“work within the system to destroy the system” “promote organized freedom for all”

[Zhentarim]

Are these phrases lawful or chaotic?

[Hackulator]

The first one is definitely just smart chaotic, unless you are just trying to set up a new system.

The second one is hard to parse without an explanation of what "organized freedom" means to the person saying it, as that phrase seems somewhat oxymoronic.

[Zhentarim]

The first one is definitely just smart chaotic, unless you are just trying to set up a new system.

The second one is hard to parse without an explanation of what "organized freedom" means to the person saying it, as that phrase seems somewhat oxymoronic.

I’ll expand— “organized freedom” is freedom with some loose oversight to ensure nobody else can take power and create restrictions to freedom. It also implies allowing courts were people can settle their grievences and percieved slights against they freedom with other people without resorting to violence.

This antivillain/antihero I’m making is a complex spin on the standard “rule the world” type villain. He wants control more to be left alone and to see everybody else is left alone, too.

[Unavenger]

Both of these are chaotic. Freedom still has to be organised to an extent, because the only possible result of a system where everyone gets where they want is self-annihilation, and people can't be granted the freedom to restrict other people's freedoms or there isn't proper freedom. Working within the system to destroy the system is a neutral means to provide a chaotic result (being involved in the government in any capacity doesn't strike me as automatically lawful) so it ends up as chaotic too.

[Hackulator]

I’ll expand— “organized freedom” is freedom with some loose oversight to ensure nobody else can take power and create restrictions to freedom. It also implies allowing courts were people can settle their grievences and percieved slights against they freedom with other people without resorting to violence.

This antivillain/antihero I’m making is a complex spin on the standard “rule the world” type villain. He wants control more to be left alone and to see everybody else is left alone, too.

I would say both are chaotic then, though the second one is on the edge and really depends how much oversight "loose oversight" really ends up meaning. This could also lead to a situation where a once "chaotic" character is "corrupted" into lawfulness once he or she gets a taste of power.

[Zhentarim]

I would say both are chaotic then, though the second one is on the edge and really depends how much oversight "loose oversight" really ends up meaning. This could also lead to a situation where a once "chaotic" character is "corrupted" into lawfulness once he or she gets a taste of power.

Interesting.

Could you also see a circumstance where evil is “corrupted” to good?

[Hackulator]

Interesting.

Could you also see a circumstance where evil is “corrupted” to good?

If you have not read it already, read the top response in the following link. It's one of the best D&D based short stories you will find on the net, or anywhere for that matter, and it speaks directly to your question.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/2mjhz9/what_would_happen_if_an_intelligent_greatsword/

[Sutehp]

The phrase "work within the system to destroy the system" makes me think of Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars. He basically worked his way to become Chancellor of the old Republic and used his power to slowly bring the Republic down and replace it with the Empire. And he did it with the approval of the Senate; remember how they applauded him when he declared himself Emperor in Revenge of the Sith? The thing is, while Palpatine is definitely Evil, he isn't really Lawful or Chaotic; he's actually Neutral. He manipulated the law and used his war machine built up during the Clone Wars, but those were just the means to the end of getting into power, so he's not really lawful. Palpatine has no real loyalty to bringing about Order for its own sake because he doesn't want to create any sort of organization that will live on after his death. He just wants to accumulate power for its own sake (which is more Neutral than Lawful or Chaotic). Also, he's not Chaotic because he has no desire to burn down the entire galaxy just for destruction's sake. Yes, he created the Death Star, a weapon of mass destruction (which would seem to make Palpatine lean Chaotic at first glance), but the Death Star's purpose was to create so much fear across the galaxy that everyone would be too afraid to oppose him. Palpatine was willing to destroy a few planets in order to make the rest of the galaxy too afraid of their own planet's destruction to fight back. But a Chaotic Evil Palpatine would have had no problems destroying all the planets in the galaxy just to watch all the explosions for fun. But in the movies, Palpatine was Neutral enough to still want to rule over the galaxy and you can't rule the galaxy if there are no planets for the galaxy to live on. (As for Darth Vader, he's definitely Lawful Evil since serving the Empire is all he had left after his wife Padme died, but that's another discussion.)

As Hackulator said, “work within the system to destroy the system” could be Lawful OR Chaotic depending on whether you want to replace the current system with something else or just want to destroy everything just so you can watch it all burn. The phrase by itself doesn't explain which purpose it's trying to accomplish, which is why Hackulator rightfully asked for clarification.

As for “promote organized freedom for all," this sounds Neutral to me. "Organized freedom" sounds like what Andoran is trying to accomplish, and that's a Neutral Good country. Democracy in general sounds like Neutral Good since it's based on the will of the people, who can self-correct the direction of the country when circumstances change, which seems less Lawful and more Neutral since adhering to rigid doctrine is not as big a concern as it would be in more Lawful countries. Sure, there's adhering to the rule of law (definitely a Lawful aspect), but with elections that change the nature and direction of the government every few years, there's more than a bit of Chaotic in addition to the Lawful. Take both of those together and it averages out to Neutral.

[Hackulator]

I would say that Palpatine is almost the definition of Lawful Evil. He didn't destroy the system, he simply subverted it to take control and make it even more tyrannical, which is exactly what a LE villain would do.

[Crake]

I would say that Palpatine is almost the definition of Lawful Evil. He didn't destroy the system, he simply subverted it to take control and make it even more tyrannical, which is exactly what a LE villain would do.

One could say that changing something into it's polar opposite is quite definitely considered to be destroying it. In essence he destroyed the republic and turned it into an empire. If I pull apart a chair and turn it into a footrest would you say the chair is not destroyed?

[Hackulator]

One could say that changing something into it's polar opposite is quite definitely considered to be destroying it. In essence he destroyed the republic and turned it into an empire. If I pull apart a chair and turn it into a footrest would you say the chair is not destroyed?

I would say more like he turned a chez lounge into a dentist chair. It was still a government, just a different kind of government.