Everyone I've talked to had their own interpretation for alignments. I want to settle this. The scenario is
"A warrior walks into a new town..."
How does that warrior act for each alignment?
Depends on character of the warrior.
Lawful Evil doesn't quite make sense to me. Laws usually protect little man and all this, taking advantage of them is usually against spirit, if not letter. And if you set laws yourself, what's the difference from chaotic?
>>45661536
>Laws usually protect little man
You don't really believe this, right?
>>45661467
>Everyone I've talked to had their own interpretation for alignments.
Therein lies the flaw in alignments. The "it's useful shorthand" argument falls apart because no can agree what it's shorthand for.
The Alignment system only works when good and evil are objective cosmic forces.
Therefore, the confusion comes from fucking shitty roleplayers who try to apply it to systems where it physically cannot make sense.
>A warrior rides into town. He burns down the church, slaughters the peasants, hangs them up as a warning to others, plunders what little riches remain and goes on his way.
This character can be pretty much ANY alignment, because the only thing that matters in this scenario is his god and the god of the population (good/evil) and whether or not he does this often, or is otherwise forbidden by his own code of conduct. (law/chaos)
Reminder that there is absolutely nothing wrong with being chaotic evil
>>45661467
according to his personality, of which the alignment is a very broad and soft descriptor
>>45661536
I am the state.
>>45661536
>Laws usually protect the little man
Kek
Here's how I've always approached it:
Lawful Good
Warrior seeks the town authority and gives his services.
Lawful Neutral
Warrior seeks the largest crowd and gives his services.
Lawful Evil
Warrior seeks the town gang and gives his services.
-
Neutral Good
Warrior waits for any authority to ask for his services.
Neutral
Warrior waits for any person to ask for his services.
Neutral Evil
Warrior waits for any criminal to ask for his services.
-
Chaotic Good
Warrior forces his services onto any authority he sees.
Chaotic Neutral
Warrior will force his services onto any person he sees.
Chaotic Evil
Warrior will force his services to any criminal he sees.
>>45661704
Are you fucking high? This makes no sense and is completely fucking stupid
>>45661536
A Lawful Evil character bends the law but avoids breaking it, either because he answers to an higher authority, has a code that's amoral but strict and consistent, or generally sees value in specific lawful things, like civilization, law, honor, etc... even if the system he works with is injust (think your generic evil empire).
That doesn't mean that they can be trusted, but that they're comfortable enough with lawful means that they don't need to ignore them to be assholes.
If they're the ones in charge, they generally assume that their own interest and the lawful ideals they espouse coincide.
>>45661467
Alignments are stupid and you should stop using them.
Is Dr. Kevorkian good or evil? The answer of course is that it depends, but D&D says "uhhhh dunno w/e GM is feelin' lol"
>>45661467
>How does that warrior act for each alignment?
This is one of the universe's great mysteries, anon. And no one can every truly know the answer.
>>45661467
Whatever fits his personality.
A Character is more then a walking embodyment of his alignment.
You have Outsiders for this kind of 2-dimensional cardboard cutouts.
>>45661970
Characters can CHANGE alignments, you know.
>>45661660
Until you graduate high school, of course.
>>45661467
I have a better scenario.
"An innocent man stands to be executed..."
How does each alignment react?
>>45661536
A lawful evil man buys out the land under the peasants through some loophoke and has them removed. Evil as fuck, but completely sanctioned by law.
>>45662101
Lawful Good - Call for a retrial, work to have the corrupt judge removed within the confines of the law
Neutral Good - Boo and hiss at the execution, then ultimately do nothing because you're boring.
Chaotic Good - Orchestrate a daring rescue the day of the execution
Lawful Neutral - Watch the Execution, don't get involved
True Neutral - Doesn't even show up, doesn't care
Chaotic Neutral - Remember that this is why we're Chaotic Neutral.
