What is your favorite alignment?
>>47472416
Unaligned.
Chaotic in general
>>47472432
Doesn't that mean you're an animal who has no capacity to understand the concept of morality?
Unprincipled.
>>47472474
Alignments have nothing to do with morality.
They are just vague descriptors.
>>47472474
It means you're a real, normal person.
>>47472514
Gr8 b8 m8
Lawful Evil or Chaotic Good
They're both fun to play for their own reasons to me.
Chaotic Good you get to be a 2coolf4school hero
Lawful Evil you get to feel like Light from death note, hatching plans to get more power without doing anything anyone can actually tag you for being completely evil.
>>47472416
out of context i like lawful neutral.
but my favorite types of characters are very human chaotic neutral pcs with personal life goals they strive for alongside the adventuring.
>>47472416
>Favorites:
Lawful Good, Chaotic Good, Chaotic Neutral
I really love playing CN characters, so I hate how it's basically considered the That Guy alignment.
>Least Favorites:
Lawful Neutral, Lawful Evil, True Neutral
>>47472494
Way I see it Alignments are the sum of a character's actions and the impact they have rather than their intent, motivations, or morals.
>>47472543
He's right if you're talking about anything before 3rd edition. Anything other than Neutral is extremism, plain and simple. Most characters given other alignments in 3rd, 4th, or 5th editions would only qualify as neutral in Basic or AD&D.
Neutral Good, Lawful Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, and Neutral Evil are shit and unnecessary.
Prove me wrong.
>>47472638
You want people to prove you wrong you're gonna have to go into depth about why they're "shit and unnecessary".
Ball's still in your court cause you never bothered to throw it.
>>47472672
First day on the Internet?
>>47472672
Protip: you can't
>>47472416
Lawful Good. Because playing the Big Damn Hero is still the most fun way to play the game.
>>47472727
>>47472727
I thought Mal from Firefly :D
>>47472745
>>47472416
Neutral evil or Neutral good.
Chaotic buttsex
>>47472727
>>47472745
>Lawful Good licenseless rider gets the shit kicked out of him and leaves the work for the real heroes
>Captain America ends up getting assassinated at the end of Civil War and goes against his own countries orders for personal gain.
>Optimus Prime ends up dying multiple times across multiple incarnations, including one time where he allowed himself to self-destruct because he killed virtual creatures to take out megatron.
So I guess LG is the alignment for weaklings and suckers?
I'll be over here when you eventually kill yourself in the name of the "greater good."
>>47472432
This
>>47472474
It means that you don't swing too far in either direction and aren't involved in the power struggle between the four axis of the multiverse.
You're not a stick in the mud or a lolsorandumb sperg and you're neither a pushover or an asshole.
You're just a person, and that's all anyone can ever be.
>>47473211
>hide blackguard threads
>ignore blackguard posts
>do not reply to blackguard posters
Lawful or good, but rarely lawful good.
>>47472416
Neutral because I decide whether my character gives a shit or not, whatever the situation.
Someone's on fire? Maybe I'll help out. Maybe I'll decide it's not my problem.
>>47472416
>using alignments
If I have to, I usually prefer to start True Neutral and drift towards a flavor of good or evil, depending on the circumstances of the game.
Barring that, Lawful Good is a decent second choice for most characters (of the "I am a highly honorable and principled person who strives for the betterment of other peoples' lives" variety)
>>47472781
Not using arbitrary 3x3 charts to template something as complex as a person's codes of morality and ethics. I mean, it's literally two-dimensional.
>>47473305
>LG paladin has to adhere to strict rules and impossibly high standards at all times, only to fall when he shows his flawed humanity.
>CE blackguard can kill, rape, and pillage to his heart's content and only get stronger the more debauchery he engages in.
>[good] spells only restore damage to creation if they're [sanctified] but are otherwise only good at damaging undead and demons.
>[evil] spells can damage the multiverse with each cast, meaning that the more casters and blackguards there are, the faster the universe ends.
>Paladins can fall and only sink into despair once they realize their god doesn't love them.
>Antipaladins can only become stronger the more evil they perform.
Only fools decide to go LG.
Don't fret, the 9 hells are always open to down-on-their-luck pallies in need of a new career, even on holidays.
>>47473423
Well played
>>47472638
Bertrand Russell is laughing at you from beyond the grave.
>>47473429
The entire point of the Good spectrum is doing the right thing even if it's the hard thing.
Especially if it's the hard thing.
That's an appealing angle for a lot of people.
>>47472593
This guy has good opinions.
True Neutral had been very appealing to me recently, but I like all alignments pretty much equally. I guess I tend to avoid NG and NE, but that's not out of any dislike for them.
>>47473480
No, being gratified and praised is what's appealing to most people.
Once you take away the medals and the accolades and their companions, most "LG" people will turn bitter and start listening to the dark whispers in their heads.
You'll find some exceptions to the rule but they are just that, exceptions. Even the brightest light fades once it runs out of fuel to burn.
Luckily, evil has no baggage to carry with them, we can do what we want and not have to deal with any of it.
>>47473755
I'm just gonna hope you're RPing and you're not actually this much of a nihilistic (and fairly naive) sociopath.
>>47473796
When you wear a fedora long enough the fibers burrow their way into your brain.
>>47472416
Lawful Neutral.
No idea why, I just enjoy playing a solid citizen-type.
>>47473818
I remember one of these threads where some guy talked about a player he knew who described himself as "Lawful Evil in real life".
>>47473796
Oh I'm sorry, when was the last time you heard of someone like Stalin backing down because their families were in danger?
Never, because proper evil is all about seeing what you want and taking it, regardless of whatever sort of repurcussions they might have on someone else.
You LG types will trade life, limb, and health to protect everyone from the big bad demons yet when you're lying on the cobblestone, bleeding out, cold and afraid and faced with the encroaching darkness of oblivion, you realize that all that hard work was for nothing.
Your death serves our purposes in the long run, because one dead paladin means one less obstacle standing between us and our goals.
There's millions of demons being produced every moment but there's only one paladin as dedicated as you that's produced in a lifetime.
Never too late to switch sides though.
>>47474013
>>47472416
>2016
>playong a system with alignments
>>47472608
>least favorite LN
>Favorite CG
pls
Lawful good for good alignments
true neutral for neutral alignment
lawful evil for evil.
I guess I would put Lawful Evil as my favorite overall, simply because thats my current characters alignment.
>>47472416
>playing a game with alignments
>acknowledging that alignments are still a thing
>D&D
>>47474013
>Evil fag
PERHAPS THE REASON YOU SEE FIT TO DIMINISH THE VALUE OF JUSTICE IS BECAUSE IT REVEALS THE WEAKNESS YOU YOURSELF CARRY INSIDE THAT SHRIVELED LUMP OF FLESH YOU DARE CALL A HEART.
>>47472416
If you're not Lawful Good get out of my hood
>>47472416
Lawful Good of course.
Chaotic good or chaotic neutral.
>>47475213
>>47475316
MY NIGGAS
>>47473469
Did Bertrand Russell write any books for D&D?
>>47473755
Honestly, my biggest qualm with Good characters is that the DMs I have played with have made it so much more incredibly profitable to be good rather than evil that you are almost forced to be good.
Being good rarely requires a major sacrifice for them, and almost always returns with some fuck huge awesome magic weapons and shit. Being evil means going contrary to the party, risking being killed, and rarely obtaining the good rewards.
I love playing evil characters, I usually go lawful evil. But it has been MUCH harder to play evil than good characters because the deck is always stacked so much harder against me.
I have no idea if this is always the case, but it has been over the DMs that I have had. It's pretty annoying.
