Post/Author/DateTime	Post
the_taken 07-16-06, 07:49 PM	I need help developing the personality of a character that: beleives in confrontaion as an often suitible course of action is intimidating is a viscious warrior direct/fortright tottaly honestwhile still maintaining a good alignment, and preferably chaotic. She like helping people, but her ideal way is either hitting someone or teaching other people to hit each other.I have a character concept in my head, but because of the rules of the Play by Post Forumns I won't be able to play her. I need help fully developing this character's personality and habits in such a fashion that I won't break the PbP rules and still adhere to the spirit of my character. I also want a character that is sane and rational. She's Letris. She believes that violence is often a jutifiable solution to many problems. Stuff like if someone is stealing your stuff, break their legs and drag them to the jailhouse. She also believes that standing up for somebody else that can't hold their own is wrong. Orcs/grots should not be hunted down and exterminated, but the villagers they often bully and steal from should be taught to defend themselves, and be good at it.
the_taken 07-16-06, 08:49 PM	Can this quirk be included in a good character?Always eats strong opponents. i.e. eats their hearts for their courage, brain for intelligence, etc. Has some confusion about how this works sometimes, such as: "If the opponent was incredibly stupid, would eating the brain lower one's mental prowess? Does the brain give insight on past experiences AND knowledge? How would the spleen give me power?" and so on. Tries to eat the entire body and be on the safe side. May complain of stomachaches later. Seeks someone who can give him clarification. Makes weapons from opponents too large to eat after eating as much as he can. Stores the weapons but never uses them.
WayneTheGame 07-16-06, 09:30 PM	I do not see why cannibalism cannot be a "good" trait so long as you don't murder innocent people just to eat them. After all, if you were to come from a savage culture that believed in cannibalism, it wouldn't make you EVIL just to practice it.
Targorn 07-16-06, 11:15 PM	She's Letris. She believes that violence is often a jutifiable solution to many problems. Stuff like if someone is stealing your stuff, break their legs and drag them to the jailhouse. She also believes that standing up for somebody else that can't hold their own is wrong. Orcs/grots should not be hunted down and exterminated, but the villagers they often bully and steal from should be taught to defend themselves, and be good at it. Try looking up Hoar the god of revenge, lawful neutral god ( I belive), but with one shift to lawful good.... Interestingly i believe tenets include helping those who help you! and FITTING punishments for offenders, I am trying this out on a LN chain tripper in age of worms (at lvl 2 already in trouble with watch but loads of fun)
Kirak 07-17-06, 07:24 AM	Two words: Sarcastic Jackass Be cynical, Be forthright, Tell them what you think, Random incoherent insults work also especially if you use them over and over again when you meet someone you want to annoy.
Robert_Fox_Kitsune 07-17-06, 07:44 AM	Three words- Doctor- Perry- Cox Watch scrubs. The majority of his lines start with calling his colleagues by degratotory terms, getting annoyed because they're always screwing up, and generally being a self centred jackass with nothing but sceptism in the skill of anyone else So yes, Kirak got it right there- go with that- cynacism, general distain for anyone who you meet....and show off. DEFINATELY show off Its a very good character concept, but can he hard to play. Just remember 'sticks and stones', so generally you'll be good if you make everyone else feel horribble, but don't physichally hurt them. Hell, you could even care for them deep down. Deep DEEP down
the_taken 07-18-06, 01:39 AM	Should I wiki the god Hoar or is it in a D&D book I might have access to. The quirk is now: May eat par tof a particularily strong opponent, trained to practice the belife that consuming certain parts of another creature will endow you with a boost to your self. Eats their hearts for courage, brains for intelligence, lungs for endurance, etc. Show-off? Maybe call it eager to use skills she knows well. Fortright? As in direct? Like: "I want you to stay at least 50ft away from me if you wear that hat. It's ugly and makes you look like an idiot." Cynnical. "I seriously dought you could convince those savages to help us. They're more likely to leave us alone if you tell them about the patch of moss on your back." Fortright and cynnical. "Your an idiot. You can't trip a fire giant. You don't have the leaverage." Not sure how to do random incoherant insults. Isn't that just redundant. Like telling the fire giant queem that she's a realy cold hearted, or some other thing relating to ice. I believe the dude from scrubbs is true neutral at best, borederlining neutral evil. He may actualy care about people, but his apathy and selfishness over rule his good traits. I want an "extreamly tough love" character. That yells at you, and may bonk you with the skull of a recently slain monster she skinned to make some boots or cloak or something. Another trait I want to include. Terrifying intimidation. After knocking the BBEG onto his ass, and somehow giving him the pannicked status, she says, calmly as if it's completely apropriate and expected, "Now. Which one of your limbs am I going to break first." What non-magical abilities do I use to do that anyway? An intimidation check only renders them friendly or shaken, which just plain blows in my oppinion. Wait! "Greater Kai Shout" from CW. Rename it to "Scary One Liner".
