Other subject: a strange thing about the D&D realm, is that you can do 'good' by destroying evil by slaying monsters. In this world, it's never good to destroy human life, at the most it's a lesser evil than prolonged suffering in the case of euthanasia, than being born unwanted in the case of abortion, or stopping people with very evil intentions in the case of war against agressors.
But in BG gate, you can vent off a person's inherent tendency to solve conflicts with violence in a for this world peaceful way. In the Swordcoast, monsters and evil monsters die and it gives an emotional satisfaction to be able to do good in such a emotion-releasing way. Doing good in this world is more about restraining your emotions, for instance the urge to buy ever more.
@Son_of_Imoen Basically, in real capitalism the banks and car manufacturers would have crashed, burned, and gone bankrupt. Capitalism basically means that there is free enterprise and people thrive or perish without government intervention.
I was a little surprised to see people talking politics on here (as it's supposed to be about a game set elsewhere), but thought I'd add my two cents.
true capitalist is not an ideal it existed, it's simply called free market, where the market is regulated by concurence rather than by the gouvernement
@Son_of_Imoen Basically, in real capitalism the banks and car manufacturers would have crashed, burned, and gone bankrupt. Capitalism basically means that there is free enterprise and people thrive or perish without government intervention.
basically, that's not an ideal, that's a sheer hell.
@Son_of_Imoen Basically, in real capitalism the banks and car manufacturers would have crashed, burned, and gone bankrupt. Capitalism basically means that there is free enterprise and people thrive or perish without government intervention.
basically, that's not an ideal, that's a sheer hell.
It's an environement where one can raise itself up by the merit of his work, not an environement where the great mind are squashed by some fort of eqaulity, it push to competion and make you better
I'd say my brain is Neutral Evil but my personality is Chaotic Good. So I always know what is smartest to do but as my personality holds the ruling seat I watch in agony as my life keeps getting ruined by acting all goody goody.
True Neutral, trying to be Lawful Good. I'm too passive to actively count as Lawful Good, but I do what I can.
Some things from the thread I'd like to pick up; A number of people have been saying "I look out for myself first, thus I am Evil". I disagree, Neutral looks out for number one. Evil looks out for number one, while crushing number two. If you want to be best in your class and study hard, it's neutral. If you study hard and try to disrupt other people's studying, it's (very minor, mind you) Evil. Creating a succesful business, competing strongly with competition is neutral. Bombing other stores and spreading bad rumors about them is evil. Both Good and Evil require some sort of action in that way. Watching someone die isn't Evil per se unless you also steal his wallet and help him along. It's certainly not good either, which requires you to get help. In either case, you need to do something.
Lawful and Chaotic have the same thing. Lawful in our society (which is very Lawful in most places) is easier, as it's just going with the established rules. Obeying a traffic light when you don't have to (empty road) is technicly a lawful thing, but it's also just what we've been raised to do. Our society generally punishes Chaos first, not Evil, and as such you can be passively Lawful without real effort. As such, you should look more to personal relations.
