But you can do Neutral acts as well. Everything's not black and white.
You can totally have CE team players. Neither chaos, nor evil, nor even their combination, precludes friendship, love, teamwork.
It might actually be that for such a character nothing is more important than himself, but his friends can be the close second rather than a distant 100th (2nd through 99th still being himself).
Once you have friends rather then temporary tools, you would go from abandoning them at the first opportunity without a second thought to abandoning them only to save your life.
And for love, you might even sacrifice yourself for the loved one, out of a twisted sort of selfishness: You don't want to live without that person and the pain you'd feel, so you sacrifice yourself and let him/her live with the pain. (Of course, you might also raise him/her from the dead as a vampire or something like that, just to have him/her around).
But you can do Neutral acts as well. Everything's not black and white.
What exactly is a Neutral act? Not doing anything. And sometimes THAT is Evil!
You can totally have CE team players. Neither chaos, nor evil, nor even their combination, precludes friendship, love, teamwork.
It might actually be that for such a character nothing is more important than himself, but his friends can be the close second rather than a distant 100th (2nd through 99th still being himself).
Once you have friends rather then temporary tools, you would go from abandoning them at the first opportunity without a second thought to abandoning them only to save your life.
And for love, you might even sacrifice yourself for the loved one, out of a twisted sort of selfishness: You don't want to live without that person and the pain you'd feel, so you sacrifice yourself and let him/her live with the pain. (Of course, you might also raise him/her from the dead as a vampire or something like that, just to have him/her around).
None of this makes any sense in relation to CE, imo.
But you can do Neutral acts as well. Everything's not black and white.What exactly is a Neutral act? Not doing anything. And sometimes THAT is Evil!
Anything that's done without regard for the morality of the situation. Whether that be Law/Chaos or Good/Evil.
I knew a Druid who sided with a Green Dragon that was trying to protect the forest from his own party. Did he piss us off? Sure. Was he being True Neutral? Definitely.
Spike from Buffy was CE for sure, and he had that chip that handicapped him but he also was in love with buffy. I think a character similar to him would be fun to play where you are in love with another PC and you basically help them out of sticky situations "because you want to kill them yourself"
Alignments were a tool, not ment to encompass the whole of intelligent beings thoughts and feelings but rather how they tend to react when confronted with fundamental concepts.
The chaotic - lawful axis just expresses how a char gets along with authority and laws.
The good - evil axis expresses how much a char cares for the well being of others.
What many seem to misunderstand is that it's not chaotic to not care much for laws/authority, that would be neutral, but to actually oppose law/authority!
Same with good - evil. An evil char opposes the well being of others while a neutral doesn't put much thought into it.
While a CG char would function ok, his opposing of law/authority being dampened by his desire to see others prosper, the CE char has nothing of that, he opposes pretty much both of the two core concepts.
It's hard to imagine such a character getting along with others for any extended period of time so I guess most players pretending to play CE chars usually play more CN or NE.
As for love: love is a hormone induced feeling of attraction to another person or thing that wears off after some time.
A good char replaces that feeling usually with respect, trust and a desire to see the other being well that might surpass even the own wellbeing.
A neutral char will usually see and weight any benefits he receives of the continuing partnership and thus look favorably upon desires and wishes of the other.
An evil char will start to exploit the relation to further his own goals and desires.
Spike from Buffy was CE for sure, and he had that chip that handicapped him but he also was in love with buffy. I think a character similar to him would be fun to play where you are in love with another PC and you basically help them out of sticky situations "because you want to kill them yourself"
I think people are skimming over "Neutral Evil" or even "Chaotic Neutral."
I'm not seeing the "I'm Chaotic Evil, but I love my friends so much that I have to save them!"
Uh no, it's more like "I'm Chaotic Evil and I'm putting up with these suckers until it's no longer beneficial to me than I'm going to frame them for a mass murder and collect the bounty for turning them in - dead."
I'm not seeing the "I'm Chaotic Evil, but I love my friends so much that I have to save them!"
Agreed most evil folks fall within NE far more then CE. A CE being cares for no one but themselves. They might like you but they'll kill you,betray you or leave you to die the moment it is useful to do so. Alot of theses "CE" examples are NE or CN not CE.
CE is textbook sociopathic killer. Calculating and conniving with no sense or even more than a textbook understanding of personal connection, morals, or ethics. They can and do understand that beneficial people are beneficial. When they cease to be beneficial, they cease to be worth keeping alive. Your hugs and kisses CE representations are nonsensical. That is CN, maybe NE. Hell, maybe even LE. CE cares not for your personal affection nor does it have any for you. There may be a professional attachment that is likely to end the moment he realizes he can outfox the dragon and you can't.
