i don't know what i can tell you for a 'way' to roleplay your character, you just roleplay the character.
alignment is just a not particularly precise measurement of a character's moral choices and inclination,
there is a whole world of personalty and motivations and knowledge and assumptions that goes into roleplaying beyond alignment.
so i'm just saying that alignment has not much to do with it, and fixating on the alignment part isn't the most helpful.
your character probably has some parameters judging who he confronts and fights/kills.
given you are already cooperative/allies, i would think you would discuss things first, before killing each other.
if your character has some sense of personal bond or comradeship with the rogue,
it seems that agreeing to part ways peacefully is the more likely option, if less dramatic.
on the other hand, if your character is a control freak who goes out of their way to impose their morality on others,
it could go the other way, likewise if they hold some set of laws as more important than a personal bond or loyalty.
whether or not you would violently turn on a companion for violating civil laws against petty theft is not dictated by alignment.
assuming your character would remain lawful (rather than shift alignment, itself a possibility) is just a very vague indication,
especially since even taking a 'chaotic' course of actions wouldn't even necessarily shift your own alignment.
so you've just got to decide what your character would do in this situation, as if you're the movie director or writer.
if you do think it will lead to interparty conflict of some kind, it's probably worth discussing with the other player out-of-character just to make sure there's no hard feelings and everybody is happy with the direction of the game.
I like Quandry's answer. :)
Let me add to the discussion by suggesting you watch Die Hard, and consider the part of Hans Gruber (played by Alan Rickman). He's clearly LE. Chaotic bunches often need an ordered mind to lead them.
As for your monk, just be the calm center of the storm.
Lawful Neutral has no permanent ill-bearings towards Evil PCs or NPCs. His very nature allows him to commit some evil as long as it's within legal bounds. As for chaotic, is there anything specifically that says you can't be party to a chaotic or evil character? Paladin, some clerics, and some cavaliers may have a code of conduct pertaining to such, but monks do not. To maintain your 'moral' standing without confrontation it to simply make a vocal objection the acts the rogue is performing and then turn a blind eye.
Being a lawful individual doesn't make him an enforcer, does it?
you need to write out a backstory and personality profile for your character.
this never needs to mention alignment categories, although it should be in line with your alignment currently being what it is.
(although you don't have to be the most exemplary example of LN alignment, either)
you take that character personality and ask how that character responds to the situation.
do they ignore it or remain silent?
do they get seduced by the different approach, and adopt such methods themself? (possibly changing alignment)
do they talk about it but never do anything? do they try to get the rogue kicked out of the group?
do they leave the group if nothing changes but not otherwise cause trouble?
do they use minimal force to prevent the rogue's actions or as a deterrent to send a message?
do they inform the local police forces if that is relevant? do they use lethal force?
or a thousand other different responces... if your character would be conflicted about what to do,
then they would probably seek to discuss the matter with other characters in-game, if they have such people to discuss things with.
those are all things depending on the character's personality and perspective on life, as well as the relationship between the characters, whether they just met, whether they have saved each other's life, whether they share common goals or political beliefs, whether they are lovers, whether they are family, etc.
you haven't even told us anything about the character besides their alignment, class, and they have many ranks in sense motive/perception.
that isn't a character, it's a mechanical build which could be shared by many characters who may react very differently.
even if you had, you still know the character best. so you need to make that decision, not have other people roleplay for you.
i mean, if somebody obliged and you and told you a course of action, they would just be dictating your character personality to you.
i don't even understand the basis for a conflict between the characters on an alignment basis (which is the only one you've suggested),
stealing things or cooperating with demons (because you believe their promises) are not incompatable with being LN.
i understand this isn't the answer you were probably looking for, but it sounds like a ripe opportunity to deepen your understanding and engagement with the roleplaying aspect of the game. good luck and have fun!
if your worry is about losing out with class abilities, it's not that big a deal for monks especially.
you don't lose any abilities when you stop being lawful, you just can't take more monk levels.
so you could very well act very lawfully in order to compensate and change your alignment back to lawful before levelling up,
or just dip in another class until you can consistently act lawful enough to become lawful again and take more monk levels.
lawful alignment doesn't mean you will follow EVERY single law. many laws will conflict, for example.
paizo includes LG paladins working for countries who legally support slavery, who are secretly working to sabotage the slave trade.
having lawful alignment just means that something in your character counts as lawful, enough to outweigh other factors.
that could be linked to allegiance to the civil laws of the land, but it could also be a personal or religious code, stated or unstated.
instead of coming at this from the perspective of letting mechanics dictate your roleplaying, start with your concept for the character,
how they have lived their life and how they react to things around them.
you must have some kernel of that idea, even if you haven't fleshed it out completely.
so then you just need to take the next step, and decide what they would do, which is ultimately independent of any game mechanics in play.
it's your GMs decision as to how your alignment may shift in response to your actions.
you may want to share with your GM the thought processes and motivations behind your character's actions so he can better understand the context for the actions.
i don't know what that site you linked to is, but you cannot take that as the bible or 'commandments' for a LN character.
most of seems plausible for /A/ LN character to belief/behave like, but that doesn't mean /ALL/ LN characters must be like that.
probably alot of that would apply to any given LN character, but ALL of it certainly doesn't need to, and indeed is unlikely to.
a LN may certainly prioritize the 'spirit' of laws over their 'letter'.
going against any one of those things is not necessarily anything to change your alignment anyways.
and more importantly, whether or not your alignment would shift due to your actions
isn't relevant to determining your character's motivations to take those actions in the first place.
alignment can shift for a reason, you are supposed to be able to follow a character's path regardless of where it goes re: alignment.
