Becoming Lawful all of a sudden

[mehs]

Was trying to play Neutral good during a war, keeping as many people alive as possible. One of the party members had a hate boner against some criminals that I captured, and wanted to execute them instead of bringing them to the police (he was also one of the police... so yeah).
I used the "you are not judge, jury, and executioner (/neither am I)" line and pretty instantly became lawful lawful lawful good by party decision. There was also a bit where i tried to solve the interpersonal conflict with the police guy by getting a promotion and thus therefore outranking him. Am i now lawful? Is this like where you care for a cat for half a day and now you just are a cat person?

Am devoted enough to keeping everyone alive that I picked up healing abilities and a feat that makes all of my damage non lethal

[Zombulian]

I don’t think that makes you necessarily lawful. It means that you achieved good outcomes by means of law in a way that was convenient, more than promoting law as something to be pursued in itself. That seems like textbook neutral good to me.
Sounds more like your party members are all chaotic though, so anything leaning more towards the L in the C-L relationship is abhorrent to them.

[Hiro Quester]

The point with having neutral in your neutral good alignment (at lest as I play neutral), entails that you are not restricted in your means of achieving good options. You can lean chaotic one day and lawful the next as the situation allows.

IMHO, it takes a consistent pattern of behavior over time to demonstrate an alignment that is different from your stated/intended alignment. (Our DM notes such incidents, and informs players ooc if their character has been playing deeper in the alignment pool than they might originally have intended.)

But a surprise alignment change based on one action should only happen for a majorly evil act that is seriously out of character. IMHO even a chaotic evil character might have an aberrant lapse into a single good action without long term consequences to their alignment.

One good action does not make an evil character a good person. The opposite isn't true. You can fall sharply, but only rise slowly.

And an alignment change would usually happen by a DM's judgment, not by party vote.

Occasionally using the law to achieve your goals doesn't make you lawful. Consistently refusing the chaotic option, and passionately defending the need to follow the law and not bend even a little, would perhaps entail a lawful good alignment.

But refusing to condone your party members executing prisoners seems eminently consistent with a neutral good alignment.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Alignment is descriptive not prescriptive. It honestly looks to me like you were lawful all along. Although if this isn't part of a longer pattern, your GM may have jumped the gun on changing what's recorded on your sheet.

In any case, just keep doing what you've described doing in your OP. You're arleady behaving in a lawful fashion.

If you want to go back to NG then you need to sprinkle some chaotic behavior. Do things simply because you think they're the right thing to do, rules and consequences be damned. Tell a superior to sodd-off for making a stupid or immoral order. That sort of thing.

[False God]

Maybe. I tend to fall somewhere between the "it takes a lot to make a real alignment shift" and the "4 or 5 moments".

While over the course of a game characters can drift from one alignment towards another via a series of actions, I would also argue that if during the "moments that really matter" your character tends to pick lawful actions, you're probably lawful. Whatever you do in the situations that don't really matter, don't really weigh on your alignment.

[Zombulian]

Maybe. I tend to fall somewhere between the "it takes a lot to make a real alignment shift" and the "4 or 5 moments".

While over the course of a game characters can drift from one alignment towards another via a series of actions, I would also argue that if during the "moments that really matter" your character tends to pick lawful actions, you're probably lawful. Whatever you do in the situations that don't really matter, don't really weigh on your alignment.

Right. I think in this case, the context that we don’t have are really the deciding factors. Were these actions in a vacuum? Were they evidence of a continued pattern of lawful behavior? Given the circumstances, was invoking the law/joining an organization the most convenient mean to reach your end? Or was it your preferred way?

[Mordaedil]

The party doesn't get to decide on whether you change alignment or not. That is a discussion between you and the DM.

In the various rulebooks, the suggestion can come from you; "I feel like my character has been acting more lawful than neutral than I originally imagined"
or from the DM; "I've noticed you've tended towards lawful actions more than chaotic or neutral ones, are you sure you are neutral good?"

The DM can also put on the hard gloves if he wants "you've been acting very lawfully, I must warn you that staying on this course will result in a change of alignment". I don't think a single instance should ever be enough to instantly change you (but you can get a slide over time, until your course-correct).

That said, the party can invite a discussion about this, I feel that is fair and fine. I know some of the people I've played it I've disagreed with on what alignment they fit into and I've brought it up like "are you sure you are playing that alignment correctly?" but I've always shown respect that it is ultimately not my call to make. I can defer to the DM and the player herself, but after that it is their discussion and if they ask for further input I will provide it. If they disagree, then that is it. I will assume they've argued their case and I might not be privvy to it.

I encourage you try to convince your group to show similar respect as well, but accept the DM call.