Sick of "lolrandom" CN characters

[Soarel]

Seriously, the only archetype I've ever seen for a chaotic neutral character is the idiotic "lolrandom" personality. You know, the guy who does things with no rhyme or reason and yells out the names of foods and animals (you know what I mean, waffles cheese toast penguin walrus). Think "teh penguin of doom" for an idea of what I'm talking about.

Anyone else had encounters with these types of PCs and have advice on how to deal with them? I can't think of a way to stop these players without killing off their characters brutally.

[PersonMan]

Talk to them OOC and explain how you (and the group, if they also have a problem with it) don't like their shenanigans and please stop.

It's a lot more effective than any kind of IC solution.

There's a lot more to CN than badly-played Slaadi-in-human-form, though.

[Lord Raziere]

show them this:
Chaotic Neutral Done Right.

1. Chaotic Neutral DOES have limits. Its not a free ticket to do whatever you want
You want to do anything you want and not get an alignment change? Be Chaotic Evil. If you disagree with me, then you don't know what Chaotic Neutral is. Because the first thing I found that makes Chaotic Neutral, is the things they will never do. There has to be something that separates CN from CE. A Line They Never Cross. Chaotic Evil has no lines- it has already crossed all of them by being Chaotic Evil. Chaotic Neutral, despite all its love of freedom, its distrust of law and authority and its selfish focus, has things it will never do no matter what. Often, this is not harming the good guys and innocents.

2. Chaotic Neutral above all, is self-consistent
Sure, your character might be freedom-loving, not particularly focused on helping others and an individualist, but that doesn't mean they are random or mercurial. The way they do things, the rules they follow, may not match up with the rest of the world or how it thinks, but they are self-consistent about how they think it. They are their own system, their own way, and it only works as long as they are self-consistent about how they go about it. The rules they follow might be loose and flexible, but they are self-consistent no matter what.

3. Chaotic Neutral recognizes Good and Evil
Chaotic Neutral people are not blind to alignment just because they like their freedom-if anything they are very good at recognizing when somebody is morally higher than them, and know who to fight and not to fight, who to oppose to fight for their freedom, and who to ally with to keep their freedom. After all, if the good guys win, Chaotic Neutral wins too, if Evil wins, that probably means less freedom- even if its a Chaotic Evil villain. After all, Chaotic Evil, does not care about what it does. Chaotic Evil will stomp over anyone else's freedom for their own freedom, and that includes Chaotic Neutral's freedom. Chaotic Neutral on the other hand is more live and let live.

4. Chaotic Neutral can be negotiated with.
Just because they are free, doesn't mean they are stupid or that they force everything to go their way. They might follow their own self-consistent logic and not care about doing good all that much, but they know when to make a deal, when to change tactics, when to stop fighting and talk. If negotiation and restraint will help them keep their freedom better than any sword or spell, they will use it. If anything, they're probably more open to negotiation than Lawful Neutral- LN has rules that must Always Be Followed No Matter What, and is inflexible about carrying them out, following their code no matter the situation. Chaotic Neutral however knows when to cut a deal, when to be smart and pragmatically negotiate to secure their freedom.

5. Chaotic Neutral is flexible for their friends
Following up, its this: Chaotic Neutral can be flexible about how they do things for the people they care about. If their friends wish them to stop stealing, they will do so- at least in their presence and if nothing forces them to steal anyways. They will still feel nothing bad about stealing in general, they will just be smart enough to not to do it when their friends would disapprove of it, or when they could get caught. They won't think it bad that they do this, they just figure "hey what they won't know, won't hurt em". Since they themselves are free, they know that others are free to, and respect their choices, even if they don't agree with them. Lawful Neutral however is inherently inflexible about their code, and while to Chaotic Neutral this just means they need to be particularly careful about not doing something that the Lawful Neutral won't like in their presence, Lawful Neutral is not as open to negotiation and there will be conflict if they find out if Chaotic Neutral has broken a rule.

6. Chaotic Neutral doesn't want to tear down the law, but to avoid it.
This may seem strange to hear, but Chaotic Neutral doesn't actively work against the law. Chaotic good may oppose the law for more freedom for everyone if its tyrannical, Chaotic Evil will probably oppose any law that gets in the way of their selfish desires, but Chaotic Neutral, while often breaking the law, isn't exactly opposing it implicitly. They are just following their own self-consistent train of thought, and it just so happens to clash with the rules around them. If anything, they try to avoid the law.

