Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sovereign110 05-17-06, 04:53 PM	I have four players in my circle, and each of them is chaotic neutral. I don't have a problem with that, really, but I fear some or all of them might not have a good, clear picture on how to stay chaotic neutral and not venture into the realm of evil. The rogue in particular is a nasty PC to DM with. He pretty much loves to steal anything and everything. In any situation he's in he tries to get ahold of someone else's property, even if the situation is unfavorable to him (He's gotten caught twice already). He pretty much steals the standard fare of items (gold, trinkets, weapons and whatnot if he finds one and nobody's around). I don't think impulsive stealing like this is necessarily evil, but I'm not sure exactly where to draw the line. One instance that the players crossed the line (in my opinion) was when they were evacuating a town that had been overrun by demons. They witnessed the unsealing of five malevolent beings, and demons were able to cross from the Nine Hells into the mortal realm at that town. The PCs took a priest with them who was part of the unsealing ritual while they were leaving, but the priest was too shocked and depressed to give any information. So on the way, they threw him off the horse and shot him as they were riding away, effectively murdering the priest. I warned them that the act was considered evil, but I'm afraid that they're getting too much of a sense of freedom playing "chaotic jackass" characters. Any tips on how to keep them in line, or examples on what might be considered evil? The players are a rogue, sorcerer, bard, and fighter by the way.
Ankalagon 05-17-06, 05:10 PM	Asking for what people consider evil on here is like shouting ....waaahaaayyyyy bar room brawl. Personally I'd say your the judge. They have done something potentially world shakingly evil. On a given action keep a +1, -1 score (it must be major though) in relation to alignment shifts. IMHO Based on what you have said at the present point in time they are evil. Can they shift back to good before that party of Paladin's hunts them down. In my game you cannot do BIG acts of evil without BIG goodies coming to take a dump on your doorstep.
Sovereign110 05-17-06, 05:16 PM	They have done something potentially world shakingly evil. Oops, maybe I didn't make this clear. They weren't responsible for the unsealing itself, they just witnessed it.
Ankalagon 05-17-06, 05:41 PM	Oops, maybe I didn't make this clear. They weren't responsible for the unsealing itself, they just witnessed it. To a party of evil hunting Paladin's there's a seal broke, deomns on the loose and a Priest is dead. The so called heroes have fled the seen. A simple speak with dead will sort out who killed the priest. I reckon your party had better bend over and whip down the tweeds quick sharp coz they are gonna get the shaft. Seriously, IMHO it will teach them a lesson. CN is invariably an excuse to do as I please and the DM can't get me for it. When in truth, the game world should get them for their actions, not because a game mechanic says "CN" at the top of the character sheet but because they are not the only force of good.
Sguss 05-17-06, 05:50 PM	The Vile Book of Darkness (quoting from memory here) adheres that the witnessing of pure evil without taking steps to prevent it is an act of evil - especialy (and noted in this same page I am remembering) the summoning of evil fiends (devils, demons). Now, if the party was unable to help - that's one thing. If, the world they venture in is over run with "good" and most specifically Lawful Good, then I could see some room there (though I wouldn't involve myself in the debate). What concerns me is that they took the priest, then when they couldn't extract information kicked him off the horse, etc. However, that's arguable too. What I would do is look at in the light of this: - did they not act out of understanding what was going on? If, so then it is not an evil action. - did they not act out of not wanting to get involved? If, so if they were good, I would consider that a slide towards neutrality if not evil. They could argue back that they are "neutral" but then I would balance that out with their perspective in the world - as in was it neccessary for these demons to be summoned or did it upset the "balance"? - did they not act out of enjoying the show? If, so then BAM. They just slipped into the realm of evil whether they like it or not. It sounds to me like your players see CN as "I can do whatever I want, without reprecrussions" alignment. Now, if this is how you view this alignment as well, then there is nothing you can or should do. If, however this is not how you see this alignment then I would have a heart to heart with the players before the next gaming session and explicity tell them how you will be weighing their alignment. Personally I take on the view that a CN is the epitome of "individual freedom" and views both lines of good and evil as extreme measures. Whether or not he gets involved for one side or the other is dependent on how that reflects on his individual freedom and of those around him. He takes this same kind of viewpoint towards Lawfulness, which he sees as the system taking away his individual rights and freedoms. IMO if the players just watched the summoning and did nothing to prevent this from happening, this is a mode of extreme evil and I would penalize them with a drift toward the evil axis. In any case, you can still disipline them through the use of a party of Paladins who mistake the players as the culprits. If you use this strategy you can play it off a couple of ways. Examples: 1) If the Paladins come across the players and start the fight, then the players are defending themselves, not an evil deed. 2) If the Players attempt to ambush the Paladins without seeking a diplomatic resolution, then this is an evil deed. 3) If the Demons get involved, then the Paladins will turn towards the Demons. Now depending on which side the players fight on not only determines their innocence but also whether their alignment shifts. Running away to leave the Paladins to their fate I would consider an evil act (though probably the smartest one) - especially if the party is powerful enough to turn the fight into the "good guys" side. I would use this above scenario over the course of the next session or two after having the sit down talk about alignments. This way your players will have an opportunity to affect their alignment and make descisions on what you all discussed earlier.
