Alignment is stupid.
What exactly does it add to the game? Mechanically they make it very important due to spells and things but aside from that I've never seen it affect a game in any way besides causing arguments which is not exactly a benefit. Sometimes people end up roleplaying alignments rather than PEOPLE which is just another drawback.
You can't act that way because your character sheet says X. Change what it says to Y.... and keep playing exactly the way you've been playing except it may affect your spells and magic items. WTF? Really? What would really be better? A magic item that knows your "lawful evil" so you get a negative level? Or a magic item that decides your too cruel to wield it and bestows a negative level on you despite what you may think of yourself?
If it wasn't so tied to the mechanics I'd just cut it out completely. As is they're best used as guidelines.
Sothmektri, that was a great well thought out post.
|
There's been a lot of thoughtful debate and a fair bit of stating opinion as fact. I'm hoping to get the former when I ask this: why is sociopathy being considered an inherently chaotic and evil personality type in the context of the game?
Ignoring for a moment that people are using sociopath and psychopath interchangeably, some of the examples given, like Dexter, are characters that rarely, if ever act impulsively. The Joker is clearly a force of chaos and evil, but Dexter? Whatever Dexter may lack in empathy, his actions can't help but remind me of a paladin or two who detect evil, then smite in cold blood once they have the proof they need to make the world a better place by acting as judge, jury, and executioner. Even less beneficent serial killers have been described as robotic in their adherence to ritual.
The Joker is scary because he has no code. His pathology is to light fires just to watch the world burn. He makes a great example because he's so extreme, but the extremes of his behavior make him a poor example of a sociopath. If anything, a sociopath is unnervingly predictable. I'm having a hard time seeing the chaotic.
I'm having a hard time seeing the chaotic.
I'm not answering your whole question, but just this aspect.
Chaotic doesn't necessarily mean unpredictable, rather, you can predict that he'll take the path of "freedom, adaptability, and flexibility". You can guess what approach he might take because you know he is willing to deviate from any plans, etc.
Though I see what you mean that a person with a locked down method might have a hard time adjusting to a situation, which would appear Lawful.
Dexter seemed to handle the crap hitting the fan pretty well though (adapting, and willing to change his method when needed)... a factor of being smart in his case I'd guess, but it still puts to light that as a sociopath he might be closer to Neutral than Lawful or Chaotic (or rather that being a sociopath isn't beholden to a particular ethics alignment).
What's with all the people saying NE is less evil than CE, or that a reedemed CE could be NE...??
Or basically comparing the evilness of NE with the evilness of CE??
Chaos vs law has nothing to do with good vs evil, as a simple consequence NE or CE are differentiated by their relation to the Law-Chaos axis, not by their evilness as some people seem to imply.
Very simple:
Adventurers as a group function much better if everyone tends to be lawful, because lawful is more group friendly.
Also they function better tending towards good because this makes a group much more stable.
Playing CE means that you have the very least of all motivations to keep and function together.
That makes "I am CE but I love and care for my group and we play together for ages" a tad bit suspicious.
So, can a playercharacter who, by alignment, opposes the very idea of caring for others and keeping together for mutual gain be a member of a successful group for any time?
I'd say a big NO!
Well, here's the thing, though - they don't have to care for others in the good sense, they can care about keeping those people around because it makes their life more interesting, or gives them a way to slaughter villages (of evil creatures) without paladins trying to kill them, or whatnot.
And they don't have to care about mutual gain, they can care about personal gain but be smart enough to realize that this group of people they're with allows them to gain things they wouldn't be capable of on their own.
They can be a part of an adventuring party without any problem, they'd just be extremely pragmatic about it because it gains them stuff (whatever stuff they might specifically like) and gives them a license to butcher/burn/disintegrate/etc. many many things without having to worry as much about retribution. Hell, they likely get rewarded for slaughter, so long as they play nice with the group.
Hell yeah..
