paizo.com Recent Posts in Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
paizo.com Recent Posts in Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
2012-04-23T16:48:47Z
2012-04-23T16:48:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
TerraNova (RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#34
2012-04-24T07:34:43Z
2012-04-24T07:34:43Z
<p>I usually put 1/3rd of the population on good / neutral / evil, and 1/3rd each on law / neutral / chaos. Its therefore pretty possible to "get along" with evil aligned people - they probably won't be pleasant, but they get along in society for the most part. You certainly wouldn't like working under them too much, but they won't rape and kill you for the most part.</p>
I usually put 1/3rd of the population on good / neutral / evil, and 1/3rd each on law / neutral / chaos. Its therefore pretty possible to "get along" with evil aligned people - they probably won't be pleasant, but they get along in society for the most part. You certainly wouldn't like working under them too much, but they won't rape and kill you for the most part.
TerraNova (RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32)
2012-04-24T07:34:43Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
loaba
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#33
2012-04-24T05:05:36Z
2012-04-24T05:05:36Z
<p>NE is your friend, right up until he slides the dagger under your rib cage. Hey, don't take it personal; it's just business.</p>
NE is your friend, right up until he slides the dagger under your rib cage. Hey, don't take it personal; it's just business.
loaba
2012-04-24T05:05:36Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
cranewings
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#32
2012-04-24T04:34:08Z
2012-04-24T04:34:08Z
<p>I treat Neutral Evil as the common evil. Neutral evil characters are the most common type of evil people in my games.</p>
<p>I basically describe them as individuals who lack feelings of sentiment and kindness except towards those they share a bond with, such as family or brothers in arms, though any breach of loyalty or trust can destroy that.</p>
<p>In addition, Neutral Evil characters get a feeling of satisfaction from hurting other people or imposing their will. </p>
<p>Law and chaos, civilization and wilderness, and so on and on, only matter to the Neutral Evil character as means to his own ends, unless he has some personal preference towards something (such as loving the comforts of civilization).</p>
I treat Neutral Evil as the common evil. Neutral evil characters are the most common type of evil people in my games.
I basically describe them as individuals who lack feelings of sentiment and kindness except towards those they share a bond with, such as family or brothers in arms, though any breach of loyalty or trust can destroy that.
In addition, Neutral Evil characters get a feeling of satisfaction from hurting other people or imposing their will.
Law and chaos, civilization and...
cranewings
2012-04-24T04:34:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Martin Kauffman 530
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#31
2012-04-24T03:30:40Z
2012-04-24T03:30:40Z
<p>Lawful Evil= Adolph Hitler. Neutral Evil=Joseph Stalin. Chaotic Evil= Idi Amin.</p>
Lawful Evil= Adolph Hitler. Neutral Evil=Joseph Stalin. Chaotic Evil= Idi Amin.
Martin Kauffman 530
2012-04-24T03:30:40Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Set
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#30
2012-04-24T03:10:18Z
2012-04-24T03:10:18Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">blahpers wrote:</div><blockquote> Replace [good] and [evil] with [holy] and [unholy]. Change all the detection spells so that they detect either (a) holy or unholy descriptors, (b) positive or negative energy, or © pure or malicious intent <i>at the time of the reading</i>. </blockquote><p>I'd suggest not breaking holy and unholy up into different types. They already did that with sacred and divine types, and only managed to create an absurd situation where a pair of good clerics can't stack a sacred bonus on someone, but a good cleric and an evil cleric can stack sacred and profane modifiers. (In addition to the grammar fail of defining something sacred to an evil god as 'profane.' Ur-Priests are profane, not evil clerics.)
<p>Using the <i>flame strike</i> precedent of just refering to the energy as 'divine power' instead of trying to break it up into holy/sacred power or unholy/profane power or chaotic/anarchic-holy power or lawful/axiomatic-holy power would simplify matters, IMO.</p>
blahpers wrote:Replace [good] and [evil] with [holy] and [unholy]. Change all the detection spells so that they detect either (a) holy or unholy descriptors, (b) positive or negative energy, or (c) pure or malicious intent at the time of the reading.