Lincoln Hills 05-17-06, 06:03 PM	The problem here is that you're presenting "heroic battle" and "epic quest" threads, when all your players really want to do is hurt people, steal valuables, and break furniture. Next week, tell 'em you're switching over to an Old West campaign (you can fake up some rules with d20 Modern, I'm sure) and they all get to play the Born-To-Be-Hanged Gang. Since they seem to want to play in that style, you'll be saving yourself a lot of trouble. (Oh, you could spend an hour debating alignments, pointing out how unpleasant their carefree lifestyle will be once a Duke of Hell is ruling the entire kingdom, and so forth - but it won't really do any good. They'll be listening to the voices in their head instead of you.)
Insanit 05-17-06, 06:14 PM	or you can give them all helms of opposite allingment ;)
Grunj 05-17-06, 09:47 PM	I feel your pain. CN is the alignment of choice for most of my players, too. I define the alignment as "self-centered bastard," where the players think primarily only of themselves. They are unlikely to help others unless there is something in it for them, although they are not actively malicious. They frequently have a problem with authority figures and probably aren't very good at keeping commitments or promises. For an iconic example of Chaotic Neutral, look at Han Solo in Star Wars, or at least the public image he tried to convey. I also thought Kevin Costner's character in Waterworld did a pretty good Chaotic Neutral.
Milandros 05-17-06, 10:08 PM	Ah, CN characters who act like complete immoral monsters - this is not exactly the first time this has come up... :) Usual disclaimer: this is an alignment issue, it's almost impossible to separate personal opinion so what follows contains some. Say "my grandfather" rather than "the NPC priest". Is it an evil act now? You betcha. Murder is evil, killing without cause (other than "I want to" or "it'd be fun!") is evil. This one act may not be enough to damn them, but it's a pretty good indication that they're on a very slippery slope indeed. The good/evil axis is separate from the Law/Chaos one. CN is not less moral than LN. It does not do more horrible things, nor does it hurt more people. If it does, it becomes CE. CN is not "consequence free". It's more the "rebel without a cause". As a neutral character for good/evil, it would mean that the PC doesn't go out of his way to help people unless there's some advantage for him in it, but generally won't hurt people either. It doesn't mean "does equal number of good and evil acts". Saving the princess from the dragon (good act) and then gang-raping her to death (evil act) does not mean your character is neutral! As for "chaotic", chaos/law should really be thought of as chaos/order. It's a common misconception that alignment/Law is to do with society/law. While a society's laws (i.e. a set of social codes and behaviorial rules enforced through threat of punishment) are by their nature Lawful, the reverse is most definitely not true. A master assassin who carefully studies his target for weeks, plans meticulous escape routes, has perfect covers and documentation, follows a set of rules and guidelines to the letter and never gets sloppy is Lawful Evil - even though he's breaking multiple laws on murder, robbery, etc. One doesn't have to be chaotic to break the law. So they're basically teenagers - rebellious (chaotic) without really knowing what they're rebelling against or in favour of (neutral). Chaotic Stupid is really just CE under "I don't want to get thumped by paladins" rulebending.
Milandros 05-17-06, 10:13 PM	For an iconic example of Chaotic Neutral, look at Han Solo in Star Wars, or at least the public image he tried to convey. I also thought Kevin Costner's character in Waterworld did a pretty good Chaotic Neutral. The image Han tried to convey, perhaps yes - though that old "heart of gold" thing makes him good, underneath :) Another good example is James Dean. "what are you rebelling against?" "Whatever you've got". That whole rebel-without-a-clue thing describes CN quite well. Unguided, not malicious, pain-in-the-butt. Romeo from Romeo and Juliet would be another possible example - emotionally guided, rebelling against both his own family and the local authorities. On a more extreme level, there's Q fom Star Trek - playing with species for his own amusement, but not actively hurting them himself.
Nani? 05-17-06, 11:56 PM	The crew of the Serenity is a mostly Chaotic (tending toward good) group that are not annoying teenagers. You just don't have much respect for the established order and you have good reasons for feeling that way. As for running a CN campaign, you should include bank robberies, banditry, looting etc. Have them break into the paladin's temple and steal his armor and if your really good seduce the cleric. All the best, Nani?
