Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

What alignment do you pick when you play and why?

13»

Comments

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,140
    Chaotic Good. I do what I want with a heart of gold.
    Wanderon said:


    This to me is exactly why the whole alignment mechanic fails - becuase people can't seem to help assigning rigid unwavering restrictions on how someone with alignment A has to react as opposed to looking at them as flexible personal decisions based on how each individual sees them.

    I think the whole alignment system is kind of prejudiced really. It puts people into little categories. It's like saying people with blonde hair always prefer tomatoes. It takes away a person's free will to say player x or npc x will always be "good" or whatever.

    I think it goes back to the monkeysphere - where people outside of a certain group of people you know exist only as 2d cutouts - not really people with full fledged motivations and feelings.

    That being said, I see it as a necessary "evil" in the game in that it's important to start somewhere when fleshing out characters and story.

  • WanderonWanderon Member Posts: 1,418
    Chaotic Neutral. I do what I want, don't taze me bro.
    @smeagolheart - I'm not opposed to the alignment system - frankly I think it does an adequate job of giving players a way to set a general tone for how their character will develop.

    What I see as failing is the manner in which PLAYERS feel the need to narrow those categories - not just for themselves which would be fine - but to attempt to "clarify" what is the correct (or incorrect) manner in which these general categories MUST be seen.

  • NifftNifft Member Posts: 1,065
    Lawful Good. Yon maiden fair needs help!
    I like how PS:T did it.

    Your alignment isn't a straight-jacket on your FUTURE behavior, it is an average of your PAST behavior.

    This is not easy to do in a table-top game, but for a cRPG it ought to be quite possible.

    (Then just make Paladin a prestige class, so if you've been Good up through 5th level you can get your Smite on.)

  • RnRClownRnRClown Member Posts: 182
    I find these threads interesting. They are of the select few topics that I will actively try to keep up to speed with, even when they spiral out of control!
    SionIV said:

    I can't say for D&D but us humans in the real world are all selfish. Some are just more than others, so the question comes in at what point do we go evil?

    That's a matter of opinion. It could just as easily be said that us humans in the real world are all good. Some more so than others. However, under what circumstances do we lose our compassion and become neutral if not evil?

    This will differ between different circles of friends and family. Nevertheless, I, my mother, my wife, and my best friend have all in our life time came across a lost purse or a lost wallet full of cash, and on occasion a debit or credit card with the pin number enclosed. It would have been very easy to withdraw the full limit of cash at one of the ATM machines that are not coupled with a CCTV camera. At the very least, taking all the cash before discarding the purse or wallet once more would have been simple. Yet, each of us followed the same course of action by handing the lost property into the nearest Police Station.

    We have also experienced the same good natured behaviour in return. My mother lost her car keys at a shopping centre. They were handed into security. It would have been simple to keep those keys until the wee hours and then hold them in the air to see which of the few remaining cars had their lights flash. My best friend lost his wallet. Handed in at a Police Station. My sister-in-law (who may be the one who would not do the same in return) lost her purse. Handed in at a Police Station.

    We have also experienced the negative side. My wife had her purse stolen from her place of employment by a colleague who was never identified. We lost money, bank cards, photographs and other important items.

    All in all, the bad (wherein lies selfish behaviour) has been totally dominated by the good.

    Why were we pressed towards doing the right thing, as opposed to wrong? We have strong morals. We understand that doing good is right, fair, and just. We like to be able to look in the mirror and know that we are not contributing to the negative aspects of this world, even if it would benefit us greatly. I could not be spending money I acquired my such means as I would be thinking of the poor soul who was suffering from losing it, and maybe going hungry or falling behind on their bills as a result. We are talking sums between £65.00 and £350.00 which is a lot for the everyday person.

    It may be worth noting that not a single one of us could be classed as "God Fearing" folk, either. So it is not like we're afraid of an omnipresent man in the clouds judging us to burn for all eternity, for our transgressions. We are predominantly Atheist as a family, as with our extended family (friends). Not that I would consider the presence of religion a positive aid. Few things are worse than a zealot who believe they have a divine power backing their actions, even when they are harmful to those they oppose. But that's a different discussion.

