What is this Druid's alignment? (Updated!)

[Zhentarim]

Alexis is a very meek, unimpressive dwarven lady. She stammers over her words and displays a clear lack of confindence. She knows what she believes and none will sway her from it, however. She has watched the city of Korvosa and knows the city spoils what is good in nature--freedom. She has a simple philosophy in life that so long as individuals repect nature, each other's freedom, and right to life, they are good. She admires the way animals are free to do as they please, but by and large do what is in the best interest of the surrounding environment. She leaves these animals, which includes the humanoids, to do their thing unless there is a problem with over population or pollution, in which case, she does what she can to reduce this while taking as little life as possible. This balance is important to keep, and Alexis doubts she is doing it right sometimes, but she strives to maintain this balance between freedom, goodness, and taking care of the environment so it will last. This is one of the reasons she gambles with the money she earns selling wildberries--so she can maybe someday hit the jackpot and build a nature preserve around Korvosa, legally limiting the growth of the civilization and keeping it managable.

I changed genders and completely rewrote the personality section.

Alexander is a very meek yet stern, unimpressive dwarven man. He stammers over his words and displays a clear lack of confidence outside of his areas of expertise. He knows what he believes, however, and none will sway him from those beliefs. In fact, when his ideals are threatened he can suddenly fly into a rage. He has watched the city of Korvosa and knows the city spoils what is good in nature--purity of the mind and body, honest work, and a commitment to preserving the land we all depend on. It is partially from this and partially from his mentor that he has built a simple philosophy in life that so long as individuals respect and protect nature, obey the laws of the land, keep their word, and maintain the health of their bodies, people should be left unmolested. This is his intrepretation of his syncretic blend of the church of Abadar and the green faith.

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=1072501

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=1070750

[Crake]

Alexis is a very meek, unimpressive dwarven lady. She stammers over her words and displays a clear lack of confindence. She knows what she believes and none will sway her from it, however. She has watched the city of Korvosa and knows the city spoils what is good in nature--freedom. She has a simple philosophy in life that so long as individuals repect nature, each other's freedom, and right to life, they are good. She admires the way animals are free to do as they please, but by and large do what is in the best interest of the surrounding environment. She leaves these animals, which includes the humanoids, to do their thing unless there is a problem with over population or pollution, in which case, she does what she can to reduce this while taking as little life as possible. This balance is important to keep, and Alexis doubts she is doing it right sometimes, but she strives to maintain this balance between freedom, goodness, and taking care of the environment so it will last. This is one of the reasons she gambles with the money she earns selling wildberries--so she can maybe someday hit the jackpot and build a nature preserve around Korvosa, legally limiting the growth of the civilization and keeping it managable.

Sounds like Chaotic Neutral. Strong focus on the individual, and personal liberties, little care for sacrifice of these things for the greater good of a community.

Also, as an aside, pretty naive, thinking that she can just buy the land around a city and do with it what she pleases. If we're looking at modern conventions, city planning is determined by the local authority, to deem what is appropriate to go where, so even if you own all the land around the city, you still can't build whatever you want. Roads are also within the purview of the authority, and thus you cannot limit transport, so even if you were somehow allowed to build a nature preserve around the city, it would just expand beyond that anyway.

If you're looking at more medieval laws, then the local nobles would have veto power over anything she tried to do anyway :smalltongue:

Of course, perhaps she's just simply unaware of that, just so long as the player behind her understands.

[Zhentarim]

Sounds like Chaotic Neutral. Strong focus on the individual, and personal liberties, little care for sacrifice of these things for the greater good of a community.

Also, as an aside, pretty naive, thinking that she can just buy the land around a city and do with it what she pleases. If we're looking at modern conventions, city planning is determined by the local authority, to deem what is appropriate to go where, so even if you own all the land around the city, you still can't build whatever you want. Roads are also within the purview of the authority, and thus you cannot limit transport, so even if you were somehow allowed to build a nature preserve around the city, it would just expand beyond that anyway.

If you're looking at more medieval laws, then the local nobles would have veto power over anything she tried to do anyway :smalltongue:

Of course, perhaps she's just simply unaware of that, just so long as the player behind her understands.
I did not even know that. I was actually going for neutral good. She wouldn't tolorate somebody else being forced to be a slave, for instance.

