Undead Hunter Campaign

[InzeladunMaster]

You don't. I shouldn't have put that in there. Just no evil guys.

Ah, good! I'd much rather play the guy who can devote himself entirely to a cause (Lawful) than the guy who moralises over everyone's inalienable rights (Chaotic). The Lawful guy is the one who stereotypes and will happily mow through an army of orcs just because he believes orcs are evil. The Chaotic guy is the one who mulls over the idea that not all orcs are evil, and what if we were about to kill some good ones that just don't understand their ways are "evil" in our eyes... The chaotic good guy is the one that won't want to kill his friend that was turned into a vampire... after all, it isn't like the guy asked for it. The Lawful guy says, "It's a freakin' vampire! Kill it!"

 

[Fyrestryke]

Ah, good! I'd much rather play the guy who can devote himself entirely to a cause (Lawful) than the guy who moralises over everyone's inalienable rights (Chaotic). The Lawful guy is the one who stereotypes and will happily mow through an army of orcs just because he believes orcs are evil. The Chaotic guy is the one who mulls over the idea that not all orcs are evil, and what if we were about to kill some good ones that just don't understand their ways are "evil" in our eyes... The chaotic good guy is the one that won't want to kill his friend that was turned into a vampire... after all, it isn't like the guy asked for it. The Lawful guy says, "It's a freakin' vampire! Kill it!"

Well, alright then! It's Vampire Clobberin' Time! We'll put that theory to test in the first adventure.

 

[thormagni]

Hmmm, it is interesting the variations on interpretations of law vs chaos and good vs. evil. I have come to view the Good to Evil axis as the measure of altruism vs. selfishness, while the Law to Chaos access as the measure of the importance of a strong social order vs. individualism.

So, to my mind a Chaotic Good character would be most inclined to prefer an outcome that ends up with the most good for the most people (High altruism with high individualism.) While a Lawful Good character would prefer an outcome that ends up with the most good for the social structure (High altruisim with high society order.) A Lawful Good character would want to work within the system and the rules, strengthening the social order while a Chaotic Good would not really care about the health of the social order as long as people were happy and healthy.

A Lawful Neutral would be concerned only that there is a strong, ordered society (high social order with no preference for good or evil), while a Chaotic Neutral would only be concerned about personal freedom (high individualism with no concern for good or evil.) Thus, a Chaotic Neutral would prefer an anarchaic state. Interesting that both of those neutral positions usually lead to an evil society, eh?

And a Lawful Evil would want a strong society with him at the top (high social order and high selfishness), while a Chaotic Evil character would want anarchy with him being the top dog (high individualism with high selfishness.)

Sure, a Chaotic Neutral character would really need a personal stake in the fight to be drawn in, but a Chaotic Good character would want to help just because evil is being done.

And the part about the LG paladin wanting to stop the killing of the necromancer... I would think that situation would only occur if the necromancer surrendered, and the paladin's code required him to take prisoners captive or to court or what have you. But LG doesn't mean dumb either. A necromancer with all of his spells at the ready is still a threat, even if he has his hands in the air and is cackling evilly "You can't kill me hero! I surrendered!"

 

[thormagni]

And just an add-on thought, I am planning on running my character as Chaotic Neutral with a tendency toward the dark side as far as it concerns undead. He likes 'em chopped, sliced, burned, boiled, decapitated, regurgitated, impaled, disembowled, etc.

 

[Fyrestryke]

Regurgitated? Eeeewwww.

 

[BobProbst]

That was as a good a summary of the alignment system as I've ever heard!

1 point for you!

 

[thormagni]

I have often wondered (well OFTEN is an overstatement, maybe I have occasionally wondered, when my family is out of town and I have nothing better to dwell on) why a Neutral Good character wouldn't make a perfect paladin, or at least a perfect, shining example of righteousness, such as a saint or some such. Because really, while the LG paladin and the CG ranger are distracted, arguing about which is better society or individualism, the neutral good cleric is only interested in doing good, whether within the system or outside of it.

Just another two cents.