I would, but I do not have to. AD&D alignment is the same one used in Pathfinder, Same Descriptions, same expectations.8-Bit_Jack said:
Poll: Lawful-Good vs Chaotic Good: Which is better?
- Thread starter ZexionSephiroth
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Fuck, I don't know. Lawful Good seems best at preserving the peace for good while Chaotic Good seems best at effecting change for good. Different tools for different situations kind of thing, can't really say which I think is 'best'.
Your description of Lawful Good does an excellent job describing what Lawful Neutral is. Lawful Neutral dictates society above all else and would do the things you point out. However, it is not Lawful Good.mrhappy1489 said:
Lawful Good characters are not govern by what some monarch or some book says. Lawful Good follows a sense of justice that comes from within. It cannot be govern by whats in a book or on an edict. If an action does not feel right, it is not going to feel right no matter who tells you or how many times they tell you it is the proper course of action. Lawful Good will not stand for it.
Lawful Good is not going to stand for tyranny anymore than Chaotic Good would. Only difference are methods. Lawful Good would take a principled stand against the monarch either by telling him no directly, turn on his fellow soldiers and stop it, or run away and raise an army of peasants to openly stop the revolt. What dictates them is greatest benefit to the most while casing the least harm. They will get rid of the bad soldiers, killing them if they must. If open revolt is the best way to attain those goals, salting the earth if you will, then open revolt it will be. And it's perfectly reasonable for a Lawful Good character to do.
Lawful Good is not Lawful stupid. I really wish people would stop going for lawful stupid as the example.
Personal ethics and nothing more.-Dragmire- said:
Lawful good believes in society. Society is the best way to elevate everyone to equality. If the society is just, the law is administered fairly and without privileges. If the society becomes a tyranny, and obvious breaks appear in place, Lawful Good will not stand for it and will try to change it. They will seek to achieve the greatest benefit with the least harm. They seek to eradicate laws, get rid of brutal policeman, or even overthrow the monarchy. Lawful Good does not prevent you from killing. However, only as a last resort and when no other alternative is presented.
Chaotic Good believes in goodness and righteousness, but has no place for society. They live on the fringes of society and live by a personal code they have. It often clashes with society.
I had the urge to check what Pathfinder said about the law/chaos axis specifically, and while um... malithet- Matethia- male? Mal...? Was right in that Lawful characters are about order, even in pathfinder (although it does seem to promote both lawful-smart and Lawful-Stupid as options). Chaotic seems a little... different than just "against society".
However, its not all the way towards anarchy, as there seem to be a few other traits mixed into the concept. Such as creativity as a core precept, emotional(ism?) as an implied state of mind, and an agenda that sounds much like a form of evolution as they favor "new ideas over tradition". (In fact, Evolve seems to be a word used often in regards to Chaotic outsiders, such as Proteans.)
Where am I going with this? Well, Assuming I'm reading into this right, the fact that the book describes alignment as being a broad set of philosophies as opposed to a narrow one, that puts Chaotic good as much more than just "looks out for one's self"; and in fact, some points, such as the "reckless and impulsive" parts; might lead them to not think about themselves at all, throwing themselves into conflicts before they ever consider the consequences... And as mentioned, they aren't against society necessarily, as they think unfettered personal freedom would allow society to flourish.
Now for my personal examples of Chaotic Good, with how much the alignment means to them and whether They are more focused on the Chaos Side or the Good Side:
Simon- (Gurren Lagann), Major example, Good Slanted.
Kamina- (Gurren Lagann) Major Example, Chaos Slanted.
Rainbow Dash- (My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic), Moderate example, Chaos slanted.
Pinkie Pie- (My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic), EXTREME EXAMPLE, CHAOTIC SLANTED TO THE MAX!
Marcus Damon- (Digimon Savers), Strong example, Chaos Slanted.
Kudou Taiki- (Digimon Xros Wars Parts 1&2), Strong example, Good Slanted.
Shoutmon- (Digimon Xros Wars Parts 1&2), Strong Example, Chaos slanted but slowly slants back towards good.
Out of all those, I think only one has core behavior classed as "selfish" or "self serving", and that's Rainbow Dash for being too lazy to get anything done in a hurry that she isn't excited about. However, if there's an immediate need for her to do something, she'll get onto it in ten seconds flat.
Also, None of my examples has a single drop of self preservation instinct... Unless you count the early stage of "young Simon", and even then, he drops that shortly after a few events take place.
(Shoutmon is Notable, in that he becomes king. After which the next time he is seen, which is in part 3, he's seen scolding his younger charge for causing trouble without meaning to, indicating an interim shift to neutral good. Of course, said charge was closer to chaotic neutral at the time, wanting only to be seen as being as great a hero as his king. So may be subjective.)
