Neutral Characters in Good Campaigns

[Scow2]

"Cosmic forces" don't have the power to make choices "I won't tolerate this kind of person being on my side" - they don't have intelligence in that sense.

Actually, they do because Magnets are also not intelligent, but still choose what particles to attract. When people perform deeds in line with a given alignment, they start aligning themselves with that alignment just as the electrons in an iron bar align themselves with the poles of a magnet and become magnetized. That's why it's called "Alignment", not "personality".(I know that's not QUITE how magnets work.... but it's an analogy)

A person doesn't cease to be Evil merely because they do Good deeds now and again.

But they DO cease to be Evil if they do Good deeds in a Good Mindset with greater or equal frequency than Evil Deeds in an Evil mindset. "All the ****ing time" is not "Now and again"

Eh.

Truth be told, as punchy as what I said earlier sounds in my head, the presence and nature of Cosmic Good really depends on the setting, so it's not really useful to make blanket statements about it.

Not only that, but actual "Balance Neutral" requires the sort of cosmic perspective that comes with being the wizard ubermensch a la Mordenkainen and is thus pretty useless for 99.9999% of player characters.

Actually, most player characters have enough power to swing the cosmic powers one direction or another by annihilating, marginalizing, or converting the forces of the other side.

Neutral is BROAD. The reason why 1/3rd of Humans can be "more evil" than someone who has "Kills babies" or "Sets children on Fire" or "Guns down civilians" on their list of behaviors is because they have no other redeeming qualities.

I prefer to think of it as a continuum:

"Great respect for all life = Good"
"Moderate respect for all life = Neutral"
"Low respect/severe disrespect for all life = Evil"

Fixed that for you. Your standards are WAY too high. Neutral is NOT "Good Light". Very few people have respect for all life (Do you really give a damn about the billions of bacteria and fungus you kill every time you wash your hands? You didn't specify "Intelligent" life.) Also, you can respect life and still freely take it.

"Setting someone on fire" as "punishment for being obnoxious" is revoltingly cruel- whether the intention is to kill them or not.

Merely being obnoxious and continuing to tick off the pyromancer after being warned results in at worst a damaged piece of clothes and a light burn for a day, or smelling terrible and being partially bald for a week.

Especially when it's a child - even if that child is a "teenage monster".

Indeed, wanting them to live with severe burns for the rest of their life (assuming healing potions are not available) is pretty Vile.

Severe burns require a MUCH worse transgression than merely being obnoxious.

On the other hand... would it really have been better for Pyro to just abandon the kid after he proved uncooperative in the fire, and without the demeaning and foul-mouthed dead weight was better-able to save the other kids with less damage to himself and the others (Including the puppy managing to survive), while the jerk burned/asphyxiated to death in the fire because he rejected his chance at salvation?

Yet, I can't imagine a mostly Good campaign playing it for laughs unless the PC who does it is a Joker expy.

Which is why the character is Neutral. And the kid isn't in any danger. He's obnoxious? The Sorcerer sets his hair on fire. He'll stink for a day, possibly be bald for a week, get spooked a bit, but otherwise be fine. (I know I've set myself on fire several times!)

Also - all three situations have the character respect life.
Pyro respects the lives of the Orphans enough to nearly get himself killed ensuring they all get out, but not to the extent of tolerating an obnoxious, degrading bully insulting and belittling his selfless efforts and tormenting the ones who've lost things in the fire. (And in his extended action, he respects the livelihoods of the people of Foresttown to sacrifice his own life to destroy the invading army, but not to the point that he'll let the few within the blast radius allow him to let the army overrun the town and kill everyone else... and he respects the lives of both the Rakshasa and their slaves enough to completely overhaul their society and ensure they can live in harmony, but not to the extent of allowing slave rebels to undermine the peace with partisanship (Who are themselves Neutral, not Evil), nor the rights of both to self-determination to the point that they can revert to a position to wipe the other out again.)

The Charioteer has enough respect for the lives of the people in town to intervene and stop the Mad Poisonbomber from killing everyone, but not to the extent of caring about the few who fail to heed his warnings and get run over more than the lives of those who will die if he doesn't stop the Mad Poisonbomber ASAP.

Even TriggerHappy has enough respect for life of the people of the planet he's on to stop the invasion of the Aliens of Subjugation and Slaughter, but not enough to feel bad about accidentally killing the scientists and civilians in the compound who get in his way (And are possibly accessory to allowing the invasion to occur in the first place). He tries not to shoot them, but if he does, "What's done is done, I can't do anything about it now - and they would have died anyway if I wasn't here to clean up this mess."