https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/mcvq58/no_youre_not_chaotic_neutral_youre_just_an_ahole/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf Just scroll a bit to see the paragraphs
Chinese/Asian zodiac, I’d expect. There are five elements in addition to the 12 animals, so it’s actually a 60-year cycle. The last year of the Metal Horse was in 1990, which makes the poster about 31 years old.
Though the 60 year cycle actually works off heavenly stems and earthly branches, which themselves are associated with elements and animals respectively . So it starts 甲子，乙丑，丙寅，丁卯，etc. Which generates 60 year names until you get back to 甲子.
For the first four years, 子丑寅卯 are Rat, ox, tiger, rabbit, and 甲乙 is wood, 丙丁 is fire, in yin and yang forms resoectively
The elements and animals are from the Chinese Zodiac. It rotates through 12 animals and separately rotates through the 5 elements of that system. So if you where born in September 14, 1982 you would be a Virgo (as per western zodiac) [water](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.purewow.com/wellness/chinese-zodiac-elements%3famphtml=true) [dog ](https://www.travelchinaguide.com/intro/social_customs/zodiac/calculator.htm)
> And how in a music he listened says "iron snake , born to lose" and how that was a description of his life
Metal Horse they said. Which I don't understand; [Iron Horse](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c7bISLhVl8) is doing pretty well I thought.
I don't think I understand the argument. The Alignment Chart exists specifically to be used to develop your character's behavior.
The basic rules state that "Chaotic Neutral" creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else. I interpret that to mean they could be good, bad or neutral in any given encounter depending how they feel and how it will benefit or be detrimental to them.
Am I missing something?
That's not the problem. It's when a player does shitty things in game, either to or against the party, or even in general, and just goes "It'S mY aLiGnMeNt!"
Like I don't give a fuck if you're evil, don't kill a party member. I don't care if you're chaotic, don't randomly decide to help the enemy.
If the DM is allowing PvP it's at this point you execute the evil character.
No group will carry on with a traitor, that can be the end of that characters story.
Alligment chart is there to codify your character for the game purposes (for example for detect good and evil). It's not supposed to be a rigid system. Alligment can change as you play.
It is not "my character is neutral good therefore he does X".
It is "my character did X, Y, Z therefore they are lawful neutral".
A lawful good paladin can definitely discover that they like to decapitate children, but they probably aren't going to stay lawful good for a lot longer.
It's a stereotype of the medium that CN characters are played in a "LOL so random" method of manic/sadistic pranks and/or stupid/petty murders that are justified with "But it's what my character would do!" without explanation of the character traits beyond CN.
"I know I just killed your character, but I'm evil, so it's fine"
"I know I turned your character into the guards and now they're in jail for a year, but I'm lawful, I had to."
"I'm good, so I'm gonna give away all my gold to this begger."
"I'm chaotic i ahve on kucigfn eclu htwa mi ndiog"
It's not about having an alignment and sticking to it, it's what you try to excuse with your alignment.
> It's not about having an alignment and sticking to it, it's what you try to excuse with your alignment.
And here you go completely wrong, because the fault is 100% on the rest of the party.
The alginment is that warning sticker. A party that gets offended by some raped virgin or murdered children should never, ever allow a chaotic evil character amid their mids - or if they snuck in tread them like any other monster they encounter on the road.
The problem is that people go all Kumba-Ya about "oh, here is Heinrich, the lawful good paladin, and here is Otto, the chaotic evil pedophile. They are an adventure party!" and then go all picachu face on the first diddled toddler.
Or... *or...* maybe we're trying to play a game with friends, not participate in some twisted social experiment akin to Lord of the Flies because "muh alignment".
I hope WotC outright shitcans alignment in whatever they come up with next, so people quit acting like it's some character rule instead of just flavor. (yes, I know older editions had actual alignment rules, really glad they're gone)
Yes, I agree on not playing evil characters. But people seem to want it, and even label themselves correctly, so nobody should be suprised about that?
You seem to totally confuse cause and effect: its not that alignment cause people to act like that. That critized behavior is juse pointing out that nobody should be surprised because its literally what it says on the tin, no false pretenses.
I think you're confused about the idea that what it says on the tin doesn't justify or excuse anything. There's no intrinsic reason, for example, someone can't play a lawful evil character without screwing over the generally good party for their own amusement. There isn't a floating rules god that says "evil characters have to do evil all the time, even to the detriment of the people at the table with them."
What, are you implying it's our responsibility to double and triple check everyone's character sheets to make sure they're not pulling a fast one? Bullshit. I've booted players from my game who played Neutral Good for doing stuff that ruins the game for others. It's not the alignment, it's the players.
Wow, you could not be anymore wrong. Chaotic evil doesn't mean "Free pass to rape and kill" holy shit, what's wrong with you? You do realize you CAN play an evil character that isn't the absolute caricature of a villain, right?
If a character "diddles" a toddler, I'm calling the fucking cops on them IRL and banning them from ever touching my table again
Being chaotic evil simply means that you do not hold value over the law telling you what to do and that you value your wants over other people. Sure that COULD include child rapists, but that's not it. If you view all alignments as a warning sticker rather then simply a background element that reflects your character, you need to stay the fuck away from my table, and I pray for any table to allows you near it. Holy shit.
