Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5476933" data-attributes="member: 4937">We don't agree on much, but I think you are spot on in this thread.It is my opinion that the different takes on what it means to be 'good' are the biggest obstacle to peoples understanding of the alignment system.  The way I look at it is that the D&D alignment wheel attempts to be objective without being judgemental.  Each of the different philosophies is given equal place and equal oppurtunity to present its point of view.   From the perspective of each of the nine alignments, they possess The Truth, and from their perspective each of them holds the place of highest honor on the wheel.  To a certain extent, even the Evil alignments belief their view and outlook is the one that is Correct and Proper, and that the further you depart from this Right view the more Wrong you are.   Thus, a person holding the Lawful Evil view believes in his own righteousness and goodness, and believes what is called Good is actually weakness and the promotion of weakness.  The Lawful Evil character looks down from what he believes is his highest purchase on the wheel and sees Chaotic Good, and for him Choatic Good embodies all that is wrong with the world and all that must be stamped out before a just world can be created.The problem I typically have with players is that some come to the table with the same sort of perspective but are unwilling to rotate the wheel so that what they have been arbitrarily labeled as is upright in their mind but instead try to rotate the descriptions.  So, a person coming to the table with a view described as Chaotic Neutral, rather than championing that view as what is most True and Correct and rotating the wheel such that CN is top most, insists that I rotate the descriptions so that what the game describes as Chaotic Neutral is described as Neutral Good, and so on and so forth until Lawful Neutral is put in what they see as its proper place of Neutral Evil. Now, if they are happy to - either as themselves or on behalf of their imagined character (and too many players can't keep this straight) - defend some perspective that claims some alignment other than Neutral Good truly define good whether it Lawful Good is more good than Good or Nuetral Evil is the only true good, then generally this produces no confusion and all is well in the D&D universe.   But if the player comes in and starts fighting over the labels, then that's where the alignment system will actually break down.My advice is simply describe the character's philosophy, and find out how your DM labels this.   If your DM labels "rational pursuit of one's self-interest" as Good, then you know from that how to rotate the wheel.  And if your DM labels "Rational pursuit of one's self-interest" as Chaotic, then you know from that where to rotate the wheel.  Provided your DM has spent time figuring out a non-contridictory distribution of labels, you should be good.</blockquote>

Verification