that makes the link valid. That's combined with the consistently CN alignment I get on alignment tests. This isn't supposed to reflect an evil bent, only pure Chaos corrupted by unhealthiness.
Mak, from your last description you sound very much like a Randian Objectivist to me, and while that may be an interesting ethical system IRL I'm not sure if it has an alignment corellate. I suppose a case could be made for LN or LE, or perhaps the Takers faction, but that's a little unfair. I personally believe in the strong rationalism and self-agency of Objectivism but it's a philosophy that takes them to an extreme and leaves no room for such good as compassion, self-sacrifice and human empathy.
We should also not be trying too hard to inject real-world philosophies into the mix. Kantian moral imperative and objectivism may be interesting discussion points but the question was posed from the Planescape perspective, not real life philosophical analogues. As such, we should be following Ripvanwormer's example and simply comparing ourselves to the type of petitioners that are present on each plane (or layer), as described in the PS setting. It's simpler and cuts out the layers of interpretation and real-life philosophizing.
Compare yourself to the petitioners of each plane and pick the one that most resembles you, that's it. Now, do you really resemble the petitioners found in the Abyss?
apathy means you don't give a shit, procrastination means you do give a shit but you have difficultly getting around to doing anything about it.
I have a procrastination problem, I do care, I just have a disconnect between thinking about things and actually doing something about it.
The petitioners in the Waste don't really care about anything do they? they are just completely sunk in misery and despair. That's the way I understand it anyway. Some people may procrastinate because they don't care, but not anybody who procrasinates is apathetic.
Yes, but why do you have difficulty getting around to it? Because deep down you don't like it or don't care. Same difference. Saying you really care but can't be assed to do anything about it is morally and functionally the same as not caring, IMO, it just allows one to rationalize it and feel less guilty. Hey, I'm lazy too, I should know. 
No, apathy has nothing at all to do with action. If you're apathetic about something, you might well do it anyway - you just don't feel any passion or excitement about it.
Passion can drive action, but conflicting passions can create conflict. Delaying the moment of choice between multiple passions creates procrastination.
Indeed you can. Any emotion, taken to sufficiently unhealthy extremes, belongs in Pandemonium. This was my point.
Indeed you can. Any emotion, taken to sufficiently unhealthy extremes, belongs in Pandemonium. This was my point.
I'd say that the Tanar'ri are pretty good at venting extreme emotions as well. Pandemonium's more place to people whose emotions have pretty much burnt out.
You're right, the definition of apathy is lack of passion, but it's been my experience that apathy leads directly to inaction and so becomes a de facto lack of action. Defining procrastination as a conflict of passion is putting a rather fine and high-minded point on it though; it's common meaning is a fancy word for laziness.
That can certainly happen.
I apologize if my high-falutin' ways offend your populist sensibilities. I'm not defining or attempting to redefine procrastination, only presenting one instance of it.
And look! 6 more posts and you're a factol.
First of a Rip's right, procrastination has nothing to do with passion or lack there of. It's most just caused by an inabillity to manage ones time. I'm not certain why that puts him in Pandemonium and not, say, the Outlands, but it's his afterlife, so I trust he knows what he's talking about.
I took the Wizards quiz and it pegged me as Lawful Neutral, which I'm pretty sure I'm not. I blame it on the quiz's flawed assumption that I live in a close-knit monarchist community, which, I am glad to say, I don't. The other quiz's link didn't seem to take me anywhere.
Krypter, as the creator of this thread my intention was for the responders to analyze their real life philosophy through the lens of the alignment system; not just select a group of petitioners that remind them of themselves. By cutting out the layers of interpretation and real life philosophising it undermines my original goal. You expressed disconcertment at me being chaotic evil, and I explained my views that are classified as chaotic evil when viewed through the alignment system. I did it in a needlessly complicated way, but I have a tendency to do that; that's why I'm a philosophy major. My views are my Nietzchean than Randian.
I agree with Rip in that procrastination is a conflict of passions. Whether this is because your passion for what you "should be" doing is set aside due to a conflicting passion for something else, or the passion for multiple conflicting things causes you to delay the moment of choice. Excessive internal conflict is hallmark of insanity, which is of course connected to Pandemonium.
Duckluck, here is a functional link to the second better test: http://www.pa.msu.edu/~aaronson/alitest/aintro.html
Hm, that certainly explains something. But still, Nietzsche isn't all that judgemental of the development of moral codes throughout history. Of course he goes on rambling about the whole slave-morality thing, but morality in itself does serve a purpouse (i.e. keeping a population from ripping itself to shreds). What Nietzsche abhors is the fusion of social morality (that which keeps society in order) with religious ideals (i.e. that you have to obey the law or else you will be punished). In this sense, I pretty much agree with what Nietzsche has to say, and indeed, he makes some pretty sharp observations in his work. I don't consider those observations about the genealogy of morality as a basis for personal morality, though, as I believe that (up to a point; there is of course the major point of autonomy, but I'll omit that for a minute) they are just that: observations.
PS: this post may suffer from sleep depravation-induced incoherency and/or misquoted nietzschian ideology.
I firmly adhere to the belief that we philosophy majors are complete and utter idiots. I love us.
Now, go hug a horse!
I, and I imagine I speak on behalf of most non-insane Christians, would just like to publicly distance myself from that moron.
Faith is not an excuse for stupidity. It'd be funny if it wasn't so sad.
"We're making a better world. All of them, better worlds." - Anonomous Harmonium Officer