CE are why a number of Paladins have gone Lawful Stupid.
|
Spike from Buffy was CE for sure, and he had that chip that handicapped him but he also was in love with buffy. I think a character similar to him would be fun to play where you are in love with another PC and you basically help them out of sticky situations "because you want to kill them yourself"I think people are skimming over "Neutral Evil" or even "Chaotic Neutral."
I'm not seeing the "I'm Chaotic Evil, but I love my friends so much that I have to save them!"
Uh no, it's more like "I'm Chaotic Evil and I'm putting up with these suckers until it's no longer beneficial to me than I'm going to frame them for a mass murder and collect the bounty for turning them in - dead."
I think people tend to think neutral means freedom to be one or the other. I know that's how some players treat Chaotic Neutral, anyway.
Lawful Evil means they work within a system without regard for whether or not other people get hurt. Neutral Evil means they work within the system to get what they want in the same situation, but they'll ditch the system if they can get away with it. Chaotic evil means they don't care about the system at all. The system could be honor, society, religion...all of the above. People who are Lawful Evil are not Devils, and people who are Chaotic Evil aren't Demons. There is a huge difference between an evil alignment and radiating pure evil.
Pure evil has very little in the way of free will. A creature that isn't born out of the blackest pit of the abyss, whether a serial killer or a guy who just doesn't care whether anyone else lives or dies, is still a creature with free will. It's not the evil that keeps the serial killer killing people, it's the pathology. They may be wired a certain way, but that doesn't mean their alignment chooses their actions. Their actions choose their alignment.
I know people will always have their own particular interpretation of alignment, but mine has always been that an alignment represents the average of everything a person has ever done. Anyone who works in statistics will tell you that averages are not perfect. Anyone who's ever had a game where the dice seemed to hate them or they got really lucky and rolled 20 after 20 long enough to pull a miracle out of their hat in a truly desperate combat will tell you the same thing. But when it comes to providing a guidepost for how someone is likely to act, an average is a lot more fair than assuming that their choices are locked-in for the rest of the game.
"I'm chaotic evil but I love my friends and want to save them" is a perfectly acceptable statement, assuming that love and friendship continue to be even more subjective than alignment, although it would probably look more like this in the mind of the chaotic evil individual, "I kill people who annoy me, but that girl isn't as annoying as the rest and it would really bother me if she wasn't around anymore."
|
CE is textbook sociopathic killer. Calculating and conniving with no sense or even more than a textbook understanding of personal connection, morals, or ethics. They can and do understand that beneficial people are beneficial. When they cease to be beneficial, they cease to be worth keeping alive. Your hugs and kisses CE representations are nonsensical. That is CN, maybe NE. Hell, maybe even LE. CE cares not for your personal affection nor does it have any for you. There may be a professional attachment that is likely to end the moment he realizes he can outfox the dragon and you can't.
CE are why a number of Paladins have gone Lawful Stupid.
Ah, you are thinking of chaotic stupid. Just because you personally think being chaotic evil precludes a being from having emotions and relationships doesn't mean its true. Let's agree to disagree.
|
|
CE is textbook sociopathic killer. Calculating and conniving with no sense or even more than a textbook understanding of personal connection, morals, or ethics. They can and do understand that beneficial people are beneficial. When they cease to be beneficial, they cease to be worth keeping alive. Your hugs and kisses CE representations are nonsensical. That is CN, maybe NE. Hell, maybe even LE. CE cares not for your personal affection nor does it have any for you. There may be a professional attachment that is likely to end the moment he realizes he can outfox the dragon and you can't.
CE are why a number of Paladins have gone Lawful Stupid.
I know others have already said that alignment should be a tool to help roleplay rather than a script, but in my mind it's always been:
A textbook sociopathic killer would be X alignment, not X alignment is always a __________.
Out of curiosity, why are sociopaths chaotic in your mind? Without emotional motivation, it seems like their behavior tends more toward the animalistic or even logical, placing them in the neutral or lawful categories. A psychopath, on the other hand, has an inherently destructive pathology.
The truth is, alignment is subjective. Everyone has a different oppinion. So talk it over with your dm and your group. What does Chaotic Evil mean to them. Are they willing to take a stance like the characters in order of the stick, where directing belkar in a certain direction instead of killing him or setting him off on his own is the better route to contain his evil?
Nothing people on the internet say will help you determine what is or isnt right in terms of alignment. And as I always say in alignment threads. Batman. That is all.
No I think he has CE pretty much pegged. You guys are thinking CN or NE and calling it CE. CE simply does not care for anyone but himself. Sure he can love in a fashion anyhow, but he'll kill them same as anyone else when it's convent to do so.
we'll have to disagree because what you guys are wanting to call CE simply is not CE. I have seen very few examples in this thread of CE, most are NE.
