Tweet
Something I have always had the desire to clarify is the scale of lawful and chaotic, which I personally feel that many people find it difficult to fully comprehend. So I thought I'd do a little research, quote a bit from the PHB and try to clear up a few misconceptions.
What I'm trying to get people away from is confusing the alignment "lawful" with someone who obeys the law. A law abider is lawful, but a lawful character does not have to be a law abider. Let me quote the PHB:
So what information can we glean from this? Well firstly it's that though law abiders will usually be lawful, and law breakers will usually be chaotic, this is not always the case. My example is this:
A rogue thief steals for a living. He is a cutpurse and a padfoot, who mugs, pickpockets and generally isn't a very nice person. He has a dozen faces and a dozen names, and no-one in the outside world knows his true nature, nor even his true identity. Can this person be lawful? No! I hear you scream. Wrong.
When this rogue returns to his hidden guildhall, he reports his day's earnings, and pays his commission to the guild. He receives a summons from the guildmaster, and without a second thought, reports immediately to his superior. He is asked to perform a rather unsavoury deed, but without a second thought, he grins and signs up. In this place, they do not steal from each other, they do not lie to each other, they are the scourge of the city, and united as such. They have honour amongst thieves.
So how is this blatant rule-breaker a lawful person? He lives his life by a strict code of conduct, he obeys his superiors, he follows orders out of respect (or fear) and lives his life as determined by the will of his guildmaster. To his peers he is inherently trustworthy, and he adheres rigidly to the traditions of his guild, knowing he can trust the other thieves of his group to do the same. He might not be a good character (and by the Gods he's not) but he's certainly a lawful character.
So when considering the implications of your alignment, try to avoid mixing up the different definitions of lawful, and don't be afraid to try something different! Lawful doesn't have to mean a legion police officer, and following strict guidelines doesn't have to mean the law
What I'm trying to get people away from is confusing the alignment "lawful" with someone who obeys the law. A law abider is lawful, but a lawful character does not have to be a law abider. Let me quote the PHB:
"Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favour new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.
"Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority and reliability. On the downside , lawful can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgementalness and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that lawful behaviour creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. those who promote chaotic behaviour say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has normal respect for authority and feels neither compulsion to obey nor compulsion to rebel. She is honest but can be tempted into lying and deceiving others.
Devotion to law or chaos may be a conscious choice, but more often it is a personality trait that is recognised rather than being chosen. Neutrality on the lawful/chaotic axis is usually simply a middle state, a state of not feeling compelled toward one side or the other. Some few neutrals however espouse neutrality as superior to law or chaos, regarding each as an extreme with its own blind spots and drawbacks.
Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral. Dogs may be obedient, and cats free spirited, but they do not have the moral capacity to be truly lawful or chaotic."
"Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority and reliability. On the downside , lawful can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgementalness and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that lawful behaviour creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. those who promote chaotic behaviour say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has normal respect for authority and feels neither compulsion to obey nor compulsion to rebel. She is honest but can be tempted into lying and deceiving others.
Devotion to law or chaos may be a conscious choice, but more often it is a personality trait that is recognised rather than being chosen. Neutrality on the lawful/chaotic axis is usually simply a middle state, a state of not feeling compelled toward one side or the other. Some few neutrals however espouse neutrality as superior to law or chaos, regarding each as an extreme with its own blind spots and drawbacks.
Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral. Dogs may be obedient, and cats free spirited, but they do not have the moral capacity to be truly lawful or chaotic."
A rogue thief steals for a living. He is a cutpurse and a padfoot, who mugs, pickpockets and generally isn't a very nice person. He has a dozen faces and a dozen names, and no-one in the outside world knows his true nature, nor even his true identity. Can this person be lawful? No! I hear you scream. Wrong.
When this rogue returns to his hidden guildhall, he reports his day's earnings, and pays his commission to the guild. He receives a summons from the guildmaster, and without a second thought, reports immediately to his superior. He is asked to perform a rather unsavoury deed, but without a second thought, he grins and signs up. In this place, they do not steal from each other, they do not lie to each other, they are the scourge of the city, and united as such. They have honour amongst thieves.
So how is this blatant rule-breaker a lawful person? He lives his life by a strict code of conduct, he obeys his superiors, he follows orders out of respect (or fear) and lives his life as determined by the will of his guildmaster. To his peers he is inherently trustworthy, and he adheres rigidly to the traditions of his guild, knowing he can trust the other thieves of his group to do the same. He might not be a good character (and by the Gods he's not) but he's certainly a lawful character.
So when considering the implications of your alignment, try to avoid mixing up the different definitions of lawful, and don't be afraid to try something different! Lawful doesn't have to mean a legion police officer, and following strict guidelines doesn't have to mean the law