Lawful Evil - You probably set those whole thing up, if not you're noting the person who did as a potential threat
Neutral Evil - "Hey can I help out?"
Chaotic Evil - Rig the rope so his neck doesn't snap and he suffers even more.
>>45661467
>Everyone I've talked to had their own interpretation for alignments.
So you are actually AWARE of the issue between discussing alignments yet you actively choose to be retarded about it.
The answer is "Who ever is currently DMing has the right interpretation for that particular game. If you disagree, GM your own then you will be right."
>>45661704
Warrior is shorthand for slut in this setting.
Do good warrior-chan, service them.
>>45662236
Bretty good.
>>45661467
>settle this
>alignment
I gift you with 40 of the toppest keks.
>>45661467
>LG
Takes a piss at the inn and flushes.
>NG
Takes a piss on a thirsty plant.
>CG
Takes a piss on the door of the corrupt mayor's office.
>LN
Takes a sit down piss in the inn.
>TN
Pisses his pants.
>CN
Takes a piss in front of a crowd of people.
>LE
Takes a piss all over the inn bathroom, then complains about the mess.
>NE
Pisses into a vial, then gives it to a beggar.
>CE
Pisses in the beggar's face.
>>45662591
Dammit, now I have to pee.
>>45662591
>Takes a sit down piss in the inn.
Now come on this is the best way to pee!
>>45662236
eh, neutral good would be the kind to just up and save him, chaotic good would incite a riot to not only save the man, but to hang the hangman/judge
chaotic neutral would probably do the same thing, but not for the sake of saving the man, just for the riot
>>45661467
I like alignment at characterr creation as a statement of how the player intends to play the character.
And GMs who say "NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT IT'S AGAINST YOUR ALIGNMENT" are doing it wrong. You just tell the player that in case they aren't aware, raping the infant prince for funsies is a Chaotic and Evil act, and if they do lots of/and or big Chaotic Evil things, you change their alignment in your notes.
Now, of course, there's no need for alignments in games where Good/Evil/Law/Chaos aren't cosmic forces, but it's handy when you have things like a +5 Anarchic Unholy Flail.
>only nine possible courses of action
Choke on goat semen and die.
>>45661536
The word "law" as used in lawful evil has little to do with written law. It's more about a personal set of morals.
>>45661467
LG: He respects any local ordinances, is more likely to be polite and kind to his fellow men, and otherwise goes about his business
NG: He probably kowtows to any local ordinances once reminded, is more likely to be polite and kind to his fellow men, and otherwise goes about his business
CG: Is probably annoyed by any local ordinances of a relevant nature keeping him down and might ignore them if doing so doesn't threaten to cause too much of a scene, is more likely to be polite and kind to his fellow men, and otherwise goes about his business
LN: Respects and follows all local ordinances implicitly and otherwise goes about his business.
TN: Basically goes about his business with no special care or notably nonstandard behaviors
CN: Does NOT like it if the local ordinances are "invasive" or the like and will probably ignore them unless implicitly or explicitly threatened and otherwise goes about his business
LE: Probably follows the letter of the law or otherwise behaves in an organized fashion, is more likely to be a selfish git, and otherwise goes about his business.
NE: Doesn't care about the law but isn't bothered by it, is more likely to be a selfish git, and otherwise goes about his business.
CE: Chafes at outside authority, is more likely to be a selfish git, and otherwise goes about his business.
You probably won't tell by looking at them.
>>45662948
>And GMs who say "NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT IT'S AGAINST YOUR ALIGNMENT" are doing it wrong. You just tell the player that in case they aren't aware, raping the infant prince for funsies is a Chaotic and Evil act, and if they do lots of/and or big Chaotic Evil things, you change their alignment in your notes.
This 100%
>>45661536
>Laws usually protect little man
>>45662591
Are you taking the piss?
>>45661467
>Lawful good:
Helps any he encounters who are in need of aid, unless it would conflict with the laws and/or his personal code.