A Lawful friend is always on time, keeps his word, pays you back (on time), always brings his stuff when you're going fishing/D&Ding/hiking, etc. Lawful Good friend is dependable, always tells you the truth and will be there for you when you need it with help and advice to the best of his ability (whether this is good help or advice depends on his Int/Wis but it's intent that matters here). Lawful Evil friend is also dependable (sort of) but will use the secrets you trust him with to exploit your situation, drive a wedge in your relationship if he's interested in your significant other, charge heavy intrest on things he borrows you and will use guilt trips and possibly blackmail to get you to do things for him. A Chaotic friend stops by whenever he feels like it, makes up bullshit stories swearing they're true, switches hobbies and activities often and will most likely often get into trouble for a variety of things (smoking/drinking/using illegal substances, tresspassing). Chaotic Good friend is awesome to hang out with, though occasionally exhausting ("Wait, you want to go do what?") but always means well. He'll punch out your bullies and if you're out of cash, he'll always have something to spare (don't ask him where he got it), knowing that either you'll pay him back or, fark it, it's ok just take it, he doesn't care. Chaotic Evil friend is a dick. He'll borrow money he never intends to return, raids your fridge whenever he's over, is a mean drunk who'll punch out anyone who disagrees with him and you're pretty sure he's done a fair amount of prison time. He'll probably try and get you to do drugs as well, so he'll have someone to sell to. Of course, all examples come in measures from 0-10, sort of, where 10 on lawful scale is extremely autistic and 10 on chaotic is extremely manic, but you can still be Lawful or Chaotic without being either of the extremes. Chaotic Evil friend may deal drugs and steal your stuff, or he may be a serial killer rapist. Both are CE, but one's a lot worse than the other. Likewise, you don't have to be a saint to be LG. Making the concious effort to be honest, nice and dependable sets you in the right direction.
Following this logic, CN doesn't have to be the raving lunatic I constantly hear people say. One of my best friends can be described as CN, never holds a steady job, shows up whenever he feels like it, not when we've agreed to meet, changes his hobbies every other week and generally starts chat conversations with "asdfsgojwhtlsj trolololol how're yoooouuu sanni boooyyyy". He's not insane nor a misunderstood genius, just impulsive, impatient and easily bored. Still a good friend and fun to hang out with though. In fantasy terms, dashing swashbucklers, lovable rogues, isolationist elves and other free spirited beings are all CN without having to be insane gibbering loons. Hell, Han Solo was probably CN when he took an ill-fated trip to Alderaan and he's practicly cool made flesh.
________
NOTE: Al alignments are subjective, my interpretation isn't the correct one, there isn't one. The system isn't designed with major philosophy in mind (in which Evil and Good practicly don't exist) but simply to deal with simple, black and white things. Helping people is good, hurting people is bad. Take it too far beyond that philosophy and the whole thing breaks down.
Yeah nice post by Drugar. Might be worth to take into account that your lawful friend could execute you on the spot if you'd let it slip that you had done something unlawful. Best example of lawful going off the track would be middle east where a woman can get stoned to death because she got raped and thus is an adulterer.
@Drugar, I strongly advice against using the term "autistic", not because it may sound "politically incorrect", but because it's not adequate, not even when figuratively speaking.
I appreciate every response and the time invested to it. And maybe I have to say I've used the alignments from D&D here just so I can get away with starting a disscusion on ethics, after all, it's not exactly right to start a talk about something that has nothing to do with the forums.
I also have to say I disagree with any TN view in life; neutral just sounds undecided, some may even say the worst thing in a moral crysis is not to do anything at all. Now if I am to look at the descriptions on TN in the manual(just saying, surely it's not written in stone):
(True) Neutral: True neutral characters believe in the ultimate balance of forces, and they refuse to see actions as either good or evil. True neutrals do their best to avoid siding with the forces of either good or evil, law or chaos. It is their duty to see that all of these forces remain in balanced contention. True neutral characters sometimes find themselves forced into rather peculiar alliances. To a great extent, they side with the underdog, sometimes even changing sides as the previous loser becomes the winner. A true neutral druid might join the local barony to put down a tribe of evil gnolls, only to drop out or switch sides when the gnolls were brought to the brink of destruction."
So, anybody refuses to see actions as either good or bad? In what situation you'll feel to make a move in any direction?
@Six, "lawful" doesn't mean we have to blindly follow the unrational rules. One may strive to live virtuously. Anyway here's the description in the manual:
"Lawful Good: Characters of this alignment believe that an orderly, strong society with a moral government can work to make life better for the majority of the people. When people respect the laws and try to help one another, society as a whole prospers. Therefore, lawful good characters strive for those things that will bring the greatest benefit to the most people and cause the least harm. Lawful good characters keep their word"
@Drugar, I strongly advice against using the term "autistic", not because it may sound "politically incorrect", but because it's not adequate, not even when figuratively speaking.
