Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6459198" data-attributes="member: 78752">To be fair, this is one of the alignment questions that players everywhere have the most trouble with: &quot;Where does selfishness belong on the wheel?&quot;&nbsp; In my opinion, if you subscribe to the classic &quot;crazy bastard&quot; definition of Chaotic Neutral, what you're describing isn't really selfishness -- the crazy bastard Chaotic Neutral character is no less hidebound than a Lawful Neutral character -- he's just bound to do whatever is most disruptive instead of what is most appropriate.&nbsp; I mean, technically the Lawful Neutral character is also being selfish -- presumably he behaves the way he does because it is what he wants, at least on some level.I've always found it a little odd that the community has accepted the selfish Chaotic Neutral character to the extent that they have.&nbsp; I've never seen anyone arguing against the Neutral Good character being devoted to good for good's sake, or the Neutral Evil character being devoted to evil for evil's sake, or the Lawful Neutral character being devoted to law for law's sake, but for some reason the Chaotic Neutral character is just viewed as a rugged individualist rather than devoted to chaos for chaos' sake.This is a great example of the opinion I don't understand.&nbsp; Why is Chaotic Neutral the one alignment that is exempt from holding true views?&nbsp; I acknowledge that this is personal perspective, but if I were playing a devoted Chaotic Neutral character I would leave all four churches intact and work to increase the discontent the imbalance must cause.&nbsp; Now, if any of them were /lawful/ churches, /those/ would get the torch -- the same way a devoted Lawful Neutral character would do everything in his power within the law to get a chaotic church closed, its members arrested, and the religion banned from the city.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 6459198, member: 78752"] To be fair, this is one of the alignment questions that players everywhere have the most trouble with: "Where does selfishness belong on the wheel?" In my opinion, if you subscribe to the classic "crazy bastard" definition of Chaotic Neutral, what you're describing isn't really selfishness -- the crazy bastard Chaotic Neutral character is no less hidebound than a Lawful Neutral character -- he's just bound to do whatever is most disruptive instead of what is most appropriate. I mean, technically the Lawful Neutral character is also being selfish -- presumably he behaves the way he does because it is what he wants, at least on some level. I've always found it a little odd that the community has accepted the selfish Chaotic Neutral character to the extent that they have. I've never seen anyone arguing against the Neutral Good character being devoted to good for good's sake, or the Neutral Evil character being devoted to evil for evil's sake, or the Lawful Neutral character being devoted to law for law's sake, but for some reason the Chaotic Neutral character is just viewed as a rugged individualist rather than devoted to chaos for chaos' sake. This is a great example of the opinion I don't understand. Why is Chaotic Neutral the one alignment that is exempt from holding true views? I acknowledge that this is personal perspective, but if I were playing a devoted Chaotic Neutral character I would leave all four churches intact and work to increase the discontent the imbalance must cause. Now, if any of them were /lawful/ churches, /those/ would get the torch -- the same way a devoted Lawful Neutral character would do everything in his power within the law to get a chaotic church closed, its members arrested, and the religion banned from the city. [/QUOTE]

Verification