Forces of Evil

[Blue_Wyrm]

I think people often mistake what they think of neutral as "Good", as far as I understand the alignments. Nowadays, in the real world, Lawful Good people tend to become very scarce, as that'd be someone who goes out of their way to help others, stop their car to pickup the hitchhikers or help the person with their flat tire, etc. Many people in richer countries rather adopt the "do what you want, as long as you don't disturb my routine" mentality, which is closer to Lawful Neutral or even Lawful Evil, for the more selfish people. Yeah, you don't have to be Hitler to be Lawful Evil, just using the system to push yourself forward without caring for others -is- lawful evil.

A little food for thoughts, while I'm supposed to work... doh!

[Rhifox]

I thought that was Lawful Evil, but then maybe I just interpret alignments differently... after all it's a very loose concept, and the only decent attempt I've ever seen at classifying personnalities.

The system in Vampire the Masquerade is much better. :P But then that game is more based around the RP aspect of PnP while DnD is more combat-oriented with RP on the side.

[Rhifox]

That may transcend plain rudeness though, because it's coupled with lack of action...or in this soon-to-be-fallen-Paladin's case, shunning his code.

I guess it's a matter of opinion, I feel evil is the result of actions (or lack thereof) not just words, at least in terms of the medium we're working with.

I'd say it's action, yes. A neutral person might like good deeds, but if they aren't willing to go out of their way to do them, then they aren't good. At the same time if they may want to beat their neighbors over the head with a club because they don't like them, that might be evil thoughts, but unless they actually go out and do it, they aren't evil.

[Vichtor]

Actions reflect what kind of person you are. Consequences of those actions reflect what others view you as.

An act made with good intentions could have disastrous consequences. Saving that one ill child from death outside the walls of the city and taking him to the orphanage where the plague he carried proceeded to wipe out half the population is a nice example. You were only doing what was RIGHT...you were helping someone in need. But the citizens of that city might view that act in a very, VERY different light.

Alignment is subjective.

[Blue_Wyrm]

Alignment is subjective.

I don't think it is in the selfless/selfish D&D sense of good and evil. The Paladin who doesn't know the baby carries the plague acts according to his lawful good moral code and will then have to Atone for his mistake, but the other one that brings the baby inside the city fully knowing the consequences loses his paladinhood on the spot and forever. Why do I say it is a mistake? Because saving a soul is a good act. And saving one knowing it will kill thousands is an evil act. Gods have clear-cut views like that.

How others judge him has no consequence on his alignment... perhaps using real life examples was a bad way to express my thoughts on D&D, sorry.

[Xanderleo]

Unfortunately, for a game to have any sense, hard rules need to be established...which may not always stay as true to logic or real life as we'd like. Hence the Alignment System.

[Rhifox]

The alignment system doesn't have any real necessary use, though, so hard rules aren't needed there. It's DnD trying to put rules to things that don't need rules. I prefer the Heroes of Horror suggestion of either removing the alignment system altogether or using the taint system on its own instead.

[GodBeastX]

I think people often mistake what they think of neutral as "Good", as far as I understand the alignments. Nowadays, in the real world, Lawful Good people tend to become very scarce, as that'd be someone who goes out of their way to help others, stop their car to pickup the hitchhikers or help the person with their flat tire, etc. Many people in richer countries rather adopt the "do what you want, as long as you don't disturb my routine" mentality, which is closer to Lawful Neutral or even Lawful Evil, for the more selfish people. Yeah, you don't have to be Hitler to be Lawful Evil, just using the system to push yourself forward without caring for others -is- lawful evil.

A little food for thoughts, while I'm supposed to work... doh!

/quoted for truth

There's alot of neutrals out there that seriously are good.

I know of two players I think are actual good examples of neutral. I hope they don't mind me pointing them out, but they deserve to know we're impressed. Jaus, and Myrddin.

[GodBeastX]

Actions reflect what kind of person you are. Consequences of those actions reflect what others view you as.

An act made with good intentions could have disastrous consequences. Saving that one ill child from death outside the walls of the city and taking him to the orphanage where the plague he carried proceeded to wipe out half the population is a nice example. You were only doing what was RIGHT...you were helping someone in need. But the citizens of that city might view that act in a very, VERY different light.

Alignment is subjective.

Evil / Good Alignment is objective. How people view your alignment is Subjective. Being evil in Drow society is still evil, but you might get some high morale in your people for sticking to it.

Law / Chaos is subjective, however.

[Krya Flacongrace]

/quoted for truth

There's alot of neutrals out there that seriously are good.
.

Ethane came to sundren as a lawful neutral person, with a high moral code.

He will tend fallen comrades, because they fight beside him. He will walk with evil people because it furthers his plot. But Ethane's experiences are changing his views, he is becoming more neutral good that lawful neutral.

The system does not reflect this... yet

[Blue_Wyrm]

I think we have a tool or something to request a change of alignment? How does it work? I never dared touching it in fear that it'd call a DM away from serious things. :P

[Rhifox]

I went neutral mainly out process of elimination. My character might believe in good but the fact that she won't risk her neck to see it done removes the possibility of being good, and she's selfish and out for herself but not willing to hurt other people to get what she wants, so that removes the possibility of being evil.


Personally, I prefer to just RP as I want and stick the alignment based off of that, rather than choosing an alignment and trying to stick to it.

[GodBeastX]

If you ask on DM chat, it's different than asking on a tell.

DM chat gets hit EVERY DM can respond, and some are not busy. If you send me a tell, 90% of the time I'm busy already. In fact, people need to get out of the habbit of sending me tells for general DM issues.

[GodBeastX]

Well, you're supposed to RP how you want. I tend to shift people personally as I see them move away from alignments. Sometimes people love to argue with me over this, but honestly, you're arguing with a brick wall if I've shifted you.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you go mercilessly doing things, you're going to wind up evil, sorry paladin. If you're going to go around healing everyone who is hurt, you're going to end up good, sorry Loviatar priests.

[Blue_Wyrm]

Oh so you mean a DM comes around, watches you and moves the alignment slider a bit on your character, sorry, I thought I heard we could do like, use a Widget after kicking a puppy, open up a menu and choose "1 - Move me slightly towards Evil". Nah then I won't go to bothering the DM channel unless I've kicked a WHOLE LOT of puppies... and that's unlikely as Drado... really. And those'd be DM-spawned puppies anyway so they'd do the alignment lowering thing themselves. :P