I'd suggest not breaking holy and unholy up into different types. They already did that with sacred and divine types, and only managed to create an absurd situation where a pair of good clerics can't stack a sacred bonus on someone, but a good...
Set
2012-04-24T03:10:18Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
blahpers
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#29
2012-04-24T01:59:25Z
2012-04-24T01:59:25Z
<p>Regarding "making tough decisions while staying in the bounds of what your character considers appropriate or acceptable": You don't need an alignment system to do that. You just need a character. The alignment system actually <i>hurts</i> this aspect of roleplaying by pigeonholing you into one of nine neat cubbyholes.</p>
Regarding "making tough decisions while staying in the bounds of what your character considers appropriate or acceptable": You don't need an alignment system to do that. You just need a character. The alignment system actually hurts this aspect of roleplaying by pigeonholing you into one of nine neat cubbyholes.
blahpers
2012-04-24T01:59:25Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
blahpers
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#28
2012-04-24T01:57:28Z
2012-04-24T01:57:28Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">StrangePackage wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">blahpers wrote:</div><blockquote>I am seriously considering doing away with alignment. The concept creates more problems than it solves.</blockquote><p>I think that's sort of the point- it's supposed to give general guidance while raising additional questions. That provides for better roleplaying opportunities- making tough decisions while trying to stay within the bounds of what your character would consider appropriate or acceptable.
<p>Besides, even in real life, with well delineated legal and moral codes, there are still differences in interpretation. </p>
<p>The conflicts created by competing alignments can be one of the most interesting parts of intra-party interactions and roleplay. They ought to be thorny- folks dealing with epic deeds should face epic challenges, both external and internal. </blockquote><p>The conflicts are far more interesting when characters aren't pigeonholed. And like it or not, they are pigeonholed, particularly by <i>detect evil</i> and all the other various mechanics that depend on the categorization of characters into neat little buckets. "Everybody in this corner is bright and pure, while everybody in this corner is evil and deserves holy judgment." Things are never that simple with mortals. So why such silly mechanics?
<p>Replace [good] and [evil] with [holy] and [unholy]. Change all the detection spells so that they detect either (a) holy or unholy descriptors, (b) positive or negative energy, or © pure or malicious intent <i>at the time of the reading</i>. Possibly have all three kinds of detection. Tweak any mention of good and evil similarly as the case warrants. Remember that LightIsNotGood and DarkIsNotEvil (and TvTropesWillRuinYourGamingLife).</p>
<p>Mortals are <i>complicated</i>. My own alignment probably changes two or three times a day. The system doesn't support that; it wants a creature's "overall alignment", something that isn't expected to change but maybe once or twice in a lifetime if at all. People just aren't that simple. They can be several alignments at the exact same point in time. We're complicated.</p>
StrangePackage wrote:blahpers wrote:I am seriously considering doing away with alignment. The concept creates more problems than it solves.
I think that's sort of the point- it's supposed to give general guidance while raising additional questions. That provides for better roleplaying opportunities- making tough decisions while trying to stay within the bounds of what your character would consider appropriate or acceptable. Besides, even in real life, with well delineated legal and moral...
blahpers
2012-04-24T01:57:28Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Shiney
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#27
2012-04-24T01:50:52Z
2012-04-24T01:50:52Z
<p>Any actions can be reasoned and logic'd into any alignment.</p>
<p>I see Lawful evil as the "I'm not a bad person. well, maybe I am. But I do what I have to to get what I want."</p>
<p>Evil is a means to an end, or a flavoring aspect to a greater goal.</p>
<p>I see neutral evil as someone who simply •is• a 'bad person.' They want to see children crying, lives ruined, harm spread because they have hate, want to spread it, they have a simple enjoyment from it.</p>
<p>Chaotic evil in my books is very similar to this, but where the neutral evil person steals the money to go towards medicine, the chaotic evil person burns down the hospital and laughs because to him, it's just darn funny.</p>
Any actions can be reasoned and logic'd into any alignment.
