NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8038411" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Because there are claims that is does things that it does not do. I can only assume you skipped my last post where I quoted the only statement on what the Law vs Chaos scale is meant to represent. Since, that is where I am drawing my premise from, the only rules text we have. But, you know, it is fair to quote things again. I'll even include the full quote of the rules text, instead of just the law and chaos stuffPHB page 122 " Alignment is a combination of two factors: one identifies morality (good, evil, or neutral),  and the other describes attitudes toward society and order (lawful, chaotic, or neutral). "Lawful good creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society. Lawful neutral individuals act in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes.Lawful evil creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order. Chaotic good creatures act as their conscience directs, with little regard for what others expect. Chaotic neutral creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else. Chaotic evil creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust. So, not only are we shown that "Society and Order" are put together on the scale, and by the term "order" we can assume those are most powerfully associated with Law (making Chaos against those concepts, which is especially since Order and Chaos are antonyms) but that Chaos is about individuals, but there is a problem even with that. See, look at the points I underlined with Chaotic Good and Chaotic Neutral, as well as the last part of Lawful Neutral. CG acts as their conscience directs... which is a personal code. They have rules they hold themselves to that they will not break. And CN cares about their personal freedoms, but what is the most effective way to guarentee your, oh, freedom of Speech? Perhaps a law, guarenteeing that others can't infringe on your rights. So, a CN, the most chaotic of alignments, would likely be quite happy with passing laws to limit the ability of others to infringe on their rights. While I can't tell you if a person who follows their own moral compass and strict personal code is CG or LN. These are not, to repeat myself, based on my own invention on what these words might mean, but the literal definitions we have been given to work with. Sure, we can assume that a chaotic society exists, but the second we try to define it, we run into problems. As The Sword did in presenting multiple examples that were in fact not chaotic at all, because a society is governed by rules, and it is how you react to those rules which determine your alignment, not the nature of the rules themselves.Well, despite your claims here, you seem to be missing a step. Like, actually pointing out any facts or evidence to refute what I am saying. See, your example requires that one person be using definitons, premises, and concepts that they other side would never use, and presuming the other side uses them. But, I'm using the definitions in the book. I'm pulling the premises directly from the text. And, instead of trying to provide your own examples, you have instead just repeatedly put forth my obvious inability to understand the "real" definitions of alignment. Not saying what those are of course, just saying I clearly don't understand them. And, I'm sorry, but you asserting I don't know what I'm talking about, and providing no counters accept to put forth that I clearly don't know what I'm talking about, really doesn't convince me of anything.</blockquote>

Verification