PDA

View Full Version : Champion of Neutrality



Abaddon87
2010-10-30, 08:27 PM
So I have a crazy idea for a character and the weapon that he/she uses. A true Neutral character that uses a weapon with each of the allignment enchantments. Good, Evil, Lawful, Chaotic... maybe throwing on Ghost Touch and that property from ToM that overcomes any DR (just an idea for those last two enchantments, not a requirement for the character plan). Play the character as someone who actually champions neutrality. For every good act, an evil one must balance it. Sticks to a strict code, but acts without reason. An interesting idea at least.

Any thoughts on how to make/improve on this base idea? Any race/class/build that might fit it well?

true_shinken
2010-10-30, 08:28 PM
Ever heard of the Concordant Killer? I believe it's from MM4 and it's basically what you want.

Abaddon87
2010-10-30, 08:34 PM
I only have MM 1 & 2... and the 3.0 versions at that... :smallfrown:

This was mostly a player character idea. I might think about playing it on some night I dont know what to do. Also, I am afb right now but I'm pretty sure you wont catch any neg levels for holding a weapon with all the allignment enchantments if you are true neutral.

true_shinken
2010-10-30, 08:40 PM
I think there is a paladin of neutrality on some dragon magazine issue.
I've been trying to track that one issue myself, but it's really hard to find it here in Brazil >.>

Aidan305
2010-10-30, 08:50 PM
Sounds like the Rilmani, the outsider race that represents neutrality. Not sure if they were ever upgraded to 3rd ed. You can find a good bit of information on them in 2nd ed stuff though.

Urpriest
2010-10-30, 08:54 PM
Sounds like the Rilmani, the outsider race that represents neutrality. Not sure if they were ever upgraded to 3rd ed. You can find a good bit of information on them in 2nd ed stuff though.

They're in the 3e Fiend Folio I believe. Fun guys. Not to derail, but it makes me sad that their concept doesn't really work in 4e.

true_shinken
2010-10-30, 08:56 PM
They're in the 3e Fiend Folio I believe. Fun guys. Not to derail, but it makes me sad that their concept doesn't really work in 4e.

There are lots of concepts that don't work in 4e. It made me really said when I noticed I simply couldn't make a Dex-focused Paladin that didn't suck.

Dr.Epic
2010-10-30, 08:57 PM
Play the character as someone who actually champions neutrality.

Champions neutrality? How can you fight for that? Wouldn't that be doing nothing? Like that one planet on Futurama? Neutrality is supposed to be apathy, not caring for either side, how can you can about being neutral?


For every good act, an evil one must balance it. Sticks to a strict code, but acts without reason. An interesting idea at least.

That's lawful: you're stick to the code of anything you do has to be balanced by an opposite act. I'm not sure how, but if you dedicate yourself to neutrality your dedicating yourself to something, and are thus living by the code of neutrality and are thus lawful. This is a paradox that is making my brain explode.

GoatBoy
2010-10-30, 08:59 PM
Champions neutrality? How can you fight for that? Wouldn't that be doing nothing? Like that one planet on Futurama? Neutrality is supposed to be apathy, not caring for either side, how can you can about being neutral?


The text says they defend the right of people across the multiverse to not take sides, and to keep good and evil in check.

true_shinken
2010-10-30, 08:59 PM
Champions neutrality? How can you fight for that? Wouldn't that be doing nothing? Like that one planet on Futurama? Neutrality is supposed to be apathy, not caring for either side, how can you can about being neutral?

Well, it was the whole shtick of druids and Harpers on AD&D - to strive for balance.

Urpriest
2010-10-30, 08:59 PM
Champions neutrality? How can you fight for that? Wouldn't that be doing nothing? Like that one planet on Futurama? Neutrality is supposed to be apathy, not caring for either side, how can you can about being neutral?



That's lawful: you're stick to the code of anything you do has to be balanced by an opposite act. I'm not sure how, but if you dedicate yourself to neutrality your dedicating yourself to something, and are thus living by the code of neutrality and are thus lawful. This is a paradox that is making my brain explode.

