PDA

View Full Version : Define: Chaotic Neutral



Jsuelieta
2011-01-13, 06:50 AM
After flipping through the forums for things to laugh at and educational material (in that order, y'all are a riot sometimes), I've come across a general dislike of evil characters, but also a dislike of people being Chaotic Neutral. Now, I can see how this could come about, being like a get-out-of-alignment-penalties-free card for the most part. I'm curious, though, as to what defines a 'good' Chaotic Neutral character in the eyes of the gaming public.

As a little side question, I've seen 'Chaotic Stupid' tossed around a lot, is that the "I can do what I want because my alignment doesn't say I can't" version of this?

pffh
2011-01-13, 07:07 AM
I feel very strongly about your freedom to make your own choices and mistakes and whatever those choices might be you have the right to make them.

The Big Dice
2011-01-13, 07:08 AM
Chaotic Neutral is that guy who sits outside your house revving his engine and playing his radio too loud. He doesn't want to be told what to do and he has no respect for anyone else.

Vangor
2011-01-13, 07:13 AM
Usually the hatred of Chaotic Neutral comes from this idea of Chaotic Stupid, which has no relation to how Lawful Stupid acts, which is a little more straightforward. Doing what you want is perfectly acceptable and how one should play Chaotic Neutral, avoiding outright disruption of organization or harming of others in the process, which would be motivated by good and evil respectively.

Where this becomes stupid is interpreting "Chaotic" to mean "Random", or doing absurd nonsense for no apparent reason. They may ignore danger or turn on the party or annoy townsfolk and such. My first experience with one tried to recarve the statue in the middle of town in broad daylight, haggled with merchants for junk, tried to create a rat uprising against the cats, and casted sleep on me during a fairly meaningless battle.

yldenfrei
2011-01-13, 07:26 AM
I'm trying to play a CN character who's out for vengeance against an Evil enemy. She sees Good as being blind to Evil (with their mercy and some such odd principles), and Evil being exploitative towards Good. She knows that the Law will not support her vengeful goal especially when two kingdoms with tenuous diplomatic relations are involved, so she takes matters into her own hands.

By analysis, she is Chaotic for her disregard and active avoidance of the laws, not Good enough by dint of her ruthlessness, but not enough ruthlessness to chuck her to the Evil side.

So, is a mindful avenger working behind Law's back a good example of a CN? Or is it a bad example?


Chaotic Neutral is that guy who sits outside your house revving his engine and playing his radio too loud. He doesn't want to be told what to do and he has no respect for anyone else.
That's not CN. That's CE, with active disregard for the well-being of others. Those sonic damages could well slaughter the entire neighborhood. :smallannoyed:

Jsuelieta
2011-01-13, 07:27 AM
My biggest point of confusion with the Chaotic Neutral thing is where the line between the alignments is. It seems like Chaotic Good is doing what needs to be done for the right reasons and Chaotic Stupid is doing whatever for no real reason. The thing is, both Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Evil seem to both fall under 'do what you want for your own reasons', granted one tends to be a little more destructive in how it goes about it.

As an example, in one of the campaigns I'm in I'm a CN druid. There's a dwarf who runs the local trade post, which also happens to be the only port on a newly discovered continent. This drawf seems to want to milk the party of every possible copper using any means. My character has an intense desire to end this dwarf, but doesn't because he's avoidable (+20 survival helps there), has a ton of guards and the party would likely frown on it (while silently cheering for doing what they couldn't).

The dwarf I have no idea about, but at what point would my druid go from neutral to evil if I decided I wanted to get the dwarf out of the way before he started trying to tax people on the air? Would it be the method of killing him, or the act of killing the bearded so-and-so itself? Is having six different plans for killing him evil in itself or still within the bounds of CN if they're never carried out?

Gullintanni
2011-01-13, 07:39 AM
I think that Chaotic Neutral, when badly played, should really be called Chaotic Lazy.

Chaotic - In the DnD sense refers to someone who places his/her individuality above that of any order. Her or she will happily participate in an ordered society, up until it begins to inhibit his or her individuality.

Neutral - Neutral characters are self-interested. They don't wish to do anyone any harm, and they don't particularly care to help you either; especially if it costs them something.

A Chaotic Neutral character then, is self-centered, and does not see any value in promoting or defending organized, ordered societies. They see the law, or intrinsic codes of belief as confining and rigid. A person's needs change from day to day, and the law be damned if Chaotic Neutral is ever going to do anything but ensure that their own needs are met. They'll try not to hurt anyone, and if they help anyone it's usually accidental, but the end result is always that the CN character has served their own interests first.

The roleplaying problem here, that tends to result in Chaotic Random (see: stupid), is that people don't define their needs on behalf of their character. If the character has a motivation and a backstory, then they will act selfishly to pursue that motivation without regard for anyone, in whatever way seems to best meet the need.

A character without a backstory (ie. a player who was too lazy to write a backstory/motivation into their character see: Chaotic Lazy) ends up acting randomly because the character begins to act on the PLAYERS needs rather than the character's needs. This results in players acting out in whatever fashion best amuses them in character.

yldenfrei
2011-01-13, 07:44 AM
@ OP: About the unscrupulous dwarf and your CN druid's intention to off him. Yes, simply thinking of ways to kill him wouldn't make you Evil. When you do act upon them, that's when you slide down. Basically, when the dwarf dies by your hand, hello Evil points.

A more Neutral approach would be to sabotage his business. Summon a few monsters to destroy his warehouse or at least its contents. If you can find some, drop seeds of any quick-growing tree or some such plant to destroy his equipment stock. Watch as the guards stand agape and try to think of some way to stop the trees without destroying many items in the process. You can shut him down, just not literally. And nobody will think Evil of you for it.Because apparently in D&D mischiefs not directly targeted towards creatures only count as Chaotic.

Vangor
2011-01-13, 07:51 AM
So, is a mindful avenger working behind Law's back a good example of a CN? Or is it a bad example?