Fend 05-18-06, 12:23 AM	Throwing the preist of the horse - thats chaotic neutral Shooting him - thats chaotic evil My party has 2 CN Characters in it and they play it nicely, tho one has started being more evil. One is a Short Blind Staff fighter who acts like the Crazy little old dude out of the anime "Wicked City" except hes blind. The other is a Cliche' of Fabio complete with the spanish flee dance, whos completely subsumed by his own ego and for somereason always seems to survive. They play chaotic neutral just fine tho :)
celtredleg 05-18-06, 01:47 AM	To a party of evil hunting Paladin's there's a seal broke, deomns on the loose and a Priest is dead. The so called heroes have fled the seen. A simple speak with dead will sort out who killed the priest. I reckon your party had better bend over and whip down the tweeds quick sharp coz they are gonna get the shaft. Seriously, IMHO it will teach them a lesson. CN is invariably an excuse to do as I please and the DM can't get me for it. When in truth, the game world should get them for their actions, not because a game mechanic says "CN" at the top of the character sheet but because they are not the only force of good. Glad to find something we can agree on. I dont punish players. The world reacts to them in the manner it really would. So you do good things, many people like you and will help you. Do nasty stuff, and there are those who try to hammer you. Just because the PCs dont have a pally doesnt mean there are none in the world. I have to say I have seen way more evil done by CN than by CE. Not sure why, other than they think there are no consequences.
Ankalagon 05-18-06, 04:07 AM	Glad to find something we can agree on. Hiya :pint:
Dyrwen 05-18-06, 04:17 AM	Beyond reprecussions via authorities, "evil" acts aren't always a troublesome occurence, I'd say. Although if you've a strong religious/god element in your campaign, I'd say there are quite a few reprecussions that can easily be enacted on each individual within a certain amount of time. The CN rogue in one of my games ended up dying due to not paying attention to his hps, so when he got to death a god of LG alignment found him and gave him quite the talking to.. leading him to a new alignment merely upon death. Although it seems rather difficult to change a characters alignment without killing them, perhaps asking what each person values as a character would be a good place to start. The CN bard I play with ended up becoming CG when she got an apprentice to look after and care about. Generally speaking there are things one can try to hold up and make more appealing to alter their alignments to your choosing, but perhaps you'd rather let them try what they will to remain as they are. Personally I'm rather paranoid as the last CN person in my party, since death will result in becoming CE and in-game there isn't anyway to change me around, being a wild mage and crazy-etc, but there is a value in staying alive, so avoiding evil acts has become a way to avoid falling too far. Defining values on a character-personality level may be the best bet, since I know being told "You die, you'll come back evil" (ooc) in a game makes me think I shouldn't do evil acts because it'll probably end up in my demise soon enough, and when I come back I'll have some trouble not killing off party members, heh. Just some ideas there, working off my own experiences with the realm of CN and all.
Gilean 05-18-06, 07:17 AM	The rogue in particular is a nasty PC to DM with. He pretty much loves to steal anything and everything. In any situation he's in he tries to get ahold of someone else's property, even if the situation is unfavorable to him (He's gotten caught twice already). He pretty much steals the standard fare of items (gold, trinkets, weapons and whatnot if he finds one and nobody's around). I don't think impulsive stealing like this is necessarily evil, but I'm not sure exactly where to draw the line.Sounds like an amazing PC. A proactive PC, one that creates his own trouble with little prodding is a gift. Just throw folk who want to use him (for robberies and such) and discard him afte that; the player will probably have lots of fun, and you only need to twist the other PCs in the events.Any tips on how to keep them in line, or examples on what might be considered evil?Is there some particular reason for why they should not be evil? Nitpicks: The characters, not the players, have an alignment. Usually, devils inhabit the 9 Hells, while demons frolick in the Abyss. In standard cosmology, that is. This is also very well said:The problem here is that you're presenting "heroic battle" and "epic quest" threads, when all your players really want to do is hurt people, steal valuables, and break furniture. Next week, tell 'em you're switching over to an Old West campaign (you can fake up some rules with d20 Modern, I'm sure) and they all get to play the Born-To-Be-Hanged Gang. Since they seem to want to play in that style, you'll be saving yourself a lot of trouble. (Oh, you could spend an hour debating alignments, pointing out how unpleasant their carefree lifestyle will be once a Duke of Hell is ruling the entire kingdom, and so forth - but it won't really do any good. They'll be listening to the voices in their head instead of you.)Especially the lower part.
Nani? 05-18-06, 08:38 AM	Throwing the preist of the horse - thats chaotic neutral Shooting him - thats chaotic evil They play chaotic neutral just fine tho :) Shooting them could be neutral or even good, if the motive is to prevent torture , end suffering. Killing a cleric who is about to taken by a demon army who would make him "suffer" could be seen as an act of mercy.
Arquinsiel 05-18-06, 09:41 AM	Chaotic stupid to be cliched about it. So the priest is in shock and depressed. Later he won't be. They're not even smart enough to carry the corpse for a little speaking with dead so hey, chaotic evil all the way I say, it's immediate gratification with no thought for their own future needs. Textbook.
Someone 05-18-06, 01:13 PM	What was the last chaotic thing the PCs did? CN characters should be noted more for their chaotic behavior, not their good/evil behavior. Did they flaunt a local law? Did they say "to heck with plans, lets do this!" or "I tire of holding back the infinite horrors of the abyss, let someone else deal with it..."? A bit of advice I give whenever one of these types of threads come up is that it doesn't mean a thing what they have written on the character sheet. The PC can't wake up in the morning and say "I'm going to be NG (or whatever) today". Its a character's actions that set their alignment. And the player should be thinking of what the character want do, not what they themselves want to do and/or get away with.