Devlonir 07-18-06, 03:32 PM	My Experience is.. do not overdo it. I once played a lawful neutral cleric of sain cuthbert (holy avenger type.. but he wasn't that picky on what needed avenging) And a lot of people will quickly forget the good things you did but will always remember you about the bad things you did. For example.. i was a true holy cleric, helping the poor, protecting the weak and so and so on. But after the moment i came down and cut off a finger a young beggar for stealing from me, i was considered a cruel bastard. While in his beliefs, cutting off a finger was just punishment for stealing. People are sensetive to actions they consider evil, even if it isn't evil for your character's belief. Also, you have a lot of nice ideas, but don't use them all in one character. That'll be a 'not-so-good overkill' and soon everyone will no longer belief you are good. Well, hope this helps ya out.
Gneral Kass 07-18-06, 08:55 PM	I present to you the words of Mark Rosewater when concerning the "good" color of Magic the Gathering; white. Simply replace the word "white" with your good alignment. I’d like to make a quick aside about white and the concept of “good.” Good and evil are labels used by people to signify whether something promotes their values or attacks their values. Something that promotes the values you believe in is good. Something that attacks the values you believe in is evil. Each color in Magic believes strongly in the thing it seeks. Therefore it sees itself as good and the enemies that oppose it as evil. Many humans share some global beliefs (the taking of a human life is wrong, for example). Some of white’s tenets line up with some of these universal human beliefs. Therefore white is sometimes seen as the color of “good.” Ah, but white is neither inherently good nor evil. White, as well as every other color in Magic, will do things that can be labeled both “good” and “evil,” and even that might not be consistent from person to person. Preservation of life is very white. Most of you would probably classify that as “good.” Fascism is also very white. Most of you would probably classify that as “evil.” I mention this because I believe it’s important to separate the white-black conflict from good versus evil. Morality versus amorality. Light versus dark. Purity versus corruption. The white/black conflict takes on many shades, but "good versus evil" is far too subjective to use properly. Let’s take one of the elements of the white/black conflict, the rights of the group versus the rights of the self. This conflict pits socialism versus capitalism. Capitalism is the black side of the argument. Is capitalism inherently evil? I don’t think so. (Although I know there are those that would disagree with me.) I’ll talk more about black (including its “good” side) when we get to Black Week. White is looking not just to help itself but to help the entire world. This is a daunting task. How can it not just create but also maintain peace? The answer is through structure. By making strict rules and laws, white can ensure that things stay in control. AKA- Being a zealous, controlling, snot-nosed pain-in-the-rear who wants everything done his way or the highway.
the_taken 07-18-06, 10:18 PM	Letris is a :r: character then.
Ulthwe 07-19-06, 10:39 PM	Hmm I had about the same thing. My newest creation is a LG Shadowbane inquisitor. By taking the class shadowbane inq. I've actually solved any problem there might be concerning alignment vs roleplaying the character, as you can read in the description of the class. They have their own look to evil, they can smite anyone they deem evil(in contrast to the paladin who can only smite evil). So now I can play the grudgy old shadowbane inquisitor that will not lose its LG alignment as long as he is able to justify his actions.
the_taken 07-20-06, 12:48 AM	An actual class ability that dampens DM fiat. I gotta get me one of those.
Eidolon Faer 07-20-06, 08:51 AM	DM Fiat. Yup, the problem is that the alignment system is so open to interpretation and so vague that any character whose powers depend on alignment can be stripped of them on a whim. Smiting evil? You should have helped the peasants first! Helping peasants first? How DARE you when there was Evil to be smited! What you need to do is sit down with your DM in advance, explain your character concept, find out what YOUR DM's view of the alignment system is (since his is the only one that matters) and work out how to handle this and whether it will be a problem. And if your DM says "Well, y'know, it's OBVIOUS. Good is, well, GOOD!" then don't play ANYTHING alignment dependant under him.