Depends on what "ruthless" means you have done. You mention ignoring the law as wanted, which is chaotic, and I imagine you will ignore the needs of others in this quest for vengeance, which is neutral. The issue is you mention not being good because of your ruthlessness. I imagine you mean granting no quarter and similar, which is perfectly acceptable.


The thing is, both Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Evil seem to both fall under 'do what you want for your own reasons', granted one tends to be a little more destructive in how it goes about it.

Effectively, neutral will not tend to harm people whereas evil does not care or enjoys the act. The main difference, to me, is Chaotic Neutral tries to avoid much they would "be caught" for.


This drawf seems to want to milk the party of every possible copper using any means. My character has an intense desire to end this dwarf

I am a little confused on the dwarf milking your party "using any means" and this being justification for killing. If the dwarf stole or similar, this wouldn't be milking, but merely charging exorbitant prices is nothing too bad. You'll need to elaborate, but from the language I would say you are tending toward evil.

The Big Dice
2011-01-13, 07:51 AM
That's not CN. That's CE, with active disregard for the well-being of others. Those sonic damages could well slaughter the entire neighborhood. :smallannoyed:
It's not loud enough to be harmful, just enough to be annoying. But what I'm getting at is, CN is the most selfish of alignments.

Jsuelieta
2011-01-13, 08:06 AM
I am a little confused on the dwarf milking your party "using any means" and this being justification for killing. If the dwarf stole or similar, this wouldn't be milking, but merely charging exorbitant prices is nothing too bad. You'll need to elaborate, but from the language I would say you are tending toward evil.

Basically we were sent to a new continent to explore and claim land for the kingdom (turns out we're claiming it for ourselves, but that's another can of worms). This dwarf is the only shopkeep for months and taxes the use of the nearby river, trade routes, price gouges his only customers (more than double normal prices for everything, even though the party is his only source of income for another year), he's even trying to stick us with the bill for a group we were never told existed that was apparently supposed to come with us. This turned into a big thing both in game and out because we'd never heard of this other group until we were charged for their room and board. Why the ones who were there weren't charged is beyond me, except that the dwarf is just trying to drain our purses dry and willing to strong-arm us with his guards if we don't want to pay.

Vangor
2011-01-13, 08:18 AM
Why the ones who were there weren't charged is beyond me, except that the dwarf is just trying to drain our purses dry and willing to strong-arm us with his guards if we don't want to pay.

Not quite justification to kill him. Does not shift you merely to plan, by virtue of the guards strong-arming you. Remember, this is a continuum where actions can either leap or slowly slide, and planning murder is a slow slide when the murder is not justified.

Anyway, what you are free to do is disrupt him, get into an altercation with the guards, and confront him openly. You absolutely do not need to back down, and you can even force the issue towards violence, and what results is not an evil act. What you basically cannot do is start slaying people.

Burner28
2011-01-13, 08:18 AM
It's not loud enough to be harmful, just enough to be annoying. But what I'm getting at is, CN is the most selfish of alignments.

Not necessarily, Lawful Neutral characters can also have the potential to be incredibly selfish.

Coidzor
2011-01-13, 08:25 AM
^: What, we just forgot about Evil?
As a little side question, I've seen 'Chaotic Stupid' tossed around a lot, is that the "I can do what I want because my alignment doesn't say I can't" version of this?

Mostly it's more like doing trivial or immature things for kicks and being generally disruptive and not playing ball as far as I've been able to tell.

Eldan
2011-01-13, 08:33 AM
I think giving my view on the chaotic alignment in general is the best thing I an do to help here. Please not that this is a personal opinion, as the "official" definition of alignment as presented in the books by Wizards of the coast is for the best part a confusing mess.

Freedom and Society: For the chaotic individual, the good of the many gives no right to trample the good of the few. While a lawful person sees reason in killing or otherwise hindering one person or a group for the good of an entire society, the chaotic person might stand up for the minority, perhaps even because they are the weaker minority and need a stronger voice.

Authority and Loyalty: For the chaotic individual, authority is not derived from a principle. The king has no right to rule because his grandfather was a good king. You don't make someone a magistrate because the law says you have to. An elder is not respected because tradition says they deserve respect.
Instead, you respect an authority because they did something to deserve your trust and respect. If someone has won many battles in the past, you follow their orders because you think they are good generals. If someone writes just laws and is a fair judge, you think they should be asked for advice.
It is similar with personal relationships: you don't love your brother just because he is your brother, but because you know him well, and he helped you out many times in the past. In a conflict, you don't help other humans just because they are the same race as you, but because you believe that they, as individuals, did the right thing. Relationships are personal, not based on principles.

Laws and Rules: You see the good in a law as a guideline for how things should be handled, but you don't follow them just because they are written down somewhere. The chaotic person is more likely to consider ignoring a law or judgment in one case because following it to the letter would be unjust, while a lawful person would be worried about setting a bad example of precedent.

panaikhan
2011-01-13, 08:44 AM
If I can get to this by a round-about way.

In a recent Ebberon game, I played a Warforged. I agreed with the DM beforehand that I would play the character 'growing up' alignment-wise (he was only a few years old) as long as there were no penalties for the changes that occured.
So, I wrote 'Neutral' on the sheet, and kept my own little alignment chart.
Our frequent run-ins with supposed law-enforcement, and others, pegged a shift to Chaotic Neutral (I want to do this, and the fleshies want to stop me).
Then I reached a crux on the chart. In one encounter we bumped into one group of fanatics in armour. The combat gradually went south for these guys until the leader finally said "We Yield."

The Warforged, never having faced an enemy who yielded before, stood confused. The character wobbled on the knife-edge between CN and CE, wondering if the "kill them all anyway" route was viable.
As a player, I knew that killing the enemy after they surrendered would plunge the character into evil.
As the character, I roleplayed through the decision - talking to the rest of the party, talking to the captive 'knights', and even eventually siding with the Monk in the party to let them go, on their word not to turn on us.

