| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
 Posted - 24 Sep 2002 : 06:06:21
|
What is your favorite alignment to play?
I suppose a better question is: all abilities and character quirks aside, if you had to play only one character for the rest of your life, what would their alignment be?
And no, I don't mean alignment as in who your character hangs out with....I mean chaotic good, neutral evil, etc.
|
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 24 Sep 2002 : 08:30:42
|
Definately Chaotic-Neutral,
I like to play Drow alot, not not be completely evil as most(almost all are) so Chaotic-Neutral is my pick.
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
 |
|
|
king-tiax
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
327 Posts |
Posted - 24 Sep 2002 : 13:58:57
|
| I am always richous in what I do, it is the way of the Red. |
My name is Tiax, I would ask yours but I don't care to become aquainted with the dead.
|
|
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 25 Sep 2002 : 08:02:32
|
....What in the....
What does that mean tiax, im confused. monkmonk?
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31772 Posts |
Posted - 26 Sep 2002 : 16:10:42
|
Greetings, and well met.
I would have to say...Neutral Evil. For me, this alignment leaves alot open for potential character and plot development. However if Evil PC's were not allowed in the campaign, I would say Chaotic Neutral. To my knowledge, I have never played a PC of a Lawful alignment.
Some alignments are restrictive and confining (to an extent, such as Lawful Good), and I have found, that in some of my campaigns, many of my PC's make a conscious effort never to play Lawful Good PC's.
Just a few thoughts...
"True hope is swift,
And flies with swallow's wings" - King Richard III by William Shakespeare |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
DragonTouched
Acolyte
USA
26 Posts |
Posted - 26 Sep 2002 : 18:38:21
|
I prefer chaotic good because that kind of character can help people in trouble, but still has the freedom to do mischief.
I never understood the neutral alignments (I don't mean neutral-good or n-evil). What motivates characters like this other than the prospect of personal gain? It seems like it would be hard to design a campaign that would draw a neutral character in. |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 26 Sep 2002 : 20:08:50
|
The Neutral alignment (aka "True Neutral") does not necessarily imply a character only out for singular, individual gain - in fact, it is USUALLY the opposite (as far as my understanding goes).
A character only out for personal gain is more likely to be pushed toward Chaotic Neutral or Evil alignements, as D&D tends to define such tendencies as the essence of evil...Even evil characters devoted to evil gods are usually out to further themselves.
The term Neutral is actually a very interesting class to play, as it affords the opportunity for a LOT of character growth. As is my understanding, the concept of neutrality is a simple lack of acknowlegement for the laws of good and evil, coupled with a general, broad goal or method which IS neither good nor evil. For example, complete druidic devotion to nature and her balance is a neutral concept. That same druid might disallow the slaughtering of a gnoll tribe so that she may keep nature in balance, even though the gnolls may have been guilty of heinous crimes in need of punishment. Or, a fighter who is possessed with vengeance for a loved one might be neutral in that the fighter cares nothing for the laws she may break in completing her mission, but rather, is concerned with balancing the scale, as it were.
While it is a VERY tough class to play, it is also VERY intriguing and worthwhile...it adds a lot of character to a party, as well, and can offset the typical extremes of good or evil characters quite nicely.
Well...that's my opinion, anyway... |
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
DragonTouched
Acolyte
USA
26 Posts |
Posted - 27 Sep 2002 : 19:07:04
|
Thank you, ArionElenim, for such an eloquent response. I think I have a better grasp on the alignment now.
If someone else has more to say on the topic, please feel welcome to contribute to the discussion. |
|
|
|
Mask
Learned Scribe
104 Posts |
Posted - 27 Sep 2002 : 21:48:53
|
| I say scr*w alignments. Let's just play how we want to. Ofcourse you'd have to make some rules, but not as many as there are now. Ofcourse you can't suddenlky turn good if you're like "chaotic-evil", but I say you should be able to do whatever you want. You're player should just suffer the consequences. |
Nothing is impossible! |
|
|
|
DragonTouched
Acolyte
USA
26 Posts |
Posted - 27 Sep 2002 : 22:07:14
|
| I agree with Mask's idea. Characters should be consistent (penalties if they're not), but the strictures of alignment don't take into account the infinite and often ambiguous nuances of real worldviews/value systems. |
|
|
|
Rory_Lana
Acolyte
20 Posts |
Posted - 29 Sep 2002 : 22:52:21
|
I like to give my characters room to grow, as well. I try to stay a neutral as possible. If the person is too lawful they my put the party in danger at one point and so on. But the fun thing to do is let you character change if need be...but only if that's a possible.  |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 30 Sep 2002 : 16:13:29
|
To defend the idea of alignments a bit, while they are at times restrictive, I think they have plenty of benefits as well.