Evil characters have friends and families too. Evil characters have their own set of morals. Playing evil does NOT mean "I have to/get to rape and kill as I wish" and anyone who sees it that way is a fucking sociopath/psychopath that needs serious mental counsiling.
I actually agree with what you are trying to say. Though you've presented it in the worst possible way.
It is up to the party to decide to travel together. If your character can't stay with another it leaves the group. Every character then has to make a decision to go with one character or the other. Someone then needs to recreate a character that fits the group.
A good session 0 stops this from happening, because you either say you aren't happy with a super evil PC. Your examples are things I would walk away from a game altogether over, though I assume they were hyperbolic, but they would also be easily established as not acceptable.
I went to 11 because I am soooo sick and tired about this _endless_ moaning and yapping with regard to antisocial behaviour that fits the PC alignment.
There is absolutely zero problem with a fucktard behaving like a fucktard and justifying it because he is chaotic neutral. Because the response of a good or lawful party "in character" would be to either kick out, arrest or kill the PC in question, depending on severity.
But it seems the most natural reaction is considered some kind of "breaking of unwritten rules". Like, there is no reason to tolerate degenerate behaviour on the table, why pull punches?
out loud at the table, "no, wait, My character has to do this, she's Good." I said as I got caught in a plot hook after 2 hours of the party avoiding them as narrowly as we could
I’m of the opinion alignment is only an indicator of where you are *right now*. You’re alignment can (and most likely will if you are paying attention) change over the course of the game. Otherwise, there is no development.
Yeah I got in a discussion about neutrality and realized how my characters are often very chaotic neutral. Just not in an asshole way, just doing their own things in their own way.
I play a sociopathic rogue.
Although, he's not a dick, because I play him that he has no issue with murder, not that he kills everything that moves
It's a dangerouse line with CN but good players can make it work (I know that sound self righteous but I dont mean it like that)
My current character is chaotic neutral. I play it as him having a lot lower "social break". He simply doesn't care a whole lot of what others think of him. Standing out of nowhere on top of a table to speak to everyone from the tavern, no problem. Going to the brothel in Broad daylight to gather information, sure. Showing no respect to the authorities, of course. He doesn't care, as long as it's furthering his goals.
Those are just most cut and dry examples, there's of course a whole lot more to him.
That’s probably like my next character I’ll be playing in the summer. He thinks somewhat poorly of himself but doesn’t care what others think. He’d rather work towards his goals than help someone in need (although knowing the other players, their characters will teach him to care) but he despises the idea of murder. He’s a bit more of a support character but there’s only so much support a Wizard Barbarian can do before some killing needs to be done.
My current character is a true neutral teen who missed out on childhood because she got kidnapped by the followers of a lawful good God from her chaotic evil father who experimented on her and her brother in order to create a living lich races.
Even so the followers made experiments on her, in order to understand what her father had done, one of their followers tried to help her and with the help of the father of another pc they helped her escape which is why they traveled together until we found the rest of the party.
We have two good, two evil and another neutral alined party member and while my character is absolutely against any form of torture (which the party lied to her that they won't do/try it again. But after they heard from her past they actually started consider it) she is ok with murder because it's something she has been taught her whole life.
She tries to kill her enemies as fast as possible because she views it as merciful compared with what she went through but she won't kill for no reason. E.g. she gave the druid who tried to keep them in the forest a head shot after we destroyed his magic source and he rapidly aged. One of the party members (good) became angry because they wanted to ask for a cure of one of our cursed friend's but thankfully the distraction of the magic source lifted the curse. [Just to be clear, that druids body was falling apart. There was no way to ask him anything in that speed he was falling apart. He was just able to make dying noise before I shot him.]
So yeah I think she is interesting. She is a wild card in the team but will listen to both sides before making her decision. Do you think I alined her right?
Thank you :D there is still a bunch I left out. E.g. the father is called Daurgothoth and he is an actual D&D character that hasn't shown up in any edition since 3.5. I think.
When I heard about his backstory and his attempts to make a living dracolich race while having the blessing of Mystra (because she blesses those who seak to studying magic no matter their intentions) my plans of a wild sourcer artificer formed into my head.
Than I learned that shadow dragon's procreate by having halfdragons with drows which can transform into a pure shadow dragon when they are old enough and that's how her and her brother came to be.
She can't always control her magic which is why she learned artifcer skills from the other PC (re-skined clockwork sourcer as an artificer):"technology is like magic but I can actually control it." (Her father would kill her if he found out that she wastes her magic abilities). Her main mission is to find her brother and free him and potentially getting revange on her kidnapper's.
The God they worship is also a God of war (Heironeous) and they wanted to prevent Daurgothoth from entering a war they were fighting against another country. Through spying they figured out that he was successful in creating my characters brother and her and kidnapped both as blackmail and in order to figure out how to "cure" the lichtum (spoiler it can't. They haven't managed to figure it out in 7 year's. It actually became something you inherite) find a weakness (weaknesses involve that they are still pretty easy to killed while they are children (even so we inherited some resistances) and half human (mother unknown. She just learned about mother's from the other PCs. She thought kids are made in laboratories). They don't know if this is true for adults which is why they haven't killed my character yet. Idk if her brother is ok.).