If faced with a tyrannical city, CG will go in and try to change it for the better, CN is more likely to escape it and find somewhere else to be free, where its easier to be free and not have to jump through as many hoops to get their freedom. Staying in a tyrannical city is a good way to get killed by its laws after all. Though this may vary, some Chaotic Neutrals might desire an interesting, risk-taking life and go into it not to spreading freedom and good to everyone else, but just as a challenge to see if they keep up their life amidst an oppressive regime. However if faced with no other choice, they will stop avoiding and fight against unjust laws for their freedom right alongside Chaotic Good.

[Bit Fiend]

Point them to some well done CN archetypes, like Saemon Havarian or Jack Sparrow.

[Tengu_temp]

Tell them to cut it out because it's disruptive. And if they don't, drop a whale on their character's head out of nowhere. They should appreciate the randomness.

[Kalmageddon]

CN in my experience usually means "I want to do whatever comes to mind and not put any effort in my character", meanwhile CE is the same thing with "I also want to kill any NPC I feel like killing" on top of it. CG? Same as CN plus "I still want to be called a hero".

This is usually the result of a player that is not very good at imagining characters or that hasn't a firm grasp of narrative and what makes a character likeable. To this kind of player Chaotic is a free ticket to ignore boring stuff like consistency and characterization.
There is no cure or solution, OOC talks can help to somewhat mitigate the annoyance of his most extreme behaviours, but usually the only thing you can do is kick him out or tolerate him.

[DM Nate]

How old is the player in question?

[Spore]

CN in my experience usually means "I want to do whatever comes to mind and not put any effort in my character", .

That's the main point why I hate alignment charts. Those should be for the DM and some spells - and not even qualify or disqualify one for classes. A new player shouldn't be like: "I want to play a chaotic neutral character." He should say: "I want to test out various things in this system so my character should be comfortable with a wide range of decisions while still loving his freedom."

Because then usually the mind of new players jumps in and says: Well my character wouldn't risk a prison sentence just because he could break into a noble's house just to drink coffee because that's stupid. Other players WANT to cause mischief. And that's totally fine.

I played a large range of characters in my group until now but I started with a CG rogue that I shifted to CN because saving those dwarves isn't as important as saving my own hide. And I did several really silly things to a point where I saved a city and still got put under a heavy permanent enchantment spell and severed some fingers. Things I regret (as a player) until this very day. Along with driving his build into a wall, three times.

[Subaru Kujo]

show them this:
Chaotic Neutral Done Right.
Chaotic Neutral, despite all its love of freedom, its distrust of law and authority and its selfish focus, has things it will never do no matter what. Often, this is not harming the good guys and innocents.

Things they'll never do, and things they feel like they must rectify (for instance, my rogue decided to attempt to kill an angel that was dewinged, and chained to this succubus as her pet (feeding her pet out of a dog bowl, the whole nine yards), as it mirrored her own experience rather well (she got herself conscripted into the Blood War most certainly regardless of her own sense), and it was the only mercy she could give (on a side note, our barbarian succeeded in it later on and the angel ascended again)).

CN in my experience usually means "I want to do whatever comes to mind and not put any effort in my character", meanwhile CE is the same thing with "I also want to kill any NPC I feel like killing" on top of it. CG? Same as CN plus "I still want to be called a hero".

Usually I use the Chaotic alignments for opportunists, but they tend to be far more in depth than most of my table's lawful characters. Take that as you will though.

[Kalmageddon]

Usually I use the Chaotic alignments for opportunists, but they tend to be far more in depth than most of my table's lawful characters. Take that as you will though.

Oh I'm not saying that Chaotic characters can't be played well. I'm saying that a Chaotic alignment lends itself well to be used by the kind of bad players I described, since it's easy to think that "Chaotic" = "Random, not bound by common sense or logic".
To be fair, D&D doesn't help at all. Most Chaotic monsters are described as mad, prone to randomness or outright violence despite not actually being Evil.

[Subaru Kujo]

Oh I'm not saying that Chaotic characters can't be played well. I'm saying that a Chaotic alignment lends itself well to be used by the kind of bad players I described, since it's easy to think that "Chaotic" = "Random, not bound by common sense or logic".
To be fair, D&D doesn't help at all. Most Chaotic monsters are described as mad, prone to randomness or outright violence despite not actually being Evil.