The truth is, alignment is subjective. Everyone has a different oppinion. So talk it over with your dm and your group. What does Chaotic Evil mean to them.
Best advice anyone can give here.
Ah, you are thinking of chaotic stupid. Just because you personally think being chaotic evil precludes a being from having emotions and relationships doesn't mean its true. Let's agree to disagree.CE is textbook sociopathic killer. Calculating and conniving with no sense or even more than a textbook understanding of personal connection, morals, or ethics. They can and do understand that beneficial people are beneficial. When they cease to be beneficial, they cease to be worth keeping alive. Your hugs and kisses CE representations are nonsensical. That is CN, maybe NE. Hell, maybe even LE. CE cares not for your personal affection nor does it have any for you. There may be a professional attachment that is likely to end the moment he realizes he can outfox the dragon and you can't.
CE are why a number of Paladins have gone Lawful Stupid.
No, I'm thinking of Chaotic Evil. You know, being without morals and out for yourself. I'm sure the Joker is full of love - for himself.
You are thinking of Chaotic Neutral.
the reason i ask about this is because i tend to lean toward chaotic evil with a lot of my characters and its not that i kill a bunch of innocent people or try and kill my party members, but i am willing to do anything for my goals and i happen to act chaotic.
i mean i will pick fights from time to time and i never want to take prisoners and i always am willing to torture what prisoners we do have but i never deliberately kill children or peasants.
so i usually get marked chaotic evil but i don't get the chaotic psycho mindset.
If your not willing to do the bolded actions your more Lawful or Neutral Evil. One of the stand out things about Lawful Evil (as defined in the SRD) is they are ruthless, murderous, but generally will not harm children or innocents.
If you have enough of a code or belief that you will not hurt kids or peasants (innocents or non combatants) then your not really Chaotic Evil. Since you say you act Chaotically (starting fights, doing whatever you want when you want) but you are following this self imposed code of 'hands off the innocent' then your more than likely Neutral Evil.
Chaotic Evil is the very definition of bloodthirsty, murdering just for the pure pleasure harming others brings you, evil. If you kill and torture because it is expedient and efficient then your really not Chaotic Evil.
CE's like to kill, inflict pain, cause suffering and do it whenever and wherever they want without regard to who suffers for it (exept themselves). They don't just do it because at times it is usefull and expediant (which it is for them), they also do it because it gives them personal enjoyment and pleasure, they really get off on it. That is the very definition of the alignment. If your not playing that attitude and beleif your not playing that alignment.
What many seem to misunderstand is that it's not chaotic to not care much for laws/authority, that would be neutral, but to actually oppose law/authority!
What you misunderstand is that this is but one interpretation. There are others, including some in official texts. I'll base my arguments on what Pathfinder says about the alignments, which is more or less along the lines of what I think of alignments.
In this instance, chaos might mean resentment toward legitimate authority. It doesn't have to. It might just as well be disregard to all rules except those you make for yourself, which amounts to not actively opposing the law (because they might be the same as your own laws).
In short: Chaos is not necessrily anarchy for anarchy's sake.
And neutral (on the order/chaos axis) can man that you have some respect for authority and neither a compulsion to obay nor one to rebel. Such a person would be honest in general, but could be enticed towards lies and deception.
In regards to our "lovestruck demon", this would mean he would like his friends and love somebody, and would deal with it in his own way. He would not bother to look up courting customs or ask around what friends are supposed to do. It's not necessary to say "hm.. so courtship means gifts, compliments, spending time in this land? Sounds perfect, but since I'm chaotic, I will *not* do that." In fact that's Chaotic Stupid.
Same with good - evil. An evil char opposes the well being of others while a neutral doesn't put much thought into it.
Again, it is only one interpretation. While some evil characters actively promote pain and suffering, others are just totally selfish and without compassion.
Neutral is not total ignorance towards others' well-being. In fact, the official text makes it sound like that is evil.
A neutral person is not unscrupulous, they have compunctions against killing the innocent - but they don't have the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.
So a neutral character will probably help a child that has been separated from his parents by taking her to the watch and handing her over - she probably won't just walk past the bawling kid, but neither will she blow her afternoon looking for the parents herself.
A neutral character will throw someone a rope if he's fallen into a pit and can't get out, but he won't fight off a bear to do so.
Another middle ground is deals not with what you'll do, but for whom: The closer they are to someone, the more they will spend and risk to help them. Wife, children? He'll probably risk his life. Really good friend? Might be the same, or at least risk not-too-severe punishment like a bit of jail time. Friendly neighbour? Will lend money during hard times if he thinks he'll get it back, but if criminals are beating him up, he probably won't rush to the rescue. And so on.