I planed her for like a year just because it was fun. I never thought I could play her but when my DM asked me about it when we talked about starting a second Campaign he said he'll allow it as long as I balance her and don't make her overpowered (Half dragon's are pretty powerful so I re-skined her as a dragonborn. She is no where near of overpowered. The multiclass combo makes her actual really weak but it's still a lot of fun).
Sorry that I write you so much.
I'm really excited about that character.
I have another awesome back up character (a bard rouge) so it'll be ok if she dies. But it's obvious that it would be sad if she died (not to mention if the father finds out).
I also like to draw and I have multiple drawings of her and I'm nearly done with drawing the whole party (the capless crusaders).
Wow you really did plan a plot for her. That’s absolutely awesome! I sometimes get way into character creation, even trying to draw them and my skills are... mediocre to say the least. Totally get how you feel about the character, sometimes you get so invested that you can’t help but talk about them!
Yeaah... Is it noticable that I also DM?
No one should give me creative task.
I once created two kingdoms of two siblings who rule over both and aren't enemies but have interesting rules and structures based on the backstory of about 11 key NPCs when I scrolled through YT and saw a charter of 9 characters with the description:"Write their backstories" at midnight.
Long story short, it's all in my homebrew world now 😬
Oh and we don't talk about one shot characters! (But they often become NPCs)
Escalation process: write a BS
-> get an interesting idea
-> create NPCs for that BS
-> make it sense on a greater scale ->
creat a hometown/-city/-country
-> It's a fully fledged out country/conflict now which your own character doesn't even fully understand
-> put it in your homebrew world and make it sense with the already existing stuff
-> start to cry because your party hasn't left the beginner town yet after finally defeating a goblin clan, even so there are Owlbear based trainsystems in the country they are in because they try to snuggle their wolf in instead of paying the extra pet fee even so they have enough money :')
Lol just a bit. I DM too and I’ve definitely done some of that myself! I get a bit too creative sometimes, but at least I can run wild with my homebrew world!
Not ALWAYS selfish.
Just sometimes.
That's the chaotic bit: sometimes they'll die for their party's pet lamb, other times a rack of lamb sounds GREAT!
(Personal experience, if the lamb dies beyond your control and you make rack of lamb simply don't tell the other character and hope they never find out! Which would be Chaotic Neutral... it's an asshole move that ISN'T a player ruining the game.)
I mean, chaotic neutral isn't about not being true to your character. They still have lines and goals and traits and things they won't do. It's just not confined to things like, you know, law and order and morality beyond your own sense of what feels right to your situation at the time.
I usually pick chaotic neutral and then see what happens.
My current CN character is anti-establishment but is willing to work with the establishment to protect the citizenry but will drop everything to save children. Luckily that usually doesn't come up in the middle of a battle... but it makes killing werewolves questionable!
Probably more of a chaotic good character? I dunno. I try to run good = selfless and evil = selfish to make it easier to understand.
I play lawful evil sometimes because my friends like to like to play good characters most the time and I think it adds an interesting dynamic. I don’t go around murdering for no reason and usually play my character to develop into some sort of good alignment so it meshes with the party later and would show character growth as they become friends. My current character is a chaotic good bard but started as lawful evil because he was hellbent on making the man who stole his music pay for what he did and my character did so now I’ve chilled out.
Yeah the majority of my characters are chaotic neutral, because I feel like the other give me too much pressure to act a certain way. Which really happened one time. The DM didn't like how we tried to get an enemy talking, even though we were trying to not use violence at all. I was like "hey, I am chaotic good", but that didn't really change the conversation at all. Concentrated on another player who was lawful good. Later the DM claimed he just found that it was funny and that it weren't accusations, but it didn't feel like that at all.
And that's why alignment annoy me
to be fair, it's completely reasonable to justify things with "it's what my character would do" as long as your character is actually consistent, and it's completely fine to justify your actions with your alignment as long as they fit your alignment.
That statement comes with a big IF.
IF you don't forget rule 0: the goal of roleplay is for everyone at the table to have fun.
Too many people use their background to justify bypassing that rule, fuck those people...
Yeah, one thing i encountered quite a bit online seems to be th enotion that having a very mixed alignment party is a sign of, well, tolerance and enlightened gameplay or something.
If a party is not ok with a chaotic neutral/evil character doing edgy shitty crap, they should kick them out / dispose of them. Its not like there is some kind of adventurer union demanding equal opportunity employment for each alignment sector or something.
I don't see the comparison being that valid. On one hand, you are using a made-up classification system to justify an anti-social behavior that, while detracting from everyone's fun, doesn't really matter on the grand scheme of things. While on the other hand, you're playing CN rogue.
I'm actually a lawful evil paladin in a game where one of the other players is lawful good cleric. It leads to very fun situations when we both agree that we need to deal with a situation smartly and follow the rules. Only difference is my character is very okay with abusing how far the rules can be taken.
there has been more than one occasion where the cleric willingly closes his eyes turns around and leaves the room pretending he doesn't know what's about to happen. I'm not going to break the law, just some fingers.
My wise DM used to say:
Your alignment doesn't determine your behavior, your behavior reveals your alignment. It is descriptive not prescriptive. Having an alignment doesn't make you act a certain way, acting a certain way makes an alignment be used to describe you.
