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

[Crimson Longinus]

Alignment never mattered when mind control is involved.

I see you're bending over backwards into a pretzel to defend alignment. A creature's base nature is not 'mind control'.

 

[Minigiant]

I see you're bending over backwards into a pretzel to defend alignment. A creature's base nature is not 'mind control'.

My point is that the monster type is forcing their mind to perform actions they being may not want to.

The chaotic fey wants to break their word. They physical can don't want they want because magic.

Same as if a wizard dominated someone to act against their nature and they fail the save. It's not an alignment question.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

My point is that the monster type is forcing their mind to perform actions they being may not want to.

The chaotic fey wants to break their word. They physical can don't want they want because magic.

Same as if a wizard dominated someone to act against their nature and they fail the save. It's not an alignment question.

That's nonsense. It is part of their nature. They're unable to break their word, that is extremely lawful trait. Yet they're chaotic. This is why alignment is just bad and misleading. You cannot rely on it as a guide of creature's behaviour. If you did, you'd assume that the fey break their word and that beholders work in groups. And both of these assumptions would be utterly wrong. You need to actually read the full description to understand the creature, and once you do, the alignment is no longer needed. All the the alignment contributes is misunderstandings and arguments; just get rid of it already!

 

[Yaarel]

That's nonsense. It is part of their nature. They're unable to break their word, that is extremely lawful trait. Yet they're chaotic.

Here, the Fey are individualists. Each one can choose to give ones own word or not. If one does, it is only binding on oneself. This is like an example of an individualist "code". There is no group. Only individuals. It is a Chaotic trait.

 

[Yaarel]

Fiendish contracts are probably the easiest way to describe Lawful vs Chaotic.

A lawful fiend will not breach their side of the contract terms unless tricked or absolutely desperate. This is why the breach penalties are so much worse. They plan to get the most out of the other signer during the contract or if the other person fails their side.

A chaotic fiend will break the deal the second it becomes inconvenient and they feel they can bare the penalties. That's why the rewards and penalties tend to be bad unless you catch an emotional fiend in a rush.

A neutral fiend will not go out their way to break a deal the second it becomes an issue. However if a better deal comes or the penatties can be brushed off, they are out. This is why their contracts tend to be purely transactional with few penatlies. They aren't planning to use the contract it self for anything long term. It's just there and can be pushed to the back of the mind to be ignored, if the contract has any long term aspects at all.

Lawful ≠ predictability

Chaotic can be legalistic and mathematical too.

What makes the devils Lawful is their group identity. The devils are a group working together to destroy humanity as a group.

The trope is, the devils are angelic beings. The imperfections of humans disgust these devilish angels. When they succeed in tempting a human to sin, the devils are proving how disgusting and inferior humans are. The devils are racists. The group identity makes devils Lawful Evil.

 

[le Redoutable]

Lawful ≠ predictability

Chaotic can be legalistic and mathematical too.

What makes the devils Lawful is they are a group working together to destroy humanity as a group.

The trope is, the devils are angelic beings. The imperfections of humans disgust the devils. When they succeed in tempting a human to sin, the devils are proving how disgusting and inferior humans are. The devils are racists.

Yess!
LE = Tempting Devils ( Hell Hosts )
NE = Undeads ( Greedy Minds ? )
CE = Traitor Demons (Ferocious Beasts )

 

[Yaarel]

Yess!
LE = Tempting Devils ( Hell Hosts )
NE = Undeads ( Greedy Minds ? )
CE = Traitor Demons (Ferocious Beasts )

I can see how Undead could be the Neutral Fiend.

Yet, in 5e, I like how the Undead are part of the ethereal Shadowfell. Moreover some feel more individualist to me, like vampires, while others feel more collectivist to me, like mummies. And ghosts can be anything.

Meanwhile, the devils and demons are astral, inhabiting domains that are made out of thought.

Where devils are Lawful Fiend, and demons are Chaotic Fiend, I strongly associate the Aberrations as the Neutral Fiend.

(I know yugoloths are supposed to be the Neutral Fiend, but I never found them memorable. Indeed, given the tropes and appearances that they do have, one can easily categorize the yugoloths as a kind of Aberration, and in that context they become flavorful. Then all Aberrations are the Neutral Evil Fiend.)

 

[le Redoutable]

I can see how Undead could be the Neutral Fiend.

Yet, in 5e, I like how the Undead are part of the ethereal Shadowfell. Moreover some feel more individualist to me, like vampires, while others feel more collectivist to me, like mummies. And ghosts can be anything.

Meanwhile, the devils and demons are astral, inhabiting domains that are made out of thought.

Where devils are Lawful Fiend, and demons are Chaotic Fiend, I strongly associate the Aberrations as the Neutral Fiend.

(I know yugoloths are supposed to be the Neutral Fiend, but I never found them memorable. Indeed, given the tropes and appearances that they do have, one can easily categorize the yugoloths as a kind of Aberration, and in that context they become flavorful. Then all Aberrations are the Neutral Evil Fiend.)

aren't Mimics and the like Terrifying Creatures, ( because at least they are mercyless beings ) ?

 

[Yaarel]

aren't Mimics and the like Terrifying Creatures, ( because at least they are mercyless beings ) ?

The Aberrations dont care about individuals or groups. They work to infect, corrupt, and destroy either, indescriminately. As Fiends, the Aberrations feel Neutral Evil, True Evil.

 

[Flamestrike]

That's not what we are talking about

So what alignment do you give someone who follows a rigid code of conduct, and is honorable and inflexible, has a clear code that governs their actions, and while they sometimes act impulsively, those actions are never contrary to that strict code?

To me, they're Lawful.

You're asserting one can both be 'honorable, dependable, follow a code, and be inflexible' while also being 'spontaneous, reckless, unconventional and flexible'.

I'm just struggling to see how that's possible, and I'm asking you to provide for me some clear fictional examples (antagonists or protagonists).

Give me someone from the MCU or DCU as an example of this.