PDA

View Full Version : Roleplaying an alternate take on neutral.



vasilidor
2016-01-23, 02:11 AM
I saw the note in the guide about lawful evil and the relationship with neutrals, and how they are all weird useless things that seek balance. I have also read the description of true neutral in the DnD books from about seven different versions of the game describing them as such. I have a different take on neutrality than that, that to my personal opinion, makes them both more playable and believable.

they do not seek balance, but rather are ultimately uncommitted to good or evil, law or chaos. they do not care for debates of morality or ethics, but are not monsters or murderers. they wont risk themselves to help a stranger (the way a good person might) without a promise of some sort of reward.and while they don't care about the fate of strangers, they do care for family and those they call friend. for the most part they are content to go about their lives in whatever society they live in, provided they have food, shelter and safety.

so what drives a neutral to adventure then?

1. advancement of wealth and station.
2. the elimination of a threat to ones home, family or friends.
3. their family or friends are of one of the other alignments, and there following along to keep the poor idealist fool / bucket of malice from either getting in over their head or from being to much of a monster or from both at the same time.

the first is what the vast majority of adventurers are after, regardless of alignment. the second almost makes them seem good, but that is an illusion. they are targeting the threat, not because of what danger it poses to others, but because of the threat it poses them. if a monster is raiding villages in an area, the local warriors will, if they believe they are able to seek to hunt it down, but only to prevent themselves to be next on the chopping block.

they will often gravitate towards good characters out of a sense of general respect, or a need of protection.

neutrals also often see themselves as good people, if only for the fact that they are not murderers or thieves. and while they may become these things they either try to justify it as a matter of necessity (depending on ones society may make that true) or may be overcome by guilt of there actions (even if it was in fact necessary for their continues survival).

they may also help others when it does not put themselves at risk without promise of reward. examples include giving out charity to those in need, giving information, or medical assistance.

one thing they will not do is put themselves in a position of risk, no matter the rewards or promises, if they believe they only possible outcome of the proposed venture is an increase of the number of dead bodies the crows will feast on. while they can be convinced to join a cause, they have to believe it is possible to succeed. and while they abhor evil just as much as good aligned folk, may be brought to aid it if only to avoid a worse fate.

One of my last characters i played was a true neutral fighter. He sought fame and fortune and glory as an adventurer, and was an outright terror with his bow on the field of battle. when he finally got his position of wealth and influence, he then found himself needing to defend it, and in doing so had allied himself with vampires and werewolves against a force that threatened the existence of all he held dear.

never got to finish that campaign.

Ettina
2016-01-23, 06:31 AM
I had a TN character who had a mishmash of lawful, chaotic, good and evil traits. He loved his family and would sometimes help others if he took a liking to them, but if you pissed him off he'd be truly vicious. He tended to be impulsive in many areas, but had some rigid rules he followed such as never telling a lie.

I had a really clear sense of his character but no idea what alignment to give him, so I took some alignment quizzes. One came up true neutral, the others were kind of all over the place, so I decided TN fit him best. But he wasn't balanced at all - he was at contradictory extremes in different personality aspects.

MisterKaws
2016-01-23, 07:44 AM
Seeking balance is not a True Neutral characteristic, it's a Lawful Neutral thing. Balance can be seen as being the same as order, and Lawful creatures sure do love their order.

BWR
2016-01-23, 07:53 AM
Seeking balance is not a True Neutral characteristic, it's a Lawful Neutral thing. Balance can be seen as being the same as order, and Lawful creatures sure do love their order.

Both the Rilmani and the modrons would disagree with you.

OldTrees1
2016-01-23, 09:20 AM
Seeking balance is not a True Neutral characteristic, it's a Lawful Neutral thing. Balance can be seen as being the same as order, and Lawful creatures sure do love their order.

Balance between Order and Chaos entails inherent imperfections in the order created. Someone driven by order would want to "let me just fix that".

Example: "Everyone gets 32 point buy then randomly assign the stats" is less ordered than 32 point buy.

However the word "balance" does have an orderly connotation.

Seto
2016-01-23, 01:02 PM
I saw the note in the guide about lawful evil and the relationship with neutrals, and how they are all weird useless things that seek balance.

