The Neutrals: the oft-misunderstood alignments

[Kirin]

"What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"

Hold onto your butts, I'm going to talk about alignments today!

A few days ago I was talking to a friend about a character who was Chaotic Neutral, and he (jokingly!) replied "So a crazy person!" I know he was kidding, but, neutral alignments are a frequently misunderstood concept. As with everything I write when it comes to roleplaying, I am only offering a perspective, not trying to tell anyone how or what to do!

The biggest thing to keep in mind is the idea that alignments are not something you roleplay necessarily, but often the end result of how you roleplay. Alignment points, mechanically, are given based on actions, not usually ideals or philosophies. I always imagined it as a cosmic game of chess between the gods, moving our pieces about the board; alignments are a somewhat tangible thing in the Forgotten Realms, but they often shift around. Most mortal people would be born true neutral until their actions in life shift them into another alignment.

Good and evil are certainly more complicated than they seem at a glace, but are basically easy to understand: Do good deeds, get good points, kick puppies around, get evil points. But what about people that "stay" neutral? There's not one thing that makes a character linger in the neutral alignments, but a lot of things:

Balance - Not all true neutrals care about "balance"! This is most specifically a druid philosophy of measuring the scales so that no one ideal dominates the others. Some druids may not even follow it (particularly in 3.5E where they can move around the alignment grid a bit more). It can apply to nondruids too, but balance is a certain philosophy, not a blanket rule for neutrals.

Refusal to take sides/Selfishness - The Switzerlands of Neutrality. These sorts of character just can't be bothered, or are apathetic about the plights of more passionate people. They are not bad people persay, but they don't go out of their way to do good deeds either.

Doing things for the "Greater Good" - Antiheroes! These are the sorts of Neutral characters who if asked, might call themselves good; but that's not how it works. They don't get to choose based on philosophy. Maybe you have to torture that guy to get information to save the lives of others. It's still an evil act, you get evil points for that. Maybe dealing with a devil is the only way to keep a powerful artifact out of the hands of someone really bad. Whatever the reasons, the constantly back-and-forth of good an evil points will still make these characters end up neutral.

Keeping up appearances - On the flipside, it's really easy for some "bad people" (particularly LE) to end up in the neutral alignments for extended periods of time, maybe even permanently. If you're a greedy, conniving asshole, but keep helping others because it works out better for you that way...well that makes you a sociopath yes, but not necessarily evil when things are measured by deeds.

Inherently neutral goals - Maybe your goals are to get filthy stinking rich, and while you have some ethical limits, you aren't afraid to get your hands a little dirty. Maybe you want to help the plight of fellow dwarves everywhere, even if it sometimes comes at the expense of others. Maybe you're just a loyal soldier...you don't care who you fight or why you are asked to fight them, you just love your country. There are lots of personal motivations and goals that exist outside the spectrum of good and evil, that can make one move in circles around the neutral alignments


This doesn't even touch on law/chaos, but I've been longwinded enough. Neutrality means a lot of things to a lot of characters, and there are even more ways a character might be neutral than what I listed here. Neutrals are just a bit harder to pin down, you might say. So when you think of neutrality, don't think of one idea behind it, because there's not; instead, think about the series of motivations and actions that led them to the gray side.

We have cookies! (As far as cookies go, they're not that good...but they're not that bad either!)

[Peridan]

Filthy neutrals!

[Fury]

I am totally pro Team Morally Ambiguous.

[Kirin]

I am totally pro Team Morally Ambiguous.

The problem is neutrals aren't really a team, they're too diverse!

[LuxA]

Neutrality is interesting to explore. Some might view it as a lack of commitment but that certainly isn't the case for all characters who have the alignment. Like you say there are so many different ways to play it. I suspect most neutrals aren't impassive to good or evil, just have another way of seeing things, or different reasoning. And I daresay most of them aren't "bad" people. They just don't follow the code of the Obviously Good people. And as has been said before, good in this game isn't infallible.

And what makes someone truly good, or evil? According to the system, if I understand it correctly, actions speak more than motives and reasons. A person with a selfish or petty heart can still be counted as good, if they do the good deeds, regardless of why they do them, and a character forced to evil acts to survive, even if their heart isn't in it, would count as evil since they do the evil deeds.

If I were to interpret the good-evil and chaotic-lawful scales more like selfishness-altruism and impulsiveness, or freedom of spirit, versus a rigid code of conduct, I would get different results - and a lot more neutral characters.

[Doubtful]

Personally I've always viewed anything outside of neutral as being the empassioned and the extreme.

The vast majority of people are N, possibly edging toward the baseline of another ( so N, going on NG). To be living the outlying alignment dream you need to be actively engaged in furthering that concept, be it universal suffering, anarchy, harmony or whatever. Everyone is born neutral (unless they're plane touched), to be something else takes time and commitment. While most people would prefer good over evil, most people don't put in the time and effort it takes to actively promote either.

Of course, there are those of N who are extremists in their own way, forcing themselves onto the path of neutrality to mimic and exalt the world those sections of the world that don't perceive or care about the extremes. Wierdos.

While N may not contain the epic world shattering battles of good v evil, law v chaos, but instead encompasses the whole panoply of the everyday human condition and all those who just try to live, work and make it through the day in a setting beset by extremism and violence.

[Lollercide]

Alignments have transformed quite a lot from their original purpose/meaning. For example, True Neutral was an alignment reserved for druids and those who switch sides for the purpose of balance. Some people now consider True Neutral to be "eh, he's not motivated by good or evil, and he sometimes follows the law when it suits him." -- the perfect between for lawful, chaotic, good, and evil.

In the end, it doesn't matter -- and shouldn't matter. Pretending the alignment system does not exist removes a lot of RP policing that stifles a lot of RP and fun. Consider every paladin ever, and how everyone wants to tell them how to be a paladin.

Even as a Lawful Neutral Red Wizard, people give me unsolicited, long-winded explanations as to why my character is actually evil -- or worse, they speculate my alignment is to dodge paladin smites.

[Phantom Lamb]

Your red wizard is just the Left Shark of the Enclave.