Based on that, I'm interpreting that to mean they are somewhat less of "anti society", as some put it; and a little closer to anarchy that previous versions, being more against order that restricts freedom rather than all order. Extrapolating from information in the game masters guide section on cities, and its points on alignment of cities, they don't seem to have a problem getting with getting orderly, as they are fine being run by a thieves guild, they simply have a problem with authority acting like... well, an authority figure. Making them similar to just plain being rebellious.
However, its not all the way towards anarchy, as there seem to be a few other traits mixed into the concept. Such as creativity as a core precept, emotional(ism?) as an implied state of mind, and an agenda that sounds much like a form of evolution as they favor "new ideas over tradition". (In fact, Evolve seems to be a word used often in regards to Chaotic outsiders, such as Proteans.)
Where am I going with this? Well, Assuming I'm reading into this right, the fact that the book describes alignment as being a broad set of philosophies as opposed to a narrow one, that puts Chaotic good as much more than just "looks out for one's self"; and in fact, some points, such as the "reckless and impulsive" parts; might lead them to not think about themselves at all, throwing themselves into conflicts before they ever consider the consequences... And as mentioned, they aren't against society necessarily, as they think unfettered personal freedom would allow society to flourish.
Now for my personal examples of Chaotic Good, with how much the alignment means to them and whether They are more focused on the Chaos Side or the Good Side:
Simon- (Gurren Lagann), Major example, Good Slanted.
Kamina- (Gurren Lagann) Major Example, Chaos Slanted.
Rainbow Dash- (My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic), Moderate example, Chaos slanted.
Pinkie Pie- (My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic), EXTREME EXAMPLE, CHAOTIC SLANTED TO THE MAX!
Marcus Damon- (Digimon Savers), Strong example, Chaos Slanted.
Kudou Taiki- (Digimon Xros Wars Parts 1&2), Strong example, Good Slanted.
Shoutmon- (Digimon Xros Wars Parts 1&2), Strong Example, Chaos slanted but slowly slants back towards good.
Out of all those, I think only one has core behavior classed as "selfish" or "self serving", and that's Rainbow Dash for being too lazy to get anything done in a hurry that she isn't excited about. However, if there's an immediate need for her to do something, she'll get onto it in ten seconds flat.
Also, None of my examples has a single drop of self preservation instinct... Unless you count the early stage of "young Simon", and even then, he drops that shortly after a few events take place.
(Shoutmon is Notable, in that he becomes king. After which the next time he is seen, which is in part 3, he's seen scolding his younger charge for causing trouble without meaning to, indicating an interim shift to neutral good. Of course, said charge was closer to chaotic neutral at the time, wanting only to be seen as being as great a hero as his king. So may be subjective.)
Let's get this out of the way, I think the ADnD alignments are bad, they are too restrictive and sometimes outright nonsense. You keep referring them to back up your points, but they are already faulty. NG sounds like the cop-out alignment the way you describe it "I'll just do whatever as long as it's vaguely good".malestrithe said:
And CG people are not part of society, cn people are just insane, ng just does whatever, true neutral (like peasants) is always all about finding balance, and it goes on and on. There's no nuance, no possibility of different interpretations of the alignment, totally eliminating the possibility of having a flawed good character or a somewhat redeeming evil character. Especially when if you toe the line you risk losing levels over it, because your character couldn't possible grow into another alignment, no heel-face turns in ADnD.
It's just a bad alignment system. the greatly improved it when they moved to 3rd edition
You make a valid point, I was going by the very brief description posed by the OP and probably should have researched the topic a bit more. I wouldn't consider this common knowledge so to me, this topic seems deceptively simple, with an underlying complexity.malestrithe said:
Kamina and Simon of Gurren Lagann are Chaotic good, and they wear trench-coats, epic shades, and mecha that break reality on a regular basis. And that's just the beginning of how ridiculously epic it gets...(damn it, Why do I have to keep bringing it up?)GTwander said:
Chaotic good runs on whatever works as rule of cool at the time.
...Also, some people argue robin hood is actually Neutral good. So... Yeah.
I think I made a point a little earlier today about Chaotic Good not necessarily being against society. And I've also been noting how chaotic good is not necessarily selfish. And some points on Azatas, The Chaotic Good outsiders of pathfinder, might shed some light on Chaotic good society and motives.
I don't think I'd even have to add much from here, and its very had to cut things from that page that aren't relevant to this discussion. The other bits being that they all have noble titles that they don't use for any form of benefit, other than a bit of self importance, and that they show up on special occasions like weddings of two seers, (which I would have put in, but the page was long enough), and a few features common to all outsiders.
Gah! any moment now, someone's gonna pop up with an excerpt on Archons...
One page from the bestiary is crammed with that many selling points for a Chaotic Good celestials, and thus Chaotic good itself.
I don't think I'd even have to add much from here, and its very had to cut things from that page that aren't relevant to this discussion. The other bits being that they all have noble titles that they don't use for any form of benefit, other than a bit of self importance, and that they show up on special occasions like weddings of two seers, (which I would have put in, but the page was long enough), and a few features common to all outsiders.
