Alignment of factions in D&D manner

[Migromul]

If I would set the alignment of the factions in a D&D manner I would set:
- lawful good for dwarfs, empire and bretonia. (religious fanatics and unforgivable revenngers)
- neutral or even chaotic good for High elfs (Intrigues doesn't make them lawful...)
- Lawful neutral for LIzards (they only mind their "great plan" (hence lawful), but chaos is their arch enemy, so they tend to the good side. But disturbers aren't realy tended friendly and they don't mind to make war against any who oppose them. Also not as Aggressors (so they're not "good"))
- chaotic good for wood elfs (they don't care about the world, bur certainly about their woods. So they're chaotic to the world, but good to their territory.)
- true neutral for the tomb kings. (Exept of Arkham. he is definitly Neutral evil.) And also the ogres. They sell mercenary to everyone. But also see everyone as potentian flesh-food... Both don't care about other politics...
- lawful evil definitly for the dark elfs.
- neutral evil for vamires, vampire coast, Norsca. greenskins
- chaotic evil are Skaven, and all real chaos-factions, of course. Although there are some, tending to neutral evil: Nurgle, and perhaps Slaanesh. But only tending imho.

What are your thoughts?

Edit: I forgot the Beastmen. Neutral evil, I would say. maybe chaotic evil.... (They're as Norsca. chaos-worshipping, but not realy a chaos-faction. Chaos warriors and chaos demons are the real chaos factions.)

[Toaster Maximus]

Dark elves also fall under neutral evil since they all are going after their own personal goals the society thing is just a cover to hide the fact most of them have no real loyality to the witch king if it get in the way of their own goals, would even say moost followers of Khaine within dark elf society save for the assassins are more chaotic evil since they would butcher whole towns and scores of slaves on a whim just to make the blood flow for their lord of murder. witch elves dont really care how they kill so long has someone bites the dust in the name of their master/god.

Sorry for typos and errors. Will likely have more thoughts when I wake up more

[A.Pot]

Yeah... I don't think most people in Warhammer would even be on the "Good" side of the alignment scale. The closest we would probably get is Alarielle but that is just her.

Everyone is at best varying degrees of Neutral to Evil, Lawful to Chaotic. And on the evil scale we have varying degrees of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ insane evil to the more sensible evils.

Karl Franz is a good example of this. He may be the one honest politician and statesman in The Empire but apparently either he or his father (thanks GW for being bad with timeline consistency even before) has zero problems taxing people to point they riot and then quelling said riots with lethal force or doing the same elsewhere and then arresting people for not being able to pay taxes because having no money left is not an excuse.

[Ashardalon]

i think your viewing it from the human perspective
in the end the only good ones are the gods

[Migromul]

Originally posted by Toaster Maximus:

Dark elves also fall under neutral evil since they all are going after their own personal goals the society thing is just a cover to hide the fact most of them have no real loyality to the witch king if it get in the way of their own goals, would even say moost followers of Khaine within dark elf society save for the assassins are more chaotic evil since they would butcher whole towns and scores of slaves on a whim just to make the blood flow for their lord of murder. witch elves dont really care how they kill so long has someone bites the dust in the name of their master/god.

Sorry for typos and errors. Will likely have more thoughts when I wake up more

Well, but they also revell in their eveil behavior. That makes them lawful imho. Bloodbathing in slaves to get youth, and deep enjoyment of everything, that would call the good (especially religious) factions "sns"...
Imho, Evils aren't realy loyal to rulers or leaders. Not even lawful evils. The "lawful" means more tending to their own ways, and staying to it at all costs. So someone admitting, that he/she is evil and enjoying it, is a lawful evil behavior. This includes betraying any leader and getting his place, if there is an opportunity. At least, this is, how I understand it. (and the conclusion from the description of the alignments in NWN II... )

Although, I may be wrong, I only realy know D&D from Computer-games. I only played one D&D P&P-game in the early 80s...