True, it doesn't cover it all. I can remove/change it if you (or anyone else) feels it should. I will explain why I used it though, I know a few autistic people and all are most comfortable in predictable, time-regulated, non-chaotic invironments and all strongly oppose deceit or lawlessness in any form. I'll try and find a better comparison though.
I also have to say I disagree with any TN view in life; neutral just sounds undecided, some may even say the worst thing in a moral crysis is not to do anything at all. Now if I am to look at the descriptions on TN in the manual(just saying, surely it's not written in stone):
(True) Neutral: True neutral characters believe in the ultimate balance of forces, and they refuse to see actions as either good or evil. True neutrals do their best to avoid siding with the forces of either good or evil, law or chaos. It is their duty to see that all of these forces remain in balanced contention. True neutral characters sometimes find themselves forced into rather peculiar alliances. To a great extent, they side with the underdog, sometimes even changing sides as the previous loser becomes the winner. A true neutral druid might join the local barony to put down a tribe of evil gnolls, only to drop out or switch sides when the gnolls were brought to the brink of destruction."
So, anybody refuses to see actions as either good or bad? In what situation you'll feel to make a move in any direction?
I find this description lacking as it requires a form of action or commitment on the person's part. It completely leaves out the people who see bad things happening and then shrug and walk away. I don't know a single person who said "Well yesterday I tipped the waiter in the restaurant so now I'm going to rip them off. Balance!" I do agree that this is very infuriating behaviour but I have to admit that I'm guilty of it way more than I want to be.
Yeah nice post by Drugar. Might be worth to take into account that your lawful friend could execute you on the spot if you'd let it slip that you had done something unlawful. Best example of lawful going off the track would be middle east where a woman can get stoned to death because she got raped and thus is an adulterer.
Lawful Good friend would report me to the proper authorities and then have faith in the system to deal with me. Executing me is Chaotic, as he doesn't have the right to take lives as he sees fit. And yes, that is a good example of Law gone wrong. Still, in those countries it's considered Chaotic, possibly Evil to try and stop her death from happening. A good example of alignment being flexible and bound to culture/location.
@Zafiro You forget to take into account that there are people who believe the world will be better for all by stoning a girl. Might not be the law in a larger part of the world or in Baldurs Gate but there will always be some extreme laws somewhere that some follow with zeal. A good fantasy setting law would be the somewhat common law against using magic which is rather hard to not break for those born with the power.
@Drugar, Yes in todays civilized world your friend would in most cases not have the legal right or obligation to kill you but that does not mean he wouldn't do it if the law said so. In military it is not an uncommon thing for desertion and on ships of old you could easily get killed for falling asleep on your post since this put the whole ship at risk. Also was not all that long ago where alchemy was an illegal practice that would get you killed.
@Six, like I said it allready a few times here, bad actions comes from a poor understanding of good and wrong; not that easy for people thesedays to act good if they are bombarded by vices everyday from everywhere they look; they don't call it "jailbait" for nothing; underage girls still bewilders me where I live, theres a real cult of the body, and they wonder why men take women for granted. We need to educate ourselves, alot of us learn it the hard way. How about with the next opportunity we try to talk about ethics out loud with a friend or family member.
I'm just arguing that lawful have nothing to do with good or bad, though in general laws are supposed to be for the greater good. Then of course many of our laws are made out of our current societies moral views which are completely biased and always change over time. Eskimos for example often killed infant girls which makes most rage but this was due to the laws of nature, males where hunters and often died which would make the whole tribe starve to death if half of the children where female since so many males died. The jailbait you talk about was long since married just a few hundred years ago while these days even prison inmates tend to kill those who have committed such a crime.