I'll give an example of loot that came out in the last game I played
>A brand new character to our game is LG Paladin and gets a +3 holy sword with an extra 2d8 radiant damage and some extra damage against anything evil
>He gets this because reasons
>LE Warlock has been in the game since the start, does evil shit on the down low so as to avoid the notice of the other mary sue good characters in the party
>has been concealing his power levels pretty well so far
>never obtains any special magical loot or anything that can benefit him while the rest of the party obtains shit like the aforementioned Paladin got
Are my DMs just shit or is this how things usually go down for playing evil characters? Because it has been extremely off putting.
>>47475440I'm not sure libertarianism/ancapism is LG, and I say that as a very libertarian person myself
I mean there is the whole NAP thing and the idea that people can help eachother through charity without government intervention, but being critical of all authority, let alone anarchism, aren't very LG at all
More like NG/CG or NE/CE in some cases like le physical removal man
When I want to transition my characters from heroes to villains, I'll start them out as Chaotic Good. They will spend the entire campaign justifying their more and more ethically questionable methods as being for a good cause, until one day they cross the line and become Evil, all while retaining that sense that they are justified.
>>47475637
I generally hate most sport video games. Guess what I do? I don't play them.
Being evil in a mostly a good game is fucking annoying for everyone in involved. Also you're right, your GM is a shit for not slapping you and saying "no".
Final key point, you're evil, you're lawful evil. If you're going to do this than do it right. Don't worry about the gear, either make your own or better yet gather your own money to buy it. Evil is generally a shortcut through almost anything. Use it
>>47475702I don't know about that. A lot of libertarian principles rely on strictly enforced social rules. Lawful doesn't mean statist.
>>47473211
*teleport behind you*
"Hehe... too easy..."
>>47475316
I think Stannis is more LN.
>>47475731
There is no way to "do it right" is the complaint here.
>manifest evil
>3 overgeared paladins in the party automatically turn on you and kill the shit out of you
>try to do evil things
>DM won't let you half of the time
There have been no "shortcuts" available to me. We get gold, but when I try to find gear or commission gear or find anything that would be useful to me, it gets shut down. The best kind of shit I have been able to get was some +1 armor and a ring of protection. Defend that when the DM will toss around +3 weapons and armor and shit to people who just started the game and did literally nothing to earn them.
>>47472474
Morality is highly subjective and remains a construct of human socitety to render those you don't like unmoral. A child doesn't follow morality for it's actions, it must be punished and molded by it's parents and the society it lives in to conform to the mold that society considers normal and 'moral'. No thanks, I'd rather be free to make my own choices, unfettered by normality and other peoples judgement of right and wrong.
>>47475702
>>47475751I think the concept of libertarianism is pretty clearly neutral. It forbids harming others while at the same time doesn't require you to help those in need.
>>47475805
Then back to second point. Either your GM is an asshole, dumb, or they are trying to make your character turn over a new leaf.
There is also the chance that your GM thinks you have some grand evil plan thought out and he wants to protect the rest of the party.
Best and logical answer I can give you. Sit down with your GM and just ask what is really going on. Why did they let you play an evil character with a party filled with heroes? If he can't give you a decent answer then walk away.
>>47475805
Is he directly placing it in the characters hands, or what?
Now is the time to either take aside the DM like a responsible adult and discuss grievances, or petulantly smash the world while you still have the power to do so.
>>47472416
neutral good
>>47475864
This latest DM has been the most blatant, but it's been common across all 3 that I've had that it ends up being pretty hard to be evil and the rewards for being good are dramatically superior to anything you can get for being evil.
What I've really been trying to determine is if this kind of shit is normal or if I've just had some lame DMs. It appears to be leaning towards lame DMs.
>>47475873
In the previously discussed event, it was all but placed into his hands. The other 2 paladins were geared up with similar shit, but the new one was just new to the group. We walked into a room just after the new guy joined in, there was a sword hilt in a pedestal, and the new guy pulled it out and got it because "he was worthy." It felt pretty ridiculous.
Now that it sounds as if my DMs have just been shitty so far it makes me more inclined to just leave the game. I'm not going to throw a temper tantrum in game and start flinging spells around like an asshole for no reason, I'd rather just leave without a fuss instead of starting a shit storm. I'll just pull the guy aside before session next week and ask him what the deal is. I'm not really certain that he'll be mature about it, but if he's going to be a dick about it it's easier to just leave.
>>47472593
straight-up, yo. LN for life.
>>47475440
I'm no lolbercuck or anarkomemester and I resent the implication that I belong in the same moral category as them.
>>47475187
I have no need to devalue your naive notion of justice, your church does that role quite nicely.
You claim that we are evil and depraved while you burn villages and sodomize children.
You claim yourselves to be just, yet you've cornered the market of torture implements and gleefully use them on "heathens" who had the audacity to disagree.
You murder innocents and shun them from your light yet act surprised when we swoop in to give them purpose and an outlet to channel that rage and fear into vengeance.
You murder anyone you perceive as evil and never question why, because your church tells you that destruction is just when levied against the darkness.
Yet you'll still claim yourselves to be just and everyone whose lives you've ruined deserved it.
In truth, the only difference between you and I is that I won't waste time trying to justify my behavior or hide behind dogma to excuse my actions.
If I am hungry, I will feed.
If I am aroused, I will rape.
If I want something, then I will steal.
And I will never use my demonic roots to ever avoid claiming responsibility. I'm a monster and I love what I have become.
>>47472432
>Unaligned.
>>47473235
>It means that you don't swing too far in either direction and aren't involved in the power struggle between the four axis of the multiverse.
>You're not a stick in the mud or a lolsorandumb sperg and you're neither a pushover or an asshole.
>You're just a person, and that's all anyone can ever be.
So, Neutral?
>If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
>>47475757
*teleport behind you*
"Have to do better than that..."
>>47476405
good meme
>>47476405
Reminds me of when my LE mage was found out from the team paladin using detect evil at the worst time. Instead of fighting each other though, we ended up debating every once in awhile about the nature of morality and whether good and evil actually existed. And if it did exist, how well a paladin ability could really judge that.
>>47472638
>Neutral Good, Lawful Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, and Neutral Evil are shit and unnecessary.
Alignments are shit and unnecessary.
You singling those specific ones out just makes you a colossal faggot.
Prove me wrong.
>>47476426
Actually, it means that you can do anything you want without having to worry about fitting into some restrictive 3x3 block that forces you to either be a goody-goody or a puppy kicking SOB.
Sometimes you'll donate extra pocket change to the church, sometimes you'll kick a puppy in anger, sometimes you'll feel bad and nurse the puppy back to health, sometimes you'll adopt the puppy and train it to become an awesome hunting buddy.
Yet you'll remain unaligned and free to do whatever you want.
>>47473211
>So I guess LG is the alignment for weaklings and suckers?
Your rhetoric is tired and sad, little man.
see
>>47473407
>>47473183
Infinitely preferable to Lawful Buttsex.
>>47476556
>Superman
>Routinely causes millions in property damage
>Murdered a man in cold blood
>Took over the world in several what if scenarios, including Injustice.
>Can perform such LG actions as lobotomizing people when they prove to be too much to handle.
Superman is perpetually one step away from flying off the handle and murdering everything he loves.
>>47476528
>Sometimes you'll donate extra pocket change to the church, sometimes you'll kick a puppy in anger, sometimes you'll feel bad and nurse the puppy back to health, sometimes you'll adopt the puppy and train it to become an awesome hunting buddy.
So, Neutral then?
>Actually, it means that you can do anything you want without having to worry about fitting into some restrictive 3x3 block that forces you to either be a goody-goody or a puppy kicking SOB.
I see, you are one of "those" anons that have no idea what you are talking about.
Action dictate alignments, alignments do not dictate actions.
Also, "even Hitler was good with his dogs."
LG can commit a CE action and NE can commit a CG action.
Being aligned does not necessarily mean being 100% perfectly aligned constantly always.
>>47476405
FOOL THAT DWELLS WITHIN THE REALM OF THE MOST BASE BEASTS, HEED THESE WORDS: I AM A SERVANT OF THE SONG, A LITANY THAT THRUMS WITH WHAT OUGHT TO BE AND NOT MERELY WHAT IS.