[Toaster Maximus]

Originally posted by Ashardalon:

i think your viewing it from the human perspective
in the end the only good ones are the gods

Well more correctly the dragons of Cathey, the old ones where the real evil ones moving their world closer to the sun and making races for their fight against chaos

[Kōizumi Seishiro]

Nice classification!
Wood Elves are more like TN though, as TN alignment is pro-nature balance and forget-everything else in DnD.
Beastmen are pro-nature with chaotic unbalanced / unhinged psychosis, so more like CN spilling over into CE cause of sentient beings sacrificed.
Tomb Kings are LE, as they are obviously necromancy--animated undead, their campaign goals are tomes of necromantic lore, so unless its necromancy-whitewashing we're having, they are evil.
Dark Elves are CE, as chaos is intrinsic part of their life and society, its mentioned in all the army books from WH 5e up, and no matter what DE faction you play in WH 2, you can witness their pretty chaotic backstabbing nature in Storm of Chaos campaign.
Same for Greenskins, they are always displayed as very chaotic an unruly (including animosity rule in WH FB), so probably CE as well.

Also, in DnD definition Neutral is a person who doesn't care about either sides of the spectrum of G-E or L-C, so I wonder if undead pirates should really be defined as Neutral, as in Dreadfleet they are pretty obviously very chaotic chaps. I mean, piracy as a project on our planet was very much openly anti-law-of-that-time

[Migromul]

BTW, I also forgot Cathay... I think neutral good would suffice.
And I also forgot Kislev. I would take them to lawful good (they're also fanatics...)

I would say, you can call a faction good - especially lawful good - if the follow aspects suffice:
- Fanatic chaos-fighters, with tending paranoia are lawful good in warhammer... (hence empire, kislev.)
- non-aggressors except of foes, who did them something wrong (dwarfs)
- But also religious or "honorable" factions, without tending paranoia. (Bretonia)

any good are
- all factions, who fight chaos in the first place (high elfs, lizards, Cathay.) but maybe more tending. (in case of lizards. I don't think, they're realy "good". Chaos-fighting comes in first place, if there ia an opportunity. But they don't realy care about chaos if it stays in the north, I think...)

Good are also nations, who care about the world itself (woodelfs).

Intern behaviours don't realy matter. It's the "greater good" that counts. (or also the "greater evil").

[Basarab Laiota]

its stupid to pidgeonhole such in-depth factions into labels like "they're just super evil lol"

[SBA77]

Originally posted by Migromul:

If I would set the alignment of the factions in a D&D manner I would set:
- lawful good for dwarfs, empire and bretonia. (religious fanatics and unforgivable revenngers)
- neutral or even chaotic good for High elfs (Intrigues doesn't make them lawful...)
- Lawful neutral for LIzards (they only mind their "great plan" (hence lawful), but chaos is their arch enemy, so they tend to the good side. But disturbers aren't realy tended friendly and they don't mind to make war against any who oppose them. Also not as Aggressors (so they're not "good"))
- chaotic good for wood elfs (they don't care about the world, bur certainly about their woods. So they're chaotic to the world, but good to their territory.)
- true neutral for the tomb kings. (Exept of Arkham. he is definitly Neutral evil.) And also the ogres. They sell mercenary to everyone. But also see everyone as potentian flesh-food... Both don't care about other politics...
- lawful evil definitly for the dark elfs.
- neutral evil for vamires, vampire coast, Norsca. greenskins
- chaotic evil are Skaven, and all real chaos-factions, of course. Although there are some, tending to neutral evil: Nurgle, and perhaps Slaanesh. But only tending imho.

What are your thoughts?

Edit: I forgot the Beastmen. Neutral evil, I would say. maybe chaotic evil.... (They're as Norsca. chaos-worshipping, but not realy a chaos-faction. Chaos warriors and chaos demons are the real chaos factions.)

This isn't exactly original but it's always fun nonetheless. Yeah I remember other discussions online that had the Lizardmen at Lawful Neutral too.

I've seen greenskins placed as Chaotic Evil or Chaotic Neutral, and seeing how they just seem to love a good fight against challenging foes nowadays regardless of their goodness or evilness, I agree with the latter.

And yeah Beastmen should be Chaotic Evil like all the other Chaos factions. The undead factions (except Tomb Kings) should all be Neutral or Lawful Evil.

