Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 6639728" data-attributes="member: 2303">I think all alignment combinations are incoherent in this way. And that is what makes the interesting to play. A paladin (pre 4E) doesn't simply have to be good and be lawful- he must take these seemingly incompatible ideals and make them work together. A devil needs to be played as both completely selfish and completely devoted to order- another contradiction. A CH elf believes in spontaneity and does not want to pay taxes - in his view all social ills can be cured by immediate action of whoever happens to be nearby - analyze this on a larger scale and it breaks down. The only alignment combination that really seems coherent is CE, but with some arguing I think it is possible to say that even your own individual freedom in the end will conflict with ultimate evil. If a CE creature has the option to end the world, should it do so? Evil prompts it to end the world (including itself), but chaos prompts it to remain itself and keep the world around as a playground.I realize my two posts here are a bit OT, as the original topic was about how to make a conflict between cooperating CH and LG characters interesting and put in the spotlight. What I am saying here is that conflicts between two characters with different interpretations of the same alignment - say two paladins - can be interesting. As can conflicting alignment influences within a single character.</blockquote>