Hey all,
For a while now, I've been thinking about Law/Chaos axis of the alignment system.
For me, Law vs. Chaos can be thought of as Predictability vs. Unpredictibility or as Consistency vs. Compromise. Let me explain with an example:
Take the following question: "Would you sacrifice one person in order to save ten?"
Now for this, the answer you (or your character) would give doesn't matter – that is for debates on good vs evil. For our purposes, let's just say a character says no.
What if we change the question to: "Would you sacrifice one person in order to save one hundred?"
or "Would you sacrifice ten people to save one thousand?" or "Would you sacrifice one thousand to save ten million?"
The questions above are all really examples of the same question: "Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?" I propose that a character's alignment on the Law/Chaos axis determines if and when their answer changes.
So take our hypothetical character who said no at the beginning. If they were Lawful, their answer of 'no' wouldn't change (or at the very least, be resistant to change). A Chaotic person though would let the circumstances dictate their response.
Of course, my hypothetical character above is someone who has taken Lawful to the absolute extreme; someone who never, ever compromises. The counterpart to that would be someone so Chaotic that they could never make a decision because they always compromised and I think both would be unplayable.
Taken at a reasonable level though, this system creates a neat dynamic in which the Good/Evil axis determines what your character's morals and beliefs are, and the Law/Chaos axis determines how you adhere to them.
Anyway, I just thought I'd share my thoughts and discuss – please feel free to chime in with yours.
Law: Kantian, Chaos: Utilitarian?