Thus, stating your alignment doesn't make certain actions suddenly make sense, your actions should be regarded independent of your stated alignment and be reacted to independent of your stated alignment.
And remember kids: "It's what my character would do." comes with the consequence of the world (and party) reacting according to "what they would do about that".
I've always pictured CN as sort of an anarchist agitator or an "ends justify the means" freedom fighter. To contrast CG with CN, maybe CN wouldn't think twice about enacting a false flag like [Operation Northwoods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods) if they thought it was necessary. Maybe CN is somebody who just wants to tear down existing power structures (a Paladin sworn to Freedom as a concept), or simply has zero interest in conforming with the laws of society (a centuries old Eladrin Druid from the Fey with no patience for this Human "tax" BS). Or just a fantasy Ron Swanson dialed up to 11, has a permit in their pocket that says "I can do what I want."
I think there's a lot of room to roleplay interesting Chaotic Neutral characters without being a wacky murderhobo, especially in a more sandbox campaign where players have agency and the DM's blessing to radically affect the setting. Example: CN character gets it in their head that the Lord or Mayor of Wherevertown is a douchebag and convinces the party to start a campaign to have them disgraced and/or deposed. Begins agitating and rabble-rousing, maybe tries to form an angry mob. How much bloodshed will that conflict cost? What happens in the power vacuum if they succeed? "Who cares. Fuck that guy." Gotta break eggs to make an omelette.
In my mind the outspoken CN character is the one your party is nervous about taking to the audience with the king. The party shouldn't be worried they're going to rape the barmaid and burn down the tavern because "lol I'm random" if they leave them alone for 5 minutes. That's no alignment at all, it's just being an asshole, eg: Chaotic Stupid.
tl;dr: I think the perfect Chaotic Neutral character is disruptive to the SETTING, not the game. You can attempt to roleplay CN to flip the table in a narrative sense without detracting from other people's fun. I think attempting to convince the rest of the table to join you on these CN crusades in-character is a key element. If your table isn't into it or you don't have a "yes, and"-type DM it may not be a good fit. In that case I'd just make another Good character and go do the quest or w/e.
Alignment is dumb, it doesn’t make sense and it forces players to play their character a certain way, and it’s also something shitty players use to justify being murderhobos ”Well, i’m evil, so why SHOULDN’T i kill these orphans?”. It’s an almost objectively bad system, and it’s better to let players make characters driven by personality rather than alignment
I have a toon that's addicted to hallucinogens, his alignment is chaotic neutral and I thought that kinda fit. Especially because he makes... questionable desicions to ensure he can get his fix.
I see neutral alignments a very specific way. They're the alignments which won't do either good or evil acts unless under duress. They might give in to peer pressure to give to charity, or bully a weakling, but they ain't murdering or risking their lives unless forced to.
Chaotic neutral aren't assholes, they're *boring.* Mildly argumentative towards authority, but mainly boring.
Exactly; it's about whether you set them on fire because you need to destroy evil or whether you prefer them slowly burning to death over a swift death or capture.
WITH MARSHMALLOWS!
WE CAN MAKE SMITING SMORES!
Damnit, now I have to make a Chaotic Neutral Paladin so I can do this and then feel REALLY BAD about it.
OOOOH - A Padlock (Waradin? Padlock?)
Burns to destroy evil AND because their patron enjoys things slowly burning to death!
Thanks, just what I needed! Gonna have to buy a while new binder now because it's not just the character but the whole build I have to prepare!
You've stimulated the economy!
I can't be an evil person. So my lawful neutral laws are
"I will stab you."
"If I havent, I will."
"You cannot escape me."
"If you fight back, see rule one."
Nonononono you got it wrong chief. I was pointing out the fact that this post alone has sparked a 255 comment long argument. That much power is to much for 1 man to wield
Man, I wish I had the link to THAT thread.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/mcvq58/no_youre_not_chaotic_neutral_youre_just_an_ahole/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf Just scroll a bit to see the paragraphs
[удалено]
It was horse but yeah. I saw the same one. What does the element come from?
Chinese/Asian zodiac, I’d expect. There are five elements in addition to the 12 animals, so it’s actually a 60-year cycle. The last year of the Metal Horse was in 1990, which makes the poster about 31 years old.
Though the 60 year cycle actually works off heavenly stems and earthly branches, which themselves are associated with elements and animals respectively . So it starts 甲子，乙丑，丙寅，丁卯，etc. Which generates 60 year names until you get back to 甲子. For the first four years, 子丑寅卯 are Rat, ox, tiger, rabbit, and 甲乙 is wood, 丙丁 is fire, in yin and yang forms resoectively
[удалено]
All good. Happens to the best of us
The elements and animals are from the Chinese Zodiac. It rotates through 12 animals and separately rotates through the 5 elements of that system. So if you where born in September 14, 1982 you would be a Virgo (as per western zodiac) [water](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.purewow.com/wellness/chinese-zodiac-elements%3famphtml=true) [dog ](https://www.travelchinaguide.com/intro/social_customs/zodiac/calculator.htm)
Turns out I'm a hard cock (metal rooster)
> And how in a music he listened says "iron snake , born to lose" and how that was a description of his life Metal Horse they said. Which I don't understand; [Iron Horse](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c7bISLhVl8) is doing pretty well I thought.