  • LadyEibhilinRhettLadyEibhilinRhett Member Posts: 1,078
    Neutral Good. It's all balance, GOOD balance.

    BY the way have anyone done the Aligment test??? I ended up as True neutral hahaha

    Aligment test:
    http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b


    Yup. I've done the alignment test. My main Bhaalspawn comes up as Neutral Good. I, personally, come up as Lawful Good.

    The_Shairs_Handbook
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,017

    @the_spyder

    No, doing something because you're being paid is called working. It's common sense. People need to feed, shelter, and clothe themselves. Those things cost money. A mercenary paid to save damsels is not necessarily Evil-aligned.

    here is the definition of selfish from websters.com

    devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

    I am not saying that requiring pay to work is 'Evil' in it's intent. but it is being concerned 'primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare'. Certainly that is beyond dispute.

    An assassin gets paid because they need to eat and cloth themselves. According to you, that means that they aren't evil. They are only using the skill set that they have to succeed. They don't necessarily like it or draw any pleasure from killing people. It is a job and they are good at it. So someone who is really good at shooting a gun at range and getting out undetected isn't evil? Even if they kill unarmed and defenseless targets? Women and children included?

    Good people can do certain amounts of selfish acts with little consequences in the way of alignment. As I said though, when that becomes your sole focus, that is when it turns evil.

  • The_Shairs_HandbookThe_Shairs_Handbook Member Posts: 219
    True Neutral. I could go either way honestly.
    Hmm.... @the_spyder you should use the word Hired Killer instead of assassin....
    Assassins are lawful (rarly good) in aligment and do have order and leaders....

    for more information read the origin of Assassins:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins

  • DjinniTonicDjinniTonic Member Posts: 9
    edited March 2013
    Lawful Neutral. Order is where it's at.
    It depends of the needs of the character and party (usually based in BG2 character creation).

    - Any Good alignment for a character that is going to need Draw Upon Holy Might.

    - Lawful Neutral for the ferret familiar. It can pickpocket and can serve as a sort of bag of holding if you pickpocket the PC or a NPC with it. It also appears to not trigger specific scripts related to items. You can carry some Drow items out of the Underdark and get them from your Ferret outside of the exit area and use them. It's a fun glitch to try, but I've never actually used it in playthrough.

    - Lawful Evil for the Imp familiar, and more choice with the quests. The imp is nice and can polymorph self. It's good to have a potential Mustard Jelly familiar that is 100% resistant to magic as a decoy for mages.

    Those are more technical choices. I guess for roleplaying is tend to make more Neutral aligned characters.

  • KaigenKaigen Member Posts: 1,567
    Neutral Good. It's all balance, GOOD balance.
    Wanderon said:

    I'm not opposed to the alignment system - frankly I think it does an adequate job of giving players a way to set a general tone for how their character will develop.

    What I see as failing is the manner in which PLAYERS feel the need to narrow those categories - not just for themselves which would be fine - but to attempt to "clarify" what is the correct (or incorrect) manner in which these general categories MUST be seen.

    This is why I prefer the system to not tie mechanics into alignment. As soon as you say "Class X has to have this alignment or it loses all its powers," or "This spell only hurts Lawful people," you're forced to narrow the definition of alignment because you need to be able to prove, whether by past action or philosophy, that your character should/should not be affected by Word of Chaos. And then because the D&D world is supposed to be based on a foundation of absolute, objective morals and ethics, those methods of "proving" an alignment have to apply to everyone equally.

  • secretmantrasecretmantra Member Posts: 259
    edited March 2013
    Chaotic Good. I do what I want with a heart of gold.


    BY the way have anyone done the Aligment test??? I ended up as True neutral hahaha

    Aligment test:
    http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b

    Yup. I've done the alignment test. My main Bhaalspawn comes up as Neutral Good. I, personally, come up as Lawful Good.

    I filled it out as if it were me, and it came out True Neutral. Interesting.

