Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!

Hussar said:

Honestly, that's how I view it. [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]'s "breaking in period" makes sense to me.



Yes, I would view it that way. Chaotic good gets the pass because, well, being good, the character still values the life and well being of others. Think Wolverine from the X-men. Disobeys orders, often goes off on his own and is frankly a menace to the team, but, generally well intentioned and often acts in other character's best interests. A Chaotic Neutral? Why on earth would I want that on the team? The alignment is diametrically opposed to everything that a team represents.



For one, following the laws of the land is not what lawful good is about. Lawful Neutral? Maybe. But, the good aspect of LG means judging laws based on morality and acting accordingly. What about LG would imply that they have to follow all the laws?

----

And, [MENTION=6919838]5ekyu[/MENTION]'s idea of whims. You own definition states that whims are illogical - they cannot be explained.

----

Lastly, it's this whole "well chaotic can be just as reliable as lawful" that has made demons in D&D unbelievably bland. 3e was particularly egregious for this. Demons that have deep, methodical plots that involved many parts? What? Naw, you're the thing of raw chaos and destruction. Plans are for weasel tongued devils. You're a demon. Live the life.

But, no, we get demons like Malcanthet and whatnot who are basically just devils with different damage resistances. BOOORRRIIIINGGG.

If CN is functionally no different than LG, then there's no point in having alignment. If a CN character is just as reliable and dependable as a LG character, then why bother having alignment at all?

And, honestly, if you want to play a reliable, dependable, works well with others character, why is it a huge problem for that character to write Lawful Good on the character sheet? What changes?

Click to expand...

Lanefan said:

Actually, I do.

If you're playing, with any consistency and without some underlying reason, what to all appearances is a CG character but it says LN on your sheet, then as far as I'm concerned you're CG and that's what detection spells etc. are going to pull from you.

Click to expand...

Hussar said:

How does unreliable = lunacy?

Lots and LOTS of people are unreliable. That doesn't make them crazy. I've been accused several times here of going to extremes, but, all I've said is that a CN character is unreliable. That's pretty much, AFAIC, the defining trait of a CN character - that they will follow their whims, not the wishes of the group. That doesn't make someone insane. Just selfish and unreliable.

Again, if your character is 100% reliable, never acts impulsively and is 100% worthy of trust, how is this character CN? What about this character makes him or her CN?

To me, the hallmark of chaotics is that they are unreliable. That's what chaotic MEANS.

Click to expand...

Hussar said:

Honestly, that's how I view it. @Lanefan's "breaking in period" makes sense to me.



Yes, I would view it that way. Chaotic good gets the pass because, well, being good, the character still values the life and well being of others. Think Wolverine from the X-men. Disobeys orders, often goes off on his own and is frankly a menace to the team, but, generally well intentioned and often acts in other character's best interests. A Chaotic Neutral? Why on earth would I want that on the team? The alignment is diametrically opposed to everything that a team represents.



For one, following the laws of the land is not what lawful good is about. Lawful Neutral? Maybe. But, the good aspect of LG means judging laws based on morality and acting accordingly. What about LG would imply that they have to follow all the laws?

----

And, @5ekyu's idea of whims. You own definition states that whims are illogical - they cannot be explained.

----

Lastly, it's this whole "well chaotic can be just as reliable as lawful" that has made demons in D&D unbelievably bland. 3e was particularly egregious for this. Demons that have deep, methodical plots that involved many parts? What? Naw, you're the thing of raw chaos and destruction. Plans are for weasel tongued devils. You're a demon. Live the life.

But, no, we get demons like Malcanthet and whatnot who are basically just devils with different damage resistances. BOOORRRIIIINGGG.

If CN is functionally no different than LG, then there's no point in having alignment. If a CN character is just as reliable and dependable as a LG character, then why bother having alignment at all?

And, honestly, if you want to play a reliable, dependable, works well with others character, why is it a huge problem for that character to write Lawful Good on the character sheet? What changes?

Click to expand...

Charlaquin said:

Is not true, the way 5e defines the alignments. That’s actually the point I was (somewhat passive-aggressively) trying to hint at by claiming that CN was “the neutralest Neutral.” I do think that Chaotic individuals should be opppsed to laws by definition, but if you actually read the definitions of the alignments in 5e, that’s not the case. CG individuals “act as their conscience directs, with little regard for what others expect.” CN individuals “follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else.” CE individuals “act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust.” There is nothing about any of those alignments that necessitates active opposition to law. They all exhibit disregard for law, certainly, but disregard is, in my opinion, a hallmark of neutrality. Hence my (in hindsight, unnecessarily coy) assertion that Chaotic in 5e is just Neutral with attitude.

Click to expand...

Charlaquin said:

Interesting. I do something similar, but I treat the alignment on the character sheet as the character’s ideals. It is, in effect, a statement of intent. The player picked Lawful Good (or whatever) because they envisioned their character as someone who holds Law and Good as noble values, and strives to live up to them. However, people don’t always succeed at living up to their own ideals. So, any effects which care about your Alignment (so, basically none in 5e) will treat you as the alignment your behavior is consistent with, regardless of what your ideals are.

Click to expand...

doctorbadwolf said:

In all of this, you continue to miss the fact that no one arguing with you views chaotic/lawful as being a difference of reliability.

You seem to define CN as literally not a sane person. A person who cannot keep watch because they don’t really want to, even though not doing so could easily get them killed, isn’t sane. You aren’t describing a CN character, you’re describing a person with no agency over their own actions.

Click to expand...

Maxperson said:

Insane is a type of CN(or other alignment type, depending on the insanity), though. It's just not the only way to play CN.

Click to expand...

doctorbadwolf said:

Good thing I’ve never said otherwise.

Btw, I’m pretty sure the first dnd forum argument I ever engaged in was basically this argument, on the old wotc forums, back when 4e was still coming out. I think you were there.

I wish those forums were still there, so I could go find out if anyone has changed their minds in that time.

Click to expand...