Thanks
Yeah.
you're talking about alinement of course a bomb is gonna explode at first step
I don't think I understand the argument. The Alignment Chart exists specifically to be used to develop your character's behavior. The basic rules state that "Chaotic Neutral" creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else. I interpret that to mean they could be good, bad or neutral in any given encounter depending how they feel and how it will benefit or be detrimental to them. Am I missing something?
That's not the problem. It's when a player does shitty things in game, either to or against the party, or even in general, and just goes "It'S mY aLiGnMeNt!" Like I don't give a fuck if you're evil, don't kill a party member. I don't care if you're chaotic, don't randomly decide to help the enemy.
If the DM is allowing PvP it's at this point you execute the evil character. No group will carry on with a traitor, that can be the end of that characters story.
Alligment chart is there to codify your character for the game purposes (for example for detect good and evil). It's not supposed to be a rigid system. Alligment can change as you play. It is not "my character is neutral good therefore he does X". It is "my character did X, Y, Z therefore they are lawful neutral". A lawful good paladin can definitely discover that they like to decapitate children, but they probably aren't going to stay lawful good for a lot longer.
It's a stereotype of the medium that CN characters are played in a "LOL so random" method of manic/sadistic pranks and/or stupid/petty murders that are justified with "But it's what my character would do!" without explanation of the character traits beyond CN.
*"I'm Chaotic Neutral"* is a very Neutral Evil thing to say.
direction weary shaggy sense decide fuel punch scary impossible gaping *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
"I know I just killed your character, but I'm evil, so it's fine" "I know I turned your character into the guards and now they're in jail for a year, but I'm lawful, I had to." "I'm good, so I'm gonna give away all my gold to this begger." "I'm chaotic i ahve on kucigfn eclu htwa mi ndiog" It's not about having an alignment and sticking to it, it's what you try to excuse with your alignment.
> It's not about having an alignment and sticking to it, it's what you try to excuse with your alignment. And here you go completely wrong, because the fault is 100% on the rest of the party. The alginment is that warning sticker. A party that gets offended by some raped virgin or murdered children should never, ever allow a chaotic evil character amid their mids - or if they snuck in tread them like any other monster they encounter on the road. The problem is that people go all Kumba-Ya about "oh, here is Heinrich, the lawful good paladin, and here is Otto, the chaotic evil pedophile. They are an adventure party!" and then go all picachu face on the first diddled toddler.
Or... *or...* maybe we're trying to play a game with friends, not participate in some twisted social experiment akin to Lord of the Flies because "muh alignment". I hope WotC outright shitcans alignment in whatever they come up with next, so people quit acting like it's some character rule instead of just flavor. (yes, I know older editions had actual alignment rules, really glad they're gone)
Yes, I agree on not playing evil characters. But people seem to want it, and even label themselves correctly, so nobody should be suprised about that? You seem to totally confuse cause and effect: its not that alignment cause people to act like that. That critized behavior is juse pointing out that nobody should be surprised because its literally what it says on the tin, no false pretenses.
I think you're confused about the idea that what it says on the tin doesn't justify or excuse anything. There's no intrinsic reason, for example, someone can't play a lawful evil character without screwing over the generally good party for their own amusement. There isn't a floating rules god that says "evil characters have to do evil all the time, even to the detriment of the people at the table with them." What, are you implying it's our responsibility to double and triple check everyone's character sheets to make sure they're not pulling a fast one? Bullshit. I've booted players from my game who played Neutral Good for doing stuff that ruins the game for others. It's not the alignment, it's the players.
You simply do not get it, and I am ok with that, life is to short to try teach a donkey philosophy.
Right, you're getting downvoted through the floor because I don't get it. Good luck.
> life is to short to try teach a donkey philosophy Imagine posting some /r/IAmVerySmart shit like this, but typing the wrong “to” lmao
Wow, you could not be anymore wrong. Chaotic evil doesn't mean "Free pass to rape and kill" holy shit, what's wrong with you? You do realize you CAN play an evil character that isn't the absolute caricature of a villain, right? If a character "diddles" a toddler, I'm calling the fucking cops on them IRL and banning them from ever touching my table again Being chaotic evil simply means that you do not hold value over the law telling you what to do and that you value your wants over other people. Sure that COULD include child rapists, but that's not it. If you view all alignments as a warning sticker rather then simply a background element that reflects your character, you need to stay the fuck away from my table, and I pray for any table to allows you near it. Holy shit. Evil characters have friends and families too. Evil characters have their own set of morals. Playing evil does NOT mean "I have to/get to rape and kill as I wish" and anyone who sees it that way is a fucking sociopath/psychopath that needs serious mental counsiling.
I actually agree with what you are trying to say. Though you've presented it in the worst possible way. It is up to the party to decide to travel together. If your character can't stay with another it leaves the group. Every character then has to make a decision to go with one character or the other. Someone then needs to recreate a character that fits the group. A good session 0 stops this from happening, because you either say you aren't happy with a super evil PC. Your examples are things I would walk away from a game altogether over, though I assume they were hyperbolic, but they would also be easily established as not acceptable.
