Alignment...where do you see yourself?

[Narren]

I was going to make this a poll, but on account of not knowing how to set one up I'll probably forgo that. I also think my question may be a bit more involved than a poll will be able to indicate, so maybe it's for the better.

Alignment is one of the more heavily debated subjects on a forum with MANY heavily debated subjects. I agree that few people can be summed up as "Lawful Good" or "Chaotic Evil."

That being said, where do most of you feel that you fall on the alignment scale? And it's perfectly OK to say that you have tendencies towards one or more.

I started thinking about this when I was trying to determine what a "good" person was, and if I meet the criteria. I'm also curious to see how many people consider themselves "good" compared to "neutral." I feel like I'm all over the place on the Law/Chaos axis, which I guess is Neutral.

[Alleran]

Neutral Good.

[Serpentine]

I think I at least have the potential to be Good, but aside from the odd explicitly Good deed my general lack of activity probably makes me more Neutral with Good leanings/intentions.
Alignment-wise, I think I'm probably Neutral. Overall, I obey laws and rules. I think they're necessary, generally speaking, they're not going anywhere anytime soon, and I'm pretty scared of punishment - always have been. However, I do not respect authority for authority's sake, and anyone who expects me to obey them just because they're "in charge" will find me... difficult. I do have a problem with authority, and I have little respect for laws I find stupid.

So, overall, True Neutral/Neutral Good.

[Varil]

Hard to say. I could easily see myself being nearly half the alignments, anywhere from Neutral Good to Lawful Neutral to Chaotic Neutral to Lawful Evil. I've gone out of my way to help people, but I've also been a pretty selfish bastard at times. I don't care about "Law" but I do care about "Order", and sometimes even "Justice".

...the alignment system doesn't really work. People are too dynamic, with circumstances and even mood changing our outlook, not to mention simple day-to-day adjustments that come from maturing as a person. On top of that, people are naturally hypocritical. We can want to do something that is unarguably "good", and still be "evil", or vice versa.

[gkathellar]

My alignment is True Batman. (http://digitalculture-ed.net/tracys/files/2009/11/batman-alignment-1024x819.jpg)

[Tvtyrant]

Lawful Neutral.

[Taelas]

I prefer to think of myself as Lawful Neutral, though I do not know if I live up to it.

[Drelua]

I have a lot of chaotic aspects and a lot of lawful aspects, but I'm definitely good. I completely ignore the law if I find it idiotic, but I definitely see it as necessary. I respect everyone else's right to live however they want to, but I never drink or do any drugs (a rarity in high school). I have absolutely no respect for tradition and, while I never push this on others or take try to take the moral high ground because of it, I don't believe in casual sex. I find it hard to apply the alignment system to real life as it is not nearly intricate enough, but I guess I'd be neutral good, maybe with leanings towards chaotic good, with everything above considered. Tough to say, though.

[Serpentine]

Y'know, aside from the Evils - most of whom self-identifying as such I generally expect to be full of it, full of themselves, wanting to be "different" or "special", or having depressingly low self-esteem - Lawful Neutral seems to be the alignment I have the most negative reaction to.

[Anderlith]

Lawful Neutral or Neutral Good, it really depends on how one views the two. Though I don't think I'm Lawful Good, which is weird

[Gamer Girl]

Chaotic Evil

[Divide by Zero]

True Neutral with Good, Evil, Lawful, and Chaotic tendencies.

[Psyren]

I think only the mods can make polls.

Neutral Good!

[QuidEst]

Well, I'm personally Lawful Good. It's a lot easier when you don't have to make a living by killing things, really. XP

[Scarlet-Devil]

Neutral Good.

[crazyhedgewizrd]

im boderline between lawful neutral and lawful evil

[kardar233]

Chaotic Neutral.

Through my role-playing experience I'm about one set of behavioral conditionings away from Chaotic Evil. If not for a set of societally-installed distastes for certain obviously-Evil things, I could easily be CE, environment permitting.

I've built a character whose mental state is me while I'm suppressing those conditionings; it's very scary.

[Shadowknight12]

Unlikeable Good.

[Xanmyral]

Well, I only tend to follow laws out of a mixture of a desire to live non harassed, fear of the consequences. A large chunk of laws are common sense safety laws, which the fact that they need to be said makes me mourn the general intelligence of the human race, so usually following them are in my best interest. Laws that I feel are unfair, impede me in a way I feel unnecessary, or are down right idiotic I ignore though. Depending on how much I dislike the law I may even just say 'ta hell with the consequences, I'm doing this to spite them. Haven't had this come up in my life however, and I doubt it will unless the US falls into despotism in the future years. So I don't normally go out of my ways to break the laws, but nor do I do so to uphold them. So on the Law/Chaos aspect I would say neutral.

I wouldn't call my self good, unless in mirth, but I wouldn't say I'm evil. Problem here is that it starts to get really sketchy. I don't go out of my way to harm others, but neither to help others. The only exception would be to spite enemies, and help friends/family. While my initial response to someone would be politeness, it's usually just for societal sake, little more. I tend to look to pragmatism first in any question, for the easiest/highest gain option. Usually if things don't concern/effect me I won't care. So I guess I am colored as the typical "apathetic neutral" cliche a bit. Normally, I tend to do both evil and good typically in the same amount. So I would say that I'm also neutral here.

^
ll
Explanation

True Neutral, heavy handed pragmatism, a good handful of "Apathetic Neutral."

[HappyBlanket]

I'd like to think of myself as Neutral Good. But sometimes it feels like I'm Chaotic Neutral.

[Narren]

For those of you who say you're good...does it feel like a default or do you feel that there is something there that separates you from being neutral?

Those who say you're evil (if you're not joking), why do you feel that way?

[Shadowknight12]

For those of you who say you're good...does it feel like a default or do you feel that there is something there that separates you from being neutral?

I've run into dangerous situations with complete disregard of my own safety to save strangers. I've a hard time thinking a neutral person would do that when they could just quietly leave and nobody would ever know.

[crazyhedgewizrd]

Those who say you're evil (if you're not joking), why do you feel that way?

i see no problem with backstabbing someone for personal gain

[Kojiro]

I've run into dangerous situations with complete disregard of my own safety to save strangers. I've a hard time thinking a neutral person would do that when they could just quietly leave and nobody would ever know.

I can see Neutral people doing that, really. Some, at least. There's variation inside the alignments and all. Especially if the person being saved is a child; far easier to let emotions/instinct lead you to such things when the young are concerned.

Anyway, personally, I would say that... Hm. Well, I'd like to say that I'm Good, although I perhaps don't put enough effort into it at times. Definitely value others' well-being more than my own, possibly to an unhealthy extent; in addition to doing things that don't benefit me for others, I can be completely unmotivated to do something for my own benefit, but if someone asks for help with something along the same lines, or of far less importance, I'm likely to jump up and help right away. I place a high value on human life as well, and it takes a lot for me to hate someone (although I am bad about holding minor grudges, which are somewhat different).

Law versus Chaos, meanwhile... Probably Neutral, due to certain tendencies on both sides plus the amazing vagueness about them. Have an odd sort of personal honor, albeit one that does not perfectly line up with most (or almost any) other. Will help out with almost any request that I think I can handle, but being ordered to do something, even something I would do normally, irritates me profoundly. Don't have much respect for authority; I have other reasons for respecting people, and standing in government and the like does not factor is much, although what one does with that authority can make a huge difference. Value personal liberty highly, but not when it comes at the cost of other people. There are some other things, too.

[Gamer Girl]

Those who say you're evil (if you're not joking), why do you feel that way?

I don't feel evil, I just am.

I care very little for anyone or anything that does not directly relate to my happiness or well being.

I don't help others, unless I get something out of it.

I will go out of my way to harm others, just as they are there(and they let their guard down).

I only follow laws/rules to the extent I need to not to get into trouble, and otherwise break and ignore them.(and it helps that I look like a good girl so most people won't believe or even accept that I might do such a thing).

[LaughingRogue]

True Neutral

[Shadowknight12]

I can see Neutral people doing that, really. Some, at least. There's variation inside the alignments and all. Especially if the person being saved is a child; far easier to let emotions/instinct lead you to such things when the young are concerned.

It's not an emotion thing. It's simple ethics. The gender, age or socioeconomic condition of the person does not matter in the slightest. Also, I'd do the same for most animals. And again, it's not an emotion thing. It's complicated and I don't want to get into details, but it's far from such a simplistic reasoning.

[SowZ]

True Neutral or Neutral Good.

[Kojiro]

It's not an emotion thing. It's simple ethics. The gender, age or socioeconomic condition of the person does not matter in the slightest. Also, I'd do the same for most animals. And again, it's not an emotion thing. It's complicated and I don't want to get into details, but it's far from such a simplistic reasoning.

For you, perhaps. Not for everyone. There are in fact people who would push some people out of the way of a moving car but not others, based solely on factors such as age, gender, and appearance. Hence it being possible for Neutral people too; a Good person would probably do it regardless of those factors, unless they believed that there was no chance and it'd just kill them both (some Good people can be rational like that, too), but a hypothetical Neutral person may do it for a child but not an adult, or a hot girl but not a guy, or something else. It can vary.

[Serpentine]

For those of you who say you're good...does it feel like a default or do you feel that there is something there that separates you from being neutral?I do good things when the opportunity arises. I wish everyone well, and if asked or if I know how will try to make others' lives better. I have hopes that, should the situation arise and it's within my ability, I could and would do the heroic thing. I believe deeply in the human rights, and apply most of them to all sentient/suffering animals. And various other bits and pieces.

[Blue Ghost]

I am definitely Lawful. I have a high degree of respect for rules and tradition, and avoid breaking them whenever possible. I also value consistency in behavior, organization, and respect for authority. Every Lawful trait in the book.

On the Good/Evil axis, I don't think people can be meaningfully measured that way. I strive to be as Good as I possibly can, and do whatever I can to help others by sharing the joy and hope I've been given. And I like to think I'm succeeding. Does that make me Good? I don't think I'm qualified to judge, though I identify as such.

[Shadowknight12]

For you, perhaps. Not for everyone. There are in fact people who would push some people out of the way of a moving car but not others, based solely on factors such as age, gender, and appearance. Hence it being possible for Neutral people too; a Good person would probably do it regardless of those factors, unless they believed that there was no chance and it'd just kill them both (some Good people can be rational like that, too), but a hypothetical Neutral person may do it for a child but not an adult, or a hot girl but not a guy, or something else. It can vary.

I don't disagree with that in the slightest, just saying why I'm pretty sure my justification goes beyond even the furthest stretch of the Neutral alignment.

[Kojiro]

For those of you who say you're good...does it feel like a default or do you feel that there is something there that separates you from being neutral?

Partially default, partially that I feel really bad when bad things happen to other people (sometimes even worse than I would for it happening to myself; I think it's because I have a somewhat different set of emotions and reactions to things, but am aware of the normal ones), partially because I feel like something that should be done, and partially just because I like helping people. It's a mixture of just "being that way" and personal, chosen beliefs.

Edit:

I don't disagree with that in the slightest, just saying why I'm pretty sure my justification goes beyond even the furthest stretch of the Neutral alignment.

Oh, no, sorry, wasn't referring to you in particular. I thought you were just saying that Neutral people weren't capable of that sort of thing, and was arguing that; wasn't arguing your alignment. I honestly don't know you well enough to make that sort of call; unless someone here does something like mistaking Evil for Chaotic ("I enjoy doing bad things to people and laughing at them, so I'm Chaotic"), I can't comment on anyone really.

[Chess435]

I've always seen myself as Neutral Good, sometimes with Chaotic Good tendencies.

[Shadowknight12]

Oh, no, sorry, wasn't referring to you in particular. I thought you were just saying that Neutral people weren't capable of that sort of thing, and was arguing that; wasn't arguing your alignment. I honestly don't know you well enough to make that sort of call; unless someone here does something like mistaking Evil for Chaotic ("I enjoy doing bad things to people and laughing at them, so I'm Chaotic"), I can't comment on anyone really.

Ah, then you're completely right. Neutral can save people too, but as you say, it's more subjective than normal. Neutral will especially care about saving the people that are important to it.

[TOZ]

Neutral.

I follow orders, but usually only because not following them gets me punished. If I witnessed someone trapped in a burning car/building I would go in to save them, but if I could get away with it there would be a number of people who would be dead right now.

[averagejoe]

I was going to make this a poll, but on account of not knowing how to set one up I'll probably forgo that.

It's not actually possible to do that anymore. It was a feature of these forums a long time ago, but it hasn't been for a long time.

As for alignment, I dunno. Lawful and/or good, but those two tend to overlap in places.

[Madcrafter]

Absolutely Lawful Neutral.

[Curious]

I'm a good person. I like helping others, and seeing my friends be happy gives me a warm glow.

I'm an evil person. I'm petty and bitter and selfish, I lie happily and don't like my brother.

I'm a lawful person. I have followed the laws of my country to the best of my knowledge, I have never taken drugs and I try to stop fights.

I'm a chaotic person. I subvert my parents and break rules when I feel lazy, I drink and I swear and I don't care who see's me.

I am a Human.

[Drelua]

For those of you who say you're good...does it feel like a default or do you feel that there is something there that separates you from being neutral?

Long Answer:
While I very rarely actually do a good thing, that's more because of my being extremely socially withdrawn. I've seen people that I know barely or not at all in pain, or maybe they just dropped something, and wanted to help them, but I was afraid they would get the wrong idea, I'd come across as creepy, (as I often do) or some other rationalization to keep me from getting close to anyone, but I always want to help, to the point that I feel a pain in my chest. Its been very clear to me that I care about others more than myself, though perhaps not strangers. I'd like to think that if I saw someone in danger I'd help, but I can't be sure of that without having had the opportunity. Of course, I'm really paranoid, so if I'm going somewhere dangerous, I'll probably be carrying a knife, which might make me more willing to help in certain situations. I've stubbed my toe so hard it was bleeding and the nail nearly fell off and just closed my eyes for a second to shrug off the pain, and felt less pain than I do when I see a friend get hurt.

Short Answer: While I very rarely do good deeds, I care more about others than myself, and the pain of others stings me more profoundly that my own, and I can't really see that being true of a neutral person.

[supermonkeyjoe]

Extremely tricky question, the best I can say is any non-chaotic non-evil. I'd like to think that I'm Good but can't say whether I'm actually good enough to be classed as that in D&D terms, same with Lawful.

[charcoalninja]

I'm lawful good through and through.

I feel laws are the best way to create and maintain a functional society. They codify policies that people can practice on mass to the benefit of all, such as traffic laws. Yes you can get by just fine without them, people figure it out, however everything runs more smoothly and is infinitely safer when behavior is mandated. I obey laws as often as possible, even if I don't necessarily agree with them, and even if it creates additional hardship for myself. I do not even cross the street when the light isn't green because that's not what you're supposed to do.


I am a giving person, feel that we have a responsibility to help those less fortunate than ourselves and feel that it is the proper order of things. I am empathic and find it easy to relate to people and to put their situations in perspective to place their problems on par with my own. I will defend those weaker than myself and stand up for what is right, and I will use my resources to better those around me whenever possible. I treat others with respect not because of obligation or mandate but because they deserve it. I put the needs of others above my own and am not easily frustrated by the actions of others. I am also slow to anger in most circumstances.

I will endanger my own life to save the life of another.

Lawful Good.

[Magic Myrmidon]

Well, I like to think of myself as Good. I mean, I do go out of my way to help people when they need it a lot. But I haven't exactly had a real test of what I'd do in a dangerous situation. Also, I'm not exactly perfect, so I've had a few times where I was mean to someone. That said, I've regretted pretty much every time I did. If I'm not good, I'm at least neutral.

As for law vs. chaos... I'd say neutral there. I have some rules for me, but I don't exactly care for a lot of accepted conventions.

[OverdrivePrime]

My very carefully cultivated life philosophy is one of empowered altruism.

I am neutral good by choice and deed.

[rakkoon]

Lawful neutral leaning towards lawful good. I also help strangers but mostly family or friends.
Lawful because I will not run a red light at 3AM, even when people are honking behind me.

[Narren]

Neutral.

I follow orders, but usually only because not following them gets me punished. If I witnessed someone trapped in a burning car/building I would go in to save them, but if I could get away with it there would be a number of people who would be dead right now.

I was going to bring this up. I know a number of people that place themselves in harms way to save others as a part of their job description (cops, firefighters, soldiers). Some of them, though, I wouldn't call "good" people. Some are inherently selfish people that truly don't care about the lives of those around them (not referring to you). They put their lives at risk and save others because it's in their job description, and they're just doing their job. I see this as inherently more Lawful than Good.

Having said that, most of the cops and firefighters (along with a great deal of other professions that are a bit less dangerous) got into that career because they WANT to help people, because they're good people. But that other minority does exist.

[Serpentine]

Sure. And that's why a single act or character trait does not an alignment make.

[Ravens_cry]

I try to be Lawful Good. While I do not succeed nearly as well as Roy does, that is where my ideals mostly lie.
That being said, good social engineering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_%28security%29) is something I admire.

[Timeless Error]

I'm definitely lawful, but I can't figure out if I'm lawful neutral or lawful good.

[Gnaeus]

Lawful Good


For those of you who say you're good...does it feel like a default or do you feel that there is something there that separates you from being neutral?


Well, I am a bankruptcy attorney, so I spend all day helping the poor through application of the law. I contribute to my religious organization, to charity, and to homeless people on the street. Pretty much all my free time that doesn't go to gaming goes to raising my small children. The deities I worship are ones that 3.5 regards as good aligned.

I have certainly experienced alignment shifts over my life. As a teen and later in college I was LN with LE tendencies. I would say that I was also NG for a while before LG.

[Partysan]

True neutral. And I'm pretty sure almost the whole planet is.

[Roderick_BR]

I can claim to be between lawful neutral and neutral good, but as the OP said, not really a lawful good. Either good, or lawful =p
I know for sure I'm not true neutral, as apathetic as I can be.
And the only chaotic thing is my is my bedroom...

[GrumpyWizard]

I believe I'm true neutral.

In my view, it is close to impossible to tell what you or other people are on the alignment axes, unless you are in a war or other disaster situation.

In Western societies, most of us have it pretty easy, and we do not need to compete for resources. It's easy to keep up a mostly good lifestyle. But once the chances of survival of your family depend on your betraying your neighbors to the "evil people"...

I think that the colleagues with whom you enjoy friendly banter today might or might not end up pillaging and worse if their nation/surroundings/friends would regularly do that.

Personally, I think that during a war, I would try my best to flee at the earliest opportunity. I would not extend help to anybody I didn't know, nor would I take advantage of them. = good neutral evil right?

I'd try to avoid breaking rules if I feared repercussions, but break them readily if that benefited my survival. I feel absolutely no inclination to risk my life for the complete strangers with whom I happen to share a country (i.e. join the army), but I would risk my life for my family. = lawful neutral chaotic right?

As mentioned in the introduction of the Book of Vile Darkness (or was it in the Book of Exalted Deeds?) In the D&D realm, violence is not to be considered an evil (otherwise I suppose practically all PCs are evil), but in real life, I think I categorically condemn violence of any kind.

I'm curious what other people think.

[hamishspence]

It's BoED- and it does have some pretty strict criteria for violence to qualify as Not Evil- both just cause, and good intentions (it also suggests that it should be discriminating in combat situations).

On alignment- I see the categories as pretty wide. Good and Evil people might be less common than Neutral people- but not by much.

And I tend to the view that alignment "shows through" even outside of disaster situations.

A Good person makes personal sacrifices routinely- not just in a crisis. They are more likely to be sacrifices of time, effort, and sometimes money, than of personal risk- and they don't have to be big ones- but they are made often, rather than very rarely.

Similarly, an Evil person's activities harm or oppress people- maybe on a tiny scale- but they're happening in "normal life" not just a crisis.

There's lots of ways this might manifest itself.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Lawful Evil.
Taking from Gamer Girl's list:

I care very little for anyone or anything that does not directly relate to my happiness or well being.

I don't help others, unless I get something out of it.

I will go out of my way to harm others, just as they are there(and they let their guard down).

I only follow laws/rules to the extent I need to not to get into trouble, and otherwise break and ignore them.
However, the laws I publicly follow or any promise I make, you can be sure I will keep my word, no matter what

I need to clarify that, like the Fire King (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/rTKEivnsYuZrh94H1Sn.html) I make exception for my loved ones and those I have reason to care about. I'm loyal to them and would abandon any "Evil scheme" for their safety and well being.
I explained this to my fiancee, who is Stupid Good(Good to everyone in spite of herself), that there are sentients, those who you know, and care/interact with and have real value to you as an entity, and then there is meat, everyone else, pawns to be used.
Publicly, it helps to mitigate my natural evilness/selfishness that I firmly believe in "Kindness out of egoism", the practice of ocasionally doing good deeds, not because you want to help or feel compelled to do so (Kant would approve of that), but because helping them will net you good deeds performed to you.
It's like the wicked twist of "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

In the seven years we have been together I have managed to make her more devious, so that she is now more... Neutral good. And she has brought me sligthly to the light side, simply by enlarging my "sentients" list.