Neutrality can be obsession with balance. Look at the Rilmani, or the aforementioned Concordant Killer.

Think about it this way: the rule of the Aristotelian Mean is that one should seek moderation in all things. Anyone who argues that this is contradictory because it would involve excessive pursuit of moderation is missing the point.

Abaddon87
2010-10-30, 09:09 PM
Yea the whole Lawful and Chaotic part is a bit tough. But as far as Good and Evil I look at it like this:

An Infernal Behemoth and a Seraph were locked in combat, each one determined to destroy the other.

"Foul creature! Begone from this place!" Shouted the Seraph.

"You first." The Behemoth laughed. His claws burned with hellfire as he struck the Seraph.

The Angel knew he could not win at this point, he closed his eyes and waited for the end to come.


*BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *THUD*

The Seraph looked up at his savior, an extremely slender young tattooed man holding a rifle.

"Th.. Thank you. You saved my life, I am in your debt." The Seraph began to rise.

*BANG*

The Nexus Champion's tattoos darkened as he reloaded.

"Consider your debt cleared." Spoke the Nexus Champion.

*BANG*


*THUD*



Or this:

Around him, the battle raged.

Most would call him foolish to have allowed himself to end up inbetween the advancing angelic and demonic armies, right in the middle of a battle that was not his. And for most, it would be foolish.

But not for him. As he wove his way through the battle, striking down a lightspeaker one minute and an oppressor the next, warriors on both sides tried to stop him. And failed. As he danced between their blades and between their combatants, every blow directed at him fell short. This was not his battle, and it would not hurt him--even if he interfered.

realbombchu
2010-10-30, 09:09 PM
{Scrubbed}

Treat your character as a calm executor of balance. If you feel something is bound to happen, help it along so the event will resolve quickly. If something opposes the flow of things, eliminate it so the world returns to its original course, for good or ill.

Urpriest
2010-10-30, 09:11 PM
A Hellbred with Ordered Chaos could do a lot of good/evil/law/chaos stuff while still being neutral. Seems like a good base for this kind of character.

Zeofar
2010-10-30, 09:32 PM
The Law/Chaos axis neutrality is weak. Abiding by a strict code isn't lawful enough to warrant "acting without reason" (Which, frankly, is weak for chaos roleplaying-wise; this is the poor man's chaotic, in my mind). Chaos does not predilect personal codes; you don't have any truly lawful traits. Handwave the "code/acts without reason" axis justification and assume that the character does equal acts that both support society and deprecate it. If it works for good/evil, it works for law/chaos, more or less.

Also, those battle descriptions both sound highly chaotic with no lawful influence whatsoever.

Eldariel
2010-10-31, 01:09 AM
Yeah, sounds like you want a Druid. True Neutral, have stuff like Word of Balance, go to town. Get a bit of a perspective, help whichever side seems to be falling behind in the small scheme of things and overall, work towards the middleground.

Akal Saris
2010-10-31, 01:25 AM
Actually, one of the Dragon Magazine variant paladins sounds like the best adaptation for this. Probably the Anarch (CN):

‘Anarch’ Class Abilities: (for review purposes...)
Destructive Strike(DR310 p48) – The Anarch is able to inflict critical hit damage on Constructs or objects, usable Charisma modifier times per day. The
Destructive Strike is designated when a critical is threatened but before it is confirmed. If the threatened critical is not confirmed, that use of Destructive
Strike is wasted. (Swaps with Smite Evil)
Slippery Mind(DR310 p48) – If the Anarch fails his/her saving throw against an Enchantment, he/she receives a new saving throw after 1 round. (Swaps with Divine Health)
Turn Constructs(DR310 p48) – Able to Turn / Destroy Constructs as a Cleric three levels lower Turns / Destroys Undead. Usable 3 + Charisma mod. times per day.

