Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Law vs Chaos thread: first Axis of alignment

The Law-Chaos Axis is foundational to D&D's alignment system and actually preceded the Good-Evil Axis.

In its earliest iteration the 3 alignments available to PCs were Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic.

The second Axis Good/Neutral/Evil was added later with the Dungeons and Dragons Basic Set (first revision 77 printing.) It remains significant in the background, even if 5e has moved away from alignment tic tac toe as a core feature, and BG3 doesn't include alignment at Char creation at all. It still informs much of our thinking and expectations. Ditching it is somewhat unfortunate because the traditional alignment system then sort of devolves into Goody goody vs baddy baddy, or other shorthands that I hear people using like "stupid Evil" vs "intelligent Evil" etc.


Good vs Evil playthroughs are getting plenty of feedback attention for BG3, but I'd propose that we (and the devs) spend a little more time thinking about Law and Chaos now.

Unlike Good and Evil which can get a bit convoluted and somewhat charged, (anyone recall how Nietzsche was quoted in the first load screen of BG1? Hehe) Law and Chaos, by contrast are somewhat easier to work with.

Based on the recent posts and patch updates concerning the popularity of good vs evil playthroughs in EA, I wonder whether some Law vs Chaos telemetry might be more revealing? And maybe help demonstrate some of the areas where the game is still lacking nuance?

What do people think about the current gameplay servicing the Law/Chaos divide, as distinct from the Good/Evil divide?

I feel like the Goblin/Minthara arch is better described as a Chaotic playthrough, rather than just an "Evil" playthrough.

Actions taken by the party along that plot line just seem to suggest a chaotic vibe more than anything else. Chaotic Neutral or Chaotic Evil can both fit the story beats there, but its the Chaos that's the driver. The about faces, the betrayals and wonton slaughter that ensues is pretty much the definition of Chaotic, since a lot of what charname has to do to get to that endpoint doesn't make a whole ton of sense from a logical standpoint. But it definitely fits if eschuing the Logos altogether is Charname's jam.

The opposing Druid/Halsin arch however doesn't fit as neatly into a Lawful paradigm of maintaining order. Neither does it have the Neutrality vibe one might expect from a typical druid plot, focused on preserving balance and whatnot. I think this is partially because the Druid line has a few breaks in the interplay with various factions to consider Aradin and his big swinging dick vs Tieflings vs Goblins vs Druids vs Shadowdruids power play, can get a little complicated to keep sorted for the PC guided by Law.

Lawful Neutral used to be aligmment shorthand for "normal" in that it was the basic alignment of most NPCs one runs into in town, paired off against Chaotic Neutral which was similarly shorthand for "crazy."

It was notable I think that none of the Companion NPCs in BG1 had the Lawful Neutral alignment. Anomen was the only one in BG2, but obviously he was a no-name and kinda forgettable lol.

They did give us Tiax as a possible Chaotic Neutral 'crazy' archetype late in the Gate BG1. But Safana and Garrick who broadened the scope a bit with crazed nympho thief style neutrality or chaotic cowardly minstel style neutrality. So some depth there hehe.

How does BG3 measure up on this one?

It seems like the devs are clearly interested in how we feel about but kicking for goodness vs villainous evil playstyles, but what of the other Axis?

Whether siding with the drow is chaotic, lawful or neutral evil depends on your reaction to the ever seeing eye and the conversation from the guards to the worg pens. If you know that the real power lies in moonrise towers than finding your way to into the bottom rung of the hierarchy and working your way up is just what a lawful evil person does.

So it can be chaotic "I want blood and fire" but I can be lawful or neutral "I see opportunity here".

I agree that using our imagination we can fill in the gaps and supply justifications to fit our internal frame of view. But I guess what I'm thinking about is whether the game is actually providing enough beats along the horizontal Axis? Where at some point we might see a news bulletin saying something like "telemetry shows that 70% of you went totally Law and Order with such and such, 20% said burn it all down, cause chaos is king! Whereas only 10% found a way to stay Neutral"

Like I just don't know if the set up is there to even frame it out that way. Or at least I found myself struggling to peg it down in the way that good/evil playthroughs are discussed.

I was also curious to see which if any companions might have a reaction to Lawful vs Chaotic actions in the way they seem offer approval or disapproval from being somewhere along the Good vs Evil divide. But I couldn't really recall anything lol. Hence the thread.

I guess my feedback there is that the Law-Chaos framing feels like it might need some more juice. But I'm interested to hear any thoughts others might have on the subject.

Interesting question. My guess that this axis will matter much more in the city. Will we defy the absurd "peacock law" and smuggle our owlbear inside the city gates? Find a "reduce" scroll and follow the law to the letter? Dadhere to spirit and letter of law and leave our beloved owlbear behind?