No contest there, I suppose. Guess it's just an issue of being lucky with people that understand what Chaotic really means in terms of enjoyment of the game (opportunists or free minded people with some rather strict lines (pretty far down maybe, granted) they won't cross).

[Red Fel]

Oh I'm not saying that Chaotic characters can't be played well. I'm saying that a Chaotic alignment lends itself well to be used by the kind of bad players I described, since it's easy to think that "Chaotic" = "Random, not bound by common sense or logic".
To be fair, D&D doesn't help at all. Most Chaotic monsters are described as mad, prone to randomness or outright violence despite not actually being Evil.

By the same token, Lawful gets taken to absurd extremes as well. Some players use Lawful to mean "I am the authority in this party, you will all obey me or I will have to kill you, nothing personal." Picture any exaggerated Paladin that emphasizes the L over the G. (Miko much?) Both C and L have their extremes.

The difference is simply one of convenience. Lawful - even Lawful Stupid - is hard to play, good or bad, because it requires you to have more limits. That's part of what defines being Lawful. Chaotic is easier to play, good or bad, because it has fewer limits (but as mentioned previously, it still has some limits). As a result, on average, you will find more players running Chaotic characters than Lawful ones. And even if we assume that the proportion of Chaotic Stupid / Chaotic = Lawful Stupid / Lawful, you will still see more Chaotic Stupid, if only because you will see more Chaotic.

There are absolutely ways to do CN (and CE, and certainly CG) right. There are also (obviously) ways to do them poorly. The problem isn't the alignment at all - it's the mentality of the player. A player can make CE seem almost heroic, a player can make LG look like a deranged homicidal lunatic. Sometimes it's intentional, artistic, entertaining or powerful. Other times it's just a player who wants to break the scenery. In the latter case, as with any out-of-character issue, it merits a sit-down.

[Thialfi]

Seriously, the only archetype I've ever seen for a chaotic neutral character is the idiotic "lolrandom" personality. You know, the guy who does things with no rhyme or reason and yells out the names of foods and animals (you know what I mean, waffles cheese toast penguin walrus). Think "teh penguin of doom" for an idea of what I'm talking about.

Anyone else had encounters with these types of PCs and have advice on how to deal with them? I can't think of a way to stop these players without killing off their characters brutally.

I haven't noticed a problem with chaotic neutral. I have noticed that several of my other players have a slight prejudice against lawful good. When they hear that a PC or NPC has that alignment, they tend to have the notion that they are sanctimonious jerks.

I have a couple chaotic neutral characters. Both are part of an anarchist cell in Sigil. One is a tiefling and is a dedicated "damn the man" type that raised herself out of the slums of the Hive and would go to almost any means to reach her goal of tearing down society and rebuilding it as a meritocracy. She is absolutely driven and does not suffer fools gladly.

The other is an air genasi from a noble and privileged family. She rejected the notion that people deserve wealth because they were born to it, but she lacks real conviction for doing anything other than having fun. She follows the cause because she cares for the friends she has made there.

I can think of numerous other ways to play chaotic neutral and have yet to run into the random crazy dude you mentioned.

[valadil]

I actually blame the terminology here. I don't think chaotic really conveys what the alignment actually means. It's not hard for someone just skimming the books to come to the wrong conclusion about that particular alignment.

That said, I don't have a particularly good alternative.

[Spore]

I actually blame the terminology here. I don't think chaotic really conveys what the alignment actually means.

It's simplified like good and evil imho. Paragon and Renegade from Mass Effect fit the modern perception of good and evil a bit better. In that notion, conservative and liberal could be - all political mentions aside - a better terminology for said alignment axis.

[DM Nate]

The way I explain it to my players, an alignment like "chaotic" can mean more than one thing...that person's motivations, or how that person accomplishes them.

[valadil]

It's simplified like good and evil imho. Paragon and Renegade from Mass Effect fit the modern perception of good and evil a bit better. In that notion, conservative and liberal could be - all political mentions aside - a better terminology for said alignment axis.

I like the terms themselves, but there's no escaping the connotation. That does make me thing of the phrase "going rogue" though. Too bad that already means something in D&D. Maybe maverick would be better than chaotic?