[SamBurke]

Neutral Good. Definitely.

[[CLASSIFIED]]

I think I'm Chaotic Neutral, because I tend to dislike environments with lots of very rigid rules, so I usually end up breaking lots of them.

If I follow a rule/law, it's rarely because I like it, it's because I wish to avoid punishment.

[ILM]

Lawful Good. Depending on where you set the needle, possibly Lawful Neutral. I'm no saint but I like to think I'm a good guy, and I dislike distress in others. I'll go out of my way to help others, but not to the point where it directly and/or severely interferes with my own interests; however I do believe in a fair fight. I believe in order and fairness more than justice and law, but I guess in the world of D&D I can fluff that into Lawful. I do what I say, but I don't necessarily say what I do. I don't cheat on my taxes, even though I believe they're too high (the bastards).

[Amphetryon]

Lawful Neutral, with Good tendencies and a Chaotic sense of humor.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

And I tend to the view that alignment "shows through" even outside of disaster situations.

A Good person makes personal sacrifices routinely- not just in a crisis. They are more likely to be sacrifices of time, effort, and sometimes money, than of personal risk- and they don't have to be big ones- but they are made often, rather than very rarely.

Similarly, an Evil person's activities harm or oppress people- maybe on a tiny scale- but they're happening in "normal life" not just a crisis.

There's lots of ways this might manifest itself.

I agree, completely. Hence my opinion of my alignment.

[hamishspence]

I see myself as LN (hence my choice of avatar)- Lawful even when it's very inconvenient, not one to make personal sacrifices for strangers, but not one to hurt others, even with provocation.

[charcoalninja]

Lawful Evil.
Taking from Gamer Girl's list:

However, the laws I publicly follow or any promise I make, you can be sure I will keep my word, no matter what

I need to clarify that, like the Fire King (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/rTKEivnsYuZrh94H1Sn.html) I make exception for my loved ones and those I have reason to care about. I'm loyal to them and would abandon any "Evil scheme" for their safety and well being.
I explained this to my fiancee, who is Stupid Good(Good to everyone in spite of herself), that there are sentients, those who you know, and care/interact with and have real value to you as an entity, and then there is meat, everyone else, pawns to be used.
Publicly, it helps to mitigate my natural evilness/selfishness that I firmly believe in "Kindness out of egoism", the practice of ocasionally doing good deeds, not because you want to help or feel compelled to do so (Kant would approve of that), but because helping them will net you good deeds performed to you.
It's like the wicked twist of "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

In the seven years we have been together I have managed to make her more devious, so that she is now more... Neutral good. And she has brought me sligthly to the light side, simply by enlarging my "sentients" list.

Another reason I know myself to be Lawful Good is that I cannot comprehend the thought processes behind responses like this and Gamer Girl's. I do not mean to offend or slander how anyone lives their life through highlighting these replies, but I simply cannot understand how people live like this. How people can construct such a sense of other that they ignore the simple mental reality that everything you think and feel, that "meat, a pawn to be used" feels. These people are no different from yourself and by treating them in the manner these ideologies endorse you are granting validity to behaviours you would not wish brought against you. I do understand the twist to the golden rule, got a rueful smile out of that, but hey that feeds into my own lawful beliefs that rules help everyone to work together better.

I cannot understand exceptions to moral rules and the differing behaviours people endorse.

Just different ways of looking at the world I guess.

[GrumpyWizard]

And I tend to the view that alignment "shows through" even outside of disaster situations.

A Good person makes personal sacrifices routinely- not just in a crisis. They are more likely to be sacrifices of time, effort, and sometimes money, than of personal risk- and they don't have to be big ones- but they are made often, rather than very rarely.

Similarly, an Evil person's activities harm or oppress people- maybe on a tiny scale- but they're happening in "normal life" not just a crisis.

There's lots of ways this might manifest itself.

Yeah, I guess you guys are right (Zigg'rrauglurr too, even though Holy smite!):smalltongue:

Also *hands Narren a couple of wands of detect alignment* here you go. :smallsmile:

[Vemynal]

I've been everything at one point in time or another except true neutral or neutral good.

Alignment / Age
Lawful Good 6 to 10
Lawful Neutral 10 to 12
Lawful Evil 12 to 14
Neutral Evil 14 to 16
Chaotic Evil 16 to 20
Chaotic Neutral 20 to 22
Chaotic Good 22 to current (I'm turning 24 in 2 months)

I'm definitely chaotic good now, possibly extremely so haha

**Prior to 6 I was some kind of chaotic but i think that was just me being younger then 6 years old

Its fun cause my brother is definitely neutral good, my mom is lawful good and my dad is lawful neutral

[Tenno Seremel]

I see myself as Neutral Good, although my understanding of good might differ from what others think of it. So, depending on viewer himself it could be Chaotic Good or Chaotic Neutral too.

[Tetsubo 57]

Neutral Good.

[GrumpyWizard]

Yeah, I guess you guys are right (Zigg'rrauglurr too, even though Holy smite!):smalltongue:
:smallsmile:

Hrm... I've just been pondering it a smithering more, and I do believe that I act NG in real life, even though I'd act true neutral in a war (I think). Well perhaps I wouldn't... urgh, life is so complicated.:smallfrown:

[Xtomjames]

Depends on my mood really. 75% of the time I'm neutral good, I see laws as a hindrance to free thought, in some cases I'm chaotic neutral to neutral evil. I'm not above stepping on toes to get what I want, especially if it's the only way to get what I want. I'm not selfish however, I always give money to beggars and panhandlers if I have extra coin to spare...

So I suppose chaotic neutral would be me.

[Shadow Lord]

True Neutral with Selfish and Lawful tendencies. I do whatever is best for myself. Who cares about anyone else.

[Narren]

Also *hands Narren a couple of wands of detect alignment* here you go. :smallsmile:

I think these things explode if I use them in the real world.

[GrumpyWizard]

I think these things explode if I use them in the real world.

Hehe, you might be right, judging by the posts to this thread :smallwink:

Let me assure you, it was never my intention to harm you in an explosion...

[subject42]

I'm actually a source of debate for my friends, and it just popped up again last weekend.

Due to certain ethical and spiritual obligations on my part, I strive to do good, I like to think that I generally pull it off, but human nature guarantees that I can't always manage it.

The law/chaos axis is where things get fuzzy. I don't strongly respect most law and tradition, but for those things that I do respect, it is ironclad. Does that make me neutral?

[charcoalninja]

I'm actually a source of debate for my friends, and it just popped up again last weekend.

Due to certain ethical and spiritual obligations on my part, I strive to do good, I like to think that I generally pull it off, but human nature guarantees that I can't always manage it.

The law/chaos axis is where things get fuzzy. I don't strongly respect most law and tradition, but for those things that I do respect, it is ironclad. Does that make me neutral?

Makes you Lawful IMO. You have an ironclad code. It doesn't have to match society, but the fact that you seek such a method out makes me think Lawful. Do you feel having a personal code and respecting a set of ironclad rules is the best way to live your life? If so that makes lawful seem even more true.

[Reprimand]

I see myself as Neutral good, not lawful at all except when it suits me.

I have a lot of chaotic behavior but I wouldn't consider myself chaotic because I prefer to plan things out and can be quite disiplined when I need to buckle down.

I find that lying can solve many problems even though the law doesn't consider it to be the RIGHT thing to do. I'm not talking just petty lies that get you out of trouble, more like lies to protect people or to not hurt their feelings. Even a lying about "Are you having a good time?" at a party that was planned for you when all you wanted was a quiet evening at home because it's polite.

[Silva Stormrage]

Neutral Good with true neutral tendencies.

[Gamer Girl]

Another reason I know myself to be Lawful Good is that I cannot comprehend the thought processes behind responses like this and Gamer Girl's. I do not mean to offend or slander how anyone lives their life through highlighting these replies, but I simply cannot understand how people live like this. How people can construct such a sense of other that they ignore the simple mental reality that everything you think and feel, that "meat, a pawn to be used" feels. These people are no different from yourself and by treating them in the manner these ideologies endorse you are granting validity to behaviours you would not wish brought against you. I do understand the twist to the golden rule, got a rueful smile out of that, but hey that feeds into my own lawful beliefs that rules help everyone to work together better.

I cannot understand exceptions to moral rules and the differing behaviours people endorse.

Just different ways of looking at the world I guess.

The weird twist is I understand and comprehend why you want to be 'good'. Most people like the so called benefits of good, and are willing to be good themselves to get the same benefits.

Of course I don't wish to be treated badly, but I protect myself from that actively; unlike the good idea that 'if your good then others will be good to you''.

I see the rules as just for the lesser people, who could not otherwise take care of themselves. Unless it has a direct benefit to me, or I can take advantage of it somehow, I don't follow the rule.

I'm sure I can't post any examples here without getting yet another infraction....but maybe with a D&D twist:

Gella Elf(who looks like a surface elf, but is clearly drow) had a nice house and some land, though the lot next to her was vacant. This lead several kobold younglings to play in this empty field. And worst of all they played with a ball, that often flew onto Gella Elf's land and knocked over items. And needless to say the kobolds were very noisy. But Gella had a plan. She cast the spell spike stones around the field. She made the sharp stones in her very own workshop(Gella is very into arts and crafts and has +10 in most craft skills). It only took a couple encounters with the spike stone spell for the kobold younglings to decide to go play ball somewhere else.....muhhhaaaaa

[Crow]

Most people in the world who see themselves as anything but lawfully aligned are lying to themselves.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Another reason I know myself to be Lawful Good is that I cannot comprehend the thought processes behind responses like this and Gamer Girl's. I do not mean to offend or slander how anyone lives their life through highlighting these replies, but I simply cannot understand how people live like this. How people can construct such a sense of other that they ignore the simple mental reality that everything you think and feel, that "meat, a pawn to be used" feels. These people are no different from yourself and by treating them in the manner these ideologies endorse you are granting validity to behaviours you would not wish brought against you. I do understand the twist to the golden rule, got a rueful smile out of that, but hey that feeds into my own lawful beliefs that rules help everyone to work together better.

I cannot understand exceptions to moral rules and the differing behaviours people endorse.

Just different ways of looking at the world I guess.

I know they are humans beings... in theory... but they have no Intrinsic value to me as a sentient entity (related to the Monkeysphere (http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html)) therefore they are "meat" for me. And I realize I am/might be meat for them as well.

As for the golden rule. My lawfulness agrees.

Different ways indeed.



The weird twist is I understand and comprehend why you want to be 'good'. Most people like the so called benefits of good, and are willing to be good themselves to get the same benefits.

Of course I don't wish to be treated badly, but I protect myself from that actively; unlike the good idea that 'if your good then others will be good to you''.

I see the rules as just for the lesser people, who could not otherwise take care of themselves. Unless it has a direct benefit to me, or I can take advantage of it somehow, I don't follow the rule.


I'm sure I can't post any examples here without getting yet another infraction....but maybe with a D&D twist:

Gella Elf(who looks like a surface elf, but is clearly drow) had a nice house and some land, though the lot next to her was vacant. This lead several kobold younglings to play in this empty field. And worst of all they played with a ball, that often flew onto Gella Elf's land and knocked over items. And needless to say the kobolds were very noisy. But Gella had a plan. She cast the spell spike stones around the field. She made the sharp stones in her very own workshop(Gella is very into arts and crafts and has +10 in most craft skills). It only took a couple encounters with the spike stone spell for the kobold younglings to decide to go play ball somewhere else.....muhhhaaaaa

And this is the kind of thing evil people does whenever it suits us them... (*raven whispering) And that is bad.

Edit:
I wanted to ask something to those with evil leanings.
I have developed over time a sort of... software generated moral compass... a Software Blackwing familiar of sorts, that wishpers in my head when something would be frowned upon by normal people.
By myself, I do not have it in me, to develop such concerns, so I have created some sort of mental construct that helps in acting normal in front of most people.
Any suggestion made by this simulated ethic algorithm is only that, a suggestion, I do as I please, but fully conscious of what is a normally accepted behavior.
So my question is, do any of you, evil(ish) aligned people, have something similar in your lives?

[gkathellar]

I know they are humans beings... in theory... but they have no Intrinsic value to me as a sentient entity (related to the Monkeyshpere (http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html)) therefore they are "meat" for me. And I realize I am/might be meat for them as well.

"Meat" is just a useless collection of sounds. It has no intrinsic value either. You're the one who applies it to people. You're the one who makes them worthless. You could also make them something else.

I guess that makes me Chaotic Good.

[jidasfire]

Lawful Good.

I don't always live up to it perfectly, as I am occasionally lazy, and perhaps a bit too acerbic for the tastes of those around me, but in general I follow a personal code of ethics and morals that revolves around being fair, consistent, helpful, and kind to others. Sometimes I think I border on Neutral Good, because I see a lot of societal obligations and rules as unjust and arbitrary, and ignore them as such, but because I have my own set of rules I stick to as often as possible, I think I'm still Lawful, just with a bit of Neutral tendencies.

[randomhero00]

I don't consider myself all that good of a person. I go mostly by my own principles, and the rest whatever I feel like. So I'd say chaotic neutral for sure. Mostly I do what feels good/is best for me in the end. Even if it looks like I'm volunteering (which I do) its for the best for ME. Not really doing it for others.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

I don't consider myself all that good of a person. I go mostly by my own principles, and the rest whatever I feel like. So I'd say chaotic neutral for sure. Mostly I do what feels good/is best for me in the end. Even if it looks like I'm volunteering (which I do) its for the best for ME. Not really doing it for others.

Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool, pal :smallwink:

:smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

[Telonius]

In terms of behavior, probably Neutral Good. Philosophy and personality? Chaotic Neutral. So I suppose it would average out to Chaotic-ish Good-ish.

[WalkingTarget]

Lawful Neutral shading into Lawful Good.

I have a healthy respect for law and order and all of that, partly as a convenience as to not be hassled and/or punished and partly because I see the sense in a lot of it, but the Lawful part mostly comes in the form of having a pretty well-established (if not exactly codified) set of personal boundaries. I'm very much in control of myself and am not likely to do things on a whim. My parents were strict, but not overbearing (and above all, they were fair) and this background has given me the ability to see the rationale behind rules and not feel the need to rebel for the sake of rebellion.

As for the Good... that's a bit tougher. I help people when I can, but its often little stuff like helping them move, or driving an elderly relative somewhere. I can empathize and sympathize, but sometimes pull back from it so that I can handle my own life without getting lost in helping others (resulting in a cobbled-together form of Stoicism). I don't think that I'm selfless enough to ping as Good all the time, but I similarly don't think I'm offsetting that with any Evil stuff, so I'd say Neutral edging towards Good.

[subject42]

Most people in the world who see themselves as anything but lawfully aligned are lying to themselves.

I would argue that most people are neutral. It's not an inherent desire to conform to a societal code that drives them, but rather an aversion to ostracism or punishment.

[Hazzardevil]

I see myself as nuetrel, but thats purely based on actions where anything that is outside the norm gets you ostracised.
If I was in a society where there were no consequences based on punishment of certain action or discrimination, I think I would gradualyl start going towards Chaotic Nuetrel or Nuetrel Evil, or maybe chaotic evil.

[Tenno Seremel]

Most people in the world who see themselves as anything but lawfully aligned are lying to themselves.
You need to visit Russia someday.

[Hazzardevil]

You need to visit Russia someday.

I was just about to post something about Russia that could get me banned.

[Necroticplague]

I personally am True Neutral, since I go equally in all directions. I have little to no respect for rules created by others, and follow them only when it serves me to/ is what I was going to do anyway (chaotic). However, I have self-created rules that I hold as an ultimate authority,and I will never break these rules. My word is my law, and if I say I will do anything, I will, come hell or high water(lawful). I will often help people when asked, and will usually refuse any attempt at reward (because I feel I'm unworthy), and I have a strong work ethic, and I don't lie, steal, or cheat (good). However, I'm paranoid, I keep to myself, and I view almost every else as an opponent in the game of life success. I'm not starting attitude of hostile, but I definitely have a starting attitude of unfriendly, and I'm very abrasive (evil).

[Redshirt Army]

True Neutral, but closer to Evil than Good, and closer to Chaotic than Lawful.

[Narren]

Most people in the world who see themselves as anything but lawfully aligned are lying to themselves.

Can you expand on that? I assume you mean it's because most of us live in a lawful society. But there are a GREAT number of people that ignore those laws when they can, or even openly defy them. I think most governments are Lawful Neutral by default (not trying to get into real world politics) but I don't think it's citizens have to be the same alignment.

[Mordokai]

Most people in the world who see themselves as anything but lawfully aligned are lying to themselves.

Get off your high horse.

As for myself, I'd say I'm in a solid True Neutral territory right now, with some Good leanings. Used to be NG, but last few years have managed to turn G to N.

I have little use for rules and will break them if I can get away with it and won't hurt anybody with that. I'll break self-imposed rules often. At the same time, I will try and help if possible, by my new and jaded outlook has somewhat managed to negate that. I will go out of a way to avoid hurting anybody though. All in all, I dare say I'm managing TN quite admirably at the moment.

[Tenno Seremel]

I was just about to post something about Russia that could get me banned.
There is a widely known saying here. "Harshness of law is compensated with its optionality." (not sure whether translation is grammatically correct)

[NNescio]

There is a widely known saying here. "Harshness of law is compensated with its optionality." (not sure whether translation is grammatically correct)

"В России строгость законов компенсируется необязательностью исполнения."

Is that the proverb you are referring to?

[ArcanistSupreme]

I'd say that I'm True Neutral with a predilection toward Law and a slight lean toward Good. I will break rules that I feel are dumb, but I usually feel a twinge of guilt and don't go out of my way to break them. I also follow many rules that others ignore (going in the door marked "Entrance" instead of the one marked "Exit"), even though the chance of punishment is nonexistent.

On the good/evil part of the scale, I feel good when I help people close to me and I love the idea of a community (ie friends and family) where everybody looks out for each other, but my somewhat pessimistic view of humanity doesn't see this working on a large scale and my actions reflect this. I'll help out friends and family without much thought, but I'm pretty averse to doing any volunteer work or making donations to charity.

[Shadowknight12]

There is a widely known saying here. "Harshness of law is compensated with its optionality." (not sure whether translation is grammatically correct)

That is true of places outside Russia, too. I can vouch for that.

[Tenno Seremel]

"В России строгость законов компенсируется необязательностью исполнения."

Is that the proverb you are referring to?

Yes, this one.

[navar100]

Lawful Neutral

[Midnight_v]

Hmm...

I took the old test it said I'm Lawful Neutral....

I doubt that somewhat though. I suspect sometimes that I'm neutral evil.
That is to say selfish. . . I reinforce that belief because I tend to think OTHER people are the same.

Yeah, I think a good chunk of people who are saying things like "I'm X/Good" or "Lawful/X" are secretly closer to Neutral Evil.

Here's why. . . think of your favorite thing in the world, other than a person... I mean were talking, Playing videogames, Eating your favorite food, having sex, for other than procreation, doing your favorite drug either literally or so to speak.

So... lets say by giving that up, "Somehow" you end famine/war in 1 small african country, forever. Would you accept that?
Now to me the people who answer emphatically "YES" are neutral evil too (cause this is the very ALIGNMENT of the popular liar/manipulist), so you can't prove it to me, regardless of you answer, nor do you need to.
The people who say "NO!" are demonstrating neutral evil or at least how at heart we have some neutral evil tendencies.

All this talk of "good" though... I have it in my head that it has to be something more than just sitting there NOT kicking puppies, and hoping for the best.
I'm pretty sure APATHY is tantamount to Neutrality.

[Drelua]

Hmm...

I took the old test it said I'm Lawful Neutral....

I doubt that somewhat though. I suspect sometimes that I'm neutral evil.
That is to say selfish. . . I reinforce that belief because I tend to think OTHER people are the same.

Yeah, I think a good chunk of people who are saying things like "I'm X/Good" or "Lawful/X" are secretly closer to Neutral Evil.

Here's why. . . think of your favorite thing in the world, other than a person... I mean were talking, Playing videogames, Eating your favorite food, having sex, for other than procreation, doing your favorite drug either literally or so to speak.

So... lets say by giving that up, "Somehow" you end famine/war in 1 small african country, forever. Would you accept that?
Now to me the people who answer emphatically "YES" are neutral evil too (cause this is the very ALIGNMENT of the popular liar/manipulist), so you can't prove it to me, regardless of you answer, nor do you need to.
The people who say "NO!" are demonstrating neutral evil or at least how at heart we have some neutral evil tendencies.

All this talk of "good" though... I have it in my head that it has to be something more than just sitting there NOT kicking puppies, and hoping for the best.
I'm pretty sure APATHY is tantamount to Neutrality.

So your argument is that we're evil because we can't prove to you that our answer of yes is not an attempt to trick you? I'm confused. As...somebody (I think I may have heard this on the Simpsons) said the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. The fact that we can't prove that we're good in no way means that we're evil. I would answer yes to your question, but I will not try to convince you of the fact that it is out of altruism.

[Tenno Seremel]

Yeah, I think a good chunk of people who are saying things like "I'm X/Good" or "Lawful/X" are secretly closer to Neutral Evil.