It would be great to see the githzeri come along so we could see lawful neutral vs lawful evil conflict.

Yeah I really hope so too. That last would be so rad! Haha

Its kinda tricky cause clearly they've stepped away from alignment in this most recent edition, which I can understand especially for the table top. I probably should have posted something in that other alignment thread that I just saw now. But still, I'm looking at it less as a feature built into Char creation or tags and more related to the world building and story beats presented to the party.

Like I'm sure the devs have a little voice on their shoulder at all times saying "ok, but do we have both good and evil covered?" But hoping they can find some crickets to argue the merits or law vs chaos in a similar fashion at some point. Perhaps as you say, we'll get a bit more when get away from the backwaters and into the big city

I don't like the lack of alignment. People need broad world views. And in a role-playing game you're supposed to play the character. Alignment changes should be able to happen - but it shouldn't be easy. Without good and evil, order and chaos - how do we explain the animosity between gold and red dragons ; demons and devils? ; how do we explain the Paladin world view? This is meant to be high fantasy where good and evil are key narratives. You could also have 'character traits' like in the Crusader Kings games.

Alignment in DnD is, and has always been, incredibly stupid. No single part of the game has caused more arguments between players, and even the people who write it can't decide what alignments actually mean. I'm glad Larian has not implemented alignments and I hope they stay gone for good.

Fights that generally start when someone says something like: "Alignment in DnD is, and has always been, incredibly stupid"

"Here, let me make a argument again a fight-starting institution by picking a fight! As long as we agree that your tastes are garbage we won't fight. Peace out."

Its stupid, whimsical, nonsensical, has 0 basis in reality, is used inconsistently, has no impact on gameplay whatsoever for PCs, can be abused as easily as disused...i mean what can be more D&D than that? We demand alignment!

I'm convinced. Now I see the light: the best way to avoid a fight it to start one, something with zero basis in reality has no role to play in a fantasy game, I was wrong to think it would be fun to see how a chaotic or lawful PC would deal with the owl bear / baldurs gate problem. In the future I will avoid whimsy.

Everyone! Listen up. Orbax does not want us to have fun in this way. Please stop having fun and await further instructions.

It's kinda at the heart of the game though, even now. I mean unless you don't care at all about the cosmology of the planes hehe. But its ok, just because a player doesn't care, or have any desire to situate their character concept in relation to the Axes of alignment, doesn't mean the architecture and broader conflicts of the game universe aren't still organized around it, even if things have shifted a bit in the last 20 years. 3rd edition removed many of the alignment based class restrictions for PCs, 4th ed compressed the entire scheme and kinda nixed it. But 5e FR has brought back the Great Wheel, and the Forgotten Realms still draws on this stuff for its underlying lore and aspects of the religions, the various factions of planar monsters and such. The tic tac toe of alignment is just an organization tool and aid to imagination at this point for the PCs, but its useful for bringing different elements together to present it as a more cohesive whole in the world building.

I've heard a lot on the boards about good and evil, but hadn't seen much on the other spectrum of the scheme and I think the law vs chaos theme is at least as interesting. I mean given that this game actually begins in Baator lol. The bones are still there. Anyhow, some of the more memorable through lines in BG1/2 carried it off, so it'd be cool to see it in BG3.

Lawful vs Chaos is a lot harder to really capture in the game because it is a lot more personal than good vs evil.

Good vs evil is fairly straight forward. It is altruism vs selfishness and compassion vs sadism. Siding with Minthara is an evil act because you are directly leading toward a battle that will cause significantly more pain and suffering in the world for your own ends.

Lawful vs Chaotic though? That fundamentally comes down to your personal code of conduct. It is about your motivations rather than your actions. Are you slaughtering those tieflings because you just love murder? Chaotic. Are you doing it because you think it is the quickest way to get what you want? Lawful. But even that gets muddy because even chaotic characters have goals they are working toward. Chaos isn't pure randomness, it just means you don't hold yourself to any code of conduct and reject the idea that you should have one.

I can probably justify any act in the game as chaotic or lawful. So I am not sure how the game can label a specific act as a lawful or chaotic one.

True, it's a bit harder. I started the same place Gygax did -- with the books of Michael Moorcock so it always seemed intuitive for that reason. And it's hard because it's both personal -- Chaotic characters are free spirits and dismissive of law and its spiritual. Chaos is also a physical force that defies laws and boundaries. Humans who touch chaos stuff find their fingers turned to mashed potatoes and their teeth to butterflies.

I always liked this idea -- that demihuman actions on the prime material plane take a physical form on the outer planes. The more people who break laws and defy authority, the stronger the forces in limbo become. If you've not read it try the Elric series for Law and Chaos. You can find paperbacks of the Elric series online for something like 25 cents each and you finish each book in the time it takes you read a magazine.