Not that I'd want to introduce even more granularity to alignment, but within lawful, it'd be cool to have a leader/follower axis.

[Kaervaslol]

Have them read The eyes of the underworld and Cugel's Saga.

Both are great examples of how to play one of the most interesting archetypes of the CN character: a quick witted, egotistical psychopath.

[The Glyphstone]

Have them read The eyes of the underworld and Cugel's Saga.

Both are great examples of how to play one of the most interesting archetypes of the CN character: a quick witted, egotistical psychopath.

"Psychopath" is usually the defining trait of CE, not CN, and that is exactly against what is trying to be encouraged here.

Not that I'd want to introduce even more granularity to alignment, but within lawful, it'd be cool to have a leader/follower axis.

Square and Funky?

[Jormengand]

"Psychopath" is usually the defining trait of CE, not CN, and that is exactly against what is trying to be encouraged here.

Even then, it's wholly possible to create a CE character who isn't psychopathic - being simply the sum total of Chaotic and Evil, rather than forcing the character to follow the Paladin of Slaughter's code of conduct just due to their alignment.

Speaking of variant paladins, I'd say that this is what "Chaotic done right" is:

"Respect individual liberty, help those in need (provided they do not use the help for lawful or evil ends), and punish those who threaten or curtail personal liberty."

With possibly a bit of:

"Disrespect all authority figures who have not proven their physical superiority to her," but not the rest of the Slaughter code.

Square and Funky?

Bacon and Necktie?

[AuraTwilight]

He's referencing this: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...d-by-FUNKITUDE!

[Jormengand]

He's referencing this: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...d-by-FUNKITUDE!

Yes, and I was referencing the picture in the TVtropes link.

[Synar]

show them this:
Chaotic Neutral Done Right.

1. Chaotic Neutral DOES have limits. Its not a free ticket to do whatever you want
You want to do anything you want and not get an alignment change? Be Chaotic Evil. If you disagree with me, then you don't know what Chaotic Neutral is. Because the first thing I found that makes Chaotic Neutral, is the things they will never do. There has to be something that separates CN from CE. A Line They Never Cross. Chaotic Evil has no lines- it has already crossed all of them by being Chaotic Evil. Chaotic Neutral, despite all its love of freedom, its distrust of law and authority and its selfish focus, has things it will never do no matter what. Often, this is not harming the good guys and innocents.

2. Chaotic Neutral above all, is self-consistent
Sure, your character might be freedom-loving, not particularly focused on helping others and an individualist, but that doesn't mean they are random or mercurial. The way they do things, the rules they follow, may not match up with the rest of the world or how it thinks, but they are self-consistent about how they think it. They are their own system, their own way, and it only works as long as they are self-consistent about how they go about it. The rules they follow might be loose and flexible, but they are self-consistent no matter what.

3. Chaotic Neutral recognizes Good and Evil
Chaotic Neutral people are not blind to alignment just because they like their freedom-if anything they are very good at recognizing when somebody is morally higher than them, and know who to fight and not to fight, who to oppose to fight for their freedom, and who to ally with to keep their freedom. After all, if the good guys win, Chaotic Neutral wins too, if Evil wins, that probably means less freedom- even if its a Chaotic Evil villain. After all, Chaotic Evil, does not care about what it does. Chaotic Evil will stomp over anyone else's freedom for their own freedom, and that includes Chaotic Neutral's freedom. Chaotic Neutral on the other hand is more live and let live.

4. Chaotic Neutral can be negotiated with.
Just because they are free, doesn't mean they are stupid or that they force everything to go their way. They might follow their own self-consistent logic and not care about doing good all that much, but they know when to make a deal, when to change tactics, when to stop fighting and talk. If negotiation and restraint will help them keep their freedom better than any sword or spell, they will use it. If anything, they're probably more open to negotiation than Lawful Neutral- LN has rules that must Always Be Followed No Matter What, and is inflexible about carrying them out, following their code no matter the situation. Chaotic Neutral however knows when to cut a deal, when to be smart and pragmatically negotiate to secure their freedom.

