>Gender: Male>Race: Human>Class: Fighter>Alignment: Chaotic good
>>961082>>961086He was so close, lawful good all the way
>>961086Yeah, looking pretty based
>>961082>Lawtists immediately start seething out of their mindsBased chaoschad
>>961211you will never be a woman
>>961217That the best you can come up with?
>>961211>seeing seethe where there is none
>>961086>he needs an external system of justice in order to inform his moral decisions
>>961224>See word "chaotic">Immediately trips over himself to rush into the thread and correct him>First one to get a response that's not circlejerking in his favor instantly switches to muh tranniesI see a lot of seething here
>>961230justice is not the same as morality genius
>>961242>chaosnigger immediately believes he's being persecuted by lawtistsI could be talking about neutral good you know
>>961271Being persecuted would imply you can do jackshit about it.>I could be talking about neutral good you knowSure you did.
>>961271>c-chaosnigger!>i totally could be talking about something else thoughpathetic
>>961260>Using the NPC meme incorrectlym8 u w0t?
>>961275>>961280I do in fact think Neutral Good is superior to both but you faggots have Law living rent free in your head so you immediately believe lawtists are onto you retarded middle school bullshit again
>>961082>Why yes, I kill NPCs who are mean to me and ignore the story, how could you tell?
>>961230lawful good types can have an internal code of conduct too retard
>>961290Internal codes of conduct don't mean jackshit on the aligment system retard. Everyone has one.
Great thread. Lawtists losing their fucking mind 1 post in
>>961294DO NOT post my selfies without my permission.
>>961292yeah but being lawful/chaotic determines whether or not you follow that code to the letter or just view it as a guideline and really are just arbitrary in your morality
>>961284I can't hear you over the lie detector pinging, Javert.
NG > REST good
>Gender: Female>Race: Human>Class: Cleric>Alignment: Neutral Good
>>961332The fuck does "cleanse me of all my idols" mean?
>Start as chaotic good>Slowly drift towards neutral good
>>961347>start as neutral evil>slowly drift towards lawful good
>>961082>Gender: Female>Race: Human>Class: Barbarian>Alignement: Chaotic Neutral
>Lawtist """Good"'">Chaoticuck """Good""'
>>961217I don't plan to either, I'm a straight maleyour point?
>>961184The only difference between lawful good and chaotic evil is your stated reason for random murder. Neutral Good and Neutral Evil are the only real alignments.
>human, male, white, paladin
>>961281>no you can't call me an NPC! that's using the meme incorrectly!
>>961082>Gender: Male>Race: Elf>Class: Wizard>Alignment: Chaotic good
>>961086>he enters a new game with zero understanding of the realm's laws and decides to follow them implicitlyhuh. i guess sheep do eat bugs.
>>962385>he enters a new game with zero understanding of the realm's laws and decides to go against them implicitlythat's why neutral good is the true chad way
>>962385internal codes of conduct =/= civic/common lawlawful is a synonym for order and order doesn't have to be external.
Neutral good is the truly Chad alignment. You're not an asshole but you also don't blindly follow laws.
>>962565chaotic good don't follow laws, that's what makes them chaotic. you're confusing moral alignments with ethical alignments
>>962545"Lawful has nothing to do with external order" is the excuse all chaotic evil murderhobos give for why they shouldn't lose their powers after committing cold blooded murder of innocents.A lawful character would AT LEAST obey the rules of whichever place he's in until he has 100% verified they are completely opposed to all of his ideals. This "I can be Lawful while still acting exactly how my conscience dictates and ignoring or actively challenging all authority" attitude is just cope from chaotics in denial.
>Gender: Female>Race: Human>Class: Cleric>Alignment: Lawful Evil
>>961337It means stop being a fucking heathen and worship only YHWH. Not YHWH AND whatever blasphemous fucking potato diety your tiny tribal brain come up with, only YHWH. Not even the idols YHWH gives you are fit for worship, only YHWH.As written, it interestingly means worshipping Jesus is also a damnable offence, since that's fucking Idol worship.