[Migromul]

Originally posted by Kōizumi Seishiro:

Nice classification!
Wood Elves are more like TN though, as TN alignment is pro-nature balance and forget-everything else in DnD.
Beastmen are pro-nature with chaotic unbalanced / unhinged psychosis, so more like CN spilling over into CE cause of sentient beings sacrificed.
Tomb Kings are LE, as they are obviously necromancy--animated undead, their campaign goals are tomes of necromantic lore, so unless its necromancy-whitewashing we're having, they are evil.
Dark Elves are CE, as chaos is intrinsic part of their life and society, its mentioned in all the army books from WH 5e up, and no matter what DE faction you play in WH 2, you can witness their pretty chaotic backstabbing nature in Storm of Chaos campaign.
Same for Greenskins, they are always displayed as very chaotic an unruly (including animosity rule in WH FB), so probably CE as well.

Also, in DnD definition Neutral is a person who doesn't care about either sides of the spectrum of G-E or L-C, so I wonder if undead pirates should really be defined as Neutral, as in Dreadfleet they are pretty obviously very chaotic chaps. I mean, piracy as a project on our planet was very much openly anti-law-of-that-time

f

If a nature-lover can only be TN, then Druids in D&D wouldn't have any other choice. But they just must be neutral. But can also be chaotic, lawful, good or evil... And tending to the world is good. Using Nature for your own might is evil. So BM are neutral evil and woodelfs neutral good imho.

In your definition, nearly no faction isn't extreme in one or the other way... Hm. maybe, but I see it a bit more different. Greensins are evil, because they destroy everything in their ways. There only mind are their waaaghs. Internal they may also be chaotic, because they will use every opportunity to replace the current waaghboss. But I don't think they care about any chaotic gods or want to destroy every life. They just want to fight. Destroying everything is just a bonus, not their intention.

Being chaotic in WH, I think, is more if a faction wants intentionally to destroy averything. And is openly sneaky.
Is this true for the DE? I don't know WH from the tabletop. I mostly know it from this game-series. So if this is the case, they're truely chaotic evil. But from what I Understand, they're more lawful evil because they are open "sinners" and enjoy that deeply. Chaotic behaviour is just oppotunistic.

Undead pirata are at least NE. They're defintily NOT true neutral, if TK aren't neutral... AND they spread undead corruption. I think, you can see this as a tendentcy to make the whole world undeads... (at least I see it that way.)

CnD doesnt only have neutral as alignment. To neural you can also be evil, lawful, good or chaotic...
The "neural" who doesn't care about L C G E is TRUE neutral. not only neutral... Pirats are evil. But they don't care about the world itself or politics in any way. So Imho, they're also neutral, hence neutral evil. (the same counts for Vampire COUNTS.)

For TK, the undead stait is "as is" and they don't mind to use and perfect it. But they stay to their desert. I don't think they want to turn the whole world into undeads... (they don't spread undead corruption.) So they're TN imho. since they just don't care to use everything, that is possiblle. But NOT as an aggressor against the whole world. That doesn't make them truely evil imho. But also not truely good. Hence TN. The exception of Arkham proves that rule... (Arkham is the other TKs arch-enemy!)

[Toaster Maximus]

Tomb Kings are to complex to give a faction wide alignment to really, has each king is a reflkecction of the nation of people and how they ruled it at the time of their death and their folowers that where burried with them. Basically each tomb king reflects the best of their nation they where burried with. Some where brutal tyrants, others where just and noble, so tomb kings rune the alignment board depending on who thee where in life. But they want to rebuild their kingdoms and laws and so on largely save for a couple so would say most have a lawful bent

Sorry for typos and errors

[Migromul]

Originally posted by Toaster Maximus:

Tomb Kings are to complex to give a faction wide alignment to really, has each king is a reflkecction of the nation of people and how they ruled it at the time of their death and their folowers that where burried with them. Basically each tomb king reflects the best of their nation they where burried with. Some where brutal tyrants, others where just and noble, so tomb kings rune the alignment board depending on who thee where in life. But they want to rebuild their kingdoms and laws and so on largely save for a couple so would say most have a lawful bent

Sorry for typos and errors

typos and errors aren't the problem... the punctuation, however could improve :)

I only can speak of the lore of the game. So if you know more, you're probably more right depending alignment of TK. But for Game-behaviour I would take them into true neutral.