5. Chaotic Neutral is flexible for their friends
Following up, its this: Chaotic Neutral can be flexible about how they do things for the people they care about. If their friends wish them to stop stealing, they will do so- at least in their presence and if nothing forces them to steal anyways. They will still feel nothing bad about stealing in general, they will just be smart enough to not to do it when their friends would disapprove of it, or when they could get caught. They won't think it bad that they do this, they just figure "hey what they won't know, won't hurt em". Since they themselves are free, they know that others are free to, and respect their choices, even if they don't agree with them. Lawful Neutral however is inherently inflexible about their code, and while to Chaotic Neutral this just means they need to be particularly careful about not doing something that the Lawful Neutral won't like in their presence, Lawful Neutral is not as open to negotiation and there will be conflict if they find out if Chaotic Neutral has broken a rule.

6. Chaotic Neutral doesn't want to tear down the law, but to avoid it.
This may seem strange to hear, but Chaotic Neutral doesn't actively work against the law. Chaotic good may oppose the law for more freedom for everyone if its tyrannical, Chaotic Evil will probably oppose any law that gets in the way of their selfish desires, but Chaotic Neutral, while often breaking the law, isn't exactly opposing it implicitly. They are just following their own self-consistent train of thought, and it just so happens to clash with the rules around them. If anything, they try to avoid the law.

If faced with a tyrannical city, CG will go in and try to change it for the better, CN is more likely to escape it and find somewhere else to be free, where its easier to be free and not have to jump through as many hoops to get their freedom. Staying in a tyrannical city is a good way to get killed by its laws after all. Though this may vary, some Chaotic Neutrals might desire an interesting, risk-taking life and go into it not to spreading freedom and good to everyone else, but just as a challenge to see if they keep up their life amidst an oppressive regime. However if faced with no other choice, they will stop avoiding and fight against unjust laws for their freedom right alongside Chaotic Good.

Hum, I find your post would need some "some" or "many", as all CN are not actually the same (and have different reasons for being Neutral and Chaotic.
But this is not the point of my nitpick.
The point of my nitpick is that you said "CN are consistent", which is something everyone seem to expect from fictional characters. But actual people are not all that consistent in their decisions, I have found. Depending on a range of at-first-view-irrelevant factors, people will act or react very differently. People will also hold inconsistent views and opinion, consciencly or not. This is probably not a "random" level of inconsistent, but still.


Okay, I've got another nitpick: alignements are not personnality nor are they characters. You pretty much know nothing of the opinions and views held by a character just from his alignement.You know even less from how he will act or react in a given situation.
I know this is probably not what you meant to imply, but I've seen too much people make such confusions (or at least what I believe are confusions) on this board.
Too often, characters thought in terms of alignement come to be reduced too 9 steoritypical characters, and people think they can tell how characters with one given alignement will react.
An exemple would be, there is no need for you CG character to liberate the city: maybe he is a coward, maybe he is good but non exalted good, or maybe he is another brand of CG, just like not all LG are paladins.
However, a CN, or even a CE, may feel the strong urge to liberate it, take down the tyrant, and maybe even try to protect its citizen, even at the price of their own life. The fact that they are not good as a whole doesn't mean they have no reason to do such a thing, or can't perform good acts, or have no reason why this particularly revulse them. Maybe, but that is very much a specific exemple, your CE is cruel and take pleasure at killing those he consider as his ennemies, hate orginazations (like your stereotypical CE), but won't harm those he consider 'sheeps', and as a former slave, will bring down any -tyrannical or not- government which tolerate slavery, executing those implied. Maybe else he is a revolutionner, but the people killed were just 'colateral damages', their death 'served a greater good'. Their motivation may even be good. Thinking of it, just like Redcloak is evil. Etc...
The best thing with non-stereotypical, exalted-alignement characters, is that a slight difference in their portayal will drastically change their perceived alignement, and it can be argued for hours.



So this changed in a rant halfway through, but the good thing is that I get in so much tangent I got back at the OP.
So the problem with 'random' CN characters is the same that with most Evil characters: they think first of their alignement, and then think 'what should a character with this given alignement do', or 'what is the stereotypical character for such an alignement', instead of building a character first (maybe with the alignement as a guideline), and then see why he does fit in the alignement (I mean, you could also not let alignement affect at all your character creation and just be picked after to match, but this is a different process).
Moreover, one should never, never let one's alignement guide one's actions.