>>962726But I thought Jesus was god, the holy trinity and all thatI gotta read the bible one of these days
>>962726I just don't fucking get religion. Isn't the entire thing based on idol worship? How would god not be an idol too? Why even build churches? They're idols too. So is the cross (though I guess that would fit within the spectrum of "Jesus"). Idol is just such a fucking generic and broad term. If I turn to a tree to pray because god is in everything and I need to be facing at something, is that not turning it into an idol too?
>>962661do you just not understand what lawful good means? The lawful part implies order which suggests structure and a overarching sense of ethics from a source while the good part suggests said sense of structure doesn't involve brutal murder of any and everything.
>>962745Idolatry means in the Abrahamic sense worship of anything in place of the Abrahamic god. So worshipping a saint would be idolatry just as much as it would be worshipping Moloch or Zeus or whatever.
>>962745YHWH makes an exception for Himself. "No idols before me" acknowledges that yes, YHWH is an Idol, but worshipping just this one is okay, because He says so. Interestingly, it also implies that there ARE other valid idols, just that worshipping them is outlawed.The various stand-ins are okay or not okay, depending on the mindset behind them.Pretending worshipping Jesus is acceptable for a moment, worshipping the cross itself is false idolatry, but respecting the cross as a symbol of Jesus' suffering and worshipping THAT is acceptable. Worshipping the Bible itself as a holy item is false idolatry, respecting the text as an account of YHWH's will is acceptable. Hopefully those distinctions make sense?>>962766Pretty much, though the same steps of logic can make them, at least, more acceptable. Worshipping a saint because they did X is false idolatry, respecting that the saint's doing X was a representation of YHWH's capacity for X, and worshipping that is acceptable.>>962734Eh, it IS debatable, but that starts to get into the different levels of translations and interpretations made over the years. Some interpretations say they are one and the same, some say they they are distinct but equal, others say fuck interpretation and just take "No idols before me" as literally as possible just to be safe.To clarify just in case, the trinity is The Father (YHWH), The son (Jesus), and The Holy Ghost/Spirit (Ambiguous at best, there's a weak argument that this stands for Metatron, the only being that directly hears the voice of YHWH, who is the one that then makes sure this voice is sent to the right people without shattering their existence. But really, it's ambiguous.)Arguing about this is one of the prime differences between denominations of Abrahamic religions, particularly Christianity and Judaism; the former tend to err on the side of worshipping Jesus is excused, the latter on the side of "What does the book say? Do that."
>>961082Why do you people take pride and try to pass it off as a manly thing to be as boring as possible? I don't get it? is it push back because you want to be 'better' then other nerds?
>>962734the point of the trinity is that they are all one
>>961082>Chaotic Good>True Neutral>Lawful Evilchad alignments
>>962871>I need to play a neon coloured nothuman with pointy ears to be specialmaking an interesting human requires more than tokenism and exoticism but the gaggle of spergs that shit out tiefling mary sues, elf archers or Drizzt clones won't understand this
>>962752>which suggests structure and a overarching sense of ethics from a sourceAnd that's the problem. If that source is just "what I think is ethical", you're not fucking Lawful. You're Neutral Good or, if you're particularly confrontative with the people around you about their own opinions, or unwilling to compromise in the face of a government that actively defies and prohibits those values, Chaotic Good.A Lawful Good character that walks into a country that has a well defined government and set of laws is inherently going to place his trust in them and follow them unless he actually knows beforehand and with all certainty that he's not going to get actually fair treatment and the law enforcers are corrupt or have designed a system made to oppress everyone else. The whole "muh inner code" is a bunch of bullcrap that amounts to fucking nothing. If you're a Lawful character, your "inner code" had to come from some kind of society with laws, not just because you made it up yourself. Everyone has an inner code, it's called standards. The world's biggest scumbag might go "Hey, I might cheat, lie, murder and steal, but I am not a slaver and try to punish them whenever I have a chance because that's my inner code". Doesn't mean he's suddenly Lawful.A Lawful character that wanders into a lawless place isn't going to be ok with it. Wanting order and structure means wanting laws. Not having any respect, desire for, or impulse to follow the laws, by mere principle, means you are not Lawful. The only occasion a Lawful Good character player is going to quote the "Lawful doesn't necessarily mean laws, just principles" piece of shit excuse is when they're actively breaking laws. If those laws were unfair in the first place, he wouldn't need that excuse, because everyone will understand why he's breaking them. If they were, then he's not fucking Lawful. He's just pretending to be, probably to keep his paladin powers or to circlejerk in 4chan about that word in his sheet.