Serpentine
2010-10-31, 01:41 AM
For every good act, an evil one must balance it.In my opinion, this is a terrible idea. This isn't "championing neutrality", it's being a mental case.
Neutrality is supposed to be apathy, not caring for either side, how can you can about being neutral?That is only one version of Neutrality. There are others.
Here's some I prepared earlier:

- Too dumb for philosophy. Animals are the main example of this. They do what they need to do to survive, cannot make any judgements over whether what they do is good or evil, and so cannot truly perform good nor evil acts.

- Too naiive for philosophy. Someone who does not think terribly deeply into the motivations behind other people. Other people do what they do, and sometimes it's good for you, sometimes it's not. You do what you're told or, again, you do what you need to do to survive, nothing more and nothing less, without any consideration for right or wrong or what is best for society.

- Undecided/too new. This character has yet to form any opinions or ideas on right and wrong. A character of mine who was almost literally born yesterday (well, a couple of weeks ago) and who has spent all their life in one place with only a couple of others to talk to has not yet experienced... anything, really. It has no concept of malice nor altruism. It will probably change its alignment as it goes along, although it may just take a distant, observational stance, as it looks at such philosophy from the outside. Which brings me to:

- The observer. This character has no emotional investment in the world around them. You may take a more "large scale" approach to the universe - everyone dies eventually, everyone goes to their appropriate afterlife, the universe trundles on, that sort of thing. You find the things people do interesting, but you do not condemn nor laude their actions, merely, for example, find it an intriguing study of human nature.

- Cloistered. This character is so focussed on one specific thing that it neither has interest nor much effect on anything else. An academic who spends all their time studying dragons of all kinds, with little interest in anything else, will probably be True Neutral, if only because they don't really do anything else, good or bad.

- Balance-seeker. All too often this is described as the "something Good one minute, something Evil the next" variety. As mentioned, this is pretty much insanity - and really, possibly more suited to a Chaotic Neutral than a True Neutral character. Alignment can be about lifetime actions, not just their immediate behaviours one second to the next. If an area, for example, has an overall dominance of Evil, then it makes more sense to balance it out with long-term Good deeds than a mixture of both. It could be things like a decision that, although this Lawful government is doing well now, it looks like it's on the way to becoming an oppressive dictatorship in 20-odd years, so you start sewing the seeds of resistance now.

- Balance-seeker 2 - the ecologist. This is the idea I had for a paladin of Balance (note the small "p". I think a TN Paladin would be hard to do well, if it's possible at all). Law and Chaos are opposing forces of creation and destruction. A world without one would be just as terrible as a world without the other, and it is together, by clashing and opposing and interaction, that the universe functions at its best. Good and Evil, if they really exist at all, are elements of the universe, like Fire or Earth. You're more likely to use Positive and Negative than the culturally-loaded terms Good and Evil. In reality, they are both necessary for the survival of species - a purely Good species would quickly be wiped out as its members hasten to sacrifice themselves for the good of others, and a purely Evil species would similarly disappear in a mess of back-stabbing and infanticide and the like. The most important thing, essential to the maintenance of the world and the universe, is diversity. Too much Chaos and you have anarchy, too much Law and you have inertia. Variety is the basis of the universe, it is the driving force of evolution, it is the best defense a species has against extinction. Anything that threatens to reduce diversity must be opposed - whether it is a tribe of orcs waging a genocide against elves, or an edge that might allow the Celestials to finally put a dint in the forces of Hell. Such a character would probably prefer to avoid death where possible, but would not necessarily balk significantly at killing where necessary.

- The Halfway House. TN can be a stopover on the way from one alignment to another. A Lawful Good character will rarely leap straight to Chaotic Evil. You're much more likely to have your idealogy slip and blend and twist into its new one over time, the transient form possibly fitting into a TN alignment.Think that about covers it.

Valameer
2010-10-31, 01:52 AM
I've played this before. It was a lot of fun getting the viewpoint right. To me, it boiled down to "Extremism is the greatest evil. Without balance, there is no free thought. Everyone has the right to choose." Also, if good or law ever 'conquered' the world, then people would get soft and weak and dependent on someone else telling them what to do.

