| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Lamoreaux04-13-07, 10:51 PM | In your opinion, what allignment do you think is the "best"? If you think some allignments are better than others then go ahead and explain why. I'm all ears. :) |
| Lord Karsus04-13-07, 10:55 PM | -That's like asking what color is the best. There is no actual answer, and everyone is going to have their own opinion. -My favorite alignment is Lawful Neutral with Good Tendencies, since I consider myself to be this alignment. |
| Lamoreaux04-13-07, 11:17 PM | I see what you mean with the fact that there is no actual answer, but I think that was the whole purpose. I want to hear why you people think your allignment is the best. (or at least why you think yours has more "benifits") |
| DojiHoturi04-14-07, 12:46 AM | The best alignment in regards to gaming is the one you can actually play without screwing it up. In real life I like to think of myself as Neutral Good, or even perhaps bordering on Chaotic Good. That makes playing those alignments quite easy for me. I can play Lawful Good, but almost invariably at some point you will have to pick between Law and Good because there are many instances where they conflict in a given society. I do not enjoy playing evil alignments, although I did experiment with that when I was younger. Lawful Evil is the only one that I could really tolerate to play because at least they had a sense of duty and honor that I could relate to. Chaos and Law for their own sake do not really make sense to me without some grounds in a percieved morality, and therefore make playing a Chaotic or Lawful Neutral character difficult without having some external push driving the character provided by the GM. 2 pennies |
| Stigger04-14-07, 01:25 AM | Neutral Good or Lawful Evil... only two I can really get my brain into when all is said and done. |
| GothicDan04-14-07, 06:45 AM | I, like LK, tend to be LN with Good tendencies. It's the best alignment for Sun Elves, I think, so that makes it the best alignment. Since Sun Elves are the best. ;) |
| Lady_K04-14-07, 07:05 AM | Honestly . . . anything that's "Evil" aligned. Of all the PCs I've ever used, I find those with "Evil" in their alignments to be the most interesting (and challenging) from a roleplaying perspective. That doesn't necessarily make them the best alignments, though I do find them to be the more enjoyable when compared to all others. |
| GothicDan04-14-07, 07:09 AM | My CE Incubus Shadow Mage WAS really fun to write online, at least... *Cough* And so was my CG Tulani. I think that's why it's so hard to pick the 'best' alignment. PLAYING many of the alignments is *fun,* but does that make them the -best-? |
| Lady_K04-14-07, 07:26 AM | That is true. When I was thinking about how to answer this question, the first thought that came to me was . . . "What alignment do I enjoy playing the most?" It's always an important question to ask oneself during the character creation process I think. Each of the alignments would seem to have their own inherent strengths and weaknesses. Though if you, as the PC, aren't comfortable playing certain types of "aligned" characters, then you aren't likely to enjoy some alignments when compared to others. That makes determining the "best" alignment difficult. |
| GothicDan04-14-07, 07:30 AM | Indeed. In real life, I tend to be more reserved around most people (besides a few family members and my fraternity brothers), so I'd probably be more Lawful/Neutral types. But I love -writing- chaotic types, rather than real life roleplay... Again, the definition of 'best' comes up. Is it what alignment WE are (we are what we do?) or what we like to play the most? Or what we like READING the most in novels? Hmmm.. |
| Lady_K04-14-07, 07:46 AM | An intriguing question. As it is, I tend to prefer "evil" aligned characters in novels . . . though, not always. The "self-destructive" type who doesn't realise his/her own destiny until it's too late often has a lot of appeal as well. I'm not sure what alignment that comes out as though . . . CN perhaps? |
| Karsus the Mad04-14-07, 02:23 PM | I don't have a favorite alignment, as I don't use the DnD alignment system but instead use the D20Modern allegiance system, which while still not capable of capturing the mortal mindset, does a far better job imho. Tho' if I had to take a gander, I'd say chaotically lawful or lawfully chaotic (with good and evil tendencies), depending on the mood:P |
| Zevox04-14-07, 03:51 PM | Lawful Good would be my favorite alignment, given my own personality is a best-fit for it. When it comes to playing characters, I prefer anything lawful basically. I can enjoy good, neutral, or evil characters if they're lawful, but I have a little tougher time with netural ones on the law/chaos scale (particularly true neutral, which seems like a very bland alignment to me), and almost never like playing chaotic ones (the infrequent CG or CN rogue type is about it). It does seem though that I find chaotic evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0435.html) characters the most amusing sorts to read about though ;) . Zevox |
| bloodtalon04-14-07, 06:59 PM | mine allways been CN cause you dont have to worry about the law and not allways out trying to kill and screw everybody over i also liked CG more of a wildwest gn fighter feel to it do what needs to be done and the end of it |
| Agudo Archmage04-14-07, 07:09 PM | My favorite is Lawful Good Just has a lot of fun game play for me Offers a challenge to all aspects of Storytelling When I read someone is Neutral, it often comes off that they (The Player) really wants to be Chaotic Good In other words they like being mostly good, (No murdering kids or puppy dogs) Yet they will get tempted by stealing stuff AKA-treasure trove of coins lol :embarrass To me Neutral Alignments are “Selfish” people They only help as far it gains them something Basically if a child or woman gets hurt, they don’t really care As long as it’s not someone they love that is |
| MaskedOne04-14-07, 07:36 PM | I prefer Neutral Good borderlining True Neutral. Law is pretty much a tool to me. It promotes Good to a degree and so should be supported to a degree. Once ignoring it becomes significantly (flagrant disregard can backlash in messy ways so ignoring the law for a short term goal is not always appropriate) more effective at promoting Good then supporting it then it should be set aside. Borderline True Neutral accounts for a certain pragmatic streak that some truly GOOD souls are better off not worrying about. I don't completely accept the concept of ends justifying the means but I'm far more tolerant of it than some might prefer. Notably, my post is mostly on philosophical preference and possibly rpg characters. I'm not interested in sharing how much or little this reflects my lifestyle. |
