Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6619277" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I'd start with some simple questions, myself.1. "Is there anyone you would not kill, under any circumstances, no matter how much money you were paid?"Yes: Go to 2No: (After *confirming* this is what they mean.) "You are Evil. This is not negotiable: you are willing to kill the old, the infirm, and the very young, as long as you get paid. That you expect to be paid for it does not make it Neutral."2: "Exclude your direct relatives, close friends, and people directly valuable to you and your interests. Is there anyone left?"Yes: Go to 3No: Go to 43: "Are any of these people 'stereotypical' off-limits targets? E.g. random young children, the elderly, the infirm, etc.; that is, targets that are clearly of no political or military worth?"Yes: "You're treading an *extremely* fine line between Neutral and Evil, but I'll let you call yourself 'Neutral' for now. People will probably still find it reprehensible that you are a killer for hire who will kill *almost* anyone."No: "You are Evil. This is not negotiable: you are willing to kill the old, the infirm, and the very young, as long as you get paid. That you expect to be paid for it does not make it Neutral."4: "Is the reason you wouldn't kill them simply because they matter to you, or is it because they are morally off-limits? E.g. if your lover broke off your relationship, would he or she become an acceptable target?"Yes: "You're Evil (etc. as above)"No: "You're treading an (etc. as above)"And this is without even considering stuff like, "Do you expect to be able to spend every penny of the money you earn on yourself and/or your relatives/friends/lover(s)?" Because killing an innocent, "unimportant" child, but ONLY if you would earn an assload of money doing it? That's pretty <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />ing Evil. I could see a twisted mockery of logic that could argue "well if I had ENOUGH money I could fix the lives of millions of children and thus completely outweigh the loss of a single life in the grand scheme," but that would require spending most or even all of the money on other people.As it stands, it sounds to me like your player has...very divergent understandings of what "Chaotic" and "Neutral" mean. Someone who has precise standards of when they will and won't perform particular acts, and who expects others to form binding contracts in order for him to perform those acts, is not someone I would consider "Chaotic." At best, it's Neutral--doesn't give a <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> about "traditional" codes of conduct, the "proper" thing, etc. but at the same time has specific personal standards that he expects to be upheld. Similarly, being a killer-for-hire is already leaning toward Evil on the G/N/E axis; given that the character will do 'whatever' job is put before him, as specified, it sounds a lot more like Lawful Neutral to me, with leanings toward Lawful Evil.Alternatively, instead of just saying, "Look dude, you SAY your character is Chaotic Neutral, but he's pretty clearly Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil," consider putting together a character very much like him but actually Chaotic Neutral--at least as you would define it. Have this character be interested, to one degree or another, in the player's allegedly-CN character--they are, after all, in similar lines of work. Make the differences of philosophy obvious; perhaps even have the actual-CN character challenge the allegedly-"CN" character on those grounds. That will create a ripe RP opportunity, and (if you're lucky) actually get the player to stop and ask: am I really playing the character I described, or am I saying one thing and doing something else?</blockquote>

Verification