It's Not Easy Being LG (Forked From: So that's why you like it)

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Forked from: So that's why you like it

I've noticed a similar theme- with one difference.

I've noticed it tended to come about more often when someone either made the choice to "Be Evil" or was forced (like you ToEE example) to "Be Evil."

Anytime the choice was made, it turned into the stab other players in the back despite the problems it caused him, attack randomly like your example etc...

But I've noticed if you go lax on the alignment rules, and just let players who like the idea of an evil campaign just play their character as they want and not worry about alignment... The evil characters act more believably evil.

Almost like the player felt some weird compulsion to "do evil stuff" just to prove he was playing evil or soemthing. I guess like mentioned it really was the opposite of lawful stupid.

My Pre-4E approach to alignment (and discussed with my players to help them understand my approach as DM) wasn't exactly lax, but I also never encouraged players to "do evil stuff" to stay evil.

[rod serling voice]Picture if you will...[/rod serling voice] the 1E alignment graph.

Instead of a flat plane, think of the graph tilted to a 45-degree angle with the Lawful Good corner at the highest point and Chaotic Evil at the lowest point.

Sliding down the slope is easy. Too many evil acts and you start to slide. Too many chaotic acts, same thing different direction.

Climbing the slope, OTOH, takes effort. You can committ as many "Good Deeds" as you wish, but if you don't want to climb the slope, you won't. You could be the nicest neighbor, help little old ladies across the street, and donate to local orphanges until you barely have enough money to live off yourself and still have an irredeemably evil side - if you don't want to be good. You don't have to commit evil acts to stay at the bottom of the slope, it's easy to stay there.

It's hard to stay at the top, though. Opportunities to act in evil and chaotic ways present themselves too often and resisting them can be difficult.

Just thought I'd share my views on the 9-alignment system instead of derailing the original thread.

 

[Clavis]

I tend to think of alignment in as a cosmic affiliation, rather than a description of behavior. Alignment describes how one feels about the multiverse on a deep level, and when push comes to shove, what cosmic powers the character will fight for. Behavior flows from alignment, but alignment doesn't dictate behavior. Lawful Good types are plenty capable of committing the occasional chaotic and/or evil act, but as long as they essentially believe in a universe where goodness flows from regulation and law, they remain Lawful Good. Conversely, Chaotic Evil people can be kind and loving to those they like, but remain Chaotic Evil so long as they deeply believe that they should satisfy their own whims at the expense of others. Simply put, when the Final Battle comes, will your character fight for the Angels, or the Demons (or one of the other teams)?

I personally never regarded Lawful Good as the most desirable alignment. If anything, I always presented the True Neutrals as the ones who were actually "right". Heroic NPCs in my campaigns tended to be Neutral, Neutral Good, or Chaotic Good. I tended to portray Lawful Good types (like Paladins) as somewhat deluded, and potentially dangerous, people who tended to get everyone killed with their constant crusades against evil and chaos.