>>962878>Lawful Good = autism>Lawful Neutral = mega-autism>Lawful Evil = control freak>Neutral Good = moralfag>True Neutral = fencesitter>Neutral Evil = sociopath>Chaotic Good = delusional>Chaotic Neutral = just fuck off>Chaotic Evil = edgelord
>>961260>>962214Hi leftypol, you guys still desperately trying not to kill yourselves?
>>963113>tranny BTFO by /pol/spicbeautiful
>>963113the NPC meme wasn't always political, it was originally just an anti-normalfag meme
>>963113>amymoreEven words are females now
>>961217stop projecting your mentall illness you tranny
I absolutely depsie CG-fags, holy shit, fucking brainlets. You can be chaotic or you can be good, you can't be both at the same time. The rule-of-law is a foundation of every civilization. Doesn't much matter what the rule is, it matters only that the rules are uniformly enforced without fear or favor, and only through the rule of law freedom can be protected. You can summarize it in two short sentences>That which is not forbidden is allowed>One person's freedom ends where another's beginsFuck CG. Holy shit I'm mad.
>>963298>i-if I call them a tranny, they won't clock me as one!dilate and then kys
>>963305>fucking brainlets>Said the 2020 winner of the annual brainlet tournament.
>>963305CG are delusional retards that think their conscience supersedes all others and their actions are righteous no matter what.
>>962906You are so right,your mere post triggered millions of lefties
>>961082>Gender: Male>Race: Human>Class: Wizard>Alignment: Lawful Evil
>>963305CG doesn't work in every environment because obviously not every nation is corrupt and tyrannical, but to say they don't exist is absolutely fucking retarded. Did you literally never read Robin Hood in school when you were a kid? Or were your teachers busy indoctrinating you into blindly obeying your country's politicians?
>True neutral>Not by not being involved, but by actively balancing out your good deeds with evilFor every megalomaniacal lich I slay, I burn down an orphanage
>>963358except Robin Hood according to legend was supporting his lawful king Richard I and opposed King John's bullshit from a position that his policies were unlawful and therefore mooteven the Chaotic Good posterchild was actually Neutral Good at least
>paladin = lawful good>cleric = neutral good>bard = chaotic good >fighter = lawful neutral >druid = true neutral >barbarian = chaotic neutral>wizard = lawful evil>rouge = netural evil>sorcerer = chaotic evil
>>963305Nah, fuck you.
>>963379Could a case be made that druids are actually lawful neutral since they live by a code to keep everything in balance?
>>963392Theres no written rules or codes for druids And they usually lack discipline necessary to be lawful
>>961082>chaotic goodfucked it up, it's either neutral good or true neutral
>Gender: Female>Race: Dragon>Class: Cleric>Alignment: Neutral Good
>>963396So the difference is that it has to written?
>>963386Who the fuck is this absolute C H A D?
>>963410Written laws suppose to be shared with othersDruids however might share the ideas but can choose on how to act (or not to act) differently Paladins or soliders on the other should all do the thing that the law tells them to do
>>963379This desuCan be moved one square depending on the personalityBut it is pretty much spot on
>>963426>King>Strong af>Plenty of scars>Doesn't take shit from no nobles or laws>Calls out to CromWho do you think?
>>963386>>963457it's been a few years since i saw the movie but i remember conan chilled out near the end. he seems NGpissing on your own visage is pretty fucking chaotic though, we can chalk it up to the alzheimer's
>>961082>Gender: Female.>Race: Tiefling.>Class: Warlock.>Alingment: Lawful neutral.
>>963521Official sources list Conan as consistently Chaotic his whole life.Take into consideration, he never gave a single fuck about the status quo or his court whining during his entire reign, and when he decided it was over and he was too old and wanted one last adventure before dying, he abdicated but also didn't let any of his sons inherit telling them being a king fucking sucks. Dunno if he turned Aquilonia into a republic before leaving or what, but he sure as hell never stopped being chaotic, just shifted from neutral to good at some point in his adventuring career.