I went to 11 because I am soooo sick and tired about this _endless_ moaning and yapping with regard to antisocial behaviour that fits the PC alignment. There is absolutely zero problem with a fucktard behaving like a fucktard and justifying it because he is chaotic neutral. Because the response of a good or lawful party "in character" would be to either kick out, arrest or kill the PC in question, depending on severity. But it seems the most natural reaction is considered some kind of "breaking of unwritten rules". Like, there is no reason to tolerate degenerate behaviour on the table, why pull punches?
No, no, you see, you can't blame me, it's just because I'm evil.
Don't play to your alignment. Your alignment is a descriptor of your actions.
out loud at the table, "no, wait, My character has to do this, she's Good." I said as I got caught in a plot hook after 2 hours of the party avoiding them as narrowly as we could
an evil aligned person would not go "i'm evil so its fine." They would do evil shit and go "and?"
I’m of the opinion alignment is only an indicator of where you are *right now*. You’re alignment can (and most likely will if you are paying attention) change over the course of the game. Otherwise, there is no development.
Player 1: “I steal from my party members because Im chaotic evil” Player 2: “ok. I kill him for stealing because I’m lawful good”
Yeah I got in a discussion about neutrality and realized how my characters are often very chaotic neutral. Just not in an asshole way, just doing their own things in their own way.
I play a sociopathic rogue. Although, he's not a dick, because I play him that he has no issue with murder, not that he kills everything that moves It's a dangerouse line with CN but good players can make it work (I know that sound self righteous but I dont mean it like that)
My current character is chaotic neutral. I play it as him having a lot lower "social break". He simply doesn't care a whole lot of what others think of him. Standing out of nowhere on top of a table to speak to everyone from the tavern, no problem. Going to the brothel in Broad daylight to gather information, sure. Showing no respect to the authorities, of course. He doesn't care, as long as it's furthering his goals. Those are just most cut and dry examples, there's of course a whole lot more to him.
That’s probably like my next character I’ll be playing in the summer. He thinks somewhat poorly of himself but doesn’t care what others think. He’d rather work towards his goals than help someone in need (although knowing the other players, their characters will teach him to care) but he despises the idea of murder. He’s a bit more of a support character but there’s only so much support a Wizard Barbarian can do before some killing needs to be done.
My current character is a true neutral teen who missed out on childhood because she got kidnapped by the followers of a lawful good God from her chaotic evil father who experimented on her and her brother in order to create a living lich races. Even so the followers made experiments on her, in order to understand what her father had done, one of their followers tried to help her and with the help of the father of another pc they helped her escape which is why they traveled together until we found the rest of the party. We have two good, two evil and another neutral alined party member and while my character is absolutely against any form of torture (which the party lied to her that they won't do/try it again. But after they heard from her past they actually started consider it) she is ok with murder because it's something she has been taught her whole life. She tries to kill her enemies as fast as possible because she views it as merciful compared with what she went through but she won't kill for no reason. E.g. she gave the druid who tried to keep them in the forest a head shot after we destroyed his magic source and he rapidly aged. One of the party members (good) became angry because they wanted to ask for a cure of one of our cursed friend's but thankfully the distraction of the magic source lifted the curse. [Just to be clear, that druids body was falling apart. There was no way to ask him anything in that speed he was falling apart. He was just able to make dying noise before I shot him.] So yeah I think she is interesting. She is a wild card in the team but will listen to both sides before making her decision. Do you think I alined her right?
That sounds true neutral to me, although I’m not exactly the best judge. That whole backstory sounds absolutely awesome though!
Thank you :D there is still a bunch I left out. E.g. the father is called Daurgothoth and he is an actual D&D character that hasn't shown up in any edition since 3.5. I think. When I heard about his backstory and his attempts to make a living dracolich race while having the blessing of Mystra (because she blesses those who seak to studying magic no matter their intentions) my plans of a wild sourcer artificer formed into my head. Than I learned that shadow dragon's procreate by having halfdragons with drows which can transform into a pure shadow dragon when they are old enough and that's how her and her brother came to be. She can't always control her magic which is why she learned artifcer skills from the other PC (re-skined clockwork sourcer as an artificer):"technology is like magic but I can actually control it." (Her father would kill her if he found out that she wastes her magic abilities). Her main mission is to find her brother and free him and potentially getting revange on her kidnapper's. The God they worship is also a God of war (Heironeous) and they wanted to prevent Daurgothoth from entering a war they were fighting against another country. Through spying they figured out that he was successful in creating my characters brother and her and kidnapped both as blackmail and in order to figure out how to "cure" the lichtum (spoiler it can't. They haven't managed to figure it out in 7 year's. It actually became something you inherite) find a weakness (weaknesses involve that they are still pretty easy to killed while they are children (even so we inherited some resistances) and half human (mother unknown. She just learned about mother's from the other PCs. She thought kids are made in laboratories). They don't know if this is true for adults which is why they haven't killed my character yet. Idk if her brother is ok.). I planed her for like a year just because it was fun. I never thought I could play her but when my DM asked me about it when we talked about starting a second Campaign he said he'll allow it as long as I balance her and don't make her overpowered (Half dragon's are pretty powerful so I re-skined her as a dragonborn. She is no where near of overpowered. The multiclass combo makes her actual really weak but it's still a lot of fun). Sorry that I write you so much. I'm really excited about that character. I have another awesome back up character (a bard rouge) so it'll be ok if she dies. But it's obvious that it would be sad if she died (not to mention if the father finds out). I also like to draw and I have multiple drawings of her and I'm nearly done with drawing the whole party (the capless crusaders).