@Six, I have a good reason to belive lawful has alot to do with good or bad. Like I said it in a previous post: I see "lawful" creed to come from rational thought, logic if you like, and the art of Politics: "Every state is a community of some kind, and every community is established with a view to some good; for mankind always act in order to obtain that which they think good. But, if all communities aim at some good, the state or political community, which is the highest of all, and which embraces all the rest, aims at good in a greater degree than any other, and at the highest good." The purpose of politics is supreme good.Sorry if you read the post allready and this feels like repeating myself. Yes, many, many people in charge today don't belive in anything anymore. The Lawmaker today, seems to me, lacks any philosophy culture. Maybe we should talk avbout virtue, like temperance, if we are to agree, we can easily change alot about lives by it.
@Six, I have a good reason to belive lawful has alot to do with good or bad. Like I said it in a previous post: I see "lawful" creed to come from rational thought, logic if you like, and the art of Politics: "Every state is a community of some kind, and every community is established with a view to some good; for mankind always act in order to obtain that which they think good. But, if all communities aim at some good, the state or political community, which is the highest of all, and which embraces all the rest, aims at good in a greater degree than any other, and at the highest good." The purpose of politics is supreme good.Sorry if you read the post allready and this feels like repeating myself. Yes, many, many people in charge today don't belive in anything anymore. The Lawmaker today, seems to me, lacks any philosophy culture. Maybe we should talk avbout virtue, like temperance, if we are to agree, we can easily change alot about lives by it.
If the purpose of politics is supreme good then why are politicians universally corrupt?
What I really should have done is include more than just lawful in my arguments. As I understand it Lawful Evil follow the law because they want to avoid getting punished, if there was a law to give beggars money a Lawful Evil person would do it but they would do so reluctantly. A Lawful Good person in the opposite scenario would want to give the beggar money but would not because then they would break the law. A Chaotic Good person would say screw this stupid law and give the beggar money. There is even an encounter like this in BG2 where you can either get the beggar sent to jail or lie to the city guard to keep him safe. A LG character might in the end convince the city council to change the law and make things a whole lot better though this would take allot of times and we'd have plenty of beggars starving to death in the meantime. A CG character might end up fighting the city guard to give a few beggars food for a few more days but short of razing the city to the ground they would likely not change anything.
As I understand it Lawful Evil follow the law because they want to avoid getting punished, if there was a law to give beggars money a Lawful Evil person would do it but they would do so reluctantly.
If you follow the Lawful alignment only out of fear of punishment, then you're not truly Lawful. That would make 95% of all people in civilised countries automaticly Lawful. Not saying that deep down, we all want to plunder and murder but only the Law is stopping is but if your behavior changes radicly when there is an absence of Law, then you're not a lawful person (traffic light at an empty road example). A Lawful person follows the law because they believe that order, hierarchy and rules are the best way to live, whether they strive to make the world a better place or whether they crush the populace and glorify their superiors.
A chaotic person can still follow the law out of fear of said laws, but he'll grow unhappy quick if he doesn't get out from under this (possibly percieved) oppression. All teenagers get +10 on their Chaotic Score.
If the purpose of politics is supreme good then why are politicians universally corrupt?
Not losing my patience, but...I belive I did say it more than once: "All these things happen to them by reason of their ignorance of what is good and evil." They don't know what's good for them for they don't care about every human. And we can't say all politicians are corrupt. Like I also said just before, some politicians have no God, no morals, no philosophy culture at all, and that's just how the 21st century goes. I guess "because power corrupts" fits, but it's not universal.
@Drugar I don't really agree with your viewpoint on the alignments but I find it intriguing that it would at the core be about order for a lawful person and the sudden lack of laws should not change anything. Still to me that sounds more like chaotic good as the laws itself don't really matter. More like universal morality where a moral code should work in any society no matter what. IE lying is bad because if you expect everyone to lie there would be no reason to communicate and if murder or theft is ok none would want to be around others and thus you no longer have a society.