One of the most memorable characters I played was an Albino Drow, Werespider, Assassin/Necromancer (2nd ed - yes, utterly broken)
The character was great to play - he hated elves and belonged to the Plainscape faction 'Dustmen' who believe that the 'real world' is the afterlife and that undead are the only ones in perfect balance with it.
So, naturally, he'd help as many poor living souls to attain personal balance with their home plane..
He also had a rat skeleton affixed to each hand crossbow - they'd do sit-ups and reload the hand crossbow.
Anyhoo, he wasn't daft either - he teamed up with the Chaotic Good 'Ex-King' fighter that had a hideous strength and poor wisdom.
They made a great double team.
..
The trick is - never be afraid of dropping any plan of action and engaging with a new one that will benefit you...
..and don't worry about collateral damage. People/stuff is there to serve you - if you didn't exist what would be the point in living?
:)
But in both of the above examples the "Chaotic" is missing.
There is no argument that NE and especially LE chars can be part of a non-evil party under some special circumstances.
Getting along for years with other, even non evil chars, is not chaotic evil in the slightest, except in the rare case where the compatriots agree to your every whim and are capable of withstanding your inevitable fits of anger and mayhem directed against them.
Hardly the description of "without any problems".
|
IF there were already a houserule that anyone of evil alignment write something else down instead on their character sheet and tell no one.
What? Deny that I'm more sensible than those brain-impared dunces?
The diabolic, tyrannical world view of Lawful Evil is the most, no, the ONLY sensible alignment. Why would I debase myself by pretending I had been dropped on my head once too often as a child and now thought it was anything less than epic-level stupid to make sacrifices for others, including total strangers who by right I can, should, and must suppress for my own benefit?
Get real, tool.
Plus, it is so much more fun to work with a bunch of care bears for some greater goal (like the destruction of a demonic cult that threatens the region's stability) when you wear your pentacle open and proudly, letting them know just who and what you are, and watching them squirm, knowing they need me along for this mission. Double bonus if the party contains a paladin!
But in both of the above examples the "Chaotic" is missing.
There is no argument that NE and especially LE chars can be part of a non-evil party under some special circumstances.
Getting along for years with other, even non evil chars, is not chaotic evil in the slightest, except in the rare case where the compatriots agree to your every whim and are capable of withstanding your inevitable fits of anger and mayhem directed against them.
Hardly the description of "without any problems".
How is working with your party so that you can slaughter thousands not chaotic? It's a means to an end - you don't have to respect authority to work with your friends.
"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." - that's what the PRD says about it (or what I considered important for this anyway).
You work with your party because you're greedy and realize they'll help you get more stuff, you may well be going around killing things you hate (evil can hate other evil, after all), and you can realize that your lust for destruction will be allowed to run far more rampant if you're working as an adventurer than just randomly killing whatever you see. And you can be vicious, violent, unpredictable, ruthless, and brutal without trying to kill your teammates, because you know that if you don't try to, they're probably going to love letting you go all-out on whatever else you might come into contact with that annoys them.
And that's discounting the fact that you may just like these people anyway - after all, they're (probably) vi8olent, greedy mass murderers too, even if they restrict themselves to killing "bad things" and stealing from "bad dead people". You can't get a much more lucrative and bloody life than that of an adventurer, and a chaotic evil character that's very smart is going to realize that getting along with their teammates enables them to gleefully cleave plenty of other things in half, far more so than they otherwise could.
What you missed is the fact that slaugthering millions doesn't really capture the chaotic part of chaotic evil. It is just evil.
You could be part of a unholy crusade going against your enemies - which would be lawful evil.
You could be part of a cabal that came together for mutual gain and finds itself in need for mass slaughter to protect the group and iron it together - which could be neutral evil.
Or you could be chaotic evil, in which case infighting is pre programmed because all have no regard for each other AND are prone to be unpredictable which involves doing stupid things if the rage is too great such as killing each other despite bad consequences (think Sheriff of Nottingham in the Kevin Costner Robin Hood - a very very good example for chaotic evil).