Well, maybe they don't actually do that. Maybe they don't play random characters because CN, but because they want to play random characters. But in this case, the problem is not with the alignement system, it is just with them. Talking to them will solve the problem-or will not, but I can't help you with that.

[Slipperychicken]

Anyone else had encounters with these types of PCs and have advice on how to deal with them? I can't think of a way to stop these players without killing off their characters brutally.

You could try vetting character concepts (both mechanics and fluff) long before play begins, and asking the players to give certain information, including but not limited to the following:

• Strategies and tactics (in combat, but also outside if applicable).
• Character build, intended feats, levels, and so on.
• Organizations and communities to which each PC is affiliated.
• Character traits and goals (beside those related to class features, swag, and murder).
• A few sentences to establish backstory and personality.
• Reasons the PC wouldn't betray the party.
• Relation to the other PCs.
• How the character reacts to nonviolent opposition to a minor goal, such as an obnoxious bureaucrat at the DMV. If the answer involves murder, you can safely reject that character concept.

When you vet PC concepts, the idea is to filter out truly repulsive ideas (such as Sir Random The CN Barbarian, Drizzt Clone #9183, or Pun-Pun Destroyer Of Worlds), and also achieve compromise when you think a character idea is salvageable.

[Janus]

Point them to some well done CN archetypes, like Saemon Havarian or Jack Sparrow.

Throw some of Robert E. Howard's Conan the Barbarian short stories in there while you're at it.

[Pex]

For a taking itself seriously CN philosophy there is Objectivism, made infamous in Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugs". Wealth is a symbol of a person's achievements. It stresses fair trade and actually abhors theft. You don't take or destroy what others' created. You must earn everything.

[Angelalex242]

Conan is CN with Good tendencies. He has a code of honor, of sorts, even if the Cimmerian Code of Honor isn't anything your average Paladin would understand. Once he becomes king of Aquilonia, he's definitely good, and may even have hit neutral good. He's actually one of the better rulers in the world he lives in, even if he does insist on personally leading his armies every chance he gets because he gets bored sitting on a throne. His armies are generally happy to have the 20th level Barbarian leading them anyway.

There's actually a Conan RPG where you can look up the Cimmerian Code of Honor.

It looks like this:

Barbaric Code of Honor: (What alignment would you call this, anyway?)

This is Conan’s style of morality, such as it is.
The barbaric code of honor is common only in lands with
harsh climates, such as Cimmeria, Vanaheim and Asgard in
the north, Ghulistan in the east and is also found among some
of the Shemites and Kozaks who live in the great deserts that
stretch over many of the southern and eastern lands. Here even
strangers are given hospitality and fallen foes are extended mercy
if they ask for it, since it is recognized that humanity must to
some extent work together against the bitter cold or suffocating
heat. Barbarian tribes who have a relatively easy time of it, such
as the Picts in their lush forests, do not usually have a need for a
code of honour, for their environment is not sufficiently deadly
as to be their most dangerous enemy. It could be argued that
the presence of a code of honour is what separates a barbarian
from a mere savage.

Restrictions of the Barbaric Code of Honor
---------------------------------------------------------
A character with a barbaric code of honor will:

Respect alliances with other honorable characters.

Ignore an alliance with a dishonorable character, even
pre-emptively, if it suits him.

Abide loyally by a contract of employment, even with a
dishonorable employer, so long as the character is well treated
and shown loyalty in return.

Slay a dishonorable foe, even if that foe is helpless.

Slay an honorable foe who is not helpless.

Protect those weaker than himself, at least from physical
dangers, if such protection is requested. This includes
ordinary folk such as peasants captured for interrogation,
who will be set free once it is safe to do so and rewarded
if they were of assistance, as well as children and most
women. A woman who has demonstrated herself to be
more capable in war than the average man need not be
protected, though the typical male with a barbaric code
of honor will probably attempt to protect her anyway.

Offer his allegiance only to an honorable leader who is
clearly stronger and better suited for power than himself,
or to a greater cause of some kind; once allegiance is
granted, the character must be utterly loyal, so long as
his leader remains honorable and loyal to him in return.
Note that a character with a barbaric code of honor
need not necessarily retain an allegiance that was always
intended to be temporary, such as a mercenary contract,
after the conditions are fulfilled.

Plunder and rob anyone other than honorable allies.

Lie, cheat and con anyone other than honorable allies.