I see Lawful evil as the "I'm not a bad person. well, maybe I am. But I do what I have to to get what I want."
Evil is a means to an end, or a flavoring aspect to a greater goal.
I see neutral evil as someone who simply *is* a 'bad person.' They want to see children crying, lives ruined, harm spread because they have hate, want to spread it, they have a simple enjoyment from it.
Chaotic evil in my books is very similar to this,...
Shiney
2012-04-24T01:50:52Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Alitan
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#26
2012-04-24T01:33:34Z
2012-04-24T01:33:34Z
<p>Really, even a C/E character COULD run with a party... even mood-swingy, emo villains can have friends (if they'll put up with the mood swings).</p>
<p>But N/E and L/E are generally better for group-oriented activity over the long haul.</p>
Really, even a C/E character COULD run with a party... even mood-swingy, emo villains can have friends (if they'll put up with the mood swings).
But N/E and L/E are generally better for group-oriented activity over the long haul.
Alitan
2012-04-24T01:33:34Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
StrangePackage
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#25
2012-04-24T00:37:21Z
2012-04-24T00:37:21Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">blahpers wrote:</div><blockquote>I am seriously considering doing away with alignment. The concept creates more problems than it solves.</blockquote><p>I think that's sort of the point- it's supposed to give general guidance while raising additional questions. That provides for better roleplaying opportunities- making tough decisions while trying to stay within the bounds of what your character would consider appropriate or acceptable.
<p>Besides, even in real life, with well delineated legal and moral codes, there are still differences in interpretation. </p>
<p>The conflicts created by competing alignments can be one of the most interesting parts of intra-party interactions and roleplay. They ought to be thorny- folks dealing with epic deeds should face epic challenges, both external and internal.</p>
blahpers wrote:I am seriously considering doing away with alignment. The concept creates more problems than it solves.
I think that's sort of the point- it's supposed to give general guidance while raising additional questions. That provides for better roleplaying opportunities- making tough decisions while trying to stay within the bounds of what your character would consider appropriate or acceptable. Besides, even in real life, with well delineated legal and moral codes, there are still...
StrangePackage
2012-04-24T00:37:21Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#24
2012-04-24T00:14:11Z
2012-04-24T00:14:11Z
<p>It is virtually impossible to get anyone to agree on what any alignment means. I like CBDunkerson's comment above about how "neutral" means two things in the rules. He's right, it does. The conflict between "neutral means doesn't care" vs "neutral means seeks balance" is one of the major reasons that neutral alignments are so frequently debated.</p>
<p>And "evil" is at least as frequently debated. Does evil mean "greedy?" Does it mean "selfish?" Does it mean "seeks to harm others?" Does it mean "seeks to advance the cause of evil"?</p>
<p>Who knows?</p>
<p>Here's how I generally play evil characters:</p>
<p>Chaotic evil - Totally unpredictable and wholly selfish. Not necessarily "greedy" just completely focused on their own desires. Will mess with lawful and or good societies/people just for fun. Think "The Joker".</p>
<p>Lawful evil - Wants to impose their desires on others. Believes that their way is the only way. Prone to hierarchical organizations with strict codes of behavior. Relies on strict punishment/reward system and believes in frequent use of examples. Will make deals and generally will stick to them until the one major backstab that makes them the biggest boss. Can be absolutely ruthless in pursuing goals. Think "Al Capone".</p>
<p>Neutral evil - The sociopath. Pretty much truly only thinks of their own ends, and those ends can be quite subtle and complex. Rarely overly greedy or overtly selfish. Can and will pretend to be law-abiding and/or good to gain their ends. Plays well with others until their ends are met. Keeps promises only when that advances their true goals. Able and willing to accept compromise when necessary. Is utterly rational and can seem to be quite reasonable at times. Think "Braniac".</p>
<p>Any of these can work within the framework of an adventuring party if it suits their needs. Of these the one that should have the most difficulty "fitting in" for a particular quest or short "adventure" would be the lawful evil character. Their natural desire to impose their will is difficult to ignore for long.</p>
It is virtually impossible to get anyone to agree on what any alignment means. I like CBDunkerson's comment above about how "neutral" means two things in the rules. He's right, it does. The conflict between "neutral means doesn't care" vs "neutral means seeks balance" is one of the major reasons that neutral alignments are so frequently debated.