| Zandilar04-16-07, 05:01 AM | Heya, My favorite alignment won't come as a surprise to too many people around here - I tend to wear my heart on my sleeve, as it were... I love Chaotic Good best. In real life I'm kind of NG as I have too many Lawful tendancies to truely be Chaotic. Sometimes I wish I was less inhibited in real life, and I like the concept of freedom and kindness that the Chaotic Good alignment represents. Of the Evil alignments, I can play LE best, but I find it tiring to do so. A friend of mine once said I wouldn't play evil well because I'm far too empathic... my partner, on the other hand, who has experienced me playing evil, says I do such a good job of it that I'm scary. The friend who said I was too empathic is about to experience me as a DM, and I'm planning the BBEGs will be not just evil, but vile. I'll have to see what he says later in the campaign about me and evil. :evillaugh :schemes: Lastly, my one of my favorite characters to write is CN with Evil tendancies... But she has her reasons for what she does, and she's not beyond redemption (and in fact, she is redeemed at some point - though after the stories she has appeared in thus far - none published yet, but I'm working on it!). |
| rolig04-16-07, 06:44 AM | Neutral good, becouse they can do almost anything a good aligned person would do to fullfill his misson... While paladins and kights must follow codes:P Anyhow i enjoy playing anything between neutral tending towards good and good aligned... |
| Grandmaster_Kane04-16-07, 03:03 PM | then just pure N you can do whatever you want anytime you wany so that is what i choose |
| King_Neckchopper04-16-07, 04:04 PM | I think the best alignment to play is NG. This is a character that is challenged right from the start. you have to be self sacrificing, and willing to forgive people, and give everyone the benefit of the doubt because you believe that there is goodness in everything. the fighter who shows mercy to his enemies pleas is neutral good. Personally i think if the whole world was neutral good things would be great. Neutral good people live to help others. All good samaritans are neutral good. the idea of "paying it foward" is neutral good. After that I love chaotic neutral, the free spirits, not the psycho's they were described as in 2E. I am emperor!!!!!!!~the New stexiec king in the Dark Crystal |
| Everdreaming04-16-07, 05:28 PM | My personal favorite is CG because I feel that represents me. I am always moving, always looking for something new to do, never able to stop and really stay somewhere. And I dont like to see people hurt(unless I dislike them). Thats my opinion of chaotic goodness and if you dont like it, oh well. |
| Zevox04-16-07, 05:37 PM | then just pure N you can do whatever you want anytime you wany ... doing whatever you want anytime you want would be a chaotic viewpoint (CN probably). Not TN at all. Zevox |
| BelainDefenderofJerusalem04-16-07, 06:23 PM | true neutral |
| Grandmaster_Kane04-16-07, 09:29 PM | ... doing whatever you want anytime you want would be a chaotic viewpoint (CN probably). Not TN at all. Zevox True N is pure chaos cn is never following the laws and looking out for yourself Pure n means sometimes you follow laws sometimews you dont |
| Lord Karsus04-16-07, 11:12 PM | True N is pure chaos -Is it just me with that one? |
| Zevox04-17-07, 01:06 AM | True N is pure chaos :uh-huh: cn is never following the laws and looking out for yourself Um, no, to never follow laws would require you to be a mindless rebel. Chaotic characters may resent authority and restrictions, but they're not idiots who never follow the laws. Just as lawful characters aren't brain-dead puppets of the laws who never question or go against them. How much chaotic and lawful characters value laws, order, and authority is certainly a reflection of their alignment, but those alignments do not exist to judge how often a character follows the laws of any given region. Pure n means sometimes you follow laws sometimews you dont Not even close. It means either you have equally lawful and chaotic (and good and evil) tendencies, no tendencies towards either, or a conscious value of a balance of freedom and individuality and honor and reliability (aka chaos and law). -Is it just me with that one? Trust me, its not just you. Zevox |
| Stigger04-17-07, 01:15 AM | Look at the Complete Scoundrel... some very interesting stuff in there for looking at non-conventional approaches to alignment interpretation. |
| The_Shaman04-17-07, 08:14 AM | I consider neutrality in any alignment either that you don't care for either end, or you aren't dedicated enough to be any other. TNs are - I think - the kind of people who aren't dedicated to order and tradition enough to be lawful, who aren't individualistic (or, so to say, libertarian) enough to be chaotic, who aren't altruistic and enough to be good and aren't callous enough to be evil. That said, I prefer adventurers who are leaning towards CN. It doesn't preclude you from doing good or evil acts, and the chaotic alignment is imo typical of a kind of people like adventurers who, let's face it, do a lot of things not normally encouraged by moral codes. I mean, how many here have found an antique magical sword in a ruined castle and then sought out the scion of the family who wielded it so they can return it? |
| GothicDan04-17-07, 08:35 AM | I mean, how many here have found an antique magical sword in a ruined castle and then sought out the scion of the family who wielded it so they can return it? It depends on the character. My Sun Elven FR character (LG) would most certainly do that, and only keep it if it was willed to him or if no owner was found, and the clergy of Corellon approved. ;) |
| Stigger04-17-07, 08:40 AM | Hate to say it, but I've had a couple of characters do that as well... one of those weapons being on the epic side of things while I was tooling around with a weenie version of a mace of disruption. |
| Agudo Archmage04-17-07, 01:00 PM | The_Shaman ..... I mean, how many here have found an antique magical sword in a ruined castle and then sought out the scion of the family who wielded it so they can return it? Blush, raises hand :embarrass Dont get me wrong...all those who just said they would find the owner, would also use it until they did..Teehehe :fight!: |
| King_Neckchopper04-18-07, 01:24 PM | True N is pure chaos cn is never following the laws and looking out for yourself Pure n means sometimes you follow laws sometimews you dont I thought TN characters tried to maintain balance and order to the natural ways of things |
| Stigger04-18-07, 03:01 PM | Well, to be honest, I don't think there's anything that can really be said to be a concrete definition of what a particular alignment 'truly' means. |
| Lord Karsus04-19-07, 09:04 AM | -Might I convolute the argument with 'Tendencies'? |