The way I see it:
CG would try to 'save' even the bad guys if possible.
CN would only think to spare the bad guys if they surrendered (but would spare them).
CE would simply kill everyone in their way.

In your example - Killing him without mercy would be evil. Attacking and driving him off (not killing him) would be neutral, but not nice. Making his life very difficult (after all, he's charging people for using the natural surroundeings) would be a typically CN Druid thing to do.

The Big Dice
2011-01-13, 08:48 AM
Not necessarily, Lawful Neutral characters can also have the potential to be incredibly selfish.
I'd say most normal people are LN. They mostly look out for themselves and the people close to them, but they also respect the law and don't do anyhting to disrupt the community in any big ways.

CN on the other hand ismore like your classic anti social alignment. Selfish and uncaring about the people around them.

Yuki Akuma
2011-01-13, 08:49 AM
Chaotic, free thinking, etc. with no preference for Good or Evil. Next!

Paseo H
2011-01-13, 08:52 AM
One of my favorite Chaotic Neutral creations is a young woman who is a narcissist as a result of an untreated nervous breakdown in her youth, so she tends to be extremely self centered, not to the point where she has no standards or decency but generally speaking she'll follow her whims, even possibly to the point of chronic backstabbing disorder.

Burner28
2011-01-13, 08:53 AM
I'd say most normal people are LN. They mostly look out for themselves and the people close to them, but they also respect the law and don't do anyhting to disrupt the community in any big ways.

CN on the other hand ismore like your classic anti social alignment. Selfish and uncaring about the people around them.

Actually I would argue that people are usually not Lawful, but rather Neutral.

To elaborate on my claim, Chaotic Neutral characters can be the most selfish, though it is also possible that Lawful Neutral characters can be incredibly selfish, believeing that caring about rules, routines and order is the best way for them and everyone else's needs should not be of any concern to them unlesss ignoring their needs would go against their alignment or it would serve the LN individual best to act altruistically

The Big Dice
2011-01-13, 09:02 AM
Actually I would argue that people are usually not Lawful, but rather Neutral.

To elaborate on my claim, Chaotic Neutral characters can be the most selfish, though it is also possible that Lawful Neutral characters can be incredibly selfish, believeing that caring about rules, routines and order is the best way for them and everyone else's needs should not be of any concern to them unlesss ignoring their needs would go against their alignment or it would serve the LN individual best to act altruistically
LN is the alignment of getting up to go to work every day. It's the alignment of the self, family and friends, then the community. LN is enlightened self interest, looking out for the community at large. Because by doing so you serve your own interests.

True Neutral isn't anything. It's someone sitting on the fence, refusing to commit themselves to anything outside their immediate needs. Neutral neither gives nor takes, nor does it heal or harm.

Eldan
2011-01-13, 09:14 AM
Getting up to work every day and supporting your family first is just about the definition of true neutral. That's not a strong conviction for lawfulness. That's "Yeah, it's probably for the best". Looking out for the community to serve your own interests too.

yldenfrei
2011-01-13, 09:26 AM
It's not loud enough to be harmful, just enough to be annoying. But what I'm getting at is, CN is the most selfish of alignments.

Still CE. CN is that other neighbor you are complaining to, who promptly tells you to leave the loud man alone, and just go buy yourself some noise cancelling mufflers if it bothers you so much. :smallsmile:

Selfishness is indeed a Neutral trait (leaning somewhat toward Evil). Though I would not actually say that either LN or CN are more selfish than the other.

And yes to the average person being True Neutral. Neutral (Lawful-Chaotic) is often described as having some modicum of respect for the Law, with no active desire to disregard or abolish it, and no active desire to promote it either.

rayne_dragon
2011-01-13, 09:32 AM
Chaotic stupid, as others have already said, is when a CN alignment is used as justification to act idiotically. It's a cleric randomly casting cause light wounds instead of cure light wounds without any real reason. On the other hand a cleric of a Luck diety who flips a coin to determine if they're going to cast cure or cause light wounds at least has some justification and can even be a decent character if they realize that sometimes you have to drop the randomness and just heal people to keep the game fun for everyone.

The way I view it, Chaotic Neutral is the punk alignment. You value personal freedom above all else and you don't want it to harm others or help others. A chaotic good character values personal freedom and wants others to be able to enjoy that freedom as well, while a chaotic evil person wants to do what they want no matter what the consequences and even prefers that others are harmed in the course of their pursuits.

Lord Raziere
2011-01-13, 09:35 AM
Chaotic Neutral is....

someone who robs a bank, with a gun that isn't loaded to get the money to fake a policeman's uniform because they flunked police academy and they want to enforce all the laws they deem just anyways. then they use the money left over to buy ice cream and candy.

not a good example? then it is....

the brother who risks everything to save his sister, and defy any authority to do so, without much thought for other people, but ends up saving the others anyways in the process of saving his sister.

maybe Chaotic Neutral could be defined as a narrow form of Chaotic Good? wants to save his own friends and their freedom as well as their own freedom, but not everyone else's.

Vangor
2011-01-13, 09:40 AM
On the other hand a cleric of a Luck diety who flips a coin to determine if they're going to cast cure or cause light wounds at least has some justification and can even be a decent character if they realize that sometimes you have to drop the randomness and just heal people to keep the game fun for everyone.

This would be a deity focused on chaos for the sake of chaos as opposed to luck, in my opinion. Deities of luck tend to bless people with ways to better their luck. Perhaps justification could be given of a character who entirely follows the luck of the cosmos seeing the coin flip as the will of the deity and thus a greater purpose, but this would need to be handled in game with mechanically favorable coin flips/die rolls.

rayne_dragon
2011-01-13, 09:58 AM
This would be a deity focused on chaos for the sake of chaos as opposed to luck, in my opinion. Deities of luck tend to bless people with ways to better their luck. Perhaps justification could be given of a character who entirely follows the luck of the cosmos seeing the coin flip as the will of the deity and thus a greater purpose, but this would need to be handled in game with mechanically favorable coin flips/die rolls.