The true path to a strong community is a balance of laws vs individuality. Selflessness balanced with selfishness. There is always a middle ground between extreme behaviour, a SANE ground.

You end up helping an evil agenda to break up a good deity's stranglehold on a community. Or stopping an evil overlord's domination scheme. Help the vigilante break up stifling authority over a city, then turn on the vigilante when he has become more powerful and big-headed than the law.

I don't get why some people (Kevin Siembieda) can't wrap their head around a motivated alignment based on neutrality (rejection of extremes) and preservation of balance.

Cerlis
2010-10-31, 02:16 AM
I'm reminded of when Dominic Deegan realized he was not the champion of Law but the champion of balance.

Unless you want a rather "kick in the door, violate everyone's morals all over the freaking place character" (which is quite common in DnD ,and though i'm against it, i'd understand if you where *shrug*)

I'd say try to think about it. I'd say the best route (as people have pointed out) is to champion for balance.

People who live in a perfect world would probably become lazy and indifferent,

people who lived in a horrible world would become talented but vile (in order to survive)

Law brings order for the sake of the community or the self(lawful evil, lawful Good) but If you listen to any anti goverment cynic you will see the basis of how law is corrupted. How if a society gets bogged down into bureaucracy that their intent is hindered by the actual rules.

Chaos brings freedom, but there is a point when people have so much freedom they are free to violate others freedoms. This is the entire reason we have Government (law). Crazy conspiracy theories aside, Law only increases because people can stop screwing each other over.

Good brings happyness and well being. But often it can be blinded by its intent. Evil makes people unhappy and hurts them but it often makes them self sufficient and stronger. Good can be bad when you are misguided such as Some people supporting slavery because they honestly thought a race of people where stupid and needed to be "civilized". Evil can be good in that, though it may hurt, peoples selfishness can force Independence. That greed drives competition and (if kept in check by law) betters the economy.

He wouldnt be against 100% Law, chaos, Good and Evil. But a guardian against when people gets blinded by their dogma and ruin society


-------------------

and since you asked more about mechanics than a lecture i'd say is it possible to have say, a Lawful Good cleric Devoted to neutrality and some of those feats from the Complete Divine (or whatever) that switches Spell Types. Like there are feats somewhere i think where you can turn your fireball into a waterball, or give ur Acid arrow the good subtype.

Lord_Gareth
2010-10-31, 02:18 AM
I'm reminded of when Dominic Deegan realized he was not the champion of Law but the champion of mind rape.

Fixed for accuracy. See the Dominic Deegan thread in the Webcomics forum for more details.

Abaddon87
2010-10-31, 10:07 AM
Yea I guess I worded this all wrong. I had meant to make this idea based on a character who champions balance. DnD doesnt call it "balance" though, calls it "neutrality". Someone who sees that Solars can be just as oppressive as Balors and Pit Fiends. Laws can be bad when they take away a persons free will, and chaos can lead to the destruction of society.

Above all things, they would be an agent of Free Will.

Now my other question still remains unanswered. Could you wield a weapon with all the enchantments for allignments without catching negative levels if you are true neutral?

Urpriest
2010-10-31, 10:31 AM
A true neutral character could indeed wield any aligned weapon without harm.

Aligned Planar Terrain Mastery from Horizon Walker would make you immune to stuff like Blasphemy as well, if it fits your character concept. And I'm still suggesting Hellbred or Ordered Chaos.

Abaddon87
2010-10-31, 10:39 AM
Those are templates Urpriest? I'll have to look into them. I got the idea from a web browers MMO I used to play called Nexuswars. Its a post-appoc type game where a war is going between the forces of Good, Evil and Free Will for controll of the future universe. People moved by good deeds gradually turn into angels, evil deeds turn people into deamons and shadows. Those with free will become Muad'Dib from Dune :smallamused:

Urpriest
2010-10-31, 10:47 AM
Those are templates Urpriest? I'll have to look into them. I got the idea from a web browers MMO I used to play called Nexuswars. Its a post-appoc type game where a war is going between the forces of Good, Evil and Free Will for controll of the future universe. People moved by good deeds gradually turn into angels, evil deeds turn people into deamons and shadows. Those with free will become Muad'Dib from Dune :smallamused:

But...Muad'Dib is essentially the antithesis of free will, that's his whole schtick! Constrained by prophecy and all that jazz.