>Neutral Good:
Helps any he encounters who are in need of aid, and follows laws when they do not conflict with his good nature.
>Chaotic Good:
Helps any he encounters who are in need of aid, and completely ignores laws other than as an inconvenience as he has no respect for them.
>Lawful Neutral:
Follows the laws and/or his personal code while acting in self interest, although not at the expense of others when possible.
>Neutral:
Follows self interest, although not at the expense of others.
>Chaotic neutral:
follows self interest, but has no respect for laws and rules, especially when breaking them will help him without directly harming others.
>Lawful Evil:
Follows self interest with no respect for the cost to others, respects laws and/or has a strong personal code
>Neutral Evil:
Follows the optimal route of self interest, respecting laws as needed, and breaking them when advantageous. Only his own life and success matter.
>Chaotic Evil:
Follows self interest with no regard to the cost to others, has no respect for laws especially when they get in the way of his plans and enjoys having the power to ignore them.
For PF/3.5
>>45661467
Walking into town is too vague a scenario. The Chaotic Evil character likely just does nothing. What motivates him to act here if all that's going on is the simple act of moving from point A to point B?
>>45661467
>LG
...and crosses the road at the crosswalk, because crosswalks make traffic more organized and safer.
>NG
...and crosses the road at the crosswalk if it's nearby, or jaywalks if he's in a hurry and he's CERTAIN not to cause an accident by doing so.
>CG
...and jaywalks once he's sure that he won't cause an accident, because who gives a shit about crosswalks?
>LN
...and crosses the road at the crosswalk, because it's the law.
>N
...and crosses the road at the most convenient place, as long as he won't be seen by the guards or get someone hurt.
>CN
...and jaywalks because fuck your rules, pig.
>LE
...and crosses the road at the crosswalk when he's sure that the guards can see what a responsible citizen he is.
>NE
...and crosses the road where he feels like it, chuckling if he gets someone else hurt.
>CE
...and jaywalks, pushing an old woman into traffic.
>>45661467
Alignments, in my experience, just generalize character to ease play. They don't define a character's actions, but are more of a guideline to help visualize their moral outlook/personality. It is helpful when getting the gist of monster race/civilizations without getting bogged down in backstory.
>>45661732
Show your work anon. How does it make no sense/stupid?
>>45661536
There are no actual lawful evil characters, there are just evil characters who still have SOME scruples, or evil characters who exploit existing institution and power relations to their own ends ends. These archetypes don't really have much in common, and neither is meaningfully distinct from Evil or Chaotic evil.
>>45664229
Well for a start it seems to equate goodness with authority and neutrality with demagoguery, which doesn't make sense on any level.
What alignment would a person have if they did evil things but for the good of mankind
Like Dr doom for example
>>45661536
You can break all the laws of the land and still be lawful evil as long as you follow a strict personal code. A Mafia boss might be lawful evil, for example, compared to a chaotic evil street thug. That said, I think the whole system is pretty dumb and falls apart under scrutiny.
>>45664392
Evil
>>45661467
Terrible example, since a chaotic evil, lawful good, and neutral warrior may act entirely the same. It depends on their motives and why they're good or evil.
>>45664408
The "personal code" nonsense doesn't get you anywhere, logically speaking, especially since a personal code and whimsy are totally identical motives. Unless you use telepathy, you could have literally all of the characters in a campaign be lawful or chaotic and it would change nothing.
>>45663471
They do, its objectively the case. In an anarchy, might makes right, period. A ruler unrestrained by law is by definition a tyrant. The only time society can be anything other than rule by the strong is when laws come into play.
>>45664392
Deluded Evil, or possibly just Disingenuous Evil.
>>45664351
"Lawful" is equated with the institutionalized (not minor police or criminals, but the big ones that last generation to generation, etc) power structures. The state and "mafia" are the two pinnacles of authority.
