Which alignments do you play? How do you play them?

[oldgrayrogue]

The purpose of this thread isn't about trying to uncover some revolutionary insight on alignment. It's about having a bit of fun casually discussing one of the many oddities that compose this wonderful game.

The reason I started this thread is because people seemed to like the one on character naming. I got the sense that people thought it was healthy for the community to discuss something innocuous and fun, instead of wading through the ALFA drama marsh. I simply tried to continue in that spirit with what I thought would be a relatively benign discussion about alignment.

I understand if you find a thread on this topic insipid, but I don't think that warrants any condescension.

I thought it provided some light hearted fun, for what its worth.

[thinkpig]

If I was trying to fix it, I'd suggest starting with the following axis: altruistic, selfish, deontological, consequentialist.

*dons Robe of the Altruistic Archmagi, then unsheathes his Consequentialist's Bane, +5 damage to those who believe a morally Good act is one which produces a favourable outcome*

Make way selfishness! I'm armed to the teeth and packing a hamster!

hahahaha this made my day

[thinkpig]

Isn't this thread about the alignment system and your personal experiences, not for degrading or insulting others for not conforming to your idea of 'morality'?

All that does is open the door for personal attacks and insults, as thinkpig/others have shown. Can we please get this back on topic?

"thinkpig/others" thanks for the shout out, kettle

[thinkpig]

Are we so allergic to criticism around here that you can't suggest room for improvement or express yourself without it being considered a personal attack? I don't ask that anyone be denied their game or conform to my conception of it; I just describe my own tastes and try to show how I came by them, as the thread asks.

[Adanu]

Are we so allergic to criticism around here that you can't suggest room for improvement or express yourself without it being considered a personal attack? I don't ask that anyone be denied their game or conform to my conception of it; I just describe my own tastes and try to show how I came by them, as the thread asks.

it's enough for most players of good PCs to assume that because they are a Paladin or faithful servant of a good deity that their moral judgments automatically consist of unquestionably 'goodness' which is, to me, hopelessly childish.

You're calling 'good' PC players childish because they don't conform to what you think good should be, and you're giving me a pot/kettle' retort?

[thinkpig]

What I am saying is that just because it says good on your character sheet, does not mean that what you decide is good, is. In real life, I believe that putting stock in concepts such as 'good' and 'evil' is conducive to things like genocide and mass subjugation, and cries for censorship from people who are afraid to think.

[Xanthea]

Thanks for clarifying that murdering twenty babies doesn't become good just because you have good on your character sheet, I guess.

[HEEGZ]

Take the personal attacks to PMs or they will be deleted. Stick to the topic please.

[Adanu]

The alignment simple is very simple In DnD. It's a judgment on your soul from the Gods, whether you want it or not. Your actions are judged by the Gods of the Forgotten Realms. The alignment system isn't about you, it's about them.

[mr duncan]

Anyway, that's me, but tell me, what alignments do you play, why do you play them, and how do you play them?

I tend to play evil characters, more often than not I am Neutral Evil or Lawful Evil. I usually go for something like Blackguard or Divine Champion of some dark god (Good old Xujja).

Usually someone from a primitive or harsh culture who thinks of themselves and their evil ways as normal and sane. This gives me room to want to adventure and kill things for their loot, but not have to be a constant threat to everyone. Like a Lawful Evil soldier who enjoys his work and always looks for excuses to justify his violent ways while calling himself righteous, that is very much my kind of character.

Xujja of White Pines is a good example of that. He could be loyal and honorable and really cared about the spiritual well being of his tiny cannibal cult. But then they were a 'family' of fanatic Auril worshippers who ate eyes and sacrificed slaves and captives to their hungry goddess. He was casually evil to start but became more and more nutty as he had his madness validated by the goddess.

Taj'mirri was my longest running NWN1 character (more people seem to remember Jain'n but I played Taj a lot longer) He was a Lolth worshipping fanatic drow who accepted he was lower in value than females but still knew Lolth was going to win in the end. For him good was evil and evil was good. Keeping your word was a sin, when a lie would do better and killing anyone or wrecking anything was a form of prayer. No one had to prompt him to evil acts and no one was safe. (He set the elven city of Tangled Trees aflame!)

I am currently playing a character who thinks he is pretty normal fellow, but he comes from a culture where slavery is normal. A tribe where pillaging city folks was a way of life and where a starving urchin who steals some bread will get his hand cut off for trying. Callous and vengeful, but not obviously or religiously evil. If someone explained the alignment system to him he would swear that he was True Neutral and would take offense at being called evil. But he lives in a cute little village with his selfish wives and at a glance seems like a nice guy.


All three of those characters were the same alignment though. Like Mikayla said, the idea of killing people and taking their loot is pretty evil so most of my adventurers are going to be evil. I have made a few goodies but it felt so vanilla that I gave it up in a few days with just one exception in NWN1.


J

[Ronan]

What I am saying is that just because it says good on your character sheet, does not mean that what you decide is good, is. In real life, I believe that putting stock in concepts such as 'good' and 'evil' is conducive to things like genocide and mass subjugation, and cries for censorship from people who are afraid to think.

