Neutrality in Pathfinder cosmology is more about being uncaring about alignment rather than keeping them in balance. I think Salim from the Pathfinder novels is a candiatate for a neutral(ish) champion of Pharasma.
D&D neutral(ish) cosmology is more about keeping balance. Those who have an interest in this should probably read Elric by Michael Moorcock. He was the champion of balance (which called itself fate), who fought against law and chaos whenever one side got too much influence.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I'd personally prefer to see Tenets of Law and Chaos over neutrality. double up on LG, CG, LE, and CE except these are more about law/chaos than good/evil. IF we get Tenets of Neutrality I want it to be the full plus (NG,LN,TN,CN,NE)
X2Brute wrote: I'd personally prefer to see Tenets of Law and Chaos over neutrality. double up on LG, CG, LE, and CE except these are more about law/chaos than good/evil. IF we get Tenets of Neutrality I want it to be the full plus (NG,LN,TN,CN,NE) Now that is a really good way of looking at the situation sideways!
Wonder if they could also design a non-ascribing approach to tenets so they can pick and choose alignments but also not reap any deific rewards? Make it very basic but possibly something smoother to choose for a multiclass to still be defensive and tank-ish? Because true neutral would be the only thing not covered by your proposed system, and I think as the system ages, a bit of flexibility on this would be healthier for dynamic builds.
I think people are misinterpreting "neutrality" remember, neutral good and neutral evil are also neutral on matters of chaos versus law. We want to see neutral chaos and neutral lawful who emphasize matters of chaos versus law, while remaining neutral on matters of good versus evil. As well as agents of neutrality that try to uphold a fair a nonbiased ideal of a neutral god.
Champions are defined as the "emissary of a deity" so their business is their deity's interests. When people ask for a neutral champion, they don't mean one who won't act. They mean one who will hold up the edicts of a deity that is neutral, chaotic neutral, or lawful neutral.
I don't think they're ever going to do Champions with "Tenets of Neutrality" but we will get causes for Champions of Neutral Deities in a different way.
I think the stumbling block to Chaotic Neutral is that people aren't understanding that "chaotic" in the Pathfinder sense doesn't mean "randomness" or "out of control". It means live and let live. In that context, chaotic neutral means that you value "live and let live" and see that as far more important than altruism/selfishness. A chaotic neutral champion would fight for a person's right to be their own person. To boil it down to one word: Libertarian. I know that word has a lot of baggage associated with it, but so does the word chaotic. I've always felt that D&D missed the boat when they named the second axis Law/Chaos. I think Law/Liberty would have been closer to what was intended. With that said, here are my thoughts on causes for Neutral aligned Champions.
Lawful Neutral -- The Authoritarian
True Neutral -- The Balancer
Chaotic Neutral -- The Libertarian
You necroed a thread to talk about alignment, are you aware they removed it in the Remaster?
And as the Champion Remaster preview shows we more or less are getting "neutral" options for them.
Recent threads in Paizo Products
|