And "evil" is at least as frequently debated. Does evil mean "greedy?" Does it mean "selfish?" Does it mean "seeks to harm others?" Does it mean...
Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)
2012-04-24T00:14:11Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
EWHM
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#23
2012-04-23T23:24:59Z
2012-04-23T23:24:59Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">blahpers wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">EWHM wrote:</div><blockquote> Most evil isn't philosophical in nature. The neutral evil person cares about number 1, more or less to the exclusion of caring much about anyone else. If working with a bunch of heroes advances number one, they'll do it, and maintaining a pretext is no big deal for them if it serves their ends. There's always a cost-benefit calculation running under the hood for them. They might not even terribly enjoy acting 'EVIL' per se. If you want them to work with you, it's actually not terribly hard in most cases—-just ensure your offer is the best on offer. </blockquote>E.g.: Jayne Cobb. </blockquote><p>Yes, although I'd argue he's got some neutral leanings also that become more prominent as the show progresses. But the totally unscrupulous mercenary is the NE archetype.
blahpers wrote:EWHM wrote: Most evil isn't philosophical in nature. The neutral evil person cares about number 1, more or less to the exclusion of caring much about anyone else. If working with a bunch of heroes advances number one, they'll do it, and maintaining a pretext is no big deal for them if it serves their ends. There's always a cost-benefit calculation running under the hood for them. They might not even terribly enjoy acting 'EVIL' per se. If you want them to work with you, it's...
EWHM
2012-04-23T23:24:59Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
blahpers
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#22
2012-04-23T21:56:34Z
2012-04-23T21:56:34Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">EWHM wrote:</div><blockquote> Most evil isn't philosophical in nature. The neutral evil person cares about number 1, more or less to the exclusion of caring much about anyone else. If working with a bunch of heroes advances number one, they'll do it, and maintaining a pretext is no big deal for them if it serves their ends. There's always a cost-benefit calculation running under the hood for them. They might not even terribly enjoy acting 'EVIL' per se. If you want them to work with you, it's actually not terribly hard in most cases—-just ensure your offer is the best on offer. </blockquote><p>E.g.: Jayne Cobb.
EWHM wrote:Most evil isn't philosophical in nature. The neutral evil person cares about number 1, more or less to the exclusion of caring much about anyone else. If working with a bunch of heroes advances number one, they'll do it, and maintaining a pretext is no big deal for them if it serves their ends. There's always a cost-benefit calculation running under the hood for them. They might not even terribly enjoy acting 'EVIL' per se. If you want them to work with you, it's actually not...
blahpers
2012-04-23T21:56:34Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
blahpers
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#21
2012-04-24T15:00:59Z
2012-04-23T21:53:13Z
<p>I am seriously considering doing away with alignment. The concept creates more problems than it solves.</p>
I am seriously considering doing away with alignment. The concept creates more problems than it solves.