Here's why. . . think of your favorite thing in the world, other than a person... I mean were talking, Playing videogames, Eating your favorite food, having sex, for other than procreation, doing your favorite drug either literally or so to speak.

So... lets say by giving that up, "Somehow" you end famine/war in 1 small african country, forever. Would you accept that?
Now to me the people who answer emphatically "YES" are neutral evil too (cause this is the very ALIGNMENT of the popular liar/manipulist), so you can't prove it to me, regardless of you answer, nor do you need to.
The people who say "NO!" are demonstrating neutral evil or at least how at heart we have some neutral evil tendencies.

Giving up my own desire, i.e. personal freedom is suddenly lawful or good? That's just Greater Good BS. Not counting the fact that giving up, say, sex is not going to help any African country. Also, being good does not mean you are suddenly a tool that resolves everyone's problems.

[Malimar]

I'm an Epicurean contractarian with Rawlsian sympathies.

Which is to say: I take enlightened self-interest and arrive at a moral system largely identical in practice to that of society at large. My behavior is usually Good, but mostly because it always benefits me to do so. I'm also a rules lawyer by temperament, and have a tendency to make and/or follow rules just for their own sake.

Which is to say: I'm Lawful Neutral.

[Slipperychicken]

Lawful Good.

[I even took a test that proved it :D]


I do things both I and the D&D rules think is right, and the force of law is our only defense against anarchy: the ultimate breeding ground of violence and ill will. There is no true substitute for Law, for it must exist in some form to curtail the whims of those who would do harm unto others: whether it be through the goodness in our hearts, or words upon a page, or the employ of rough men to keep us safe, the law must be, to preserve the greater good.


EDIT: I often find myself doing or saying things I think are right while one part of me says "damn it, I could've had X, if only I lied/broke a rule/violated my stupid ethics". But, Heroic Sacrifice or Lawful Stupidity, that's just the nature of the beast: sometimes trading expediency for morality.

[big teej]

if you leave aside the fact that my beliefs actually dictate it is impossible for ANY to be good. (only neutral with good tendencies)

I place myself as "formerly chaotic evil, now Lawful Good"

mostly because I do my best not to apply reality to my favorite hobby.

[Halae]

see myself as Neytral with good tendencies, like a lot of people. Serpentine essentially wrote what i was going to say, so if you feel inclined, just go back to the first page and read what she wrote again.

alternatively, My alignment is Lazy Good.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Yeah, I guess you guys are right (Zigg'rrauglurr too, even though Holy smite!):smalltongue:


Hehe, Unholy Bligh right back at ya! :smalltongue:


I personally am True Neutral, since I go equally in all directions. I have little to no respect for rules created by others, and follow them only when it serves me to/ is what I was going to do anyway (chaotic). However, I have self-created rules that I hold as an ultimate authority,and I will never break these rules. My word is my law, and if I say I will do anything, I will, come hell or high water(lawful). I will often help people when asked, and will usually refuse any attempt at reward (because I feel I'm unworthy), and I have a strong work ethic, and I don't lie, steal, or cheat (good). However, I'm paranoid, I keep to myself, and I view almost every else as an opponent in the game of life success. I'm not starting attitude of hostile, but I definitely have a starting attitude of unfriendly, and I'm very abrasive (evil).

Necroticplague, if you accept an opinion, purely based on your description you sound to have a greater leaning towards Lawful Neutral.
The reason behind this, is that a Lawful aligment does not mean following all rules;
It means following a set of rules, trying very hard no to break them, ever.

You might not follow gobernment/society's laws, but you have a very strong code that you follow to any cost. Check the SRD description: "A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government."

As for Midnight_v opinion that everyone is Neutral Evil, I think Drelua answered it quite nicely, " the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence"

Any takers on my Internal Software Simulated Ethics?
I wanted to ask something to those with evil leanings.
I have developed over time a sort of... software generated moral compass... a Software Blackwing familiar of sorts, that wishpers in my head when something would be frowned upon by normal people.
By myself, I do not have it in me, to develop such concerns, so I have created some sort of mental construct that helps in acting normal in front of most people.
Any suggestion made by this simulated ethic algorithm is only that, a suggestion, I do as I please, but fully conscious of what is a normally accepted behavior.
So my question is, do any of you, evil(ish) aligned people, have something similar in your lives?

Also I want to say that I'm enjoying this thread very much. :smallbiggrin:

[Eldest]

Red.
MtG.

[charcoalninja]

I'm sorry but unless you're posting from within the walls of a maximum security prison, or will end up there someday soon you're not Chaotic Evil. I get the feeling that people don't understand what that alignment entails.

"A chaotic evil character does what his greed, hatred and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal." PFRPG

"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.

To make the claim that you are chaotic evil you are stating that you actively seek to harm others to benefit yourself, have no qualms with killing another if its convenient, and act only out of hatred and greed. You care for nothing but yourself and oppress others around you who get your way.

You will steal from 'friends' if given the opportunity.
You will rape if you can get away with it.
You have no problem beating someone nearly to death for being in your way.
You actively hate, and arbitrarily make enemies and seek the destruction of others.
If you injure someone by accident you feel no compulsion to help them in any way.
When you do cause harm to others you feel no remorse and laugh at their misfortunes. Causing pain brings you joy.

Bollocks you're Chaotic Evil.

[ArcanistSupreme]

You will steal from 'friends' if given the opportunity.
You will rape if you can get away with it.
You have no problem beating someone nearly to death for being in your way.
You actively hate, and arbitrarily make enemies and seek the destruction of others.
If you injure someone by accident you feel no compulsion to help them in any way.
When you do cause harm to others you feel no remorse and laugh at their misfortunes. Causing pain brings you joy.

Bollocks you're Chaotic Evil.

You said it yourself. Just because a person is "evil" doesn't mean that they are stupid or self-destructive. It also doesn't mean that they have to do all of the above to qualify; any one or two would qualify in my book.

[Drelua]

I'm sorry but unless you're posting from within the walls of a maximum security prison, or will end up there someday soon you're not Chaotic Evil. I get the feeling that people don't understand what that alignment entails.

"A chaotic evil character does what his greed, hatred and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal." PFRPG

"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.

To make the claim that you are chaotic evil you are stating that you actively seek to harm others to benefit yourself, have no qualms with killing another if its convenient, and act only out of hatred and greed. You care for nothing but yourself and oppress others around you who get your way.

You will steal from 'friends' if given the opportunity.
You will rape if you can get away with it.
You have no problem beating someone nearly to death for being in your way.
You actively hate, and arbitrarily make enemies and seek the destruction of others.
If you injure someone by accident you feel no compulsion to help them in any way.
When you do cause harm to others you feel no remorse and laugh at their misfortunes. Causing pain brings you joy.

Bollocks you're Chaotic Evil.

I think you're looking at chaotic evil in a bit of an extreme way. It might just be my opinion, I think if that were true, it would also be true that to be chaotic good you have to run around to help poor people Robin Hood style, or that to be lawful good you have to be absolutely free of any vice, or that you have to enslave people to be lawful evil.

That's not to say that I entirely disagree with you; some people are likely exaggerating. Its easy to think yourself to be evil when you haven't seen evil. We live in a mostly good society; a TN devil in hell might think of himself as chaotic good if this system were presented to him and he were asked what alignment he thought he was. Of course, I'm not saying I'm entirely free of this fault, though perhaps I have it less than others, if only from watching shows like Criminal Minds and Dexter, and having had a friend who was definitely evil, maybe chaotic too. Of course, he would never do any of the things you listed, simply because he can't fight at all and he's a huge coward.

Basically, to have one of the extreme alignments doesn't necessarily mean that you are the epitome of, say, chaotic evil.

Edit: wow, I spent a lot more time writing that than I thought. Not surprised I was ninja'd.

[charcoalninja]

You said it yourself. Just because a person is "evil" doesn't mean that they are stupid or self-destructive. It also doesn't mean that they have to do all of the above to qualify; any one or two would qualify in my book.

They don't have to do them in order to qualify, they have to be willing to do them even wish they could do them. I just don't buy that people who are actually like that just casually toss it out on an RPG web forum. You're talking about people that are seriously messed up here. Chaotic Evil is insane.

[gkathellar]

I'm sorry but unless you're posting from within the walls of a maximum security prison, or will end up there someday soon you're not Chaotic Evil. I get the feeling that people don't understand what that alignment entails.

-snip-

Bollocks you're Chaotic Evil.


You said it yourself. Just because a person is "evil" doesn't mean that they are stupid or self-destructive. It also doesn't mean that they have to do all of the above to qualify; any one or two would qualify in my book.

Alignments are silly game abstractions, not DSM classifications. There's no set of minimum or maximum criteria because they're not real things. People can call themselves whatever they please in relation to them, and it changes nothing except maybe how bitter a person feels about themselves.

[charcoalninja]

I think you're looking at chaotic evil in a bit of an extreme way. It might just be my opinion, I think if that were true, it would also be true that to be chaotic good you have to run around to help poor people Robin Hood style, or that to be lawful good you have to be absolutely free of any vice, or that you have to enslave people to be lawful evil.

That's not to say that I entirely disagree with you; some people are likely exaggerating. Its easy to think yourself to be evil when you haven't seen evil. We live in a mostly good society; a TN devil in hell might think of himself as chaotic good if this system were presented to him and he were asked what alignment he thought he was. Of course, I'm not saying I'm entirely free of this fault, though perhaps I have it less than others, if only from watching shows like Criminal Minds and Dexter, and having had a friend who was definitely evil, maybe chaotic too. Of course, he would never do any of the things you listed, simply because he can't fight at all and he's a huge coward.

Basically, to have one of the extreme alignments doesn't necessarily mean that you are the epitome of, say, chaotic evil.

Edit: wow, I spent a lot more time writing that than I thought. Not surprised I was ninja'd.

it was a great reply anyway! And to restate just to make sure I'm being clear, I mean that they are willing to, and see no rational problem or have any moral qualms with any of those actions. They don't have to have done them, as you both have pointed out, its quite easy to be in situations where you simply do not have the ability to follow your 'instinct', but I just don't believe the people claiming to be evil have an inkling of just how extreme you have to be in order to get that label at all. Being selfish doesn't make you evil, actively harming others for personal gain makes you evil. Sure some of these guys may be bad people, but evil is a serious thing to throw around IMO.

[Das Platyvark]

Somewhere on the chaotic end of neutral good/true neutral.

[Drelua]

it was a great reply anyway! And to restate just to make sure I'm being clear, I mean that they are willing to, and see no rational problem or have any moral qualms with any of those actions. They don't have to have done them, as you both have pointed out, its quite easy to be in situations where you simply do not have the ability to follow your 'instinct', but I just don't believe the people claiming to be evil have an inkling of just how extreme you have to be in order to get that label at all. Being selfish doesn't make you evil, actively harming others for personal gain makes you evil. Sure some of these guys may be bad people, but evil is a serious thing to throw around IMO.

Maybe people are too quick to call something good, and this leaves them thinking an equally mild degree of evil is really evil. As long as you're not saying all chaotic evil people would be willing to do the things you listed; some may be interested in murder but not rape, some may just not care about any of those things, but not be the least bit offended if they were faced with them (unless they're the victim :smalltongue:). As long as you're not saying all chaotic evil people want to do all the things you listed, just that they would not be opposed to them, I definitely agree with you.

[ArcanistSupreme]

They don't have to do them in order to qualify, they have to be willing to do them even wish they could do them. I just don't buy that people who are actually like that just casually toss it out on an RPG web forum. You're talking about people that are seriously messed up here. Chaotic Evil is insane.

I disagree. Perhaps the extremes of Chaotic Evil are insane, but I've heard of plenty of people that wander around vandalizing property and hurting animals just because they feel like it. Then they go to their nine to five job the next morning. They function in society; they're perhaps disliked, but they aren't locked up.

Lawful Evil is also more common than you'd think; have you ever met the malicious bureaucrat that does her absolute best to make your paperwork take as long as possible because you dared to make her do her job in the middle of the afternoon? Even though you explained quite clearly that it was that agency's request that the paperwork be filled out? She will never break the rules, but she will do everything permitted by the letter of the rules to make your experience miserable. Obscure rules that nobody has heard of, archaic rules that haven't been in effect for decades, and fees and penalties that you never heard of will all come into play.

Even in the black-and-white morality of D&D there is room for scale. Both of the examples I described above are Evil, but neither would make a good BBEG.

[byaku rai]

On one of my better days, I fall into the category of Chaotic Good. I go out of my way to help people, I quietly disregard laws and regulations if it suits my mood to do so, and I set things up so that people do things to help themselves, with little obvious intervention from me.

On one of my worse days, I'm easily Neutral Evil. The same impulses that lead to subtly helping others on good days are corrupted into subtly ****ing with them, and laws become a bit more important to me, although usually just because of what happens if I'm caught doing one of my subtle little evils. These range from randomly stealing small items (pencils, pens, USB drives, etc.) to actively causing serious problems with another person's life (sowing seeds of mistrust between someone I don't like and another person, generally a significant other because I'm a bastard like that sometimes).

I sometimes treat other people as less of real individual beings and more of psychological experiments (hmmm... If I push this button, what happens?), which can be either good or evil depending on the results.

However, the truly good and truly evil days are quite few and far between, so I guess generally I'm True Neutral with Chaotic tendencies.

[charcoalninja]

I disagree. Perhaps the extremes of Chaotic Evil are insane, but I've heard of plenty of people that wander around vandalizing property and hurting animals just because they feel like it. Then they go to their nine to five job the next morning. They function in society; they're perhaps disliked, but they aren't locked up.

Lawful Evil is also more common than you'd think; have you ever met the malicious bureaucrat that does her absolute best to make your paperwork take as long as possible because you dared to make her do her job in the middle of the afternoon? Even though you explained quite clearly that it was that agency's request that the paperwork be filled out? She will never break the rules, but she will do everything permitted by the letter of the rules to make your experience miserable. Obscure rules that nobody has heard of, archaic rules that haven't been in effect for decades, and fees and penalties that you never heard of will all come into play.

Even in the black-and-white morality of D&D there is room for scale. Both of the examples I described above are Evil, but neither would make a good BBEG.

That example, is a VERY good point.

[Talya]

Chaotic Neutral, heavy on the chaotic, with occasional good tendencies.

[Drelua]

I disagree. Perhaps the extremes of Chaotic Evil are insane, but I've heard of plenty of people that wander around vandalizing property and hurting animals just because they feel like it. Then they go to their nine to five job the next morning. They function in society; they're perhaps disliked, but they aren't locked up.

Lawful Evil is also more common than you'd think; have you ever met the malicious bureaucrat that does her absolute best to make your paperwork take as long as possible because you dared to make her do her job in the middle of the afternoon? Even though you explained quite clearly that it was that agency's request that the paperwork be filled out? She will never break the rules, but she will do everything permitted by the letter of the rules to make your experience miserable. Obscure rules that nobody has heard of, archaic rules that haven't been in effect for decades, and fees and penalties that you never heard of will all come into play.

Even in the black-and-white morality of D&D there is room for scale. Both of the examples I described above are Evil, but neither would make a good BBEG.

You're right, but your first example is definitely psychologically unstable at best, could likely end up in jail if he was caught brutalizing animals (if not he'd better either be one tough SOB or hope I don't find out. Like I said, I lean towards chaotic good . :smallwink:), and could be on his way to doing worse than animals - a lot of serial killers start with animals before killing people, I've heard. Certainly one doesn't have to be an extreme version of CE to be CE, like I said, but your example of CE fits a good portion of charcoal ninjas criteria. I think the song Freedom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apZnLDDUDHQ) by Blues Traveler does pretty good job of summing up CE.

Edit: So that's how you make a link show as something other than the web address.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

ArcanistSupreme 100% there with you.


As byaku rai, I have the ocassional CG moment (especially if I'm with my fiancee, she brings out the good side in me). But I almost always function in my LE default persona, with Software moral compass integrated.



I sometimes treat other people as less of real individual beings and more of psychological experiments (hmmm... If I push this button, what happens?), which can be either good or evil depending on the results.


This is exactly what I mean when I say the vast majority of people are "meat" to me, no real individuals.

This doesn't mean I will kill anyone who crosses me (even tough the desire is often there) or rape any cute girl that I see walking around. The lawful part of the equation means I have my own code, and at the same time I respect the law, because I fully know the consecuences that might befall.

Something that needs reinforcing is that both real people and d&d characters that reside on the ventral side of the aligment plane, can and DO have people that are meaningful to them, people they wouldn't hurt anymore than mr._goody_two_shoes_paladin_guy would hurt someone important to them.

Even a psychotic character like Belkar has someone that is important to him.

[Gamer Girl]

I'm sorry but unless you're posting from within the walls of a maximum security prison, or will end up there someday soon you're not Chaotic Evil. I get the feeling that people don't understand what that alignment entails.

"A chaotic evil character does what his greed, hatred and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal." PFRPG

"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.

To make the claim that you are chaotic evil you are stating that you actively seek to harm others to benefit yourself, have no qualms with killing another if its convenient, and act only out of hatred and greed. You care for nothing but yourself and oppress others around you who get your way.

You will steal from 'friends' if given the opportunity.
You will rape if you can get away with it.
You have no problem beating someone nearly to death for being in your way.
You actively hate, and arbitrarily make enemies and seek the destruction of others.
If you injure someone by accident you feel no compulsion to help them in any way.
When you do cause harm to others you feel no remorse and laugh at their misfortunes. Causing pain brings you joy.

Being evil does not mean you must be caught by the law or someday will be...that's just wishful thinking on the part of good guys(or worse belief in that karma fiction)

Vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable would describe me well enough... And I do hurt and oppress others(though I have yet to kill anyone...)

I do 'steal'...a lot, not that I have many 'friends'...and it's more just taking things from people who can't hold onto them.

It's safe to say I hate lots of people...and do make them personal enemies(though they are not informed).

I have never helped anyone unless I had something to gain. I don't help.

I do laugh and feel happy when I can hurt and take advantage of others.



Story:

Gella Elf(good elf on the outside, drow on the inside) lives in a land where she may carry her loaded hand crossbow all the time. Gella, in fact carries two and even has the legal right to conceal them on her person. Gella is never without her hand crossbows, except for the handful of places they are not allowed(and some times even then...). Gella has used her hand crossbow to deter criminals and other folks several times, thought to date she has never hit someone with a bolt. She has fired 'warning shots' at persons, but is a pretty good shot from spending lots of time on the practice range. Gella's spouse and both her elflings(both under 100) each have their own hand crossbows as well...

[charcoalninja]

I do laugh and feel happy when I can hurt and take advantage of others.



And I will never be able to understand how this can be true. I cannot fathom the thought processes behind such a life. Just can't.

I guess you are Chaotic Evil, if what you say is true, you're certainly the antithesis of everything I try to be...

[gkathellar]

I do laugh and feel happy when I can hurt and take advantage of others.

And then you go and boast about it on the internet.

[Incanur]

Chaotic good in the classic sense.

[Narren]

Story:

Gella Elf(good elf on the outside, drow on the inside) lives in a land where she may carry her loaded hand crossbow all the time. Gella, in fact carries two and even has the legal right to conceal them on her person. Gella is never without her hand crossbows, except for the handful of places they are not allowed(and some times even then...). Gella has used her hand crossbow to deter criminals and other folks several times, thought to date she has never hit someone with a bolt. She has fired 'warning shots' at persons, but is a pretty good shot from spending lots of time on the practice range. Gella's spouse and both her elflings(both under 100) each have their own hand crossbows as well...


Gella shouldn't fire warning bolts. For one, they can hit someone/something unintended. Even if Gella is Evil and doesn't care about accidentally hurting others, the Kingdom was strict liability laws about bolts fired. Also, firing a warning bolt gives the other elf an opportunity to draw his crossbow you didn't know he had and fire back. If you're shooting crossbow, shoot to stop the threat.

But I'm still trying to figure out how Gella and her crossbows relate to what you were talking about. :smallconfused:

[Serpentine]

Most people in the world who see themselves as anything but lawfully aligned are lying to themselves.Merely obeying most laws out of fear of punishment or laziness does not make a Lawful alignment, nor does a Chaotic alignment require one to go out of one's way to break as many laws as possible.

[gooddragon1]

Neutral Good/Kind

I'll follow the law as long as it doesn't allow for cruelty. When it does I follow the path of kindness instead.

I'll not allow the innocent to suffer if I can help it though.

[Dienekes]

Easily Lawful Neutral

Law is very important to me. They keep things going, keep me protected, and I believe they should be followed, or if you don't follow them you should accept your punishment I have no pity for you in any case. The chaotic mindset is almost alien to me personally.

As to neutral, I try to be good and at times I even succeed. Giving money to the needy, when I don't think I need it, volunteering at soup kitchens when it won't be too inconvenient. However I love schadenfreude far too much and have a rather black and insulting sense of humor.

[Esprit15]

Neutral Good (Leaning more towards true neutral). I like order, but I also like individual freedom to a certain extent, and there needs to be a balance between them. I enjoy the occasional evil moment, but not to the point of being sadistic or what most would consider bad.