JUSTICE IS NOT A TOOL OF THE PALADIN, NOR IS IT THE OBLIGATION OF RELIGION; IT IS MERELY THAT WHICH IS APPOSITE TO THE ONE WHO TAKES UP THAT HEAVIEST OF MANTLES. A WEIGHT WE BEAR WILLINGLY, FOR THERE IS A SONG OF LOVE THAT MOVES ME FAR MORE STRONGLY THAN YOUR CRY OF FEAR AND HATE.
I FIND YOU PITIABLE, THING OF FILTH AND DISGUST, FOR ALL YOU HEAR ARE THE GRUNTS AND HOWLS THAT ARE A POOR MIMICRY OF SOMETHING FAR GRANDER.
>>47476638
>>Routinely causes millions in property damage
meh.
Not saying the original comics didn't have lulsy stupid examples of this, but damage happens.
And just because nobody reads comics about superheros going back to literally mend fences, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
>>Murdered a man in cold blood
Whosits?
>>Took over the world in several what if scenarios, including Injustice.
So did your mom.
>>Can perform such LG actions as lobotomizing people when they prove to be too much to handle.
A LG government would be perfectly capable of doing the same thing and remaining LG.
Not all of LG is nice and pleasant.
>Superman is perpetually one step away from flying off the handle and murdering everything he loves.
Exactly the point.
Superman has the power to crush everyone and everything and is under extraordinary stress having to live in a world made of crystal and tissue paper, and hardly ever even lashes out a little.
>>47472416
Whichever alignment would best compliment the group, really.
I tend to gravitate to Neutral Good, though.
>>47476832
You are but one man standing against the rising tide of darkness paladin.
Your song won't save you and your words are merely that, words.
Words can convey a wide array of messages but in my centuries of life, I've made men such as you crawl on their knees and beg me for mercy.
Sometimes, I even convert them to one of my kind and bolster my ranks with their power, and let me tell you, a paladin is always the most interesting because once you've cracked through their ego, they're all merely men wrapped in steel and leather and furs and capes and years of forced programming made to drown out their humanity and replace it with the minds of soldiers.
I've seen their every memories, the first time they murdered an innocent on orders of their church, the first time they felt numb after confronting the evils of their church, the first time they killed again and told themselves "it's for the greater good."
They take to the darkness like a fish to water, in fact, they are happy when the process is complete because for the first time in their lives, they feel complete and total freedom, unshackled by the expectations of man and faith and allowed to act upon their instincts.
I'm sure that beneath that booming confidence, you're simply a child who was forced to grow up and forced to hide everything about yourself to life within the world you were born in.
Maybe one day I'll welcome you to the fold, I'll even let you feel as if you went down fighting a good fight.
>>47476937
>Not saying the original comics didn't have lulsy stupid examples of this, but damage happens.
It's not just the comics though.
In JLU, Superman and Captain Marvel (Shazam) destroyed an entire city just by fighting one another, this was also under the false assumption that Luthor was producing a bomb to detonate.
In Man of Steel, Superman and Zodd's fight destroyed the bulk of Metropolis and probably murdered millions of innocent people in the process.
In another JL episode, Superman was willing to let Brainiac assimilate Apokolips (I know I fucked the name up somehow) just because he was too clouded by anger to realize that allowing Brainiac to assimilate one of the most hostile worlds in the galaxy wasn't the best idea to make.
>Whosits?
Zodd
>So did your mom.
...okay?
>A LG government would be perfectly capable of doing the same thing and remaining LG.
So can a LE government.
>Not all of LG is nice and pleasant.
Then how is it LG?
>Superman has the power to crush everyone and everything and is under extraordinary stress having to live in a world made of crystal and tissue paper, and hardly ever even lashes out a little.
Except for the aforementioned times when he flew off the handle and caused millions in unnecessary damage and murdered people.
>>47473211
>Captain America ends up getting assassinated at the end of Civil War and goes against his own countries orders for personal gain.
I HAVEN'T SEEN CIVIL WAR YET FUCK
>>47476405
>[pssh-ing intensifies]
>>47477161That's the end of the comic arc of the same name. Cap lives through the movie because Disney owns Evans' soul for next two decades
>>47472416
chaotic good several times over
the themes and creatures aligned with it just fit perfectly with me
minus the LGBT bullshit they try to attach to it (I actually like rainbows; I don't get why they're always the designated gay insignia).
arborea/arvandor as the afterlife sounds perfect to me
>>47473429
Hope springs eternal, and perfection being impossible is no reason to give up on it.
TL;DR, you're a pleb.
>>47477211
Don't associate those whelps with us, they only commit evil because it's "in style."
When confronted with true evil, they fold like laundry and lose their minds shortly aftertwards.
They're only tolerable when they're being prostrated and taught the true meaning of the word, often through force.
>>47476405
>>47472416
I tend to gravitate towards LG, NG and LN, depending on the occasion and the character I play.
I consider getting to play LE a privilege, but my PF group banned me from playing it because I managed to make Moloch worship the state religion by making it all about honor, duty and protecting the people's rights in our Kingmaker campaign. Also, eternal walhalla fighting for the good cause. It was way too fun, though.
>>47475559
No but he did adequately demonstrate why the burden of proof is on the one making a claim, not the one opposing it.
>>47477450
I'm now thinking of Bertrand Russel writing an essay titled: "Burden of proof: the prove me wrong anon is always a faggot".
>>47477123
>In JLU, Superman and Captain Marvel (Shazam) destroyed an entire city just by fighting one another, this was also under the false assumption that Luthor was producing a bomb to detonate.
That was an empty, new contruction that Luther had just built that Superman had every reason to believe was about to be destroyed anyway.
He was a wrong little puppet, and it was not his finest hour, but it's not like they wiped out Metropolis.
>In Man of Steel, Superman and Zodd's fight destroyed the bulk of Metropolis and probably murdered millions of innocent people in the process.
As opposed to letting Zodd kill whoever he pleased?
Ideally, he would have lured Zodd away like in Superman II, but Zodd was less of a mook that time.
>let Brainiac assimilate Apokolips
A tactical error, nothing more.
>>Whosits?
>Zodd
Oh, you mean how he did the only thing he could to stop a murderous zealot from killing an innocent family?
Yeah, he "killed a man in cold blood" is a strange way of phrasing that he killed someone in battle where it was innocents lives in danger instead of his own.
>>So did your mom.
>...okay?
Alternate worlds are pointlessly alternate.
>So can a LE government.
So he could be LE. But he isn't.
>>Not all of LG is nice and pleasant.
>Then how is it LG?
By being Lawful and Good, not necessarily Nice and Pleasant.
Seriously, this is not hard.
>Except for the aforementioned times when he flew off the handle and caused millions in unnecessary damage and murdered people.
Meh to the damage.
He didn't murder anyone.
He killed Zod in battle and if anyone else died in the battle, they are casualties of Zod's aggression, not murdered by Superman.
>>47477260
>>47472416
Chaotic Neutral. To hell with the rules! I am just another animal, just with more wits. It is not in my nature to obey or understand the rules. I am the almighty egoist and I believe that society is only trying to put me down.
>>47476999
YOU SPEAK OF MY STANDING AGAINST THE DARKNESS AS A LONESOME TOIL, UNAWARE OF YOUR OWN BLINDNESS AS YOU SPEAK TO OTHERS OF THEIRS: THERE IS A REASON PALADINS ARE OF FLAME, SONG, AND LIGHT, PATHETIC SHADE.
YOU SPEAK OF CORRUPTING THE LIGHT WHICH HAS GONE OUT, AND CROW YOUR VICTORY WHILST UPON A LAND OF COAL AND OIL. BUT THE FLAMES ARE CATCHS, THE SONG GROWS, AND LIGHT SPREADS AS EASILY AS IGNITING A MATCH.