In short what you say is that CE chars can work together if they do NOT behave as CE chars among each other but rather as LE chars and only be CE to everyone outside the group...
What you missed is the fact that slaugthering millions doesn't really capture the chaotic part of chaotic evil. It is just evil.
You could be part of a unholy crusade going against your enemies - which would be lawful evil.
You could be part of a cabal that came together for mutual gain and finds itself in need for mass slaughter to protect the group and iron it together - which could be neutral evil.
Or you could be chaotic evil, in which case infighting is pre programmed because all have no regard for each other AND are prone to be unpredictable which involves doing stupid things if the rage is too great such as killing each other despite bad consequences (think Sheriff of Nottingham in the Kevin Costner Robin Hood - a very very good example for chaotic evil).
In short what you say is that CE chars can work together if they do NOT behave as CE chars among each other but rather as LE chars and only be CE to everyone outside the group...
Except you can be unpredictable without trying to kill your friends, or coworkers, or whatever you want to consider the rest of the party. Unpredictable doesn't mean stupid - if a character is CE and stupid, then yeah, they might go killing the rest of the party, but they don't have to be.
They can even be downright loyal to their friends (the street gang examples above come to mind), but hate large organization, or too much planning, simply being prone to following their whims. Which don't have to include killing the party - they have plenty of other stuff to kill, main, and destroy that they don't have to turn it on their groupmates.
Now, if the rest of the party is the sort to try to "reform" the CE character, then they're likely to quickly fall out of their good graces. Then the CE character is likely to either just leave, or try to kill them, or whatever, because those people no longer serve said character's interests without being "buzzkills". But if they give the little demon free reign to slaughter their enemies and don't try to "rein them in", so to speak, there's no reason to turn on them, and there's incentive to work with them to some degree (plenty to be adventuring with them) to advance their own goals and paint the dungeon red (with blood and entrails of course).
i really must disagree about this, i do not believe that being chaotic evil makes you anymore chaotic than chaotic neutral. and i cant see being chaotic makes you anymore evil than lawful evil, i don't get how the only possible option for chaotic evil is a mad mass murderer who will always kill anyone he can and cant just like some one and can never have a friend. wouldn't the very nature of being chaotic in chaotic evil mean that you could just as easily befriend some one as kill them?
it seems to me like most people feel there is a varying degree of all the alignments except for chaotic evil which only comes in full throttle psycho killer.
the only real difference i see between chaotic neutral and chaotic evil is being more willing to do something evil without regret.
i really must disagree about this, i do not believe that being chaotic evil makes you anymore chaotic than chaotic neutral. and i cant see being chaotic makes you anymore evil than lawful evil, i don't get how the only possible option for chaotic evil is a mad mass murderer who will always kill anyone he can and cant just like some one and can never have a friend. wouldn't the very nature of being chaotic in chaotic evil mean that you could just as easily befriend some one as kill them?
it seems to me like most people feel there is a varying degree of all the alignments except for chaotic evil which only comes in full throttle psycho killer.
the only real difference i see between chaotic neutral and chaotic evil is being more willing to do something evil without regret.
That's how I see it. Law-Chaos and Good-Evil are two separate axes. CE, NE, and LE are all equally evil (or have the same range of evil equally), they simply go about it differently. CG, CN, and CE all have the same amount of chaos, what differs is in how much they direct that chaotic energy to helping or harming others.
And of course CE people can have friends. Hell, even demons can have friends - they don't do well with large groups, they don't form orderly hierarchies, but they can like individuals (they may express that in really odd ways though...demon date night probably involves a pyrelit disembowling and a walk on a beach composed of crushed-to-sand angel bones and a lava sea...followed by really kinky bedroom activities, likely in the most public place they can find just to flaunt it).