[Maphreal]

I'd say I'm Neutral Good, mainly because I can't decide where I stand between Lawful and Chaotic. I've never been organized in thought or in practice, and I do believe in the need and importance of law. By the same token, I've got no problem breaking a law I see as silly and doesn't violate my moral code, so long as I know I won't get caught.

There was a time in my life I could have been considered Chaotic Evil. I hurt people, and I don't mean that I was just a **** to them at Starbucks and bragged about it to the internet. I'm talking full on assault and battery.

I had a lot of issues back then. Now I couldn't imagine doing what I used to do, especially now that I'm a father. I go out of my way to help others, and devote a portion of my wealth to secular charities. In part I'm trying to make up for my past actions, and also making society just a little better for my daughter to grow up in.

[Gamer Girl]

And I will never be able to understand how this can be true. I cannot fathom the thought processes behind such a life. Just can't.

I guess you are Chaotic Evil, if what you say is true, you're certainly the antithesis of everything I try to be...

Just different views on things...


And then you go and boast about it on the internet.

Not exactly 'boasting', it's not allowed to boast about evil real life things here.....it's more just a statement. And my fictional tales....


Gella shouldn't fire warning bolts. For one, they can hit someone/something unintended. Even if Gella is Evil and doesn't care about accidentally hurting others, the Kingdom was strict liability laws about bolts fired. Also, firing a warning bolt gives the other elf an opportunity to draw his crossbow you didn't know he had and fire back. If you're shooting crossbow, shoot to stop the threat.

But I'm still trying to figure out how Gella and her crossbows relate to what you were talking about. :smallconfused:

Some people are talking about how evil must kill. I was just pointing out that Gella(my fictional drow that looks like a surface elf) is armed nearly all the time and is ready and willing to harm another or even kill with her concealed crossbow. Gella is in good standing with the guards of the kingdom and has special magical shields and get out of trouble magic items. Gella is well aware of the laws and such, she even helped get the 'Castle Law' passed for her kingdom(making it legal to shoot intruders first and ask questions later). Gella is currently working to get the 'allow hand crossbows in taverns' law passed(and that will be on the ballot this year, next too the 'we don't want to join the evil ogre cleric services' for our kingdom.)

[The Rugi]

Difficult to sum up one's life in a single alignment. Depends on the situation really. Like, if I'm programming, I'll be lawful because protocol and standards are important for productivity. I'll be good if someone wants help with something I enjoy doing. I'll totally be willing to help without expecting anything in return. And when I'm playing a video game, I'll probably be chaotic, and whether I'm good or evil depends on whether the other guy is being a jerk or not.

[Midnight_v]

So your argument is that we're evil because we can't prove to you that our answer of yes is not an attempt to trick you? I'm confused.
You're confused probbably because you think that was an argument.
It wasn't. It was a statement. I didn't say "Defend your good" in fact I pretty much said the opposite cause I find that people get belligerent pretty quickly when you suggest a belief they harbor is wrong, especially when its on something that causes superiority complexes in so many like morality seems to. So even though I say things like "some" and "many" and "I believe", I may well get reactions like I said "You" or "Most"... LOL its to be expected. In brief though, I being a directly self interested person, consider myself Neutral Evil. I don't think most NE people would tell you that, I certainly wouldn't if asked in real life. Its anti-pragmatic to do so. . . ymmv.


Giving up my own desire, i.e. personal freedom is suddenly lawful or good? That's just Greater Good BS. Not counting the fact that giving up, say, sex is not going to help any African country. Also, being good does not mean you are suddenly a tool that resolves everyone's problems.

Since were using game terms and no one can be "just lawful" or "Just good" in the sense that they can be "true neutral" trying to separate the terms into saying "Lawful" or "Good" has approximately JACK to do with what I suggested. Which is "Lawful Good" see saying those words together in D&D has a definition. It's on pg104 in the players handbook says: Lawful Good, "Crusader".
But just to show how wrong you are (when talking D&D terms, which we are by the way) here's the relevant bits from the srd: :smallsmile:

Lawful Good, “Crusader”
A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.

Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion.
So while this demonstrates not only that my fact checking may be a little better than yours in this one case. It also illustrates how people who say "I"m lawful good" may well be saying different things entirely if they haven't read the D&D precise relevant bits.

Oh and Speaking of which...
Your Mom::smallwink:


You Are Not Good. And Your Mom is Not Good.
"I have made mistakes in my life, but basically I think I'm a good person." - Your Mom

I'm sorry, but you are not a Good person. You go through your life, you don't stab anyone in the face, you don't break any laws, you don't take pictures of naked children, and… so what? You want a medal for that? Shut up.

The sad fact of the matter is that if you aren't exerting yourself for a cause, if you aren't exerting yourself for something, you aren't Good. You probably aren't Evil, but seriously: get over yourself. Before you can really get into the mind of a Good character you honestly have to come to terms with the fact that you, as a person, are probably Neutral. Your character is a much better person than you are.

The reverse is also true for villains, and should come as no surprise to people who play Evil characters, since most people don't consider themselves Evil. Characters are generally much more than the players who play them. Villains are blacker, heroes are nobler, and when you play one of those characters you should come to terms with that. Even though it probably hurts you a little bit to contemplate it, if you're going to even try to play a Good character you need to play them as a much better person than you personally are.

[Herabec]

I find myself, after close examination, to usually acting in a Lawful Neutral way, with a few tendencies toward being Lawful Good; particularly when I'm in a good mood.

[Tenno Seremel]

{Scrubbed}

[drakir_nosslin]

Lawful Neutral.

I'm unable to break laws and regulations, even minor ones when I know that there isn't a chance of me being caught and punished. I have a very high respect for authority, and I do as I'm told by my superiors.
On the other hand, when I'm put in a leading position I expect everyone to do as they are told, to the letter, or come to me and explain why my orders are a bad idea. I tolerate no excuses, either you've done something as you should, or you have not, which is wrong.
I'm certainly not good. I don't care much for my fellow humans, though I would (and have, several times actually) help someone in danger, more because it is expected by me (according to the rules and traditions in our society) than compassion. I have a hard time sympathizing with people, and I rarely do something 'good' unless I gain something from it. However, I don't hurt people, or steal or anything like that and I wouldn't kill anyone, even if I could, so I don't think I'm evil either.

[Zonugal]

Hmm... This might be difficult for me.

I'm a true, old-fashion narcissist in almost every way possible. I am generally apathetic to everything/everyone, take almost near-sustenance at a stranger crying and find the greatest delights in crafting lies/spinning half-truths.

But I'm also known for contributing much time to charity activism, doing mission trips to help communities and every summer I volunteer to help children.

But I do so many of those because I enjoy the company (not the cause), enjoy the ego-boost and very often like using them to make myself seem more noble than others (it truly is a fun game).

In college I was a resident assistant, so I enforced rules/policies. But I did it because it was easy, paid well and allowed me to feed of the suffering of using the rules to punish people.

I have at times been called, "The single worst person I've ever met," while the same day been thanked for leading a noble cause.

I think I might be Lawfully Evil, what do you folks think?

[Drelua]

Now to me the people who answer emphatically "YES" are neutral evil too

Looking back, I think this is where the confusion came from. You didn't say they can be neutral evil, you said they are, with the way you worded implying that it is true of everyone who claims to be good. If you meant to say that this is true some of the time, then I agree with you - It's human nature to lie.


You're confused probbably because you think that was an argument.
It wasn't. It was a statement. I didn't say "Defend your good" in fact I pretty much said the opposite cause I find that people get belligerent pretty quickly when you suggest a belief they harbor is wrong, especially when its on something that causes superiority complexes in so many like morality seems to. So even though I say things like "some" and "many" and "I believe", I may well get reactions like I said "You" or "Most"... LOL its to be expected. In brief though, I being a directly self interested person, consider myself Neutral Evil. I don't think most NE people would tell you that, I certainly wouldn't if asked in real life. Its anti-pragmatic to do so. . . ymmv.

I don't mind being told I'm wrong, unless I feel like someone is simply dismissing whatever I say. I also hate when people try to tell me what I am. Your first post seemed to be doing both of those things. This post seems to clarify things, but your first post seemed very arrogant, but something tells me that's just some difficulty with communication, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Now, the reason I believe most, if not all, of the people here is because they have no reason to lie. What do they gain from convincing people that could easily live thousands of miles away that they're a nice guy? I'll probably never meet anyone IRL that's on this thread, and even if I did I wouldn't know it, so whats the point? I think that neutral evil people are pragmatic, like Artemis Entreri (I don't care what the official stat block says, he's not chaotic) and would not waste their efforts on such a deception if there wasa nothing to gain. Of course, I could just be saying all this, as part of some elaborate evil plan:smallwink:. And maybe I only pointed out that possibility so you would think 'he wouldn't point that out if it was true'. :smalltongue: or maybe I'm sleep deprived. I'll be back to continue this discussion around 2 o'clock tomorrow; I'm rather enjoying it.:smallsmile:

[Hazzardevil]

I must admit I do act Evil on some days, either days where everything goes wrong or when I can deliberatly get at people I dislike.

For example:
1 day there was a douchebag in my lesson, he took my stuff and whipped me with dish clothes (It was a food technology lesson .) This lesson is part of the reason why I belive teachers are almost always useless.
I put up with it informing the teacher, yet she was a useless bitch and did nothing but:
"You shouldn't do that Ryan,"
or
"Ryan, please stop whiping Harry."
At the end of the lesson as everyone charged out the lesson I shoved Ryan over and I think he banged his head on a table, if he did, I'm glad.
Everyone else in my class was running out of school, but I had an afterschool thing going on, so I walked over to it.
Now Ryan was angry with me by this point, I wasn't surprised, and he just ran at me, presumably to try and stab me with a pencil in his hand.
What I did next was instinctive, I didn 't know I was doing it until I had done it.

As he came into range I grabbed hold of him and used his momentum to throw him into a bush down a slope, (Yes my school has bushes on slopes.) Now he was furious so I made a run for it. He went to teh office to tell them what I had done. I knew he would do this, so I got him into even more trouble, he had to knock on a window to get the attention of the office lady, it was how my school worked. Now as soon as sshe turned round I made sure he saw me, predicting he would chase me. He fell for it and got into trouble for wasting the lady in the office's time.

Now at this point I didn't have any more plan, so I just ran, I could easily escape at any time from him, but I just let him follow me up to the point where I saw my friend and a teacher walking along. I stopped and started talking to my friend as if nothing happened. Now this Ryan is rather stupid and jumped round the corner and got me into a headlock.
Now this Ryan is short, I'm about 2 metres tall, he's about 1 metre tall, so at any time I could have picked him up and dropped him on the floor, but I'd have gotten a detention for that so I didn't do anything apart from in a calm voice asked the teacher if I could fight back for the whole 2 minutes I was in a headlock, the teacher was useless and did the whole get off him, don't do that routine all teachers do, it wasn't until she threatened expulsion from the school he stopped.

I think that I was manipulative of him here and I suppose in all this I was very lawful evil, so this, is Lawful Evil for schoolboys.

I think in hindsight, I am a lot closer to evil than I first thought.

Also, is anyone familier with the realest philosiphy? It's basically the belief that evil is the true nature of man. It's something that I suppose could interest everyone.

[Magic Myrmidon]

Maybe I'm not so good. I kinda sympathize with Hazzard's story. Doesn't seem TOO bad.

That being said, I couldn't imagine myself doing that. Although I half wish I could. The one time I was punched in school I walked away. And then, when the whole inevitable talks with the principal happened, I just recommended that we let it go. :/

Also, I really enjoy this topic.

Also, I really enjoy the DnD analogies for real life situations. :p

[Luckmann]

Lawful Neutral.

[Hazzardevil]

Maybe I'm not so good. I kinda sympathize with Hazzard's story. Doesn't seem TOO bad.

That being said, I couldn't imagine myself doing that. Although I half wish I could. The one time I was punched in school I walked away. And then, when the whole inevitable talks with the principal happened, I just recommended that we let it go. :/

Also, I really enjoy this topic.

Also, I really enjoy the DnD analogies for real life situations. :p

It was just how manipulative I was of this boy, I wouldn't do this to some random person, I have over reacted to small things before like when a boy called me Harold I got behind him, grabbed his shoulders and then stood on the inside of his leg so he fell over backwards.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Hmm... This might be difficult for me.

I'm a true, old-fashion narcissist in almost every way possible. I am generally apathetic to everything/everyone, take almost near-sustenance at a stranger crying and find the greatest delights in crafting lies/spinning half-truths.

But I'm also known for contributing much time to charity activism, doing mission trips to help communities and every summer I volunteer to help children.

But I do so many of those because I enjoy the company (not the cause), enjoy the ego-boost and very often like using them to make myself seem more noble than others (it truly is a fun game).

In college I was a resident assistant, so I enforced rules/policies. But I did it because it was easy, paid well and allowed me to feed of the suffering of using the rules to punish people.

I have at times been called, "The single worst person I've ever met," while the same day been thanked for leading a noble cause.

I think I might be Lawfully Evil, what do you folks think?

Hi! Yep you are, and be proud of it. The rules are there to both protect you (and protect others), those who do not take advantage of them are fools (Not insulting other aligments :smalltongue: )

Also you follow my method of doing good to others to get good treatment from them.

Publicly, it helps to mitigate my natural evilness/selfishness that I firmly believe in "Kindness out of egoism", the practice of ocasionally doing good deeds, not because you want to help or feel compelled to do so (Kant would approve of that), but because helping them will net you good deeds performed to you.
It's like the wicked twist of "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

[Midnight_v]

Looking back, I think this is where the confusion came from. You didn't say they can be neutral evil, you said they are, with the way you worded implying that it is true of everyone who claims to be good. If you meant to say that this is true some of the time, then I agree with you - It's human nature to lie
Hmm... Yeah I may have worded that wrong. More like the default thought in my head is that people are pragmatic. I also think the MORE someone extols how virtuous and noble they are the more suspicious I become. In this world I find it seems almost every nut with a cause claims the greater good. So yeah I did say I did say "Now to me" perhaps I should have quatified it better. My apologies, I was pretty out of it then too.


neutral evil people are pragmatic, like Artemis Entreri (I don't care what the official stat block says, he's not chaotic) and would not waste their efforts on such a deception if there wasa nothing to gain.
+1
As you can see

I being a directly self interested person, consider myself Neutral Evil. I don't think most NE people would tell you that, I certainly wouldn't if asked in real life. Its anti-pragmatic to do so. . . Pragmaticism is the rule of the day for this part of the discussion.


I don't mind being told I'm wrong, unless I feel like someone is simply dismissing whatever I say. I also hate when people try to tell me what I am. Your first post seemed to be doing both of those things.
I feel ya, I hope it cleared up somethings. I'm really wasn't saying "You're not" but moreso "I don't believe automatically" when someone says they are when it comes to things like: I"m lawful good.
Thats what I was spelling out with the self sacrifice thing. Its not me dumping on peoples self worth or anything, It's that when people say "I"m lawful good" a lot of time they're trying to do what Tenno Seremel suggested and break it into its constiuent parts.
Which doesn't work when using those terms, as I illustrated, Lawful Good has a defintion, meaning that you're "Required to act" now I can't say anyones not right this second going to volunteer at a soup kitchen today, or stopping some oprressive regime. The thing is ... you have to DO something to make such a claim justly, I contrarily hate to see people not understand something.

@ Tenno Seremel
Sir, you may cease civil discourse at any time, or discourse entirely at anytime, it's your right. Still, doesn't make you anymore correct in your assertions. Sorry, I didn't mean to hurt anyones feelings.

[noparlpf]

I've thought about this a lot before. I'm Chaotic Good overall.
Why good? I often go out of my way to do nice things for people or to help strangers out. I spent half an hour digging a stranger's car out of the snow over the winter and then pushing it onto the street where it could get traction. (That's one of the bigger things I've done lately.) I also don't do things that are intentionally hurtful to other people, and avoid accidentally harming people when possible. Of course, everybody slips up occasionally, say if they're having a bad day, but at the end of the day I'm probably Good.
As for chaotic, yeah. I was debating the law-chaos axis for a very long time. (Read: months.) It's very badly defined in 3.0 and 3.5. I finally decided this when I reread the chaotic good section of the PHB. "Relies on his own conscience" and "has his own moral compass" are two paraphrased lines which made me decide that I'm Chaotic and not Neutral on that axis.

Edit: I found this (http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=align) on an old thread.
I came out strongly Chaotic Good, with NG second, LG third, and LN fourth.

[Drelua]

I'm really wasn't saying "You're not" but moreso "I don't believe automatically" when someone says they are when it comes to things like: I"m lawful good.


Oh, I completely agree with you there. I'm not saying I automatically believe what everyone says beyond a shadow of a doubt. It's more like 80%; odds are they're telling the truth, but online, and more so in real life, there's always a chance that someone is lying, and you can never be completely sure that they're not. And people seem to think good people can't be cynical and slow to trust...


Edit: I found this (http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=align) on an old thread.
I came out strongly Chaotic Good, with NG second, LG third, and LN fourth.

Huh, maybe I was wrong about my alignment. That test sai that I'm very chaotic good (the little green bar was maxed), with chaotic neutral as a distant second, and neutral good just barely below that, with no points towards any other alignment.

[Gamer Girl]

Difficult to sum up one's life in a single alignment. Depends on the situation really. Like, if I'm programming, I'll be lawful because protocol and standards are important for productivity. I'll be good if someone wants help with something I enjoy doing. I'll totally be willing to help without expecting anything in return. And when I'm playing a video game, I'll probably be chaotic, and whether I'm good or evil depends on whether the other guy is being a jerk or not.

It's not so hard to sum up your life with an alignment if your honest with yourself. There are things you would and would not do. There are things you would only do in special circumstances, but the circumstances matter.

If you even like to do programming that is a lawful trait, as opposed to us chaotic folks that never follow directions. But still you must look at the bigger picture. If your a computer programer, and when to school for it and spend 1/3 of your day doing that...it's safe to say your lawful. But if you do the 'cool dude I don't read directions', but otherwise do follow directions, then your not chaotic.

A good person is willing to help without expecting anything in return(though this is a lie for most good people as they are only good to attempt to get things back). An evil person never helps..and even if they do seem to be helping, it's only to help themselves.

A person can't swing from good and evil with every decision...you are good or you are evil. For example, even when a good person does a bad thing, like violence or theft, they will still have their good limits. A good person might very well beat up someone for some reason, but not overly harm them just beat them up. An evil person will use the excuse to beat someone up to inflict great harm..as much as they can get away with. The evil person thinks about harming others often, and has even does some research and taken a couple 'self defense'/street fighting type classes so they know where to hit...

The same way an evil person does not help others, unless they have something to gain. You can't be evil, yet still randomly help people to be nice(unless your manipulating them).

[No brains]

As an AMERICAN I am listed in my MM as often Chaotic Neutral.

I take a wide view of my actions, which severely complicates my alignment.

I like the idea of law. Consistency helps you stay safe by letting you know when something might disrupt the balance of your life. Then again, if a rule makes no damn sense or is even counter intuitive, I will disobey it flagrantly (people of PA, sing in your showers!). Even then, however, I will make a good attempt at formally addressing the stupidity of the issue with due process before I resort to rebellion. I guess you could say I favor law over chaos.

I know I am good- even to my disadvantage. I will politely put up with putrid, festering and moving landfills of **** until it meaningfully hurts me. I let myself get taken advantage of again and again and never put an icepick in its proper receptacle of some jerk's heart because I know it will cause more crap for me to put up with. Even when there is nothing to be gained or lost from a situation, I will normally take a kind route.

What really screws things up for me is that the prime rule that dictates all of my actions is: "What will get this crap out of my face soonest?" In all my endeavors, I take up a virtuous sloth that benefits others just so they can get what they want and leave me alone. It just so happens that the pressure from society favors lawful and good actions. It's too much trouble to wreak wanton destruction, and that's why I refrain from it. Though in the end, I doubt that my conditioning would let me name people to be arbitrarily arrested for the traitor quota even if it became less trouble in the future.

TL;DR: I am lazy neutral. I just look as virtuous as a paladin.

[noparlpf]

A good person is willing to help without expecting anything in return(though this is a lie for most good people as they are only good to attempt to get things back). An evil person never helps..and even if they do seem to be helping, it's only to help themselves.

I recently discovered that being good and truly being good gets you cupcakes. Two strangers I helped out at school went out and bought me cupcakes afterwards. (The seeds of evil have been planted.)

Edit:
Then again, if a rule makes no damn sense or is even counter intuitive, I will disobey it flagrantly (people of PA, sing in your showers!).

In MA it's illegal for the woman to be on top.
It's also just about impossible to legally take a bath up here. Especially in Boston.
On the bright side, it's still legal to have a duel to the death in Boston.

[Bovine Colonel]

The same way an evil person does not help others, unless they have something to gain. You can't be evil, yet still randomly help people to be nice(unless your manipulating them).

http://www.giantitp.com/articles/XbsQgS9YYu9g3HZBAGE.html

Not the whole article is related.