Dell Kallyan 07-20-06, 02:47 PM	Three words- Doctor- Perry- Cox WRONG! Doctor - Gregory - House! Well, I've never watched Scrubs, but when I saw the thread's title it made me think of Dr. House immediately, then I saw your post. Actually, Perry Cox sounds a bunch like House from your description. Cannabalism is in the book of vile darkness as an extremely evil trait. Would I rule that cannabalism is evil? It depends on the scenario. If you eat people for sustenance it is one thing, but if you consume an enemy's heart after killing them in combat to honor them, I'd say it can be part of a good character's traits. Would a good character defeat a bad guy, and after the bad guy surrenders kill him and eat his heart? Definitely not, it would be pretty evil. I'd recommend not eating different parts of different people, pick one part and stick to it. Hearts are always a good part to pick since they are so very symbolic. Beware though, that unless it is mainstream in your campaign setting for people to do so, it will most likely be considered evil by all other people if they don't know you well (or even if they do know you). Can the character you described in the first post be considered good? No. Your character sounds lawful evil to me. Maybe lawful neutral. "Well, I subdued these robbers..." *hands robbers with broken limbs over to guards* "The weak should be taught to fend for themselves" Maybe if your character openly tries to teach people to defend themselves you could shoot for lawful neutral. Sort of like a balance between good and evil, fighting fire with fire but also trying to help peasants. I think it could work out as LN as long as you are careful not to do anything drastically evil, and make sure you counterbalance all evil acts with some sort of good outcome.
the_taken 07-20-06, 05:45 PM	Lawful?!? I was going more for chaotic. See the difficulties? I was trying to just maintain goodness and leave the chaotic/lawful side up to interpretation. Character traits: Violent, but good aligned. Eats the hearts of foes honorably slain, unless of the cowardly sort. What alignment would you give Ferris from FFV? She's a pirate, and not an hour into the game she asks wether her crew is deaf or braindead. (Actualy just started the game yesterday.) I need to write up a personality description for Letris. One that will say good alignment, while being violent. Edit-> What determins alignment: Personality, or motives and deeds? Edit2-> Barbarians are extremely violent. Even good aligned one often choose barbarian diplomacy over regular diplomacy. She is not adverse to training villageers to fight and defend themselves. In fact I plan on having her start a combat academy and mercenaries corp.
Tormsskull 07-21-06, 09:57 AM	Cannibalism is not inherently evil. Ever read the Anne Rice books? In Queen of the Dammned the two ancient sisters' tribe has a custom of eating certain body parts of their parents. It was seen as taking all of the good aspects of them into yourself, of a sort. Replace the word 'mean' with 'stern' and I think you can be a Lawful Good character no problem. You can be like one of the old ultra conservative dudes that has a kind heart but isn't very nice. The kind of guy that shouts "Damn kids, get off my lawn!" If he saw a kid fall and break his arm while playing on the sidewalk, he might even laugh. Does that make him evil? Not at all. He'd probably go out and help the kid, and might even make fun of him while doing it. "Broke your arm eh? Guess you should have listened to me." *helps kid out* Wanting people to be self-reliant doesn't equate to an alignment. If someone is dieing and you pass them over because you think they are too weak to deserve help, then you are crossing the border from good towards neutral.
the_taken 07-21-06, 11:44 AM	There's that lawful tag poping up again. Let's not replace 'mean' with 'stern'. Let's replace 'mean' with... 'grouchy'... 'unpleasant'... Where's that thesaurus? That old man is territorial, a chaotic trait.
