Lawful or Chaotic: Your Preference?

[goto124]

Just asking for opinions here. Do you, personally, like to play Lawful or Chaotic characters, and why?

I myself play games to escape my responsibilities to society, which is why I'm almost always Chaotic. Also, I've played a game where you pretty much have to suck up to royal jerks (PC). It's soured me a lot, and the very idea of Lawful reminds me of that. It doesn't have to be, I know, but still.

[Lord Raziere]

I mostly play Chaotic. It just matches me and my love for art and individuality so well!

but sometimes I play Lawful, because some characters just fit that better. But mostly Chaotic.

[Vertharrad]

Chaotic. I like the freedom to change my mind when it's needed. Lawfuls don't get that...they're too dogged, staid, and regemented. Freedom, liberty, and justice; I stick to Chaotic Good. Although I have played lawfuls, I tend to stay away from those these days.

[goto124]

While we're at it, Talakeal once said that playing Lawful could be easier, since you don't have to think about what you should or shouldn't do.

Which sounds like you don't actually want to play the game, merely joining in to please your groupmates for whatever RL reason. Like rolling a stupid orc Barbarian who follows everything the leader tells him to do.

[veti]

While we're at it, Talakeal once said that playing Lawful could be easier, since you don't have to think about what you should or shouldn't do.

Which sounds like you don't actually want to play the game, merely joining in to please your groupmates for whatever RL reason. Like rolling a stupid orc Barbarian who follows everything the leader tells him to do.

Conversely, your stated reason for playing Chaotic could be rephrased as "I don't really want to 'roleplay', in the sense of trying to imagine myself in someone else's head, I just want to be silly without having to face unpleasant consequences for a while".

But I don't think it's constructive to attribute uncharitable motives to other people whose preferences don't match yours. For myself I generally play chaotics, because I have fantasies of independence the same as everyone else, and in an RPG setting I don't see why I shouldn't play those out.

[goto124]

Conversely, your stated reason for playing Chaotic could be rephrased as "I don't really want to 'roleplay', in the sense of trying to imagine myself in someone else's head, I just want to be silly without having to face unpleasant consequences for a while".

You know what, you're right.

[Red Fel]

The funny thing about the absolute morality alignment grid is that, just as Good is "Good-er" than Evil, Lawful is often depicted as "Good-er" than Chaotic. (A sentiment with which I don't agree, but it's a position nonetheless.) Since absolute morality prevents you from easily having both Good and Evil traits (without some difficulty or Neutrality), I often use the L-C axis to give more nuance to my characters. Thus, I play my Good characters as Chaotic, so that I can give an edge to their morality; their desire for freedom allows me to give them some anger, some rage issues, without having to indulge in selfish or party-destructive conduct. I play my Evil characters as Lawful, so I can add some comprehensibility and sympathy to their ruthlessness; their pragmatism and honor can cause all but the most rectally-enbranched Paladins to respect them.

Alternatively, I just leave people guessing. In the absence of Detect spells, it's really quite fun.

[Karl Aegis]

There is no reason to choose between either of them because both alignments can act exactly the same.

[oball]

I think every character I have played so far has been C or N - my two characters in games that went for any large amount of time were NE and CN. However for my next campaign I plan to play a Paladin, since I have never really tried to adhere to the bounds of Lawful (and to a lesser extent, Good) in a game, and I think despite being restrictive on the surface, those restrictions may encourage more creativity - in the same way that you may get writer's block when given a blank sheet of paper and told to write anything, but be able to come up with something when given a more structured writing challenge. In other words it is easy to play chaotic (for me) because I do not have to be as consistent, while playing a lawful character will cause me to think more carefully about what my character would do and force me out of my roleplaying comfort zone.

[A_Man]

Pretty much always Lawful, oddly enough. I enjoy having my cruel characters manipulate/play the system which is best played with some sort of rules, and my nice characters generally have some sort of code of honor and would never break it, even if it meant death.