+1 on that
let me put it another way, lets say you started playing a chaotic neutral character who enjoyed killing the bad guys a little too much and had no problem torturing to get information and once in a while you even killed the random npc commoner just because he was picking a fight with you and so your Dm decides to shift your alignment to Chaotic evil, you wouldn't all of a sudden start threatening to kill your friends or burn villages to the ground just because.
Chaotic is unpredictable, but being neutral or good will limit the things you do while being unpredictable.
As a good char you won't hurt anyone and even help others for no personal gain. This in itself makes you more predictable and therefore dampens your chaotic behavior because certain things are out. Same to a lesser degree for a CN char.
But for a CE char NOTHING is dampened. He can kill his group members because he isn't very controlled. That has NOTHING to do with "being stupid" - many intelligent people did horrible things in a rage that they regretted an instant later - the CE char is prone to such behavior which makes him a very very poor group player!
Again, saying a CE char has "friends" begs the question "for how long".
i guess we will just have to agree that we don't see chaotic evil the same way.
i just don't see the shift from neutral to evil actually altering the personality of a character that much.
+1 on that
let me put it another way, lets say you started playing a chaotic neutral character who enjoyed killing the bad guys a little too much and had no problem torturing to get information and once in a while you even killed the random npc commoner just because he was picking a fight with you and so your Dm decides to shift your alignment to Chaotic evil, you wouldn't all of a sudden start threatening to kill your friends or burn villages to the ground just because.
All in your example says evil, nothing really says chaotic. Really this can also be NE or LE and one of these two would probably fit alot better, if your GM shifts your alignment to CE for this then he is simply wrong.
But for a CE char NOTHING is dampened. He can kill his group members because he isn't very controlled. That has NOTHING to do with "being stupid" - many intelligent people did horrible things in a rage that they regretted an instant later - the CE char is prone to such behavior which makes him a very very poor group player!
Yeah, and so could anyone else if emotions run high enough. Said CE character may not be as good a team player as a non-CE character, but he could still do it well enough. It depends on how much the other characters provoke him, and how much they're willing to put up with outbursts and violent tendencies (many people would rather put up with that than a stereotypical paladin).
Again, saying a CE char has "friends" begs the question "for how long".
For as long as his friends amuse him, basically. As long as they're helping to advance his goals and not getting in the way of his fun, he has no reason to turn on them.
i just don't see the shift from neutral to evil actually altering the personality of a character that much.
Ah, for a drastic example (please forgive me), you wouldn't mind living as a jew in Nazi germany back in 1940 because it isn't all that different from living in Great Britain at this time?
Surely not!
All in your example says evil, nothing really says chaotic. Really this can also be NE or LE and one of these two would probably fit alot better, if your GM shifts your alignment to CE for this then he is simply wrong.+1 on that
let me put it another way, lets say you started playing a chaotic neutral character who enjoyed killing the bad guys a little too much and had no problem torturing to get information and once in a while you even killed the random npc commoner just because he was picking a fight with you and so your Dm decides to shift your alignment to Chaotic evil, you wouldn't all of a sudden start threatening to kill your friends or burn villages to the ground just because.
first i will say that in most cases a characters alignment would only shift one step, second i didn't need to point out any major chaotic acts because no matter what your good-evil alignment is i don't see how your chaotic nature will change.
Oddly enough, Metalocalypse is on here, and that made me wonder...what alignment would you classify Dethklok as?
I could easily see them (well, aside from Toki, but especially Murderface) being CE...just a very lazy, less-than-thoughtful CE. They don't go out of their way to cause mayhem, but when they do, they simply think it's "brutal", typically. And they get along well enough with each other, even though they do fight amongst themselves. And they definitely hate authority.
...he has no reason to turn on them.
That is where we differ. You paint CE people as mostly reasonable.
