Pathfinder 1E Is Chaotic Neutral the Good Man's Evil?

[Celebrim]

Thanks for your help, guys. I'm pretty new to this forum, and it's cool to see people take such an interest.

You can almost always snare a nerd or three with an alignment discussion.

I don't think anything that drastic is needed. Perhaps there will be an alignment change in the near future, but characters not getting along is the basis for some of the best RP I've ever had. I'm okay with my characters getting screwed over as long as it's completely in character.

I would hope that it doesn't become necessary. Intraparty interaction of any sort is the core of good RP. If your PC's don't regularly interact with other PC's in character, you aren't yet a mature roleplaying group no matter how well you interact with NPCs.

But eventually, if you have a party with really diverse ethical beliefs, once those beliefs are acted on it becomes increasingly difficult to justify IC the party staying together - doubly so if party members start working against each other's interests. And the better the RP is and the better the characterization, the more this is true rather than the less. At some point, players have to come up with IC compromises of one or more player's that allow the party to continue and give room for the relationship to continue. The online web-comic "Order of the Stick" does an awesome job of showing this, particularly in the relationship between the LG Roy Greenhilt and the CE Belkar Bitterleaf. Right now, the conflict is less over the zealous inquisitorial ways of the righteous party core, than it is over the selfish and increasingly destructive behavior of the party's arcane mercenary so I put the primary burden on that player to figure out how to IC mollify the rest of the party. Typically, what you see is player's choosing to ignore the behavior, which isn't an IC solution. It keeps the game going, but it isn't good role-playing. It's great that no one is taking in character actions personally - that's as it should be - but if your character doesn't take someone screwing them over personally, then it's a bit weird.

And yes, PC's not getting along perfectly is often the basis of really great RP. There is a vast range of justifications you can employ that add depth to a character when you answer a question like, "Why do you still hang around people you don't like?"

 

[Hand of Evil]

I have a soapbox...GMs should define evil in their games. Just a quick list of things that are seen as evil acts, with a bit of explanation for it. Most of this will come from the gods and will build a culture for the setting.

Why? Because players will use modern moral values for a fantasy setting, which it does or may not apply. Being a villainous character (or bad word here) does not make the character evil.

Examples of some evil acts - I would pick and choose them and let my players know:

• Cold Blooded Murder - killing just to be killing. This does no include war or feuds or the killing of orcs.
• Orcs - they are evil because they worship evils gods, do cold blooded murder and eat the playable races.
• Not paying wereguilds - you do a crime, you explain yourself and pay for it.
• Cannibalism - eating the flesh of the playable races.
• Slavery - This includes any mind control.
• Breaking your Word - You shake or share blood or spit in your palm, this is a sealed deal, breaking it is an evil act.
• Stealing a riding animal - does not include stealing from a herd (coming of age), this is taking a persons riding animal.