Search results

This is exactly my point that we want to think through these things. I would not choose to use this alignment system, but it satisfies my requirements and so I think it is a valid choice, and I would know know how to play your system and have fun.

I think of it as reimaging how the Outer Planes beings work, which have a lot less lore in 1e. Take a look at my slaad example for a flavor of this.

Right! But rather than appearance, make their behavior and belief system the black box. It's another approach. For example, you could have a slaad that loves dwarves but hates all other demi-humans. "I love you, Helga Birchshield, but everyone else gets dipped in treacle".

Basically I lose the 3x3 grid, which has uses. Your continuum is an extension of the old Law-Chaos axis from many fictional sources, and as I said I'd be happy to play in that world.

Oh no! Chaotics can have quests, they're just weird and henchmen can be hard to hire!

Great question. As a DM, I can't be infinitely creative. If I can have some guides as to the fundamentals of an NPC or a settlement, I can improvise from there. Having solid definitions for alignment lets me focus on roleplaying those alignments and not have to get into what we mean. I'm a big...

I guess I'm hoping my version of alignment makes it a viable and playable choice again. Probably too much to hope for.

Amen brother. Also, I'm glad you mentioned the slaadi. Now remember that I am a VERY old 1e player so my lore stops with the Fiend Folio (FF). And the FF version of the slaadi is basically Chaotic Evil, hardly different from demons. To me, the slaadi embody every version of personal code there...

I definitely understand this view, but the notion of "natural law" simply does not exist in actual governments, certain not the squabbling feudal kingdoms of my setting. I do use this notion for how True Neutrals think about things, though.

I totally get this for modern play. For an old like me, you have paladins and anti-paladins, and fighters and cavaliers can fill in the spaces in between.

I'll just say that libertarians are NOT Chaotic Good and leave it at that.

Very glad you posted this, thank you. As long as we don't view alignment as cartoonishly intense (Dudley Do-Right, anyone?), I think the average walking around person is Lawful Good. They obey most laws, and they grant their fellow agency (or certainly don't interfere with it). I happen to...

Boy is this a great post--thanks!

Yes indeed, and I do think my definition of Chaos allows for this, along with crazy "charismatic democracies" like the elves.

Yes, I understood your source. I think what you are calling LAWFUL and CHAOTIC are pretty close to Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil, but not exactly. What's missing is the cosmic enmity between the two that your example is capturing. It's fine if you want to play that up in your setting, but I don't...

Yup, a lot that's valid here. I'm less interested in what came before than hammering down some useful and interesting definitions we can use today.

I'd call this person Chaotic Good or Chaotic Neutral depending upon how much agency they grant to others. The smaller that circle, the less Good they are. They have a code outside of social standards, which is basically what I'm calling Chaos.

All of this is very reasonable. I prefer Neutral to mean "indifferent to" rather than middle ground. So a Neutral Good character is not kinda-Lawful or kinda-Chaotic, but rather cares much more about Good. They are the ones who will protest injustice before the Lawful Goods, because they care...

Exactly! Chaotic Good seems completely bonkers, and I don't think large groups of humans can pull it off. Yet one of the most important demi-human groups have been canonically Chaotic Good since 1e. I think that's interesting, and I came to this definition precisely to explain the behavior of...

Or perhaps even more as Conformist vs. Non-Conformist. But as I noted elsewhere, I consider both true Evil and Chaotic stances as very rare in human experience. Mere non-conformity is not really Chaos to me. Chaos is weirder.