I say they are certainly not reasonable, that is one of the things that separates CE from NE, not being reasonable most of the time, which, again, has nothing to do with being stupid.
|
I think that CE does not fit very well in most serious games. This alignment represent pure personal freedom and a complete disregard for the well-being of others around you. Its a very selfish alignment and does not fit well with a structured group. This alignment breeds internal party conflict which is not fun for most players if it happens too much.
...he has no reason to turn on them.That is where we differ. You paint CE people as mostly reasonable.
I say they are certainly not reasonable, that is one of the things that separates CE from NE, not being reasonable most of the time, which, again, has nothing to do with being stupid.
Not being reasonable isn't a trait of a chaotic character though, it's the trait of an insane one. A CE character isn't necessarily any less sane than an LG one is, though if they were insane they'd surely manifest it differently.
That's the thing - CE isn't any further from baseline (neutral) than LG is, or CG or LE. If you're saying a CE character can't act reasonably, then neither could a CG one, it's just that a CG one would want to help people and a CE one only wants to help itself, and probably gets a kick out of doing so at others' expense (possibly doesn't care, it's just easier to get ahead by stepping on others than by not).
...first i will say that in most cases a characters alignment would only shift one step...
No, in my experience people pick an alignment and often miss it 95% in which case a drastic step would be appropiate.
In your example it isn't clear if the char ever behaved chaotically to start with. Most cases I had in my 33 years of GMing were people who picked CN, because they thought it gave them most freedom but then played NN with evil tendencies prompting me to shift them to NE (the proto evil alignment of players).
Very very few people actually play CN - my wive being one.
the thing is your alignment is not what you always do all the time but rather what you tend to do most of the time. and the thing about being chaotic is no mater where you stand on the good-evil axis you can always act in opposite from time to time.
and again i point out that there is many degrees of chaotic evil.
... Not being reasonable isn't a trait of a chaotic character though, it's the trait of an insane one. A CE character isn't necessarily any less sane than an LG one is, though if they were insane they'd surely manifest it differently...
Ehm, no.
Humankind is in an eternal conflict of urge/desire vs. reason.
Chaotic means giving in to ones own urges/desires to a certain degree while lawful means (usually) suppressing those (sometimes along with reason) and adhering to a certain law instead. Indeed LE chars try to subvert the law to fit their own urges/desires while LG chars try to make the laws as close to the collective urges/desires as can be reasonably function while still being LG.
Chaotic Evil is the ultimate in giving in to ones own urges/desires. While this musn't mean a CE char is always totally unreasonable it means he places his own urges and desires before reason most of the time.
And if being unreasonable is insane, then you probably agree that many many people are totally insane ;)
i have to disagree with you
you seem to have a similar opinion of chaotic evil as most people have for lawful good being lawful stupid.
i see no reason a person cant play a fully functioning chaotic evil character who has no urges or whims towards killing his friends.
chaotic evil is not chaotic psycho, being chaotic evil doesn't make you a mad killer who eats puppies.
Ehm, no.
Humankind is in an eternal conflict of urge/desire vs. reason.
Chaotic means giving in to ones own urges/desires to a certain degree while lawful means (usually) suppressing those (sometimes along with reason) and adhering to a certain law instead. Indeed LE chars try to subvert the law to fit their own urges/desires while LG chars try to make the laws as close to the collective urges/desires as can be reasonably function while still being LG.
Chaotic Evil is the ultimate in giving in to ones own urges/desires. While this musn't mean a CE char is always totally unreasonable it means he places his own urges and desires before reason most of the time.
And if being unreasonable is insane, then you probably agree that many many people are totally insane ;)
Well, many people are. ^_-
But I don't think we consider lawful and chaotic the same thing like...at all. Chaotic to me isn't about giving into your desires without thought, nor does lawful mean suppressing them like some sort of weird vulcan.
To me, chaotic simply means you don't have rules - you may have guidelines, but if you do, you set them yourself, and they're definitely bendable. You make decisions based on every individual situation without regard for similarities with previous situations (not to say they don't factor in at all, you just don't make choices because other people think you should or because you have done the same in the past).