[Terraoblivion]

Not playing D&D it gets a bit trickier to judge since it gets into alignment debate territory to determine which I play. I'd say that my main character at the moment is chaotic, either chaotic good or chaotic neutral of the sane kind who just happens to not quite be a good enough person to be chaotic good. Beyond her, I've mostly played people in the lawful good/lawful neutral who isn't quite good enough to be lawful good zone, with the occasional character who is largely lawful but has very particular rebellions against their superiors that probably makes them neutral on that scale.

In general, I find it easier to portray a lawful mindset, especially when playing explicitly heroic characters. It's just intuitive for me to see a just government as the primary way of preserving freedom and justice than not having structures to protect people. There's nothing preventing lawful characters from rebelling against unjust authority either, which removes the primary limitation people tend to see about lawful characters. Characters more concerned with their own issues, even if generally good people who want the best for everyone, are more likely to end up chaotic because ultimately their concerns are not about larger structures, but the stuff that matters to them personally. Either group is about equally consistent in terms of personality, they just tend to have different priorities, though of course there is a large variety in either group. Introverted, dutiful and somewhat neurotic genetically engineered child soldiers who like baking insanely sweet cakes are pretty different from disillusioned Prussian officers wracked by guilt over participation in the destruction of the Paris Commune and who throw themselves into fighting alien invaders to give their military background meaning. Even if both fight alien invaders and move around somewhere in LG/NG/LN/TN (depending on interpretation of the characters in question) corner of the alignment grid.

[YossarianLives]

Honestly I prefer to be neutral rather than chaotic or lawful. When creating a character I often start off with TN as my alignment and see how the character develops from there.

[theNater]

Lawful, usually. I think that loyalty, honor, and honesty are fine ideals; while I don't always live up to them in real life, I can absolutely live up to them in game.

[AdmiralCheez]

I've played characters of both alignments and found that my chaotic characters were more fun. It's just easier for me to play a character whose only loyalty is to themselves and the party. That's not to say that I play chaotic as a troublemaking lunatic that steals everything in sight; if following the law suits his needs, then so be it, but when the law gets in the way of his goals, then anything could happen.

[Comet]

I find that D&D characters tend to lean towards chaos, through circumstance if not through choice. All that wandering and fighting. That's why I like to play characters that are Lawful in alignment, to balance things out and remind myself that there's more to the world than our adventures.

[AxeAlex]

Hello there,

Although I enjoy alignments, I don't like characters defined by their alignment, they often fall short in overall personality.

That said, I would go for Lawful. I like my characters with clear goals, causes they hold dear. I find that both heroes and villains tend to be "larger than life" and have generally more "epic" personalities when they are lawful.

I have this silly idea that "Lawful" and "Good" are more than Chaos and Evil, which are the "lack" or law, and the "lack" of good.

[Frozen_Feet]

I don't think I have a preference here. I play both as suits my whim.

[Metahuman1]

I favor chaotic or neutral over lawful. It's really nice to only have to give a crap about the rules that aren't my own when I feel it's the path of least resistance and/or the best way to keep people form successfully enforcing there rules on me with threat of overwhelming violence in retaliation.

[AlexanderML]

I usually play lawfuls, the only one I remember (and have liked) was my first character, who lived for 2 years, but his approach to life was lawful (he just had very different views on things at random, so not very chaotic like). The more common forms of chaotic characters seem to rub me off the wrong way, the mindset I can't understand.

[Twice]

More often than not, I'm particularly inclined toward toward characters with ambiguous moralities, so my preference is similarly ambiguous. If I can, I typically avoid lawful characters. They're rare for me partake to, unless I am playing something lawful evil. Lawful evil happens to be my favorite PC alignment.

Otherwise, Chaotic inclinations are something I'm fond of to due to freedom of thought and free choice when it comes to actions that might seem more amoral. Never the less, it's sometimes fun to play the Lawful Good character who has self-imposed ideals and doesn't project them onto more dark inclined individuals and just plays light conscience and exemplify paragon.