I suppose it depends on the Luck deity in question... are they about just good luck, or about luck both good and bad? In the case of the particular character I was actually thinking of the DM (not me) had the deity of luck be of both good and bad luck and felt the need to point out on numerous occassions that "she's not just the goddess of good luck." Plus it was nice in that because other characters knew they ran the risk of being harmed instead of hurt they didn't look at the cleric as a walking box of band-aids. And, of course, having the character have some skill with legerdemain and a player who's pretty good at flipping coins the way xhe wants to doesn't hurt either.

Jsuelieta
2011-01-13, 09:58 AM
So lemme see if I have this straight. Using my hawk companion to drop alchemist's fire onto the dwarf's building knowing he's likely to run away because he's already said he doesn't have magic items or scrolls is chaotic, but neutral. Tying him up or waiting until he's asleep so he can't get out of the soon-to-be inferno would be chaotic and evil. Dropping the alchemist's fire on top of the party warlock because his name happens to be 'torchboy' (not kidding) is chaotic and stupid. All that sound about right?

Eldan
2011-01-13, 10:01 AM
Pretty much, yeah.

Though that's one of the less extreme examples of chaotic stupid. Let me paraphrase:

"Of course I can around naked and juggle while the orcs attack! I'm chaotic neutral! What do you mean, I get no XP for that, it's good roleplaying!"

rayne_dragon
2011-01-13, 10:12 AM
Dropping the alchemist's fire on top of the party warlock because his name happens to be 'torchboy' (not kidding) is chaotic and stupid.

Actually I find that more funny than stupid, if only because the warlock was named 'torchboy.' Really, with a name like that you're asking to be set on fire by anyone with even a little moral ambiguity.

Ingus
2011-01-13, 11:02 AM
Asi I see it...

Philosophical:
Good/Evil axis define the way you define your purposes. On the good side, with many different nuances, you find "help myself and help others", on the neutral side you find "help myself", on the evil side you find "help myself even harming people". As said, you can find differend declinations of the principle and a balancement between interests (goods can save lives at the expense of other's properties without any inconvenience, while bads can act or even be goods sometimes to a major selfish interest [or even be evil towards the majority of people and good to, say, love mates].
Law/Chaos axis define the way you interact with the world. If your character faces the reality with an ordered, meticolous way, he's lawful. If he knows (or feel) what he wants but has no clue of how to get it, and tries anyway, he's chaotic. If he has an average planning attitude, but he can drop out a plan in favour of improvisation, he is neutral.
Of course, not lawful, nor chaotic are stupid. So panning and not planning are relative concepts in regard of the average.

But, to have a more practical answer on the chaotic neutral problem solving...
(your example, possible solutions)
1. start a concorrent activity, just for the pleasure to offend him
2. start a nasty tricks war, with property destruction, saboting, defamation and boicot of his store
3. do not pay. If he uses violence, then what happens is his fault
4. start an argument. What happens, well, happens.

If the dwarf is not a very bad person, so your CN character would normally not take in action a plan (plan? he's chaotic) to kill him. He could, however, wait when he's asleep, enter into his room and beat the hell out of his a... (non lethal damage). In the end, rayne is right: punk alignment, after all

Exil3dbyrd
2011-01-13, 12:01 PM
The example for CN that I use is a non-Maliscious Computer hacker. He'll pirate software and write an exploit or two, but not to specifically make life harder for people. Not that he would have any problem crashing an enemy's server or fragging his pc, but he's not the guy writing viruses to destroy poor average buisnessman Joe's database just because he could.

JonestheSpy
2011-01-13, 12:28 PM
Similar to what Yuki said, it's not that hard. An individualist who's neither particularly malevolent or benevolent. Doesn't mean selfish or lazy, that's the CE types.

To use Big Dice's example, a CN person would ignore any laws about noise limits and blast his stereo, but that doesn't mean he'd automatically blow off a neighbor who asked him to turn it down. A Chaotic neutral person isn't any more likely to be a jerk than any other person of neutral alignment.

I highly recommend checking out the Icelandic sagas for anyone interested in what a society of chaotic folks would look like.

And drifting somewhat off topic, I think most folks are neutral. They like a certain amount of order, but not too much.

Waker
2011-01-13, 12:46 PM
I could look at a CN character as a vagabond. They have no ability to plan ahead (though they can dream), tend to react to situations and ignore law/traditions. That being said, a player does still need to define what are the goals and common reactions a character might have. Do they tend to react to surprise with anger? Do they run?
In my experience when a player makes a CN character they do so because they don't want to invest a lot of effort into roleplaying. I'm not saying this is 100% the case, but it has happened more often than not. As other players have told me before, "CN means you can do whatever you want." Whether your are the player or the dm, you need to define how the character is CN. Are they a vagabond? An anarchist? A petty thug?
I've also seen a lot of people say that CN means selfish. That isn't necessarily the case. You could be a "lazy good" person, helping those who happen to be in your sight, but ignoring those beyond your sight. Because work is hard.

Cirrhosis
2011-01-13, 02:28 PM
As an example of CN, i would point you toward Han Solo. He's not out to hurt anyone who isn't out to hurt him, but he's not going to help anyone without a good reason either. He just wants to be left alone to do his own thing.

As for the chaotic stupid thing, is it me, or do most of the examples people have given seem like they aren't so much neutral as evil? CN is all well and good in terms of not worrying about the consequences overly much, but harming someone who thinks you are healing them? Evil. Casting sleep on someone who thinks you have their back in the middle of combat, even an inconsequential one? Evil.

Willful and knowing disregard for the safety of others who are depending on you to help them survive, thereby increasing their chances of death significantly by dancing and singing instead of fighting is in the same ballpark as stealing your party's rations and sneaking away in the middle of the night.

The point where CN and CE transition is the point where the character has developed a bridge of trust with these people. A CN character who didn't care about the survival of the other people in the party would not have joined them in the first place.