WE SHALL LIGHT THE PATHS OF THOSE BEFORE, AND THOSE WHO TREAD AFTER US. FOR WE ARE OF THE LITANY, AND OURS IS THE SONG WHICH SHALL UNMAKE THE SCARS OF YOUR HATE.
>>47477625
I'd read that.
>>47477659
All I'm seeing is LG is allowed to do whatever they want, so long as they make sure to save a couple of worthless lives at the cost of other worthless lives.
I guess in the end, evil is just more honest and transparent when they make other people's lives miserable.
>>47477920
Your light can only cover the surface, our hatred runs deep paladin.
>>47475814
*tips fedora*
D&D doesn't work that way. Things are good or evil. Society has no say over it.
>>47476808
So what's the point of alignments then? Does an author designate a character's deepest traits on some stupid chart in a novel's prologue prior to the actual story? No. And if roleplaying is essentially making a novel with a bunch of other people playing the other characters and the world, there is no reason to do such a thing, especially when the only manner by which one could have an actually decent character in such a system would be to violate said system by acting out of its parameters.
>>47478064
D&D is a dinosaur of old rules and sacred cows kept alive by people wishing to get into ttRPGs yet lack the knowledge to know that D&D is merely the surface of a deeper wealth of games.
D&D is kinda like the Angry Birds or CoD of tabletop RPGs, extremely popular in spite of its flaws and samey gameplay mainly played by people who either refuse to branch outside of their comfort zone or people who note the flaws but play it ironically in the same way that people watch "the Room" or "Cool Cat saves the Kids."
I mean, it's not necessarily the worst thing ever but it does breed a lot of terrible habits and poor expectations out of players if they ever decide to branch out into other games.
>>47478043
Believe it or not, my malicious friend, a church is not the definition of good and can commit evil acts. Evil acts such as killing innocents or torturing heretics, as you have described. That a religious establishment has performed such acts makes them no more good nor evil, just as when a paladin performs an evil act it is no less evil due to their holy status, as evidenced by their inevitable fall due to said action. Don't believe that? I defy you to find me a paladin of an ostensibly good deity or ideology that fell due to a good action that was not performed at the expense of an even greater good.
>>47478043
SO THOU PROCLAIM: WE SHALL SEE IF YOUR WORDS HOLD ANY WEIGHT.
>>47478111
What's your system of choice anon?
>>47478130
We shall Paladin.
I look forward to the day when I see you join my ranks.
I enjoy your banter, in fact, I'll almost miss seeing you defy me.
Almost...
>>47478175
[Spoiler] Unzips Judgement. [/Spoiler]
>>47472416
Unaligned, I'll go TN if my DM doesn't let us stray off the grid but unaligned is better
Then like 99% of /tg/ does but will never admit to, I and the rest of the group will proceed to completely forget that alignment exists for the rest of the game unless the paladin tries to detect evil on something
>>47478144
Let's see, I've played Apocalypse World, Changeling the Lost, Shadowrun 5e, a few d20 derivatives, a few custom systems that friends have made over the years.
My favorite system though is going to have to be Changeling: the Lost. The rules are nice and simple, there's a lot of interesting kiths and seemingsto choose from, contracts feel weird yet powerful, and honestly, it's the system where I built one of my favorite characters.
Shadowrun 5e would be second but the terrible formatting and the way that matrix rules work just makes the game crawl to a screeching halt. The worldbuilding is fairly well done though and I'm a sucker for urban fantasy tropes, it's just a shame that having a technomancer or a rigger or a hacker is so important to the bulk of runs you could do though but, eh, whatever.
The WoW RPG is probably one of my favorite d20 derivatives though, simply because I'm able to play undead and it's the system where I built another one of my favorite characters as well.
>>47478233*Brings the hate*
>>47472745
>a covert HYDRA agent
>Lawful Good
Alignment's fine when you just use it like Old D&D where it's some factional framework of the universe, representing the struggle between supernatural Order and Chaos. Adding Good/Evil axis was a mistake.
Along the line, some edition of D&D (1e maybe?) added Good/Evil and turned it into the world's shittiest personality test. One of those silly internet "which comic book character are you???" quizzes would serve most D&D groups better than that dumbshit alignment chart.
Not only that, but 4e and 5e are the only editions where you can safely ignore them, all other editions have things like Protection from Evil, or "Barbarians must be Chaotic" (even though that contradicts what Law and Chaos are supposed to represent), or the DMG straight up recommending you drain XP from players if they fail to roleplay within the ridiculously tight constraints of their alignment box. Fuck 9-square alignment.
>>47478425
>waaa I can't understand what rough guidelines are
Fixed that for you my man
>>47478064
>And if roleplaying is essentially making a novel
What the fuck?
>>47479059
It really is just cooperatively writing a story, man.
>>47476463
*uses Time-Turner and uses Shadow Clone Jitsu*
"I'm just getting warmed up kiddo."
I like to play lawful good because it's hard for me to play characters with vastly different personalities than myself.
I wouldn't say I have the conviction to be lawful good in real life, but it's the ideal I strive towards. My dad is one of the few people I've met who I could say are actually lawful good, and I'd do anything to be half as good a man as he is.
>>47472416
Neutral, because you can get away with anything reasonable as long as you do stuff on the other end of the spectrum to balance it. This also applies to the more extreme alignments where they're allowed to "ignore" the "rules" every once in a while as long as they stay predominantly in their own area.
>>47479311
"So am I!"
*Activates almighty push!*
>>47478992
It's only in 3e+ that they've become rough guidelines, and it doesn't change the fact that even as "rough guidelines" they're utterly useless.
Also fucking lol, "Hey man chill, it's just a rough guideline, except oh by the way the PHB says chaotic neutrals follow their every minor whim no matter what the consequences and don't consider personal property to be a valid concept, and if you don't play your alignment properly the DM is supposed to level drain you."
>>47479562
It must be hard to have the 'tism so bad you must comply with every line of a book that tells you at several points to interpret it as best suits you.
>>47479626
If we're talking about D&D alignment I'm obviously going to talk about how it's presented in the books, not my own head. If you yourself find it bad enough that you ignore it and use your own interpretations then great I'm glad we're in agreement.
>>47479464
*easily parties it with demonblood black flame uchigatana*
"My father's technique... you BASTARD"
>>47479714
"That's not all!"
*Body double seizes you from behind*
*Body double stabs you through the chest*
"You're a thousand years too early to defeat me whelp."
>>47472416
Chaotic Good
>>47479687
which again, the book literally tells you to treat it's DMing advice as just that, advice, use at your discretion.
I agree with you that some people take the alignment system too seriously, but it is rather obvious intended to be a guideline to get you thinking about how characters would react. It is a starting point to build upon, not an end.
This of course, is more a problem with people such as yourself, who view the written word as law, than with the system.
I normally play one of the good alignments. I'm old fashioned, even if my characters have some flaws they ultimately want to help.
>>47479778
>This of course, is more a problem with people such as yourself, who view the written word as law, than with the system.
Actually, it's a problem with the devs saying "oh hey man, do what you want, it's cool" and then immediately adding shit like alignment based prereqs and giving the GM the ability to take XP from people if they don't play into the narrow purview of their alignment.
I mean, nWoD had a similar premise with the vice/virtue system but the difference between that and alignments in D&D is that for the most part, vice/virtue sits in the background while alignments in 3e mattered to the point where the GM could arbitrarily gimp your character just because you didn't play into your role effectively enough in their eyes.
>>47476999
blah blah blah typical evil badguy edgy bullshit lets just get to the part where youre lying on the ground crying like a bitch in a pool of your own blood and vomit
>>47479778
>I agree with you that some people take the alignment system too seriously, but it is rather obvious intended to be a guideline to get you thinking about how characters would react. It is a starting point to build upon, not an end.