I personally break laws on a daily basis and don't care the least about what society tells me to do or not do. Allot of people break the law unknowingly too, dumblaws.com to get a hint. If the law disappeared I would still act the same way as I do now, most likely starve to death in a long time anarchy as I wouldn't plunder or steal. Do believe in order and follow rather strict moral codes so would that make me lawful?
@Drugar If the law disappeared I would still act the same way as I do now, most likely starve to death in a long time anarchy as I wouldn't plunder or steal
I would do the same.
Except in the case of some sort of apocalypse which left very few humans alive; in this situation I would pull a "Zombieland" and go live in Bill Murray's house or something.
I just did that alignment thingie on wizards, and I got Lawful Good for some reason. I'm not sure that I respect laws overly much, in the end they are merely useful tools. People are basically good, and the only good law is one that protects that goodness, and allows it to flourish in all of us.
However all too often the "rules" are set up to protect those who would seek to do harm, or are just after self enrichment, and to protect their own position. However when such systems exist it is best to tear them down from within the confines of that legal system. Such is possible, look at Ghandi (a trained lawyer lest we forget), who with a formidable knowledge of law, and a fundemental understanding of goodness defeated the British Empire all the while advocating a non-violent approach.
That said as with the rise of fascism, or dare I say terrorism today sometimes you need to pick up the sword, although I do lament that in these days the sword is drawn all too often without thinking. In the end good has to trump law, otherwise what was the point of law in the first place?
Comments
But in BG gate, you can vent off a person's inherent tendency to solve conflicts with violence in a for this world peaceful way. In the Swordcoast, monsters and evil monsters die and it gives an emotional satisfaction to be able to do good in such a emotion-releasing way. Doing good in this world is more about restraining your emotions, for instance the urge to buy ever more.
Basically, in real capitalism the banks and car manufacturers would have crashed, burned, and gone bankrupt. Capitalism basically means that there is free enterprise and people thrive or perish without government intervention.
I was a little surprised to see people talking politics on here (as it's supposed to be about a game set elsewhere), but thought I'd add my two cents.
I tried continuing our tangent in a 'message.' Did it work?
So I always know what is smartest to do but as my personality holds the ruling seat I watch in agony as my life keeps getting ruined by acting all goody goody.
Some things from the thread I'd like to pick up;
A number of people have been saying "I look out for myself first, thus I am Evil". I disagree, Neutral looks out for number one. Evil looks out for number one, while crushing number two. If you want to be best in your class and study hard, it's neutral. If you study hard and try to disrupt other people's studying, it's (very minor, mind you) Evil.
Creating a succesful business, competing strongly with competition is neutral. Bombing other stores and spreading bad rumors about them is evil.
Both Good and Evil require some sort of action in that way. Watching someone die isn't Evil per se unless you also steal his wallet and help him along. It's certainly not good either, which requires you to get help. In either case, you need to do something.
Lawful and Chaotic have the same thing. Lawful in our society (which is very Lawful in most places) is easier, as it's just going with the established rules. Obeying a traffic light when you don't have to (empty road) is technicly a lawful thing, but it's also just what we've been raised to do. Our society generally punishes Chaos first, not Evil, and as such you can be passively Lawful without real effort. As such, you should look more to personal relations.
A Lawful friend is always on time, keeps his word, pays you back (on time), always brings his stuff when you're going fishing/D&Ding/hiking, etc. Lawful Good friend is dependable, always tells you the truth and will be there for you when you need it with help and advice to the best of his ability (whether this is good help or advice depends on his Int/Wis but it's intent that matters here). Lawful Evil friend is also dependable (sort of) but will use the secrets you trust him with to exploit your situation, drive a wedge in your relationship if he's interested in your significant other, charge heavy intrest on things he borrows you and will use guilt trips and possibly blackmail to get you to do things for him.