And an evil character, might just be very selfish. Lend someone money during a hard time? Yeah, but only if he has some securities, and with interest (probably steep, too). Pull someone out of a pit? That's a valuable service, won't you agree? Toss me your purse, you're not as heavy that way, and I'll keep it to make the way back home easier for you...
Being evil does not preclude caring someone you consider your own: Loved ones, close friends, family. Their love might not be as altruistic as that of others, but it's still love. They will still do things for their loved ones they wouldn't do for anyone else. It's just that the reasons are more selfish:
I'll risk my life for her. Those buffoons don't look too dangerous, and I'm sure she'll be very grateful.
There's a whole Adventure Path about a lovestruck fool who just wants to impress his beloved...(By basically becoming Destruction and reducing large parts of the world to burning rubble)
As for love: love is a hormone induced feeling of attraction to another person or thing that wears off after some time.
Yeah, and magic is just feats of misdirection, tricks and fast fingers.
What?
There's this chick, Shelly or something, who wants to have a quite word with you.
|
|
I'm starting to think there should be a table for evil behavior. Maybe a set of tables for all behavior. Something like:
"You see a kitten. Your character will..."
Lawful Good
1-100 Pet the cute kitten
True Neutral
1-50 Kill the kitten because you hate cats
51-100 Don't kill the kitten because you love cats
Chaotic Evil
1-10 Skin the cat alive
11-20 Torture the cat, then skin it alive
21-30 Dance on the cat until its poor broken body lies twitching
31-40 Eat the cat
41-50 Pretend to befriend the cat, wait until it loves you unconditionally, then torture and kill the cat
51-60 Research whether its life will be a sad, torturous existence and if so, don't kill it because that might be construed as merciful
61-70 Engage the services of a kindly old lady to care for the cat, then kill and eat her. Oh, and kill the cat too because it was looking at you funny.
71-80 Place the cat underwater and wait several hours to see if it can breath underwater. If it can, reroll ignoring this result.
81-90 Pin the kitten to your lapel and wear its bleeding body as a trendy new decoration. And then kill it.
91-100 Pet the adorable kitten...because it is sending you telepathic orders to kill everyone. Also, kill it because you don't take orders from anyone.
Interesting idea on alignments totoro.
How does a Blasphemy spell (harms non-evil) affect the N(CE) character in your world? The same as Neutral or the same as Chaotic Evil?
How about if he wields a Holy weapon?*Edit*
I just want to be clear, I'm not trying to be instigating or anything. I'm genuinely interested in the tendencies idea.. but just never could pin down where they would sit in the game rules (should he be treated as Neutral or Evil in those cases, etc).
I treat N(CE) as N. Blasphemy would impact a N(CE) creature just like N, and a holy weapon could be held by a N(CE) as if N. Since (E) can be controlled, (E) creatures are not paladin entrees unless they actually do something that makes them look evil, like murder.
I used to have a finer grain (e.g., holy weapons inflict +1d6 damage against (E) and +2d6 against Evil). However, I decided that I wanted the decision to move from self-interest to full-blown evil to be a big one. When you finally decide that you are aligned with Evil, rather than just a self-interested sociopath, that has an outer plane impact.
I'm starting to think there should be a table for evil behavior. Maybe a set of tables for all behavior. Something like:
"You see a kitten. Your character will..."
Lawful Good
1-100 Pet the cute kittenTrue Neutral
1-50 Kill the kitten because you hate cats
51-100 Don't kill the kitten because you love catsChaotic Evil
1-10 Skin the cat alive
11-20 Torture the cat, then skin it alive
21-30 Dance on the cat until its poor broken body lies twitching
31-40 Eat the cat
41-50 Pretend to befriend the cat, wait until it loves you unconditionally, then torture and kill the cat
51-60 Research whether its life will be a sad, torturous existence and if so, don't kill it because that might be construed as merciful
61-70 Engage the services of a kindly old lady to care for the cat, then kill and eat her. Oh, and kill the cat too because it was looking at you funny.
71-80 Place the cat underwater and wait several hours to see if it can breath underwater. If it can, reroll ignoring this result.
81-90 Pin the kitten to your lapel and wear its bleeding body as a trendy new decoration. And then kill it.
91-100 Pet the adorable kitten...because it is sending you telepathic orders to kill everyone. Also, kill it because you don't take orders from anyone.
ROTFL!!!!!
|
I'm starting to think there should be a table for evil behavior. Maybe a set of tables for all behavior. Something like:
"You see a kitten. Your character will..."