Anyway, Horizon Walker is a prestige class in the DMG focused on a ranger-y character who travels across the world and between the planes, Ordered Chaos is a feat from Fiendish Codex I that lets you count as chaotic in certain ways while nonchaotic, and Hellbred are a race from Fiendish Codex I that are souls condemned to hell that rebel against their dark masters, and can count as evil for things without being evil.

dsmiles
2010-10-31, 11:01 AM
Read about Mordenkainen in the LGG. His philosophy: Enforced Neutrality.

Abaddon87
2010-10-31, 11:07 AM
Was saying Muad'dib only in the sense of the whole "superhuman" thing. Im not sure about those things Ur, Im not looking to count as chaotic OR evil at all. I dont suppose there is any kind of template for Neutral creatures? Like a plane alligned neutrality?

mucat
2010-10-31, 11:15 AM
Yea I guess I worded this all wrong. I had meant to make this idea based on a character who champions balance. DnD doesnt call it "balance" though, calls it "neutrality". Someone who sees that Solars can be just as oppressive as Balors and Pit Fiends. Laws can be bad when they take away a persons free will, and chaos can lead to the destruction of society.

Above all things, they would be an agent of Free Will.

Now that makes a lot more sense than the "for every good act, you must commit an evil one" description.

As Serp said, someone who actually tried to intentionally balance good and evil acts would be either insane or evil. Good and evil just aren't symmetric that way. Someone who believes that good creatures might need to be kept in check, though, is a strong character concept.

He would probably not use the terms "Good" and "Evil" to describe the balance he was trying to strike. An oppressive Celestial is still a Celestial, but in his mind, they are decidedly not "good".


For an example from fiction, I'm reminded of John Constantine (as portrayed in comic books, not in the embarrassingly bad movie they made.) He's a little on the Chaotic side compared to what you've got in mind, but he definitely believes angels are as big a threat to the world as demons, and will take a stand against whichever side is trying to trigger Armageddon at the moment.


Now my other question still remains unanswered. Could you wield a weapon with all the enchantments for allignments without catching negative levels if you are true neutral?
Certainly. The negative levels only apply if you're opposite the weapon's alignment, not if you're neutral. (How such a weapon came to exist in the first place would be an interesting story, of course!)

dsmiles
2010-10-31, 11:25 AM
Mordenkainen the archmage formed the Circle of Eight as a tool to manipulate political factions of the Flanaess, preserving the delicate balance of power in hopes of maintaining stability and sanity in the region. Mordenkainen's view of 'enforced neutrality' is not tit-for-tat equality, but rather a detailed theoretical philosophy derived from decades of arcane research. He has fought ardently for the forces of Good, most recently during the Greyhawk Wars, but just as often has worked on darker plots to achieve his ends. In all things the Circle of Eight prefers to work behind the scenes, subtly manipulating events to ensure that no one faction gets the upper hand.
This is a champion of neutrality if I ever saw one.

Starbuck_II
2010-10-31, 12:01 PM
Morden was evil a lot even when he was striving for balance: he was evil aligned (despite what he thought since Alignment is a cosmic force not an opinion)).

dsmiles
2010-10-31, 12:07 PM
Morden was evil a lot even when he was striving for balance: he was evil aligned (despite what he thought since Alignment is a cosmic force not an opinion)).

LGG lists him as TN.

