PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Characters who bend the alignment system, but do not break it



hamishspence
2010-11-19, 05:12 AM
This is for discussion of characters who conform to their alignment stereotype in most respects, but have one or two traits that are strongly against it (considered not enough to change their alignment).

Lawful:

The most stuffily lawful character I've ever played is also one whose instinctive reaction to any order would be to stare at the alleged "authority figure" as if they were an annoying but ultimately irrelevant insect. He might override this instinct and decide that the person actually has a valid point, but his first instinct is to assume that no one holds legitimate authority over him.

Nonetheless, he's utterly Lawful, with an organized and systematic mindset and a strict system of rules and standards he holds himself to. He often (but no longer always always) looks with disdain on those who do not follow such standards.
Opposed trait- instinctive disrepect for authority.

Good:

Example 1: A person believes making personal sacrifices to help others is immoral. However, they protect innocent life, because they enjoy doing so- and feel emotional pain when the innocent are under attack, and believe the gain in enjoyment outweighs the risk (and that the pain in guilt of letting the innocent be attacked, would outweigh the gain in personal safety).
Opposed trait- does not make personal sacrifices to help others (because, from their view, when they take risks, spend time, etc, for others, it's not a personal sacrifice- it's a trade in which they gain (in enjoyment).

Evil:

it's someone who has been victimized, has enormous rage and hatred- but also considerable empathy- the last thing he wants is to be a victimizer of the innocent.

To those who prey on the innocent though, no atrocity is too vile to inflict on them.
Opposed trait- does not harm the innocent.

Chaotic I haven't got an offhand example for- maybe someone who is very devoted to Chaos, but with the opposed trait of an unusually organized, methodical approach to upholding it?

Serpentine
2010-11-19, 05:17 AM
Chaotic character who is extremely organised and methodical in his personal life?

hamishspence
2010-11-19, 06:10 AM
Alternatively, a Chaotic character with genuine respect for authority, but disorganized, intuitive, and prone to breaking rules.

Mildred Hubble in The Worst Witch might be a bit like this- unlike her friend Enid Nightshade, who doesn't really respect authority either.

true_shinken
2010-11-19, 06:25 AM
Except on the evil example, I'd say they are neutral.

hamishspence
2010-11-19, 07:41 AM
I don't know, I'd say someone who's dedicated their life to Doing Good Deeds- not for the physical reward, but for the emotional reward- and refrains from doing evil for similar reasons, is closer to Good than Neutral.

Similarly- a sufficiently organized person can be Lawful despite disrespect for authority- the head of a thieves guild, for example.

Felixc-91
2010-12-01, 12:26 AM
agreed, lawful simply means a respect and devotion to order. this can be the law of the land, a personal code, or the instructions of a specific person (perhaps someone who has saved the individual's life), or any number of other options.

Ormur
2010-12-01, 05:09 AM
I've never quite managed to find out whether respect for authority and a devotion to order in the abstract are both necessary to be considered lawful (and the opposite for chaotic), whether one is more important or if they comprise two separate axes that run parallel to the lawful-chaotic one?

Can the law itself be chaotic as is implied by power centres having alignments. If so what is a lawful person's standing vis a vis a chaotic authority.

It's a bit problematic defining alignment based on adherence to external factors that vary from location to location. If so then a personal preferance for order must be more important. Is the lawful chaotic axis then simply consistent-inconsistent?


Example 1: A person believes making personal sacrifices to help others is immoral. However, they protect innocent life, because they enjoy doing so- and feel emotional pain when the innocent are under attack, and believe the gain in enjoyment outweighs the risk (and that the pain in guilt of letting the innocent be attacked, would outweigh the gain in personal safety).

Sounds like a decent person that's a disciple of Ayn Rand and desperately trying to reconcile those two things.

hamishspence
2010-12-01, 05:16 AM
Probably. In D&D- there is an organization in Planescape (The Fated) modelled heavily on Randian doctrine- with quite a lot of Neutral members, and possibly some Good members.

So you could have a person who is trying to balance their desire to help others, with their desire to avoid doing things they believe are immoral- like putting the needs of strangers ahead of the needs of people they love.

The solution, being to rationalize most of their Good deeds as selfish- because they want to do them for their own emotional wellbeing.

Burner28
2010-12-01, 08:14 AM
agreed, lawful simply means a respect and devotion to order. this can be the law of the land, a personal code, or the instructions of a specific person (perhaps someone who has saved the individual's life), or any number of other options.

While I do agree with your reasoning in a way, is there actually any official Lawful character that didn't follow any external law or authority

hamishspence
2010-12-01, 08:41 AM
Paladins which operate alone might qualify as this. If the being starts to manifest paladin powers, they might become an "agent of the forces of Law and Good" without every answering directly to any authority other than "these forces".