Lawful Good
1-100 Pet the cute kittenTrue Neutral
1-50 Kill the kitten because you hate cats
51-100 Don't kill the kitten because you love catsChaotic Evil
1-10 Skin the cat alive
11-20 Torture the cat, then skin it alive
21-30 Dance on the cat until its poor broken body lies twitching
31-40 Eat the cat
41-50 Pretend to befriend the cat, wait until it loves you unconditionally, then torture and kill the cat
51-60 Research whether its life will be a sad, torturous existence and if so, don't kill it because that might be construed as merciful
61-70 Engage the services of a kindly old lady to care for the cat, then kill and eat her. Oh, and kill the cat too because it was looking at you funny.
71-80 Place the cat underwater and wait several hours to see if it can breath underwater. If it can, reroll ignoring this result.
81-90 Pin the kitten to your lapel and wear its bleeding body as a trendy new decoration. And then kill it.
91-100 Pet the adorable kitten...because it is sending you telepathic orders to kill everyone. Also, kill it because you don't take orders from anyone.
+1,000,000
this is pure win LOLEDIT: do I even want to see the table for hampsters?
|
|
It's the same for CE as it is for LG - CE doesn't mean CE (Stupid), which is how some of the behavior is being described. For a perfect example of CE alignment play, I suggest you read Bob Salvatore's 'Homeland', about House Drizzt and their adventures. Yes, they were willing to kill their own family members to advance, but it happened twice in 200 years. How long before an adventuring group goes through 200 years of game time?
The CE drow had strict laws which were absolutely followed, as long as they couldn't get around them, and it was in their interest to watch the others to see if they were not following the rules, because catching them allowed advancement in their own cause. They developed friendships, which were only betrayed for extremely good advancement or to avoid fatal danger. Some of them lasted 500 years, and were never betrayed. Admittedly, they were not betrayed because it was not necessary, but that's the CE doesn't mean CE(stupid) metaphor.
Oh, and per numerous other D&D works, NE is the most evil alignment, as you are concerned with pure evil. That is where your average sadistic killer pyschopath belongs. The comments marking CE actions as actually NE, are actually closer to CN. CE is doing evil to advance themselves. NE is doing evil, just to be doing evil.
I suppose this varies a little even among the published material. By 3.5 and Complete Scoundrel, they were definitely treating Neutral Evil as "selfish evil." I would have a hard time seeing Sawyer on Lost as evil purely for evil's sake, in any season.
Oh, and per numerous other D&D works, NE is the most evil alignment, as you are concerned with pure evil. That is where your average sadistic killer pyschopath belongs.
That's nonsensical.
The comments marking CE actions as actually NE, are actually closer to CN. CE is doing evil to advance themselves. NE is doing evil, just to be doing evil.
Doing evil to do evil is what the Evil alignment is. You can be LN and be doing evil stuff, but you aren't doing evil stuff to be Evil.
Why would NE be a sociopathic killer over CE?The CE drow had strict laws which were absolutely followed, as long as they couldn't get around them, and it was in their interest to watch the others to see if they were not following the rules, because catching them allowed advancement in their own cause. They developed friendships, which were only betrayed for extremely good advancement or to avoid fatal danger.
All the Drow stuff I've read describe them exactly as I described CE.
|
|
stuff
Wow, I understand you're playing devils advocate, but that was a longest post to say absolutely nothing.
Why won't a good character tolerate an evil character. You can't just make a blanket assumption, you have to explain it, same with neutral and evil, actually I'll give you your explanation on evil, but at the same time, evil people work together all the time, violent street gangs exist despite the fact that their all chaotic evil (or at least neutral evil, other wise they wouldn't be forming violent street gangs.
You can't just say they won't, you have to explain why they won't, failing that your just screaming at a deaf person.
And evil people can have people they trust and don't f&+$ with as long as it's profitable not too.
|
|
I'm not normally big on anime or manga, but I think Black Lagoon has an excellent portrayal of a CE character working with characters of other alignments, most of which are evil.
Revy is an obvious psychopath who relishes killing and has no qualms about it, but she still has loyalties to other characters. Has she threatened to kill them? Yes. Would she if she had to? Maybe. But she still has an attachment to them that she is unable to explain, and has put herself in danger in order to protect them.
I think "Good" and "Evil" should be viewed as tendencies. An Evil character can still have relationships with other people, and their own loyalties. Their alignment is based more on tendencies and how they treat society in general. Norman Bates was a psychotic Chaotic Evil murderer, but was totally loyal to his mother, even after her death.
Characters don't have to understand why they feel or do things. They often just do them. In Baldur's Gate II, Korgan, another obviously Chaotic Evil character, could have a very good relationship with the player even if you were Lawful Good. He also had an attachment to Mazzy, a very Good character.
No I think he has CE pretty much pegged. You guys are thinking CN or NE and calling it CE.
Sorry seeker but I love this:
We are thinking of CN or NE -- not CE... it could be confused for either CN or NE but it is diffinently not CE...