| Renvale99904-19-07, 10:04 AM | -Might I convolute the argument with 'Tendencies'? Agreed, you can be LN with good tendencies...I think Khelben was this alignment...yes I'm forgiving him...everybody cheer...done??...okay moving on... Alignments are guidelines, not straight rules...the only time I really make my players stick to their alignments is when we're playing exalted characters, but other than that I let them interpret their own actions...as a general rule, if they find they are not keeping with their alignment, they are required to change it...which they have...had a rogue start out CN but did alot of good things and moved himself to CG. I like giving my players a little lee-way with alignments, but I tend to inforce the consequences of their actions.. Example, another rogue(started out LE) killed a stable boy in order to take some horses without being noticed. Later on in the campaign, the entire group turned good. Not long after some paladins showed up and demanded the rogue stand trial for killing the boy...he went along willingly and ended up being executed, player had absolutely no problem with it, he understood. To be honest we still talk about that character to this day. |
| Lord Karsus04-19-07, 06:23 PM | yes I'm forgiving him...everybody cheer...done??...okay moving on... -That does make me very happy. :) |
| TheCheshireCat04-19-07, 06:52 PM | I suppose the "best" alignment would be the one that allows you access to the best spells/abilities/feats/damage resistance/chili cheese fries. I'm afraid I don't have the time to search through the books and see which cool items have alignment requirements and such, but that might be a basis to see which is the best alignment. Or perhaps in other words, the most utilitarian alignment. But barring that, I personally love CG, as this is what I feel I am most like. I follow the rules when I want, but if they ever contradict what I feel is my moral code, then I either go against them, or complain my head off. |
| MaskedOne04-20-07, 04:22 PM | The_Shaman Blush, raises hand :embarrass Dont get me wrong...all those who just said they would find the owner, would also use it until they did..Teehehe :fight!: Depends on the blade and the DM. Casually wielding a high profile magic sword can be unpleasant when people come to take it away. Of course, I'm as likely to sell (very carefully) it as return it. |
| Grummush_Rogue04-21-07, 10:19 AM | well CE has the great ability to do what ever the heck you want (a DMs worst nightmare), but CN has the same thing, but with the actual possiblity of being able to TALK to people without them running in terror :hides: :dragon: |
| Fabius Maximus04-21-07, 01:07 PM | No alignment is the best alignment. |
| AMGriffin04-30-07, 10:21 AM | I don't know that, that's a good question. My favorite PC ever (who I still use from time to time) was a half-orc fighter/barbarian named Skel who was chaotic neutral to the max (though by the end of the campaign he was chaotic good). He was exceedingly tempermental and reckless, but deep and introspective in his own way, then he got to fall in love with the party's half-elf rogue. They ended up having three children (two boys and a girl), all of which appeared as NPCs in a later campaign. Such a fun character to play. |
| Lord Karsus05-01-07, 05:35 PM | No alignment is the best alignment. -How philosophical. But, without an alignment, do we truly exist? :) |
| Fabius Maximus05-02-07, 07:50 AM | -How philosophical. But, without an alignment, do we truly exist? :) Certainly. Whithout an alignment, we are free to do whatever we want and not restricted by an artificial set of morals/ethics. Seriously, I think It'd be better if alignment would be replaced by taint. |
| Lord Karsus05-02-07, 09:19 AM | Certainly. Whithout an alignment, we are free to do whatever we want and not restricted by an artificial set of morals/ethics. -What you are describing, though, is the TN (True Neutral) alignment. Thus, we all would have alignments after all... |
| Fabius Maximus05-02-07, 10:05 AM | -What you are describing, though, is the TN (True Neutral) alignment. Thus, we all would have alignments after all... Sorry, but that's wrong. Being free to do everything is free to create your own set of morals and ethics, being as restrictive as any alignment. Or, OTOH, creating only guidelines for yourself and deviating from them frequently. The alignment system is entirely to tight for my taste. |
| BrennonGoldeye05-02-07, 10:08 AM | I thought TN characters tried to maintain balance and order to the natural ways of things That would be 1 side of the coin. The other side would be ignoring the concept of "balance" and simply embracing extremes as the way to true neutrality.;) There is also a Dragon Mag(:weep:) with TN paladins in it. Paramanders and Paramandyrs. One seeks balance amongst the extremes, the other wishes to destroy samesaid extremes. Both are TN. I am CG through and through. I believe laws are needed and will happily follow them as long as Good(and my goal) is served. On the other hand, using the law as a club will get you a Enhanced Twinned Acidball in the sack.;) |
| Braekor Dragonfang05-02-07, 01:26 PM | Playing Lawful Stupid Paladins as a comedic stereotype is fun my favorite alignment... LE, but with LG tendencies. it sounds strange, but basically my character idea is a plucky, annoyingly positive-minded LE 18-25 year old wild elven blackguard, who has an evil 'code of honor' I.e. no killing kids, no killing puppies or similar animals, resort to violence only if it furthers his needs, and generally act nice and happy until some butthole paladin comes along and uses detect evil |
| MaskedOne05-02-07, 07:10 PM | -What you are describing, though, is the TN (True Neutral) alignment. Thus, we all would have alignments after all... Shrug, you're generous. At first glance, it reads a touch too similar to "might makes right" or more precisely, "want, take, have" and consequence to innocents be d*****. I don't think I need to classify where on the alignment scale that ends up at. Most who don't ascribe to such viewpoints do have some form of guiding morality or ethic (not necessarily consciously acknowledged), whether such personal moralities and codes can easily be classified within the alignment system might be questionable but something (a conscience, for lack of a better term) is in play discouraging the casual disregard of other beings for personal advantage. |
| GothicDan05-02-07, 08:36 PM | I'm not sure if a subconscious desire constitutes any sort of ethical or moral bias. That's more of a purely instinctive/emotional response, not a societal construct. |
| Stigger05-03-07, 02:06 AM | But quite possibly instincts and emotions shaped by our more conscious morals and ethics. Kinda depends on the situation and the person... like most things in life. |
| GothicDan05-03-07, 02:12 AM | Chicken or the egg? |
| Fabius Maximus05-03-07, 06:25 AM | Chicken or the egg? ;) I read an article a while back about that people raised without the attendance of other people (most likely so-called wolf-children) still developed some kind of a moral code. IIRC, it contained not killing others on a whim. And since almost every animal species has something like a kill constraint towards members of it's own species, it's only logical that human beings would have something like this, too. |