I'm telling you it's useless either way, and again the DMG specifically tells the DM to level drain you if you're not playing your character right. There are rules about changing alignments, which class can be which alignment, which races trend toward which alignments, items that can be used by certain alignments, spells to protect against certain alignments, etc etc etc. all of which are based on this ridiculous two axis system that fundamentally fails at describing anything remotely resembling human thought processes and behaviors.
A better way to construct this stuff is to encourage players to answer slightly more complex questions like "What does your character want? What is he willing to do to achieve this? How does he deal with obstacles?" 5e takes a step in the right direction with this, imo. It's not perfect but it's miles better than two-axis alignment, which they thankfully pushed even further to the side than in 3e.
Yes you can ignore them and just draw your own ideas about morality. Yes you SHOULD do that. No, that doesn't make the RAW any better, which is what you fundamentally have to be talking about when you're discussing an RPG system. If we take "well the book says you're allowed to just ignore stuff you don't like and make up your own mind" as a valid excuse, then there's literally not a single criticism we can make about D&D, or any other RPG ever made for that matter.
>>47479900
You're a pale imitation of the paladin that came before you whelp.
Go home and drink from your mother's teat while you still have the ability to move of your own volition.
>>47479951
fuck off teradactyl.
>>47479951
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy95hbGiBmI
>>47472416
Lawful evil. I like being an asshole but not an immediately malicious asshole.
>>47478318
You're that cat fuccboi from those old threads, aren't you?
You act like a gigantic hipster faggot but you've never even played Munchausen or Fiasco or any other indie game other than Anus World.
>>47480442
The fuck?
>>47472416
Lawful Good.
>>47477161
>>47477211
Technically he got assassinated in the storyline *after* civil war, but details, details. Legitimately, the movie is better written than the comic, because the comic authors were heavily biased against Iron Man, while the Rusos wanted people to be able to see both sides.
>>47472416
neutral
>>47480650
The problem with comic Civil War is that Ironman was a fucking dumbass who made stupid decisions and generally didn't get called out for his bullshit enough.
I mean, consider the following
>Program would've forced non-combatents into combat roles against their will, like the young girl who could summon clouds who was conscripted into being a military sniper against her will.
>Letting fucking Green Goblin control the monitoring center for keeping track of registered meta-humans
>Willingly working with villains to find/capture unregistered meta-humans.
>Generally encouraged characters like Spiderman to reveal their identities to the world, which almost cost Peter his job and eventually caused the events of OMD/OMIT
I mean, to say nothing on the fact that most of the arguments Ironman came up with were shitty and poorly written by default.
>>47478011
>All I'm seeing is what I want to, that everyone just makes everyone miserable.
Succeeding to blow up a planet of soulless robots is less evil than trying and failing to blow up a planet of people.
A person’s intent matters.
Your empty post did not.
Party on, sad little poster.
>>47481127
What measure of "soulless" is the robot and how does that necessarily make their genocide less horrific?
Also, are cyborgs considered machines to you or do you consider them human?
There it is again, that pious self-assured swagger that allows a LG paladin to burn down villages because one guy raised a corpse and apparently we can't have that.
A person's intent only matters so much until you're the guy having a sword shoved through your chest because you, gasp, had a conflicting opinion with the church.
Nuff said.
>>47478064
>So what's the point of alignments then?
It sure as hell is not to curb or control player action.
The other anon covered the basic point that Alignments are largely vestigial.
Their only real purpose any more is either as an actual physical, planar force in D&D, and more relevantly, as characterization shorthand.
You could describe Captain Jack Sparrow’s wild nature, flaunting of the rules of whichever society he’s in at the moment, and general disregard for matters of morality, despite being entirely able to take actions both Good or Evil in nature.
Or you could say he’s CN.
Savvy?
>Does an author designate a character's deepest traits on some stupid chart in a novel's prologue prior to the actual story? No.
Stop dictating to authors how they can write, it’s rude and presumptuous.
>And if roleplaying is essentially making a novel with a bunch of other people playing the other characters and the world,
That’s certainly one of several valid ways of looking at it.
>the only manner by which one could have an actually decent character in such a system would be to violate said system by acting out of its parameters.
Any decently written character is a real person, and most real people work out to be neutral.
But again, you can always act outside your alignment.
>there is no reason to do such a thing,
So, there is no reason to use short hand, there is no reason to ever refer to your character by their race and class, there is no reason to abbreviate the summation of Jade Thornback the Wolfslayer?
I actually agree completely.
There is no reason to use alignments or characterization shorthand of any kind if you don’t want to.
It is a vague and inaccurate set of guidelines that barely serve as a set of hazy landmarks.
But those out there raging that some people do are really quite amusing.
>>47481207
>What measure of "soulless" is the robot and how does that necessarily make their genocide less horrific?
First, it was a Lexx reference.
>Also, are cyborgs considered machines to you or do you consider them human?
Second, they *were* cyborgs technically, as their processing units were made with a portion of human brain, but they retain nothing of the original person and are not considered people by society or the individual in question.
If a person truly believes that trees are just simple plants and he cuts them down, it is not evil.
If a person truly believes that a tree houses the living souls of people and intends to cut it down and fails, it is evil.
Intent matters.
>There it is again, that pious self-assured swagger that allows a LG paladin to burn down villages because one guy raised a corpse and apparently we can't have that.
Indeed.
>A person's intent only matters so much until you're the guy having a sword shoved through your chest because you, gasp, had a conflicting opinion with the church.
“Imagine you're a deer. You're prancing along, you get thirsty, you spot a little brook, you put your little deer lips down to the cool clear water... BAM! A fuckin sword rips off part of your head! Your brains are laying on the ground in little bloody pieces! Now I ask ya. Would you give a fuck what kind of intent or alignment the son of a bitch who killed you had?”
>>47481859
>Intent matters.
So what you're saying is, if a dude butchers someone because they're nuttier than bat shit, it's perfectly okay for him to do so because he never intended to stab those pixies that keep floating over his head and singing off-key folk music.
Intent doesn't automatically make a crime any less abhorrent just because the person doing the crime didn't know that it's a crime.
It's like how Kinders are supposed to be "lovable" scamps who have no concept of ownership and that someone gives THAT GUYS licence to steal from the party because "hurr it's what my character would do."
Did you know that plants actually feel pain and react to stimulus? Did you also know that the smell of freshly cut grass is actually the equivalent of a person crying out in panic because something was slicing them apart?
Keep that in mind and consider that we do this periodically throughout the spring/summer.
>>47481975
>So what you're saying is, if a dude butchers someone because they're nuttier than bat shit, it's perfectly okay for him to do so
No, that’s not okay, that’s bad, especially for the someone.
But unwittingly slaughtering people because you are crazy is not evil, it is crazy.
This is why they have Not Guilty by reason of Insanity in the USA.
>Intent doesn't automatically make a crime any less abhorrent just because the person doing the crime didn't know that it's a crime.
Still abhorrent, just not necessarily an evil action.
Swimming in crazy waters makes knowing intent murky.
>Kender
Kenders are poorly written because they are not-evil and beloved by default, as such, they are a bad example of anything.
>Did you know that plants actually feel pain and react to stimulus?
In varying degrees, yes.
>Did you also know that the smell of freshly cut grass is actually the equivalent of a person crying out in panic because something was slicing them apart?
Is that a quote or an attempt at a metaphor?
Because you are mixing senses there and it doesn’t work.
All life is precious.
Nearly all life is dependent on killing other life.
Such is the cruel nature of the universe.
When killing, where we believe the line is between Good and Evil matters less than whether or not we draw a line.
Intent matters.
>>47482218
>Is that a quote or an attempt at a metaphor?
Neither.
The smell of freshly cut grass is actually pheromones that basically releases a "oh shit, shit's going down over here" signal to any plants in the area.
>>47481975
> Did you know that plants actually feel pain and react to stimulus?