Even though that alignment is smack in the middle of the two you keep referring to instead.
No I think he has CE pretty much pegged. You guys are thinking CN or NE and calling it CE.Sorry seeker but I love this:
We are thinking of CN or NE -- not CE... it could be confused for either CN or NE but it is diffinently not CE...
Even though that alignment is smack in the middle of the two you keep referring to instead.
You have completely lost me. I really have no clue what your trying to say there.
No I think he has CE pretty much pegged. You guys are thinking CN or NE and calling it CE.Sorry seeker but I love this:
We are thinking of CN or NE -- not CE... it could be confused for either CN or NE but it is diffinently not CE...
Even though that alignment is smack in the middle of the two you keep referring to instead.
I don't know what kind of wacky, non-euclidean alignment sphere you are using there...
so i was thinking, do you think it is possible to play Chaotic Evil without being a blood thirsty psycho?
cant a chaotic evil character have close friends without being tempted to kill them and without them also being evil?
my suggestion alex from clockworkprange
I don't know what kind of wacky, non-euclidean alignment sphere you are using there...No I think he has CE pretty much pegged. You guys are thinking CN or NE and calling it CE.Sorry seeker but I love this:
We are thinking of CN or NE -- not CE... it could be confused for either CN or NE but it is diffinently not CE...
Even though that alignment is smack in the middle of the two you keep referring to instead.
he's saying it's either Chaotic, or it's evil.
Chaotic or evil -- chaotic or evil.
Since he's bouncing between Chaotic Neutral, and Neutral Evil, he's saying it's diffenintly not lawful or good.
So we bounce between chaos and evil... instead of just landing on both chaos and evil -- or chaotic evil.
he's saying it's either Chaotic, or it's evil.
Chaotic or evil -- chaotic or evil.
Since he's bouncing between Chaotic Neutral, and Neutral Evil, he's saying it's diffenintly not lawful or good.
So we bounce between chaos and evil... instead of just landing on both chaos and evil -- or chaotic evil.
Well when you put chaos and evil together you get something unlike evil or just chaos. You get a defined style of evil, one that simply does not match the examples you are using.
Most of your "CE" examples are really NE. Some would fall into CN but most are not CE as they display acts a CE person just are not capable of.
So if the example is evil, but not lawful and does not match CE behavior then good chance he is NE. If he is just wacky and odd and wants to be "evil" but is not really evil but has tendency to do evil he is often CN
I'm starting to think there should be a table for evil behavior. Maybe a set of tables for all behavior. Something like:
"You see a kitten. Your character will..."
You don't want to be cruel to kittens. Death likes them, and you'll meet him sooner or later...
|
Well, here is my completely unsolicited view on alignments.
Lawful means the way you do things is just as important as the result of your actions.
Chaotic means as long as the result is what you want, you're justified.
Good means you go out of your way to improve other people's lot.
Evil means you go out of your way to harm other people.
So a Lawful Good character will go the speed limit because it is the right thing to do.
A Chaotic Good character will go over the speed limit when no one is around, but slow down in busy areas to keep from hurting anyone.
A Lawful Evil character will go under the speed limit, to frustrate other drivers and make them late.
A Chaotic Evil character will go as fast as he pleases, in the most aggressive and dangerous manner, hoping to cause an accident.
Still rough around the edges, so any thoughts would be welcome.
NE is doing evil, just to be doing evil.
NE can be doing evil for evil's sake. Same for the other evil alignments.
There's always the question about whether your alignment is an active one or a passive one.
Passive means you're good/evil/lawful/chaotic because your behaviour falls into that category. You do it because that's how you want to act.
Active means you champion the cause. You write good/evil etc onto your banners. You consider it an ideal, a goal, a cause. You want to obliterate those who oppose your ideals, because they oppose your ideals.
That works with everything.
What sets NE apart from LE and CE is that you are just evil. Not evil combined with order, not evil combined with chaos.
If you're passively evil, that means that you probably pretty much ignore laws. You might use them if they suit you, you might bend them, or outright break them. What matters is whether you can get away with it. You don't oppose them, either, unless you can benefit from that opposition.
If you're actively evil, though, you champion evil itself.
Daemons are neutral evil. Many consider them the evilist of fiends! Devils want to corrupt mortals, to lead them astray from the path of righteousness, to tempt them. Demons want to destroy things, break smings, smash things, kill things.
Daemons want to obliterate souls. Not just destroy lives. Not corrupt the souls. They want to drive life itself to extinction. No afterlife for you, only dark oblivion.
Daemons want to obliterate souls. Not just destroy lives. Not corrupt the souls. They want to drive life itself to extinction. No afterlife for you, only dark oblivion.