[Stront]

Chaotic Good without a doubt. I believe in the greater good and will break any law, lie, steal, etc...if it saves a life or protects the innocent. Now I'm not against laws that serve the greater good and follow most; however, laws are purely suggested guidelines in my humble opinion.

[Scarey Nerd]

I'd say... True Neutral with Chaotic tendencies. I do everything for personal gain. I won't break a law just because it's there, because that would make my life unecessarily difficult, but if I strongly disagree with it then to hell with it. On the other hand, I believe in the necessity of law and order, though I might not agree with its current implementation. I have the capacity to do both good and evil, I think, though good/evil is simply dependent on what side of the line you stand on.

[kabreras]

Chaotic Neutral.

I've built a character whose mental state is me while I'm suppressing those conditionings; it's very scary.

Prety much the same...

Law : if it wasnt for what happend in our society when you break it... Hell give me teleport and you will see how i care about law !
Good / Evil : I can be a pest sometimes doing some bastard things and sometimes i could do all to help, depend of my mood.

[noparlpf]

...though good/evil is simply dependent on what side of the line you stand on.

That raises another question. Are Good and Evil objective or subjective? One of my uncle's students wrote a paper on how red dragons aren't chaotic evil. I personally believe that, regardless of what people think of their own actions, there is some objective morality floating out in the aether somewhere.

[Scarey Nerd]

That raises another question. Are Good and Evil objective or subjective? One of my uncle's students wrote a paper on how red dragons aren't chaotic evil. I personally believe that, regardless of what people think of their own actions, there is some objective morality floating out in the aether somewhere.

Is a terrorist a freedom fighter or an evildoer? Was Robin Hood a hero or a thief that plagued the state? Was Martin Luther a pioneer or an antidisestablishementarianist*? It's always dependent on one's point of view. For instance, in my opinion, all 3 questions are answered as the latter. Others may well disagree. Of course, try putting that into context with Detect Evil and life becomes infinitely more complicated...

*Hands up who else has managed to get THAT into a sentence? Go me...

[Drelua]

That raises another question. Are Good and Evil objective or subjective? One of my uncle's students wrote a paper on how red dragons aren't chaotic evil. I personally believe that, regardless of what people think of their own actions, there is some objective morality floating out in the aether somewhere.

I would say that both exist; some things are good or bad depending on the society and the person they're being done to. However, regardless of what the perpetrator thinks, it is evil to kill an innocent person. Some may be so deluded as to think that by killing innocents they are saving lives in the end. I don't know if anyone here has seen Dexter, but it's basically about a psychopath who can't stop himself from killing people, so he only kills criminals who escaped punishment. He may think that he is channeling an evil desire into something righteous, but he is still doing evil, though I would say he is doing less than he would be if he was killing innocent people. He may perceive his actions as good, but they are evil.

The Sword of Truth series of books by Terry Goodkind had some interesting ideas about objective morality vs. subjective morality.

[Aricandor]

N or NG probably. As much as I kind of like to think I'd run in to help someone in grave danger, I know myself well enough to know I'd probably just end up standing frozen. Yeah, I don't deal well with pressure. :smallbiggrin:

Then again, should one consider that kind of thing when trying to place oneself on the scale?

[Drelua]

Then again, should one consider that kind of thing when trying to place oneself on the scale?

I don't think courage is part of your alignment. You may freeze if you saw, say, someone getting mugged, but I think that if you're morally offended by it and feel sorry for the victim, you're probably good. You may not have the courage to stop the mugger, but would you if you could? I think, if the answer is yes, then you're good, assuming your motives were unselfish.

[ffone]

Most people think of themselves as Chaotic Good, and their behavior is consistent with that of a mindset which is Neutral Evil but highly risk averse (i.e.won't do anything 'bad' with hardly any chance of getting caught) and highly sensitive to social status and appearing to be 'nice' or 'good'.

[Shadowknight12]

The problem with these kinds of threads is that a lot of people can't simply talk about themselves and let it be. They have to publicise their opinion about others, without thought or care about the propriety of such statements, and without the slightest courtesy of minding how it sounds. It's a lot like preaching, really, if one thinks about it.

[Esprit15]

Edit: I found this (http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=align) on an old thread.
I came out strongly Chaotic Good, with NG second, LG third, and LN fourth.

Hm, according to that my evaluation was quite accurate: I had equal Neutral Good and True Neutral, a little bit of chaotic good and neutral evil, and an even smaller bit of chaotic good.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Most people think of themselves as Chaotic Good, and their behavior is consistent with that of a mindset which is Neutral Evil but highly risk averse (i.e.won't do anything 'bad' with hardly any chance of getting caught) and highly sensitive to social status and appearing to be 'nice' or 'good'.


The problem with these kinds of threads is that a lot of people can't simply talk about themselves and let it be. They have to publicise their opinion about others, without thought or care about the propriety of such statements, and without the slightest courtesy of minding how it sounds. It's a lot like preaching, really, if one thinks about it.

Coming from a similar place than Shadowknight, If thats your opinion ffone, you are entitled to it, but such blanket statements feel insulting to those who feel different, and express their alingments and mindsets here.
Again, you are 100% entitled to your opinion, but please don't express it as a blanket statement that might cause the others to feel insulted.
Therefore starting a unnecesary discussion in what has been, so far, a very interesting showcase of the variety of mindsets present in the playground and how all of them can discuss things in a civil manner

[Gamer Girl]

Coming from a similar place than Shadowknight, If thats your opinion ffone, you are entitled to it, but such blanket statements feel insulting to those who feel different, and express their alingments and mindsets here.
Again, you are 100% entitled to your opinion, but please don't express it as a blanket statement that might cause the others to feel insulted.
Therefore starting a unnecesary discussion in what has been, so far, a very interesting showcase of the variety of mindsets present in the playground and how all of them can discuss things in a civil manner

Just look at the results.....there are a lot of good and neutral people here. Very few have said they were evil. Most people feel they are lawful, only some chaotic.

In most real life alignment discussions a lot of people try to claim to be 'chaotic' or 'evil' as it's the cool way to be, as good and lawful are seen as normal and boring. But you don't see much of that here.

[Redshirt Army]

How about immediately after someone got grilled for imposing their alignment ideas on posters, I impose mine as well!

Anyway, in my opinion, the vast majority of people are True Neutral, with only minor tendencies towards Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos. That's not to say that there aren't some really selfless people and heartless jerks out there, but for the most part, people just lean towards alignments, rather then exemplifying them.

In my opinion, if you're not really Good unless you consistently make sacrifices of money, time, health, or reputation to help those you see as unfortunate, without any ulterior motive, and without the sacrifice being trivial (a few dollars to a homeless person, holding open a door).

As for Evil... eh. Just being a scumbag isn't enough, you have to actively give up resources (and not trivial ones) for the express purpose of worsening the conditions of others. You treat them like meat? Go for it. Unless you go out of your way to pulverize the meat, you're not evil.

This is all, of course, my opinion, but feel free to rip me to shreds about it.

(I should note I don't run D&D this way, mostly because I feel that at heart, D&D is about exceptional heroes and villains, so the whole alignment thing gets more exaggerated.)

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Just look at the results.....there are a lot of good and neutral people here. Very few have said they were evil. Most people feel they are lawful, only some chaotic.

In most real life alignment discussions a lot of people try to claim to be 'chaotic' or 'evil' as it's the cool way to be, as good and lawful are seen as normal and boring. But you don't see much of that here.

Which is exactly why I like it here, the ones who consider themselves good, don't feel or have the need to act "cool" and "edgy" by claiming to be something they are not.
And for us who embrace the darker side, we don't feel nor have the need to pretend to be nice guys or be anything if bluntly honest on how we see the world. We might be evil but we sure can be civil.

This, I find it exhilarating and mighty refreshing :smallsmile:

Edit (So as to not double post):


How about immediately after someone got grilled for imposing their alignment ideas on posters, I impose mine as well!

Anyway, in my opinion, the vast majority of people are True Neutral, with only minor tendencies towards Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos. That's not to say that there aren't some really selfless people and heartless jerks out there, but for the most part, people just lean towards alignments, rather then exemplifying them.

In my opinion, if you're not really Good unless you consistently make sacrifices of money, time, health, or reputation to help those you see as unfortunate, without any ulterior motive, and without the sacrifice being trivial (a few dollars to a homeless person, holding open a door).

As for Evil... eh. Just being a scumbag isn't enough, you have to actively give up resources (and not trivial ones) for the express purpose of worsening the conditions of others. You treat them like meat? Go for it. Unless you go out of your way to pulverize the meat, you're not evil.

This is all, of course, my opinion, but feel free to rip me to shreds about it.

(I should note I don't run D&D this way, mostly because I feel that at heart, D&D is about exceptional heroes and villains, so the whole alignment thing gets more exaggerated.)

Hey! If it's your opinion it's great to share it! I don't agree, but then again I expect to disagree with most people, having a particular take on life.
What will likely get you "ripped to shreds" here is to say: "EVERYONE is like this, yada yada". So, we are cool, you are free to go... This time :smallamused:

[noparlpf]

In most real life alignment discussions a lot of people try to claim to be 'chaotic' or 'evil' as it's the cool way to be, as good and lawful are seen as normal and boring. But you don't see much of that here.

Yeah, I love to show off to my friends how much I enjoy the suffering of the common folk. That's definitely what people like to see.
'Round where I'm from, being chaotic or evil isn't really seen as cool, but I do see that mindset occasionally. I just don't really feel like it's the norm to see chaotic and evil as cool. I'm pretty chaotic, and I'm really the exception to the rule in my area. Most of the people at my school are some form of neutral.
Actually, maybe what my peers are lacking is Charisma. That's probably it. Most of them don't really stand out.

[Gamer Girl]

Yeah, I love to show off to my friends how much I enjoy the suffering of the common folk. That's definitely what people like to see.
'Round where I'm from, being chaotic or evil isn't really seen as cool, but I do see that mindset occasionally. I just don't really feel like it's the norm to see chaotic and evil as cool. I'm pretty chaotic, and I'm really the exception to the rule in my area. Most of the people at my school are some form of neutral.
Actually, maybe what my peers are lacking is Charisma. That's probably it. Most of them don't really stand out.

I lot of people just see 'chaotic' and 'evil' as a rebel and cool. While 'lawful' and 'good' are old boring people(or worse parents). And most people just like to talk a good talk about how 'evil' or 'chaotic' they are...but when it comes down to it they are good and lawful, of course.

Neutral is more rare then you think....most people are by default good.

[noparlpf]

I lot of people just see 'chaotic' and 'evil' as a rebel and cool. While 'lawful' and 'good' are old boring people(or worse parents). And most people just like to talk a good talk about how 'evil' or 'chaotic' they are...but when it comes down to it they are good and lawful, of course.

Neutral is more rare then you think....most people are by default good.

Well, if you check out the PHB, it says that most neutral people are neutral leaning towards good simply because most people aren't going to want trouble, and will generally be more sympathetic to the good (who help people) than to the evil (who harm people).
I personally feel like most people are neutral. Maybe halfway between neutral and neutral-something, but rarely actually all the way to neutral-something.

[Shadowknight12]

Coming from a similar place than Shadowknight, If thats your opinion ffone, you are entitled to it, but such blanket statements feel insulting to those who feel different, and express their alingments and mindsets here.
Again, you are 100% entitled to your opinion, but please don't express it as a blanket statement that might cause the others to feel insulted.
Therefore starting a unnecesary discussion in what has been, so far, a very interesting showcase of the variety of mindsets present in the playground and how all of them can discuss things in a civil manner

Pretty much this.

I don't really feel the need to get into an argument with every single person who says "YOU LIAR/DELUDED FOOL/HAT-WEARING MANIAC. YOU ARE X INSTEAD!" so I'll just ignore such posts. I wouldn't presume to know humanity so well that I can make blanket statements without even accounting for exceptions and abnormalities, but that's just me. Others are obviously wiser and all-knowing. Whatever makes people feel more at ease with the world they live in, I guess.

[TheRinni]

Chaotic Neutral. I follow my whims above everything. Governing laws, social norms, and moral principles are all the wills of other people. I will follow these things when I think they're correct, not when someone else tells me to.
I don't go out of my way to break these things, but I won't follow them "just because." And, I have no problem disregarding them just because I feel like it.

EDIT:
Although, by http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html (this) test, I'm apparently Chaotic Evil. >:\ I don't think that's accurate.

(or worse belief in that karma fiction)
I find a variety of religions interesting - they're just so fascinating. And, I have to say, that I find that statement to be as insulting as saying "that faith fiction." Hinduism, and the karma concept, is an intriguing belief system.

[Siosilvar]

Mmm... probably Lawful Good, based on my own observations and those of others around me.

The test linked here tells me I'm very strongly Neutral or Chaotic good, with pretty much no third place, though. These (http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html) tw-uh, (http://www.angelfire.com/dragon/terragf/) three (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b) tell me I'm Lawful Good though.

Somebody used M:tG colors, I'm 99% certainly White/Blue.

[Gamer Girl]

Well, if you check out the PHB, it says that most neutral people are neutral leaning towards good simply because most people aren't going to want trouble, and will generally be more sympathetic to the good (who help people) than to the evil (who harm people).
I personally feel like most people are neutral. Maybe halfway between neutral and neutral-something, but rarely actually all the way to neutral-something.

Sure that is what one guy wrote in one book years ago...so what?

My point is more about real life....most people are good: they help each other, they are nice, they respect each other and get along well. People give their money to help others, and their time. You will often find donation bins full. And so forth. I know several people, that although poor and/or on a fixed income still donate at least 1/3 of what they have to help others. And in many circles that is common....and that is the action of a good person, not a neutral one.

And just look at the extremes: when a kid goes missing thousands of people show up to help look for them. And they are not just neutral people with nothing better to do.....they are good people who want to help.

Just look at the famous mom who was just found not guilty of her child's death(guess who I'm talking about...). There was national outrage over this...and not by the neutral or evil people(speaking for evil we don't care if some dies)....it was all the Good people.

[noparlpf]

Sure that is what one guy wrote in one book years ago...so what?

My point is more about real life....most people are good: they help each other, they are nice, they respect each other and get along well. People give their money to help others, and their time. You will often find donation bins full. And so forth. I know several people, that although poor and/or on a fixed income still donate at least 1/3 of what they have to help others. And in many circles that is common....and that is the action of a good person, not a neutral one.

And just look at the extremes: when a kid goes missing thousands of people show up to help look for them. And they are not just neutral people with nothing better to do.....they are good people who want to help.

Just look at the famous mom who was just found not guilty of her child's death (guess who I'm talking about...). There was national outrage over this...and not by the neutral or evil people (speaking for evil we don't care if some dies)....it was all the Good people.

Maybe my problem is that I associate with teenagers. Maybe things will look better in ten years.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Maybe my problem is that I associate with teenagers. Maybe things will look better in ten years.

Oh yeah, as i see it, younglings have a hard time knowing themselves... Knowing their alignment is pretty much impossible except for the most extreme cases.


Siosilvar, thanks for the 3 tests! I find them more accurate than the one previously posted.

[Siosilvar]

Siosilvar, thanks for the 3 tests! I find them more accurate than the one previously posted.

Mmm... the WotC one I find not "deep" enough, whatever that means to whoever's reading this.

[noparlpf]

Oh yeah, as i see it, younglings have a hard time knowing themselves... Knowing their alignment is pretty much impossible except for the most extreme cases.

Yup, I'm a sophomore in college. Most of my peers strike me as some form or other of neutral because they're not done growing up and maturing yet (despite the fact that they all consider themselves to be the epitome of maturity and infallibility).
(Also, 90% of the population at my school, including teachers, are hipsters. It's horrible.)

[HalfDragonCube]

True Neutral: the 'meh' alignment.

[Techsmart]

I like to believe that I am neutral good, but I sometimes have a tendency to act closer to true neutral or lawful good. Most alignment tests end up putting me somewhere in that area anyhow, so I guess its a pretty good guess.

[AMFV]

It's hard to say. Alignments don't really work that well in the real world.
For instance if I were in Belgium in 1940, I would likely have worked as hard to ferry escaping Jews out of Nazi territory. If the situation were different and I were a Waffen-SS guard in a camp in Poland, I can't say that I would have acted in a good and kind manner. People are capable of great good and great evil. I know for a fact that I am capable of doing things that are very difficult and sacrificing for others. I am also capable of doing things that are selfish and unpleasant to others.
In answer to your question I am probably LG, or close to it. I have a pretty strict moral code. I've broken it on occasion, but it hurt, and it was difficult to deal with, I think if I were chaotic I wouldn't feel poorly because I broke a code I made up myself. Despite this I think there are very few chaotic people who would break all the rules, so it's hard to say. But in any case due to my feeling bad over breaking my moral code, I would say I am Lawful.
I have been willing to sacrifice a great deal to help other people, in that sense I am good. I have done some very not good things (like lying to my wife, for instance) in my life, but again those made me feel terrible. Also a person who wasn't genuinely concerned with being a good person wouldn't probably worry about how they would have acted in 1940 as a Waffen-SS guard. The other thing that helps me know that I am least strongly inclined towards good, is that it is immensely painful for me to see people suffering, even emotionally. While I would kill to protect my family, or my country, I would not do so lightly. I think that this is the sign of somebody who is good.

[Sierim]

I guess I would be somewhere between Neutral Good and Chaotic neutral. I do what I do because it makes sense to me in the moment, and prefer not to cause harm when I can reasonably avoid it. My most basic value is personal autonomy. I leave you alone, you leave me alone. I aim in activity to advance these goals without creating undesirable long-term costs.

[Bovine Colonel]

Sure that is what one guy wrote in one book years ago...so what?

It's what provides the context of this discussion.


My point is more about real life....most people are good: they help each other, they are nice, they respect each other and get along well. People give their money to help others, and their time. You will often find donation bins full. And so forth. I know several people, that although poor and/or on a fixed income still donate at least 1/3 of what they have to help others. And in many circles that is common....and that is the action of a good person, not a neutral one.

Congratulations. You live in a bleeding awesome place. Or just know a lot of people.


And just look at the extremes: when a kid goes missing thousands of people show up to help look for them. And they are not just neutral people with nothing better to do.....they are good people who want to help.

Thousands out of...how many? Also, mind providing an example? I'm pretty sure it's not thousands, though I might be wrong.


Just look at the famous mom who was just found not guilty of her child's death(guess who I'm talking about...). There was national outrage over this...and not by the neutral or evil people(speaking for evil we don't care if some dies)....it was all the Good people.

No, neutral people can still be outraged over stuff like this. They just wouldn't actively do anything about it given the chance.

[Narren]

No, neutral people can still be outraged over stuff like this. They just wouldn't actively do anything about it given the chance.

I was thinking the same thing. You don't have to be Good to care about anyone. Wouldn't most Lawful Neutral people be outraged? That goes against the law and societal norms. Even Evil people can be outraged.

What do you call a person who blows up an abortion clinic? They're killing innocent people, but they're doing it because they care about unborn children.

[Gamer Girl]

I was thinking the same thing. You don't have to be Good to care about anyone. Wouldn't most Lawful Neutral people be outraged? That goes against the law and societal norms. Even Evil people can be outraged.

What do you call a person who blows up an abortion clinic? They're killing innocent people, but they're doing it because they care about unborn children.

You need to be careful saying 'anything can be anything', as it makes the discussion pointless. If anyone can be of any alignment and think/do anything, then everyone is all alignments.

Only good people care about the deaths of others. Neutral people have no interest(and are the ones that say 'the system worked'). And evil people don't care at all.

Again, only good people care about the clinic. The neutral person has no interest unless it directly effects them. And the evil person does not care at all(and really laughs at the idea that so called 'innocent' people were harmed).

[Magic Myrmidon]

Well, after taking 4 quizzes (the three in this topic, and another one I know of), I got neutral, lawful good, neutral good, and chaotic good.

So, as far as the quizzes go, my self assessment as neutral good seems about right. Woo.


Then again, it's easy to answer hypotheticals. Another thing to act as you say you would.

[Arrowhead]

Its very hard to fairly judge one's self. If one thinks highly of themselves and believes them self always right, they will probably always pick Chaotic or Lawful Good. Most people fall into Neutral Good range, I think. Its the people that are trollin' or having a bit of a laugh that say they are evil in any sense I think. Evil in real life requires an almost complete sociopath- its "hard" to attain.

I've been described as Chaotic and Lawful Good by my D&D friends. The more interesting questions is "What were the alignments of famous people like Ghandi, Hitler, and entertainers like Jimmy Hendrix?"

My votes respectively would be Lawful Good, Chaotic/Neutral Evil, and Neutral Neutral or Neutral Good.

[Ormur]

Lawful neutral aspiring to neutral good.

Ethically I have all sorts of lofty views but I'm to lazy and self-centred to do much about them. I try to be nice and help people, just not hard enough. Trying to optimize your world-view isn't as important as doing something to make the world a better place. I also value laws and authority more than I thought, it's something that's easy to fall back on instead of being genuinely good when you're lucky to live someplace where the government takes care of it's citizens.

[Mordokai]

Just look at the famous mom who was just found not guilty of her child's death(guess who I'm talking about...). There was national outrage over this...and not by the neutral or evil people(speaking for evil we don't care if some dies)....it was all the Good people.