| Lord Karsus05-03-07, 09:21 AM | Chicken or the egg? -Egg, as dinosaurs and their predecessors laid eggs. |
| Lord Karsus05-03-07, 09:22 AM | Sorry, but that's wrong. Being free to do everything is free to create your own set of morals and ethics, being as restrictive as any alignment. Or, OTOH, creating only guidelines for yourself and deviating from them frequently. The alignment system is entirely to tight for my taste. -What I am saying, though, is that what you are describing is the TN alignment. Thus, in adhering to all of that, you do have an alignment. White, the absence of color, is still classified as a color. |
| GothicDan05-03-07, 01:23 PM | I read an article a while back about that people raised without the attendance of other people (most likely so-called wolf-children) still developed some kind of a moral code. IIRC, it contained not killing others on a whim. And since almost every animal species has something like a kill constraint towards members of it's own species, it's only logical that human beings would have something like this, too. That's a pack-survival instinct, though, not ethics, as far as I'm concerned. |
| Lord Karsus05-03-07, 01:25 PM | -By definition, animals can't have ethics, as they don't have the ethos. |
| Fabius Maximus05-03-07, 04:45 PM | -What I am saying, though, is that what you are describing is the TN alignment. Thus, in adhering to all of that, you do have an alignment. White, the absence of color, is still classified as a color. White is all colours, by the way. The absence of colour is black. ;) And what you think I described is Chaotic Neutral rather. TN is the classical 'Balance in All Things', or maybe 'I don't give a damn'. I'm talking about relative alignment here, and the discussion is not something new. A paladin from Mulhorand will see enslavement as something pretty normal and societally accepted. A paladin from the Heartlands will not. You can't press people - and that's what characters in a role-playing game are supposed to be - press into an artificial alignment system. Somebody thought of that system and used his own moral/ethical bearings to calibrate it. |
| Lord Karsus05-03-07, 05:46 PM | White is all colours, by the way. The absence of colour is black. ;) -I thought it was the other way around...Well, no matter. Replace 'White' with 'Black', then. I could have sword, though... And what you think I described is Chaotic Neutral rather. TN is the classical 'Balance in All Things', or maybe 'I don't give a damn'. -I don't know about that. Sounded more of a TN thing to say. But, either way, an alignment is still present. :P |
| Stigger05-03-07, 07:13 PM | White being the absence or presence of color depends on if you're talking about pigment or light. Same goes for black. So you're both right. And prey animals in general don't understand the line between life and death, hence they end up killing each other a lot more frequently, usually during mating displays and in dominance exhibitions, than predators, who fairly consistently show a keen awareness of death and generally do their best to avoid killing each other. Predators also have a much greater tendency to play as compared to prey. Though on the Mulhorandi slavery bit, it was my understanding that all those slaves belonged to the Pharoah, or at least to the temples, which is basically a cultural way of saying you belong to god, and not necessarily the same thing as private ownership of slaves... since in all likelihood those paladins would look at themselves as slaves to their deities. At least from the way I understood the material. |
| Alediran05-03-07, 11:47 PM | I'll give one: TN gives you "immunity" to: Detect Good, Detect Evil, Detect Law, Detect Chaos, Smite Evil, Smite Good, Smite Law, Smite Chaos. |
| Stigger05-04-07, 01:31 AM | Unless its coming from a high level grayguard, who can smite anything... :tongue: |
| Fabius Maximus05-04-07, 07:02 AM | Though on the Mulhorandi slavery bit, it was my understanding that all those slaves belonged to the Pharoah, or at least to the temples, which is basically a cultural way of saying you belong to god, and not necessarily the same thing as private ownership of slaves... since in all likelihood those paladins would look at themselves as slaves to their deities. At least from the way I understood the material. Which would still be horrendous to a Paladin from the Heartlands. |
| Stigger05-04-07, 10:08 AM | There's nothing that says that good has to be some monolithic force that agrees on every single issue out there. There's a lot of stuff the Mulhorandi would probably find just as appalling in Heartlands culture, as the opposite is certainly true. Good is still a quantifiable thing though, and both would still be lawful and good. Its not an exalted definition of good, certainly, but that doesn't mean its immediately evil. |
| Fabius Maximus05-04-07, 11:17 AM | There's nothing that says that good has to be some monolithic force that agrees on every single issue out there. There's a lot of stuff the Mulhorandi would probably find just as appalling in Heartlands culture, as the opposite is certainly true. Good is still a quantifiable thing though, and both would still be lawful and good. Its not an exalted definition of good, certainly, but that doesn't mean its immediately evil. No, but it's not 'good' either. At least, not 'good' in D&D context. |
| BrennonGoldeye05-04-07, 09:52 PM | No, but it's not 'good' either. At least, not 'good' in D&D context. Law is just as much a part of a paladin as Good. By Law these folk were the property of the Divine Pharaoh. Notice the big D. A good aligned D at that. One who treated them as a good aligned D would. With compassion and respect. Far better treatment than the folk on the street recieved from their fellow citizens. Any paladin who freed said slaves from their Master would be automatically in violation of their vows. And in conflict with other paladins. Sounds like the RW 1100's to me. I'm hearing echo's even now. Anyway.. Slavery is one of the primal manifestations of Law IMHO. :yuck: |
| Fabius Maximus05-05-07, 08:18 AM | I didn't want to go into that particular discussion because it's essentially beating a dead horse. But, in the context of the D&D alignment system, said Mulhorandi Paladin would also violate the code when allowing slavery to continue. So, by definition of the Paladin code, there can't be any Mulhorandi Paladin's, only fallen ones. That's an example why the alignment system is flawed. |
| Stigger05-05-07, 09:05 AM | However you're talking about a 'western' paladins code, which they don't necessarily have to follow. One could easily make an arguement that everyone is ultimately the property of the gods, but that they only take possession of you when you die, the Mulhorandi just do it in a different order. Alignment isn't supposed to operate on the absolute definitions you're trying to give it... if you think of it in terms of absolute, then it is broken, if you think of it simply as a nebulous guidelines, its far, far, far from broken, which I suspect is the way it was intended to be used given some of the stuff in books like Complete Scoundrel and Champions of Valor. |