blahpers
2012-04-23T21:53:13Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
gamer-printer
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#20
2012-04-23T21:49:23Z
2012-04-23T21:49:23Z
<p>I find playing 'Neutral' characters easy and fun. I'm never one sided in my current use of alignment. If I do something good, I try to do something evil next to balance it out. Same with lawful and chaotic acts. My character sort of gets bipolar about things. When I do good, I do really quite good on equal levels to a paladin. Then I recall what alignment did I emulate last, and strive to appear opposite in alignment to whatever it was I had been.</p>
<p>In a way it's kind of forced alignment, but it's the best way I can keep track that I am maintaining some consistency in my alignment reveal at the time of given playing session.</p>
<p>Our group has played completely evil aligned groups without much of a problem. In general the chatacters stay neutral to each other while doing absolutely evil things to those around us.</p>
<p>The idea that evil characters cannot work together is silly. Chaotic evil is a bit more difficult to maintain well, but lawful or primarily neutral evil groups work fine together, as long as the evil activities are constant and directed at a specific target outside of the party.</p>
<p>Other GMs play like evil groups are stupid and never have reliable results of success. That's simply crazy. While being an evil genius, you do really dark things, you don't suddenly become stupid - you're still a genius, evil or not.</p>
I find playing 'Neutral' characters easy and fun. I'm never one sided in my current use of alignment. If I do something good, I try to do something evil next to balance it out. Same with lawful and chaotic acts. My character sort of gets bipolar about things. When I do good, I do really quite good on equal levels to a paladin. Then I recall what alignment did I emulate last, and strive to appear opposite in alignment to whatever it was I had been.
In a way it's kind of forced alignment, but...
gamer-printer
2012-04-23T21:49:23Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Jorda75
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#19
2012-04-23T21:08:47Z
2012-04-23T21:08:47Z
<p>I would agree with you on the whole, though I would probably prefer someone lawful evil with long reaching goals you could have a neutral evil character in pretty much the same situation.</p>
<p>I recently purchased Book of the Damned- Volume 3, Horsemen of the Apocalypse, which talks extensively on the nature of Neutral Evil. It shows that even creatures who are essentially pure evil can work with others in order to further their long term goals. A daemon may support a group of Lawful Good clerics, if only to slowly twist them towards evil an tyranny and in the end bring about theirs and many other peoples deaths.</p>
<p>To me neutral evil has always been the deepest, darkest evil. It supposes evil over all other choices, law and chaos are abstracts that do not even factor into the mind, they are constructs that a pure evil person or creature can ignore or even mimic in order to reach their true ends.</p>
<p>This of course is all based on how closely you hold to alignments, in many of the games I run I like to look at the alignment as a loose guideline, not a strict code, which is why I have never had a problem with non-lawful monks or even paladins with enough justification (this was mostly in earlier editions without as many options as Pathfinder allows).</p>
I would agree with you on the whole, though I would probably prefer someone lawful evil with long reaching goals you could have a neutral evil character in pretty much the same situation.
I recently purchased Book of the Damned- Volume 3, Horsemen of the Apocalypse, which talks extensively on the nature of Neutral Evil. It shows that even creatures who are essentially pure evil can work with others in order to further their long term goals. A daemon may support a group of Lawful Good...
Jorda75
2012-04-23T21:08:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
EWHM
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#18
2012-04-23T20:58:14Z
2012-04-23T20:58:14Z
<p>Most evil isn't philosophical in nature. The neutral evil person cares about number 1, more or less to the exclusion of caring much about anyone else. If working with a bunch of heroes advances number one, they'll do it, and maintaining a pretext is no big deal for them if it serves their ends. There's always a cost-benefit calculation running under the hood for them. They might not even terribly enjoy acting 'EVIL' per se. If you want them to work with you, it's actually not terribly hard in most cases—-just ensure your offer is the best on offer.</p>
Most evil isn't philosophical in nature. The neutral evil person cares about number 1, more or less to the exclusion of caring much about anyone else. If working with a bunch of heroes advances number one, they'll do it, and maintaining a pretext is no big deal for them if it serves their ends. There's always a cost-benefit calculation running under the hood for them. They might not even terribly enjoy acting 'EVIL' per se. If you want them to work with you, it's actually not terribly hard in...