JonestheSpy
2011-01-13, 02:48 PM
I could look at a CN character as a vagabond. They have no ability to plan ahead (though they can dream), tend to react to situations and ignore law/traditions


I've also seen a lot of people say that CN means selfish. That isn't necessarily the case. You could be a "lazy good" person, helping those who happen to be in your sight, but ignoring those beyond your sight. Because work is hard.

You know, I really don't get the leap of logic people make in declaring that a radical individualist is incapable of planning ahead or working hard.

Gamer Girl
2011-01-13, 03:07 PM
You know, I really don't get the leap of logic people make in declaring that a radical individualist is incapable of planning ahead or working hard.

A radical individualist can plan and work hard, but not a CN radical individualist. The type of person who plans and works hard and is a radical individualist is LE.

Saph
2011-01-13, 03:13 PM
I think the reason a lot of people dislike CN characters is that D&D is basically a team game. Parties that work together well usually put the group ahead of the individual, while CN characters usually put the individual (specifically, themselves) ahead of the group.

Doesn't mean that CN characters automatically make bad party members, but they're definitely less reliable on average.

This is also why, if you're going to have Evil characters in your party, LE is generally preferable to CE.

The Big Dice
2011-01-13, 03:19 PM
A radical individualist can plan and work hard, but not a CN radical individualist. The type of person who plans and works hard and is a radical individualist is LE.

CN isn't a radical individualist that can't make plans. CN is your classic "TV redneck" type. Think Joy on My Name is Earl. She's fully capable of making plans and carrying them out, but she has little to no concern for anyone other than herself and possibly her kids.

Lapak
2011-01-13, 03:21 PM
Saying that a CN character cannot plan ahead is like saying that a LN character is literally incapable of being spontaneous or coming up with new plans on the fly when things go wrong. It may not be their first preference or their natural tendency, but it's a little much to say 'no, they never plan ahead, even if they have a good reason or specific goal in mind.'

CN, like every other alignment, represents a whole spectrum of personalities: in this case a spectrum that revolves around 'individual choice should generally take precedence over authority.'

(As a side note, I think the Law/Chaos axis works better when given a specific context - in my campaign, it's the character's general feeling towards civilization specifically as opposed to order in general. Your prototypical nature-oriented Druid or your barbarian nomad who is deeply suspicious of cities are examples of CN in this paradigm, though both may be orderly planners.)

Lord_Gareth
2011-01-13, 03:28 PM
Having read nothing but the OP, here's how I define a "good" CN character.

CN characters either oppose law or, alternatively, are not capable of participating in an organized society. Now, "opposing" law can be as simple as doing what you want irregardless of rules, but it might also mean an active dedication to lawlessness. In personal affairs, a CN character might come across as honorable or even disciplined, but the CN character takes on these traits because he finds them attractive, not because he feels he "should". CN characters consider concepts such as duty, obligation, and patriotism to be traps for the unwary and the unimaginative to fall into and ideas like government and especially hierarchy make them uncomfortable.

CN characters can respect structure and leadership, but they prefer for these things to arise on their own and to maintain themselves fluidly. A CN character might enjoy democracy or meritocracy, for example. CN characters join parties primarily because of friendship, profit, or dedication to a cause, and will work with other party members while making their own ideas and opinions known vocally. If party conflict becomes too great, the CN character is the one to react first, either by retreating or taking pro-active measures to see their desires made manifest.

CN characters are often in the middle on the "moral" alignment axis not out of a disinterest for good and evil, but out of a willingness to commit good acts for evil ends, or vice versa. Because CN characters value freedom above morality, they can seem dangerous and unpredictable to those that do not know them.

Does that make sense?

Gamer Girl
2011-01-13, 03:35 PM
Saying that a CN character cannot plan ahead is like saying that a LN character is literally incapable of being spontaneous or coming up with new plans on the fly when things go wrong. It may not be their first preference or their natural tendency, but it's a little much to say 'no, they never plan ahead, even if they have a good reason or specific goal in mind.'



One of the problems here is the game vs real life. What you say is true for a CN or LN person who lives that way 24/7.

However, most games are only a couple game hours of a 24 hour game day. And if a CN/LN person is always doing the 'best' thing, then they are not playing their alignment.

For example, if every time a LN person sees a monster they charge and kill it or if a CN person sits down before each battle and draws up complex battle plans, then they are not playing there alignments.

Lord_Gareth
2011-01-13, 03:37 PM
One of the problems here is the game vs real life. What you say is true for a CN or LN person who lives that way 24/7.

However, most games are only a couple game hours of a 24 hour game day. And if a CN/LN person is always doing the 'best' thing, then they are not playing their alignment.

For example, if every time a LN person sees a monster they charge and kill it or if a CN person sits down before each battle and draws up complex battle plans, then they are not playing there alignments.

I disagree. Here's the primary difference re: planning - LN thinks long-term, and CN tends to think short-term. LN is a strategist, CN is a tactician. CN might draw up a complex plan, but be willing to change it on the fly; LN might not have a plan at all, but act out of a motivation for long-term improvement of order (such as by killing every gnoll they see).

JonestheSpy
2011-01-13, 03:42 PM
A radical individualist can plan and work hard, but not a CN radical individualist. The type of person who plans and works hard and is a radical individualist is LE.

Wow. That makes no sense whatsoever.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 03:51 PM
As said, you can find differend declinations of the principle and a balancement between interests (goods can save lives at the expense of other's properties without any inconvenience, while bads can act or even be goods sometimes to a major selfish interest [or even be evil towards the majority of people and good to, say, love mates].

I'd go so far as to say you can have evil people who are good toward the majority of people and evil to, say, a hated group.

Gamer Girl
2011-01-13, 03:59 PM
I disagree. Here's the primary difference re: planning - LN thinks long-term, and CN tends to think short-term. LN is a strategist, CN is a tactician. CN might draw up a complex plan, but be willing to change it on the fly; LN might not have a plan at all, but act out of a motivation for long-term improvement of order (such as by killing every gnoll they see).

