NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tzor" data-source="post: 2984117" data-attributes="member: 12826">First of all I think a lot depends on how extreeme the various members of the alignments are to each other.  Even a LG Paladin and a CG anarchist might wind up parting ways after a few days.  It also depends on how important the goals are.  Sometimes you have to work with people you personally don't like.A lot also depends on how you view good and evil.  Often we get confused between the acts and the reasons why those acts are done in the first place.  Evil does evil acts in order to reach their own personal goals, typically those of more power!  Good does good acts to help others.  So the motivation of evil (self) and good (others) has to be aligned in order to get them to work in the first place.  This is half of the problem.Given that, evil needs to tone down on the evil stuff because annoying the good will only hurt their chances of getting the goal which benefits the evil person.  Good needs to tone down on the demands of the evil because without the evil the chances of getting the goal which benefits the others will not be accomplished.  The result, typically is a mutual agreement in a murky neutrality.  Also good needs to restrain from sidetracking into various acts of goodness.The same stuff applies to law and chaos as well.  Chaotic characters might have to take more consideration with local laws or matters of discipline than they would normally prefer, "You mean we can't stop for several meals on our froced march to the battle?"Necessity often makes strange bedfellows.  On the other hand, in order for any group to work there needs to be elements of compromise on all of the parties involved.  If the players can find areas where all the characers can compromise somehow, the game should go well.</blockquote>

Verification