Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="theoremtank" data-source="post: 703759" data-attributes="member: 6099">There are two classes for which I feel the alignment restrictions do not always make sense.  These are the Barbarian and the Monk.[From the SRD]Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it."Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, and a lack of adaptability."Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility.People who are neutral with respect to law and chaos have a normal respect for authority and feel neither a compulsion to obey nor to rebel. They are honest, but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others. In my opinion, the barbarian has just as many lawful qualities as it does chaotic.  A barbarian would hold the laws and traditions of its clan or community in high esteem.  He would respect the tribe leader's authority.  He is typically close minded and lacks outside cultural adaptability.  The barbarian would never be chaotic in the setting of his own community.  I believe the arguement for a barbarian being chaotic lies more in his reaction to the world outside of his tribe.  Although, a barbarian is agressive towards outside communities and cultures because of his lack of understanding and closemindedness (this is a downfall of lawful behavior).  He does not respect a foreign culture's idea of law because it is not the "true" law.  That is, the law that governs his tribe.  This is closemindedness.  The barbarians thoughts on outside cultures are akin to a chrisitan fanatic; they don't understand these cultures and they don't want to, they are just wrong.  Chaos as defined in the rules has nothing to do with savage behavior.  It is defined in terms of a person following his own moral code, ideas, and philosophy.  This does not encompass the typical barbarian.Excluding a monk from being of chaotic alignment does not always make sense.  Chaotic alignment does not imply the character is without discipline.   A chaotic aligned monk would fit the archetype of the 'soul searcher', or the wandering 'student of life.'  He is openminded, and seeks to understand outside influences.  How he chooses to interpret these influences is left to his own ideas and concious.  These are not qualities of lawfullness.  The concept of discipline, which is a strong monk trait, is independent of the definitions of law or chaos.  For instance:  Drizzt Do'Urden fits the chaotic alignment.  He was tremendously disciplined in his study of swordplay and combat (like most monks); this does not contradict his alignment.  He uses what works in terms of combat, and alters what he believes does not (a chaotic trait).  For those that read Homeland, recall his frustration and eventual solution with the combat manuever that Zaknafein swore was the only correct option.  However, Drizzt is very much like the archetype of a monk in terms of mindset.  He is open minded and takes what is good from society and discards what is not.  Monks are less likely to be fanatical than they are to be openminded.  I would argue a monk be lawful only in the early initial stages of his training.  That is, he must respect his elders and their opinion.  However, when the monk becomes older and must advance his training, this is where the chaotic alignment takes over.I'm open to feedback, please jump in.Thanks</blockquote>

Verification