Now you're just trying too hard. Speaking for neutrality, I personally don't care if somebody unknown to me bites it. Do I consider myself evil because of it? No. Callous, quite probably. But evil, most certainly not.

Stop trying to look cool with you being all evil and dark. You're not. Savvy?

[Stront]

I think the big difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is who they target. If you kill non-combatants (civilians) you are evil. Targeting soldiers is a different matter in my opinion - much more subjective.



Is a terrorist a freedom fighter or an evildoer? Was Robin Hood a hero or a thief that plagued the state? Was Martin Luther a pioneer or an antidisestablishementarianist*? It's always dependent on one's point of view. For instance, in my opinion, all 3 questions are answered as the latter. Others may well disagree. Of course, try putting that into context with Detect Evil and life becomes infinitely more complicated...

*Hands up who else has managed to get THAT into a sentence? Go me...

[Hazzardevil]

For every allingment test I have taken I have gotten True neutrel. Apart from 1 that gave me chaotic evil and said I was an Orc Barbarian, I'm disregarding that one.
Now one mentioned earlier wherre it says which allingments you are closest to with the resulst.
I got true nuetrel as my highest, Nuetrel Evil second highest and Chaotic and lawful evil 3rd and I didn't give the answer for good allingments for any question.

[Narren]

You need to be careful saying 'anything can be anything', as it makes the discussion pointless. If anyone can be of any alignment and think/do anything, then everyone is all alignments.

Only good people care about the deaths of others. Neutral people have no interest(and are the ones that say 'the system worked'). And evil people don't care at all.

Again, only good people care about the clinic. The neutral person has no interest unless it directly effects them. And the evil person does not care at all(and really laughs at the idea that so called 'innocent' people were harmed).

This interpretation is why many people feel that the alignment system is too rigid. They MAKE it rigid, when it's actually more flexible. People of any alignment can care about others, but only Good people are likely to care about every stranger out there. The Lawful people can be upset if the system failed (someone getting away with a crime) because it destabilizes their way of life in some small way. You say you're evil...so that means you don't care about ANYONE? Friends? Family? Anyone?

And if only Good people care about the clinic, what the people who blow up the clinic BECAUSE they care about what goes on in there? They're Good? They've killed innocent people, and probably don't care. Even an Evil person can care about a category (ex, kids) and act upon that passion in an evil manner.

[excruciarch]

Chaotic Neutral (0/40) =]

[hamishspence]

And if only Good people care about the clinic, what the people who blow up the clinic BECAUSE they care about what goes on in there? They're Good? They've killed innocent people, and probably don't care. Even an Evil person can care about a category (ex, kids) and act upon that passion in an evil manner.

This. Fictional serial killers like Dexter are sometimes done this was- they care about a category (children) and act on it in an evil manner (capturing and torturing to death those they feel "deserve it").

There's plenty of room for "Evil but compassionate" or "Evil but altruistic" within the alignment definitions- especially if you consult expanded sources like Champions of Ruin.

[Zigg'rrauglurr]

Its the people that are trollin' or having a bit of a laugh that say they are evil in any sense I think. Evil in real life requires an almost complete sociopath- its "hard" to attain.

I've been described as Chaotic and Lawful Good by my D&D friends. The more interesting questions is "What were the alignments of famous people like Ghandi, Hitler, and entertainers like Jimmy Hendrix?"

My votes respectively would be Lawful Good, Chaotic/Neutral Evil, and Neutral Neutral or Neutral Good.

In general, a Sociopath would be in the Neutral/Chaotic Evil range, which doesn't mean that everyone from that alignment is a sociopath. Lawful Evil instead functions within society, and uses it for it's own gain.

As for your famous people analysis the only one I disgress is Adolph H. This guy was the epitome of the despot, he used the existing law in Germany to rise to power (using the system to be put in a position of power), had laws passed to legalize his actions & beliefs.
Neutral/Chaotic Evil,instead , wouldn't care for the law much to carry on their actions, and most from those alignments wouldn't care for establishing a government based on their ideals.

Jimmy H. ... I don't know enough of his personal life, to pass judgement.


This. Fictional serial killers like Dexter are sometimes done this was- they care about a category (children) and act on it in an evil manner (capturing and torturing to death those they feel "deserve it").

There's plenty of room for "Evil but compassionate" or "Evil but altruistic" within the alignment definitions- especially if you consult expanded sources like Champions of Ruin.

QFT


This interpretation is why many people feel that the alignment system is too rigid. They MAKE it rigid, when it's actually more flexible.

Agreed, How everyone behaves during the day or in certain cases is pretty flexible.
The alignment is a general view, the default setting in someones life if you will.
The outrage example provided by Gamer Girl serves for this. I'm not from that area, but I would feel pretty miffed about it. It's because I care? No, the problem is that the system failed to punish the infractor, failed to protect is intended target. Similar things happen in my country, (justice failing to convict serious offenders, who are by all accounts guilty) that makes me feel angry, because when the day comes that I might need the system to protect me, I don't really know how much can I trust in it. That's why I'm also aware of all the legal ways I can , for example, kill or deter an attacker should the need arise, and I will do so gladly, when I have the chance.




People of any alignment can care about others, but only Good people are likely to care about every stranger out there. The Lawful people can be upset if the system failed (someone getting away with a crime) because it destabilizes their way of life in some small way. You say you're evil...so that means you don't care about ANYONE? Friends? Family? Anyone?

Agreed, except the last part. Both Gamer Girl and me (the most outspoken representatives for the Evil but civil alignment here) have people we care about, teach them to protect themselves, and we would kill without hesitation for them. The rest of the world, most of it? Don't care/Funny when they suffer, specially if they brought it on themselves


And if only Good people care about the clinic, what the people who blow up the clinic BECAUSE they care about what goes on in there? They're Good? They've killed innocent people, and probably don't care. Even an Evil person can care about a category (ex, kids) and act upon that passion in an evil manner.
mmm. Ok, the problem here is what they think of themselves. I believe that if they are honest with themselves, then, like The Operative in Serenity, they "know" they are working for a "better" world, but they are not part of it. Therefore, probably not good. Others might be deluded with the whole "Sword/Knight/Fist of God" and think themselves as the last bastion of good-hood...
Evil regarding something as important... Agreed, already mentioned before, also Belkar with Mr. Scruffy.



Now you're just trying too hard. Speaking for neutrality, I personally don't care if somebody unknown to me bites it. Do I consider myself evil because of it? No. Callous, quite probably. But evil, most certainly not.

Stop trying to look cool with you being all evil and dark. You're not. Savvy?

Altough some might say that being callous would fit any alignment. You are free to express your perceived aligment. The thread is titled "Alignment...where do you see yourself?" for a reason.

However we politely request that you refrain from commenting on others alignment in a snarky or any other "total & final" way that doesn't construct towards an intelligent discussion.
If you mention that you think that evil almost doesn't exist and those who refer as such are "acting cool", it's ok.
But in writing, general statements such as that one, come off as rude.

[Mordokai]

Have you considered I find her attitude rude?

[TheRinni]

Now you're just trying too hard. Speaking for neutrality, I personally don't care if somebody unknown to me bites it. Do I consider myself evil because of it? No. Callous, quite probably. But evil, most certainly not.
To be fair, she did make the point that Neutral people are likely to not care as well. You're just repeating the point - expanded on, ever so slightly - from a neutral view.

Stop trying to look cool with you being all evil and dark. You're not. Savvy?
Have you considered I find her attitude rude?
I find that's no reason to be rude in return. It's simply hypocritical.

[Mordokai]

I never claimed to the contrary.

[Gamer Girl]

This interpretation is why many people feel that the alignment system is too rigid. They MAKE it rigid, when it's actually more flexible. People of any alignment can care about others, but only Good people are likely to care about every stranger out there. The Lawful people can be upset if the system failed (someone getting away with a crime) because it destabilizes their way of life in some small way. You say you're evil...so that means you don't care about ANYONE? Friends? Family? Anyone?

And if only Good people care about the clinic, what the people who blow up the clinic BECAUSE they care about what goes on in there? They're Good? They've killed innocent people, and probably don't care. Even an Evil person can care about a category (ex, kids) and act upon that passion in an evil manner.

Any system has to be ridged overall. You can't just say 'anything' can be good or evil or chaotic or lawful. If you do, what is the point? You also can't use just one example, any human will defend themselves, for example, regardless of alignment. The difference is how and to what extreme. Take a simple robbery(person comes home and finds a robber..just like the ADT commercial.). A good person might try to scare the robbery and chase them away, maybe even hit/hurt them, but nothing too bad. A more neutral attitude is the ''just take the stuff and leave my family alone''. But an evil person....will kill the robber. The evil person wants to kill someone, and wants to have the 'legal'(ha) right to do so free and clear of any penalty. (Gella Elf lives in a concealed carry kingdom and always has her hand crossbow on her, and has the 'Castle Law' to protect her saying she can legally shoot any trespasser on her property.)



Agreed, except the last part. Both Gamer Girl and me (the most outspoken representatives for the Evil but civil alignment here) have people we care about, teach them to protect themselves, and we would kill without hesitation for them. The rest of the world, most of it? Don't care/Funny when they suffer, specially if they brought it on themselves

Gella Elf has two young elflings, both under 100. Both have their very own hand crossbows and are trained in the use of them. Both fully intend to get their own concealed carry paper at 160(the earliest legal age here). Gella's daughter Bella will be dating armed.



Now you're just trying too hard. Speaking for neutrality, I personally don't care if somebody unknown to me bites it. Do I consider myself evil because of it? No. Callous, quite probably. But evil, most certainly not.

Stop trying to look cool with you being all evil and dark. You're not. Savvy?

Well, I did say that only the good folks care if unknowns die.

I'm not trying to look like anything, I'm just saying the truth...within the limits of this good board.

[Drelua]

The difference is how and to what extreme. Take a simple robbery(person comes home and finds a robber..just like the ADT commercial.). A good person might try to scare the robbery and chase them away, maybe even hit/hurt them, but nothing too bad. A more neutral attitude is the ''just take the stuff and leave my family alone''. But an evil person....will kill the robber. The evil person wants to kill someone, and wants to have the 'legal'(ha) right to do so free and clear of any penalty.

I think you're looking at alignment too rigidly. I know many people disagree on how strictly definable the alignment system is, so I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying I disagree. There are many ways a good person could react in this situation. They could also react as you said a neutral person would, or they could even take pity on the robber and let them take some things (not likely, but possible), or react in many different ways. The main part I disagree with is that you have the neutral person reacting in what strikes me as more good than the good person. The good person is responding with anger while the neutral person thinks of keeping their family safe first? neutrality on the good/evil axis doesn't necessarily complete apathy. They could be vengeful but not take it too far, but be fairly nice to people that don't make them angry. And not all evil people want to kill someone; even Dexter doesn't really want to do it, in a way, he just can't help himself, so he tries to do good. I'm sure there's some people in things like UFC that are sadistic, but not murderous, and sadism is certainly not a good or even neutral quality; I'm pretty sure that if enjoy inflicting pain on anyone, you're evil, but this doesn't mean you want to kill anyone. There's probably plenty of LE bankers out there that love kicking people out of their homes but don't want to kill anyone, though it would probably take less anger than it would for most people for them to be pushed to murder.

[noparlpf]

I see myself as chaotic good and most of my friends do too. Various online alignment quizzes agree. Does that mean that I would go out of my way to avoid hurting or killing somebody if they were threatening me in some way? No.
I would kill with hardly a second thought if it were to defend my family or close friends. I would even defend a complete stranger, and I wouldn't hold back for fear of hurting their assailant.
(Oh yeah, and I would probably defend myself, but I think that's a given.)
Does that make me chaotic evil (even if only some of the time)?

[Drelua]

I see myself as chaotic good and most of my friends do too. Various online alignment quizzes agree. Does that mean that I would go out of my way to avoid hurting or killing somebody if they were threatening me in some way? No.
I would kill with hardly a second thought if it were to defend my family or close friends. I would even defend a complete stranger, and I wouldn't hold back for fear of hurting their assailant.
(Oh yeah, and I would probably defend myself, but I think that's a given.)
Does that make me chaotic evil (even if only some of the time)?

I see myself as chaotic good too, and I think I'd do exactly what you said in any of those situations, though I'm pretty sure I'd hold back if I was defending myself or another from a girl, though I'm sure there are statistics that show how unlike that is. Besides, you can't be one alignment some of the time, another the rest. Of course, it's easy to say you would do that, but I've never been in such a situation, so I'm not sure I'd be able to do that. But, as I have said before, I don't think that really matters when determining your alignment, I think you should only consider what you think should be done. As long as you wouldn't kill them after knocking them out, you wouldn't enjoy killing them, and you would feel remorse afterwards, that doesn't make you good, or even neutral, especially considering the danger you are putting yourself in, for your friends, family, or even a complete stranger.

[noparlpf]

I see myself as chaotic good too, and I think I'd do exactly what you said in any of those situations, though I'm pretty sure I'd hold back if I was defending myself or another from a girl, though I'm sure there are statistics that show how unlike that is. Besides, you can't be one alignment some of the time, another the rest. Of course, it's easy to say you would do that, but I've never been in such a situation, so I'm not sure I'd be able to do that. But, as I have said before, I don't think that really matters when determining your alignment, I think you should only consider what you think should be done. As long as you wouldn't kill them after knocking them out, you wouldn't enjoy killing them, and you would feel remorse afterwards, that doesn't make you good, or even neutral, especially considering the danger you are putting yourself in, for your friends, family, or even a complete stranger.

Oh yeah. I have the flaw Chivalrous Courtesy. -4 to attack a member of the opposite sex.

[Tr011]

Great sentence I totally agree with:

Player Handbook, page 105:
Chaotic good is the best alignment

[Drelua]

Oh yeah. I have the flaw Chivalrous Courtesy. -4 to attack a member of the opposite sex.

I don't think there's very many evil people that have that. And I'd say it's more of a penalty to damage, maybe even a will save to attack in extreme cases. Although I knew a guy who was definitely evil; he would laugh at the idea of a girl brutally murdering a guy, but he would get angry at the idea a guy hurting a girl, for ANY reason. He always talked about how honourable he was because he would never hurt a girl, but he had no problem getting another girl to hurt a girl. I think a lot of it was an act, though I don't know what he hoped to gain through it, or how much of it he actually believes. He isn't very smart. You probably think I might be making this up, but I swear, I'm not.

[noparlpf]

Great sentence I totally agree with:

Player Handbook, page 105:
Chaotic good is the best alignment

It says that for like half the alignments.
LG, NG, CG, N, CN.
And for LE, NE, CE it says "___ is the most dangerous".


I don't think there's very many evil people that have that. And I'd say it's more of a penalty to damage, maybe even a will save to attack in extreme cases. Although I knew a guy who was definitely evil; he would laugh at the idea of a girl brutally murdering a guy, but he would get angry at the idea a guy hurting a girl, for ANY reason. He always talked about how honourable he was because he would never hurt a girl, but he had no problem getting another girl to hurt a girl. I think a lot of it was an act, though I don't know what he hoped to gain through it, or how much of it he actually believes. He isn't very smart. You probably think I might be making this up, but I swear, I'm not.

That flaw has the prereq "good or lawful alignment". So CG, NG, LG, LN, LE can take it.
I was just going with an actual published flaw (Dragon Magazine #324), not how it functions in real life. I just wouldn't hit a girl. If I had to (and this has happened before), I would initiate a grapple. It doesn't hurt her, she can't hurt me, and she's so confused by the rules that she doesn't even know what to do next.

[Shadowknight12]

I just wouldn't hit a girl. If I had to (and this has happened before), I would initiate a grapple. It doesn't hurt her, she can't hurt me, and she's so confused by the rules that she doesn't even know what to do next.

In my case, this applies to men as well, provided they are weaker than me. And conversely, it doesn't apply to women that are as strong or stronger than me. I don't see it as a gender issue, I see it as a more general principle that goes something like "If attacking subject is weaker than self, aim for non-painful incapacitation."

[noparlpf]

In my case, this applies to men as well, provided they are weaker than me. And conversely, it doesn't apply to women that are as strong or stronger than me. I don't see it as a gender issue, I see it as a more general principle that goes something like "If attacking subject is weaker than self, aim for non-painful incapacitation."

I know that I ought to agree, but there's that tiny kernel of sexism that I can't eliminate that specifically says that I shouldn't hit girls. That's why it's considered a flaw in D&D.

[Shadowknight12]

I know that I ought to agree, but there's that tiny kernel of sexism that I can't eliminate that specifically says that I shouldn't hit girls. That's why it's considered a flaw in D&D.

I would think that it's a flaw because someone weaker than you (regardless of gender) can still kill you horribly and you are imposing yourself a disadvantage against them that might well mean your painful, agonising death.

But that's just my interpretation.

[noparlpf]

I would think that it's a flaw because someone weaker than you (regardless of gender) can still kill you horribly and you are imposing yourself a disadvantage against them that might well mean your painful, agonising death.

But that's just my interpretation.

Oh yeah, there is that. That's probably a good point, at least in-game. I've only had women after my life a few times in real life, so that part doesn't apply quite as much to real life.

[Toon Fighter]

True Neutral with lawful tendencies

[Shadowknight12]

Oh yeah, there is that. That's probably a good point, at least in-game. I've only had women after my life a few times in real life, so that part doesn't apply quite as much to real life.

I mean for both in-game and real life. A feeble old lady with a gun can still kill you horribly. Especially if she's a good shot and wants to make you suffer first.

I've yet to meet a woman IRL that's actually stronger than me (even the crazy ones), but I still know that there are women out there that will break my bones just as easily as they might snap a dry twig. If one of them decides to inflict grievous bodily harm on me, I'm not going to hold back.

It's not quite as simple as saying "women" in general. :smalltongue:

[AMFV]

I don't mean to attack another person's alignment (as many people in this thread have done) but I feel that at least one person is representing carrying a ''hand crossbow'' as being an evil thing. A hand crossbow is just a thing no more inherently evil than anything else. If used on people without provocation or not in self-defense it is evil, but if used for defense it's not really. Also, as I stated I believe myself to be Lawful Good, but if I had a hand crossbow and drew it on somebody... I wouldn't fire a warning shot, at all. Period. I consider myself to be good but if the situation warrants it I will defend myself and others, to the point of using deadly force.

[cd4]

I would put myself as True Neutral tending towards Lawful Good. I usually follow rules and laws but don't always and I usually stay neutral until I have to pick a side at which point I try to choose the Good side.

[Silus]

I personally feel I tend to bounce around between Neutral Good, True Neutral and Lawful Evil.

[Narren]

Any system has to be ridged overall. You can't just say 'anything' can be good or evil or chaotic or lawful. If you do, what is the point?

But I believe that "anything" can be of any alignment (to an extent). Let's use your example.



You also can't use just one example, any human will defend themselves, for example, regardless of alignment. The difference is how and to what extreme. Take a simple robbery(person comes home and finds a robber..just like the ADT commercial.). A good person might try to scare the robbery and chase them away, maybe even hit/hurt them, but nothing too bad. A more neutral attitude is the ''just take the stuff and leave my family alone''. But an evil person....will kill the robber. The evil person wants to kill someone, and wants to have the 'legal'(ha) right to do so free and clear of any penalty. (Gella Elf lives in a concealed carry kingdom and always has her hand crossbow on her, and has the 'Castle Law' to protect her saying she can legally shoot any trespasser on her property.)

I have to disagree with you. You say the alignment system is rigid, and give rigid examples that don't apply. Why would a good person try to scare them away? What is inherently "good" about that? What if they're afraid? And why is it neutral to just give in? What if they're Lawful Neutral and feel the need to punish the lawbreaker? What if they're Chaotic Neutral and don't like someone infringing on their lives? What if they're True Neutral (or any alignment!) and just plain don't want people taking their stuff from them. Alignment doesn't dictate how one would defend their property. After much consideration, I consider myself to be a good person (with lawful and chaotic tendencies, so I guess Neutral Good). If someone breaks into my home, and I'm sure that it's a burglary, I'm shooting to kill.

There difference here, is that I'll feel bad the person's family. I'll feel remorse that I had to kill someone, but I'll still do it. The Neutral person may not give it much thought, and the evil person will enjoy doing it.

That's how the same action can be taken by someone of any alignment. It's not WHAT you do, but WHY you do it and how it makes you feel.

Another example can be when V fried Kubota. If V killed Kubota because he was too dangerous to leave alive (getting off because of a corrupt system) then that could be considered Chaotic Good, in my opinion. However, V killed him just because he didn't want to be inconvenienced, and many consider that to be evil.




Gella Elf has two young elflings, both under 100. Both have their very own hand crossbows and are trained in the use of them. Both fully intend to get their own concealed carry paper at 160(the earliest legal age here). Gella's daughter Bella will be dating armed.


Man...Gella really likes her crossbows.

As to the topic of hitting a female, I believe in equality of the sexes. If anyone, regardless of age, gender, or physical strength/ability tries to use violence against me, I respond with as much force as I need to subdue the threat. And when in doubt, I'd rather use too much than too little.