Gah! any moment now, someone's gonna pop up with an excerpt on Archons...
He's Chaotic Lawful. Upholds the law with a fair bit of chaos. Neutral Good probably is the closest.DoPo said:
I have to jump on the Chaotic Good alignment bandwagon. It's pretty much the closest to my alignment anyway, if I had one.
I actually tried to make Chaotic lawful, or Lawful Chaotic, an actual thing. It failed spectacularly under peer review.Ninjat_126 said:
Still, the concept for their outsiders I up with was amusing. Essentially being Cyborg DJ's with shifting colors and adaptive rebuilding of themselves to suit their current task. It was a fun thought, and it feels like only a really chaotic individual would come up with such an idea.
...back on topic. I think that despite many a person arguing for Lawful good with better logic, Chaotic good is averaging in the lead. So we've got the biggest band-wagon!
But on a more serious note, with less bragging, it does lead one to assume that chaotic good is something people relate to better.
Which is easy to understand; this is a gaming forum, most of us probably like to have fun, Chaotic good is filled with the principles of joy, so...
[Insert conclusion to line of thought here->]
The two extremes, Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil, are notorious for being shit for RP. The only real way to develop an interesting character out of a Lawful Good character would be to introduce a choice where they have to break their alignment.
Example: As a law stating all thefts to be punished by execution, poverty being prevalent, children are often executed according to law.
Neutral Good would probably overlook the law to help the people in need. Chaotic Good would ignore the law, possibly actively working to abolish it or the people in government. Lawful Neutral would gather up the criminals out of duty, while True Neutral wouldn't involve themselves. Chaotic Neutral would be at the bar getting drunk, not giving a shit. Lawful Evil would gather up the criminals and enjoy the executions. Chaotic Evil would just murder people for fun. But Lawful Good? They have to break their alignment or pretend the conundrum doesn't exist.
Not that I mind that, per se. This is what makes characters interesting; it's juts that the character wouldn't be Lawful Good any more. They'd be Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral.
Example: As a law stating all thefts to be punished by execution, poverty being prevalent, children are often executed according to law.
Neutral Good would probably overlook the law to help the people in need. Chaotic Good would ignore the law, possibly actively working to abolish it or the people in government. Lawful Neutral would gather up the criminals out of duty, while True Neutral wouldn't involve themselves. Chaotic Neutral would be at the bar getting drunk, not giving a shit. Lawful Evil would gather up the criminals and enjoy the executions. Chaotic Evil would just murder people for fun. But Lawful Good? They have to break their alignment or pretend the conundrum doesn't exist.
Not that I mind that, per se. This is what makes characters interesting; it's juts that the character wouldn't be Lawful Good any more. They'd be Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral.
What makes the alignment system in D&D so great is that none are better then the other. Chaos has the benefit of swifter justice at the cost of future ramifications, while Lawful is longer justice with either more ramifications now or the chance of the baddie escaping jail ALA Batman's Joker.
The issue is that they always assume that a lawful-good character is always a "Smite dat evil asshole" all the time, when it isn't really true.
I, personally want to play a lawful good character when I finally meet another D&D group but with my experience as a Chaotic bard / thief I can tell you that, just because you can kill the big-dick-priest there doesn't mean that the town will like you.
The issue is that they always assume that a lawful-good character is always a "Smite dat evil asshole" all the time, when it isn't really true.
I, personally want to play a lawful good character when I finally meet another D&D group but with my experience as a Chaotic bard / thief I can tell you that, just because you can kill the big-dick-priest there doesn't mean that the town will like you.
This is why I liked Planescape: Torment's alignment system: Your alignment changes to reflect your actions, with no penalty, it's just a reflection of what is. It's so much easier when you consider them to just be opposite ends of a spectrum, with plenty of grey (neutral) area in between. Making it black and white just makes it complicated. You can be "mostly" lawful... just like in real life, and as long as you're not habitually chaotic, it doesn't change anything. Moral ambiguity solved.
For the record, my Nameless One usually ended up being either chaotic neutral or chaotic good. Cause that's how I roll.
For the record, my Nameless One usually ended up being either chaotic neutral or chaotic good. Cause that's how I roll.
It's the difference between a straight-laced cop and Jack Bauer. Arguably the cop is a more moral character, but then again Jack Bauer is more dedicated.
I tend to side with Chaotic Good, simply because it's a morality that refuses to compromise good for law. It doesn't matter that the law says you can't just go around causing massive property damage, because DAMMIT I JUST BLEW UP A GANG HIDEOUT TO SAVE THE KIDNAPPED ORPHANS.
I tend to side with Chaotic Good, simply because it's a morality that refuses to compromise good for law. It doesn't matter that the law says you can't just go around causing massive property damage, because DAMMIT I JUST BLEW UP A GANG HIDEOUT TO SAVE THE KIDNAPPED ORPHANS.