I disagree. This brings up the modern problem of anyone can be anything because we say so and want it to be that way and use that name, title or such for us.

A lawful person makes plans and is very orderly, a chaotic person does stuff on the fly. Once you get into 'the CN guy can plan a complex attack and a LN guy will just charge in and attack', then your saying that anyone can be anything they want to, at any time they want to, always.

Yes, not everything a person does has to be of their set alignment, but about 75% of what they do needs to be....or they would have a different alignment.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 04:04 PM
Yes, not everything a person does has to be of their set alignment, but about 75% of what they do needs to be....or they would have a different alignment.

To quote Fiendish Codex 2:


Most mortals are only weakly aligned. They go about their daily business without thinking too much about the big issues, and they rarely take actions dramatic enough to register as good, evil, lawful, or chaotic.

So, if a LN or CN person is one of those who are ""only weakly aligned" then they'll rarely be doing Lawful, or Chaotic, acts. Yet they will still be doing them.

RndmNumGen
2011-01-13, 04:08 PM
I tend to see the general CN archtype as the ultimate cowboy, living on the frontier because he doesn't like the laws of the cities, doing what he wants because he wants to. At the same time, he's not vandalizing settlements or robbing banks or kidnapping people to make money (That's CE).

CG is closer to the cowboys that actually go after the bandits who vandalize settlements, rob banks and kidnap people.

Lapak
2011-01-13, 04:09 PM
Yes, not everything a person does has to be of their set alignment, but about 75% of what they do needs to be....or they would have a different alignment.That's only true if you assume that a two-axis alignment is capable of covering every aspect of a character's personality and actions, as opposed to assuming that it covers a couple of spiritually-significant bases.

An Evil character doesn't have to be actively Evil 75% of the time to be Evil. A villain might knit and have breakfast and run errands and then spend 2% of his day murdering someone just because he can - he'd still be Evil, even though he spent 98% of his day performing Neutral activities and having Neutral thoughts. The same can be applied to the Law/Chaos axis. A Chaotic character doesn't have to be all-Chaotic-all-the-time to qualify.

JonestheSpy
2011-01-13, 04:11 PM
That's only true if you assume that a two-axis alignment is capable of covering every aspect of a character's personality and actions, as opposed to assuming that it covers a couple of spiritually-significant bases.



Lapak wins an internet.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 04:11 PM
I tend to see the general CN archtype as the ultimate cowboy, living on the frontier because he doesn't like the laws of the cities, doing what he wants because he wants to. At the same time, he's not vandalizing settlements or robbing banks or kidnapping people to make money (That's CE).

Hmm- would Ben Rumson from Paint Your Wagon be a good example of this- he breaks a lot of rules, but the idea of betraying a partner is anathema to him.

Whenever "civilization" gets too strong in the frontier, he packs up and moves.

Dr.Epic
2011-01-13, 04:12 PM
Very loose morals but there's a line they won't cross; they're not a complete monster.

Lateral
2011-01-13, 04:15 PM
I've always pictured Chaotic Neutral as the guy who does whatever the hell he wants so long as nobody gets hurt too badly.

I always tend to play (and act) Chaotic Neutral bordering on good, though, so I'm a bit biased. Straight Chaotic Neutral is 'do whatever the hell I want, no matter what anyone tells me', as opposed to Chaotic Good, which is 'do what I feel is right, no matter what anyone tells me', or Chaotic Evil, which is 'do what I want, especially if it hurts people'.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 04:19 PM
These can be a bit subject to circumstances though.

A character who does what he thinks is right- and in the process harms a lot of people, and knows that this is the consequence of their actions- and keeps acting that way- might be Evil rather than Good, if they're sufficiently deluded about "what they think is right".

Gamer Girl
2011-01-13, 04:22 PM
So, if a LN or CN person is one of those who are ""only weakly aligned" then they'll rarely be doing Lawful, or Chaotic, acts. Yet they will still be doing them.


Yes a person can get away with not doing 'alignment acts' all day, maybe all week. The average person has a very boring life...get up, work and sleep....they have no chance to do much of anything. And a criminal is still CE even if he is locked up in prison and has not done anything evil in years.


But good/evil and law/chaos are different, the first is more of a choice and the second is more of your nature. For the most part, your free to pick if you want to be good or evil, but if your lawful or chaotic that is just who you are.

A lawful person follows laws and rules...they even like the rules. A lawful person gets up at the same time, does the same things and is very robotic.

A chaotic person is..well, chaotic. They don't follow laws or rules, they get up whenever and they do random things.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 04:25 PM
A lawful person follows laws and rules...they even like the rules. A lawful person gets up at the same time, does the same things and is very robotic.

A chaotic person is..well, chaotic. They don't follow laws or rules, they get up whenever and they do random things.

This seems overstereotyped.

A Chaotic monarch (like the king of Breland in Eberron, or most Elven monarchs) still has laws to follow. Often, they will be writing the laws for others to follow.

"Chaotics do random things" also seems a bit excessive.

They might act based on a thought that come to them at the time "Hey- maybe this issue needs to be looked at" but not completely randomly.

Gamer Girl
2011-01-13, 04:33 PM
This seems overstereotyped.


It's not so much a chaotic person can't follow at law, it's just that they don't want too.

Take the modern example: 25% of people will drive over the speed limit, automatically and no matter what...they are Chaotic. 25% of people will always, always follow the posted speed limit..they are Lawful. The other 50% are the Neutral folks...most will generally follow the speed limit, but are more then willing to break it if they think they can get away with it.


Something like a Chaotic king and still appear to follow the laws, as long as they don't effect him much. But when it comes to something he does not like, he will change it on the fly.

RndmNumGen
2011-01-13, 04:33 PM
Hmm- would Ben Rumson from Paint Your Wagon be a good example of this- he breaks a lot of rules, but the idea of betraying a partner is anathema to him.