Devlonir 07-22-06, 01:07 AM	I think we all have tendency of going towards lawful because of one simple reason. If you are mean/stern, cynical and have your own form of rules/traditions, you have your own set of rules. Dont forget, lawful in Dungeons and Dragons, in my opinion, doesn't mean you follow THE law, but that you live by a strict code of conduct or have you life hang together by different traditions. The difference between good/neutral/evil on the lawful side is the difference between following that code in a way to help others, even considering bending it when your ethics tell you so (good), following it strictly, no matter what (neutral), or following the code only up to a limit where he feels he has to and also using it for your own good and to hurt others (evil) A real life example i like to use is a police officer. For example, a car with a woman having a baby is stopped by a police officer, if he is LG, he will not give the ticket and help them get to the hospital. The LN one will also help them to the hospital, but feels he still has to give them a speeding ticket. The LE officer will give them a ticket and then warn the hospital someone is underway, but won't help them in any other way. Still, i think your character will be very lawful, he just has his own rules he follows and not the rules of the land.
Puskara 07-23-06, 10:36 AM	I have a character concept in my head, but because of the rules of the Play by Post Forumns I won't be able to play her. I need help fully developing this character's personality and habits in such a fashion that I won't break the PbP rules and still adhere to the spirit of my character. I also want a character that is sane and rational. She's Letris. She believes that violence is often a jutifiable solution to many problems. Stuff like if someone is stealing your stuff, break their legs and drag them to the jailhouse. She also believes that standing up for somebody else that can't hold their own is wrong. Orcs/grots should not be hunted down and exterminated, but the villagers they often bully and steal from should be taught to defend themselves, and be good at it. Congratulations, your character is a Social Darwinist! A political philosophy that is used to justify the moral superiority of the rich and powerful. Note that social darwanism actually has nothign to do with Darwin's theory of evolution. Anyhoo I suggest reading up on social darwinism, it might spawn some good ideas for you. Unfortunatly social darwinism is based upon greed and the use of power to suceed, nessiarily pushing others down in the process. I cannot see how it would be anything but evil. There have been lots of mentions on the character being lawful, I think this is just a nice way of saying evil in this case. After all the character described here does nto seem to me to be upset by the idea that someone tried to steal from them as much as they were to weak to suceed. Just my take based on the OP. Puskara
the_taken 07-26-06, 05:39 PM	Can the character you described in the first post be considered good? No. Your character sounds lawful evil to me. Maybe lawful neutral.That's wy I'm asking for help."Well, I subdued these robbers..." *hands robbers with broken limbs over to guards* And what would a regular good alighned PC do? Draw his sword and just hack away assuming they're of an evil cult or something."The weak should be taught to fend for themselves"...so that hey can become strong and in turn teach other weak people to become strong.Maybe if your character openly tries to teach people to defend themselves you could shoot for lawful neutral. I thaught lawful neutral character enforce law and structure to the exclusion of all else? I've edited my first post.
JulesCARV 07-27-06, 01:37 AM	I would say that meanness and prospensity toward violence per se are opposed to good alignment. However, there are two ways in which a mean, violent person can still be good. One is for their positive traits to simply be sufficient that they override their meanness and violence and make them good. Everyone has vices and virtues. If someone has comparatively minor vices and comparatively major virtues, they can be good in spite of their vices. The second is the "daimond in the rough" approach of someone who comes off as mean unintentionally -- not trying to be mean, but something of an abrasive personality, like Mr. Darcy from Pride and Prejudice, who says things that offend people without malice, etc. Given that the meanness of your character seems to be a philosophical commitment, and not just an accidental personality trait, I'd say the first one is a higher priority. On cannibalism, once again, I'd say it's a vice, but not one so great that sufficient virtues can't overcome it. Mauling the corpse of someone who is dead, and thus poses no threat to you is horrifying to the family, friends, etc of whoever you killed. True, killing them is horrifying anyway, but if you had to do it, you had to do it. There's no reason you have to leave their corpse in a condition bound to leave survivors even more upset than the death would normally make them.
fil kearney 07-27-06, 04:03 AM	anime is riddled with these types of characters. watch ranma 1/2, tenchi muyo, el hazard oav, and even outlaw star are good examples of chaotic good characters that oten express themselves through violence and acidic sarcasm. rage issues is the best way to pull that stuff off. stub yer toe, scram like hell and break whatever you stubbed yer toe on. whack people that insult you or press your buttons wrong... have LOTS of buttons to be pressed accidentally... and then stub your toe as you walk away. have a lot of pride and cascade the rage when you get shwon how human you are through karmic backlashes... having a selfish streak is useful as well. it makes bruising the ego easier. my 2 cp.