Alignments Definitons

[Krisaga]

Lawful evil is where it's at. Why yes, I am a fist officer. No, beating a child isn't strictly against the law, why do you ask? Carry on.

[matnow]

yey i am CE
though sometimes I act like a NE
but as someone said it is only a tip how you can behave, not a strict rule we have to follow
ofc its obvious that CE character will not spread love and peace

[g1megatron]

[DrowHowYouLikeMeNow]

It seems like I misunderstood Lawful good. I could have sworn a lawful good character hates to break the law.

[Rasael]

Yes but there are different laws with different priorities. There is Natural Law, Civil Law, Penal Law, Religious law. Which ones you prioritize don't affect how lawfull you are unless you are absurdly twisting the law to meet your own ends beyond how far it can reasonably be twisted.

I would argue though that it is not murder to "kill" an Undead person... or is it?

[SandTrout]

There is another version of True Neutral that is somewhat difficult to pull off. One can be Neutral by being good and benevolent in some cases and evil and cruel in others.

This is typically associated with Chaotic Neutrals, but this does not actually require any bias towards order or chaos, as such a character may be extremely consistent personally, but be opposed to outside authority, or vice-versa where they always follow the law, but when the law does not apply, they act on whim.

I call this means of playing a True Neutral "sum of the parts Neutral" because while they do good or do evil without some desire to create balance, the end result is neither a net good or net evil. Similarly, in some aspects they may be very Lawful, while in others they fit strongly into the Chaotic category.

The trick to this is not being contradictory to the point where you're considered schizophrenic. In my experience, it is not a version of the alignment that is typically planned for, but achieved more or less by accident or as the result of a character concept.

[Aelcar]

Personally, I have a particular vision of N/E that I often employ in my RP. I tried in the past the N/E that kills everyone for his own advantage, but it's a bit detrimental for your companions' nervous system (even OOC). In the last years (and my Drow is following this philosophy), my N/E characters tend to be detached from the world in their quest for power, and definitely devoid of any morality: they will not go around killing people, or backstabbing companions for a magic item: the will just pursue their goals, and if there are children to set on fire or puppies to kick, so be it...

So, the result is: my character will probably walk away ethereal from an attack, or teleport away (and maybe planning to kill the opponent later, after careful preparation..) as easy as he will sacrifice a whole orphanage worth of kids for a phylactery...both times, he wont smile or be angry...or feel anything at all .

[omnilicious]

he wont smile or be angry...or feel anything at all .

The way of the sociopath (actual definition of the term is unable to feel - goes to extremes to be able to feel. Most of the time fails at finding love, and finds violence is an easier way to feel - murder/mayhem) A good NE if you maintain not caring about feeling. CE if you want to feel but can't/don't know what feeling actually feels like.



Stated above with the OP was that Lawful meant following the law. Obviously wrong since LE generally means organized law breaking ie: Assassins.


Being good is not a "leaning" or a "direction" It means being good. This means personal sacrifice to help others. If you give the guy at the entrance to bel-air a dollar, you're still neutral... If you go out of your way to give your time to a homeless shelter (on a regular basis for no gain), you are good. Being good is being active in improving the lives of others, less fortunate or not (it could mean that you help enable your rich friends dreams by supporting him with your own skills).

Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic aren't strict at all. They're definitely leanings.
Lawful is following a code. The code could be anything from a paladin's code of ethics, the law (the perfect guard is LAWFUL NEUTRAL, not GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!) or any set of rules/ideas/oaths/etc. that you might think of. Neutral is being a paragon of your alignment (just remove "neutral" from the start of the alignment and be that alignment). Chaotic is being a teenager of that alignment. No joke, Chaotic alignments are hilarious and my favorites.

Being Good and Evil are strict. Neutrality is far more complex because it often has leanings to one or the other, but never goes out of it's way to be an extreme, though it can choose to be one or the other in an attempt to maintain balance.

It's hard to say one persons thought on alignment is right. Follow your gut .

[Xanfyrst]

Lawful Evil = Abusing Law

[fury165]

The problem I have with some of the more detailed descriptions of the alignment system is that they quite often end up contradicting themselves trying to explain the different nuances. The Lawful Good descriptor is probably the most blatant, as it bounces between defining it as following lawful rule and a personal ethic (which is more specifically lawful neutral) more than once. I usually find it best to, instead of trying to define the alignments within a vacuum, to find a character from media (usually movies, for me) who best fits the archetype you wish to emulate, and then define the character within the alignment schema.

[bono_bob]

It seems like I misunderstood Lawful good. I could have sworn a lawful good character hates to break the law.

I been told many times I'm lawful good in real life, and we do hate to break laws. We hate stupid laws just as much if not more than a chaotic good person who has no regard for rules to begin with because laws are meant to protect people, not hurt them. Also understanding LG s ability to break the law makes mor sense in context of faith. They follow the divine holy rules above and first most before laws of the land. If the law of the land does not contradict their morale code, then they humbly submit. Well are supposed to at least, especially if they are a Paladin. After all, Torm didnt become the God of paladins by not humbly serving.

I still insist that in DnD, the best way to know the alignments is to look at the gods.

[Xanfyrst]

Lawful Good characters can quite certainly break the law, if they find it unjust. It's just the way they do it that may differ from what fx. a Chaotic Good character would do. CG characters are more likely to take up arms and scream revolution, while the LG would tend to try work it out peacefully with the authorities (unless it's a tyranny).

[VitalTouch]

Alignments are a wise players guide but a fools bible.

From first edition alignments were meant as a tool to facilitate role play and are not intended to be used as a straight jacket.

Being "good" doesn't mean you have to help every old lady across the road

Being "evil" doesn't mean you deliver petty insults from under the protection of guards and then congratulate yourself by stroking your cat.

Being lawful doesn't mean you can't sleep when you don't pay the parking fine on your cart.

Being chaotic doesn't mean you alternately sing the skol song late at night then run into a nunnery and pour soup in everyone's hair.

What I'm trying to say is that there is not ~set~ way of behaving just because you have an alignment, one player's version of LG maybe very different from another's, etc etc

[mireigi]

Alignments are a guideline for how a character is to be RP'ed overall. Shifts in alignment reflect the course your character takes throughout his/her life and generally have very little impact on the game in a mechanical sense. The only exception being those few classes who are restricted by alignment and must maintain or avoid a certain alignment on either or both axis.

Paladins are special however. If their actions cause them to shift towards Chaotic or Evil, they must attone in some way or risk losing their status as Paladins. In some cases, depending on their actions, they may lose their status as a Paladin for a while or permanently - even with attonement.

Monks may or may not be subject to the same rules as a Paladin, but only if their actions cause a shift towards Chaotic. However, it will largely depend on which order they belong to, if any.

Everyone else can gain and lose points on both axis without any severe penalties. Even an Anointed Knight, which require you to be Good, can drop from 100 points to 76 points through one action and still not suffer any consequences due to their class. As long as they stay within the Good alignment, they will be fine. What others think of them, however, may change drastically.

[Hitman Hard]

Just waiting to see more intelligent and relateable chaotic evil characters who aren't interpretated as monsters with poor planning/manipulation skills.