[Palanan]

Yup, my overall impression is Chaotic Neutral. She seems to have a dispassionate approval for the freedom of others, and won’t pass judgement on them as long as they’re not contributing to social or environmental imbalance.

Certainly there are shadings of a benevolent approach, especially her preference for restoring balance as gently and unobtrusively as possible. That’s definitely an inclination towards good in my book, and this attitude can coexist perfectly well with her general appreciation for freedom.

A druid who was a more severe form of Chaotic Neutral, without any good tendencies, could be a very different person indeed. I could see a Chaotic Neutral druid deliberately destabilizing an ecosystem, on the theory that the natural world should be dynamic, constantly changing and adapting to new circumstances.

In this view, a climax community would be a form of stagnation that should be actively opposed, both on principle and because habitat disturbance gives underrepresented species an opportunity to flourish. For instance, suppressing fire in a naturally fire-maintained forest would, in this druid’s view, be an unnatural condition preventing the dynamic sequence of succession and the germination of uncommon and specialized seeds.

So according to this philosophy, a strictly Chaotic Neutral druid might actually be setting forest fires to burn off a stable climax community, in order to allow a more dynamic and unpredictable community to develop. But Alexis would probably find this view unacceptably hard-hearted and cruel, since it dismisses the pain and suffering of individuals in favor of longer-term outcomes. Instead, she’d be preventing forest fires and saving individuals to the best of her ability—and that’s the difference that her innate goodness makes.

[Zhentarim]

Yup, my overall impression is Chaotic Neutral. She seems to have a dispassionate approval for the freedom of others, and won’t pass judgement on them as long as they’re not contributing to social or environmental imbalance.

Certainly there are shadings of a benevolent approach, especially her preference for restoring balance as gently and unobtrusively as possible. That’s definitely an inclination towards good in my book, and this attitude can coexist perfectly well with her general appreciation for freedom.

A druid who was a more severe form of Chaotic Neutral, without any good tendencies, could be a very different person indeed. I could see a Chaotic Neutral druid deliberately destabilizing an ecosystem, on the theory that the natural world should be dynamic, constantly changing and adapting to new circumstances.

In this view, a climax community would be a form of stagnation that should be actively opposed, both on principle and because habitat disturbance gives underrepresented species an opportunity to flourish. For instance, suppressing fire in a naturally fire-maintained forest would, in this druid’s view, be an unnatural condition preventing the dynamic sequence of succession and the germination of uncommon and specialized seeds.

So according to this philosophy, a strictly Chaotic Neutral druid might actually be setting forest fires to burn off a stable climax community, in order to allow a more dynamic and unpredictable community to develop. But Alexis would probably find this view unacceptably hard-hearted and cruel, since it dismisses the pain and suffering of individuals in favor of longer-term outcomes. Instead, she’d be preventing forest fires and saving individuals to the best of her ability—and that’s the difference that her innate goodness makes.

If only there was a CG druid. The forced neutral component of druids is silly. Respect for nature and wearing locally sourced clothing and armor. I wouldn't be surprised if non-evil druids were vegan. (I'd imagine a NE druid would be a druid because they love the challenge of living of the land and unlocking its secrets by living the way of the beast!)

[Crake]

If only there was a CG druid. The forced neutral component of druids is silly. Respect for nature and wearing locally sourced clothing and armor. I wouldn't be surprised if non-evil druids were vegan. (I'd imagine a NE druid would be a druid because they love the challenge of living of the land and unlocking its secrets by living the way of the beast!)

I quite agree with the silliness of the neutral requirement of druid, and in my games I actually let them be any alignment they want, but with a tendancy toward chaos away from law.

[Pleh]

This strikes me as classic CG. Her focus is on preserving life and quality of life. CN should be a little more self focused. CE is indulgent of dark, selfish desires, but CN is "lookout for #1 to within sense and reason".

This Druid finds joy in benefitting others in a self sacrificing manner. Gives her a good tendency, if not alignment.

[Zhentarim]

FIRST QUESTION:

I figure the answer is no, but I wanted to check. My character is a level 1 Dwarf Druid who worships Sarenrae and rrwho spent his time (and dwarves live very long) as a Sarkoris farmer, then as a farmer in the middle of the worldwound until he couldn't defend it anymore. She basically joined the crusades to get his farm back. Would it be more than just flavor if Dolga Silverbeard took a rank in Farmer?

