Or Lawful Stupid? Or Stupid Evil?
I reserve those alignments for antagonists. :)
It has worked well over the years.
Not really.
Chaotic Stupid/Lawful Stupid/Stupid Evil are the victims of people taking alignments to their extremes due to convoluted and skewed perceptions of those alignments.
Of course, these made-up alignments are likewise variant due to the perceptions of the players and GMs involved, and sometimes a player wants to (or has to) conform to that alignment to maintain their character.
The most common example of this is Paladins and GMs with the Lawful Stupid alignment. In some cases, a Paladin PC doesn't want to commit to an action that he claims is really stupid, but he has to, because if he doesn't, the GM will make that Paladin PC fall. Or, inversely, the Paladin PC wants to commit an action that the GM claims is really stupid (such as using Smite Evil on every enemy he fights), but the Paladin PC feels like that he has to because his alignment (Lawful "Stupid") dictates it so, and thus the GM makes the Paladin PC fall for his misconception about his alignment (which most certainly isn't Lawful Stupid).
Other examples of poor alignments include Stupid Good (falling for an obvious trick set by the GM and his evil creatures because the purest of heart shouldn't doubt the darkest of souls), Neutral Stupid (not doing anything because he doesn't care/has no interest in it himself), and True Stupid (he doesn't care about anything, as long as he gets to do his one thing, akin to how most GMs would run animals. Bonus points if you actually dropped your Intelligence down to help roleplay the alignment).
In practically all of these cases, as Wraithguard pointed out, it's really only useful (and entertaining) in the aspect of the GM to employ for his NPCs. In other cases, not so much.
**EDIT** Grammar and phrasing is hard...
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
C'mon guys, don't leave Stupid Good out in the cold.
"Leave those poor hellspawn alone! What did they ever do to you?"
"You mean besides slaughtering that village we passed through and trying to eat us?"
"Well, they probably came from a broken home. The least you can do is try to be understanding"
Just because you're using your alignment as an excuse to be stupid doesn't mean you aren't being stupid.
It depends. Can you come up with a rationalization for how this idiot has lived long enough to become an adventurer without being killed by family/law enforcement/monsters/themselves?
Luck.
Or, in Pathfinder terms: Magic.
In general, "Stupid" alignments should never be played. That said, people can and will disagree on what constitutes being "Chaotic Stupid."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stupid is as stupid does.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Purely depends on the campaign your in.
If is a light-hearted romp where everyone is in it for the laughs, then sure go ahead (just remember to change the act up a bit now and then, so that it doesn´t get too stall).
If its a normal or serious campaign, I wouldn´t really do it. First of all it can get old really fast and it doesn´t really help forming party cohesion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I often play true neutral as either "Principled and intellectual opposition to the very concept of alignment" or "impenetrably naïve". I guess the latter could be "neutral stupid" or "stupid neutral."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I played a paladin based on Don Quiote... I think he'd qualify as Stupid Good :D
He was a lot of fun... but he didn't last as long as I'd like. But he did try to solo a dragon... and did better then he should have ;P
Whenever we had to chose a direction in a dungeon... He voted RIGHT. We always take the RIGHT path...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is such a thing as being so chaotic stupid that you wrap around to being chaotic brilliant.
It is okay to be CS only in this event, and in that case you were never really 'stupid' in the first place.
What about the barbarian with 7 intelligence who is chaotic neautral lol
I play a pretty fun stupid And Chaotic character
"Wild Card b+#$$es!!!" - Charlie Kelly, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, the poster child for chaotic stupid.
It's never OK being Stupid-anything.
Aside from that, any alignment can work with the right character developement.
I've never had a problem with it.
I figure if you're playing a protean, somehow, sure.
Otherwise, Probobly not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We Be Goblins.
+1
One big issue with it is that it often strains credibility as to why your party members would put up with a potentially unpredictable or dangerous party element that makes it more likely to get them killed.
At the very least, they should look for a more reasonable replacement unless you have a very good background reason why they wouldn't just kick you out.
This is one of the more frequent problems with bad PC behavior. A lot of parties will put up with things that should lead to group members being ejected or the group breaking up, because the players don't want to make new PCs or risk offending the player whose character is getting the boot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it ever okay to be...Stupid?
No.
Silly, perhaps. Whimsical, certainly. Stupid? Never.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Chaotic Stupid, Lawful Stupid, and Stupid Evil are player alignments, not character alignments.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
sometimes you just have to dare to be stupid just ask AL.
Not really.
Chaotic Stupid/Lawful Stupid/Stupid Evil are the victims of people taking alignments to their extremes due to convoluted and skewed perceptions of those alignments.
Of course, these made-up alignments are likewise variant due to the perceptions of the players and GMs involved, and sometimes a player wants to (or has to) conform to that alignment to maintain their character.