Uh what? Im pretty sure pain requires some sort of nervous system. Plants definitely react to stimuli but they definitely dont feel pain. Not in real life anyway
>>47482287
It's not pain as you or I would recognize but they still know the difference between being left on a table and being sliced and diced for a fruit salad.
Pain's primary function is basically to warn an organism when something is going wrong in their body, under that definition, what's the difference between how we feel pain and how plants feel pain?
>>47475187
I remember some great wordbuilding with that simple pic.
I think the writefags made some great shit, like a Vampire princess being guarded by her royal Knight "Uncle" or something, and that she undertakes a walk to her local temple to be cured of her vampirism.
But of course it fails, and she needs to be guarded from the sun. And also the angry peasants.
>>47482283
>Neither.
It was me not interpreting the phrase “the equivalent of a person crying out in panic” as “the equivalent of a distress call.”
>The smell of freshly cut grass is actually pheromones that basically releases a "oh shit, shit's going down over here" signal to any plants in the area.
Interesting.
Even more horrifying is this:
>When the plants were infested by caterpillars, the plants released a distress GLV that attracted predatory bugs who like to eat the caterpillars in question.
You know how we like that smell?
We used to eat bugs like that.
When we cut the grass and it is calling out for help?
It’s calling out to us.
>47482287
>Uh what? Im pretty sure pain requires some sort of nervous system. Plants definitely react to stimuli but they definitely dont feel pain. Not in real life anyway
There’s the Venus fly trap, that fern thing that closes up when you touch it, and I’m pretty sure broccoli is found to have an IQ of about 2 since it is able to react to stimuli such as electrical currents.
>>47482320
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VoNgLnjzVg
lawful neutral
>>47482218
Killing another human being is not something that most people will necessarily be capable of handling, even if they've done it as self-defense.
You ended another sentient creature's life and now you'll have to live with that guilt for the rest of your life.
I could come up with any reason in the world for why that little girl had to be hung off a streetlamp by her own intestines but it doesn't necessarily change the fact that I killed her or anything.
Trying to justify murder makes you no better than the ones who do it just because they felt like it.
>>47482705
>Killing another human being is not something that most people will necessarily be capable of handling, even if they've done it as self-defense.
Truth, because it is mostly considered an abhorrent action.
But that does not necessarily make it an evil action.
>You ended another sentient creature's life and now you'll have to live with that guilt for the rest of your life.
Possibly. But feelings of guilt are not necessarily restricted to evil actions.
>I could come up with any reason in the world
>Trying to justify murder makes you no better than the ones who do it just because they felt like it.
You seem to be having trouble understanding what is being discussed.
It is not a question of committing an evil action and then finding a justification for it.
It is a question of committing an action you truly believe is not evil.
I do not mean an action that you have known was evil, were told was evil, and choose to “believe” is not evil.
I mean a true, “water is wet” or “gravity pulls objects”, belief.
If it is later revealed to you that the action you took was in fact evil, and you come to understand and believe that, you are still not retroactively evil.
Intent matters.
>>47472416
I like the "shades of grey" vibe that comes from Lawful Neutral. You can be a tyrant or a hero, all depending on how other's view your devotion to your creed/legal system/religion/etc. Gives it a little complexity that the other lawfuls seem to lack.
>>47477123
>Superman and Captain Marvel (Shazam) destroyed an entire city just by fighting one another,
The context was that he was trying to find a bomb that would kill millions if it went off.
>In another JL episode, Superman was willing to let Brainiac assimilate Apokolips (I know I fucked the name up somehow) just because he was too clouded by anger to realize that allowing Brainiac to assimilate one of the most hostile worlds in the galaxy wasn't the best idea to make.
Its not so much that he allowed braniac to assimilate Apocalypse as much as he did not whant to trust someone named DARKSAIDE especially after he mindcontrolled him into almost destroying the sity he was sworn to protect, oh and darkside doble crossed the justice league in the end so supes was right about that.
>Except for the aforementioned times when he flew off the handle and caused millions in unnecessary damage and murdered people.
Else worlds don't count also he is not all powerful and can not save everyone and everything all the time.
you seem to be under the delusion that lawful good characters follow their codes one hundred percent of the time while in reality no one can follow the law all the time they just follow the spirit of the law.
>>47472416
>>47483326
Lawful Neutral.
Lawful makes the character have a strong code that he follows be it a moral, personal, or societal one. This gives the player a focus and creates a strong character. By the end of one or two sessions everyone should know how the lawful character behaves and be able to predict and play off of him accordingly.
Neutral allows the player to do practically anything he wants. A generally good character can still end up lying or subverting his allies to satisfy his own needs and a generally dickish one can still find it in his heart to run back into the flaming building for those peasants. It all circles back to the lawful part of themselves. What do they believe in?
>>47476937
>A LG government would be perfectly capable of doing the same thing and remaining LG.
I'd disagree with this. Just because a government thinks they can do something doesn't make it good.
>>47479396
This. That Cap quote is pretty much how I approach most issues.
>>47485223
>I'd disagree with this. Just because a government thinks they can do something doesn't make it good
And just because the act of someone being lobotomized can be evil and shouldn’t be done, doesn’t mean that is always the case.
>A LG government would be perfectly capable of doing the same thing and remaining LG, under the right circumstances (as I suspect Superman was).
The second bit was implied, possibly unclearly.
>>47485341
>And just because the act of someone being lobotomized can be evil and shouldn’t be done, doesn’t mean that is always the case.
I can't think of a single realistic scenario where lobotomy would not be evil.
>>47485363
That's not the point. If someone was indoctrinated into thinking that a lobotomy made someone feel super happy sunshine, they wouldn't be evil for giving someone a lobotomy.
>>47473480
the only problem is the definition of good vs aleigance. even God razed a few cities and exterminated a few innocents.
>>47481975
>Did you know that plants actually feel pain and react to stimulus?
Plants do not have the nervous system and brain that would allow them to feel pain. It should be obvious that they react to stimulus, so does every living thing. Saying that plants can "feel" or experience something like panic is completely inaccurate.
Even animals which can feel pain aren't experiencing any suffering when they do since they aren't sapients. Pain is to them what it is intended to be for humans, an emergency signal prompting some kind of reaction, not a source of misery.
>>47484969
Actually, the writers have stated superman is as strong as he needs to be. All he has to do is sit in the sun for a little bit to get more power. He could actually save everyone but he doesn't. He could rebuild the damages he does, but he doesn't. He plays the hero just to impress lois. Superman is a fraud. If you want a hero that actually cares go look up the mother fucking flash.
I like playing the LE BBEG who is with the party because he was usurped by the new BBEG, or is pretending to be LG to kill them.
>>47485669
>Even animals which can feel pain aren't experiencing any suffering when they do since they aren't sapients.
This is retarded and 100% opinion based. How many fucking dolphins and great apes have you had in depth conversations with on the nature of suffering?
>>47472636
>Most characters given other alignments in 3rd, 4th, or 5th editions would only qualify as neutral in Basic or AD&D.
Nah. In AD&D its not abnormal for an entire village to share an alignment, as remember, alignment is what side you're on, hence alignment, not "muh personality." There's nothing abnormal about Lawful Good.
The retarded meme that only the purest and saintliest of types are LG has got to die, it was never and will never be true.
>>47485801
>How many fucking dolphins and great apes have you had in depth conversations with on the nature of suffering?
Neither is any more sapient than a toddler.
>>47485827
Other than the fact that that's just your opinion man, glad we agree that >>47485669 is strictly wrong since toddlers certainly can suffer.
>>47485854
Toddlers can feel pain, they cannot suffer.
>>47485883
Please, tell me more about your faith-and-feelings based worldview. Grace me with your wisdom, o Pistis Sophia!
Is this like a P-zombie thing, or did the bird that told Bard Smaug's weak spot inform you that children can't suffer until their fifth birthday (or whatever)?
