Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Seeten" data-source="post: 2029872" data-attributes="member: 27186">Well, strict lawful neutral is more about judging and supporting laws, not rewriting/controlling the laws, LN seems to me a whole different mindset. LE (and even NE, I guess) doesnt have to be without morals to be evil, I think thats what I am getting at.I know the character has upside, and isnt pure evil, but I dont think you need to be pure evil to BE evil. Judged on the basis of her actions, over the course of the entire game, if you were running a CRPG style alignment system where each action drove your alignment up or down, it might have ended at the low end of LN.I dont think thats a good way to judge alignment though. I think the majority of your actions should be compromises to BE a LN character. If you do a lot of bad stuff and some good, I dont think you ought to end up Neutral based on the percentages. This is a philosophical thing, I guess, but if I play a character, they need to be internally consistent, and the Alignment is more of a window on their fundamental nature than anything else. In Melissa's case, she was a Tyrant, if a well intentioned one, and Tyrant is the archetypal LE.Tyrants, even historically are not all bad, and even the bad ones dont do all &quot;evil&quot; things. I mean, nobody wants to consider THEMSELF to be a bad person. You might say it, but nobody deep down believes it about themself, and so very few people will kill little children, or defenseless women, just because it brands them as obviously evil, even to themselves.&nbsp; Sociopathic monsters and psychopathic monsters excepted. Sociopaths and psychopaths are, of course, by the very nature of this post, excluded.AEG's book, Evil, has a lot of these same ideas in it, but most are common sense.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Seeten, post: 2029872, member: 27186"] Well, strict lawful neutral is more about judging and supporting laws, not rewriting/controlling the laws, LN seems to me a whole different mindset. LE (and even NE, I guess) doesnt have to be without morals to be evil, I think thats what I am getting at. I know the character has upside, and isnt pure evil, but I dont think you need to be pure evil to BE evil. Judged on the basis of her actions, over the course of the entire game, if you were running a CRPG style alignment system where each action drove your alignment up or down, it might have ended at the low end of LN. I dont think thats a good way to judge alignment though. I think the majority of your actions should be compromises to BE a LN character. If you do a lot of bad stuff and some good, I dont think you ought to end up Neutral based on the percentages. This is a philosophical thing, I guess, but if I play a character, they need to be internally consistent, and the Alignment is more of a window on their fundamental nature than anything else. In Melissa's case, she was a Tyrant, if a well intentioned one, and Tyrant is the archetypal LE. Tyrants, even historically are not all bad, and even the bad ones dont do all "evil" things. I mean, nobody wants to consider THEMSELF to be a bad person. You might say it, but nobody deep down believes it about themself, and so very few people will kill little children, or defenseless women, just because it brands them as obviously evil, even to themselves. Sociopathic monsters and psychopathic monsters excepted. Sociopaths and psychopaths are, of course, by the very nature of this post, excluded. AEG's book, Evil, has a lot of these same ideas in it, but most are common sense. [/QUOTE]

Verification