What Alignment is Most-Often Played Incorrectly?

[BedlamX]

OK...I may have changed my mind slightly on the alignment system...slightly.

I just read the wiki entry for D&D alignments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignme...eons_&_Dragons)). While some will not agree with the article, I happen to find it quite good at making the alignment system a little less black and white that the handbook reads. I also LOVE that they like point out the "with x tendencies" alignments . After reading it and the notes it makes from books I have never read, my vote on this poll would be "None of The Above."

The Complete Scoundrel, which I have never read nor even heard of, places Batman, Dick Tracy, and Indiana Jones as Lawful Good. Now, I would never have thought this, but it makes good sence to me after reading all th eposts in this thread. I play many of my LN and LG characters in a sort of Batman-esque way (including my Shadowbane Stalker). And I absolutely love their references for Lawful Evil. Makes me want to remake one of my old toons that fit this interpretation to a tee.

After reading this article, I don't think any of the alignments are played "incorrectly." Give it a read if you have not seen it. Unless you are even more stuck in your ways than I usually am, you will come away with a much more accepting view of many of the alignments.

I ain't afraid to admit when I am mistaken...

So long as someone proves me to be

And this article does just that.

[Doubtful]

Strange thing is, we seem to be in agreement about "bending" the guidelines on Lawful alignment. Problem is, the stupid books don't really leave that whole lieing part open for discussion. This is why I don't like the system as is. It ain't gonna ever change, I know. But it just annoys me that after making a complete personality, it really does not fit into any of the alignments available.

You are viewing them to sternly. Seriously - Your hate of the system is clouding your judgement.

They're predominately guidelines - They do not define your character as a rigid stereotype (Well, they do if you decide that's how you want to work with them).

As a guide, the key points of that previous paragraph again. With some added words.

As a rule, "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.

*Note: Implies - Not 'Dictates' or 'Is Always The Case'
**Note: Can - Not 'Means' or 'Always'


Edit:

Dammit! You changed your mind and beat me to it.. *shakes fist*

Double Edit:
Batman is quite blatantly a Paladin of Hoar.

[BedlamX]

By the way, I was not viewing them sternly. I have always played as the wiki article says. It is just that alignments, especially LG, have been crammed down my throat for so long it is pathetic. I don't know how many times I have been shot down for playing an alignment (again, usually LG or LN) the way the wiki article states because one DM reads that line one way and another interprets it differently. After a while, any mention of DM applied alignment shifts just set me off into my "who says your interpretation is more accurate than mine" mode.

I actually had a fun Paladin a while back in PNP AD&D. He was fun because he was..well...human. With human personality quirks and character flaws. I made him a ladies man that drank a bit too much. When he drank, he exagerrated his exploits while telling tales to woo women. It was fun and not exactly the typical Paladin. Other than those traits, he was a pillar of the church. He fought evil with abandon, paid his tithe (it was a rule back then...not sure now), and was honorable in all aspects of life. He just liked ale and women (who he always treated well and never made offers of marriage or any other type of long-lasting relationship. My DM loved him.

Until he moved away and the new DM decided he was too vile to be a Paladin and had him fall.

This is where I'm coming from just so you don't think I am terribly narrow-minded in my dislike of the system. The wiki and Complete Scoundrel would have been a great help back then. Might have kept me from ever developing my attitude towards the D&D alignment system.

[Doubtful]

The normal approach that is taken is to give a 1-3 alignment point shift for actions that are 'out of alignment' (and even then, only extreme ones - Everyday things really won't have an effect). No single event, unless it's a truly impressive one, will get you a massive swing in one go.

That way changes are gradual, not sudden - It also prevents individual DMs from dominating characters (I mean, I'm an opinionated ass, you wouldn't want to give massive power or responsibility to me) or inflicting their particular world view on everyone.

For the record, I'm not actually a big arse. That's just an act... I'm a massive one.

[GodBeastX]

OKay, LAw and Chaos are very situational in D&D. Just to give you an example:

Devils are Lawful in D&D.

Devils lie.

Devils cheat.

Devils scare people so much they climb up chains lined with razors so they slice themselves apart just so they can laugh.

etc etc.

Devils are hardcore lawful though.