EWHM
2012-04-23T20:58:14Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Selgard
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#17
2012-04-23T20:53:16Z
2012-04-23T20:53:16Z
<p>I think most of the problem people are having with accurately defining it- is because.. well, being "neutral" is really an abstract thing that would be extremely hard to do.</p>
<p>You have law: which is rigid and structure. Not necesarily bound to laws- but bound to doing things in an orderly fashion.</p>
<p>Chaos is far more free form. They aren't worried about law or order or structure- and will struggle against it in the aim of just being themselves.</p>
<p>So Neutrality is supposed to be between the two. Yet there really isn't alot of wiggle room.
<br />
Neutrality is going to be seen as Chaotic simply because it isn't the rigid lawful thing.</p>
<p>To me i see it more as- them advancing the morality side of it regardless of law or chaos.</p>
<p>A chaotic good person would struggle against laws as them not being the most expedient way to be good, while a lawful good person would want to follow the laws even if they dragged out justice a little longer.</p>
<p>I could see a neutral good person not caring which road to good you took as long as you got there. If there are laws, good use them. If not- well fine, go that route too.</p>
<p>The evil side would really work the same way, IMO.
<br />
A lawful evil person would have a rigid hierarchy. An evil mercenary group or church would be a prime example of this. They are perfectly evil but have ranks and schedules and rules and regulations for how to go about doing said evil things.</p>
<p>The Chaotic Evil guy is the reverse. He has evil to do and he's going to do it his way and doesn't care one whit for rules, regulations, agreements, or whatever. His goal is whatever his goal is and he's going to do whatever it takes to do it without regard to laws internally- even any code or set of conduct. he does what he does however he can do it.</p>
<p>The Neutral Evil guy has his goal. He'll use the best method to obtain it. If that means following guidelines or using some structure, fine. If that means going off the hook and winging it, then so be it. He's not really wedded to either method- he just wants his evil done.</p>
<p>The value of the NE guy is that he can fit into the LE or the CE role- if thats what he needs to do. he just doesn't care about law or chaos. He cares about the end result. </p>
<p>Thats just my 2 cents anyway.</p>
<p>-S</p>
I think most of the problem people are having with accurately defining it- is because.. well, being "neutral" is really an abstract thing that would be extremely hard to do.
You have law: which is rigid and structure. Not necesarily bound to laws- but bound to doing things in an orderly fashion.
Chaos is far more free form. They aren't worried about law or order or structure- and will struggle against it in the aim of just being themselves.
So Neutrality is supposed to be between the two....
Selgard
2012-04-23T20:53:16Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Marthian
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#16
2012-04-23T20:51:17Z
2012-04-23T20:51:17Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">StrangePackage wrote:</div><blockquote> He was of the opinion that LE would be the only workable Token Evil Teammate because he could be trusted at his word to basically play within the team structure. In his opinion, NE wouldn't. He basically claimed that NE was Evil with a personal agenda, and would be focused on opportunities as they present themselves for advancement.</blockquote><p>Ya know, in my opinion, being evil =/= stabbing friends in the back. You could be evil, and still be loyal to the party (even if they are good.) I'd describe it as working towards the greater evil that may or may not conflict with the party. If you read Order of the stick, Belkar's a good example (I guess...)
StrangePackage wrote:He was of the opinion that LE would be the only workable Token Evil Teammate because he could be trusted at his word to basically play within the team structure. In his opinion, NE wouldn't. He basically claimed that NE was Evil with a personal agenda, and would be focused on opportunities as they present themselves for advancement.
Ya know, in my opinion, being evil =/= stabbing friends in the back. You could be evil, and still be loyal to the party (even if they are...