Lawful, in contrast, means you have very strictly defined codes of conduct that you follow (not necessarily benevolent codes, though), and you try to make every situation's decision fit that code, because you believe that following that code will advance your goals better than not even if it may be inconvenient at times (working within the laws for an LE character, for example, may take longer and have a lot more bureaucratic red tape than simply breaking those laws).
In regards to killing, I've always viewed the evil alignments in the following manner: Neutral and Lawful alignments will kill for some kind of advancement, whether personal or societal. A Chaotic Evil character will kill because he enjoys it. Now that's not to say that every CE character will blithely go around slaughtering everyone in the vicinity (though I'm sure they're out there), but he will want to scratch that murderous itch from time to time.
That's the approach I took to the one Chaotic Evil character I ever decided to play. The party already consisted of predominantly good characters, including the ever-watchful Paladin, so I knew in order to play this character I would have to skew him towards an interpretation of Chaotic Evil that would be cohesive with the rest of the party.
*TANGENT*
I think that's one thing a LOT of players leave out when they are designing or running their characters: how does this character work in a GROUP? D&D/Pathfinder/whatever is designed to be a cooperative experience. Going with a concept designed to be the proverbial square peg in the round hole of party dynamics is being incredibly selfish. Of course that's not to say you can't CHALLENGE the party dynamic (as I will show later) but you have to be sure that in the process you never BREAK it.
*TANGENT OVER, ON WITH THE SHOW*
So this Chaotic Evil character I rolled up named Brom was designed to be a bit bent. He was a fighter, very effective at his work, who loved the simple pleasures in life - killing others being at the top of the list. So Brom signed on with an adventuring party so as to have a socially acceptable outlet for his homicidal tendencies. In short, when the party killed a band of orcs, it was a borderline orgasmic experience for him. And once the combat was over and Brom had his fill of bloodshed, he could relax a bit before the murderous impulses came up again. But hey, he's in an adventuring group: there's lots of opportunities to kill!
Now how Brom was able to work with the group was simple: he LIKED the people he was with. Just because you are Chaotic Evil doesn't mean you can't have friends, though it can make having long-term friends interesting. Most of the group accepted him since he was handy in a fight, told ribald and hilarious jokes, and kept his murdering to those with "E" in their alignments. The Paladin did have a few issues seeing as whenever her Detect Evil was activated Brom stood out like mad. However, she didn't feel this was enough to smite him down (chalk this up to the way the DM ran Paladins in his game. When I run a game Paladins are WAY more intolerant of evil.)
So I had a character that still worked in the dynamics of the party (with a little bending), and presented some interesting drama. A lot of people in the group started to question their own motivations: after all, they were committing the same actions as a Chaotic Evil character (i.e. mass killing): the only distinction, and it was a slim one in some cases, was they didn't get the same amount of joy in the act that he did. 'Cause seriously folks: Brom REALLY got off on the kill.
And that's my long-winded story of how you can play a Chaotic Evil person in a party. Remember that while Good and Evil are not abstractions in most fantasy roleplaying settings, there are degrees and shades of evil that can be brought to the game. I approached Chaotic Evil as a psychological base for the motivations of my character, motivations that still allowed him to act as a semi-regular adventurer would. Says something, doesn't it?
...and again i point out that there is many degrees of chaotic evil.
Which means a character who is "only a little" CE might only once in a year kill a compatriot during a hot argument or would only grieviously wound them or would only steal his loot?
Would you be placated knowing this if you were in that group with that "only a little bit CE" guy?
...That's the approach I took to the one Chaotic Evil character I ever decided to play...
In my book this would make a fine example of a NE character.
He was very predictable (enjoying slaughter - which is evil). To better satisfy his personal desires and goals ("being top of the list") he joined a group.
He never betrayed their trust. He never acted chaotic as in can't know what he is up to. They helped him to indulge his evil (which would put a hard strain on any good chars).