| Fabius Maximus05-05-07, 11:52 AM | Maybe, but if I start to think about D&D characters, I automatically think in terms of alignment, and I hate it. Thing is, people don't work like that. It's unrealistic, and a rather badly designed crutch for coming up with a character background, so that you don't have to much thinking to do yourself. That's why I like the taint system. It's easier and more flexible. There a tainted being, and there are untainted beings. Exposition to tainted ones rubs off on untainted (if they fail there saves). Being 'evil' doesn't make you tainted, unless you do something that violates the relevant society's fundamental morals and ethics. |
| GothicDan05-05-07, 03:36 PM | Maybe, but if I start to think about D&D characters, I automatically think in terms of alignment, and I hate it. Isn't that mostly your problem, though? I tend to think in terms of race, class, past, history, etc. Alignment is usually one of the last things I figure out. |
| Fabius Maximus05-05-07, 06:08 PM | Maybe it's my problem, but I don't think I'm the only one. |
| GothicDan05-05-07, 06:13 PM | That, I agree with. I've heard other people express similar concerns. I don't know why (personally), but I've heard such. |
| Khaelieth05-05-07, 07:32 PM | Arrogant sadistic is the best tbh. |
| JaiaDrottsingr05-05-07, 09:19 PM | Alignments. Everyone is true neutral with slight influences in any directions. It's not like you pick your own alignment, or even the people know that they are what they are. I don't allow defeat/smite spells and detect becomes detect evil thoughts. This one is not really able to be used in an inn where most of the seven deadly sins shall be present. As for palidans, I hate them. So, whenever a player plays them, I intend to trip them up. I once had a player who killed five war veterans/former heroes/purple heart owners because he was told that they were slavers. They were all lead witnesses to cases of corruption in Thay. Yep, stupidity murdered the one chance anyone had to stop the Evil. Anyway, I push the Chaotic sides (like I personally am [CG/CN], if you can't tell). |
| GothicDan05-05-07, 09:33 PM | As for palidans, I hate them. So, whenever a player plays them, I intend to trip them up. Wow. Speaking of stupidity... |
| Lord Karsus05-05-07, 09:49 PM | -Stupid double post...:nonono: |
| Lord Karsus05-05-07, 09:50 PM | It's not like you pick your own alignment, or even the people know that they are what they are. -And why not? It happens all the time. How many times do you hear stories about criminals and similar people who have "found the lord"? I would consider that an alignment change from perhaps CE or CN to CN or CG, depending on the situation, and if said individual actually means it. Wow. Speaking of stupidity... -In the words of Dan himself: ZOMG!!1! :) |
| JaiaDrottsingr05-05-07, 10:22 PM | No one knows what they are. The criminals may still commit crimes, but as they are doing it in "The name of the Lord" they regard themselves as LG. It's like the blowing yourself up because good ol' peace-lovin' Allah told a denomination that has been discontinued to do so. As this could easily become a stereotypical Karsi/Jaia political-type argument, I'll try and stray as far from the gov't as possible. You could stop a mugging, only to have aided the local drug dealer (which you recognize slightly) with his biggest shipment. That's a good thing that you stopped the mugger. Add two goody goody two shoes points. You intentionally aided and abetted your former backer. Add fifteen baddy baddy boomballatti points. Note: You've been cold for three years and have forgotten most of that period. In DND, this could change you from TN to NE. In real life, this makes you a witness as soon as you recognize and phone him in and you get a chance to earn back your standing with God/Allah/Shiva/Nirvana/Metallica/Watevah. One of the biggest reasons the alignment system is flawed is because life and DND have DM's. Life not only has a DM, it has the only fully competent one in exsistence. |
| Zevox05-05-07, 10:23 PM | I once had a player who killed five war veterans/former heroes/purple heart owners because he was told that they were slavers. They were all lead witnesses to cases of corruption in Thay. Yep, stupidity murdered the one chance anyone had to stop the Evil. That scenario was a result of him being an idiot, not a result of him being a Paladin. Your last sentence even acknowledges this fact. And intelligent Paladin would rather have let them testify, then afterwards turn them in to face justice for their crimes themselves. As for palidans, I hate them. So, whenever a player plays them, I intend to trip them up. *seconds Dan's comment* Zevox |
| JaiaDrottsingr05-05-07, 10:41 PM | That scenario was a result of him being an idiot, not a result of him being a Paladin. Your last sentence even acknowledges this fact. And intelligent Paladin would rather have let them testify, then afterwards turn them in to face justice for their crimes themselves. They weren't slavers, the trials were going to be kept secret, they were under the protection of the courts, and this player had the same IQ as me. On the same legal test. And a higher GPA. But I did give evidence that the five were slavers. Valid evidence. Incorrect but shrewd. |
| Zevox05-06-07, 01:25 AM | They weren't slavers, the trials were going to be kept secret, they were under the protection of the courts, and this player had the same IQ as me. On the same legal test. And a higher GPA. But I did give evidence that the five were slavers. Valid evidence. Incorrect but shrewd. I meant the character was stupid, not the player. Unless he was a Paladin of Hoar (in which case it was in keeping with his beliefs - poetic justice, just vengeance and all that), killing people for crimes like that without so much as attempting to put them on trial is something no Paladin with an ounce of sense and/or any respect for the values he is supposed to uphold would do. ...and yeah, I'll continue to keep some of my other opinions to myself. I'll just repeat that I'm with Dan. Zevox |
| Stigger05-06-07, 02:33 AM | Vindictiveness for choosing certain classes... nice. |
| Khaelieth05-06-07, 08:42 AM | Gleeful sadistic is also quite good. But remember, we're working out from the guidelines the wizards from the coast tell us to use. Stealing is -not- lawful, but can be good! |
| Stigger05-06-07, 01:37 PM | Society tells us that too when it glorifies Robin Hood stereotypes. ;) |
