10th Alignment: True Extremist [Archive] - Wizards Community

10th Alignment: True Extremist [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
ZeronHitaro
10-30-06, 03:47 PM Something I was thinking about on the way to class. I remember in the deck of many things there's a card that forces the person to take an alignment opposite to their current one and I wondered:

What happens if a True Neutral person draws that card?

From what I can tell, the general consensus is that True Neutral is an animalistic view of the world (as most if not all animals are TN). You do only what you need to for survival. (In a sence, being highly impartial to the world around you).

The opposite of highly impartial is highly opinionated.

This also reminded me of many a topic talking about the abuse of the Chaotic Neutral alignment where players do: What ever they want, when they want, just because "They feel like it."

To me this seems to be more of a polar opposite to True Neutral, hence what I call: True Extremist

IMO, this is not an alignment I'd make avaliable to players, rather a rare alignment that occurs when a TN character is forced to change into an alignment completely opposite of their own.

I haven't fully flushed out what a True Extremist character would be like other than the short general descriptions above so:

Comments, suggestions, opinions, ect are more than welcome on this ideal.
Tenebrous_Sage
10-30-06, 03:52 PM I believe the general rule for TN characters that are forced to change to the opposite alignment is to change their alignment to one of the "extreme" alignments LG, LE, CG, CE.
SeptimusMagistos
10-30-06, 04:56 PM A true extrimist may be forced to view things the way they suggested a Chaotic Neutral character view them in 2nd edition-Do whatever seems like a good idea at the moment. If you can't decide, flip a coin.
Inajira
10-30-06, 05:16 PM How about Chaotic-Lawfull. Check out the science of chaos therory and fractal math.

Or Evil-Good. Helps others because it helps herself in long run. Karma

Both only aviable in the Far Realm
Seeker95
10-30-06, 07:32 PM I agree with Tenebrous as to how that card worked in my campaign.
Milo HoBo
10-31-06, 01:21 AM I have already declared Neutral and True Neutral two different alignments in my campaign. Both available from the start. 10 alignments.

Neutral is just uncarring (Boccob) or unable to care (think animals). No oppossing alignemts.

True Neutral is the one who activly seeks balance. They may even help evil to keep good in balance only to later switch and help good to keep evil in balance. Think of them as the zealot against zealots. Opposing alignments would be LG, CG, LE, CE.

This is far different from the uncarring nature of Neutral.

These would the the two completely opposite (but not necessarily opposing) alignments. Thus, in my campaign, switching would occure between these two.
aelryinth
10-31-06, 01:39 AM I have already declared Neutral and True Neutral two different alignments in my campaign. Both available from the start. 10 alignments.

Neutral is just uncarring (Boccob) or unable to care (think animals). No oppossing alignemts.

True Neutral is the one who activly seeks balance. They may even help evil to keep good in balance only to later switch and help good to keep evil in balance. Think of them as the zealot against zealots. Opposing alignments would be LG, CG, LE, CE.

This is far different from the uncarring nature of Neutral.

These would the the two completely opposite (but not necessarily opposing) alignments. Thus, in my campaign, switching would occure between these two.

I always called True Neutral the balance of alignments, the thinking side of a Natural Philosophy.

I called False Neutral the unthinking, bestial neutrality, where you simply didn't care one way or the other. A large number of people, all animals and plants would fit into False Neutral...not having an alignment philosophy.

===Aelryinth
TheChilliGod
10-31-06, 01:50 AM I always called True Neutral the balance of alignments, the thinking side of a Natural Philosophy.
I called False Neutral the unthinking, bestial neutrality, where you simply didn't care one way or the other. A large number of people, all animals and plants would fit into False Neutral...not having an alignment philosophy. Yeah, though it was always written on the character sheet as "True Neutral," we have the same sort of thing. Except we called this "False Neutral" "Meh Neutral." Because that's what you tended to say, "meh."

I would cross this Opposite Alignment bridge when/if I come across it, not before, but I'm leaning heavily on making the opposite alignment of TN one of the extreme alignments, determined at random.
Silverthumb128
10-31-06, 01:59 AM How about Chaotic-Lawfull. Check out the science of chaos therory and fractal math.

Neutral. Lawful with Chaotic tendencies, Chaotic with Lawful tendencies, its the exact same thing. No need to complicate things.

Or Evil-Good. Helps others because it helps herself in long run. Karma

Neutral. Evil with Good tendencies, Good with Evil tendencies, its the exact same thing. No need to complicate things.

If you want to use the card to change the alignment, roll 1d8, pre-determining what each number would become. Or, as one of the extremes, 1d4.
asurademon
10-31-06, 04:35 PM however true neutral people can be highlly opinionated. There are those that believe there must be absolute balance in all things, I can see them being extremely dedicated to the cause of bringing perfect balance between good and evil, law and chaos. Of course then there are those that are simply selfish, they don't really do particularly evil things, but won't go out of their way to do good, they are sort of amoral. And yes there are those that seek to live in perfect moderation as well.
supernerd222
10-31-06, 09:52 PM As I understand it, there are three types of (true) Neutral:

1) The kind where you are totally lethargic and ambivalent, like an animal. You have no interest in anything, you just go day to day.

