Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 1426308" data-attributes="member: 15538">Remember that anything other than Neutral is an extreme.  Many real people are probably LN or NG, either they act on positive impulses or they do what's expected of them.  But most are simply neutral.  They might do the right thing; they might do something selfish, if it's something they feel strongly about.  They set their personal opinions above right or wrong.  They aren't terribly consistent about being either principled or free-wheeling.  So the NG character is the guy who basically acts in a reasonable, normal fashion, apart from his quirks.  But when the chips are down, he would risk his life for just about anyone, even a bad guy who is potentially capable of reform.  A CG charcter is different.  He is so free-spirited he is at odds not only with society, but with people.  He responds to criticism about inconsistency or hypocrisy with a shrug, and says, "That was yesterday, this is today."  And is serious.  Think of Oscar Wilde, who pronounced he contradicted himself often, just to be interesting.  When it comes to himself and others, he tends to behave in a reasonable, normal fashion.  He may even spit on a beggar.  But when the chips are down, he would risk his life for just about anyone, even a bad guy who is potentially capable of reform.  A LG character is the opposite.  In the absence of any over-riding counterargument, it's argument enough that things are done how they are done.  He will do extraordinary, often unreasonable things, based on his belief in principles, order, justice, and one's responsibility to society.  He believes in things like rank, ownership, hierarchy.  In many ways, he is a reasonable, normal person.  He may help a beggar, or may spit on him.  But when the chips are down, he would risk his life for just about anyone, even a bad guy who is potentially capable of reform.  By the same token, though, he will uphold the law or a principle, even if it means dire suffering for himself or even an innocent person.  Such a character is torn between duty and compassion.  One way to get a handle on such a person is to decide whether he is, overall, more lawful or more good when it comes to each of the following: lying; keeping your word; laws; personal principles; moral character; the proper role of society; roles in the family; relationships with friends; criminal justice and punishment; warfare; chain of command; social caste; commandments of his deity; conflicts between powerful Outsiders; marriage.  If you answer either "good" or "lawful" for every one of those things, you have likely misidentified the character's alignment.  The classic Paladin is (to the death) lawful in matters of lying; lawful about his word; good when it comes to law; lawful or good in his personal principles; lawful on the stance of good character; favors the Good in matters of society; may be lawful or good with family; is immenently lawful toward friends, true but stern; is lawful in matters of criminal justice and punishment; is good even in times of war; may be lawful or good toward military commanders; may be lawful or good when social caste leads to conflict; is lawful where the tenets of his religion is concerned; is likely to favor a group of Good outsiders over Lawful ones; and is Lawful with regard to marriage and chastity.  That's of course my view of the stereotype, and notice that in several areas, a character could go either way and still strongly resemble the stereotype.  Another LG character could deal with each in reverse.  They would still understand where the other was coming from.  And being LG, would neither condemn nor fail to oppose the other if they came into conflict.</blockquote>

Verification