Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7747113" data-attributes="member: 42582">Well, what you call &quot;rationalisations&quot; I would call reasons and convictions, revealed by conduct as well as by word. And what else would be indicative of a person's moral outlook?I don't agree with this - I think that the LG person is concerned about damage to the community, usurpation, etc; whereas the CG person is concerned about damage to individuals, power structures, hierarchy etc.If these seem small differences - and I can see that they well might - then I think that is a view that the whole lawful/chaotic set-up isn't picking up on anything too profound or important. Which would also be a reasonable view.I think this is one of many examples that shows that the general distinction between lawful and chaotic is unstable, and that the details have to be worked out table-by-table, either in play or as part of the prep for play.Upthread I said that I tend to see NG as CG-lite. A Robin Hood that adheres to the rightfull throne but is rather casual about resisting and robbing the sheriff and his/her friends in the meantime might be an instance of NG, though.For a really clear example of CG I think you need to find a figure whose repudiation of received social structures in favour of self-realisation is more thorough-going. A certain sort of hermit, or knight-errant, or wild person of the woods, might fit this description. Robin Hood comes close, but (for the reasons you give) probably isn't quite there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7747113, member: 42582"] Well, what you call "rationalisations" I would call [I]reasons[/I] and [I]convictions[/I], revealed by conduct as well as by word. And what else [I]would[/I] be indicative of a person's moral outlook? I don't agree with this - I think that the LG person is concerned about damage to the community, usurpation, etc; whereas the CG person is concerned about damage to individuals, power structures, hierarchy etc. If these seem small differences - and I can see that they well might - then I think that is a view that the whole lawful/chaotic set-up isn't picking up on anything too profound or important. Which would also be a reasonable view. I think this is one of many examples that shows that the [I]general[/I] distinction between [I]lawful[/I] and [I]chaotic[/I] is unstable, and that the details have to be worked out table-by-table, either in play or as part of the prep for play. Upthread I said that I tend to see NG as CG-lite. A Robin Hood that adheres to the rightfull throne but is rather casual about resisting and robbing the sheriff and his/her friends in the meantime might be an instance of NG, though. For a really clear example of CG I think you need to find a figure whose repudiation of received social structures in favour of self-realisation is more thorough-going. A certain sort of hermit, or knight-errant, or wild person of the woods, might fit this description. Robin Hood comes close, but (for the reasons you give) probably isn't quite there. [/QUOTE]

Verification