A Chaotic friend stops by whenever he feels like it, makes up bullshit stories swearing they're true, switches hobbies and activities often and will most likely often get into trouble for a variety of things (smoking/drinking/using illegal substances, tresspassing). Chaotic Good friend is awesome to hang out with, though occasionally exhausting ("Wait, you want to go do what?") but always means well. He'll punch out your bullies and if you're out of cash, he'll always have something to spare (don't ask him where he got it), knowing that either you'll pay him back or, fark it, it's ok just take it, he doesn't care.
Chaotic Evil friend is a dick. He'll borrow money he never intends to return, raids your fridge whenever he's over, is a mean drunk who'll punch out anyone who disagrees with him and you're pretty sure he's done a fair amount of prison time. He'll probably try and get you to do drugs as well, so he'll have someone to sell to.
Of course, all examples come in measures from 0-10, sort of, where 10 on lawful scale is extremely autistic and 10 on chaotic is extremely manic, but you can still be Lawful or Chaotic without being either of the extremes. Chaotic Evil friend may deal drugs and steal your stuff, or he may be a serial killer rapist. Both are CE, but one's a lot worse than the other. Likewise, you don't have to be a saint to be LG. Making the concious effort to be honest, nice and dependable sets you in the right direction.
Following this logic, CN doesn't have to be the raving lunatic I constantly hear people say. One of my best friends can be described as CN, never holds a steady job, shows up whenever he feels like it, not when we've agreed to meet, changes his hobbies every other week and generally starts chat conversations with "asdfsgojwhtlsj trolololol how're yoooouuu sanni boooyyyy".
He's not insane nor a misunderstood genius, just impulsive, impatient and easily bored. Still a good friend and fun to hang out with though.
In fantasy terms, dashing swashbucklers, lovable rogues, isolationist elves and other free spirited beings are all CN without having to be insane gibbering loons. Hell, Han Solo was probably CN when he took an ill-fated trip to Alderaan and he's practicly cool made flesh.
________
NOTE:
Al alignments are subjective, my interpretation isn't the correct one, there isn't one. The system isn't designed with major philosophy in mind (in which Evil and Good practicly don't exist) but simply to deal with simple, black and white things. Helping people is good, hurting people is bad. Take it too far beyond that philosophy and the whole thing breaks down.
Best example of lawful going off the track would be middle east where a woman can get stoned to death because she got raped and thus is an adulterer.
I appreciate every response and the time invested to it. And maybe I have to say I've used the alignments from D&D here just so I can get away with starting a disscusion on ethics, after all, it's not exactly right to start a talk about something that has nothing to do with the forums.
I also have to say I disagree with any TN view in life; neutral just sounds undecided, some may even say the worst thing in a moral crysis is not to do anything at all.
Now if I am to look at the descriptions on TN in the manual(just saying, surely it's not written in stone):
(True) Neutral: True neutral characters believe in the ultimate
balance of forces, and they refuse to see actions as either good or evil.
True neutrals do their best to avoid siding with the forces of either
good or evil, law or chaos. It is their duty to see that all of these forces
remain in balanced contention. True neutral characters sometimes find
themselves forced into rather peculiar alliances. To a great extent, they
side with the underdog, sometimes even changing sides as the
previous loser becomes the winner. A true neutral druid might join the
local barony to put down a tribe of evil gnolls, only to drop out or
switch sides when the gnolls were brought to the brink of destruction."
So, anybody refuses to see actions as either good or bad? In what situation you'll feel to make a move in any direction?
"Lawful Good: Characters of this alignment believe that an
orderly, strong society with a moral government can work to make
life better for the majority of the people. When people respect the
laws and try to help one another, society as a whole prospers.
Therefore, lawful good characters strive for those things that will bring
the greatest benefit to the most people and cause the least harm.
Lawful good characters keep their word"
I will explain why I used it though, I know a few autistic people and all are most comfortable in predictable, time-regulated, non-chaotic invironments and all strongly oppose deceit or lawlessness in any form. I'll try and find a better comparison though. I find this description lacking as it requires a form of action or commitment on the person's part. It completely leaves out the people who see bad things happening and then shrug and walk away. I don't know a single person who said "Well yesterday I tipped the waiter in the restaurant so now I'm going to rip them off. Balance!"