Marthian
2012-04-23T20:51:17Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
hogarth
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#15
2012-04-23T20:47:19Z
2012-04-23T20:47:19Z
<p>I see a neutral evil character as someone who's evil and who isn't particularly consistent or inconsistent in his actions.</p>
I see a neutral evil character as someone who's evil and who isn't particularly consistent or inconsistent in his actions.
hogarth
2012-04-23T20:47:19Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Desriden
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#14
2012-04-23T20:44:40Z
2012-04-23T20:44:40Z
<p>NE usually is portrayed as greedy in my games. If the character is a bit of a coward, others can control that. If they are an adventurer, then they'll turn when the odds look good to do so.</p>
NE usually is portrayed as greedy in my games. If the character is a bit of a coward, others can control that. If they are an adventurer, then they'll turn when the odds look good to do so.
Desriden
2012-04-23T20:44:40Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Banecrow
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#13
2012-04-23T20:42:47Z
2012-04-23T20:42:47Z
<p>LE all the way, the lawful aspect you give the character direction that they will follow. Just make sure they define their laws, being lawful does not always mean following the laws of the realm, it means they have a set definition of laws or rules they follow. A serial killer could very well be considered lawful evil.</p>
<p>Most fun I ever had was a LE merc, I did the job and followed the contract. Tell me to kill that baby, sure if it was within my contract to do so, go save the princess and save the kingdom also ok if it was within my contract.</p>
<p>Another fun character I played that was LE, was a Psionic character who had been picked on and always passed up for promotions in town, when he was "obviously" better off at leading. He finally figured that he needed to make these people love him, if he was going to take over and rule. So he set out to be the "hero" people wanted and sometimes even set it up so he could save the day. Yes he may have been doing the right thing and helping others but he was doing it for his own motives. He was NOT above killing someone to keep them quiet when he needed too.</p>
LE all the way, the lawful aspect you give the character direction that they will follow. Just make sure they define their laws, being lawful does not always mean following the laws of the realm, it means they have a set definition of laws or rules they follow. A serial killer could very well be considered lawful evil.
Most fun I ever had was a LE merc, I did the job and followed the contract. Tell me to kill that baby, sure if it was within my contract to do so, go save the princess and...
Banecrow
2012-04-23T20:42:47Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Deadmanwalking
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#12
2012-04-23T20:39:08Z
2012-04-23T20:39:08Z
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jal Dorak wrote:</div><blockquote> A NE merchant is someone who will choose murder/torture/blackmail ahead of any other option whenever practical. He may finance a local death cult, or secretly run a slavery ring. Merely hoarding goods at the expense of others is not evil. Hoarding goods with the explicit intention of starving a group of halflings to death is evil. </blockquote><p>I disagree with this. Evil can be based on philosophic devotion or outright sadism and malice, but it can also be the result of <i>simply not caring</i> about the welfare of others. To quote myself for an example:
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deadmanwalking wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Indeed. My would-be Evil Overlord LE Drow Bard was polite and conscientous as a rule, always treated his personnel extremely well, had no personal hatreds or prejudices of any kind (and considered racial prejudice foolish), and always attempted to negotiate with enemies prior to the outbreak of hostilities. He treated his personal prisoners well (securing their loyalty in many cases), and never personally engaged in wanton cruelty, as he saw no point in it. Really, he was an urbane, pleasant, individual to associate with.</p>
<p>He was just utterly without anything resembling a conscience. and completely willing to do anything necessary to accomplish his goals. A consumate pragmatist. </p>
<p>For example (in his backstory), his most reliable subordinate (a Half-Drow cousin and family retainer) was CE and personally enjoyed torturing people to death in the most horrible fashion possible. My character's sister was in the line of succession before him (Drow, after all) so he decided to remove her, lured her into an isolated location, and gave her to his retainer to dispose of. While she still lived. The awful things that happened to her thereafter probably don't bear thinking on.</p>
<p>Why did he do it? It was the most effective solution to the problem she posed, and he had nobody else he could trust to dispose of her and never talk about it under an circumstances. Simple pragmatism, not any real hatred or desire to hurt her per se.</p>
<p>Also, the definition of Evil. </blockquote><p>
Jal Dorak wrote:A NE merchant is someone who will choose murder/torture/blackmail ahead of any other option whenever practical. He may finance a local death cult, or secretly run a slavery ring. Merely hoarding goods at the expense of others is not evil. Hoarding goods with the explicit intention of starving a group of halflings to death is evil.
