D&D General For those that find Alignment useful, what does "Lawful" mean to you

[le Redoutable]

Not exactly. That implies that Chaotic is seen as being way above baseline. It's more like people want to avoid being Lawful that badly. Lawful is, in many minds, axiomatically the alignment of irrational dickheads who enforce rules no matter what; Lawful Good is thus either self-deluded (the 'Good' part being in name only, behaving as if they were righteous but actually being constantly heinous, cruel, destructive, selfish, and generally just really awful), or is a hamstrung bureaucrat meekly making excuses about what they are and aren't allowed to do while monstrous events occur around them.

I've literally never seen a player choose to be Lawful Neutral (at least as a mortal; LN gods, on the other hand, are extremely common.) I've seen dozens, perhaps even low hundreds of NG, CG, or CN characters. Many of those CN characters are actually either CG or NG because the Good label carries the connotation of being a square, never doing anything fun or joyful. Many other CNs are actually CE but playing in a game where evil PCs aren't permitted, so they're just as destructive and dangerous but like, take time to pet a kitten now and then. All other alignments have shown up now and then.


Good: You've already given the key example. Unpardonable sins. The knowing murder of an innocent person, for example, or...well, to be blunt, sexual assault. Child abuse. There are a LOT of things that, if someone does them, it's pretty clear they're instantly kicked out of Good and can't just go back to it with a quick change. Redemption is hard, and we recognize that there are some acts that maybe there can't be any redemption for, even with an infinite amount of time. For D&D-specific things, becoming a lich is presented this way, to the point that some books will dance around it, just saying that it's horribly reprehensible and no good person would even seek out how to do it, let alone actually DO it.

Evil: I still see bright lines. Consider A Tale of Two Cities. A noble but secret sacrifice not forced by anyone, and which you'd never see negative consequences if you didn't do it. And its very nobility requires secrecy: your sacrifice can't even earn fame. That conflicts with how most D&D eds define "Evil," as it's a rubbish deal to any "rational" (non-Good) mind. The Redemption Equals Death trope is built on this. Self-sacrifice, in a non-self-serving way, is almost axiomatically anti-Evil. It doesn't necessarily make you Good, that very aforementioned trope is pretty controversial, but such actions make it very hard to argue that a person is truly Evil--it's at least "Neutralizing," if you will.

Law: Consider that "steal to save your kid" thing. If a Lawful char's player stole without any hesitation and then covered it up...that sounds like "falling from Lawful" to me. Lawful doesn't strictly mean being honest (many LE types are excellent deceivers), but I'd say it does mean "I keep my word, and make amends if I break it," like how Good says "I do right by others, and make amends if I fail." IMO, "my word is my bond" is almost pure (single-person) Lawful; it's pretty much THE thing separating most LE antagonists from NE/CE ones. Other acts would be, for example, "abandoning my spouse and children to unite with my One True Love" (CG: "my cruel spouse and hateful step-children," CE: "my dependent spouse and children") "arranging for a third party to suffer the consequences for my deeds" (CG: "a third party that got away with other crimes," CE: "an innocent third party").

By comparison...I just don't see such actions articulated for Chaos. I'm dead certain if I used my definition of Chaos, I could come up with them. But the way people actually play and discuss Chaos, there aren't such things. There is literally nothing that could BE a "fall from Chaos," because even something like "staying with your cruel spouse and hateful step-children" will end up spun as soulful individual bravery in the face of terrible hardship or something like that.

again, Good is Empathy, Evil is Cruelty ( or Inhuman Technics ), ...

 

[CreamCloud0]

I’m reminded of (in what might be a divisive subject to bring up) Captain America: civil war wherein cap, usually the poster boy for law and doing things the right wayTM, ends up going vigilante justice because he values a set of concepts and doing good over doing things legally, but consider: even before he was recruited he was faking papers to try get into the army and later disobeying orders and rescued the captured soldiers,
He values good above all but when push comes to shove it’s chaos above law for him

 

[le Redoutable]

what about Chaos and Creativity ?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

what about Chaos and Creativity ?