I do agree that this is very infuriating behaviour but I have to admit that I'm guilty of it way more than I want to be. Lawful Good friend would report me to the proper authorities and then have faith in the system to deal with me. Executing me is Chaotic, as he doesn't have the right to take lives as he sees fit.
And yes, that is a good example of Law gone wrong. Still, in those countries it's considered Chaotic, possibly Evil to try and stop her death from happening. A good example of alignment being flexible and bound to culture/location. Thank you, thank you! Like the post, tell your friends, err, or something.
A good fantasy setting law would be the somewhat common law against using magic which is rather hard to not break for those born with the power.
@Drugar, Yes in todays civilized world your friend would in most cases not have the legal right or obligation to kill you but that does not mean he wouldn't do it if the law said so. In military it is not an uncommon thing for desertion and on ships of old you could easily get killed for falling asleep on your post since this put the whole ship at risk. Also was not all that long ago where alchemy was an illegal practice that would get you killed.
Then of course many of our laws are made out of our current societies moral views which are completely biased and always change over time. Eskimos for example often killed infant girls which makes most rage but this was due to the laws of nature, males where hunters and often died which would make the whole tribe starve to death if half of the children where female since so many males died.
The jailbait you talk about was long since married just a few hundred years ago while these days even prison inmates tend to kill those who have committed such a crime.
As I understand it Lawful Evil follow the law because they want to avoid getting punished, if there was a law to give beggars money a Lawful Evil person would do it but they would do so reluctantly.
A Lawful Good person in the opposite scenario would want to give the beggar money but would not because then they would break the law.
A Chaotic Good person would say screw this stupid law and give the beggar money.
There is even an encounter like this in BG2 where you can either get the beggar sent to jail or lie to the city guard to keep him safe.
A LG character might in the end convince the city council to change the law and make things a whole lot better though this would take allot of times and we'd have plenty of beggars starving to death in the meantime. A CG character might end up fighting the city guard to give a few beggars food for a few more days but short of razing the city to the ground they would likely not change anything.
A Lawful person follows the law because they believe that order, hierarchy and rules are the best way to live, whether they strive to make the world a better place or whether they crush the populace and glorify their superiors.
A chaotic person can still follow the law out of fear of said laws, but he'll grow unhappy quick if he doesn't get out from under this (possibly percieved) oppression.
All teenagers get +10 on their Chaotic Score.
Still to me that sounds more like chaotic good as the laws itself don't really matter. More like universal morality where a moral code should work in any society no matter what. IE lying is bad because if you expect everyone to lie there would be no reason to communicate and if murder or theft is ok none would want to be around others and thus you no longer have a society.
I personally break laws on a daily basis and don't care the least about what society tells me to do or not do. Allot of people break the law unknowingly too, dumblaws.com to get a hint.
If the law disappeared I would still act the same way as I do now, most likely starve to death in a long time anarchy as I wouldn't plunder or steal.
Do believe in order and follow rather strict moral codes so would that make me lawful?
Except in the case of some sort of apocalypse which left very few humans alive; in this situation I would pull a "Zombieland" and go live in Bill Murray's house or something.
However all too often the "rules" are set up to protect those who would seek to do harm, or are just after self enrichment, and to protect their own position. However when such systems exist it is best to tear them down from within the confines of that legal system. Such is possible, look at Ghandi (a trained lawyer lest we forget), who with a formidable knowledge of law, and a fundemental understanding of goodness defeated the British Empire all the while advocating a non-violent approach.
That said as with the rise of fascism, or dare I say terrorism today sometimes you need to pick up the sword, although I do lament that in these days the sword is drawn all too often without thinking. In the end good has to trump law, otherwise what was the point of law in the first place?