the demon thing is more cuz this is gestalt, and im also a druid (thus leaving me with lawful neutral alignment) and i have the trait demon hunter.
again, your build is irrelevant to your character's motivations.
your mention of the druid thing seems to be in the context of not wanting to become LE because that would lose druid abilities.
indeed it would, but that has no bearing on whether or not your character may may do things pushing them to LE alignment.
although i hardly see why not reacting negatively to somebody who was convinced to work with a devil would warrant an evil alignment shift.
having a demon hunter trait MAY suggest a certain perspective and course of action responding to this situation, but the roleplaying aspect is really up to you. not all characters who are good at fighting demons will respond the same way to a given situation.
if your character would strongly react to somebody for cooperating with demons that is a roleplay issue, not alignment issue.
if you're not familiar with roleplaying, it may be useful to select a role-model to base your character off of,
either a character in a film or a novel, and use that as a basis for how your character feels and behaves.
you can choose one that over-all feels 'lawful neutral' as that would best match a character who has several levels in monk/druid.
that doesn't necessarily mean that that character will never take non-lawful/non-neutral actions, though.
then you can better focus on roleplaying the character as a person rather than implementing game stats.
most characters will have the kernel of possibility for making different moral choices in different situations,
roleplaying a character means engaging with those possibilities and flux, not just fulfilling a set alignment.
(albeit many characters may indeed be inflexible about certain things, that's an aspect of their character)
|
It sounds like you have a habit of finding yourself with no choice whatsoever but to kill your fellow party members. How sad for you.
Even when you're not playing a Paladin, you still have a strict code that requires you to judge others, find them wanting, and then need to kill them.
Even when you're not good aligned, merely witnessing an act of evil causes you to feel "destined" to kill an ally.
Huh. Maybe the problem is you?
|
|
1) Why is your character traveling with this rogue? Are you friends? Family? What?
If you are traveling with them because the DM said to, then of course you're going to have party conflict. You have to figure out why you are adventuring and why you are adventuring with this party in particular. No one can tell you these things. A rigidly lawful person without proclivities toward evil would probably dissolve his ties with such a chaotic rogue before killing them. But that's just my interpretation.
2) I would propose that you talk with the DM about how they perceive "lawful" behavior, as well as with the other players at the table concerning what they want to see in the game.
3) If you can't reach a definition of lawful that meets your DM's desires while still allowing you and the other players to enjoy the game, I would suggest you stop painting yourself into lawful corners. I understand the desire to "stretch" in RPGs, but it sounds like you have exceeded your ability to stretch and are threatening to strain something. Play a neutral character with lawful tendencies. Move into it lawful behavior slowly.
4) Sit down and make a character you want to play, then work with your DM to make the mechanics fit the character. It sounds to me like you are working things the other way, and you are catching yourself in a place that you enjoy mechanically, but can't enjoy at the table.
5) Remember that people have friends and loved ones that wildly conflict with their "alignment". Even NE sadists have people who they deeply love. Even LN people have that buddy who flits around like crazy, driving them mad, but without whom their life would feel empty. Decide for yourself why you put up with these chaotic hijinks.
Anyone here read Order of the Stick comics?
If so, you'll know exactly what I mean.
Roy, the party leader, is a lawful good fighter. Boring, I know, but still.
Belkar, the party rogue is Chaotic Evil to the point where he constantly has his lead sheet ready for any Detect Evil spells thrown his way. ( "Stop oppressing my culture, you ethnocentric *paladin*" anyone?)
Belkar regularly steals things, kills enemies at little to no provocation, and turns kobold heads into hats/salsa bowls.
Roy's argument for keeping him aboard? "Someone has to do it. And if I can focus his Evil towards goals that might save the world or do Good, it's worth it."
This fits this situation nearly perfectly.
Control the Beast.
|
|
You misunderstand 4.
Make a *character* you want to play. A personality. A character as in one you'd see in a book or a play or a movie. Figure out if you want to be Indiana Jones or Elric or Radagast or Gandalf or The Grey Mouser or Ford Prefect. Then figure out what mechanics fit the *character*. Choosing mechanics that force you into restrictions that you as a player don't enjoy is a sure why to end up with a one-way ticket to downtown suck-ville.
I want to play a druid/monk gestalt isn't a thing. Describe what you want to do to someone with no knowledge of D&D, and "druid/monk gestalt" has somewhat along the same amount of meaning as saying that you want to floorble the phirnaxes in the guykagosht market zingerblasts.
Stop nouning. Verb some. Adjective a lot.
As for 1, you have to deal with a crazy sneak-thief or else watch your homeland succumb to invasion and/or plague? Murdering my cohort would be the absolute last thing on my mind in that situation, and I'm pretty flipping LG IRL. I'm the kind of kid that turned himself in to the principal for being late at school. And I still understand that sometimes petty larceny can be overlooked, for the time-being at the very least.
hah! entertainingAnyone here read Order of the Stick comics?
If so, you'll know exactly what I mean.Roy, the party leader, is a lawful good fighter. Boring, I know, but still.
Belkar, the party rogue is Chaotic Evil to the point where he constantly has his lead sheet ready for any Detect Evil spells thrown his way. ( "Stop oppressing my culture, you ethnocentric *paladin*" anyone?)
Belkar regularly steals things, kills enemies at little to no provocation, and turns kobold heads into hats/salsa bowls.
Roy's argument for keeping him aboard? "Someone has to do it. And if I can focus his Evil towards goals that might save the world or do Good, it's worth it."
This fits this situation nearly perfectly.
Control the Beast.
It is quite entertaining. I mean, heck, Roy into "heaven" with this regiment. Surely it can resolve your moral problems.
floorble the phirnaxes in the guykagosht market zingerblasts.
Hot.