I miss CG

[ProfessorCirno]

On the note of chaotic good and evil working together, they'd both easily team up to topple an overbearing tyrant/king/government official. Lawful good and lawful evil would begrudgingly join one another to rid the world of a group of rampaging demons.

The idea of "You don't have imagination because you have to go by the rules" is the wrong one to take. Instead, the rules don't have imagination if they can't see why lawful would team up with lawful irregardless of good and evil to fight chaos.

 

[La Bete]

The French Resistance in WW2. Actually, even Robin Hood counts.

He was loyal to the King, yes, but the King wasn't in power. Robin Hood still flagrantly disobeyed the set laws of the land. That's chaotic. And he did it for good reasons.

Bam.

French resistance? Umm.. No.

Robin Hood? Which Robin Hood are you referring to?

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

The French Resistance in WW2. Actually, even Robin Hood counts.

He was loyal to the King, yes, but the King wasn't in power. Robin Hood still flagrantly disobeyed the set laws of the land. That's chaotic. And he did it for good reasons.

Bam.

Are you kidding me?

By that reasoning all these people turned LG the moment their side won. It's silly. You can be lawful and fight the Usurper. In fact, it's your duty! You seem to be one of those who mistook Lawful Good for Lawful stupid. No way is a paladin standing by whilel evil prince John is usurping the throne. He's leading the charge against him! And what about Richard Lionheart himself? Is he CG too since he is fighting the current leader of the land?

Maybe the usurper is edicting laws, but these are not the legitimate laws. Lawful Good would tend to go berserk at this situation. Lawful Neutral were the one who would could have accepted it. Assuming they were playing fast and loose with the rules of succession, which is a bit against character.

And fighting Nazis in the french resistance doesn't make you automatically good,. It could, but it's more likely that your just a patriot pissed off that foreigners have invaded your country and are threatening your family and neighbours. Most of them would be unaligned in modern 4e parlance.

 

[Family]

Malcolm Reynolds: "May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

 

[pemerton]

Imagine that there exists a society which is generally lawful good and accepting of slavery. Lawful good members of this society do not believe that slavery is in and of itself evil

I hit a stumbling block at about this point in your example.

It's quite possible to imagine chaotic good revolutionaires working along side chaotic evil ones to overthrow some slave based society they mutually abhor even if the society itself isn't notably evil except in the question of slavery.

I actually find this very hard to imagine. In the real world we have actual examples of those who fought against slavery: Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglas, John Brown. Who am I invited to imagine as their Chaotic Evil comrades?

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Are you kidding me?

By that reasoning all these people turned LG the moment their side won. It's silly. You can be lawful and fight the Usurper. In fact, it's your duty! You seem to be one of those who mistook Lawful Good for Lawful stupid. No way is a paladin standing by whilel evil prince John is usurping the throne. He's leading the charge against him! And what about Richard Lionheart himself? Is he CG too since he is fighting the current leader of the land?

Maybe the usurper is edicting laws, but these are not the legitimate laws. Lawful Good would tend to go berserk at this situation. Lawful Neutral were the one who would could have accepted it. Assuming they were playing fast and loose with the rules of succession, which is a bit against character.

And fighting Nazis in the french resistance doesn't make you automatically good,. It could, but it's more likely that your just a patriot pissed off that foreigners have invaded your country and are threatening your family and neighbours. Most of them would be unaligned in modern 4e parlance.

It's not that Robin Hood went against Prince John, it's how he did it.

Going against a usurper may not immidiately ring the CHAOTIC lights, but banditry? Are you honestly going to tell me banditry is not a chaotic action?

Also, fighting Nazis may not automatically equate to good, but I'm pretty sure defending your homeland, your neighbors, and your family, is.

 

[fuindordm]

The X.Neutral alignments in 3.x can also be good for completely amoral races (races that don't judge things by good or evil, possible the Ealdrin race).

Heh.

"If I don't make it, tell my wife... Hello."

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Me, I'm not using the chaotic/lawful and evil/good grid.

I'm using the conservative/progressive and self-centered/altruistic grid, and it works like a charm.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The problem with Lawful Good and Lawful Evil seems to be there are always inherent conflicts.

There are laws that can be used for evil - racist laws, laws that allow waging war against innocents. But how can a Lawful Good character stay lawful and good in the presence of such laws?

Doing evil also can break laws and order. To be "succesful" at being evil you need to lie and cheat occasionally. There are laws that stand in your way.

These conflicts are certainly interesting, but are they a "strength" of the alignment system? If I can't really keep my alignment because there are situations where the components of it are at odds, is it a good descriptor?

You can avoid these conflicts if you remove "Law/Chaos" as a separate axis and integrate them with good/evil.

Lawful Good men are people that uphold justice and fairness. They support the law of the land as long as they also uphold good ideals. If not, they will not just ignore them, they will fight them and institute an order that works for good.

Evil people care for themselves. Justice or Fairness doesn't matter, as long as it helps them.

Chaotic Evil are worse - they despise Justice or Fairness, and want to destroy the order as it is.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Me, I'm not using the chaotic/lawful and evil/good grid.

I'm using the conservative/progressive and self-centered/altruistic grid, and it works like a charm.

That sounds actually like a good idea. It seems to create a lot less conflict with what constitutes "lawful" behavior.