Cog
2010-10-31, 12:29 PM
A Soulbound Weapon (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20070214a)Psychic Warrior could pull off your weapon. Each time you materialize it, you choose your enhancement abilities freely, and can pick an aligned one to match the situation's needs without the cost of piling them all on a single weapon.

hamishspence
2010-10-31, 04:12 PM
Morden was evil a lot even when he was striving for balance: he was evil aligned (despite what he thought since Alignment is a cosmic force not an opinion)).

Epic handbook would disagree on his alignment.

And a case can be made for "he did not debase or destroy the innocent for fun or profit"

While I personally don't consider that the only arbiter of whether a character is Evil or Non-Evil, it does indicate that him being Evil can be argued against using PHB as a source.

dsmiles
2010-10-31, 04:14 PM
Epic handbook would disagree on his alignment.

And a case can be made for "he did not debase or destroy the innocent for fun or profit"

While I personally don't consider that the only arbiter of whether a character is Evil or Non-Evil, it does indicate that him being Evil can be argued against using PHB as a source.


LGG lists him as TN.

Plus this ^. :smallbiggrin:

WinceRind
2010-10-31, 06:31 PM
I'm not sure if doing a good act for every evil act actually makes you neutral.

It just makes you indecisive and flaky, at best.

Otherwise, druids could totally be champions to neutrality.

hamishspence
2010-10-31, 06:39 PM
I'm not sure if doing a good act for every evil act actually makes you neutral.

It just makes you indecisive and flaky, at best.

Yup- to be neutral might require other things.

Possible examples:

1: Unwilling to debase or destroy the innocent for fun and profit

2: Unwilling to harm the innocent ever- only committing evil acts against the "not-innocent"

3: Qualms against harming the innocent

4: Some respect for life

5: Some concern for the dignity of sentient beings

6: Some altruism

That said, I lean to the view that when the evil acts are serious enough, or the character has evil traits like "enjoying the suffering of others" in enough strength, even if the character is "unwilling to harm the innocent" they can eventually cross the line into Evil alignment.

Abaddon87
2010-10-31, 10:21 PM
Once again... :smalltongue:

Yea I guess I worded this all wrong. I had meant to make this idea based on a character who champions balance. DnD doesnt call it "balance" though, calls it "neutrality". Someone who sees that Solars can be just as oppressive as Balors and Pit Fiends. Laws can be bad when they take away a persons free will, and chaos can lead to the destruction of society.

Above all things, they would be an agent of Free Will.

Serpentine
2010-10-31, 10:28 PM
Do you, then, withdraw or reword you "For every good act, an evil one must balance it." statement?

Heliomance
2010-11-01, 04:06 AM
What makes a man turn neutral? Is it lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.

Also, in a world where good and evil are quantifiable universal forces, the attitude of "for every good act, an evil one must follow" is not necessarily psychotic and evil. It is entirely possible to imagine a setting where, should the forces of Good become too strong, the balance will be broken and the universe destroyed, the same being true if Evil becomes too strong. In that case, being a champion of Balance makes perfect sense, doing good or evil to weaken whichever faction is currently winning.

It would be a bit of a Crapsack World, but plenty of people like those.

hamishspence
2010-11-01, 04:39 AM
In some of the Dragonlance books, the Dragonlance world Krynn is described as being one of these.

Myth
2010-11-01, 05:37 AM
I didn't really read trough all the usual algnment rage and semantics. OP if you want to improve this build, consider a weapon from Baldur's Gate II - the Equalizer.

http://i.ehow.com/images/a04/8u/go/forge-equalizer-sword-baldurs-gate-1.6-800X800.jpg

Converted from AD&D to 3.5 it will be:

The Equalizer Longsword:

Damage: 1d8 slashing
Critical: 19-20/×2
Weight: 4 lb.
Special:
Always considered magical for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
Grants immunity to Mind-Affecting effects.
vs True Neutral + 0 to hit, + 0 to damage
vs Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Neutral + 1 to hit, + 2 to damage
vs Neutral Good, Neutral Evil + 2 to hit, + 4 to damage
vs other alignments + 4 to hit, + 6 to damage and counts as good or evil aligned for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction (whichever is needed).