First and perhaps foremost, alignments allow a wonderful starting point for players who are inexperienced as concerns gaming. It can be hard to explain the idea of "getting into character" to someone who has never rolled dice - alignments shorten the process and give newbies a starting point...i.e-they might have a better idea of how a character may act when confronted with a city guardsman if they are Lawful Neutral as opposed to Chaotic Neutral.
Also, several spells target alignment....the alignment system allows a quick, hands-free judgement of the character's soul....thus, we know who is protected from whom with Protection from Evil. This way we don't have arguments about "I'm not evil! I just like torturing babies and small puppies for fun and profit! What's wrong with that!"
In addition, Alignment also allows a DM the opportunity to see what gods will acknowledge what characters should the DM choose to bring gods into the picture. I.e.-Cyric is not going to give a Lawful Good paladin a second thought, but a Lawful Evil one is a different story...
That said...eh, what do I know? I'm just a PC. |
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 30 Sep 2002 : 17:07:21
|
I do kind of agree with the post above. Though I don't think alignments are restrictive by themselves. They are as restrictive as the players and DM make them.
I do use alignments in my campaign, but use them as a moral compas, as guidelines. Not as a straight rule saying to a character: No you can't do this because it violates your alignment.
In fact the only requirement for me that characters need an alignment is possibly the fact mentioned about who will be affected by what spell effect. And to a lesser extent what deity the characters can worship as their patron.
|
|
|
|
kahonen
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
358 Posts |
Posted - 30 Sep 2002 : 19:20:07
|
When my party generate characters they don't choose an alignment. Soon after getting to 3rd level I discuss their character with them and we decide what alignment the player has played the character and that then becomes their alignment. I've always found that the alignment descriptions given in the 2nd edition DM's guide cover every possibility. After this point any alignment changes suffer the normal penalties.
I can't see any point in saying to someone who has never played the game "your character should behave this way because of their alignment". All it does is complicate the game unnecessarily.
Deciding the alignment after 3rd level, however, makes it fairly straightforward to play the alignment beacuse that's the way they've already played the character. |
|
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2002 : 08:40:14
|
I agree, I think you should just play how you feel is right, and not be deturred by a set of guidelines like Allignments.
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2002 : 20:00:27
|
Yes, that is all true. Alignment should NOT be a restriction...however...
As a DM, part of your job IMHO is to (dare I say it) restrict PCs in a sense that allows you to keep your story line together AND allow for PC freedoms.
For instance, if I had based a campaign around a series of moral choices (like, "do we leave the crippled woman here to die so that we can save the city?" or "Is slaying this entire clan of bugbears justice because they are harboring an assassin"?)that would later SERIOUSLY affect the plot, knowing that I have a Chaotic Good ranger there to further things along helps a great deal. However, if this same Chaotic Good ranger decides that they should rape the afore-mentioned crippled woman, sever her limbs, beat her with them and then ride away on her horse after stealing everything she has so that the party can pawn her valuables, this places a serious monkeywrench into the campaign.
When something like this occurs, I usually take the player aside and discuss their alignment with them. No, robbing the blind priest is not something a true Lawful Neutral cleric of Helm would do. If he does, then he is NOT Lawful Neutral. He is of a different alignment if he cannot find some Lawful way to explain what he did (i.e.-"I HAD to rob the priest of the crystal he carried because I knew he would not part with it, and we absolutely HAD to have it to stop Demogorgon the Terrible from entering the Realms." - a very lawful thing to do).
Now, if the PC wants to play a Chaotic Evil cleric who is masquerading as a good guy, or who has somehow found a way to distort what Helm sees him doing so that he can pursue evil things, then great - in fact, I often encourage this sort of "gaming outside of the box", because if we didn't, there would be no Chaotic Good drow rangers running around....
|
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
kahonen
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
358 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2002 : 22:48:04
|
Sorry, Arion but I have to disagree.
Many of the elements in my campaigns are based around moral dilemnas but I don't need to know a PC's alignment to know how the PCs in my party will react - I know my players well enough to know how the PCs they are playing will react.
Your statement "As a DM, part of your job IMHO is to (dare I say it) restrict PCs in a sense that allows you to keep your story line together AND allow for PC freedoms" seems to be contradictory - I can't see how you can restrict PCs AND allow for PC freedoms.
I see my primary function as a DM as being ready to react to a position I am placed in by the party, NOT limiting the party to what I expect them to do. I have never had a problem keeping a storyline together as a result of player actions. You overcome the possibility of this happening by knowing your players and preparing your material.
|
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 02 Oct 2002 : 08:37:21
|
I agree with Kahonen. I tend to let PC's do what they want, but I make sure they find out what their actions might cause. In the example sketched by Arion on the Chaotic Ranger and the crippled woman for instance. If they PCs decided to do as described, I'd let them. Yet they would find out that those actions have certain repercussions.
