How are alignment tendencies different from full alignments?

[Zhentarim]

How would TN(LE) differ from LE?

How would TN(NE) differ from NE?

How would TN(CE) differ from CE?

How would TN(LN) differ from LN?

How would TN(CN) differ from CN?

How would TN(LG) differ from LG?

How would TN(NG) differ from NG?

How would TN(CG) differ from CG?

How would any of these "half-step" alignments differ from TN?

[hamishspence]

While they might occasionally be tempted into non-TN behaviour - their non-TN behaviour is very much the exception rather than the rule.

I think that's a good summary of what "tendencies" means in this context.

[HouseRules]

A way to show a variation of alignment.

Find lesser of two Evil is easier when all choices are Evil.

There are * steps in each axis.

Good-Evil Axis

Good (Stupid Tendency)
Good (True)
Good (Neutral Tendency)
Neutral (Good Tendency)
Neutral (True)
Neutral (Evil Tendency)
Evil (Neutral Tendency)
Evil (True)
Evil (Stupid Tendency)


Similar applies to Law-Chaos Axis.

Law (Stupid Tendency)
Law (True)
Law (Neutral Tendency)
Neutral (Law Tendency)
Neutral (True)
Neutral (Chaos Tendency)
Chaos (Neutral Tendency)
Chaos (True)
Chaos (Stupid Tendency)


One of the issue, is that Neutral is NOT bouncing back and forth between the two extreme. If they do, that is "Chaotic", and deserve to be "Chaotic (True)" literally.

Characters with tendency are likely to take actions of that alignment as well as their own alignment. At least 2/3 of their action are in their alignment at at most 1/3 of their action are in their tendency.

Neutral (Stupid Tendency), it's not my problem "yet"! And then too slow to react. So there are over 82 alignments.


Lawful Stupid
Stupid Good
Holding the idiot ball (Neutral Stupid)
Stupid Evil
Chaotic Stupid

[Eldonauran]

Whenever I see someone playing an [alignment] with [tendencies], I simply decide that the particular character is on the cusp of moral dilemma and may be actively engaged in an alignment readjustment. Otherwise, it is simply someone of that [alignment] that is experiencing a typical 'temptation' of another alignment tendency that just about every other morally fluid being in the multiverse experiences from time to time, which might or might not lead to a readjustment later. How they react to the 'temptation' and internalize the decision they made will go towards the universe readjusting their alignment.

Alignments are descriptive, not prescriptive. You can act outside of the described alignment the universe has assigned you to varying degrees and still maintain that alignment, so long as the overall sum of YOU remains within that alignment. If something changes enough, then realignment occurs. There is no need for [tendencies] as far as I am concerned. Every thinking creature in the multiverse has a fluid alignment, to some degree or another.

[zlefin]

in the same way that shades of a color can all refer to the same color and share some similarity, while having some difference too. it's a continuum to an extent.

I'm not sure if any would be as different as indigo and azure; but that's the basic idea.

[Ruethgar]

I think there should be a Neutral(Stupid Tendency) as well, just thinking back on Treebeard and the ents deciding not to get involved in something that will undoubtedly involve them eventually. Utter inaction is rarely a wise choice, at least flee if you're not going to fight.

[Bartmanhomer]

I feel like that tendencies are the same.

[Florian]

How would any of these "half-step" alignments differ from TN?

They don't matter. Alignments are still descriptive, not prescriptive, are very broad and have a huge amount of overlap that is dependent on stance and intentions to make sense of. You can well say, firmly LG with a hard tendency to LE and it would mae sense in context of alignments.

[Darth Ultron]

How would any of these "half-step" alignments differ from TN?

A tendency shows a habit or choice about just one fairly specific thing, but not a full commitment to the full alignment. For example, anyone with Lawful Tendencies will follow laws, rules and traditions and anyone with Chaotic Tendencies will care more about themselves if they have a direct choice.


How would TN(LE) differ from LE?

Examples: The he cop that enforces their own harsh personal punishment on criminals for a specific crime, or the judge that does not give a person a second chance.. The cop is a ''by the book" cop all day...but when he catches a thief they often ''fall on their own sword" . The TN judge follows the law ''by the book", but the (LE) will always give the harshest penalty and offer no second chances.



How would TN(NE) differ from NE?

The NE is out for them selves.

Examples: Anyone that takes advantage of a trust to steal, like a clerk at a store. Or the person willing to do anything for a promotion.



How would TN(CE) differ from CE?

This is the typical TN person, who causes brutal physical harm on a subordinate...because they can. This person might enjoy an evil act...like killing...and will look for a ''right" way to do it...like ''killing in self defense".



How would TN(LN) differ from LN?

This is the TN person that goes ''by the book" just a bit too much. Or they see the Law of the Land as important.



How would TN(CN) differ from CN?

This TN person has a dark side...a vice...something ''bad'' they do on a whim. This is also typical of a TN person that thinks a single law or rule just ''does not apply to them" for whatever reason.



How would TN(LG) differ from LG?

This TN person has a good side. The judge that while going ''by the book", also gives light rulings and allows second chances. The authority figure that tends to ''give people a break".



How would TN(NG) differ from NG?

This TN person has a good side, but is willing to go outside the law and order. The Judge that throws out a case to help a good person. Or otherwise breaks a rule to do good.



How would TN(CG) differ from CG?

This TN has a good side, and is willing o do anything non evil.

[Zhentarim]

A tendency shows a habit or choice about just one fairly specific thing, but not a full commitment to the full alignment. For example, anyone with Lawful Tendencies will follow laws, rules and traditions and anyone with Chaotic Tendencies will care more about themselves if they have a direct choice.



Examples: The he cop that enforces their own harsh personal punishment on criminals for a specific crime, or the judge that does not give a person a second chance.. The cop is a ''by the book" cop all day...but when he catches a thief they often ''fall on their own sword" . The TN judge follows the law ''by the book", but the (LE) will always give the harshest penalty and offer no second chances.



The NE is out for them selves.

Examples: Anyone that takes advantage of a trust to steal, like a clerk at a store. Or the person willing to do anything for a promotion.



This is the typical TN person, who causes brutal physical harm on a subordinate...because they can. This person might enjoy an evil act...like killing...and will look for a ''right" way to do it...like ''killing in self defense".



This is the TN person that goes ''by the book" just a bit too much. Or they see the Law of the Land as important.



This TN person has a dark side...a vice...something ''bad'' they do on a whim. This is also typical of a TN person that thinks a single law or rule just ''does not apply to them" for whatever reason.



This TN person has a good side. The judge that while going ''by the book", also gives light rulings and allows second chances. The authority figure that tends to ''give people a break".



This TN person has a good side, but is willing to go outside the law and order. The Judge that throws out a case to help a good person. Or otherwise breaks a rule to do good.



This TN has a good side, and is willing o do anything non evil.

What do you mean by “fall on their own sword”?