Roleplaying the Lawful/Chaotic Alignment Axis

I have encountered roleplayers who completely butcher the lawful/chaotic alignment axis when they play characters. Especially the Chaotic Neutral alignment.

Personally, I have known more than a few players who would create a chaotic nuetral character and use that alignment as an excuse to commit random acts of absolute absurdity and self-destruction, often casting spells at point blank range to kill off the entire party when that player gets too bored. Quite often, these 'loonies' play Chaotic Neutral characters as if their alignment were called 'Random Stupid'.

Consider the following words, that deal with the chaotic/lawful alignment axis:

Lawful vs. Chaotic

Structured vs. Unfettered
Planned vs. Spontaneous
Thinking vs. Feeling
Disciplined vs. Devoted
Reasonable vs. Intuitive
Fairness vs. Reputation

Left-brained vs. Right-brained

'Chaotic' players are far from being random in their behavior, and will maintain plenty of personality traits that remain unchanged for long peroids of time. (and no, randomness by itself is not considered a personality trait, and stupidity is determined by lack of mental ability scores)

********************************

What do you guys think?

How would you tell (How have you told) someone that they are roleplaying an alginment incorrectly?

What kinds of things have your characters done, that reflect the Lawful or Chaotic axis? (while avoiding the abstracted ideals of Lawful/Chaotic societies)

I once heard a very important observation made on human behavior (which can also be applied to fictional humanoid characters.) And this was said by a psychologist, so it carries some weight:

"Even crazy people have reasons for what they do. They just have crazy reasons."

As for Lawful vs. Chaotic, a lawful character generally adheres to a set code of behavior, but not necessarily the laws of society. (Think of a Thieves' Guild crime boss.) A lawful character will follow rules, even if it is contrary to his personal best interests to do so, because the welfare of the larger group depends on his adherance to those rules.

Conversely, a chaotic character can be a law-abiding citizen (and very often is.) He simply has a "line drawn in the sand" with regard to those laws. If he finds them tolerable he obeys them, but if he deems them too intrusive or inconvenient he breaks them.

A chaotic person is free, no matter what restrictions are imposed upon him by outside forces. He didn't make them, so he does not necessarily feel bound by them.

How would you tell (How have you told) someone that they are roleplaying an alignment incorrectly?

Around here? I wouldn't/haven't, because it's freeform enough that I wouldn't feel I had a right to expect anyone to conform to a consistent alignment even if they've stated it outright. Law or Chaos, Good or Evil, as dichotomies (?spelling) are really only for cardboard chars. People and chars change over time (at least, they should be allowed to). I could (and did) have a discussion in-char with someone playing a paladin over whether something counted as a lie, but only at a philosophical level. I as a player wouldn't accuse his player of breaking alignment if his char did lie. At the most, I might have my char question other paladins to see if her notions of the class type needed revision.

Actually alignments are NOT just for cardboard characters. Even though this site is limited freeform, if a player chooses to play a character such as a celestial from Celestia they WILL be L/G not chaotic/good, not neutral/good but lawful good. A fiend from Baator will ONLY be lawful evil. A demon from The Abyss will ONLY be chaotic evil. The reasons for these alignments is because of the planes that they live on. Lawful/evil pit fiends are NOT going to tolerate one of their brethren turning chaotic/evil like their sworn enemies. Now this is an ENTIRE plane we are talking about not just some little bitty organization but something that holds MILLIONS that would hunt down the offender. That rings true for many of the other planes. Basically what I am saying is that if you want to play a DnD or other type of character you had better chose to forego freeform and abide by the rules set forth by the setting. I am not saying that in ALL cultures the demons, devils and celstials (angels to some worlds or locales) are from the same places but if someone uses the DnD terms for these places then they should also play the alignments as well.

Jason

My characters tend to live by their own rules... there for, the closest allignment I can put to them is usually Chaotic Good or Chaotic Neutral... Actually, they're usually CG or NG. They always have the best intentions, just.... they don't always go about it the "right" way.

