I hate Chaotic Neutral

[Kesh]

I think there's a lot of misunderstanding of a lot of the alignments. CN is, basically, just someone who is not overly altruistic and doesn't like too many rules. It is neither random nor disinterested.

I've played a CN character who was a motivator for the group. He was very, very curious about things, wanted to accumulate toys and treasure, and had no qualms about volunteering his "friends" for things.

My wife is about to play a character that I see as CN (she hasn't picked an alignment, yet). It's a bounty-hunter with no real loyalties, except to whomever is paying her at the moment. She is both aggressive and proactive.

I don't think the problem is with the CN alignment. I think it's with a player who is looking for a way to be disruptively lazy.

I think this is the best way of thinking about CN. It's not that they're free of morals or anything... it's that they're, essentially, anarchists. They do what they want, when they want, and if they get into trouble it's their own fault. Anyone who plays CN and then complains when their character has to suffer the consequences of their actions is not getting the concept.

I think the best fictional example of CN I've seen is Jayne Cobb from Firefly / Serenity. He's a ruthless, reckless mercenary, but he (generally) follows the orders of his employer, since that's where the money comes from. He's also none too polite.

 

[Henry]

Now this seems like a player who is afraid you may use those 'ethical strings' to somehow screw their character over. They probably see this as an attempt to make a character who cannot be 'interfered' with by the DM.

To me, the flaw in this thinking (of any player espousing this idea) is that the purpose of a DM is, indeed, to "interfere" with a PC. A DM sets up the challenges, provides an adventure, gives the players a reason their characters are subjected to a perilous life for greater good or gain. If a character is not "screwed with", then nothing happens to him. There's an issue of trust, but if you don't trust the person who's DM'ing, then there's no reason for the GROUP to hang together, much less the characters.

Things must be very different around here, since...I have almost never seen CN to cause any problems.

It's all in who's in the group, really. I've seen it many times, because some players just don't want to either (A) have consequences for their actions, or (B) just get in, get the loot, and get out. The first is wish fulfillment, kind of a pen and paper frustration removal. The second is more about power acquisition, when someone wants very little to get in the way of it. Chaotic neutral, "the closest thing to "chaotic evil as you can get" is the quickest tool to these means.

 

[amethal]

While I agree that is is possible for a character to run a fair, fun CN character which adds to the gaming experience for everyone, I've yet to see it happen.

Our party has Toby Underfoot, CN Halfling Rogue (with a few levels of fighter). Toby is a light hearted, fun loving halfling who adventures to stave off boredom, satisfy his curiosity and pay for his love of bacon sandwiches.

He's always the first to volunteer for anything that sounds like fun, loves a challenge and likes nothing more than showing off his talents in front of his comrades. If he saves the group, he'll boast about it for weeks.

He has no respect for authority, but doesn't use that as an excuse for leaving a trail of murder and destruction in his wake.

His player does a fine job of roleplaying him, and genuinely adds to the gaming experience for everyone.

 

[Mystery Man]

I hate CN as an alignment choice. But it seems to be the most popular choice these days. But just like many players hate elves as a popular choice, I hate CN.

I am considering declaring a moratorium on it. Seriously. I hate kibitzing with player choice, but I find that the attitude behind the alignment choice of CN is at odds with my GMing style.

Basically, it says to me that the PC will not get involved in the adventure unless there is personal gain involved. I find that very limiting and get tired of twisting the player's arms or bribing them.

I tried to provide for it by simply requiring that, if the PC is CN, required to come up with a strong character motivation that would explain their presence on some of my adventures without twisting their arm. But this has met with limited success, primarily because I find the players' efforts in this vein uninspiring. Which just tends to confirm my thought that CN is a lazy character design choice.

Am I alone here? Any strategy in dealing with this?

I make my players play heroic good characters. No neutrals or evils whatsoever.

 

[Turjan]

In my experience, the CN alignment can be summarized as "socially inept". I don't mean this as a good description of what the alignment is supposed to mean, but as a description how I see it played. It's some kind of mechanical excuse for a player's trolling. At least that's what I see when the CN player again disrupts all party plans, doesn't keep any arrangements and annoys all other players to no end: "I don't know what you have, I only play according to my alignment!" I have yet to see a single example of someone playing this alignment in a non-disruptive way. Nowadays, I come up with a warning to any player who just mentions his plans to play a CN character. This warning is usually enough to discourage him, without any need from my side to ban it from the table.

Actually, I see LE a better fit for a party than CN. Not that I like having evil chars in my group - this usually is banned - but they are at least not disruptive. They just have different goals.

 

[Voadam]

I think its a player and character concept issue, not an alignment issue. Would the player play any differently with a straight neutral alignment? With a completely mercenary character concept but who is LN?

Do you just want him to be good? To belong to a cause or group so that money is not the hook into the adventure?

Ever tried having an npc steal powerful magic from him? Revenge works as a great motivator for self centered evil characters as well as for good guys.

 

[Mystery Man]

Ever tried having an npc steal powerful magic from him? Revenge works as a great motivator for self centered evil characters as well as for good guys.

IMBO that's just backdoor railroading. For me it's much more straightforward and true just to say "this is the type of game I run" and "these are the alignments I don't allow" rather than try to manipulate them to do the same thing. Much less tiring on the psyche.

 

[Oberyn]

See now I am going to use this thread as an example when i talk to one of my DM's. He wants to start a game where we are all Rogues in a major city. I was drooling at the thought of a game like that considering i love being Rogueish...
Then he tells me the only alignment that is allowed is CN...
Well im a player folks and im not a very big fan of CN either and i realise that i might jsut get alignment better than my DM because when i asked to play LN he said "Your going to be a theif who follows the law?!" Not only does this alignment restriction make me not want to roleplay my character at all (known enough CN people in real life ot be sick of seeing them in a game im supposed to have fun with.) it also doesent allow me to play the concept i was going to go for Rogue/Monk. Because despite making CN the only alignment possible he hasnt changed any of the class restrictions so we cant have anything that doesent allow chaotic characters.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

But CN alone, without specific statement of further motivation, does not give me confidence that you are going to run a character who belongs in the party.

Neither is being LG much of a motivation either. If players don't write out histories and tell the DM what motivates their characters then yea, just being CN won't let you fit into a group.

 

[schporto]

I guess what I am saying is the players have to meet you half way regardless of their alignement or choose an AL that works for the group.

That's it in a nutshell right there. The base problem isn't with the CN or evil alignments I think, but with the motivation to play. The DM has a responsibility for setting the game up, and providing some semblance of hooks for the players. The players need to work those hooks into their characters. That's their job. This is a joint venture. So you're tired of bribing the character. Then don't bribe him. Set the situation of say, a bunch of undead (i.e. no loot) are destroying some refugee camp. The good folks are going to go charging, and stop the mean undead. The chaotic guy can sit on his but and not play if he wants. Or they can come up with some reason for going forth. The DM set the adventure, now the player needs to motivate his character.

Now if there is something that will cover the entire campaign you should let folks know. I'm currently running the return to temple of elemental evil. I told people this ahead of time. That's (to me) fair. I have a CE and a CN characters in the game. They both have a reason for being there and for why they want to destroy the new temple. As such the game is moving along. It probably does make life easier when you can just appeal to everyone's good and altruistic nature. But some players don't like to play that way. Let them, you bend a little, tell them to bend a little. Things usually go ok.
-cpd