>>47485907
Just because it turns into a sapient later on doesn't mean it is always a sapient.
>>47485938
Wait, o font of Gnosis, you have yet to share with us how you learned the cutoff point of suffering, and how you learned that scientists are full of shit. Was it magic? God? Did a talking animal let you know "hey dude, don't worry, I can't suffer, and in fact have no true knowledge of the words of this sentence, not unlike the fabled Chinese translator in a box?"
>>47485883
How can something feel pain yet not suffer?
>>47485964
Its the P-zombie argument, some people experience a level of solipsism causing them to believe P-zombies (beings who do not experience internal qualia) are real.
Its slightly below "whoa dude, what if we're really in the Matrix" tier philosophy.
>>47485959
Individual people will mature at different times, sapience is not a magic quality that suddenly descends into you. That said, there is a clear distinction between the sapient and the nonsapient, and the difference between you and a toddler, dolphin, ape, or plant is one such distinction.
>>47485964
Because pain only coincidentally causes suffering. Some people even derive pleasure from the sensation of pain. Pain itself is just a physical feeling.
>>47486006
>sapience is not a magic quality that suddenly descends into you
The problem is that your entire argument is based off magic.
>there is a clear distinction between the sapient and the nonsapient,
Correct, your faith-n-feelings.
Aside from the plant, anyway...
>>47486030
>>47486061
Not an argument
>>47472745
How would he open his parachute?
>>47486252
He simply parries the impact using his vibranium shield.
>>47486313
That would actually work, right?
>>47486399
I've never read the comic books (its hard to read that many words after pretending to be only read 10 wpm). Fuck if I know.
>>47481411
>Stop dictating to authors how they can write, it’s rude and presumptuous.
Did I ever? I was stating more along the lines of what authors do and don't do than what they can and can't do. It was a means of illustrating why putting characters into boxes like that is, at best, a poor habit that contributes to bad writing (and hence why authors refrain from doing so).
>>47485363
Immortal or otherwise unkillable mass murderer proven capable of escaping imprisonment?
>>47485801
>How many fucking dolphins and great apes have you had in depth conversations with on the nature of suffering?
>The answer may surprise you!
>Click to find out!
Coming to an ad near you soon.
>>47482408
You have the posts from that thread screencapped? I'd like to read that.
True Neutral, leaning very slightly towards Good and Chaotic rather than Evil and Lawful.
>>47486399
>>47486460
The ground would not hurt him.
Him slamming into the back of the shield would.
Squish.
Plus, that's not the round vibranium shield, so maybe it wouldn't work at all.
>>47486481
>Did I ever?
You asserted and assert what writers do.
As if you know what *all* writers do.
>Writers don't do x
>Therefore if you do x, you are not a writer
How is that not dictating what writers can do?
>>47481411
As a sidenote, I never thought of it before reading this post but alignment fits Pirates of the Caribbean *perfectly*, as it features the clash of the pirates against civilization, and both against the unfathomable weird nonsense (and sometimes trying to use it).
Like you could say Disney typically writes simple stories, and be right, but it has a definite Apollonian/Dionysian style contrast there, more than just good guys and bad guys.
>>47486481
If you're not telling a story that uses alignment, you are free to not use alignment. I doubt most would call Elric of Melnibone a "Chaotic Evil" figure, but not only does Elric describe himself as evil and clearly of the chaotic mindset, but Gygax had Elric of Melnibone in mind when writing the alignment system (and considered him CE).
Likewise, Sir Holger, though providing, likewise, the core inspiration for LG and paladins, still had temptations, failings, and a mind that could wander in dark places.
The idea that being LG makes you all good or CE makes you all bad is totally retarded and indicates a lack of knowledge both about the intent behind alignments and the inspiration for them.
But chances are if conflicts between order and chaos, or at least good and bad, don't entertain you at all, then you probably won't want to write a story about conflicts between universal forces.
>>47476405
>Implying that all paladins are Sigmarites.
Strawmanning much?
>>47481859
>>47481127
>Intent matters.
So if Hitler truthfully believed the world was controlled by (of course evil) Jews, and he would protect the world from evil by doing the Shoah, he was LG?
>>47486856
Of course he was LG anon
>>47485827
>toddlers cannot experience suffering.
Sorry, but you are an retard.
>>47486856
>implying he wasn't
>>47472416
Anything lawful. Generally lawful neutral but I like Lawful Evil because those are generally the most interesting villains and lawful good because I see it as a roleplaying challenge.
>>47486856
Yes. He combined discipline with the willingness to fight evil without mercy, acted as a good person is expected to act by society, acted for the greater good for the greatest number, etc. Lawful Good by 1e, 2e, 3e, 4e, and 5e standards.
Even PF acknowledges that if you are a committed racist who genuinely believes xyz race is irredeemable, you can go so far as to kill their children and still be good. Its on their website and everything, bugbears are the example.
>>47481207
>>47486856
>A person's intent only matters so much until you're the guy having a sword shoved through your chest because you, gasp, had a conflicting opinion with the church.
It depends on the setting, I feel. In a world where the gods physically exist as manifestations of certain values, then intent has nothing to do with it because Good has a physical manifestation and you can just follow what it says.
In other settings, lawful good could theoretically be twisted.
>>47486935
>because Good has a physical manifestation and you can just follow what it says.
Wrong. "Good" as defined by a cosmic force is just one equally valid conception of good. Basing morality on alignment is like basing morality on the shape of a skull or color of skin. Yes, it is based on some more or less objectively quantifiable feature of nature, "good particles", but that feature itself isn't intrinsically connected to good any more than anything else is.
>>47486935
Worth mentioning: even in a setting with objective alignments, people can be, 100%, confused or led astray. If you are 100% for justice, freedom, happiness and civilization, you still don't necessarily know how to perceive that.
"Stabbing people because you disagree with the church" is a completely fucking retarded example (Galileo endlessly, endlessly shit talking the church is a better example).
Even in a setting with objective good alignments, its completely plausible for good types to wind up fighting and killing each other, as nobody has all the answers. They just won't wind up committing evil acts, barring misplaced fireballs, etc.
>>47486992
>objective alignment is the same as racism
For fuck's sake, are you still pissy about necromancy?
>>47487033
It's the same as racism or Scientology or the Indian caste system or any number of other moral frameworks which assign moral character to physical properties.
Alignment just does it with magical properties instead of real ones. "Detect Evil" could just be a magical Geiger counter for all we know, and it has an equivalent moral value in any case; "evil particles" are not evil by their nature, they're evil by a particular (and almost certainly heavily biased in favor of whatever pantheon spread the meme that this magic had something to do with morality) definition.
>>47487078
>It's the same as racism... or the Indian caste system
It really isn't.
>or Scientology
...what? I don't even begin to know what Scientologist "morals" are are beyond obedience.
>they're evil by a particular (and almost certainly heavily biased in favor of whatever pantheon spread the meme that this magic had something to do with morality) definition.
Detect Evil isn't used as a deathworthiness detector, but it is a sign that someone is, at a bare minimum, a being that is an extreme threat. Best case scenario, they are a very aggressive and hostile necromancer with ambitions of causing mass unemployment by means of violating the dead, and probably one who will try to bully you into surrendering Aunt Mable's corpse. Most of the time, however, its spot on.
The fact that """""""""""good necromancers""""""""" almost universally have ambitions to steal everyone's corpses and institute a welfare state in which everyone is dependent on their """""""""""beneficence""""""""""" leads me to not be surprised that most are evil, however.
>>47487178
>...what? I don't even begin to know what Scientologist "morals" are are beyond obedience.