>>961082What are the best games with these alignments, I don't play rpgs
>>963544>I don't play rpgs>>>/vrpg/
>>963544Anything DnD based. Just google it, you'll probably get a million recommendations and then you pick what looks coolest to you.Also, never ever play anything for the alignment system. Alignment systems suck, and not only are you expected to dance to the tune of the writer's own morality (and trust me, nobody can fucking agree on this shit, just look at this thread) but also it's actually detrimental to roleplay, where people forget about their character concept and just chase the label that happens to have their two word combination on it. It's actually a wonder any videogame devs still use the dogshit alignment system for anything.
>>963564I was thinking of buying Baldur's II
>>963570It's great if you think you can stand the graphics and gameplay. I didn't recommend it immediately because if you're not into rpgs at all it might be underwhelming at a first glance, but if that doesn't discourage you it is pretty great.
>>963544Neverwinter nights has it, and it's possible to change alignment through your actions
>>963534i didn't know that, thanks!is that build actually good?
>>963592>Fighter/Thief>Ridiculous Strength>Ridiculous Con>Ridiculous Dex>Fuck, even ridiculous Cha and Int>Only Wis starts out low, and he still gets it up to a respectable 15 throughout the years>Plus latent psionics because why the fuck notIt's busted as fuck. Like "Opened the game console and gave himself max stats and powers" busted.
>>963329>CG are delusional retards that think their conscience supersedes all others and their actions are righteous no matter what.That's literally everyone ever.
>>963358If the law is wrong, a lawful good seeks to change it.
>>963113you're looking for them at wrong places
>>964853Under what authority?
>>961184>lawful good all the wayHe suffers a great deal of hubris. Know thy place in the celestial order. The Gods, King, and then Man.
>>965440Looks like the demographics of Brazil
>>961082I like Paladins more.
>>965411I don't get the question. Do you think Lawful = Slave, or that even most systems don't allow for change in structure and form? Or even that Lawful people cannot be autonomous? What a retarded question.
>>970257It's very simple anon, who is your character to change the laws? What makes him worthy to tell other governments that their variant of lawful is wrong and his is right? If your LG character arrived at a place with laws he doesn't agree with, why would anyone take him seriously? Or worse, if it's an evil government, what's stopping him from appearing dead in a ditch the next day?
>>970279Good=LawIf the law isn't good then it's not law. Be good or be dead.
>>970279>who is your character to change the laws?An autonomous force of good utilizing the system or overthrowing or replacing the system he deems unworthy or unsatisfactory to meet the needs. Whether or not this is subjective nature is objectively right is irrelevant. There is literally nothing further to speculate on this question.
>>970296Said the LE Asmodeus worshipper
>>970297>or overthrowing or replacing the system he deems unworthy or unsatisfactory to meet the needsWelcome to CG anon.
>>970300Overthrowing implies replacement with a new system to follow (by force, as opposed to more peaceful and simple straight-up replacement), brainlet-kun. Which would continue to be lawful. It's only Chaotic if you remove the system and allow for might-make-right to take its place.
>>970305>It's only Chaotic if you remove the system and allow for might-make-right to take its place.Why? A CG could perfectly install a democracy or similar systems. You've also already seen an example in this very thread of a CG character who usurped an evil tyrant and told the corrupt nobility to go suck dick while he put down order, only to abdicate afterwards once his job was done and the kingdom would be left stable and prosperous. This entire argument just parts from your already flawed starting point that a Chaotic character literally can't help but tear down the system, no matter if it's a system he agrees with or not.