Have no in-principle objection to slavery, being willing to
keep or free slaves as it suits his purposes.

Grudgingly respect genuine piety but despise venal priests
and the typical trappings of civilized ‘religion’.

Like or dislike others based on their honor and their
actions, not on their religion or race.

Be hospitable and generous to those in need, even to
strangers. It is said that no man starves in Cimmeria,
unless there is a famine and all starve, because every
family will give of their own food to anyone without.

Respect the hospitality shown him.

Avenge any seriously intended insult with immediate and
lethal force, if at all possible. Note that barbarians new to
civilization are likely to avenge even a jesting insult in the
same way, not having yet learnt the subtleties of civilized
behavior, which can allow a man to insult another
without the imminent danger of having his skull split.

Avenge any physical harm done him, at the earliest
opportunity, in a manner fitting his sense of balance and
justice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A character with a barbaric code of honor will not:

Slay a wild animal, or any other creature, for sport alone.
He may slay in self-defense, or for revenge, or to get food
or other resources, or slay a sworn enemy.

Slay an honorable foe who offers a ransom or throws
himself on the character’s mercy.

Slay or steal from one who has shown him hospitality
in his own house, even if they turn out to be an enemy,
unless the other breaks hospitality first.

Harm anyone currently under his protection or receiving
his hospitality, even if they turn out to be an enemy,
unless the other breaks faith first.

Assist the authorities with any information about his
friends or allies, even if refusing to do so puts him at
risk.

Desert his henchmen or retainers, even if they appear to
desert him. If he ever achieves the position of chieftain or
a similar authority, he feels he must set an example to his
followers. Even if they doubt him, he must prove himself
to them, particularly if they need him.

[Kurald Galain]

Oh I'm not saying that Chaotic characters can't be played well. I'm saying that a Chaotic alignment lends itself well to be used by the kind of bad players I described, since it's easy to think that "Chaotic" = "Random, not bound by common sense or logic".

In retrospect they should probably have picked a different term than "chaotic" (yes, I know it's an Elric reference; that's not an excuse 20 years later)

To be fair, D&D doesn't help at all. Most Chaotic monsters are described as mad, prone to randomness or outright violence despite not actually being Evil.

As I recall, the 2E PHB actively described CN characters as acting like this (and then dying as a result, to be fair).


Anyway, practically speaking I'd suggest two things. First, in my opinion certain players simply shouldn't be allowed to play CN characters (just like in Vampire, you're not playing a Malkavian unless you persuade me first that you can actually do a good job at it). And second, if you think you can "get through" to the player, let him answer this question: why would anyone want to hang out with your character? And if he can't think of an answer, that means his character gets dumped by the group and he has to play something else.

[Lord Raziere]

maybe better terms for these would be "Free" and "Orderly" like "Orderly Good" and "Free Good" where Free cares more about their own freedom and independence, while Orderly cares more about safety, stability and everything working correctly.

so it'd be better to call it Free Neutral or Independent Neutral- someone who just wants to be free and independent, no chaos involved just freedom. a simple rewording would go a long way to change things for the better.

of course, they can work with others, they just have to agree on a few things and be tolerant of each other.

[Vinegar Tom]

I fear I may be showing my age here, but didn't the 1e PHB (it's a while since I read it) define CN as the default vanilla alignment for players who couldn't be bothered to take any moral standpoint whatsoever? As opposed to True Neutral, that utterly weird alignment nobody ever chose unless they were absolutely determined to be a Druid, in the same way that CHA was only not the dump stat if you were a Paladin, only more so.

To put it simply, D&D started out as a strongly good versus evil game; the law/chaos axis was fluff pinched from the works of Michael Moorcock that has only comparatively recently become important. It's never mattered anywhere near as much as being Good or Bad, except if you happen to worship a god that worries about such things. The rules state that humans are the most random of all major sentient races, therefore one-third of all humans are Chaotic. Does this make one human in 3 raving mad? I think not. By the same token, one human in 3 is technically evil. But there are degrees of evil, just like chaos, that you need to bear in mind.

As a rule of thumb, especially with beginner PCs, I've always assumed that alignment is pretty flexible, unless of course your powers come from a god who is by definition a rules-lawyer. In which case you brought that condition on yourself, and if you're a good roleplayer, you know what you're doing. But I'm still watching you...