    The_Shairs_Handbook
  • toanwrathtoanwrath Member Posts: 621
    Chaotic Good. I do what I want with a heart of gold.
    It varies, and I rarely play the same alignment twice in a row. Chaotic Good is my most often used, followed by Lawful Good or Neutral Evil.

  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,017

    Hmm.... @the_spyder you should use the word Hired Killer instead of assassin....
    Assassins are lawful (rarly good) in aligment and do have order and leaders....

    for more information read the origin of Assassins:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins

    Potatoe/Potaaatoe. But thanks for the link. :)

    The_Shairs_Handbook
  • WanderonWanderon Member Posts: 1,418
    Chaotic Neutral. I do what I want, don't taze me bro.
    Kaigen said:

    Wanderon said:

    I'm not opposed to the alignment system - frankly I think it does an adequate job of giving players a way to set a general tone for how their character will develop.

    What I see as failing is the manner in which PLAYERS feel the need to narrow those categories - not just for themselves which would be fine - but to attempt to "clarify" what is the correct (or incorrect) manner in which these general categories MUST be seen.

    This is why I prefer the system to not tie mechanics into alignment. As soon as you say "Class X has to have this alignment or it loses all its powers," or "This spell only hurts Lawful people," you're forced to narrow the definition of alignment because you need to be able to prove, whether by past action or philosophy, that your character should/should not be affected by Word of Chaos. And then because the D&D world is supposed to be based on a foundation of absolute, objective morals and ethics, those methods of "proving" an alignment have to apply to everyone equally.
    But in the BG world this is clearly established - you are whatever alignment you choose to be at character creation - as I recall fallen paladins and rangers don't change alignment when they fall they just lose their powers - not to mention the number of things that actually have any mechanic attached to alignment other than character creation and the action of a few spells can be counted on one hand with fingers left over.

    No doubt there are times when such mechanics fail becuase they are finite and thus must set intentional parameters that may not be capable of considering nuances in an action that might define it in a different manner - but in the D&D "world" as you put it isn't it typically a live DM who makes those calls and not really any "absolute objective morals and ethics".

    Doesn't in fact the D&D world encourage players to be able to plead their case before a DM and encourage DMs to be flexible on matters like these?

    It's just when the action is transferred to a CRPG that you lose that ability and thus isn't it perhaps a good thing that the manner in which alignments come into play in games like BG tends to stay away from tying them to game mechanics?

    I've never played PnP and have little or no issue with the manner in which alignments have been implemented into the few D&D based CRPGs I have played - The issue I noted in this thread is entirely related to the manner in which other gamers - particularly the so called "roolz lawyers" who can't seem to stop themselves from making finite rules that Lawful good MUST do this or CN CAN'T do that out of what should be simple general categories very subject to personal adaptations.

    The concept that all human behavior can be categorized into 9 segments is after all pretty ridiculous to begin with so the more finite you try to make each one - the more ridiculous it gets.

    Of course this is all from a CG to CN perspective with just a trace of CE madness from my youth.

  • RnRClownRnRClown Member Posts: 182
    I took the Alignment Test and the result was Neutral.
    A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutrality is a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil. After all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.

    Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run. The common phrase for neutral is "true neutral." Neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion.

    --excerpted from the Player’s Handbook, Chapter 6
    I answered as honestly as I could. Is there a way to see which answers pertain to which alignment? I went back and altered a few answers to my second most likely option, but the end result was the same.

    The first paragraph makes sense. I don't feel strongly one way or the other in relation to law vs. chaos. I prefer law, but I also care little for many of its policies. Chaos is quite often something to be avoided, but not always, as other times it can be a necessity. I tend to step back from that particular conflict, even if I do lean towards law on a more frequent basis. I stand on the side of good over evil. Always. Nevertheless, I am not actively pursuing good on all fronts and all times. I will do my part, but I will also step back when I so choose. I will not aid evil, other than if it is a battle between two evils and a union with the lesser evil helps smite a more heinous evil. Outside of such an instance, I may not actively seek out evil and smite it where it stands, but if I come across an evil act those perpetrating it shall most likely have to answer for it. I say "most likely" because if it is the assault and perhaps even murder of someone who I think deserves it, then I shall walk on by without a flutter of remorse. I often disagree with the way laws mollycoddle criminals, instead leaving the victims to feel worse off. Judge Dredd has a course of action I agree with.