>>970318>A CG could perfectly install a democracy or similar systemsThen that would be lawful.The thing that you're majorly missing in these points is that Lawful or Chaotic describes an idelogy. You're taking snapshots of time and describing the actions as part of these idelogies without capturing the reason for them, then ascribing them to the actors. Lawful people subscribe to a belief that orderly systems are the best way to handle matters and security, getting everyone on the same page and creating a history or precedence. Chaotic people on the other hand believe mostly in a "true" freedom, that people should only survive on their own, and you can and should only have what you can keep through force and your own wit. Rebelling against a lawful system seems chaotic if you only take it at its face value, but if you see that the rebellion is to install a new, similar lawful system without tyrants, then this can only really be considered a lawful act even if at the moment they are using neutral means to achieve it.To use a ham-handed food analogy, 4chan's favorite, it's like you're looking at someone carving a turkey and saying "this person is eating a roast turkey thanksgiving dinner", without taking into account that just moments before, he pulled out the bread, the mayonnaise, some cheese, and a small bag of chips.
>>970353Your logic is entirely and simply that taking one chaotic act for a lawful purpose is going to be lawful, but taking one lawful act for a chaotic purpose is impossible. If a lawful character can take one chaotic act like rebellion to overthrow an evil system, why can't a chaotic character take one lawful act like creating a law system to ensure the freedom of the population is protected? Again, you've literally seen one such case in this thread.The fact of the matter is you're treating all chaotic characters as if they were slaads. Completely incapable of coherent actions and reasonings. If something has an order to itself, it must be torn down, inconditionally and with no flexibility. Yet you are completely eager to defend that lawful characters can bend their morality as necessary and still be completely admirable for it.Chaotic characters aren't some ticking bomb that destroy ideologies wherever they go just because they exist. A Chaotic character who arrives to a place where the laws are something he's ok with will simply... do nothing about it. Move on. And if he later arrives to somewhere he does not, he might remember those from before and put those down there after said rebellion. Might-makes-right is not a good ideology. So a Chaotic Good character won't try to implement it and won't just leave innocent people to be conquered to whoever happens to be strongest. That's not how it works, that's just the narrative you've convinced yourself of.
>>970376>why can't a chaotic character take one lawful act like creating a law system to ensure the freedom of the population is protected?Because that's a far longer-reaching ideology that directly runs counter-current to the beliefs of Chaotic. And in fact, is what makes Conan such a developed character. He in fact created a lawful system despite being Chaotic, and in the end, held true to his roots and abandoned the system in favor of Chaos because he decried it as not worth it. It's also part of the reason why there's even an argument to be had about his supposed neutral tendencies, having this contradiction in him.Again, it's an ideology. Conan is Chaotic because of his beliefs, and acting on those beliefs is what betrays your beliefs. But people are contradictory.>The fact of the matter is you're treating all chaotic characters as if they were slaads.[...]I think my above analysis of Conan's actions is sufficient enough to debunk this idea, but just to make sure, no, that's not the case at all.A Chaotic belief is one that believes in benefiting themselves or their beliefs through most any means necessary. But only a Chaotic stupid would do this at the cost of things like family, society, or even in the midst of a lawful system. A Chaotic person can and will follow the law of their land if they believe it to be their most beneficial action at the time, even if they don't believe that this is the optimal system in place to handle the situation.>Yet you are completely eager to defend that lawful characters can bend their morality as necessary and still be completely admirable for it.Because the action, as several anons replied with before you started this, is one of Good, not Law/Chaos. The system is being replaced because the system itself was deemed evil, not that systems themselves are evil.>Might-makes-right is not a good ideology.It's not evil either. This is a Chaotic ideology.
>>970413>abandoned the system in favor of Chaos because he decried it as not worth it.That never happened. Conan didn't abdicate because he decided his entire reign hadn't been worth it, he abdicated because he felt Aquilonia was finally in a state where he could finally leave and trust that it'd govern itself fairly. I don't know where you took this defeatist argument from. I also don't know why apparently according to you Conan having chaotic beliefs while doing lawful stuff was possible but apparnetly no one else can do that.>A Chaotic belief is one that believes in benefiting themselves or their beliefs through most any means necessary.This is already wrong. That's an EVIL belief. A Chaotic character wants FREEDOM. The good/evil part of it just dictates whether all he wants is personal freedom or freedom for everyone else. You're the only one here taking a blatantly egoistical and evil ideology and attributing to the chaotic spectrum for no reason. As if a Lawful Evil character couldn't seek to benefit themselves.>Because the action, as several anons replied with before you started this, is one of Good, not Law/Chaos.And yet you refuse to allow a Chaotic Good character to perform the exact same Good action that according to yourself has no bearing on Law/Chaos.>It's not evil either. This is a Chaotic ideology.Wrong. Chaotic is about freedom. A Chaotic Evil character will stab someone to take their stuff, but it's not the freedom loving part of him that tells him to do it, it's the evil, greedy part.You're just equating chaotic with evil for no good reason when none of the alignment definitions throughout the years have ever given an argument of greediness and selfishness being inherently chaotic.