In real life, the doing "good" has no firm definition. Even if you agree on a set of ethics, the best way to follow those ethics is almost never agreed on. In D&D though, good and evil are absolutes. D&D good is not RL good, and certainly no D&D player should think his PC's actions would be good in real life just because of what his character sheet says.

I played Maer as a psychopath. He was special forces, a government spook for the Marches. It said NG on his character sheet, but he was willing to torture, kill and punt puppies if necessary to protect what he considered good. Would he do good in real life? If he happened to be on the good side of a war, sure. But he might very well be on the bad side, because real life is a lot more complicated than D&D. If Alyra is a politician shaking hands and kissing babies, Maer would be the spook waterboarding some poor sob in Gitmo. He was not the sort of person anyone would want anywhere near their kids, yet he was largely D&D good.

[Ithildur]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm

Alignment

A creature’s general moral and personal attitudes are represented by its alignment: lawful good, neutral good, chaotic good, lawful neutral, neutral, chaotic neutral, lawful evil, neutral evil, or chaotic evil.

Alignment is a tool for developing your character’s identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character. Each alignment represents a broad range of personality types or personal philosophies, so two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other. In addition, few people are completely consistent.


Good Vs. Evil

Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.

Being good or evil can be a conscious choice. For most people, though, being good or evil is an attitude that one recognizes but does not choose. Being neutral on the good-evil axis usually represents a lack of commitment one way or the other, but for some it represents a positive commitment to a balanced view. While acknowledging that good and evil are objective states, not just opinions, these folk maintain that a balance between the two is the proper place for people, or at least for them.

Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral rather than good or evil. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior.

Law Vs. Chaos etc.

Stuff certainly can be debated, but for the purposes of discussing alignment (which is clearly a RPG concept for crying out loud, not actual RL morality or philosophy) the above exists as a reference point to dissect, deconstruct, analyze, read into, completely contradict, whatever. i.e. what is 'innocent' life? Is a paladin smiting an evil orc 'protecting innocent life' at all times? Is it possible that he does so in a manner that clearly undermines 'altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings'? Is there room for shades of grey in specific situations? It clearly says 'two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other', but how much variance can there be between 2 paladins (or 2 LE priests, whatever) of different orders/faiths, or even the same faith, same order (because)? Is Maer really NG or a delusional CN bastard really? blah blah etc.

[oldgrayrogue]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm

Alignment

A creature’s general moral and personal attitudes are represented by its alignment: lawful good, neutral good, chaotic good, lawful neutral, neutral, chaotic neutral, lawful evil, neutral evil, or chaotic evil.

Alignment is a tool for developing your character’s identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character. Each alignment represents a broad range of personality types or personal philosophies, so two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other. In addition, few people are completely consistent.


Good Vs. Evil

Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.

Being good or evil can be a conscious choice. For most people, though, being good or evil is an attitude that one recognizes but does not choose. Being neutral on the good-evil axis usually represents a lack of commitment one way or the other, but for some it represents a positive commitment to a balanced view. While acknowledging that good and evil are objective states, not just opinions, these folk maintain that a balance between the two is the proper place for people, or at least for them.

Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral rather than good or evil. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior.

Law Vs. Chaos etc.

Stuff certainly can be debated, but for the purposes of discussing alignment (which is clearly a RPG concept for crying out loud, not actual RL morality or philosophy) the above exists as a reference point to dissect, deconstruct, analyze, read into, completely contradict, whatever. i.e. what is 'innocent' life? Is a paladin smiting an evil orc 'protecting innocent life' at all times? Is it possible that he does so in a manner that clearly undermines 'altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings'? Is there room for shades of grey in specific situations? It clearly says 'two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other', but how much variance can there be between 2 paladins (or 2 LE priests, whatever) of different orders/faiths, or even the same faith, same order (because)? Is Maer really NG or a delusional CN bastard really? blah blah etc.

Yep.

Paldin1: Orcs are all known and accepted to be lawless and evil villains. It is "good" to purge the world of them. They deserve punishment for their crimes. To kill an orc child is a "mercy" because it will only grow up to be an evil villain otherwise.

Paladin 2: While all orcs are evil, all life is sacred. If orcs threaten good folk I will defend them against the orcs, but otherwise show them mercy in the hope they will redeem their evil ways. To kill any innocent, especially a child, is never justified.

See? Both are clearly valid RP of LG to me. Alignment is about providing a framework within which to develop the personality, morality, and basis for the actions of your character. That's it.

[thinkpig]

Paldin1: Orcs are all known and accepted to be lawless and evil villains. It is "good" to purge the world of them. They deserve punishment for their crimes. To kill an orc child is a "mercy" because it will only grow up to be an evil villain otherwise.

Well Paladin 1 would get some evil points for rationalizing murdering children in my game

[Xanthea]

Can we just remove alignment like the bad outdated relic that it is already?