| Lord Karsus05-06-07, 05:45 PM | No one knows what they are. The criminals may still commit crimes, but as they are doing it in "The name of the Lord" they regard themselves as LG. It's like the blowing yourself up because good ol' peace-lovin' Allah told a denomination that has been discontinued to do so. -I'm talking about in actuality, not that one percieves him/herself as. We're taking a step back and looking at everything omnisciently, here. And, like I already stated, the former criminal meant what they said, about "finding the lord" and all of that stuff. Thus, they are not going to be killing, maiming, stealing, and so on, anymore. You could stop a mugging, only to have aided the local drug dealer (which you recognize slightly) with his biggest shipment. That's a good thing that you stopped the mugger. Add two goody goody two shoes points. You intentionally aided and abetted your former backer. Add fifteen baddy baddy boomballatti points. Note: You've been cold for three years and have forgotten most of that period. In DND, this could change you from TN to NE. In real life, this makes you a witness as soon as you recognize and phone him in and you get a chance to earn back your standing with God/Allah/Shiva/Nirvana/Metallica/Watevah. -You lost me... (And, that isn't exactly how it works in D&D, either. It takes more than a single act to change someone's alignment, barring the most grievous of acts, of course.) |
| JaiaDrottsingr05-06-07, 06:42 PM | Just forget it. Pallies suck and minstrels are T3h B0M8. |
| Lord Karsus05-06-07, 07:51 PM | -Ookaayy... |
| Khaelieth05-07-07, 07:34 AM | If you try stopping a mugging, how can it be bad, from your point of view? A pally might ruin his wee silly code, but I'd let my characters stay good without a shred of doubt. |
| Lord Karsus05-07-07, 08:57 AM | If you try stopping a mugging, how can it be bad, from your point of view? A pally might ruin his wee silly code, but I'd let my characters stay good without a shred of doubt. -I think what Jaia was getting at in that example is that by doing something, you can unknowingly help a "bad guy". So, you stop the mugging, and go on your way. The person who was being muggled, though, was a drug dealer, and would have had his drugs taken away had you not interfered. He now sells his drugs to junkies and some kids, who become junkies. Now the "blood" is on your hands, too. -While it does logically make sense, I don't think that anyone would buy into that argument. Basically, then, anything you do can be an inherently evil act. |
| Khaelieth05-07-07, 09:06 AM | Aye, but if you see a woman being mugged, you don't think that she might be the bordello madame. Not helping her would be neutral, perhaps even evil. |
| Lord Karsus05-07-07, 09:18 AM | Aye, but if you see a woman being mugged, you don't think that she might be the bordello madame. Not helping her would be neutral, perhaps even evil. -Like I said, I don't think that anyone buys into that argument. If you did, that would mean that eating is a bad thing, since that means that you are causing impoverished children in Latin America to starve to death. Or, breathing is a bad thing, since you are stealing the air that a man who is suffocating to death could have used... |
| BrennonGoldeye05-07-07, 09:56 AM | -Like I said, I don't think that anyone buys into that argument. If you did, that would mean that eating is a bad thing, since that means that you are causing impoverished children in Latin America to starve to death. Or, breathing is a bad thing, since you are stealing the air that a man who is suffocating to death could have used... Very nice.:thumbsup: |
| Renvale99905-07-07, 10:04 AM | Alignments are guildlines, period...taken literally they tend to break down quickly and hinder PC's |
| Stigger05-07-07, 12:38 PM | Would only be evil for the paladin if he knowingly aided a villainous type. Good if he was simply helping someone in need, since maybe his righteous action will provide an example later in life for the villain to emulate when he perhaps tries to reform himself... you can look at that tons of different ways to suit whatever agenda you're trying to push. |
| Straploknight05-10-07, 11:02 PM | Vindictiveness for choosing certain classes... nice. werd, same goes for vindictiveness for choosing certain races (excluding game breaking ones)... nicerest..est..and some more est. |
| Stormbrand05-11-07, 09:38 AM | My favourite is Lawful Good, because there is something inspiring about outright heroes - one who holds true to right and honour throughout. Law is just as much a part of a paladin as Good. By Law these folk were the property of the Divine Pharaoh. Notice the big D. A good aligned D at that. One who treated them as a good aligned D would. With compassion and respect. Far better treatment than the folk on the street recieved from their fellow citizens. Any paladin who freed said slaves from their Master would be automatically in violation of their vows. And in conflict with other paladins. Sounds like the RW 1100's to me. I'm hearing echo's even now. Anyway.. Slavery is one of the primal manifestations of Law IMHO. :yuck: Strange. Is the authority of slavery ever legitimate? Law is only covered by the Paladin Code in 'Respect Legitimate Authority' - tolerating unfair laws is not required, nor does it place Law on the same level as Good. In the case in question, well-treated slaves makes it tolerable on context, not something to support. The institution of slavery opposes both Law and Good. Alignments. Everyone is true neutral with slight influences in any directions. It's not like you pick your own alignment, or even the people know that they are what they are. I don't allow defeat/smite spells and detect becomes detect evil thoughts. This one is not really able to be used in an inn where most of the seven deadly sins shall be present. As for palidans, I hate them. So, whenever a player plays them, I intend to trip them up. I once had a player who killed five war veterans/former heroes/purple heart owners because he was told that they were slavers. They were all lead witnesses to cases of corruption in Thay. Yep, stupidity murdered the one chance anyone had to stop the Evil. Anyway, I push the Chaotic sides (like I personally am [CG/CN], if you can't tell). Just forget it. Pallies suck and minstrels are T3h B0M8. Mark this as a DM to avoid. |
| Stigger05-11-07, 09:48 AM | Unfortunately for the case of your example, that slavery was instituted by the very deities they serve... who were, up until recently, in fact also that legitimate authority. Doesn't necessarily make it right by Heartlands standards, but it certainly is by Mulhorandi standards. What is honorable and right is generally defined by the society doing the defining, at least for a given culture. While the institution of slavery in the context of D&D is not good, its not necessarily evil either, as evidenced by the generally good alignment of the Mulhorandi pantheon who would have instituted it in the first place. |
| The_Black_Rose05-11-07, 04:46 PM | I love chaotic neutral with all my soul. It's who I am and you have no limits, but still somewhat goodly intentions. Next campaign, try a Cn, you'll probably like it. (no guarantee) |