>>970433>I don't know where you took this defeatist argument from.I misspoke, I was referring to him convincing his children not to take the throne, which essentially seemed to demolish the system. See >>963534 's post here.>he abdicated but also didn't let any of his sons inherit telling them being a king fucking sucks. Dunno if he turned Aquilonia into a republic before leaving or what, but he sure as hell never stopped being chaotic>That's an EVIL beliefIt's not though. Evil is simply the belief that it's okay to kill people to obtain their means, or at the very least killing is a natural part of the process. To be Good reflects the opposite.>A Chaotic character wants FREEDOMWhich means abandonment of security systems, which de facto means Might-makes-right. You can't have freedom if you can't earn it, anon.Also: >The good/evil part of it just dictates whether all he wants is personal freedom or freedom for everyone else.is laughably wrong on its basis. Good/Evil = Life/Death axis.>Chaotic Good character to perform the exact same Good action that according to yourself has no bearing on Law/Chaos.I never denied them the action to cause a rebellion, because the rebellion itself is neither law nor chaos in nature. You merely started to inject believes to make a really trite old argument of "hurr hurr you say you are law, but you didn't enslave yourself to the ideal so now you are chaos ;)" when the context of the actions is fundamental in teh question.>Wrong.No, it's correct, as it always has been in accordance with the original alignment axis developed by its creators, as well as coinciding with the beliefs of many that came after.>You're just equating chaotic with evil for no good reasonNo, you're just operating on a grossly incorrect interpretation of Good/Evil, when that aspect is the most simplest part of the alignment axis. It makes it really clear that you've been playing for less than, what, 3? 4 years?
>>970444>chaotic neutralHas there ever been a character with this alignment that wasn't invader zim whacky or just jibberingly insane?
>>970478I've always thought chaotic neutral would mean to get the funniest outcomes possible. You should roleplay at the Tom Bombadil of whatever setting you're in.
>>970472You are still talking about Conan as if he gave up or as if his argument for abdicating was that authority is inherently wrong. He convinced them to not reclaim their right to the throne because it's a miserable life, and he abdicated because he realized he didn't need to live said miserable life anymore. There's no deeper message here, Conan simply didn't care for being king, but understood he needed to play politician and lawmaker for a while to ensure the people would be ok. Because he was Chaotic GOOD, which is the combination of words that seems to fry your brain.>It's not though.It fucking is. You're taking simple evil concepts as greediness, selfishness and despotism (because that's basically what might-makes-right is) and you're attributing them to an alignment that is EXPLICITLY NOT EVIL. Like, I can't fucking present any arguments until you realize your logic is flawed at a fundamental level. In your brain, evil = chaotic, and that's just not true. It's your own bias not letting you see here.And besides, evil is not simply killing. There's so many fucking ways to do evil that don't require explicit murder.
>>970478Harrim and Jubilost from Kingmaker
>>970504>He convinced them to not reclaim their right to the throne because it's a miserable life, and he abdicated because he realized he didn't need to live said miserable life anymore. There's no deeper message hereWhy would there have to be? Clearly following the ideals of Law went counter-current to his actual ideals of Chaos, so he did indeed give up on the system proclaiming it wasn't worth it, despite running it very successfully. What more is there to read here?>Conan simply didn't care for being king, but understood he needed to play politician and lawmaker for a while to ensure the people would be ok. Because he was Chaotic GOODBut this doesn't beget that. Conan was under the belief he had to play at Law, so he ran a Law system. That doesn't mean that this was the best way to run Chaotic Good, just what the character believed at the time. He could have implemented other systems as well, but either found fault in or didn't think of them.Humans make mistakes, anon. That's all you're really demonstrating.>It fucking is.Incorrect. Sorry. This is just facts.>You're taking simple evil concepts as greediness, selfishness and despotismThose aren't actions of evil though. You can be good and be greedy or selfish, as long as those actions don't directly harm others, then you're good. But Chaotic.>evil is not simply killing.It quite literally is.