NE all the way - even to the point of the alignment description in Pathfinder.
...and again i point out that there is many degrees of chaotic evil.Which means a character who is "only a little" CE might only once in a year kill a compatriot during a hot argument or would only grieviously wound them or would only steal his loot?
Would you be placated knowing this if you were in that group with that "only a little bit CE" guy?
they would be no more likely to do such acts to friends as anyone else would.
ok maybe a little more likely but i just don't see a chaotic character always doing something, i see the fact that they are chaotic mean that you cant predict anything they might do other than do something unexpected.
...That's the approach I took to the one Chaotic Evil character I ever decided to play...In my book this would make a fine example of a NE character.
He was very predictable (enjoying slaughter - which is evil). To better satisfy his personal desires and goals ("being top of the list") he joined a group.
He never betrayed their trust. He never acted chaotic as in can't know what he is up to. They helped him to indulge his evil (which would put a hard strain on any good chars).
NE all the way - even to the point of the alignment description in Pathfinder.
The only reason I would skew towards the chaotic interpretation is in motivation. In my mind, the NE character kills to gain something else. The CE kills to revel in the act itself.
the only real difference i see between chaotic neutral and chaotic evil is the willingness and comfort with evil acts.
Why do people think Chaotic means 'has uncontrollable urges'? Do all Chaotic creatures have ADD? Or 'unpredictable'? Are they all mental patients?
We already have been there. How would you describe chaotic except for "prone to give in to his own whims and desires".
And that the whims and desires of evil creatures are different from those of good is not debatetable.
So, yes, a CE char will not necessary slay all around him at every second, but he might do so once in a while and just because he hasn't done so doesn't mean he would do it.
Being evil but highly controlled in regard of your own urges is not CE in my book, this is NE (if you surpress your urges to further your own goals) or LE (if you do so to adhere to laws).
Why do people think Chaotic means 'has uncontrollable urges'? Do all Chaotic creatures have ADD? Or 'unpredictable'? Are they all mental patients?
I think that's one way of looking at it. But then my interpretation of Alignment includes the conceit that Good, Evil, Neutrality, Law, and Chaos are not merely abstractions: they are tangible forces affecting the world. So someone who pings high on the Chaos will indulge in actions that set him diametrically opposed to someone who pings high in Law. Returning to the example of my character Brom: he enjoys killing people. He doesn't kill for any sort of agenda or to acquire anything: he just kills because he enjoys it. This, in my mind, puts him solidly in the chaotic category. He may be predictable, but his "predictable" actions still run counter to the paradigm of Law.
|
We already have been there. How would you describe chaotic except for "prone to give in to his own whims and desires".
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.
Not must include.
|
|
Or you could be chaotic evil, in which case infighting is pre programmed because all have no regard for each other AND are prone to be unpredictable which involves doing stupid things if the rage is too great such as killing each other despite bad consequences (think Sheriff of Nottingham in the Kevin Costner Robin Hood - a very very good example for chaotic evil)
Just to be clear, the corrupt legal authority of Nottingham who abused and manipulated the law in order to gain more power and wealth for himself was Chaotic Evil, not Lawful Evil? What was Robin Hood, then?
|
meh..so much talking to come to the same resolution as ever:
Noone agrees what any particular alignment "means" and ascribes different nuances to each of the 9.
To the OP (if you're still reading)...
My two CE characters in recent memory did not start out that way.
The 1st, a Gnomish Beguiler in the Eberron setting, began as CN. Through adventuring, he established that "what he said was reality" and once he got Glibness, that was pretty much true. Noone could beat his Bluff checks, and he started to become convinced that was the way the world was supposed to be.
At one point, he tricked a bunch of Good and Neutral adventurers into helping him and the rest of the party (through Charm, Bluff, and Diplomacy) through a dungeon, only to try and lock them into a vault deep below ground. That one ended in their deaths when they fought back against being buried alive.