The most common example of this is Paladins and GMs with the Lawful Stupid alignment. In some cases, a Paladin PC doesn't want to commit to an action that he claims is really stupid, but he has to, because if he doesn't, the GM will make that Paladin PC fall. Or, inversely, the Paladin PC wants to commit an action that the GM claims is really stupid (such as using Smite Evil on every enemy he fights), but the Paladin PC feels like that he has to because his alignment (Lawful "Stupid") dictates it so, and thus the GM makes the Paladin PC fall for his misconception about his alignment (which most certainly isn't Lawful Stupid).
Other examples of poor alignments include Stupid Good (falling for an obvious trick set by the GM and his evil creatures because the purest of heart shouldn't doubt the darkest of souls), Neutral Stupid (not doing anything because he doesn't care/has no interest in it himself), and True Stupid (he doesn't care about anything, as long as he gets to do his one thing, akin to how most GMs would run animals. Bonus points if you actually dropped your Intelligence down to help roleplay the alignment).
In practically all of these cases, as Wraithguard pointed out, it's really only useful (and entertaining) in the aspect of the GM to employ for his NPCs. In other cases, not so much.
**EDIT** Grammar and phrasing is hard...
Ugh, I hate GMs like that.
GM: Your Paladin has fallen.
Me: Why?
GM: You killed those children.
Me: They were evil demons who had just killed several civilians and lit their houses on fire plus half our party was incapacitated by them.
GM: Still children.
Chaotic Stupid is fine if you're playing Paranoia. So is Lawful Stupid, and all the rest.
If you are in a serious campaign, even stupid PCs should be sensible.
When 3rd ed first came out, one of my players made a dwarven paladin of the god of Progressive Architecture. He had an Int of 4 and a Wis of 14. He was barely sentient but still wasn't Stupid, although he did manage to spend 3 hours in a Cloudkill while building some steps (he couldn't climb and needed to get to the top of a wall). It was dark and he never took any damage from the cloud that he noticed to realise that it was there...
Sometimes the kind of stupidity and what actions are taken as a result can change the answer.
"Heroes have an infinite capacity for stupidity. Thus are legends born!" -Thor, when fighting Jormungand in Thor 380, June 1987.
|
I agree with the sentiment that no one INTENDS to play a "Stupid" alignment and they inevitably arise due to misinterpretation of the alignment. In the case of "Chaotic Stupid," I find it's almost always attempting to be "wacky" or "zany." Basically attempting to inject comedy into the game. How "Stupid" this is largely depends upon whether the GM and other players are "in on the joke" or not. It crosses into "stupid" when the other people at the table find it annoying or that it clashes with the mood the table's trying to set, or if the "zany" behavior is directly disrupting the game (such as the classic "I DROP MY TROUSERS AND WHIZ ON THE KING!" example).
We Be Goblins.
The irony being that goblins aren't actually chaotic.
I openly admit that I have a hard time thinking of a specific class as anything other than stupid: druids. I cannot take the restriction on metals seriously, as somebody who knows how important a giant iron-nickel sphere is for keeping us alive.
IIRC the idea of metal+druidism=bad has a mythological basis. In any case, the druid doesn't necessarily need to have a problem with metal armor (they can wear metal items and wield metal weapons, after all). Just treat it like a quirk that comes with gaining druidic powers and you should be fine.
Yes.
Not every game is about succeeding on quests, fighting terrible monsters, and being pushed to the limits of your abilities. Some games are about having a chill time and relaxing with friends while you derp around town and occasionally travel to nearby goblin dens. This was how my college games were, for the most part. And in such an environment, it's not really a problem to be Chaotic Stupid, or Lawful Stupid, or whatever you want, as long as everyone is on the same page.
I think the assumption is that Pathfinder games are Serious. And if they are, then ____ Stupid can be a serious problem. But if that assumption is changed, then it can be fine.
We Be Goblins.The irony being that goblins aren't actually chaotic.
Maybe, but the do give you a valid excuse to play stupid, at least as a group. I mean, the first We Be Goblins had you on an "epic" quest for fireworks for goodness sake!
As for the overall topic, the answer is generally no, it's not okay to play the "stupid" version of your alignment. It's almost always disruptive and drags down the experience for everyone. On the other hand, allowances should be made for someone new to the game trying to figure things out, at least for a few sessions. Especially if it's clear they are trying to role play, and just haven't quite figured out when they've gone too far.
Ugh, I hate GMs like that.
GM: Your Paladin has fallen.
Me: Why?
GM: You killed those children.
Me: They were evil demons who had just killed several civilians and lit their houses on fire plus half our party was incapacitated by them.
GM: Still children.
Hehehe... I had a barbarian who used an earthbreaker who ran across some demon monster thing that disguised itself as a child...
I actually got use the Phrase. "Ok, I Gallagher the little girl!!"
I'm glad I wasn't playing the paladin THAT day :D :D
Something fun about turning Gallagher into a verb :P