>>970478https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChaoticNeutralTake your pick.>>970507Also Amiri.
>>970521There is no more arguing to be done. At this point all left to do is just say "Wrong" at each other over and over again. But at the very least don't fucking try to present an erroneous narrative for a well defined and finished work of fiction like Conan. You clearly haven't read it, don't try to bend what little you know to support your argument.
>>970530You really haven't done much to counter the arguments though. Literally all you did was scream "It's defeatist to give up!" when that seems to be what he actually did. So what more is there for me to interpret from that?Also, I think it's a little more than "Ur wrong" at this point, because I've pretty much dismantled your immature interpretations thus far with a simple logic you've yet to conquer. I don't know why you're trying to victory eject at this point instead of taking the opportunity to learn from your mistakes.
>>970540At this point you're just going with the tried and true 4chan tactic of saying I haven't made any arguments, that I'm immature, and simplifying what I've said. There's nothing left to do. This is your last (You). I should have realized as soon as you got triggered at the start of the thread I shouldn't have expected intelligent conversation.
>>970548>At this point you're just going with the tried and true 4chan tactic of saying I haven't made any argumentsNo, you have, several of them. But I've dismantled all of them.>that I'm immatureThe argument is immature. The problem you're making with your interpretations, and what clues me in that you've been playing for less than 5 years, is because you're still interpreting the alignment axis as a personality test, rather than an actual philosophy or ideology. Your argument with "It's a Choatic action to rebel!" is what mostly gives this away. You're looking at the action, then trying to fit that action in on the personality chart you have in your head."If u r lawful, dat mens you folla da rules! SEND DIS 2 5 PEOPLE U LIK!"You're basically just ascribing submissive traits to lawful people and assuming they must be slaves. You still aren't approaching it at the angle of a philosophy. Of an adult looking at their world experience, and thinking "Hm, I understand the points of both sides, but I truly believe that people live their best lives when not constrained by having to defend themselves from those who are stronger, and a large society is better supported by order." THIS is the thought train of someone who is a thinker and is truly lawful, not the personality interpretation.>I should have realized as soon as you got triggered at the start of the threadI jumped in like 30-40 posts ago. Not everyone who disagrees with you is the same person, anon.
>>970567>"If u r lawful, dat mens you folla da rules! SEND DIS 2 5 PEOPLE U LIK!"Your argument this entire time has been "If u r chaotic dat mens you brek da rules!" you hypocrite piece of shit.
>>970567>I jumped in like 30-40 posts ago. Not everyone who disagrees with you is the same person, anon.I haven't posted since the start of the thread and I can tell thats bullshit lmao
>>970576>Your argument this entire time has been "If u r chaotic dat mens you brek da rules!" you hypocrite piece of shit.Where did you see that? Cite the post and the interpretation of this?>>970581Schizo.
>>970595>A lawful good character can perfectly stage a rebellion to bring down a lawful government because he thinks it's evil. It will still be lawful because his philosophy is lawful.>A chaotic good character cannot possibly create laws that ensure the freedom of the people against those who would oppress them. Nu-huh, that's impossible, they're too chaotic for that. Their personalities won't allow it.How hypocritical of you to now go on a rant about philosophy vs personality tests. Maybe look at a fucking mirror before calling others immature.
>>970616Contradicted by my posts here: >>970472>>970413>And in fact, is what makes Conan such a developed character. He in fact created a lawful system despite being Chaotic[...]And>A Chaotic belief is one that believes in benefiting themselves or their beliefs through most any means necessary. But only a Chaotic stupid would do this at the cost of things like family, society, or even in the midst of a lawful system. A Chaotic person can and will follow the law of their land if they believe it to be their most beneficial action at the time, even if they don't believe that this is the optimal system in place to handle the situation.Especially.Also contradicted by:>>970472>I never denied them the action to cause a rebellion, because the rebellion itself is neither law nor chaos in nature.Sorry that you ~feel~ like my words should be wrong because they make you feel bad and stupid, but I feel haven't been hypocritical at all.