The good/evil determines which of the two is adhered to. State = good, majority = neutral, mafia = evil.
"But what if you're in Mordor?"
Yes, a Paladin would be Evil, but still Lawful if he joined that realms "Mafia / rebel group".
Who you are is determined by your environment. When your environment changes, your labels change.
The environments are pretty simple. You have your core/home base that determines your alignment (usually some sort of state), then the off shoots that you battle against ("mafia", criminals, etc) or join up with to fight the state.
>>45664392
Lawful or Neutral evil.
Lawful if it's part of an organization. Neutral if it's something he does, but isn't committed to.
>>45661536
The idea is that there is no "spirit of the law". Lawful Good characters use laws to do good things, and take advantage of loopholes and ambiguity to do so. Lawful Evil characters use laws to do evil things, and take advantage of loopholes and ambiguity to do so.
There's a lot of leeway with legal systems for both good and ill, and a pro Lawful player will know how to use it. But both good and evil Lawfuls recognize that the laws of society give them the power to do it.
Does that make sense? It does in my head, a little less so on paper.
>>45661704
The problem with this is that it's completely submissive. Good characters may want to check in to see who needs help, but Evil characters are very often self serving.
What if an Evil character decides to rob a house? Who is giving service to besides himself?
>>45662591
I know what this is
>>45665257
>completely submissive
How people play varies greatly. But a sandbox / unstructured D&D seems to aimless. And the issue you brought up applies here.
My version of D&D is story driven. You're the protagonist, and you have a job to do. You have a core path, with winding offshoots that eventually bring you back onto the path. Being "submissive" guarantees you being pushed forward though.
A good character can look for help, and that would be the Chaotic Good in my example. Looking to help someone other than the town authorities, or the town mob. Like a barkeep (doing good chaotically, because you can).
A character that just wants to rob would be servicing himself. Which means Neutral Evil if he's robbing out of necessity (waiting until he needs to rob, or rob a specific thing/place), or Chaotic Evil (robbing the first chance he gets, almost any thing/place at random).
Your example thing is stupid OP so I added a bit.
A warrior walks into town and comes across two theives mugging a woman...
>LG
...the warrior incapacitates the theives and calls the guards to arrest them. He brings the woman to a hospital in case she might be hurt and asks for nothing/denies any reward.
>NG
...the warrior calls for the guards and then incapacitates the theives.
>CG
...the warrior incapacitates the thieves and hints at a reward from the woman. He also takes some cash out of the theives pockets, after all they deserve it.
>LN
...the warrior calls for the guards (who quickly arrive) and offers a testimony in court. The guards tell him there won't be a trial as the theives were caught red-handed. The warrior then insists that the theives have a fair trial.
>N
...the warrior calls for the guards and leaves.
>CN
...the warrior mugs the theives and tries to swoon the woman.
>LE
...the warrior tells the theives they are absolute scum for mugging a woman. It should be a man instead, or someone who actually has a chance at defending themselves.
>NE
...the warrior joins the theives in the mugging and splits the cash.
>CE
...the warrior kills everyone and loots the corpses.
>>45661817
They have no problem exploiting the shit out of loopholes in the law and will happily hide behind technicalities.
LE are the jerk who use the rules to their own advantage. The sort of people who prefer exploits in games over straight up hacking.
Alignments are very broad descriptions.
A CE warrior could burn the town down and kick puppies, or he could just be a rude, selfish asshat.
A CE warrior watching a barfight could just laugh or he could throw a knife in, or he could join in and kill them all.
>>45665608
So LE characters spawn camp?
>"It's a valid strategy!"
>"It's not against the rules!"
>>45661704
What if he just goes to a hotel?
>>45665828
Neutral (Good, Evil, True Neutral is determined by his next actions).
Character does his thing until he's forced to do something for someone (or to someone)
If he decides to help town authorities at the hotel, he's Good. If he helps some local at the hotel, he's True Neutral. If he commits are crime in the Hotel, or joins a gang, then he's Evil.