SECOND QUESTION

My character has these stats:

18 str
16 dex
15 con
7 int
15 wis
5 cha

Are there any drawings of muscly dwarven women with about those stats I could put on my mythweaver's sheet?

[Jeff the Green]

Are there any drawings of muscly dwarven women with about those stats I could put on my mythweaver's sheet?

Google Image Search "dwarf woman". Just about all of them are muscly.

[Zhentarim]

http://imgur.com/a/KUz4N

Would that pass for a female dwarf druid?

[legomaster00156]

You can fully expect the rank to be just flavor. The Worldwound and its border have very little workable land.

[Zhentarim]

How would one excuse a lawful and idealogically pure character with these stats?

[Kol Korran]

Without revealing the campaign details too much, there will be a time in it to dwell on your own projects, but it is very, very minor, and many groups skip it...
Besides, as mentioned, the Worldwound is terrible for farming. Think a post apocalyptic, demon and chaos radiated magic. There ARE plants there, but very scarce, very tough, most likely inedible, and some of them might try to kill you...
That said, you're a Druid, and will become a mythical one, so all is possible.
I'd suggest to keep it as flavor, and decide whether to add ranks when the opportunity arises, and if the DM and group wish to explore this venue, instead of killing demons, which the AP focuses on...

[Zhentarim]

I'm trying to decide between skill focus (acrobatics) and power attack.

[MindTheGap97]

I'd say Power Attack is hands down much stronger

[TheIronGolem]

How would one excuse a lawful and idealogically pure character with these stats?

However you want, because ability scores have nothing to do with alignment. There's nothing to "excuse" here because there's no contradiction that needs to be resolved.

But if you would like me to offer one of many valid suggestions: A "slow thinker" - not necessarily stupid, but takes longer than most to draw conclusions. As a result, rarely speaks up but instead prefers to observe and take in as much information as possible before making up their mind.

[Zanos]

Are you doing something important specifically with acrobatics? Power attack is usually much better, even in Pathfinder.

[The Glyphstone]

Great Modthulhu: One thread, one topic please. It's fine to ask for advice from the forum community for your character, but please do it with one thread for all your questions about a character, rather than four separate threads for every single facet of that character.

[Zhentarim]

Great Modthulhu: One thread, one topic please. It's fine to ask for advice from the forum community for your character, but please do it with one thread for all your questions about a character, rather than four separate threads for every single facet of that character.

No problem!

[Kish]

If you break the law, you must be tracked down and punished. If you eat a lot of candy or do drugs, you must be cleansed. This leads into helping others--he will aid those who are not his allies so long as they are harming neither nature nor other sentient beings.
Now it's really easy: Lawful Evil, subcategory "puritanically controlling."

[Zhentarim]

Now it's really easy: Lawful Evil, subcategory "puritanically controlling."

Hmm. I was going for lawful good.

[arkangel111]

LN, follows the letter of the law without care for the reasons, just that it doesn't infringe on his values.

[Buufreak]

Yea, LN is the way to go here, if only because that little bit about Druids requiring Neutral, so LG and LE are out.

[Lagren]

Currently I'd agree with LN for Alexander.

And since I can never let one of these threads go by without tossing one of my own characters at it, here's one of mine. :smallwink:

This character is affable and easily-liked. They want a better future for themselves and everyone around them, and are willing to throw themselves into many years' work towards this end — even on behalf of those who would ignore or actively shun their aid.

This character believes that the one true virtue is being able to face the truth with one's head unbowed. If everyone stopped lying to themselves and each other, the world would be a better place. They work tirelessly to disabuse others of their illusions, regardless of how comforting they may be.

This character believes that some sacrifices are necessary in the name of a better world, and therefore does not mourn overlong when the truths they reveal prove too much to bear. To them, being deliberately ignorant is the same as being dead: choosing not to interact with reality makes you little more than a ghost.

On the other side of the coin, this character greatly admires those who face horrible truths with dignity: they believe that the only way to overcome a terrible situation is to face it head-on, searching for hidden light in the darkness.

What alignment are they?

[arkangel111]

LG, sounds like a common pally belief without being lawful-stupid. He feels his belief is right regardless of others feelings. I guess technically could be LE if his beliefs supersede others personal rights.