The only way that I try to influence the party is by having them interact with NPCs or ahving them find signs that will direct towards a certain goal. But even then I leave the PCs to decide wether or not they follow up. This does not have to cripple the campaign. |
|
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2002 : 06:49:48
|
Well, I took the allignment quiz today that I downloaded off this site, and apparently im Chaotic Evil.....hmmmmmm......makes me wonder, am I really a Dark Elf?
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
|
|
|
eilinel
Learned Scribe
France
296 Posts |
Posted - 10 Oct 2002 : 03:57:54
|
just a little bit tanned, my dear Drizzt 
You know what? I am also neutral evil. Hell! I didn't know that i was so deeply evil.
mmmh... if read well, nobody wants to play a lawful. yet, i like lawful evil, they are just too cute.
But i prefer chaotic neutral, it stays the most funny alignment you can ever play. |
|
|
|
lowtech
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 10 Oct 2002 : 19:09:32
|
| I like Nuetral characters, they are the most versatile. I don't mean nuetral in the druidic sense (those guys annoy me) but in the sense that someone cares about certain things (like family, friends or country) more than moral principles. |
|
|
|
Drummer Boy
Senior Scribe
USA
395 Posts |
Posted - 11 Oct 2002 : 00:00:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Drizzt
I agree, I think you should just play how you feel is right, and not be deturred by a set of guidelines like Allignments.
The Great Drizzt
I agree with you. That's why I like neutral good the best. That way you start out with a high reputation, you can make some mischief, and if you want, it doesn't affect the game if you have evil NPC's in your party, as long as you don't keep your reputation too high. |
|
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 11 Oct 2002 : 06:21:21
|
I either play Chaotic Neutral(usually) or Neutral Evil(if im more or less a character thats looking out for himself) I tend to play alot of Drow characters, so I like those two best.
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
|
|
|
Ditalidas
Learned Scribe
Netherlands
127 Posts |
Posted - 11 Oct 2002 : 14:10:41
|
Alignment has always been an issue that caused a lot of problems. I believe that the overall alignment is important. Are you lawful good and want to do an evil act? Fine by me... As long as his main actions stay Lawful Good. But if that same character keeps up his evil line of action, he cannot be Lawful good anymore. Which in my opinion is also perfectly alright... Maybe the character has very good reasons to change his or her alignment. In that case it might even be rewarded.
I am strongly against the words: 'You cannot do that because it's not you alignment.' What that matters I agree with mumadar and feel that 'wrong' decisions should be, when needed, have consequeces in the game.
But to get back to the main question: what is my favorite alignment.
I play mostly Chaotic Good characters. Don't ask me why... maybe I played too much with characters with evil tendencies, and my lawful Good characters had always a lot of trouble keeping her companions within the lines of law.
With my Chaotic Good character I feel less the need of keeping my fellow companions from breaking in in houses or beating up the bad people.
|
'All that is' is also 'All that is not' for the one cannot exist without the other.
Sweet Water and Light Laughter |
|
|
|
eilinel
Learned Scribe
France
296 Posts |
Posted - 12 Oct 2002 : 01:06:36
|
i think the most simple alignments to play are neutral good and chaotic good. they are just good, just one is free and don't want to lte anybody to walk on his feet, the other doen't care about anything except to be good with people. What is more simple?
You can feel this alignment like you live, you are probably not always so good but it's what to tend to.
Well... it's true, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 12 Oct 2002 : 08:12:59
|
I think Neutral Evil is the easier of all, you dont have to concern yourself with anything besides, yourself! Which is the way I am in real life, it's all about personal gain! Even though the test I took says im Chaotic Evil, but I guess that might be right as well.
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
|
|
|
eilinel
Learned Scribe
France
296 Posts |
Posted - 12 Oct 2002 : 23:40:07
|
ok... depending how you play neutral evil. I mean, if you are the evilest you can, it begins to be harder. And above all if you want to play with good guys. The best is to be enterely evil in a group of good players and nobody knows that. I did, it was a great time. I was lawful evil and and the end everyone was against the others. it was a biggest mess i have ever seen before between players. Actually, it was very close to turn in fight between the characters but also between the players!
Unfortunately i died before and by this way they discovered the truth...
|
|
|
|
Frey
Learned Scribe
130 Posts |
Posted - 13 Oct 2002 : 20:12:54
|
Hi there,
Hmm, I've always felt a little awkward about the 'evil' alignments... I can hardly think of any character (in play or IRL) who really thinks of him(her)self as being evil.