    I used to consider Chaotic Good to by my most suited alignment. Later I felt Neutral Good was a better fit. Now it appears a branch from Neutral may be where I fall. Whether Lawful, True, or Chaotic, may be best for someone else to suggest?

    The_Shairs_Handbook
  • FoggyFoggy Member Posts: 297
    Lawful Evil. I didn't spend 5 years at evil law school to be plain evil.
    Varies a lot, beat the game with all alignments, and this is the one I had most fun playing. It's good to forget about emotional needs and RP a cold calculating selfish 'hero' on its way to power.

  • KaigenKaigen Member Posts: 1,567
    Neutral Good. It's all balance, GOOD balance.
    @Wanderon You're right in that this is more of a PnP issue than a CRPG issue, because most CRPG's take such a hands-off approach to alignment that it might as well not have a mechanical impact at all. I mean, BG never does a check to see if you're *really* playing a Neutral Good character or if you're playing a Chaotic Evil character and just selected Neutral Good so that you'd have a higher starting reputation and could cast Holy Smite/not be injured when a party member casts it.

    It's a different matter in PnP when player A is trying to justify to the DM why his Barbarian is still Chaotic enough to rage using a rationale that theoretically applies equally to whether or not player B's Bard can still take Bard levels (due to the assumption of an objective standard), when Player B has an entirely different rationale to justify his character's chaotic alignment. Too much DM flexibility in this case undermines the notion that these are objective, cosmic forces that individuals encourage or discourage through their actions/intents/philosophies.

    @RnRClown Your question really comes down to what standard of behavior Good characters should be held to. Is a passive support of Good ends philosophically and when it comes to your attention enough, or do you have to actively seek out opportunities to promote Good? I imagine most Neutral characters support Good in some passive form, because honestly, who wouldn't prefer Good neighbors over Evil ones? A lot of it comes down to whether you believe that most people are basically Good, or whether Good is the purview of people who go above and beyond the everyday.

  • TyranusTyranus Member Posts: 268
    Neutral Evil. It's all about me and my needs
    I always choose the evil route first. Whenever I start a new game I'm in it for me, myself, and I. Once I've beaten it once and know who will/wont betray me I will play as a good character and align with the loyal factions.

  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,017
    I normally play a CN or NE Wizard, but I generally party up with a Goodly group and play the 'Good' path in the game. I figure it this way, if I want to do something morally ambiguous, then the Party leader takes charge and does it. Otherwise, he is hiding in plain sight by doing the "Good" thing.

    I recently had a hankering to play a Cavalier and so I started out from Candlekeep as such. It is fun. I also started out an 'Evil' party and have enjoyed that as well. I think it makes a whole lot more difference in BG2 though than it does in BG1.

  • KristijonasKristijonas Member Posts: 11
    Neutral Good. It's all balance, GOOD balance.
    Neutral good. Because to paraphase 'neutral evil', it's all about 'others and their needs.'

  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    None of the above
    I play a variety of alignments, depending upon what seems to me to suit (or is compulsory for) the character I'm creating. I more often play on the Good side, but not always.

  • MathmickMathmick Member Posts: 326
    None of the above
    I didn't know I was only restricted to picking one alignment. =O

  • francofranco Member Posts: 507
    Chaotic Good. I do what I want with a heart of gold.
    Chaotic Good.

    Chaotic - I don't believe that the government or society has the right to tell me what I must do. It must be my own decision. (But, this idea seems to emphasize Freedom more than Chaos. I don't think the game's alignment system really has a good slot for this).

    Good- I often want to bring about a result that helps others and myself, because I respect humanity and its overall welfare. However, if I must sacrifice unduly to help others, I usually refuse. (Don't tell me its my "fair share").

Sign In or Register to comment.