| Straploknight05-11-07, 07:03 PM | My take on CN is different, I associate it with hard core survival - you owe no fealty to anyone or any idea - free to bend like a reed in the wind or be hard as steel as the situation demands. The end justifies the means. |
| JaiaDrottsingr05-11-07, 07:27 PM | Mark this as a DM to avoid. That character loved my campaigns! Sure, he always got abused, but he was the always first one to laugh. What I hate about paladins is that they are confined to that stupid alignment. CE gods, LG paladins that strive for evil and are quickly disbanded. LE gods, paladins with slight gender confusion that never avoid murdering crap. |
| Eled_the_Worm_Tamer05-11-07, 07:44 PM | Well from past charicters I can safely say I gravatate to Neutral good Its just the best alinment for a hero as far as I can see. LG sooner or later asks you to compromise one or the other. CG sooner or later has to act dependable. Neutral good seems a wider path to folow, wich in turn lets you get away with an occasional slip so you avoid becoming a cardboard cut out. Becase lets face it every one has a little evil in them. |
| BrennonGoldeye05-11-07, 08:35 PM | CG sooner or later has to act dependable. Chaos is always dependable. :D |
| BrennonGoldeye05-11-07, 08:37 PM | CG sooner or later has to act dependable. Frikkin Double. Sorry all |
| darksyngr05-11-07, 08:51 PM | I don't really have a favorite alignment. Only one I do not enjoy playing is CE. I think 'best alignment' is more based on what class or type of character I feel like playing at the time. However, I do tend to lean toward neutral types lately. |
| XHereticX05-11-07, 09:01 PM | Dunno what you mean by best alignment, but CN gives you the most freedom. |
| BrennonGoldeye05-11-07, 10:25 PM | In your opinion, what allignment do you think is the "best"? Mine.:P |
| Stigger05-12-07, 02:02 AM | Whatever you most relate to gives you the most freedom... |
| JaiaDrottsingr05-12-07, 08:56 AM | Can't we all just agree that the alignment system is slanted toward stereotypes rather than example? |
| Straploknight05-12-07, 09:48 AM | Hah, my alignment is the best alignment, cause it will kick all your sorry alignments butts! |
| Stigger05-12-07, 10:14 AM | Can't we all just agree that the alignment system is slanted toward stereotypes rather than example? I'd say it was more archetypes really... its only as slanted towards stereotypes as you allow it to be. It allows for a tremendous amount of leeway if you just give it some thought and a looser interpretation than you seem willing to. |
| MaskedOne05-12-07, 11:02 AM | Ignore please. Not in the mood to rehash a discussion of what law is and can create. |
| Lord Karsus05-12-07, 06:19 PM | What I hate about paladins is that they are confined to that stupid alignment. CE gods, LG paladins that strive for evil and are quickly disbanded. LE gods, paladins with slight gender confusion that never avoid murdering crap. -LG Paladins do not strive for evil. |
| Ral_The_Invincible05-12-07, 06:23 PM | LG of course, always LG |
| Passivearmada07-18-07, 04:42 PM | i like Chaotic Neutral, because i do whatever the hell i want! who says a Chaotic Neutral person has to break the law? i follow som elaws and break the ones i dont like. if i want a nice relaxing day, ill stay out of trouble and stuff- if i want to have some fun, i have no problem with breaking the law- that's what CN is to me. Neutral Evil is fun, i have a NE character, but i woyld only reccomend it to people who are in small parties, and dont fully trust their companions, and vice versa. it keeps you on the edge and provides a good and interesting roleplaying experience. i like to drop hints of my character's past, showing it was painful, hence the edginess. its also fun to have them "find their light" and shift to a better alignment (a more goodly one, that is), and use their stealthy skills (at least for me) or their all-for-me style of combat for the good of a town or city they like. a king's spy, an undercover agent, a boncer, a vigilante, or anything. True Neutral is something im looking into- its just that i dont like the "balance is everything" idea, and i never like a PC that is devoted to a cause, hence my avoiding of paladins, though theyre fun to roleplay alongside. |
| Winsee07-18-07, 10:06 PM | The trap that I see many of my players fall into is trying to trying to base their characters' actions on their chosen alignment. The thought process normally goes something like "my character is neutral good. What would a neutral good character do in X situation." I believe that a players' choices should be based on a character's personality, beliefs, and various external motivations. The character's final actions should determine their alignment and not vice-versa. Most of the player I have that make CN or TN characters play closer to Neutral/Chaotic Evil, and I would let a paladin smite them. Being chaotic neutral does NOT mean that you can randomly decide to kill babies because you are "unpredictable." Killing babies for no reason is EVIL. P.S... My favorite alignment (and therefore the best) is True Neutral. I think of it as live and let live, with a bit of apathy mixed in. Passionate befiefs are for law/chaos/good/evil. |
| captaincarot07-19-07, 11:53 AM | P.S... My favorite alignment (and therefore the best) is True Neutral. I think of it as live and let live, with a bit of apathy mixed in. Passionate befiefs are for law/chaos/good/evil. nah neutral is best because you get to kill everyone who is too powerful to stop them upsetting the balance and don't have to go round worrying about it. if you make a mistake just go redress it by killing an equally powerful but oppositely aigned person. :plotting::evillaugh:P |
| DarkSongKnight07-27-07, 04:45 PM | My CE Incubus Shadow Mage WAS really fun to write online, at least... *Cough* And so was my CG Tulani. Are there actual stats on an incubus, and if so, where? Or were the succubus stats used? I think an incubus would be very interesting to play or use as an NPC. ;) Any information is greatly appreciated. Concerning alignments, I don't think there is a single "best" one. Its all going to depend on the character's concept, and what type a character a specific player enjoys playing, or is willing to play. My favorite, however, is Chaotic Good. Its what I would consider myself to be, should the alignment system be applied to the real world. Sorry I'm late in posting. :P |
| Zevox07-27-07, 04:50 PM | Are there actual stats on an incubus, and if so, where? Or were the succubus stats used? I think an incubus would be very interesting to play or use as an NPC. ;) Any information is greatly appreciated. An Incubus is just a male version of a Succubus, so it uses a Succubus' stats. Zevox |
| Drew1369r07-28-07, 04:38 AM | LE because its fun to find those ways around everything NE because all my guy wanted was power and walked on many backs to get to it NG because even they can hire an assassin and get away with it alignment wise! |