[Drelua]

As to the topic of hitting a female, I believe in equality of the sexes. If anyone, regardless of age, gender, or physical strength/ability tries to use violence against me, I respond with as much force as I need to subdue the threat. And when in doubt, I'd rather use too much than too little.

On a conscious level, I completely agree with you. I don't think a woman trying to kill me deserves more kindness than a man (unless she has a good reason), but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be harder for me to hit a girl. There's really no good reason for it, and I'm not defending it morally. It is sexist, but I can't help it; it's like when my friends called it 'idiot logic' that I would eat a cow but not a dog. They were wrong because it isn't logic at all, it's emotion, which I can't control. I never told them it was wrong to eat a dog but fine to eat a cow, I said I wouldn't knowingly do it.

[Narren]

I don't mean to attack another person's alignment (as many people in this thread have done) but I feel that at least one person is representing carrying a ''hand crossbow'' as being an evil thing. A hand crossbow is just a thing no more inherently evil than anything else. If used on people without provocation or not in self-defense it is evil, but if used for defense it's not really. Also, as I stated I believe myself to be Lawful Good, but if I had a hand crossbow and drew it on somebody... I wouldn't fire a warning shot, at all. Period. I consider myself to be good but if the situation warrants it I will defend myself and others, to the point of using deadly force.

Agreed. Don't draw a crossbow unless you're willing and able to use it. And don't fire a crossbow unless you intend to kill the target. Brandishing a weapon, trying to scare the target, or trying to wound the target will only get you killed.

[Dark Kerman]

I always thought myself as a true neutral, did a quiz, said I was NG, not sure about that though. :smalltongue:
As a rule of thumb, I am somewhere on the good spectrum approaching people, somewhere on the evil spectrum approaching me.

For example. If I see someone requiring help with a task (lets say removing a cat from a tree, for arguements sake) I would (probably) help.
However, if the exact same person *asked* me to, I would probably say no, in any manner of way. :smalleek:

Beh, guess i'm a teenager, so just enjoy being contrary. Be interesting to see how my head goes when I finally leave this bag of neurochemicals stage im at.

[Starbuck_II]

Lawful Good. I've always been stuck as a Paladin in life.
I wish I could lie sometimes (sometimes being honest isn't the best way, people don't really want the truth even when they ask for it).

[Zonugal]

Hi! Yep you are, and be proud of it. The rules are there to both protect you (and protect others), those who do not take advantage of them are fools (Not insulting other alignments :smalltongue: )

To another degree the rules serve as both a control for others & myself. The laws of the land dictate what I can get away with and heaven help you should I find a loophole. It's about equality in all extremes.


Also you follow my method of doing good to others to get good treatment from them.

Publicly, it helps to mitigate my natural evilness/selfishness that I firmly believe in "Kindness out of egoism", the practice of occasionally doing good deeds, not because you want to help or feel compelled to do so (Kant would approve of that), but because helping them will net you good deeds performed to you.
It's like the wicked twist of "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

I would cite this in addition to building a reputation. Influence is much easier to gain when constructed on a foundation of charitable, good acts.

[Gamer Girl]

I have to disagree with you. You say the alignment system is rigid, and give rigid examples that don't apply. Why would a good person try to scare them away? What is inherently "good" about that? What if they're afraid? And why is it neutral to just give in? What if they're Lawful Neutral and feel the need to punish the lawbreaker? What if they're Chaotic Neutral and don't like someone infringing on their lives? What if they're True Neutral (or any alignment!) and just plain don't want people taking their stuff from them. Alignment doesn't dictate how one would defend their property. After much consideration, I consider myself to be a good person (with lawful and chaotic tendencies, so I guess Neutral Good). If someone breaks into my home, and I'm sure that it's a burglary, I'm shooting to kill.

There difference here, is that I'll feel bad the person's family. I'll feel remorse that I had to kill someone, but I'll still do it. The Neutral person may not give it much thought, and the evil person will enjoy doing it.

That's how the same action can be taken by someone of any alignment. It's not WHAT you do, but WHY you do it and how it makes you feel.

I'd say alignment does determine your actions. And I'm trying to say in the broad categories of 'good' and 'evil' and such and not nitpick each combined alignment. I know tons of good people and can tell you that at least half of them could never hurt anyone(even the 'tough he-man guys'). It's even worse for women, who often get ill or worse if they even think about violence.(I've taken dozens of women self defense classes and can tell you a good half of the women drop out as they just can't hit/hurt anyone). Now granted the other half of the good folks might hit/hurt, but at least half of them will 'pull their punches' too. A neutral person could go either way, but mostly fall towards the good way.




Man...Gella really likes her crossbows.

Yes she does...



I don't mean to attack another person's alignment (as many people in this thread have done) but I feel that at least one person is representing carrying a ''hand crossbow'' as being an evil thing. A hand crossbow is just a thing no more inherently evil than anything else. If used on people without provocation or not in self-defense it is evil, but if used for defense it's not really. Also, as I stated I believe myself to be Lawful Good, but if I had a hand crossbow and drew it on somebody... I wouldn't fire a warning shot, at all. Period. I consider myself to be good but if the situation warrants it I will defend myself and others, to the point of using deadly force.

I never said it was 'evil' to be armed. The evil part comes from wanting an excuse to hurt or kill someone with the crossbow and the fact that Gella Elf is more then ready to hurt/kill if she is given the chance. Gella's hand crossbow gives her a nice +10 to intimidation checks, and Gella is never without her trusty hand crossbow. Unlike the good person who says 'if I had a hand crossbow', Gella has a hand crossbow, loaded and ready to use all the time. Only about half the good folks would do the warning shot/scare away...the other half would hurt/kill. As long as the situation warranted it....


Agreed. Don't draw a crossbow unless you're willing and able to use it. And don't fire a crossbow unless you intend to kill the target. Brandishing a weapon, trying to scare the target, or trying to wound the target will only get you killed.

You should note that having a not so concealed hand crossbow holster does give you a +10 to intimidation skill checks, and even gives you the super natural ability to cast fear and awe into people(who are, for example, shocked when Gella shows up at an elfing birth day party armed with her hand crossbow)

[AMFV]

I never said it was 'evil' to be armed. The evil part comes from wanting an excuse to hurt or kill someone with the crossbow and the fact that Gella Elf is more then ready to hurt/kill if she is given the chance. Gella's hand crossbow gives her a nice +10 to intimidation checks, and Gella is never without her trusty hand crossbow. Unlike the good person who says 'if I had a hand crossbow', Gella has a hand crossbow, loaded and ready to use all the time. Only about half the good folks would do the warning shot/scare away...the other half would hurt/kill. As long as the situation warranted it....



You should note that having a not so concealed hand crossbow holster does give you a +10 to intimidation skill checks, and even gives you the super natural ability to cast fear and awe into people(who are, for example, shocked when Gella shows up at an elfing birth day party armed with her hand crossbow)

You did not say it was evil to be armed, however you explicitly state that a good person says "if I had a hand crossbow", implying that a good person wouldn't have a handcrossbow. Also on a non related note, I have been around weapons a LOT, and carrying a loaded one is a TERRIBLE idea, not to derail the thread, but weapons malfunction, often, in fact I think it significantly more likely to have a malfunction resulting in an ND than it is to actually have to fire you're weapon at another person.

[Gamer Girl]

You did not say it was evil to be armed, however you explicitly state that a good person says "if I had a hand crossbow", implying that a good person wouldn't have a handcrossbow. Also on a non related note, I have been around weapons a LOT, and carrying a loaded one is a TERRIBLE idea, not to derail the thread, but weapons malfunction, often, in fact I think it significantly more likely to have a malfunction resulting in an ND than it is to actually have to fire you're weapon at another person.

Well, it's true that most 'good' people do not walk around with loaded hand crossbows, for the simple reason that they don't have the guts to use them. The 'average' good hand crossbow owner has the unloaded crossbow locked up with a trigger lock, in a case in a locked cabinet with the bolts in a separate locked cabinet elsewhere.

Though some good hand crossbow owners do join us on the dark side(and hopefully will sign the upcoming scroll that will allow us concealed crossbow owners to carry them into taverns).

Again, this is a good example of good and evil. See the good person actually cares about things like 'weapon malfunctions'. The evil person does not care about such things, dumb orcs and goblins will always find ways to kill themselves and win Darwin Awards.

I have tons of crystal balls with hand crossbow safety visions on them, and use them to teach my own elven younglings. (A favorate is the city guards man who shoots himself in the leg with his own hand crossbow, in front of lots of younglings, right after he says ''I'm the only one who has touched this, so i know it's safe TWANG!'' you should be able to find it online easy enough...)

[Narren]

I'd say alignment does determine your actions. And I'm trying to say in the broad categories of 'good' and 'evil' and such and not nitpick each combined alignment. I know tons of good people and can tell you that at least half of them could never hurt anyone(even the 'tough he-man guys'). It's even worse for women, who often get ill or worse if they even think about violence.(I've taken dozens of women self defense classes and can tell you a good half of the women drop out as they just can't hit/hurt anyone). Now granted the other half of the good folks might hit/hurt, but at least half of them will 'pull their punches' too. A neutral person could go either way, but mostly fall towards the good way.


I wonder where your numbers come from, but I won't argue with you. Many people abhor violence and have trouble inflicting it upon others. I never said ALL good people are able to do these things, just that "good" and "violence" are not mutually exclusive.




You should note that having a not so concealed hand crossbow holster does give you a +10 to intimidation skill checks, and even gives you the super natural ability to cast fear and awe into people(who are, for example, shocked when Gella shows up at an elfing birth day party armed with her hand crossbow)

It also gives the badguy a +10 to his spot check. Now he knows your armed before you even realize he's going to be a threat. Never give up the element of surprise, and never let someone know your armed. Let him find out when you're "cowering" and you reach for your "wallet."


You did not say it was evil to be armed, however you explicitly state that a good person says "if I had a hand crossbow", implying that a good person wouldn't have a handcrossbow. Also on a non related note, I have been around weapons a LOT, and carrying a loaded one is a TERRIBLE idea, not to derail the thread, but weapons malfunction, often, in fact I think it significantly more likely to have a malfunction resulting in an ND than it is to actually have to fire you're weapon at another person.

Weapons malfunction often? Where is that coming from? Weapons don't just randomly go off. There's nothing wrong with carrying a loaded...crossbow...as long as the carrier is safe and proficient with it. ND's, tragic as they are, account for a VERY small fraction of crossbow deaths. And I can promise you I wouldn't be alive today if I didn't always carry a weapon.

Though I do strongly believe that anyone who carries one needs to be certified in it's use and annually qualify with it to prove proficiency and safety.

[Narren]

Well, it's true that most 'good' people do not walk around with loaded hand crossbows, for the simple reason that they don't have the guts to use them. The 'average' good hand crossbow owner has the unloaded crossbow locked up with a trigger lock, in a case in a locked cabinet with the bolts in a separate locked cabinet elsewhere.

Again, you seem to be confusing "Good" with "unprepared"

Paladins are undisputed good. Do they keep their weapons locked away?


Though some good hand crossbow owners do join us on the dark side(and hopefully will sign the upcoming scroll that will allow us concealed crossbow owners to carry them into taverns).

I have to ask...why? Why do people think crossbows and alcohol should be mixed?


I have tons of crystal balls with hand crossbow safety visions on them, and use them to teach my own elven younglings. (A favorate is the city guards man who shoots himself in the leg with his own hand crossbow, in front of lots of younglings, right after he says ''I'm the only one who has touched this, so i know it's safe TWANG!'' you should be able to find it online easy enough...)

That guy is a moron and an embarrassment. So was his partner who "checked" the open chamber when he dreads showed him...which is commonly done for safety, especially in demos.

[noparlpf]

I mean for both in-game and real life. A feeble old lady with a gun can still kill you horribly. Especially if she's a good shot and wants to make you suffer first.

I've yet to meet a woman IRL that's actually stronger than me (even the crazy ones), but I still know that there are women out there that will break my bones just as easily as they might snap a dry twig. If one of them decides to inflict grievous bodily harm on me, I'm not going to hold back.

It's not quite as simple as saying "women" in general. :smalltongue:

I understand that. I'm not very eloquent sometimes, so I didn't express my understanding well.

Yeah, I don't think I've met many women who are stronger than I am. That would really be impressive...based on the carrying capacities chart in the PHB (pg 162), I have a strength score around 18-20 (based on the light load listing and my ability to move at full speed for over a mile carrying a 120 pound girl, but not hustling or running).
On the other hand, technique is important, and a black belt would probably have an advantage over me. So would the old lady with a gun. (I refuse to carry ranged weapons. They are cheating. I like bludgeoning weapons.)
And yeah...not quite as easily as they would break a dry twig. The twig requires only a tiny bit of force (easy enough to exert with two fingers); ribs require something like 150 psi. (I think I read that somewhere recently; the number sticks in my mind).



On a conscious level, I completely agree with you. I don't think a woman trying to kill me deserves more kindness than a man (unless she has a good reason), but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be harder for me to hit a girl. There's really no good reason for it, and I'm not defending it morally. It is sexist, but I can't help it; it's like when my friends called it 'idiot logic' that I would eat a cow but not a dog. They were wrong because it isn't logic at all, it's emotion, which I can't control. I never told them it was wrong to eat a dog but fine to eat a cow, I said I wouldn't knowingly do it.

That's pretty much me. (On the topic of cows: I love hamburgers, but if handed a live cow and a gun, I wouldn't be able to kill and eat it. Actually, if handed a cow, I think I might collapse under its weight and end up with several broken bones. I also wouldn't eat dog.)



I have tons of crystal balls with hand crossbow safety visions on them, and use them to teach my own elven younglings. (A favorite is the city guards man who shoots himself in the leg with his own hand crossbow, in front of lots of younglings, right after he says ''I'm the only one who has touched this, so i know it's safe TWANG!'' you should be able to find it online easy enough...)


That guy is a moron and an embarrassment. So was his partner who "checked" the open chamber when he dreads showed him...which is commonly done for safety, especially in demos.

Oh hey, instead of lawful stupid, we have stupid evil. Sweet.

[Narren]

Oh hey, instead of lawful stupid, we have stupid evil. Sweet.

I don't think he was Lawful or Evil....just stupid. His training taught him to check the chamber visually and manually. His partner's training taught him to check the chamber visually and manually. His training taught him to keep his finger on the frame of the weapon. He was lazy.

[noparlpf]

I don't think he was Lawful or Evil....just stupid. His training taught him to check the chamber visually and manually. His partner's training taught him to check the chamber visually and manually. His training taught him to keep his finger on the frame of the weapon. He was lazy.

No, I meant to stereotype of Lawful Good = Lawful Stupid. Which is usually a pain.
Whereas Stupid Evil (the elf in the description is supposed to be evil, right?) is teaching her children how to use crossbows by showing them videos of guys who don't know what the heck they're doing. Stupid Evil is good for the rest of us because they're the inept, comic relief type of villains.

[druid91]

The weird twist is I understand and comprehend why you want to be 'good'. Most people like the so called benefits of good, and are willing to be good themselves to get the same benefits.

Of course I don't wish to be treated badly, but I protect myself from that actively; unlike the good idea that 'if your good then others will be good to you''.

I see the rules as just for the lesser people, who could not otherwise take care of themselves. Unless it has a direct benefit to me, or I can take advantage of it somehow, I don't follow the rule.

I'm sure I can't post any examples here without getting yet another infraction....but maybe with a D&D twist:

Gella Elf(who looks like a surface elf, but is clearly drow) had a nice house and some land, though the lot next to her was vacant. This lead several kobold younglings to play in this empty field. And worst of all they played with a ball, that often flew onto Gella Elf's land and knocked over items. And needless to say the kobolds were very noisy. But Gella had a plan. She cast the spell spike stones around the field. She made the sharp stones in her very own workshop(Gella is very into arts and crafts and has +10 in most craft skills). It only took a couple encounters with the spike stone spell for the kobold younglings to decide to go play ball somewhere else.....muhhhaaaaa

The rules are not just for those who cannot otherwise care for themselves. The rules are the lines of code for this great machine we call society. When the cogs don't follow the rules it causes problems in that machine. Therefore people breaking the rules is why we aren't flying around in rocket cars:smalltongue:. Because without the need to enforce the rules the time and effort spent enforcing them could have been instead spent on rocket car research. Thanks a lot Gamer Girl.:smallwink:


I know they are humans beings... in theory... but they have no Intrinsic value to me as a sentient entity (related to the Monkeysphere (http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html)) therefore they are "meat" for me. And I realize I am/might be meat for them as well.

As for the golden rule. My lawfulness agrees.

Different ways indeed.



And this is the kind of thing evil people does whenever it suits us them... (*raven whispering) And that is bad.

Edit:
I wanted to ask something to those with evil leanings.
I have developed over time a sort of... software generated moral compass... a Software Blackwing familiar of sorts, that wishpers in my head when something would be frowned upon by normal people.
By myself, I do not have it in me, to develop such concerns, so I have created some sort of mental construct that helps in acting normal in front of most people.
Any suggestion made by this simulated ethic algorithm is only that, a suggestion, I do as I please, but fully conscious of what is a normally accepted behavior.
So my question is, do any of you, evil(ish) aligned people, have something similar in your lives?

I don't consider most people, people at first. Nor do I consider them meat. They are cogs. They do their job best when left alone, with minimal interference. I don't care therefore I do not harm.

To cause harm sends causes stress within the cogs, causing vibrations wich ripple until they become full blown shaking which causes an irritating banging sound as cogs slam into the rules. This shaking is not good. Please cease and desist messing with the order.:smallwink:


Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool, pal :smallwink:

:smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

Selfishness=/=Evil.

Neutral is looking out for #1.

Evil is looking out for #1 while amusing yourself torturing #2.


Hehe, Unholy Bligh right back at ya! :smalltongue:



Necroticplague, if you accept an opinion, purely based on your description you sound to have a greater leaning towards Lawful Neutral.
The reason behind this, is that a Lawful aligment does not mean following all rules;
It means following a set of rules, trying very hard no to break them, ever.

You might not follow gobernment/society's laws, but you have a very strong code that you follow to any cost. Check the SRD description: "A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government."

As for Midnight_v opinion that everyone is Neutral Evil, I think Drelua answered it quite nicely, " the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence"

Any takers on my Internal Software Simulated Ethics?
I wanted to ask something to those with evil leanings.
I have developed over time a sort of... software generated moral compass... a Software Blackwing familiar of sorts, that wishpers in my head when something would be frowned upon by normal people.
By myself, I do not have it in me, to develop such concerns, so I have created some sort of mental construct that helps in acting normal in front of most people.
Any suggestion made by this simulated ethic algorithm is only that, a suggestion, I do as I please, but fully conscious of what is a normally accepted behavior.
So my question is, do any of you, evil(ish) aligned people, have something similar in your lives?

Also I want to say that I'm enjoying this thread very much. :smallbiggrin:

I have something akin to your mental construct, but geared primarily towards making me seem less creepy. Being over six feet in height and still sneaky has that effect.



I'm sorry but unless you're posting from within the walls of a maximum security prison, or will end up there someday soon you're not Chaotic Evil. I get the feeling that people don't understand what that alignment entails.

"A chaotic evil character does what his greed, hatred and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal." PFRPG

"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.

To make the claim that you are chaotic evil you are stating that you actively seek to harm others to benefit yourself, have no qualms with killing another if its convenient, and act only out of hatred and greed. You care for nothing but yourself and oppress others around you who get your way.

You will steal from 'friends' if given the opportunity.
You will rape if you can get away with it.
You have no problem beating someone nearly to death for being in your way.
You actively hate, and arbitrarily make enemies and seek the destruction of others.
If you injure someone by accident you feel no compulsion to help them in any way.
When you do cause harm to others you feel no remorse and laugh at their misfortunes. Causing pain brings you joy.

Bollocks you're Chaotic Evil.

That could apply to more people than you think. Fear of repercussion for the most part keeps things like this at the very least hidden, hence why I want to carry a katana when I finish training, that and they look good. Paranoia speaking.


Which is exactly why I like it here, the ones who consider themselves good, don't feel or have the need to act "cool" and "edgy" by claiming to be something they are not.
And for us who embrace the darker side, we don't feel nor have the need to pretend to be nice guys or be anything if bluntly honest on how we see the world. We might be evil but we sure can be civil.

This, I find it exhilarating and mighty refreshing :smallsmile:

Edit (So as to not double post):

Hey! If it's your opinion it's great to share it! I don't agree, but then again I expect to disagree with most people, having a particular take on life.
What will likely get you "ripped to shreds" here is to say: "EVERYONE is like this, yada yada". So, we are cool, you are free to go... This time :smallamused:
I embrace the grey side. Or green side. I've heard it called both.

As for myself? I range from an apathetic true neutral with an attitude of "Meh why bother" To rarely a slightly frightening Lawful Inhuman. I call it that because it's not quite evil... it's just.. a very scary lawful.

[Drelua]

Being over six feet in height and still sneaky has that effect.