In the most painful way possible -- after causing you to lose any hope you had.
Well when you put chaos and evil together you get something unlike evil or just chaos. You get a defined style of evil, one that simply does not match the examples you are using.Most of your "CE" examples are really NE. Some would fall into CN but most are not CE as they display acts a CE person just are not capable of.
So if the example is evil, but not lawful and does not match CE behavior then good chance he is NE. If he is just wacky and odd and wants to be "evil" but is not really evil but has tendency to do evil he is often CN
So are there acts that other alignments are "Just not capable of"? or is this a special status you reserve only for CE?
Seems funny you saying that CHAOTIC anything "Can't do something ever."
CE are sociopaths. They don't care for anyone other then themselves. They hurt folks because they enjoy it, they might like someone but they will kill or harm them if it is useful to do so.
Kinda like LG are not capable of killing folks just because it is useful to do so, or murdering children. CE is the bottom line of evil, it's the evil so vile so dark that evil people don't trust or like it, it's the evil of demons and souls so corrupted , so vile, that evil folks don't wish to have them around. It is the lowest of the low, there is nothing redeemable about CE.
If they had a good side or soft spots or codes of any type, they wouldn't be CE, but LE or NE instead
See you are repeating yourself and not answering the questions Seeker:
Is this something you only reserve for CE?
Does LG have things that it absolutely can't do? How about CG? LE?
Why is CE not part of the normal continum of alignment?
You've taken this specific alignment and have stated, "This doesn't work like the other alignments -- if you have a CE alignment you must absolutely have to act in this way."
Do you do this for the other alignments?
It's just -- odd, highly unchaotic, not very flavorful, and in the end utterly lacking in any regards as to making sense. In general I can at least follow why you state things the way you do but this time I'm not following.
And not in the "oh this is chaotic so it's unpredictable" sort of "doesn't make sense", but the type of lacking in sense that makes me go "Whu?"
No i repleyed you didn't listen is all. We will not agree be case your simply calling something CE that does not act it. "My pc have friends he would never harm and a code, and won't hurt kids or the elderly but is CE" ...no that is not CE not by the book but you guys seem to think it is.
LG pc's wont' comment acts of mass murder, they won't lie every day all day long, they wont back stab friends or allies just because it might be useful to do so at that time.
LG and CE are the top and bottom of AL. LG strive to be the best they can at all times while CE strive to be the best for themselves, they don't care if they burn a city, kill a child or 50 children, a whole race, betray a nation or murder a man who had been their friend for 20 years if it is useful to do so. That is CE, that is the vilest of the vile the evil so foul it has nothing to redeem it and no limit to what it will do.
we'll have to agree to disagree.
CE are sociopaths.
Might be sociopaths.
Don't have to be sociopaths.
CE is the bottom line of evil
Actually, CE could be considered less evil then NE, because CE is evil coloured by chaos, while NE is pure evil not concerned with matters of order and chaos.
It certainly is not eviler than other evils. You're confusing your matters here. Chaos is not evil. Lawful is not good. If it were, we'd have a straight alignment scale. But it isn't so we don't.
If they had a good side or soft spots or codes of any type, they wouldn't be CE, but LE or NE instead
That is simply wrong. NE doesn't mean "it would be CE if not for those redeeming qualities". NE is not less evil than CE, and LE is not less evil than NE. They're all equally evil, because they're all evil evil.
While many choose to conflate good and order, as well as evil and chaos, Pathfinder does not do so.
And there are many stories and even cultures that do it the other way around, where freedom is considered a "good" thing and oppression "evil".
LG and CE are the top and bottom of AL.
See, while a lot of the discussions here are about opinions, this is simply wrong from a factual point of view. Morality (i.e. good versus evil) and ethics (i.e. order versus chaos) are separate. Lawful is not more good than chaotic, evil is not less lawful than good, or anything like that.
Alignment, in Pathfinder, just is not a line. It is a matrix.
LG strive to be the best they can at all times
Simply not true. They colour their goodness with order. They're often honest to a fault - while a white lie might be the "good" thing to do, they will tell the truth and crush hope.
Or they will oppress the few because they belief it is better for the many.Those are just two examples.
... and won't hurt kids or the elderly but is CE"
I didn't say that part. I said specifically he would do anything to anyone else that wasn't specifically "his". He has not yet done lots of specifically vile things in general yet -- simply because doing so wouldn't provide him with anything and would endanger him -- however he has specifically called a cambion and unleashed it on a village of gnolls (though the gnolls attacked the town he was in first -- so you might call this one a draw).
LG pc's wont' comment acts of mass murder, they won't lie every day all day long, ...