Whenever "civilization" gets too strong in the frontier, he packs up and moves.

Exactly. That's how I see CN, anyway.

Lord_Gareth
2011-01-13, 04:34 PM
Chaotic characters don't necessarily break laws for the sake of breaking, but they might. Instad, chaotic characters follow laws that they find convenient and disregard those laws which they dislike.

Sipex
2011-01-13, 04:39 PM
That's only true if you assume that a two-axis alignment is capable of covering every aspect of a character's personality and actions, as opposed to assuming that it covers a couple of spiritually-significant bases.

An Evil character doesn't have to be actively Evil 75% of the time to be Evil. A villain might knit and have breakfast and run errands and then spend 2% of his day murdering someone just because he can - he'd still be Evil, even though he spent 98% of his day performing Neutral activities and having Neutral thoughts. The same can be applied to the Law/Chaos axis. A Chaotic character doesn't have to be all-Chaotic-all-the-time to qualify.

This seems overgeneralised like "If you do anything evil (or good?) you're that alignment."

I mean, what would you call a player who saved an orphanage and then donated all his gold to it, built homes for the poor then murdered some sod just because he could?

My brain is pinging evil and yet I don't want to believe that. Damn social conventions.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 04:43 PM
Something like a Chaotic king and still appear to follow the laws, as long as they don't effect him much. But when it comes to something he does not like, he will change it on the fly.

A Chaotic Good king will tend to create laws that are primarily based on morality and "not harming others save in self-defense". Aside from that, they're likely to restrict government somewhat, due to how much they value individualism.

"Anything that's not mandatory is forbidden" would be the rule imposed on officials- to ensure that they govern as little as possible- only doing what's needed.

I'm not sure how a Chaotic Neutral ruler would govern a chaotic neutral people. Maybe there would be no ruler- with the people ruling as a group? Few laws- but some taboos and traditions to keep society from simply breaking up.



I mean, what would you call a player who saved an orphanage and then donated all his gold to it, built homes for the poor then murdered some sod just because he could?

My brain is pinging evil and yet I don't want to believe that. Damn social conventions.

I don't see any problem with that being Evil- it's simply a case of "a mix of Good and Evil deeds tends to be Evil rather than Neutral".

Champions of Ruin stresses this.

Gamer Girl
2011-01-13, 04:48 PM
My brain is pinging evil and yet I don't want to believe that. Damn social conventions.


This belief is at the heart of the problem. People don't want to 'believe' in one thing or the other or do not want to be labeled something they don't like.

Say Alay has a baby, but does not want it, so she kills it. Murder of a helpless innocent is a evil act......but Alay sure does not want to be evil, so she believes what she did was not evil and was good, as she wants it to be that way.


Same way a criminal might spend all year stealing money...and at Christmas he gives away a lot of money to charities. He does not want to be called good for doing that, so he does not call the action good.

Same with...people think Chaotic is cool and fun. So even though they do the exact same thing everyday and never even think about doing anything on the fly or breaking any laws or doing what they want.....they will still say they are 'cool and chaotic'.

hamishspence
2011-01-13, 04:58 PM
Same way a criminal might spend all year stealing money...and at Christmas he gives away a lot of money to charities. He does not want to be called good for doing that, so he does not call the action good.

Some might actually want to be called good- and make excuses for their normal actions "it's a victimless crime" "I'm only stealing from those that deserve to be robbed" and so on.

Others, however- might hate the idea that anyone knows they are altruistic in some ways- and so conceal it- claiming that every apparently altruistic act they're doing is for a selfish reason.

Still, characters who want to be called "bad" are rare.

Grelna the Blue
2011-01-13, 05:30 PM
The only personal freedoms a Chaotic Neutral character cares about are her own. The rights of others might be important to a CG character, but CN types care mainly about themselves and CE types will oppress the hell out of anyone if it seems convenient or fun to do so.

As with all of the Chaotically aligned, CNs don't like toeing the line, being pushed around, having to conform. It might from be stubborn adherence to a personal code or agenda or it could be from sheer bloodyminded contrariness, but the wishes of other people and the polite conventions of society are dead last on the priority list for a CN character.

Chaotic Neutral has two theme songs:

I've Gotta Be Me
Whether I'm right or whether I'm wrong
Whether I find a place in this world or never belong
I gotta be me, I've gotta be me
What else can I be but what I am

I want to live, not merely survive
And I won't give up this dream
Of life that keeps me alive
I gotta be me, I gotta be me
The dream that I see makes me what I am

That far-away prize, a world of success
Is waiting for me if I heed the call
I won't settle down, won't settle for less
As long as there's a chance that I can have it all

I'll go it alone, that's how it must be
I can't be right for somebody else
If I'm not right for me
I gotta be free, I've gotta be free
Daring to try, to do it or die
I've gotta be me

I'll go it alone, that's how it must be
I can't be right for somebody else
If I'm not right for me
I gotta be free, I just gotta be free
Daring to try, to do it or die
I gotta be me



My Way
And now the end is near
And so I face the final curtain
My friend I'll say it clear
I'll state my case of which I'm certain

I've lived a life that's full
I traveled each and every highway
And more, much more than this
I did it my way

Regrets I've had a few
But then again too few to mention
I did what I had to do
And saw it through without exemption

I planned each charted course
Each careful step along the byway
And more, much more than this
I did it my way

Yes there were times I'm sure you knew
When I bit off more than I could chew
But through it all when there was doubt
I ate it up and spit it out, I faced it all
And I stood tall and did it my way

I've loved, I've laughed and cried
I've had my fill, my share of losing
And now as tears subside
I find it all so amusing

To think I did all that
And may I say not in a shy way
Oh no, oh no, not me
I did it my way

For what is a man what has he got
If not himself then he has not
To say the things he truly feels
And not the words of one who kneels
The record shows I took the blows
And did it my way

Yes it was my wayProperly played, CN characters can be fun and interesting. Most often they are not properly played.