>>45663333
I like it.
LG
Believes that laws, and orders from authority are to be followed and has a strong moral compass
NG
Only cares for what he/she believes is right, and this is what drives his/her motives. Authority is an influence and factor into his/her motives, but is secondary
CG
Does what he/she believes is right with no respect to authority
LN
Follows authority so long as it is not extreme, has a weak moral compass and will do good, and evil actions
NN
Goes with the flow, has no strong opinions for authority, or good/evil
CN
Doesnt care for authority, only looks out for number 1
LE
Takes authority, or uses authority for personal gain has no qualms doing anything so long as there is personal gain to be had
NE
Looks out for number one, but has no issues mugging that wealthy noble, or using the system for personal gain
CE
Fuck the police, fuck your shiny new armor
>>45661467
Hard to say without knowing their goals. Ultimately, all of them can probably be summed up with "Go to the tavern and get some booze"
NOT SO DIFFERENT ETC
>>45662591
>pisses his pants.
>>45663333
nice dubsquads
>>45664321
You can have Evil characters who believe in rigid order. Take a society of evil monks that operate like the Spartan warriors, terrorizing the surrounding villages into providing them with food and other resources.
>>45664498
This.
>>45664558
What are you talking about? Whimsy is unpredictable and intangible. A personal code is constant and definable.
Stop talking about alignment. You don't understand it at all.
>>45662065
Completely missed the point, try again.
>>45661467
The later editions of D&D seem to suggest that Good is unquestioning altruism where the character is prepared to give up his own life and happiness for the sake of others, even strangers, while Evil is ruthless egoism where the character is willing to sacrifice the lives of others to gain more power himself. Neutral in this case would be a character that does neither. Someone who refuses to make a slave out of himself or others.
Law and Chaos are much more badly defined, but in general a lawful character likes structure, order and traditions while a chaotic character doesn't. Unless they do, because a barbarian that takes pride in his tribe's chaotic traditions is still chaotic.
>>45661704
why does good equal serving authority?
why does law mean seeking out people?
Why does evil just mean criminals?
Why does chaos mean rape?
that is completely detached fro good/evil/law chaos
Good can oppose authority, and work with criminals
Evil can serve authroity, and fight criminals.
Your Good and evil are standard law and chaos. how d you mix that up?
Lawfulness has nothing whatsoever to do with seeking out people to offer services too. what does that have to do with lawfulness? thats just being proactive
Chaotic doesn't mean you stick your nose into other people's business. This just makes your chaotic a more extreme version of your lawful, instead of opposites. how do you do that and not realize the issue?
there's having your own interpretation then there's calling a spade a tuba.
D&D alignments are pretty awful.
>>45664229
>>45661704
LG
>Seeks to serve or uphold a legitimate authority that he views as just and good. If no such authority is present, he'll want to establish one.
LN
>Serves the legitimate authority, good or evil.
LE
>Uses laws and organizations to protect himself and to serve his cause. Lawful Evil characters are mob bosses, Cyberpunk CEO's and evil tyrants, for example.
NG
>Will strive to do most good he can, in any way he can.
Neutral
>Just leave me alone, man
NE
>Will use any means necessary to forward his own agenda. He will lie, murder and steal if that is needed, but can as well work with others and put up an act if it forwards his goals. Any relations they have are usually twisted in some way.
CG
>Doesn't care about laws when they protect evil or hamper the innocent. Chaotic Good characters might become vigilantes or rebels for the cause of good.
CN
>Chaotic Neutral characters do what they want, whenever they want, and only care about consequences when they are immediate and dire enough.
CE
>The hardest alignment to categorize, but basically the Joker.
>>45665015
. . . Wat. You seriously just said that *any* authoritative power structure is good by definition. That's fucking idiotic and actually fascist. A rebel paladin in Mordor is good because SAURON IS EVIL. In the alignment system good is based around altruism and willingness to help others whenever possible while evil is based on selfishness and willingness to hurt others to get what you want. The state doesn't literally define your moral character and morality is not whatever you like.