Yeah, but you should never believe what Lawful Evil says :smallbiggrin:


I have also read the description of true neutral in the DnD books from about seven different versions of the game describing them as such. I have a different take on neutrality than that, that to my personal opinion, makes them both more playable and believable.

they do not seek balance, but rather are ultimately uncommitted to good or evil, law or chaos. they do not care for debates of morality or ethics, but are not monsters or murderers. they wont risk themselves to help a stranger (the way a good person might) without a promise of some sort of reward.and while they don't care about the fate of strangers, they do care for family and those they call friend. for the most part they are content to go about their lives in whatever society they live in, provided they have food, shelter and safety.

That is one aspect of the description of TN in D&D (3.5 at least) : "A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. ".


so what drives a neutral to adventure then?

1. advancement of wealth and station.
2. the elimination of a threat to ones home, family or friends.
3. their family or friends are of one of the other alignments, and there following along to keep the poor idealist fool / bucket of malice from either getting in over their head or from being to much of a monster or from both at the same time.

the first is what the vast majority of adventurers are after, regardless of alignment. the second almost makes them seem good, but that is an illusion. they are targeting the threat, not because of what danger it poses to others, but because of the threat it poses them. if a monster is raiding villages in an area, the local warriors will, if they believe they are able to seek to hunt it down, but only to prevent themselves to be next on the chopping block.

they will often gravitate towards good characters out of a sense of general respect, or a need of protection.

neutrals also often see themselves as good people, if only for the fact that they are not murderers or thieves. and while they may become these things they either try to justify it as a matter of necessity (depending on ones society may make that true) or may be overcome by guilt of there actions (even if it was in fact necessary for their continues survival).

they may also help others when it does not put themselves at risk without promise of reward. examples include giving out charity to those in need, giving information, or medical assistance.

one thing they will not do is put themselves in a position of risk, no matter the rewards or promises, if they believe they only possible outcome of the proposed venture is an increase of the number of dead bodies the crows will feast on. while they can be convinced to join a cause, they have to believe it is possible to succeed. and while they abhor evil just as much as good aligned folk, may be brought to aid it if only to avoid a worse fate.

I rather agree with all of that. With one caveat : individual TN characters have individual values and some may endanger themselves even for a meagre reward, if it's a reward that resonates with their beliefs. If you're interested in that topic, I have written a guide about TN, much like Red Fel has done about LE. The link is in my sig. (and from there you can find the link to the Alignment Handbook superthread, where every alignment has been done, sometimes several times).




One of my last characters i played was a true neutral fighter. He sought fame and fortune and glory as an adventurer, and was an outright terror with his bow on the field of battle. when he finally got his position of wealth and influence, he then found himself needing to defend it, and in doing so had allied himself with vampires and werewolves against a force that threatened the existence of all he held dear.

never got to finish that campaign

Nice. One of the advantages of being Neutral is a lot of choice in terms of allies :smallsmile:

Ninjaxenomorph
2016-01-23, 03:06 PM
I've become a lot more analytical with my character's alignments recently, particularly neutral ones. I'm cooking up a character that is Neutral who, above all other things, is seeking someone out to prove he is worthy of her. He's manipulative and pragmatic, and ultimately will do anything to reunite with this woman, but, tries to overcome adversity with guile and subterfuge before taking direct action. He abides by laws more often than not, not because he feels it is the right thing to do, but because its often easier to comply than be a criminal. Everything he does is in pursuit of his goal.

daremetoidareyo
2016-01-23, 03:49 PM
You could look at neutral as pragmatic.
They are comfortable with moral grey areas.
Typically, They are fine operating without perfect knowledge, although there is a trope of true neutral that seeks perfect knowledge.
They want orderly chaos, autonomy that behaves with orderly enough cohesion.
Nothing has to be perfect but everything could work a little bit harder, but hey...you can't reach everybody, and so, you just plow on:
Punish the bad guys, reform the lost ones, keep power out of most peoples hands or in everyone's hands.

That isn't actively seeking balance, that is being courteous enough to extend the maximum amount of trust into others without unnecessarily risking getting your throat slit. They don't view themselves as neutral, but as the best type of person that a flawed creature can be, given the circumstances.

vasilidor
2016-01-23, 10:48 PM
to be entirely honest though, i think the game as a whole can be improved just by ripping the alignment rules straight out of it.
but that is probably best held in reserve for a homebrew thread.