Someone else already pointed out the issues with D&D style alingnment. Even following D&D alignment, I would think Lenin's and Stalin's positions would be swapped. Most of Lenin's time active as a revolutionary was overthrowing the tsar, which definitely went against the law. Much of Stalin's time as a revolutionary was as general secretary of the new society the revolutionary workers and peasants built, so he was operating within the law. If this was limited to Stalin's work before the founding of the USSR this would make more sense, but people on this chart come from a bunch of different times.

[–] huginn@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Bottom row aren't even marxists.

[–] Red_Scare@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 2 days ago

That's not fair to Leon

[–] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml 18 points 3 days ago

This makes no sense.

[–] pyromaiden@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 3 days ago (2 children)

While this is cool I don't think it's very accurate to how the D&D alignment system works.

Lenin for example can't be Lawful Good as he was a revolutionary, which is antithetical to a 'Lawful' character. The category specifically refers to how the individual interacts with authority, in which a Lawful character respects the authority of institutions/figures even while trying to fight against them (basically reformism).

'Chaotic' by contrast has little to no reverence for authorities - even nominally 'good' ones - and is closer to an anarchist than a communist. Not where I'd put Stalin at all.

"Neutral" is an explicitly moral quantifier; the middle ground between "Good" (compassionate, empathetic, selfless, etc.) and "Evil" (cruel, corrupt, petty, etc.) and refers to literal moral grayness; e.g. a "True Neutral" would be a mercenary-type figure. Not how I'd classify Marx at all.

[–] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 3 days ago

Also, Yeltsin doesn't belong on this chart at all since he wasn't a Marxist.

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I wonder, if a revolutionary carries out a successful revolution, and establishes a new government that they see as more legitimate than the one they deposed, does the entire universe shift to seeing the new government as "lawful" and the anyone fighting to restore the old regime as "chaotic"? If not, at what point does a post-revolutionary government shift from a chaotic organization to a lawful one, in the universe's eyes?

Perhaps the difference is generational, ie the people who overthrew the old system will always be considered chaotic, but their children who grow up in the new system if they don't overthrow it in turn are considered lawful. There has to be some arbitrary moment where the designation changes, because alignments in D&D are observable, objective phenomenon and not relative in the slightest.

[–] pyromaiden@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 3 days ago

D&D alignment is more for individuals than governments or organizations IIRC since D&D is a character-based game.

In which case a character can change their disposition over time, just like real morality.