Selfish perhaps (wich is opposite to Good IMHO), yes (unknowingly often), but real Evil ... nah.
I've tought about characters who opperate from a very narrow world-vision and will be classified as Evil, but would still consider him(her)self as good. The trick is how one does look upon other races/breeds/families/countries (again very close to real life), even a real fascist would consider himself to be good, wouldn't he?
The PHB is quite handy in discribing activities which would classify you in one or another alignment, and still ... it seems to depent on to whoom you'll act that way.
2 answer your question: I think I'm chaotic good IRL, and to make it myself easy I like playing Good characters (would consider neutral), not nesseceraly chaotic though (but lawful is quite opposite to the way I think so hard to play as well).
One character I created (but never played ... yet) was a Lawful Good Ranger. But his 'Lawful' would mean 'fitting in Natures Laws' and his 'Good' would mean 'good for the forest folk and the natural environment', so his behaviour in civilized surroundings would have marked him as chaotic evil character I gather... What's in a name anyway?
|
- Imagine ... there's no imagination. -
(remember Frey is just a PC) |
Edited by - Frey on 13 Oct 2002 20:21:30 |
|
|
|
The Great Drizzt
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 14 Oct 2002 : 07:19:45
|
Hmmm....
You bring up a good point, and I agree, but Drizzt is Chaotic Good, and hes not really chaotic at all, and hes good, both in nature and in the civilized world as well, even when he is scorned because of his skin color.
So there might be "something" in a name at least.
The Great Drizzt |
"Don't poke Drizzt, 'tis highly unsociable!" Drizzt Do'Urden -BG1 |
|
|
|
Artalis
Senior Scribe
USA
444 Posts |
Posted - 17 Dec 2002 : 18:44:44
|
I know this is an old topic but I just found it and wanted to contribute my 2 cp as it were.
I agree wholeheartedly with Frey (big suprise there eh Frey?)
I am disappointed that so many people see no merit in playing good characters. I find Neutrality tedious in the extreme and Evil to be completely undesirable in my campaign.
There is nothing epic or inspiring about a bunch of self-serving children running around hunting for money and magic items.
The game was meant as a chance to be a hero/heroine,to be larger than life, and to give us a break from the hazy shades of grey that dominate the real world. A chance to overcome impossible odds agains terrible evils.
I also think character design needs to be taken a step further in the cases where people choose CN and lower. The player should realize that the Characters life would have shaped his alignment not the desires of the power/money hungry player. The game's purpose is to have fun as well so I am not telling anyone to go out and only play alignments they hate, but rather to look at them a little differently.
I don't consider myself "limited" I would characterize my own personal alignment as Neutral Good. I am not "restricted" there are simply certain things I would not do. I will not break into someones house and steal their DVD player just because I want one. It's wrong, and I don't want to do it. I am not just worried about the repercussions of that action either, it's a simple matter of what is right and wrong to me. It's the same with characters, we need to get "into character" and stop looking at the alignments as straightjackets and view them for what they are, a handy label/tool.
All this talk of freedom of action and liking CN and Evil alignments bespeaks to me people who are only playing half the game IMO. I'll give you an example of a well developed character who "chose" his own alignment. You will see that when the character was built and his history considered the answer was laid out clear as day.
Take Nighteyes my longtime favorite character, for example; He was raised in Evereska by the clergy of Hanali Celanil (LONG LONG STORY), he loved his surrogate parents but was often disappointed by their flighty nature. He was sent early to an academy of magic there and did his best to learn everything he could get his hands on as quickly as possible. Shortly after that he was inducted into a Bladesinger lodge (almost abducted, really), where he was taught about the code of the Bladesinger. The Defense of the Elven Way.
To defend something at the risk of one's own well-being is generally a "good" trait IMO. Adherance to a "CODE" is Lawful behavior (loosely, most elves are CG, but I would hazard a guess that most bladesingers have some lawful tendancies), Nighteyes was dissapointed by flighty people, so he would want to be as steadfast and strong of mindset as possible.
(In my experience we tend to overcompensate to keep from becoming the things we dislike)
Thus it was not hard to figure out that Nighteyes is Lawful Good. Keep in mind that I am simplifying the process but the steps are the same.
It's the character's personality and experiences in his/her formative years that shape the alignment not the desires of the one who plays them.
|
Artalis
Email
|
|
|
|
Salius Kai
Learned Scribe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 17 Dec 2002 : 18:59:03
|
| I'm going to have to say that my favorite to play as would have to be chaotic neutral. My character can go along with whatever it is he feels like doing. Its very entertaining. |
"Welcome to these walls of infinite knowledge."
Salius Kai |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Favorite Alignment