2) The kind where you are either a poof, schizo, or undecided. You join stuff, but often quit and help the other side. This is the one detailed in the PHB.

3) The kind where you believe that neutral is the only way to go, and you actively promote it. This is the kind the Rilmani do.
Inajira
11-09-06, 01:58 AM Neutral. Lawful with Chaotic tendencies, Chaotic with Lawful tendencies, its the exact same thing. No need to complicate things.

The difference between Neutral and Lawful-Chaotic is game affect. For example, if you had a magic item that could only be used by those that are Chaotic and causes damage to anyone that is Lawfull. A Neutral character could use the iteam at about half power but whould also take half the damage. A Chaotic-Lawful character would be able to use the iteam at full power but would also take full damage. Also when a Lawful-Chaotic character uses a magic iteam designed for a Neutral character he gets the same benifits a Lawful or Chaotic character would but takes the combinded penelties of both.
Because these alignment only exsist in the Far Realm there is a chance( I'd say 5% but up to DM) that it confuses the magic iteam causing random affects.
The downside is the character can't use intellegent magic iteams, because they think he's the opposite alignment of them with a spell to fool them.
A Lawful-Chaotic character can be a cleric of a Lawful or Chaotic deity; but not NG,N,NE deites.
JulesCARV
11-09-06, 02:42 PM Neutral might just be not very passionate or involved about moral issues -- including not being very passionate about neutrality itself -- but that doesn't necessarily mean lethargic or indifferent. A true neutral person might be extremely passionate about preserving 19th century architecture, and raise hell if anyone tries to tear down an old building, and know everything about different styles, architects, conventions, building materials, etc, of the era. It's just that what he deeply cares about isn't particularly relevant vis-à-vis, law, chaos, evil, or good.
caeruleus
11-09-06, 10:31 PM Something I was thinking about on the way to class. I remember in the deck of many things there's a card that forces the person to take an alignment opposite to their current one and I wondered:

What happens if a True Neutral person draws that card?

I see this as analogous to multiplying a number by -1. Positive numbers become negative, negative numbers become positive, but zero remains zero. You might say that the opposite of zero is having a magnitude, but magnitude itself is not a number.