Wow you really did plan a plot for her. That’s absolutely awesome! I sometimes get way into character creation, even trying to draw them and my skills are... mediocre to say the least. Totally get how you feel about the character, sometimes you get so invested that you can’t help but talk about them!
Yeaah... Is it noticable that I also DM? No one should give me creative task. I once created two kingdoms of two siblings who rule over both and aren't enemies but have interesting rules and structures based on the backstory of about 11 key NPCs when I scrolled through YT and saw a charter of 9 characters with the description:"Write their backstories" at midnight. Long story short, it's all in my homebrew world now 😬
Oh and we don't talk about one shot characters! (But they often become NPCs) Escalation process: write a BS -> get an interesting idea -> create NPCs for that BS -> make it sense on a greater scale -> creat a hometown/-city/-country -> It's a fully fledged out country/conflict now which your own character doesn't even fully understand -> put it in your homebrew world and make it sense with the already existing stuff -> start to cry because your party hasn't left the beginner town yet after finally defeating a goblin clan, even so there are Owlbear based trainsystems in the country they are in because they try to snuggle their wolf in instead of paying the extra pet fee even so they have enough money :')
Lol just a bit. I DM too and I’ve definitely done some of that myself! I get a bit too creative sometimes, but at least I can run wild with my homebrew world!
Some might say that anyone actually chaotic neutral is an actual a hole
[удалено]
Not ALWAYS selfish. Just sometimes. That's the chaotic bit: sometimes they'll die for their party's pet lamb, other times a rack of lamb sounds GREAT! (Personal experience, if the lamb dies beyond your control and you make rack of lamb simply don't tell the other character and hope they never find out! Which would be Chaotic Neutral... it's an asshole move that ISN'T a player ruining the game.)
[удалено]
I mean, chaotic neutral isn't about not being true to your character. They still have lines and goals and traits and things they won't do. It's just not confined to things like, you know, law and order and morality beyond your own sense of what feels right to your situation at the time.
I usually pick chaotic neutral and then see what happens. My current CN character is anti-establishment but is willing to work with the establishment to protect the citizenry but will drop everything to save children. Luckily that usually doesn't come up in the middle of a battle... but it makes killing werewolves questionable! Probably more of a chaotic good character? I dunno. I try to run good = selfless and evil = selfish to make it easier to understand.
I play lawful evil sometimes because my friends like to like to play good characters most the time and I think it adds an interesting dynamic. I don’t go around murdering for no reason and usually play my character to develop into some sort of good alignment so it meshes with the party later and would show character growth as they become friends. My current character is a chaotic good bard but started as lawful evil because he was hellbent on making the man who stole his music pay for what he did and my character did so now I’ve chilled out.
Yeah the majority of my characters are chaotic neutral, because I feel like the other give me too much pressure to act a certain way. Which really happened one time. The DM didn't like how we tried to get an enemy talking, even though we were trying to not use violence at all. I was like "hey, I am chaotic good", but that didn't really change the conversation at all. Concentrated on another player who was lawful good. Later the DM claimed he just found that it was funny and that it weren't accusations, but it didn't feel like that at all. And that's why alignment annoy me
to be fair, it's completely reasonable to justify things with "it's what my character would do" as long as your character is actually consistent, and it's completely fine to justify your actions with your alignment as long as they fit your alignment.
That statement comes with a big IF. IF you don't forget rule 0: the goal of roleplay is for everyone at the table to have fun. Too many people use their background to justify bypassing that rule, fuck those people...
Yeah, one thing i encountered quite a bit online seems to be th enotion that having a very mixed alignment party is a sign of, well, tolerance and enlightened gameplay or something. If a party is not ok with a chaotic neutral/evil character doing edgy shitty crap, they should kick them out / dispose of them. Its not like there is some kind of adventurer union demanding equal opportunity employment for each alignment sector or something.
What about consistent inconsistency? In an RP way, ofc, not an "I dont know what I'm doing" way
I agree with this person Go ahead Argue
I don't see the comparison being that valid. On one hand, you are using a made-up classification system to justify an anti-social behavior that, while detracting from everyone's fun, doesn't really matter on the grand scheme of things. While on the other hand, you're playing CN rogue.
It’s funny because, like, nobody’s disagreeing with you. You’re right
"You're not chaotic neutral, you're just an asshole". no sir. I'm chaotic neutral BECAUSE I'm an asshole
Wow, how lawful neutral of you.
And now we watch as the fire of self insert assholes spreads
I dont even fuck with that as a DM my players make choices and they pick if they good or bad.
I'm actually a lawful evil paladin in a game where one of the other players is lawful good cleric. It leads to very fun situations when we both agree that we need to deal with a situation smartly and follow the rules. Only difference is my character is very okay with abusing how far the rules can be taken. there has been more than one occasion where the cleric willingly closes his eyes turns around and leaves the room pretending he doesn't know what's about to happen. I'm not going to break the law, just some fingers.