[TheBlankStare]

I still maintain my origional view: All of the above.

Why? Because you don't play an alignment, you play a character. TBS, sorry I'm going to use you as an example - Nothing personal.

Why is their this bizarre concept that all LG people must be paladin style heroes?

You are simply mistaking LG for Paladin. They are very very different things.

Umm. I don't take much personally here. In fact, I hardly have much to say about anything but I am interested in why folks think that Lawful Good is the most incorrectly played alignment. I've even agreed with the "all of the above" viewpoint. I was actually putting forth a possible reason that Lawful Good is still leading the poll. It's got the votes but nothing really backing them up and I'm curious.

I probably should have used a generic example for Lawful Good though. You can remove the Baragorn/paladin reference and put in "Generic LG PC" because the same thing applies. Out of character, people want to be rewarded with goodies for their efforts. LG characters generally care more for helping other people out than accumulating vast hordes of wealth. In fact, they have even been known to give a lot of it away! I think that even when someone has a lawful good character they still want the goodies and it's one of the reasons that it becomes harder to play.

Another reason is that I don't think very many people really want to play Lawful Good PCs. Our current leader might even be in the lead because people are mistakingly believing other player's characters of being Lawful Good when they aren't. That's interesting to me because it would indicate that people are actually playing other alignments incorrectly.

. . . we really need alignment signs above toon's heads . . .

[prismaticcrow]

The only alignment always roleplayed correctly is Chaotic Sexy.

(back to your arguments then)

[Handsomeman]

i think the alignment that is most often played incorrectly would be lawful evil. or just evil in particular. a lot of evil character ive seen in the past tend to like to be secretly evil. so they do a whole bunch of stuff that would make them look like a good guy. but the opportunity and the rewards that comes with it from doing an evil act never shows up. in the end they just become good guys doing good deeds that just think evil things, but never doing it. or it could be that they are actually doing evil stuff and hiding it extremely well.

[GodBeastX]

i think the alignment that is most often played incorrectly would be lawful evil. Or just evil in particular. A lot of evil character ive seen in the past tend to like to be secretly evil. So they do a whole bunch of stuff that would make them look like a good guy. But the opportunity and the rewards that comes with it from doing an evil act never shows up. In the end they just become good guys doing good deeds that just think evil things, but never doing it. Or it could be that they are actually doing evil stuff and hiding it extremely well.

^ this this this!

[Thief Of Navarre]

^ this this this!

I can agree with that!

On the issue of Lawful Good I can only give you my interpretation because the sourcebooks state differently:

Lawful good doesnt always have to be holier than thou goodie goodies! If any of you have seen/read pride and prejudice by Jane Austen you might think Mr Darcy borders on neutral with good tendencies but for my money he is a prime example of lawful good, Ill summerise so I dont bore you;

1. He gives people money according to need (neutral good)
2. He is relatively disciplined and possesses remarkable acumen (lawfull)
3. He treats people with kindness. (good)

You dont have to be a champion of justice to be a lawful good character, thats why the path is open to rogues

[richardleitch5]

On the alignment RPed wrongly it’s easy to say LG, in fact it’s probably the only one you can really say because unless there a paladin you just don’t know. Ok you can “guess” what alignment they are but honestly when they set of druid spells there is about 3 classes they can be and none of them have a set alignment, same with cleric magic and arcane spells.

On another point wont paladins oaths change slightly depending on the god they follow? I mean the drunken paladin story could work with some gods as not all religions bad drinking and so let a paladin get plastered in his name every now and then because he follows the dwarf god of bear.

[Thief Of Navarre]

I didnt know there was a dwarven god of bear! Now a god of beer; I think the whole dwarven pantheon does a lot of that

[GodBeastX]

Ironically I just read about paladins today in FR. Every paladin has the same basic code, but for each deity they have a special mindset essentially. The campaign setting of FR book shows a few (Section in the image below). Otherwise you have to read Faiths and Pantheon book which talks about gods in more depth. This should give you an idea though:

[GodBeastX]

That made me want to make a Helm paladin or Sune one

[KimKandor]

Paladin of Sune - crazy chaotic loving evangelists stamping out bad hairstyles. Hide your ugly babies.