Later, he betrayed a family of Gnomish dissidents/rebels to the Trust (Gnomish Secret Police), because he was so afraid of the Trust himself. He did so subtly, and none of the party was wise to it.
Finally, while adventuring on the isolationist continent of Sarlona, he depopulated a village with fear - broadcasting a "panic alarm" through their in-place telepathic communication system. While in the process of murdering a few of the remaining peasants, the party's Psion (CN or LN IIRC) took offense to that and started an inter-party conflict that left a cohort and some followers dead, and the Beguiler and Ardent fled.
All the while, though, he was polite, charming, and very nice to everyone the party met. He provided extremely useful information, not to mention spell support and tactical assistance, to the party, and was responsible for avoiding TPK at least once. He embodied Chaos as a end, and chose Evil as the easiest/most effective means to that end.
Alternatively, my Rogue from Second Darkness actually started as Chaotic Good. You know the type - Han Solo wannabe, out for loot, excitement, and pretty girls. I based him pretty much on Cayden Cailean.
Throughout that AP, you meet with Elves a LOT. Each and every single one of them was condescending, backstabbing, and (in his eyes) irredeemably Evil. By the midpoint of the AP, he had "fallen" to CN (for those familiar, about the time you go "undercover") and being exposed to both Drow and surface Elves did not help the situation.
By the end, he was still the "out for loot and booty" guy he had started as, but his new mission was to rid the world of Elves. Luckily enough, most of his targets wore purple skin and rode spiders, but once the Drow were out of the way, the surface Elves were next.
He still considered his adventuring party his family, though, and would go out of his way to protect them. The means by which that would happen merely got a bit more....dramatic....as his career advanced.
As far as saying "CE can't have friends or close relationships, because they're insane and will kill them all"....really? Do you apply the same level of behavior restriction on CG or CN? Does LG have to use nonlethal force at all times? Does N have to flip a coin to determine behavior?
Forcing a set of behavior on a character because of 2 letters at the top of his character sheet is shortsighted and detracts from the game, IMO. Let them play how they want, and assign alignments based on their actions/decisions...not the other way around.
|
|
i just don't see the shift from neutral to evil actually altering the personality of a character that much.Ah, for a drastic example (please forgive me), you wouldn't mind living as a jew in Nazi germany back in 1940 because it isn't all that different from living in Great Britain at this time?
Surely not!
Was that either necessary, helpful or in any way persuasive? Aside from being just the sort of "You're wrong because I'm right" argument that turns alignment threads into shouting matches because nothing is more frustrating than people whose entire argument is that they disagree, it's also more than a little offensive to toss in the holocaust as part of a semi-sarcastic rejoinder. If you feel like you have to add "please forgive me" as a disclaimer, it's probably in bad taste no matter how many disclaimers and apologies are made in advance. Please keep that in mind.
|
|
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.
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.
Given these two definitions, a freedom fighter rallying against a legitimate (but LE government) who has no qualms about killing officials of this regime is chaotic evil.
Alternatively, someone who relishes in the slaughter of anything and everything and simply does so to slake their bloodlust would be considered chaotic evil.
Alignments do not dictate that characters of the same alignment will act the same in different situations/if they have different personalities.
...broadcasting a "panic alarm" through their in-place telepathic communication system. ...
See I read that and all I think is "SHARK ALARM! SHARK ALARM"
Anyway, I do like your point about CE people wanting to have some kind of relationship, thus serving as an impetus to stay with a group of people. I'm reminded of the character interaction between Korgan (the CE Dwarf) and Mazzy (the LG Halfling) in Baldur's Gate II. There did seem to be some legitimate affection at points between them. 'Course I'm not sure I got all the interactions possible between the two, and it was several years ago. Point is: just because you're willing to engage in wholesale slaughter with 99% of the world's population, that doesn't mean you can't have a few folks you love to be around and would actively protect. One could even claim this kind of inconsistency of character is embodying the unpredictable nature of chaos.