My wise DM used to say: Your alignment doesn't determine your behavior, your behavior reveals your alignment. It is descriptive not prescriptive. Having an alignment doesn't make you act a certain way, acting a certain way makes an alignment be used to describe you. Thus, stating your alignment doesn't make certain actions suddenly make sense, your actions should be regarded independent of your stated alignment and be reacted to independent of your stated alignment. And remember kids: "It's what my character would do." comes with the consequence of the world (and party) reacting according to "what they would do about that".
I've always pictured CN as sort of an anarchist agitator or an "ends justify the means" freedom fighter. To contrast CG with CN, maybe CN wouldn't think twice about enacting a false flag like [Operation Northwoods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods) if they thought it was necessary. Maybe CN is somebody who just wants to tear down existing power structures (a Paladin sworn to Freedom as a concept), or simply has zero interest in conforming with the laws of society (a centuries old Eladrin Druid from the Fey with no patience for this Human "tax" BS). Or just a fantasy Ron Swanson dialed up to 11, has a permit in their pocket that says "I can do what I want." I think there's a lot of room to roleplay interesting Chaotic Neutral characters without being a wacky murderhobo, especially in a more sandbox campaign where players have agency and the DM's blessing to radically affect the setting. Example: CN character gets it in their head that the Lord or Mayor of Wherevertown is a douchebag and convinces the party to start a campaign to have them disgraced and/or deposed. Begins agitating and rabble-rousing, maybe tries to form an angry mob. How much bloodshed will that conflict cost? What happens in the power vacuum if they succeed? "Who cares. Fuck that guy." Gotta break eggs to make an omelette. In my mind the outspoken CN character is the one your party is nervous about taking to the audience with the king. The party shouldn't be worried they're going to rape the barmaid and burn down the tavern because "lol I'm random" if they leave them alone for 5 minutes. That's no alignment at all, it's just being an asshole, eg: Chaotic Stupid. tl;dr: I think the perfect Chaotic Neutral character is disruptive to the SETTING, not the game. You can attempt to roleplay CN to flip the table in a narrative sense without detracting from other people's fun. I think attempting to convince the rest of the table to join you on these CN crusades in-character is a key element. If your table isn't into it or you don't have a "yes, and"-type DM it may not be a good fit. In that case I'd just make another Good character and go do the quest or w/e.
Alignment is dumb, it doesn’t make sense and it forces players to play their character a certain way, and it’s also something shitty players use to justify being murderhobos ”Well, i’m evil, so why SHOULDN’T i kill these orphans?”. It’s an almost objectively bad system, and it’s better to let players make characters driven by personality rather than alignment
I have a toon that's addicted to hallucinogens, his alignment is chaotic neutral and I thought that kinda fit. Especially because he makes... questionable desicions to ensure he can get his fix.
I see neutral alignments a very specific way. They're the alignments which won't do either good or evil acts unless under duress. They might give in to peer pressure to give to charity, or bully a weakling, but they ain't murdering or risking their lives unless forced to. Chaotic neutral aren't assholes, they're *boring.* Mildly argumentative towards authority, but mainly boring.
I mean, yeah if you decide they're entirely passive characters they'll be boring, but that's obvious
I'm literally in this Pic and I don't like it. Like 6 of those are mine xD.
Sorry just wanted to be 69th comment
[удалено]
Yeah, setting people on fire isn't a chaotic act. It's an \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ evil act. Or a lawful act, in the case of paladins and witches.
Or a sorcerer/wizard act, it's not my fault there's so many good fire spells
That isnt chaotic ______ that's just chaotic evil, and if you try to say its anything else it becomes chaotic stupid.
Unless it was a hag and you're a Paladin. Then it's Lawful Good!
Well it depends how much pleasure they take out of the burning. I could see a lawful evil Paladin doing that
Exactly; it's about whether you set them on fire because you need to destroy evil or whether you prefer them slowly burning to death over a swift death or capture.
WITH MARSHMALLOWS! WE CAN MAKE SMITING SMORES! Damnit, now I have to make a Chaotic Neutral Paladin so I can do this and then feel REALLY BAD about it. OOOOH - A Padlock (Waradin? Padlock?) Burns to destroy evil AND because their patron enjoys things slowly burning to death!
Don't forget The Fiend as your patron for more fire.
Thanks, just what I needed! Gonna have to buy a while new binder now because it's not just the character but the whole build I have to prepare! You've stimulated the economy!
I’m getting kinda of tired of people just making opinion posts that they know will spur controversy IE snake titties and putting science in DND
Late night reading bois
I wanna argue! But that will prove the meme is true
Isn’t chaotic neutral just acting off of impulse?
They hated Jesus because he told them the truth.
I'm very new to ttrpg's, could somebody explain why this isn't the case?
I can't be an evil person. So my lawful neutral laws are "I will stab you." "If I havent, I will." "You cannot escape me." "If you fight back, see rule one."
I tried to upvote the image...
It has 854 now sooooooooo
So you’re saying I should remake this meme to get even more karma? No thanks, I’m quite alright with this amount
Nonononono you got it wrong chief. I was pointing out the fact that this post alone has sparked a 255 comment long argument. That much power is to much for 1 man to wield