Oh, I agree with you there. I'm 6'4", highly anti-social, and I accidentally sneak up on people all the time. Then I made the mistake of buying a black leather jacket. When the uniform of my school calls for black shoes and pants, and a white shirt. People that know me realize I'm generally a nice guy, but not many people know me. Stupid low charisma score. Shoulda put some ranks into diplomacy instead of bluff. Or instead of craft (woodworking); That was a highly unoptimized decision. :smallwink:

[noparlpf]

I missed this post before.


The weird twist is I understand and comprehend why you want to be 'good'. Most people like the so called benefits of good, and are willing to be good themselves to get the same benefits.

I don't want to be good. I just am. It's natural for me.


Of course I don't wish to be treated badly, but I protect myself from that actively; unlike the good idea that 'if your good then others will be good to you''.

For the love of Pelor, can't you people realize that good and stupid are not synonymous? I don't assume that people will treat me decently. However, just because other people do the wrong thing doesn't mean I should. I do what I think is right because I think it is right and for no other reason.
Furthermore, I look out for myself. If somebody insults me or treats me poorly, I speak up in a civilised, mature fashion. If somebody f***s with me, I have no problem defending myself with physical force.


I see the rules as just for the lesser people, who could not otherwise take care of themselves. Unless it has a direct benefit to me, or I can take advantage of it somehow, I don't follow the rule.

Now that's just conceit. I admit to being guilty of arrogance and conceit. That's where my chaotic bit comes in; if a law seems silly to me and breaking will not hurt anybody (or me) then I see no real reason to follow it. (Hooray for jaywalking!)


I'm sure I can't post any examples here without getting yet another infraction....but maybe with a D&D twist:

Gella Elf (who looks like a surface elf, but is clearly drow) had a nice house and some land, though the lot next to her was vacant. This lead several kobold younglings to play in this empty field. And worst of all they played with a ball, that often flew onto Gella Elf's land and knocked over items. And needless to say the kobolds were very noisy. But Gella had a plan. She cast the spell spike stones around the field. She made the sharp stones in her very own workshop (Gella is very into arts and crafts and has +10 in most craft skills). It only took a couple encounters with the spike stone spell for the kobold younglings to decide to go play ball somewhere else.....muhhhaaaaa

She could just, you know, put up a "No Trespassing" sign like a normal person. Or talk to the kobolds' parents about how they're being disruptive in the neighborhood. Killing children? There is never any good reason to kill children.
(Unless they're infected with a zombie virus. F*** undead. Even if they're intelligent undead, they all deserve instant death. I guess I'm a bit racist...or is it typist? Undead is a type, not a race, right?)

[druid91]

Oh, I agree with you there. I'm 6'4", highly anti-social, and I accidentally sneak up on people all the time. Then I made the mistake of buying a black leather jacket. When the uniform of my school calls for black shoes and pants, and a white shirt. People that know me realize I'm generally a nice guy, but not many people know me. Stupid low charisma score. Shoulda put some ranks into diplomacy instead of bluff. Or instead of craft (woodworking); That was a highly unoptimized decision. :smallwink:

6'3" I have walked over and sat down in front of people who then proceed to jump out of their skins ten minutes later when I say something.

According to my dad it's because I'm so bland and unmemorable.

[noparlpf]

6'3" I have walked over and sat down in front of people who then proceed to jump out of their skins ten minutes later when I say something.

According to my dad it's because I'm so bland and unmemorable.

Though I'm only 5'9, I don't have any ranks in Hide or Move Silently. I'm not that good at going unnoticed.
I maxed out my ranks in Spot and Listen, though, to make up for my low Wisdom. Uncanny Dodge also comes in handy.

My charisma is generally pretty good, and people notice me.
Unfortunately, I look kind of sketchy. Strangers tend to assume I'm some kind of punk or hoodlum or something. It doesn't help that when I'm out in public I tend to look pretty pissed off. I'm quick to apologize for bumping into somebody, but people are surprisingly faster to apologize to me.

[Drelua]

6'3" I have walked over and sat down in front of people who then proceed to jump out of their skins ten minutes later when I say something.

According to my dad it's because I'm so bland and unmemorable.

I'm always surprised at how unobservant people can seem to be. I do stuff like this all the time, like walking out of the kitchen through one door while my mom walks in the other, then sitting on the couch in the next room, then she's surprised to see me. I have people jump when say something all the time. Maybe it has something to do with the black and white I usually wear; colours that don't catch the eye. Or maybe we were both ninjas in a past life. that would explain why I'm so interested in swords.

[Gamer Girl]

She could just, you know, put up a "No Trespassing" sign like a normal person. Or talk to the kobolds' parents about how they're being disruptive in the neighborhood. Killing children? There is never any good reason to kill children.(Unless they're infected with a zombie virus. F*** undead. Even if they're intelligent undead, they all deserve instant death. I guess I'm a bit racist...or is it typist? Undead is a type, not a race, right?)

Well, see Gella Elf does not live in a world she likes(back in the day we treated kobolds the way they should be treated, as monsters. But the elven council has given the kobolds too many civil rights as if they were elves) . The 'Good' ideas of say asking the kobold younglings who have Ints and Wis of like 5 combined anything is pointless. And it's not like Gella knows the parents of all the kobolds(not like this is Mayberry,), and even if she did there is only a 50% chance that the rotten kobold parents would even do anything. And Gella's use of the spell spike stones did not kill any koboldlings, as far as she knows only one was hurt with a cut on his knee. And Gella's use of the spell was 100% effective..the kobold younglings don't play in the 'dangerous field' next to her home.



Though I do strongly believe that anyone who carries one needs to be certified in it's use and annually qualify with it to prove proficiency and safety.

I agree, this stops too many orcs, goblins, kobolds and such from getting hand crossbows. And it's fun to watch them fail.


Again, you seem to be confusing "Good" with "unprepared" Paladins are undisputed good. Do they keep their weapons locked away?

Of course not, but paladins are the exception. You will find most good folks keep there hand crossbows locked up, unloaded, and bolts far away. Yes, paladins (like cops) are armed, but most good people are not.



I have to ask...why? Why do people think crossbows and alcohol should be mixed?

Under the current law, Gella Elf can't go armed with her hand crossbow to say Applebees or Outback as they are establishments that serve alcohol. But the new law, up for vote in the fall, will change that so it's ok to have your hand crossbow in a place like a tavern that sells beer. Note the law will specif that you can't drink while you have your crossbow on you.


No, I meant to stereotype of Lawful Good = Lawful Stupid. Which is usually a pain.
Whereas Stupid Evil (the elf in the description is supposed to be evil, right?) is teaching her children how to use crossbows by showing them videos of guys who don't know what the heck they're doing. Stupid Evil is good for the rest of us because they're the inept, comic relief type of villains.

Showing younglings videos of people making mistakes is a good thing. It lets the younglings understand reality. And crossbow mistake videos are standard parts of some official guard classes too. And 'idiot' videos are used for great effect for driving and anti smoking classes too(among other things). Now granted a lot of good people don't like this sort of reality, and would much rather just hide there younglings form it and hope nothing happens.(and often fail). Ever watch one of them 'we put some younglings in a room with a fake paint crossbow and watch them secretly to see what happens'? Every time the 'assamar kid' who is perfect by their parents, will grab the crossbow and 'splatter' someone by 'accident'. Gella knows that her daughter Bella would never do that as she knows all about hand crossbows and knows exactly what to do if that should ever happen.

[noparlpf]

Well, see Gella Elf does not live in a world she likes(back in the day we treated kobolds the way they should be treated, as monsters. But the elven council has given the kobolds too many civil rights as if they were elves) . The 'Good' ideas of say asking the kobold younglings who have Ints and Wis of like 5 combined anything is pointless. And it's not like Gella knows the parents of all the kobolds(not like this is Mayberry,), and even if she did there is only a 50% chance that the rotten kobold parents would even do anything. And Gella's use of the spell spike stones did not kill any koboldlings, as far as she knows only one was hurt with a cut on his knee. And Gella's use of the spell was 100% effective..the kobold younglings don't play in the 'dangerous field' next to her home.

My Int and Wis combined are only 18. Guess which of those stats is the 2. Don't discriminate against those of us with low Wis.
(And despite their low Int, if you're friendly and reasonably, the kobolds are fairly likely to be friendly and reasonably too. Oh, wait, Gella's huge circumstance penalty to Diplomacy after casting stone spikes on their kids would probably ruin her chances with that.)
...She could always just put up a fence. Or move. She doesn't need to be such a sour apple.


Of course not, but paladins are the exception. You will find most good folks keep their hand crossbows locked up, unloaded, and bolts far away. Yes, paladins (like cops) are armed, but most good people are not.

I consider ranged weapons to be cheating. Otherwise I would carry one.
I keep various bludgeoning weapons around the house. A crowbar in the bed, a heavy bat by the door, a steel pipe by the toilet...


Showing younglings videos of people making mistakes is a good thing. It lets the younglings understand reality. And crossbow mistake videos are standard parts of some official guard classes too. And 'idiot' videos are used for great effect for driving and anti-smoking classes too (among other things). Now, granted, a lot of good people don't like this sort of reality, and would much rather just hide their younglings from it and hope nothing happens.(and often fail). Ever watch one of them 'we put some younglings in a room with a fake paint crossbow and watch them secretly to see what happens'? Every time the 'aasimar kid' who is perfect by their parents, will grab the crossbow and 'splatter' someone by 'accident'. Gella knows that her daughter Bella would never do that as she knows all about hand crossbows and knows exactly what to do if that should ever happen.

...I just don't even know what to say to this.
I've never touched a gun in my life (besides my dad's practice handgun that shoots plastic pellets that could hardly do more than cause a bruise). I'm 100% sure that if left alone with a gun and another kid, I wouldn't shoot them, accidentally or otherwise. (I'm seventeen.) I know that most kids wouldn't shoot anybody, accidentally or otherwise. Honestly, Bella here is more likely to shoot somebody, even if only by accident, because she's likely to pick the crossbow up, thinking she knows what she's doing, and make a mistake with it.

[hamishspence]

Selfishness=/=Evil.

Neutral is looking out for #1.

Evil is looking out for #1 while amusing yourself torturing #2.

This represents only one type of Evil character- the kind that's amused by doing evil acts.

There are many others. Some do evil acts purely for profit, never for pleasure. Some do them out of a desire to benefit the many (by committing evil acts against the few). Some do so out of fear rather than attraction (when failure to commit evil acts might lead to them being persecuted by the group). And so on.

[OverdrivePrime]

Wow, this thread has taken a turn for the disgusting. Unfortunate.

I'm always surprised when I find examples of people who seem to embrace being 'evil'. It always seems so cartoonish. Perhaps that's due to my own naivety, or just an inherent difficulty accepting the idea that people don't want to be the hero of their own story.

I have a lot easier time wrapping my head around the kind of evil that is self-delusional and rationalizes away evil choices as being for some kind of greater good. Take the lunatics who hurl vile insults at the families of dead soldiers, for example. If you talk with them, every single one of them is convinced that they are on the path of justice and righteousness. They fervently believe that they are doing good, though they are clearly (to the rest of us) evil actors.

As for the um... 'hand crossbow' issue, I think it's pretty laughable to claim that weapon choice is a sizable factor in alignment. I'll make an exception for the whip or cat o' nine... which may indicate a lawful kinky alignment.

I personally disdain hand crossbows and repeating hand crossbows, but I'm perfectly fine with longbows and heavy crossbows. I don't own one, but I know several people who I think of as 'good' who do and regularly train in their use. Like a sword or a mirror, it's just a tool. I suppose how one thinks of their tool is the important frame of reference.

If you're looking at your tools as something that give you power over others, power to control, cause fear and kill, then yes you're quite possibly evil. An Internet connection or an international bank can, and frequently are, wielded for similar purposes. Are child pornographers or bank boards that look for ways to screw people out of their homes and livelihood any less evil than someone who carries a crossbow and hopes to find a reason to use it to deadly capacity? Not in my worldview.

[hamishspence]

I'd say that even someone who enjoys killing other people, doesn't cross the line into Evil, unless they kill someone without just cause.

A soldier in war, might develop a taste for killing the enemy- but if they always take prisoners when it's called for, and never kill "unnecessarily" they may be able to maintain a Neutral alignment.

[OverdrivePrime]

I think we cross into grey territory when you start consider actions taken in open war.

My moral compass says that taking pleasure in killing other humans is always an evil thing, but I can see satisfaction and pride in effective work being important to performing the duty of a soldier, but to actually delight in killing someone seems pretty clearly dark.

Enjoying in the moment and soberly considering later though... probably just neutral.

[hamishspence]

It is somewhat "grey".

Enjoying committing "not technically evil" acts a little too much, is a little dangerous, but if the person avoids committing evil acts, a case could be made that they're at the low end of Neutral. And if they consistantly behave in a good fashion, they might even be at the low end of Good.

They have a "vice" but they avoid the temptation to indulge that vice enough to commit actual Evil actions.

I'd apply the same principles to killing animals, for that matter. Killing a predator in self-defence or defence of others- Not Evil. Killing one purely for sport, without "just cause"- perhaps a (slightly) Evil act.

[yugi24862]

Well, I only tend to follow laws out of a mixture of a desire to live non harassed, fear of the consequences. A large chunk of laws are common sense safety laws, which the fact that they need to be said makes me mourn the general intelligence of the human race, so usually following them are in my best interest. Laws that I feel are unfair, impede me in a way I feel unnecessary, or are down right idiotic I ignore though. Depending on how much I dislike the law I may even just say 'ta hell with the consequences, I'm doing this to spite them. Haven't had this come up in my life however, and I doubt it will unless the US falls into despotism in the future years. So I don't normally go out of my ways to break the laws, but nor do I do so to uphold them. So on the Law/Chaos aspect I would say neutral.

I wouldn't call my self good, unless in mirth, but I wouldn't say I'm evil. Problem here is that it starts to get really sketchy. I don't go out of my way to harm others, but neither to help others. The only exception would be to spite enemies, and help friends/family. While my initial response to someone would be politeness, it's usually just for societal sake, little more. I tend to look to pragmatism first in any question, for the easiest/highest gain option. Usually if things don't concern/effect me I won't care. So I guess I am colored as the typical "apathetic neutral" cliche a bit. Normally, I tend to do both evil and good typically in the same amount. So I would say that I'm also neutral here.

^
ll
Explanation

True Neutral, heavy handed pragmatism, a good handful of "Apathetic Neutral."

^^^^^^^^

Couldn't say it better myself, so wont try

[Kojiro]

My point is more about real life....most people are good <and so on>

It's interesting seeing a person who self-identifies as evil having such an outlook on humanity in general. Despite identifying as (Neutral) Good and being identified as such by others, I have to admit that I would put most people as True Neutral, in the usual "may prefer Good, but will not go to much effort or personal risk for it" way. Although, more or my pessimism comes from thinking that people are a bit stupid and selfish rather than outright bad/evil.

Also, quiz results; the perfect balance on Law versus Chaos amuses me.

You Are:

Neutral Good


Neutral Good- A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order. However, neutral good can be a dangerous alignment because because it advances mediocrity by limiting the actions of the truly capable.

Detailed Results:

Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (23)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (25)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (23)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXX (6)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXX (6)

Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXX (6)
Neutral - XXXXXXXX (8)
Chaos --- XXXXXX (6)

Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
Neutral - XXXXXXXX (8)
Evil ---- (0)
Note that many people argue that Neutral and/or Evil are pragmatism; I don't entirely agree here. I am a bit pragmatic, sometimes to the point of paranoia, but even at my worst I wouldn't regard myself as evil. There are different ways to be pragmatic; for example, evil, neutral, and even good people can carry concealed weapons. The reason they have those (fear for all three, use against others for the first, defense of self in the second, defense of others and/or self in the third) changes things, though. Being a cautious but Good person isn't impossible; while I would, and have, done things that were risky to help other people, I would not do something suicidal. If there is no chance of helping, then running out to do it anyway and die yourself isn't Good, it's stupid. Or possibly Lawful to a worrying degree.

Related issue, topic of hitting people stronger/weaker/different gender/whatever, while I would never assault anyone without reason, if I were forced to defend myself or defend someone else, I would go for incapacitation, possibly with lingering damage. This ties into the pragmatism above; it's not an issue of cruelty, but stopping the person as fast and efficiently as possible and rendering them unable or unwilling to harm someone else. Sometimes, this is as simple as standing between the person and their target. Other times, you may have to break something on them, or worse; while I have never done it and would never do it lightly, among the many skills learned at the martial arts school I attended, I can basically emulate that one move from towards the end of Kill Bill volume two (the eye one, not the one that somehow stops his heart or whatever, that was silly).

This actually ties into another thing that I, personally, believe about good and evil. As established, "Good" involves self-sacrifice and being willing to put oneself in danger and the like. In some cases, however, this can involve doing the unpleasant thing; shooting the kidnapper before he starts killing hostages, fighting in a war (as a soldier; while I will not comment on the reasons for going to war, I will say that a good many of those soldiers deserve a lot more respect than they get), breaking an aggressive man's arm before he can stab/kill/rape/whatever some person. Anyone can do those things, but, unless you have the right (or possibly wrong) sort of personality, you will not enjoy them, and they will leave a mark on you, so to speak. Being a good person can sometimes involve acknowledging the unpleasantness of a situation, regretting its necessity, and then doing it anyway, for the sake of both protecting others and making it so that they don't have to take that upon themselves instead. Shouldering the burden yourself, so to speak.

In my opinion, at least. Wow, that was longer than I intended, or expected.

[hamishspence]

This actually ties into another thing that I, personally, believe about good and evil. As established, "Good" involves self-sacrifice and being willing to put oneself in danger and the like. In some cases, however, this can involve doing the unpleasant thing; shooting the kidnapper before he starts killing hostages, fighting in a war (as a soldier; while I will not comment on the reasons for going to war, I will say that a good many of those soldiers deserve a lot more respect than they get), breaking an aggressive man's arm before he can stab/kill/rape/whatever some person. Anyone can do those things, but, unless you have the right (or possibly wrong) sort of personality, you will not enjoy them, and they will leave a mark on you, so to speak. Being a good person can sometimes involve acknowledging the unpleasantness of a situation, regretting its necessity, and then doing it anyway, for the sake of both protecting others and making it so that they don't have to take that upon themselves instead. Shouldering the burden yourself, so to speak.

This is pretty much what BoED says of violence- sometimes violence is called for, and in such cases, committing it is not evil.

A person who enjoys such "called for" violence a bit too much, I would say is "less good" than someone who sees it as regrettable- but IMO it wouldn't necessarily be enough to make them outright Non-Good.

[Kojiro]

A person who enjoys such "called for" violence a bit too much, I would say is "less good" than someone who sees it as regrettable- but IMO it wouldn't necessarily be enough to make them outright Non-Good.

True; a Good person could still enjoy "righteous retribution", but that in and of itself is not Good. Doesn't necessarily make them Evil or even Neutral though. Probably should have clarified that, but I'm running on a lack of sleep so I'm a bit amazed that I've been as coherent as I have.

[hamishspence]

Yup- just as there's lots of shades of grey within Evil, there's a certain amount of shades of grey within Good.

The description of how Good is not incompatible with pragmatism, caution, or violence seemed pretty well done to me.

[Volos]

Lawful Evil.

I adhere to most laws set by society, but when at all possible I take actions that only benifit myself and I never put others before myself. My view of other people is rather low, and I find myself thinking of darker things when idle. I am charismatic and get along with others, but when it comes down to it I would rather see the world burn. So Lawful Evil.

[Raimun]

True Neutral with Good tendencies, I guess.

I do agree with most stuff said in Neutral Good-alignment but I can be sometimes a bit indifferent. I like to help people unconditionally but most of the time I'm content to be left to my own devices, whatever it might consist at the moment (school/work, hanging out with people, entertainment, etc.). While that might be sometimes a bit selfish, I find harming other people for personal gain distasteful, so Evil is out of question.

I don't really have any preference for Law or Chaos. I don't lean to either one of them or I bounce back and forth along the Law-Chaos-axis like a ping pong-ball. In general, I'm just as likely to go "by the book" as I'm to do things my way. Still, I have a great respect to both order and freedom and I see value in both. Sometimes I feel I'm actually Lawful and Chaotic Neutral. :smalltongue:

[hamishspence]

"Will not harm others for personal gain/pleasure" doesn't rule out an Evil alignment.

However, I'd say a person actually has to do Evil acts, fairly regularly, to qualify as Evil, if they have that trait.

"Helping people unconditionally, regularly" (if it can qualify as a personal sacrifice) may be all that's needed to qualify as Good- they don't need to do it all the time. Just, often.

[Raimun]

"Will not harm others for personal gain/pleasure" doesn't rule out an Evil alignment.


Why else would anyone commit Evil acts if not for personal gain? Pleasure could be argued to be "personal gain". Evil is all about getting what you want and harming others while at it.

... without a few exceptions, like worshipping demons and animating the dead. The former I don't do and the latter I wouldn't do even if I could.

Edit: Though, people in fiction worship demons and animate the dead for their personal gain, too.

Edit2: And demons aren't capable of anything but the foulest of villainy and undead are a mockery of life that seek nothing but to end life, so...