 |
| Alignment Diagram from the Second and Third editions of Holmes. |
Above is the alignment diagram from Holmes' rulebook, in which the interstices between four forces produce five alignments. The only hint of a continuum here are those segments of the alignment that approximate more closely to Neutral. (This spacial element may help us interpret the table below.) Holmes' monsters (p.22-34) appear in the chart below according to the alignment he assigned them. Surprisingly, the majority of these monsters are Neutral. At times, a number of LE or CE monsters occur in a row, alphabetically. While I noted below the order in which Holmes indicated a divergence in a population's alignment by 1st or 2nd, in the absence of a percentage breakdown, I assume that a 50/50 division is indicated. In one case, we are told merely that "some" elves are neutral (less than 25%?) and that the Displacer Beast, though neutral and not listed as belonging on under one or more of the evil alignments, merits the parenthetical comment, "evil." (Is this an indication of evil tendencies within a broadly Neutral alignment, heralding the complications to come in AD&D? Or is it an unresolved editorial issue, and later percentages between Neutral and evil displacer beasts, exact alignment to be decided, never came to pass?) Link to document with table below.
Holmes Monsters
Lawful Good
|
Chaotic Good
|
Neutral
|
Lawful Evil
|
Chaotic Evil
|
Blink Dogs
Dwarf (25%)
Pegasi
Unicorn
|
Brass Dragon (2nd)
Elf
Storm Giant (2nd)
Gnome (75%)
Wereboar (2nd)
Werebear (2nd)
Pixie (2nd)
|
Bandit (50%)
Basilisk
Berserker
Carrion Crawler
Cockatrice
Displacer Beast (evil)
Djinni
Doppleganger (2nd)
White Dragon (1st)
Black Dragon (2nd)
Brass Dragon (1st)
Dwarf (75%)
Elf ("some neutral")
Hill Giant
Stone Giant
Frost Giant (1st)
Fire Giant (1st)
Cloud Giant
Storm Giant
Gnome (25%)
Griffon
Hippogriff
Hydra
Lizard Man
Wereboar (1st)
Wererat (1st)
Werebear (1st)
Weretiger (1st)
Werewolf (1st)
Nixie
Owlbear
Pixie (1st)
Purple Worm
Rust Monster
Skeleton
Stirge
Zombie
|
Bandit (25%)
Gargoyle
Fire Giant (2nd)
Hell Hound
Hobgoblin
Kobold
Wererat (2nd)
Manticore
Medusa
Minotaur
Mummy
Shadow
Spectre
Vampire
Wight
Wraith
|
Bandit (25%)
Bugbear
Chimera
Doppleganger (1st)
White Dragon (2nd)
Black Dragon (1st)
Red Dragon
Ghouls
Hill Giant
Frost Giant (2nd)
Gnoll
Goblin
Harpy
Weretiger (2nd)
Werewolf (2nd)
Ogre
Orc
Troglodyte
Troll
|
None: Black Pudding, Fire Beetle, Gelatinous Cube, Giant Ant, Giant Centipede, Giant Rats, Giant Tick, Gray Ooze, Green Slime, Horse, Ochre Jelly, Shrieker, Spiders, Yellow Mold. (“If the monster’s alignment is not given, it may be assumed to be an unintelligent beast that will attack anyone who comes near,” p.22.)
 |
| Holmes Alignment Diagram from First Edition. If anyone has a bigger scan they can send me, it would be much appreciated. |
Holmes and 4e
I am not very familiar with fourth edition D&D, but I note right away a structural similarity between it's alignment system and Holmes. If we follow widespread assumptions hinted at in D&D materials before 2nd edition, and list the alignments from LG (purportedly the most good) to CE (purportedly the most evil), we see a striking structural (and terminological) similarity. This is complicated only slightly the fact that Holmes also left a number of monsters without alignment -- one might be tempted to say, unaligned -- thus hinting that perhaps Holmes saw Neutral as a substantive alignment. However, since intelligent creatures, including humans and superhumans, are unaligned in 4e, it may be that there is still no significant difference, and that Unaligned may simply cover more alignment landscape, but broadly of similar make-up. I wouldn't be surprised if 4e's simplification of the two-axis, nine alignment system were directly inspired by Holmes. The five alignment system does not come naturally to me: from experience, I am much more comfortable with either Law-Neutral-Chaos or the more baroque Gygaxian Nine that went forth and conquered the gaming world, However, setting the five out on a continuum as below, and assuming that there is an indication of movement from most good to least good/most evil (left to right), then that might make more sense to me than four forces (or dimensions) producing only five alignments, rather than nine. I'd be happy to hear from anyone who has additional information on Holmes and alignment or on alignment in 4e.
Comparison of Alignment Systems
Holmes
|
Lawful Good
|
Chaotic Good
|
Neutral
|
Lawful Evil
|
Chaotic Evil
|
4e
|
Lawful Good
|
Good
|
Unaligned
|
Evil
|
Chaotic Evil
|