Lycar
2011-01-13, 06:35 PM
About CN rulers and CN societies:

Personally, I always think of Traveller's Vargr (http://traveller.wikia.com/wiki/Vargr) as the poster children (http://members.pcug.org.au/~davidjw/libdata/alphabet/v/vargr.htm) for a Chaotic Neutral society.

Sure, they live in 'packs', but they only do so because they believe the leader is worthy of their loyalty. And they break ties pretty quickly if their esteem for a leader plummets.

Since they are still predators by nature, they probably tend more towards the CE end of the spectrum then CG, but then again, since they actually care about how their fellow sentients view them, they usually try to be liked even outside their immediate social sphere.

As far as laws go, they will respect what their respected leader prescribes and pretty much ignore everything else. So it is more like a 'I-want-to-belong' attitude then a 'I-want-to-do-what's-right' one really.

Hope that helps. :smallsmile:

Lycar

zorba1994
2011-01-14, 12:10 AM
I always explain CN as the pyromaniac: Doesn't necessarily want to see anyone get hurt, but likes watching the house burn.

Alternatively, I use the cast of Firefly to explain the alignments: (Mal is CG but bordering on CN, Zoe is LN/LG, Wash is N, as is Inara, Jayne is CE, Kaylee is NG, Simon is CN/CG, Shepherd is LG, and River Tam is CN)

Callista
2011-01-14, 02:00 AM
Chaotic Neutral is... hmm. Well, I just keep on thinking of fictional examples.

Jack Sparrow from Pirates of the Caribbean.
The entire philosophy of the musical "Rent" (and most of its characters).
Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, and most old-style slapstick cartoon characters in general.
Q from Star Trek.

CN is the trickster, the free spirit, the anarchist... not mean-spirited, but can be either really, really annoying or amazingly helpful depending on which side of the bed they woke up on today.

Tortiekat
2011-01-14, 08:19 AM
I'm currently playing a CN character , so I've given this matter some thought.

Given the well-known problems with the alignment system, I tend to be open to lots of interpretations of it--I'm more interested in how a particular character interprets the system *for herself* than coming up with a systematic, one-size fits all interpretation.

In the case of my character Delshandra, I see it like this: she's neutral because she's amoral--she won't do the right thing just because it's the right thing to do; there has to be some self-interest involved. But she's amoral, not evil: she still takes the lives and feelings of other people into account when trying to decide what to do. She's chaotic because she hates anyone having authority over her, and generally tries to set things up so that she has autonomy (like impersonating a noblewoman, her favorite con to run.)

That's just her version of CN. Other people might have different but equally valid interpretations: the CN cleric or wizard who feels that chaos and entropy define reality, the CN bard who feels that life is just a game of chance, the CN fighter who believes that the world is resolved by the whim of the gods. Those views of CN would emphasize the randomness and neutrality of the universe. You could also have the CN character who thinks that laws are merely the way people justify their own actions to each other--that emphasizes the "anti-authoritarian" view of CN.

You can even retreat to the "mentally ill people are CN" view of DnD 2e, although not all mental illness is chaotic--even schizophrenics can have highly-evolved delusional structures with very lawful attributes.

In Del's case, she's willing to follow the laws that benefit her but doesn't really believe anyone has the right to tell her what to do. (She'd do pretty well in Special Circumstances in the Culture, come to think of it.) She lives in a pretty nice kingdom and obeys their laws because it benefits her to stay in that society. If people tried to force her to do something that she didn't see giving her any personal benefit, she'd resist. But she's neutral, not evil, so her definition of "personal" extends to her friends, family, even the kingdom itself.

I suppose you could make a case that she's really CG, and certainly she trends in either direction--sometimes her obsession with power puts her close to CE, but her friend the druid (who has demonstrated that Good does not mean Weak) pushes her towards CG. She thinks she's CN, though, and that works for me :)

Jsuelieta
2011-01-14, 09:18 AM
Y'know, when I first asked about this, I was just trying to get an idea of where the line between Chaotic Neutral and any particular flavor of evil (or good) was because, hey, my character is a druid, no neutral means no druid powers. Slipping in either direction on that axis is bad news for me and moving on the other one is incredibly hard to do in most cases.

The idea behind the druid was along the lines of "The only law is that of nature, no being may bind another to their ways without consent. Cities remove the freedom of nature, but as long as you respect my ways, I shall respect yours. Try to impose your will upon me and be prepared to pay for it later." She does, however, have this thing about debts. Once a debt is owed it must be repaid to maintain proper sense of balance between people. Exceptions are arbitrary debts or fines, i.e. due to breaking a minor law like jaywalking.

In reading that description, does it seem like it's almost leaning in the direction of true neutral to anyone else? If it's not just me I may have to talk to my DM and swap to that so I have less fear of losing powers to alignment.

I really didn't expect three pages worth of posts on this topic, but it's awesome to get all the feedback. Y'all are a great resource!

Burner28
2011-01-14, 09:20 AM
Y'know, when I first asked about this, I was just trying to get an idea of where the line between Chaotic Neutral and any particular flavor of evil (or good) was because, hey, my character is a druid, no neutral means no druid powers. Slipping in either direction on that axis is bad news for me and moving on the other one is incredibly hard to do in most cases.

The idea behind the druid was along the lines of "The only law is that of nature, no being may bind another to their ways without consent. Cities remove the freedom of nature, but as long as you respect my ways, I shall respect yours. Try to impose your will upon me and be prepared to pay for it later." She does, however, have this thing about debts. Once a debt is owed it must be repaid to maintain proper sense of balance between people. Exceptions are arbitrary debts or fines, i.e. due to breaking a minor law like jaywalking.

In reading that description, does it seem like it's almost leaning in the direction of true neutral to anyone else? If it's not just me I may have to talk to my DM and swap to that so I have less fear of losing powers to alignment.

I really didn't expect three pages worth of posts on this topic, but it's awesome to get all the feedback. Y'all are a great resource!

Nope still Chaotic Neutral