That said, Lawful Neutral is probably one of my least favorite alignments.

[Bad Wolf]

Chaotic.

Chaotic Neutral is the party alignment.

[goto124]

I'm currently roleplaying an LG in the FFRP section of these forums, just to see the appeal.

I just think of him as a cute, silly and naive boy.

[BootStrapTommy]

As I might have predicted, this bedlam seems to leans Chaotic.

I prefer Neutrality, honestly.

[Zalphon]

I have a tendency toward Lawful in my Evils and Chaotic in my Goods.

And Neutral in my Neutrals.

Chaotic Good, because tyranny is a truly vile poison that affects societies.

True Neutral, because what really is morality

Lawful, because a thousand plans with a thousand more contingencies for each is more powerful than "RAWR! GIVE ME YOUR LUNCH MONEY, PUNY HUMAN!"

[Sith_Happens]

My characters have skewed Lawful so far, but it's hard to say whether that hints at a preference considering that (a) "my characters" currently number at three (four if you count ones that I built but didn't end up actually playing) and (b) alignment has so far been one of the last things I decide about a character, with the one I end up picking basically just being a function of how I've envisioned that character's personality (excepting characters with alignment requirements, in which case the requirement acts as a constraint on the range of possible personalities I might decide on).

[Mr.Moron]

Apart from a few "Chaotic Stupid" characters I've played mostly a Joke, I've stuck with LG or law-leaning NG. The few times I've tried to C or E leaning, I've just made myself feel uncomfortable.

[Lathund]

I'll play whatever suits my character. So far, I've played NG, CN, CG, LG and currently N. Really want to try LN some time too. And my preference... I think lawful, because it's a more demanding alignment. Chaotic often feels like a lack of personal commitment to me; a very 'whatever' approach to life. Lawfulness, however, must be chosen and maintained.

[Warfiz]

Easy for me people never expect me i always pick chaotic i can do what ever i want even is a group of all good i am Chaotic Evil Cleric Gnome and my deity is Zebiom (chaotic evil deity of the sea and tempests) and personally i'm a sadistic physcopath so it fits me to smack people in the face with my mace when ever i feel like it

[NichG]

I usually tend towards neutral or chaotic.

Part of it is that it's so standard for NPCs, organizations, etc in many games to end up holding the idiot ball or have unreasonable secret agendas in an attempt to create drama, that putting your decisions in the hands of others in a D&D-like world is just asking for trouble. Its hard for DMs to mentally model the ways in which large organizations actually do ensure their own stability, because the DM is emulating all that on the brain of a single individual. So large organizations end up being just as flaky if not more so than individuals, which saps away a lot of what Lawfulness has going for it in practice.

It also doesn't play nicely with the usual D&D growth curve, because its pretty easy to level up more quickly than you could reasonable advance within an organization. The result can be a sort of weird power imbalance (or even worse, a competency imbalance). A lawful outlook also can have problems with changes in scope - if the thing you character owes loyalty to becomes irrelevant due to escalation in the game, that can make it hard to maintain the character's motivation. E.g. its all well and good to be dedicated to the defense of the village of Hommlett, but when suddenly you find yourself fighting against planar incursions, dealing with Blood War politics, etc then it can be hard to keep that concrete thing relevant. The character must grow at that point, but timescales are generally pretty compressed in adventures so it ends up feeling sort of forced and disconnecting for a character who really cares about their fealty or membership in some specific social structure in the world. A chaotic-leaning character (e.g. inward-focused) carries their motivations with them and can more easily adapt them to a new situation.

[Necroticplague]

Chaotic. Being chaotic doesn't stop you from having a personal code, but it stops the complaints of 'your character wouldn't do that, he's lawful!' that I hate listening to. I play my characters how they act, then just try to fill in whatever alignment I think will get me the least complaints from others. I don't play my character their alignment.