>>45661536
>what are the rupublicans in the USA.
Lawfull evil means you are willing to bend the laws and use them in your favour. Look at the multinational corporations that use semi-slave labour in swetshops. It's perfectly lawfull, but you wouldent call it good now would you?
>>45661704
>Lawful Good
>Warrior seeks the town authority and gives his services
Thats lawfull neutral
>>45662667
If you are a cucked mangina, maybe.
>>45672947
>cucked
maybe its me but i like it beter when we called everyone autists, cucked implys we are in a relationship and we bloody well know this shit is not true.
>>45661467
Alignment systems make a lot more sense when you replace the word evil with selfish.
>>45672899
>but you wouldent call it good now would you?
I would. Nike doesn't force people into their factories, nore do they chain their workers to the machines. People *choose* to work there because they earn more by doing so than they do by sowing rice.
>>45672947
Like all Lawful Neutral.
Any alignment interpretation has to make sense of objective alignment effects (such as Smite Evil). If you make alignment about what a person thinks of themselves, then it's very hard to accomplish that.
My standard interpretation is that the eight "outer" alignments accord with the ambitions of powerful extraplanar creatures. So if you're Lawful Good, it just means that what you're doing tends to further the goals of the Seven Heavens. Personality isn't a big deal: there are Lawful Good jerks, saints, and monsters, but they all get messed up by Unholy Swords because they're aligned against the forces that power such blasphemous weapons.
(Neutrals are a special case. They're not in favour of the Prime Plane being over-run by Outsiders, and act to play the invaders off against one another.)
>>45664616
When you introduce laws, you're not just removing "might makes right" you're just changing the definition of "might".
Might is no longer about how swoll you are, or how many swoll people you convince to listen to you, it becomes how many resources you have and how you translate that into power and personal gain. This exists in today's society just as it has for thousands of years.
>>45662667
>Now come on this is the best way to pee!
this
Why the hell not sit and relax instead standing like some horse?
>>45661467
Assumption: new town is mid-sized, warrior is low level and alone.
Lawful good - looks for job/someone to help, and tries to learn local law - and abides by it. Even if he has to be in local church by 1pm every sunday.. despite not believing in their local god.
Chaotic good - looks for job(that will help someone), but his own moral code is above the law.
Neutral good - looks for job that will help people, assumes that law will be typical/generic - aka Don't Be A Dick.
Lawful neutral - true bearuocrat, looks for oficial work, with proper contract made between him and his employer.
chaotic neutral - looks for the job that pays the best, dosen't care much about breaking law, but weighs consequences of breaking the law vs payout.
neutral - looks for least effort, highest payout, maximum safety job.
Lawful Evil - reads upon the laws, finds a loohole, uses it to extort money from people. or he goes bounty hunter mode for local crime syndicate(or looks for rebels, despite current regime being oppresive as fuck). Stays safe - the kind of dickhead that everyone hates, but no one can find any evidence of him breaking the law.
chaotic evil - join the most radical anarchist group, plans terrorist attacks. or starts the group.
neutral evil - takes the jobs that pays the most, hurting someone is a big plus.
in general: lawful works within confines of law
chaotic dosen't care about it - has his own moral code.
neutral(in this axis) - does what is safest(stays within confines of law, but will ingore retarded laws)
good looks for ways to help people, sometimes against his interest.
evil will go out of his way to hurt someone
neutral is lazy - maximizing payout/effort ratio
>>45677589
good example of lawful evil would be a noble, who extorts his peasants, but within confines of law - so even if king/his senior wanted to remove him from the post - there is no legal way to do it.
>>45661536
Lawful is misleading.
Order might be a more accurate concept.
Structure, order, stability, governance, hierarchy.