I disagree with this. Evil can be based on philosophic devotion or outright sadism and malice, but it can also be the result of simply not caring...
Deadmanwalking
2012-04-23T20:39:08Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Mercurial (alias of Wiggz)
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#11
2012-04-23T20:14:49Z
2012-04-23T20:14:49Z
<p>Too often, characters with a neutral bent in their alignment are inappropriately viewed as someone who makes an active effort in order to 'preserve neutrality'... much more likely, he is simply a character that is indifferent to whatever aspect he is neutral in.</p>
<p>I see a Neutral Evil character as one who is ultimately self-motivated and driven by self-interest whether for power, wealth, whatever. When the law or even meticulous planning favors him, he'll take full advantage of it... when working outside the law, double-crossing or backstabbing supposed allies, he's fine with that as well.</p>
<p>I agree, 'Pragmatic Evil' - and 'Pragmatic Good' for that matter, definitely seems the way to go. Some characters or NPC's may choose for rP purposes to actively serve the force of balance, but that would be a much rarer interpretation to my mind.</p>
Too often, characters with a neutral bent in their alignment are inappropriately viewed as someone who makes an active effort in order to 'preserve neutrality'... much more likely, he is simply a character that is indifferent to whatever aspect he is neutral in.
I see a Neutral Evil character as one who is ultimately self-motivated and driven by self-interest whether for power, wealth, whatever. When the law or even meticulous planning favors him, he'll take full advantage of it... when...
Mercurial (alias of Wiggz)
2012-04-23T20:14:49Z
Re: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Neutral Evil- How do you see it?
Jal Dorak
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nzuh?Neutral-Evil-How-do-you-see-it#10
2012-04-23T20:10:27Z
2012-04-23T20:10:27Z
<p>@blahpers: Your descriptions sound more like a CN character (selfish, unconcerned with morality). Evil IS just as restrictive as good. In the same way that a paladin that murders is cast out of his order, so would be a blackguard that sends money to a poor orphanage with no expectation of return. </p>
<p>I'm seeing more and more the "evil characters think they are good" argument. Yes, most evil characters think they are doing the "right" thing, but they also know the difference between Good and Evil, and the fact that they choose Evil whenever practical is what makes them Evil and not Neutral. The "right" thing is that Good = weakness, and Evil = power; only the stupid or foolish would choose to help others at the expense of themselves or their group. The exception here is the insane or extra-planar evil, which ignorantly commit evil at every possible turn regardless of consequences, but in this case they don't think about the "right" thing at all, that's why they are the way they are.</p>
<p>An unscrupulous merchant is not NE, he is N (a CN merchant will likely be out of business quickly).</p>
<p>A NE merchant is someone who will choose murder/torture/blackmail ahead of any other option whenever practical. He may finance a local death cult, or secretly run a slavery ring. Merely hoarding goods at the expense of others is not evil. Hoarding goods with the explicit intention of starving a group of halflings to death is evil.</p>
@blahpers: Your descriptions sound more like a CN character (selfish, unconcerned with morality). Evil IS just as restrictive as good. In the same way that a paladin that murders is cast out of his order, so would be a blackguard that sends money to a poor orphanage with no expectation of return.
I'm seeing more and more the "evil characters think they are good" argument. Yes, most evil characters think they are doing the "right" thing, but they also know the difference between Good and...
Jal Dorak
2012-04-23T20:10:27Z