Fiction often connects them, but history makes it complicated. It's usually more balance that encourages creativity, rather than Law or Chaos individually. You need a certain minimum amount of stability and cohesion in order to produce great art, music, or literature: war and revolution are usually bad for poets while the war is happening, but great for them after the war is over. But if society is too rigidly-constrained, creativity gets stifled by conformity.

The artist and the architect need both a solid foundation to start from, and wide-open spaces to rise into. If the space is closed up, nothing new gets made. If the foundation breaks, nothing can be built up.

This is why I almost always play my LG characters as very glad that they have CG allies. Allies with differing but compatible views (or at least who are willing to reach compromises with you) are almost always more useful, and more beneficial, than allies who never question your choices.

 

[Hussar]

There is a D&D tradition that perceives Chaotic to mean "random" (= Chaotic Stupid), and by contrast, Lawful to mean "ordered" (= Lawful Stupid).

However, the above two unhelpful definitions are inconsistent and logically irreconcilable with the other more helpful definitions elsewhere.

The better definitions are Lawful=group and Chaotic=individual, especially for the sake of a roleplaying game.

Not random. Impulsive. There’s a difference.

Not ordered. Methodical. There’s a difference.

 

[le Redoutable]

Fiction often connects them, but history makes it complicated. It's usually more balance that encourages creativity, rather than Law or Chaos individually. You need a certain minimum amount of stability and cohesion in order to produce great art, music, or literature: war and revolution are usually bad for poets while the war is happening, but great for them after the war is over. But if society is too rigidly-constrained, creativity gets stifled by conformity.

The artist and the architect need both a solid foundation to start from, and wide-open spaces to rise into. If the space is closed up, nothing new gets made. If the foundation breaks, nothing can be built up.

This is why I almost always play my LG characters as very glad that they have CG allies. Allies with differing but compatible views (or at least who are willing to reach compromises with you) are almost always more useful, and more beneficial, than allies who never question your choices.

I would best confront Creativity ( from Artists , Thanks ) with Crazyness ( Madness would be unnecessary useful to add )
and ( Madness ===> CN sorry )

 

[le Redoutable]

... and where would you put spontaneousness ?

 

[Yaarel]

Not random. Impulsive. There’s a difference.

Not ordered. Methodical. There’s a difference.

Lawful people can be impulsive. Thor, the protectir of oaths, is like that. Many old school Paladins are like that. When Lawfuls see their group being harmed, they lose their cool. Many Lawful Evil extremists are like this.

"Impulsiveness" is a personality quirk, not an ethical alignment.

Likewise, Chaotic person can be cool, methodical and logical, about asserting ones own individuality.

 

[Flamestrike]

A Lawful person respects structure, family, honor and tradition. They are predictable, dependable, and often rigid in thinking.

A Chaotic person is impulsive, reckless, and unconventional. They are agents of change, and act according to their conscience (or lack thereof for CE) with no respect for family, honor or tradition, only held in check by masters and commanders out of fear, friendship or respect.

Darth Vader is Chaotic evil. As Anakin Skywalker he was Chaotic Good. Raisltin Majere was also Chaotic Evil. Deadpool is Chaotic Neutral, as was Bronn of Blackwater and Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean.

Eddard Stark was Lawful Good. As is Brienne of Taarth. Tywin Lannister was Lawful Evil. As was Artemis Entreri, Steel Brightblade and the Punisher. Judge Dredd is LN.

 

[Flamestrike]

Lawful people can be impulsive. Thor, the protectir of oaths, is like that.

MCU Thor is not Lawful. He's (very) Chaotic (Good).

As is Tony Stark, but Tony moves from CN (start of Iron Man 2), to CG (after his injury) to NG as his arc progresses.

Cap is LG. He can do LG all day.

Lokis arc in the MCU takes him from CN to CE to CN to CG.

Thanos is LE. He has a code, and respects family, honor and tradition. He is rigid in his thinking, and a tyrant. He's just also a genocidal monster.

Spidey is NG.