Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Which type of True Neutral are you?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9312213" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I think the only real distinction between those three things is how you conceptualize your alignment. From the standpoint of the universe - perhaps some incarnated representation of balance - all of those are fine distinctions that don't amount to much. They do change how you conceive and play the character, but there are a lot of different ways of being within each of the alignments. Indeed, it's possible to be within the same alignment and be in conflict with someone else in the same alignment for a variety of reasons. </p><p></p><p>I point back to my comment on how character with different amounts of INT and WIS invariably view alignment differently. Low INT characters are not going to verbalize, describe, and conceptualize their alignment well. They won't feel the need for a systematic philosophical description of what they believe. They are going to be more likely to view their behavior in terms of what you call "intentionality", where they mentally examine their own beliefs and work out algorithmically what they feel they ought to do in a situation. This is true of every alignment, including ones like Chaotic Neutral. A high INT CN you would expect to have a worked-out philosophy to defend their choice of being a self-willed and self-determined being, whereas at low INT CN they are just acting on impulse and whim to satisfy their own desires and this amounts to the same thing just with less verbiage. </p><p></p><p>But that "intellectuality" of alignment is just one of many things that can create variation in a character of a particular alignment that alignment itself does not attempt to answer. It's not a one stop shop for finding out everything about a character. It tells us something important about their most deeply held beliefs, but it doesn't tell us everything about those beliefs, how they rationalize their beliefs, how self-aware they are of their own beliefs, or exactly how they codify those beliefs. For example, imagine two Lawful Evil characters, one sworn to the service of a member of a tyrannical hierarchy who rules an empire and the other who is a leader in an organized crime family acting within that community. Both fundamentally believe the same things, and both would understand and perhaps even respect the other. Both believe the needs of the group are more important than the needs of the individual. Both believe that they are bound by external codes of honor that they must follow even when it would seem impractical or go against their own impulses. Both believe that there is no good but holding power ruthlessly in order to protect your in group from those that are doing the same. Both believe that strength comes from pain and overcoming pain. And they would both despise self-indulgence, lack of self-control, weakness, dishonorable conduct, betrayal, and mercy as vices to be avoided. But they would have differences in what they believed their code of honor demanded of them and to whom they were sworn to be loyal that would almost invariably leave them enemies. Alignment can't possibly describe all the details of an individual's belief system, and it's left to the individual player and GM to work out within the broad framework provided what the nitty gritty details are.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 9312213, member: 4937"] I think the only real distinction between those three things is how you conceptualize your alignment. From the standpoint of the universe - perhaps some incarnated representation of balance - all of those are fine distinctions that don't amount to much. They do change how you conceive and play the character, but there are a lot of different ways of being within each of the alignments. Indeed, it's possible to be within the same alignment and be in conflict with someone else in the same alignment for a variety of reasons. I point back to my comment on how character with different amounts of INT and WIS invariably view alignment differently. Low INT characters are not going to verbalize, describe, and conceptualize their alignment well. They won't feel the need for a systematic philosophical description of what they believe. They are going to be more likely to view their behavior in terms of what you call "intentionality", where they mentally examine their own beliefs and work out algorithmically what they feel they ought to do in a situation. This is true of every alignment, including ones like Chaotic Neutral. A high INT CN you would expect to have a worked-out philosophy to defend their choice of being a self-willed and self-determined being, whereas at low INT CN they are just acting on impulse and whim to satisfy their own desires and this amounts to the same thing just with less verbiage. But that "intellectuality" of alignment is just one of many things that can create variation in a character of a particular alignment that alignment itself does not attempt to answer. It's not a one stop shop for finding out everything about a character. It tells us something important about their most deeply held beliefs, but it doesn't tell us everything about those beliefs, how they rationalize their beliefs, how self-aware they are of their own beliefs, or exactly how they codify those beliefs. For example, imagine two Lawful Evil characters, one sworn to the service of a member of a tyrannical hierarchy who rules an empire and the other who is a leader in an organized crime family acting within that community. Both fundamentally believe the same things, and both would understand and perhaps even respect the other. Both believe the needs of the group are more important than the needs of the individual. Both believe that they are bound by external codes of honor that they must follow even when it would seem impractical or go against their own impulses. Both believe that there is no good but holding power ruthlessly in order to protect your in group from those that are doing the same. Both believe that strength comes from pain and overcoming pain. And they would both despise self-indulgence, lack of self-control, weakness, dishonorable conduct, betrayal, and mercy as vices to be avoided. But they would have differences in what they believed their code of honor demanded of them and to whom they were sworn to be loyal that would almost invariably leave them enemies. Alignment can't possibly describe all the details of an individual's belief system, and it's left to the individual player and GM to work out within the broad framework provided what the nitty gritty details are. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Which type of True Neutral are you?
Top