I agree and disagree with you, Fen. I agree that extraplanar creatures and the like from those planes are naturally instilled with a certain alignment. But I won't go so far as to say you can't at all play them differently. Even if you read certain publications from the D&D game itself, even the demon lord Grazz't or however you spell it borders on Lawful, and he's a Tanar'ri. But I also agree with you in that playing one of these creatures with a different alignment is going to be an abomination to other creatures of that type, and even completely different creatures. Really, people can PLAY whatever they want to play. They just need to ready for other CHARACTERS to react in a natural way, i.e. completely disbelieving a "good" demon, or something like that, and also, other demons being disgusted with them and even seeking their death. I see a lot of people who basically seem to say, "oh, I know, let me play this kind of character in a fundamentally and radically different manner, just to be different and weird," and then get mad when people treat them in character as something fundamentally and radically wrong and weird. Basically, play whatever you want to play, but be ready for characters to treat you accordingly.

As we didn't do a lot of playing using this such of thing, I do admit I liked the "tendencies" bit that some people can add on to their characters. It allows for a little big of deviation from the norm, yet allows them to remain in their "proper" allignment. Of course, too many tendencies and you start to shift, but that happens. People change. I don't think a single one of my characters that I have played for more than a few months hasn't shifted to some extent, due in part to things that happened to her.

Although I do admit I don't like the "All x have to have y allignment." I don't remember where I saw it or heard it, but it is possible for something to have an allignment that goes against the norm. Just keep in mind that this sort of thing is supposed to be rare. Problem comes here, that if someone comes in that way, it could be rare from their character's point of view and not to the rest of us, because there's about 20 such people like that. Those be the breaks of ISRP.

(keep in mind the numbers I used are not proven, or known. They were just merely used for the sake of arguement. For all I know, there could only be one or two people who "push the envelope" or what have you)

Kathryn_aka_Kat said:

Around here? I wouldn't/haven't, because it's freeform enough that I wouldn't feel I had a right to expect anyone to conform to a consistent alignment even if they've stated it outright. Law or Chaos, Good or Evil, as dichotomies (?spelling) are really only for cardboard chars. People and chars change over time (at least, they should be allowed to). I could (and did) have a discussion in-char with someone playing a paladin over whether something counted as a lie, but only at a philosophical level. I as a player wouldn't accuse his player of breaking alignment if his char did lie.

Click to expand...

Bingo.

Kat said it all. This is freeform, many people's characters don't even have an alignment. Just stay true to the "feel" of your character and you're fine.

I did not mean what I said to be taken so, literally and so "must be my way".

It is just that with Law and Chaos alignemnts, I have seen many people and characters slip on its larger abstractions instead of working with the set of their smaller nuances when defining a character.

I am not just talking about ISRP here either, but all roleplaying involving this axis. In addition, I don't mean that one should pigeonhole their character within a single alignment either.

I was speaking more wholistically and trying to discern how others have reflected this alignment axis with the characters they have played.

Ah, okay, my bad. I misinterpreted the point of the thread. Sorry. Personally, I think alignments can be pretty important, but like the books say, they're tools to help you play your character, not mandatory set-in-stone laws on how you should act. I've had characters who've changed alignments over time, when it became a logical progression. And I've run games where I've thought a player is not quite playing the alignment they have on their sheet. Advising said player is very tricky, though. I told this one player I had who's character was supposed to be Chaotic Neutral that I thought her character was really leaning more toward Chaotic Good, and perhaps she should consider making that her alignment instead. She didn't take it that way, though, and decided instead of playing the character the way she seemed to be developing, she would swing in a drastically different and erratic direction, for the sake of being Chaotic Neutral. So if you're in that situation, you'd probably want to be more clear in your communications with the individual in question.

Personally, when I make a new character, unless I'm playing a class with an alignment restriction, like a paladin, cleric, or ranger (I play 2E), I don't pick an alignment until I get a good feel for the character. That way, it's more like choosing the alignment around how the character already behaves instead of making the character behave like his alignment. That's my take on it, anyhow.