Scientology is actually a great comparison to D&D alignment, since Scientologists believe in what are essentially "evil particles" called thetans that can be detected with special equipment and training, just like a Detect Evil spell. Thetans and "evil particles" don't intrinsically have anything to do with moral judgements, though. I could swap them or replace them with any other arbitrary properties, like neutrinos per sq. nm or degree of lead toxicity, and have an "objective morality" with equal worth to alignment. Of course these measures of good and evil are just as valid and flawed as a Benthamite's or Kantian's or Objectivist's and so on, because morality is not and cannot be intrinsically connected to anything else. It is defined outwards from the arbitrarily selected axiomatic positions that people hold; one such position might be that the magical particles that are detected when a certain spell is cast have moral significance.
>>47486856
>So if Hitler truthfully believed the world was controlled by (of course evil) Jews, and he would protect the world from evil by doing the Shoah, he was LG?
Intent matters anon here.
Not even meme-ing, but if the Shoah was the ONLY way, then yes, Hitler was LG.
But that's a bit like saying the only way to euthanize the terminally ill is to gnaw their faces off with hamsters.
>>47487306
>Flawed
>Kantian morality
Pick one.
>>47477920
Light is an anomaly in an innately dark universe.
>>47487638
>Kantian morality
>being a pleb
Pick two
Chaotic Good/Neutral and Lawful Evil.
Lawful Good: A knight in shining armour, yawn.
Neutral Good: Just "good", yawn.
Chaotic Good: Edgy good, hell yeah. There's something incredibly romantic about heroic rebels.
Lawful Neutral: Come on this is the ultimate alignment of boredom. The people who just do their job and follow orders.
True Neutral: Nothing in particular, yawn.
Chaotic Neutral: An individualist badass übermenschen, hell yeah.
Lawful Evil: The appeal of this is the hardest one to explain, but I guess there's something unexpected about an Evil character being also Lawful.
Neutral Evil: Just evil, yawn.
Chaotic Evil: Cartoonish Evil, yawn.
>>47490759
Is this bait? You obviously don't know how alignments work at all.
>>47472416
Neutral Good for when I want to be good
Lawful Neutral for a principled judge
For whatever reason, I can't stomach Lawful Good...
>>47490779
Sure, they were stereotypes of each alignment and any alignment can be interpreted in an interesting way and in the end it depends on the individual character blah blah, but if we go just by the alignments alone, that is my answer.
>>47490867
But that's bullshit
CG isn't "edgy good"; LN doesn't just "do its job"; TN isn't "nothing in particular", etc
Read up on alignments
>>47487306
>Thetans and "evil particles" don't intrinsically have anything to do with moral judgements, though.
Its not really a good comparison since there's a 99.9% correlation between detecting as evil and being evil.
The 0.1% is the way that necromantic skeletonbots detect as evil, oh noez thing of the mindless skeletons!
>>47490528
>Morality being determined by the action itself
>Being a coward who relies upon good fortune to be 'moral'.
Try harder, son: your mother and I are getting worried.
>>47472416
Lawful Evil
I'm going to reach my goals whether you like it or not. It's up to you whether we'll fight over it.
>>47490779
At this point, noone really knows how alignments work.
>>47490528
Utilitarians get Dutch Booked like fools by the first demon or mathematically literate person they meet.
>>47473211
Civil War was a shit comic series that only got popular because of the gimmick. The writing was awful.
It's the same fucking thread as always.
Edgelords and whatever you call faggots roleplaying as paladins argue who is more powerful.
Noone can agree what alignments trully mean and which action fits whitch alignment.
The standard genocidal paladin and philatrophic necromancer.
And once again, no conclusions will be drawn, same arguments will be used when this thread appears again, faggots will roleplay as same characters.
Alignment system was a mistake.
>>47494978
D&D is a mistake.
>>47494978
Alignments were fine before everyone, including the devs, started taking them so damn seriously.
>not playing true neutral
>>47494978
>Noone can agree what alignments trully mean and which action fits whitch alignment.
It's more like a smaller but still sizable and vocal minority that genuinely can't grok alignment and, I think, very abstract reasoning in general who are naturally hard to reason with. These same people will eternally never understand why lawful alignment does not equal always following the law and they are drawn to alignment threads like mosquitoes to a light bulb.
Plenty of people get and enjoy alignment, but you have that minority that genuinely don't understand why they don't understand starting arguments and declaring alignment to be "stupid" all the time.
>>47476405
7ou know, when I was dming I had a player that talked like this. We booted his ass, only to find out later he actually tried to rape someone. People with this kind of thought process need to be institutionalized.
>>47476584
THERE IS NO LAWFUL BUTTSEX IN MY CHURCH BROTHER
True neutral exists for people who don't want alignments. At least thats what I got out of it.
>>47472416
>2016
>Alignments
>>47497156
Different anon, but riddle me this - what for you need alignments at all? They are absolutely pointless parameter that does nothing and in most cases ends up as a cheap replacement for creating fleshed out character, so instead of role-playing an actual person, people can say "Well, I'm X".
And then of course are fuckers who constantly argue about what each alignment is supposed to even mean. It means nothing, because it's an awful system implemented for no real reason, that is now part of "muh tradition" wankery. Alignments were one of the biggest mistakes of entire tabletop RPG history, as they serve no real purpose and regularly harm the quality of role-play.
>>47501433
Different anon here, but your riddle was already answered.
See
>>47481411
>>47501332
Not necessarily
You can find plenty of TN character archetypes who aren't "unaligned"
"Extreme" Allignments are fun. Why be Good if you don't go overboard with it? Why be Evil if you can't twirl your moustashe and plot your diabolical schemes or scream blasphemies from the top of mountain of skulls? If I want to be Lawful, you bet I'll be most loyal and honor bound little cog in the machine! And what is chaos but just another word for fun?
>>47501916
So my allignment is most likekely Something Something Ham.
>>47501939
Just ham? My characters regularly go so ham they turn bacon. Get on my level, scrub.
>>47501913
True Neutral never made quite sense to me. It seems like allignment least likely to go on on an adventure, which seems to be the key of most rpgs?
>>47501904
This answers nothing, you mong. The only thing it does is bullshitting around "Well, alignments might be useless, but we have them, so we should use them anyway"
>>47502022
True Neutral doesn't mean you don't have any opinions.
A good example of a true neutral character (that isn't a druid) would be a bounty hunter: they don't feel strongly towards the law, they're just doing what they need to do to earn money. They're not chaotic either, since it wouldn't bring them anything of value to act chaotically.
On the other hand, they're not good, since they essentially look out for themselves first, but they're not evil, since they avoid hurting people unnecessarily and just do their job.
The character I just described is TN, but he's not necessarily boring. It's just that his actions can't be placed anywhere else on the L-C/G-E axes than in the center.
>>47473183
Buttsex is irrelevant to alignment. I've had and have seen characters of all alignments engage in it.
>>47502050
Ah, thank you, that makes perfect sense!
>>47499096Do you have legit autism?
>>47502044
To;dr for the illiterate like you:
Alignments = Optional Characterization Shorthand
It's not that hard of a concept.
>>47472474
In 5e, this
>>47472494
>>47472514
>>47473235
>>47475814
It's explicitly stated that alignment is somewhat of a conscious choice. People in that realm self-identify as good and evil based on their ideals.
>>47472416
Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral, depending on what the DM allows.
LE because of self desires and keeping closest relations safe and happy often drive more believable and interesting characters, also allows to do some good RP and NPC backstabbing.
LN as a personal reflection.
>>47472416
I tend to go either chaotic/neutral good or neutral evil with my characters.
>>47472416
Lawful neutral, because I have someone else in my group who tends to play paladin and be lawful good. It creates a nice dynamic for interactions with NPCs because we can do good cop bad cop to get what we want. If not I do neutral good because I like the idea of being a farm hand or something similar who gets stuck in with adventurers and would like to go back to his simple life if possible.
>>47472416
Lawful Neutral. It feels like a Lawful Lawful.
>>47502958
What is that? Pastry crime division chief?
>>47502980
Cheeky. I'll make a mental note of that.
>>47472416
I do things irl and they call me just a guy. I do it I a game and I am chaotic evil. wtf