Actually they will -- Archons will slay entire armies of evil -- though probably in battle it doesn't say it has to be, and lawful good PCs can lie about many things all day long -- consider second darkness when they doing that one thing in that one place in the third book (iirc).
LG and CE are the top and bottom of AL. LG strive to be the best they can at all times while CE strive to be the best for themselves, they don't care if they burn a city, kill a child or 50 children, a whole race, betray a nation or murder a man who had been their friend for 20 years if it is useful to do so. That is CE, that is the vilest of the vile the evil so foul it has nothing to redeem it and no limit to what it will do.
See now I got an idea of where you are coming from -- you see alignment as a hierarchy. I see it as a wheel. Lawful good at its edges blends into and changes into lawful neutral or neutral good, both of which start to blend into the alignments beside them and so on until eventually you could work your way around the whole circle (not saying everyone or anyone would work around the whole circle just that they *could*). The alignments are not stark things that exactly state what you can and can't do and dictate how you act -- they are discriptors given to sets of behavior that are *generally* followed though not always completely and not always as expected.
Personally I simply do not agree with the idea that you can fall so far you cannot rise again, just as I do not agree with the idea that you can rise so high you can not fall. That sort of "morality" tends to be something more akin to what World of Darkness has.
EDITS:
Your hiearchy I would imagine goes something like this?
LG > NG > CG > LN = N > CN > LE > NE > CE
********
I just realized I did not include some key information I should included when discussing the sorcerer in question:
First he is chaotic neutral -- currently -- (though with many of his actions he is at least on the path towards evil). Just to more throughly explain him I'll include a link to him and the game I'm playing him in:
slightly off topic, I didn't say you could not fall, nor that you could never be redeemed. Falling is easy, redeeming however..even to redeem CE one step {which would be CN or NE} would be a massive undertaking to say the lest.
Some one brought Riddick up as an example, which was a pretty good one. He was CE at the start the first movie yet by the end not so much, by the 2nd movie he was NE for sure..which is one step from CE..so in a way he underwent a massive life changing event { the first movie} and he changed from it.
The hierarchy is pretty much out of the book and the one step rule.
Lg-NG-CG
LN-TN-CN
LE-NE-CE
I kept bringing CN and NE up as they are both one step from CE and as such folks tend to end up with CN and NE pc when they get close to CE but are not yet CE.
As for your Pc you stated he was CE, which is what I was basing my argument off of. His loyalty I could see with CN easy enough. However to me once he slips to CE that loyalty lasts only as long as it is useful to him.
Anyhow as long as you and your GM is on the same page, what anyone says online does not amount to much.
As for love: love is a hormone induced feeling of attraction to another person or thing that wears off after some time.
This statement is not scientifically proven. What has been scientifically proven is that the state of "love" has a direct impact on brain chemistry, however they have yet to prove that you can cause "love" with a hormone or other chemical. *Lust* maybe, but not love (which has different chemical effects in the brain and is thus capable of being distugished from lust) you seem to be confusing effects of something for the thing itself.
EDIT:
@ Seeker:
That is not a hierachy -- that is a matrix. And one with no actual values assigned to boot -- therefore it can't be said that one is "better" than another. While falling is a common parlance for describing the move from one alignment to another (as is redemption) that doesn't mean it is what is happening -- in actual effect one is simply transitioning from one alignment to another.
I disagree, CE might like folks but nothing is put above themselves, nothing. Evil is capable of it however being CE your a sociopath. Nothing is above you, no friends, no family, not a nation. Nothing.
At first I disagreed with you, but then I read the alignment section of the rules:
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.
Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, self-righteousness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has some respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to obey nor a compulsion to rebel. She is generally honest, but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others.
...
Lawful Evil: A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order, but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises.
This reluctance comes partly from his nature and partly because he depends on order to protect himself from those who oppose him on moral grounds. Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains.
Some lawful evil people and creatures commit themselves to evil with a zeal like that of a crusader committed to good. Beyond being willing to hurt others for their own ends, they take pleasure in spreading evil as an end unto itself. They may also see doing evil as part of a duty to an evil deity or master.
Lawful evil represents methodical, intentional, and organized evil.
Neutral Evil: A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple. She sheds no tears for those she kills, whether for profit, sport, or convenience. She has no love of order and holds no illusions that following laws, traditions, or codes would make her any better or more noble. On the other hand, she doesn't have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil villain has.
Some neutral evil villains hold up evil as an ideal, committing evil for its own sake. Most often, such villains are devoted to evil deities or secret societies.
Neutral evil represents pure evil without honor and without variation.
Chaotic Evil: A chaotic evil character does what his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. Thankfully, his plans are haphazard, and any groups he joins or forms are likely to be poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.
Chaotic evil represents the destruction not only of beauty and life, but also of the order on which beauty and life depend.