| Blue_Hill07-28-07, 05:00 AM | Njaah, I like CG because like to play ranger character.. :D That alignment is closest to me, I thought.. I dislike all evil alignmets.... |
| Fillow07-28-07, 07:16 AM | For few weeks, I try to play a crinti assassin, who is neutral evil. And my DM always recall me about the evil side I do not play. I see no matter to be bad to bad/evil people but I cannot be bad to nice/good people ! I'm afraid that my crinti be the first crinti marauder to become good ! Help ! :D My other PC is a gnome, a NG ranger and I wont say my alignement in real life is Neutral good but it's the easier alignment to be played ! So It is the one I prefer. |
| Karsus the Mad07-28-07, 03:22 PM | Sounds more like your DM has an "absolute" ideal about morality, rather than an organic approach, or more accurately, has a human approach to morality:) "Evil" people can be kind. In my own opinion, the most "evil" of people are those that others (for one reason or another) feel have the overall "Good" at heart, but abuse it for personal gain. Obviously, my own gaming style won't help, as I removed the entire alignment system. I go for a customized version of the allegiance system in D20 Modern. Of course, that's purely my own opinion based on what you posted. I certainly don't want to offend your DM, or you:P |
| Dimensional_Drifter07-28-07, 06:33 PM | A question. Why do you all think the chaotic alignments are so popular? Perhaps society and individualism? the concept of "freedom" and the popular meanings of that word? I just am trying to figure out why so many attribute that alignment with being most like their own ethical and moral tendencies. |
| Fillow07-29-07, 03:38 AM | I think Chaotic is popular because players are convinced that it's a good way to do what they want, where they want. As you said DD, according to their mood. |
| Shildren07-30-07, 05:10 PM | In my opinion Chaotic Neutral is the eaisest to play and not screw up, especially as a fighter, thief, assassin, or any class the money and noteriety are the driving forces. No other alignment allows for such a broad range of decisions and responses... ie... While having a drink in the wandering willow Marieska lvl 4 ranger steps on my lvl 14 polished boot of ass kicking after calling my daughter a lich. I kill the ranger and use her hair to wipe the disrespect off of my toe... other example... A local magistrate witnessed my slaying of the ranger and decides that my ability to terminate with ext pred. would be helpful to rescue his 6 month old planar touched son from the Zentharim. He asks, He pays, I go be a hero. CN allows for lots of freedom and allows you to play with your heart and head at the same time. If a path is too dangerous, don't follow, it won't change your alignment if you run from a large contingent of red wizards and all you have is a halfling cleric and a human fighter for company leave them to die and hall ass... don't forget to pick up the fleeing gnome on the way by though... you might need a living shield on the way out... it's all part of CN..,..do what's best to keep you alive and rich |
| Dimensional_Drifter07-30-07, 05:39 PM | A lot of times, I find that players will define CN as randomness and play it with no moral or ethical restraints whatsoever. As likely to walk away from those in need than to help. Many times such people act as if their commiting wanton acts of violence is justified. CG, so that they have more freedom in the definition of what is "good" and CE, so that they can destroy and kill and pillage without thinking at all. In truth I find chaotic alignments are all interpreted wrong. Many that say: "I think I would be chaotic good in real life", might just fall into "Chaos = Cool" sort of like those who favor evil because "Evil = Cool" |
| Passivearmada07-30-07, 06:57 PM | I used to be a Chaotic Neutral fanatic, but now I'm kind of looking into True Neutral. TN, to me, means you have no certain code saying 'good' or 'evil'. You do what you want, but you're not so reckless and....chaotic. To me, it's Chaotic Neutral, only less chaotic and selfish. Some people will look at True Neutral as a wizard that dedicates his life to a 'balance.' To me, it can be a trickster that plays pranks every now and then, but will stand by his friends no matter what. But alignments can vary- not all Chaotic Neutral people will sacrifice their friends to get some treasure, be it life or gold. If I ever play Chaotic Neutral, that's how I'll do it- play your pranks, say what you want, but stand by your friends. |
| Dimensional_Drifter07-30-07, 07:17 PM | What I'm trying to say is that no one really does whatever they want, because the basic levels of morality say that even people that lack morals for the most part still will act to avoid punishment and such. Chaotic Neutral still is not total recklessness or I don't care about no one but myself nor is True Neutral. I think it is people seeing the alignments as a way to justify such behavior even when such a character would still limit his or her actions to a certain set of guidlines of what is right or wrong. Chaotic alignments can't possibly mean that everything is on a whim and that there is no structure at all to the character's thinking. The structure is more flexible is all. And for True Neutral, I don't think it is total disregard for good and evil except when it comes to those I care about. They would certainly prefer good over evil not only in concept, but in their own actions and decisions as well. Simply not as devoted to said moral leanings. |
| Karsus the Mad07-30-07, 07:26 PM | A question. Why do you all think the chaotic alignments are so popular? Perhaps society and individualism? the concept of "freedom" and the popular meanings of that word? I just am trying to figure out why so many attribute that alignment with being most like their own ethical and moral tendencies. For me personally, because of my complete and utter lack of an attention span, I typically go through the day leap frogging from thought to thought, project to project, and so forth, doing precisly what I feel like at the moment. I also lack a moral basis, which means that while I believe that Good and Evil exist, I'm simply incapable of believing that my own opinion on such is a universal truth, and I accept my views on Good and Evil as just that, my own views, with no more or less substance than others. Thus the reason I'm CN:P |
| Dimensional_Drifter07-30-07, 07:41 PM | Of course I'd like to believe there is structure to everything. Although Karsus the Mad, you may well be CN as far as alignments, which one really can't apply to life entirely, go. I'm simply believe many pick chaotic alignments for their characters so they feel they aren't accountable for as much. However for those who feel they fit chaotic alignments with their own personalities, such as a few that said "I think chaotic good fits me the best" I think most should reevaluate the patterns in their behavior and find that chaos is a lot more rare than they think. Or at least misunderstood. |