Recent content by Maxperson

Very little is 100% and outside of something like a demon and I'm not saying it should be, but "smart" play wouldn't have a PC be ruled by whim or emotion even as high 25% of the time. And if your CE PC is avoiding being CE 75%+ of the time, he isn't CE. He's LE or NE with a small streak of C...

That may be, but it is what the game has written. You're free to re-define it for your game and use it differently.

They do have self-preservation. If you know someone or multiple people are stronger and will kill you, you probably don't do it. I say probably, because they are also often ruled by emotion and that will sometimes translate into not playing it safe or not caring. They are just typically not...

This is in direct contradiction to every edition's alignment description of CE except maybe 4e. What you're describing is the opposite of acting on whims and/or driven by emotion. What keeps CE in check is being stronger than the CE individual and the CE individual is aware that he is weaker.

100% false. I'd have to write a novel and even then it wouldn't be perfect. Things would be off just a bit and I'd have to tweak it. It's not an incomplete vision. The AI and/or myself can't know exact shades or shapes, so I'd have to tweak things. Not every shade has a name to be called, so...

I tested it earlier. It did just fine keeping the picture steady as I made changes. Other than it being reaaaaaaaally slow at it, and my having limited attempts per day. And if it does start to drift many changes down the road, that just means that AI isn't there yet, not that it isn't AI art...

So programs don't make the computer do anything. Nor are they designed to get the computer to do or show anything. Got it. It's completely incidental that my computer does lots of Baldur's Gate things when I run that program. The program itself wasn't designed to make any of it happen...

I quoted 4 of the 5 editions where the CE write-ups refute that interpretation. The 5th might also, but 4e was kind of an oddball and I don't know what it said about CE.

Once he does that, though, he's no longer acting on whim and/or driven by his emotions, two major hallmarks of CE.

Heh. I just pulled up an image and started modifying it just to see. It can follow instruction as I have been saying. However.... 1. It takes a good amount of time to make the image with the instructed change. 2. There's a limit to the number of images I can make per day. I could do what I...

Not really. Control vs. no control isn't made up by me. I can enter a prompt and just let an AI run wild, having no control. Or I can take an image, even one not supplied by the AI, and then spend hours and hours, changing hundreds or even thousands of details via the AI tool, and have total...

Sure it does. "By promoting chaos and evil, those of this alignment hope to bring themselves to positions of power, glory, and prestige in a system ruled by individual caprice and their own whims." There's no thought behind caprice and whim. Here's the 5e version. "Chaotic evil (CE)...

This False Dichotomy is false. I do not need to know how to draw a picture in order to tell(not ask) the AI to make the changes that I can envision. The final result will not at all be the original picture, but will be a very different picture that I envisioned and created.

A prompt yields something outside of your control. Direction yields something within your control. I suppose we could call both prompts, but it would get confusing because control over the result is what makes all the difference.

It's what the alignment has been from the outset. It's might makes right. The Joker or the Kurgan(from the Highlander) are perfect examples of Chaotic Evil. They aren't going to shy away from doing what they want when they want to do it. Edit: Here is the 1e description. "By promoting chaos...