Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warehouse23" data-source="post: 2182412" data-attributes="member: 27941">Projecting neutrality onto the good/evil and law/chaos axes as "midpoints" or "balances between the two" really gets my goat sometimes. I've come to understand neutrality in D&D as deliberate, directed non-involvement. It's a way of interacting with a world in which forces of Good and Evil, Law and Chaos clash on the battle fields, and saying, "I'd rather not take sides. I'd rather not be involved." Neutrality is an alignment for the foot soldier on the front, who has been thrown into epic combats against mighty dragons of darkness (or what have you) and really just wishes he was back on his farm, rather than on some damn fool idealistic crusade. It's an alignment for the wizard who knows better than to meddle in the affairs of gods or dragons. Neutral characters will do their job to accomplish their goals, but won't rescue the damsel in distress or sacrifice themselves for the sake of innocents, unless there's a damn good reason to do so. They're not good and they're not evil--the idea would never cross their mind--they're just looking out for themselves and their way of life in a world which seems to be run by epic figures of Virtue or Wretchedness, intent on forcing their way of life on the rest of the populaiton. Neutral is the alignment for all of those characters who wake up one morning, thinking, "How the hell did I end up in a fantasy RPG?"</blockquote>