Neutrality is like zero in this regard. It has no opposite as far as alignment is concerned. It is opposed by partisanship, but partisanship itself is not an alignment.
Milo HoBo
11-09-06, 11:51 PM What is the opposite of being a neutral party a big war? Being in war with both sides. Well, it makes sense to me, but I could very well be wrong.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ZeronHitaro 10-30-06, 03:47 PM	Something I was thinking about on the way to class. I remember in the deck of many things there's a card that forces the person to take an alignment opposite to their current one and I wondered: What happens if a True Neutral person draws that card? From what I can tell, the general consensus is that True Neutral is an animalistic view of the world (as most if not all animals are TN). You do only what you need to for survival. (In a sence, being highly impartial to the world around you). The opposite of highly impartial is highly opinionated. This also reminded me of many a topic talking about the abuse of the Chaotic Neutral alignment where players do: What ever they want, when they want, just because "They feel like it." To me this seems to be more of a polar opposite to True Neutral, hence what I call: True Extremist IMO, this is not an alignment I'd make avaliable to players, rather a rare alignment that occurs when a TN character is forced to change into an alignment completely opposite of their own. I haven't fully flushed out what a True Extremist character would be like other than the short general descriptions above so: Comments, suggestions, opinions, ect are more than welcome on this ideal.
Tenebrous_Sage 10-30-06, 03:52 PM	I believe the general rule for TN characters that are forced to change to the opposite alignment is to change their alignment to one of the "extreme" alignments LG, LE, CG, CE.
SeptimusMagistos 10-30-06, 04:56 PM	A true extrimist may be forced to view things the way they suggested a Chaotic Neutral character view them in 2nd edition-Do whatever seems like a good idea at the moment. If you can't decide, flip a coin.
Inajira 10-30-06, 05:16 PM	How about Chaotic-Lawfull. Check out the science of chaos therory and fractal math. Or Evil-Good. Helps others because it helps herself in long run. Karma Both only aviable in the Far Realm
Seeker95 10-30-06, 07:32 PM	I agree with Tenebrous as to how that card worked in my campaign.
Milo HoBo 10-31-06, 01:21 AM	I have already declared Neutral and True Neutral two different alignments in my campaign. Both available from the start. 10 alignments. Neutral is just uncarring (Boccob) or unable to care (think animals). No oppossing alignemts. True Neutral is the one who activly seeks balance. They may even help evil to keep good in balance only to later switch and help good to keep evil in balance. Think of them as the zealot against zealots. Opposing alignments would be LG, CG, LE, CE. This is far different from the uncarring nature of Neutral. These would the the two completely opposite (but not necessarily opposing) alignments. Thus, in my campaign, switching would occure between these two.
aelryinth 10-31-06, 01:39 AM	I have already declared Neutral and True Neutral two different alignments in my campaign. Both available from the start. 10 alignments. Neutral is just uncarring (Boccob) or unable to care (think animals). No oppossing alignemts. True Neutral is the one who activly seeks balance. They may even help evil to keep good in balance only to later switch and help good to keep evil in balance. Think of them as the zealot against zealots. Opposing alignments would be LG, CG, LE, CE. This is far different from the uncarring nature of Neutral. These would the the two completely opposite (but not necessarily opposing) alignments. Thus, in my campaign, switching would occure between these two. I always called True Neutral the balance of alignments, the thinking side of a Natural Philosophy. I called False Neutral the unthinking, bestial neutrality, where you simply didn't care one way or the other. A large number of people, all animals and plants would fit into False Neutral...not having an alignment philosophy. ===Aelryinth
TheChilliGod 10-31-06, 01:50 AM	I always called True Neutral the balance of alignments, the thinking side of a Natural Philosophy. I called False Neutral the unthinking, bestial neutrality, where you simply didn't care one way or the other. A large number of people, all animals and plants would fit into False Neutral...not having an alignment philosophy. Yeah, though it was always written on the character sheet as "True Neutral," we have the same sort of thing. Except we called this "False Neutral" "Meh Neutral." Because that's what you tended to say, "meh." I would cross this Opposite Alignment bridge when/if I come across it, not before, but I'm leaning heavily on making the opposite alignment of TN one of the extreme alignments, determined at random.
Silverthumb128 10-31-06, 01:59 AM	How about Chaotic-Lawfull. Check out the science of chaos therory and fractal math. Neutral. Lawful with Chaotic tendencies, Chaotic with Lawful tendencies, its the exact same thing. No need to complicate things. Or Evil-Good. Helps others because it helps herself in long run. Karma Neutral. Evil with Good tendencies, Good with Evil tendencies, its the exact same thing. No need to complicate things. If you want to use the card to change the alignment, roll 1d8, pre-determining what each number would become. Or, as one of the extremes, 1d4.
asurademon 10-31-06, 04:35 PM	however true neutral people can be highlly opinionated. There are those that believe there must be absolute balance in all things, I can see them being extremely dedicated to the cause of bringing perfect balance between good and evil, law and chaos. Of course then there are those that are simply selfish, they don't really do particularly evil things, but won't go out of their way to do good, they are sort of amoral. And yes there are those that seek to live in perfect moderation as well.
supernerd222 10-31-06, 09:52 PM	As I understand it, there are three types of (true) Neutral: 1) The kind where you are totally lethargic and ambivalent, like an animal. You have no interest in anything, you just go day to day. 2) The kind where you are either a poof, schizo, or undecided. You join stuff, but often quit and help the other side. This is the one detailed in the PHB. 3) The kind where you believe that neutral is the only way to go, and you actively promote it. This is the kind the Rilmani do.
Inajira 11-09-06, 01:58 AM	Neutral. Lawful with Chaotic tendencies, Chaotic with Lawful tendencies, its the exact same thing. No need to complicate things. The difference between Neutral and Lawful-Chaotic is game affect. For example, if you had a magic item that could only be used by those that are Chaotic and causes damage to anyone that is Lawfull. A Neutral character could use the iteam at about half power but whould also take half the damage. A Chaotic-Lawful character would be able to use the iteam at full power but would also take full damage. Also when a Lawful-Chaotic character uses a magic iteam designed for a Neutral character he gets the same benifits a Lawful or Chaotic character would but takes the combinded penelties of both. Because these alignment only exsist in the Far Realm there is a chance( I'd say 5% but up to DM) that it confuses the magic iteam causing random affects. The downside is the character can't use intellegent magic iteams, because they think he's the opposite alignment of them with a spell to fool them. A Lawful-Chaotic character can be a cleric of a Lawful or Chaotic deity; but not NG,N,NE deites.
JulesCARV 11-09-06, 02:42 PM	Neutral might just be not very passionate or involved about moral issues -- including not being very passionate about neutrality itself -- but that doesn't necessarily mean lethargic or indifferent. A true neutral person might be extremely passionate about preserving 19th century architecture, and raise hell if anyone tries to tear down an old building, and know everything about different styles, architects, conventions, building materials, etc, of the era. It's just that what he deeply cares about isn't particularly relevant vis-à-vis, law, chaos, evil, or good.
caeruleus 11-09-06, 10:31 PM	Something I was thinking about on the way to class. I remember in the deck of many things there's a card that forces the person to take an alignment opposite to their current one and I wondered: What happens if a True Neutral person draws that card? I see this as analogous to multiplying a number by -1. Positive numbers become negative, negative numbers become positive, but zero remains zero. You might say that the opposite of zero is having a magnitude, but magnitude itself is not a number. Neutrality is like zero in this regard. It has no opposite as far as alignment is concerned. It is opposed by partisanship, but partisanship itself is not an alignment.
Milo HoBo 11-09-06, 11:51 PM	What is the opposite of being a neutral party a big war? Being in war with both sides. Well, it makes sense to me, but I could very well be wrong.