>Why yes I am a human male lawful-good paladin, what gave it away?
>>970639You are STILL acting from the erroneous stance that things like selfishness are inherent to the chaotic alignment. Here, let's just fucking see what the OFFICIAL stance is. Aka. what the LAW you love so much says.>"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.>A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he's kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.Absolutely nothing about selfishness, or benefitting themselves through any means necessary.And by the way,>Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has a normal respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to obey nor a compulsion to rebel.>rebel.>Chaotic Good, "Rebel"Rebellion IS a chaotic act. And a Lawful character rebelling IS a Lawful character taking one chaotic action. No matter how much you try to push your bullshit narrative about rebellion not falling anywhere on the law/chaos spectrum.
>>970641violently racist reaction on the drow
>>970567>The problem you're making with your interpretations, and what clues me in that you've been playing for less than 5 years, is because you're still interpreting the alignment axis as a personality test, rather than an actual philosophy or ideology. It's both you dumbass. You believing laws are important doesn't matter jackshit if you still react violently to a cop pulling you because you're a violent sperg.
>>970677>You are STILL acting from the erroneous stance that things like selfishness are inherent to the chaotic alignment.It's not erroneous though. To take on the "Might-makes-right" stance of Chaos, one must assume a natural level of selfishness. It is true that you can also be lawful and selfish to a very small degree, it is largely a trait of Chaos.>Absolutely nothing about selfishness, or benefiting themselves through any means necessary.No, but those are natural traits of the alignment. You can't>with little regard for what others expect of him.Without a largely selfish personality.>Rebellion IS a chaotic act.It's not though. It can be associated with it on mistake, but a rebellion is mostly an act on the Good/Evil alignment depending on the fundamental purposes.Also, pic related, since you too seem woefully inexperienced in looking this up. This isn't all encompassing, but should be a good start to give you inkling that you're wrong and speaking with great authority on a subject you know little about.>inb4 (You) try to dismiss critical thinking because I pulled this off reddit.>>970705>It's both you dumbass.It's not, retard. You don't violently react to armed guards out of self-preservation instincts or retardardation. That's solely an intelligence/wisdom axis.
>>970747Didn't read lol
>>970749Did you think posting that would make me mad?
>>970769Nah I thought it'd make you realize much of an autist you areAlas
>>970782If I'm autistic for being right, then that won't bother me in the slightest, friend.
>>970788That's alright, I bet being right about the most flawed, stupid and unanimously agreed worst system in DnD makes you feel really good about yourself
>>970799>unanimously agreed worst system in DnDPeople only think it's the worst system because they consistently use it as a personality test i.e. Incorrectly.Like with most D&D detractors, I invite you to try using it correctly, and I think you'll find it's actually rather gratifying, so long as you aren't playing Post-WotC era D&D that is.
>>970807People think it's the worst system because some nerds whose only claim to relevance was making up a system for play pretend fantasy settings tried to classify morality in ways not even millennia of philosophists have tried to and obviously went at it with the the skill of a crippled slug. Only manchildren that see the world in black and white and consume "hurr look I put my favorite series character on an alignment chart" memes by the truckload find that shit believable. And like most people that have never actually played D&D, I invite you to actually talk to experienced DMs so you can receive the best advice concerning it most of them will give: Don't fucking use it.
>>970826>I invite you to actually talk to experienced DMs so you can receive the best advice concerning it most of them will give: Don't fucking use it.I have. Over and over. The result remains consistent: They never use the system right, or they're using Post-WotC, which was intentionally built wrong on purpose. As a joke. Thus they played it in a very unfun way, or were taught incorrectly as a result. There's a reason the OSR exists, anon, and it's because that milieu of play remains stand up and consistent. Meanwhile, all of the 3.PF holdovers have moved on to PF 2e or 5e, and are still complaining about things that were already fixed ages ago.Once more, play D&D correctly and the way it was intended, and I think you'll find all your holdovers on alignment and the system itself are woefully incorrect.
>>970888>I have. Over and over. The result remains consistent: They never use the system right>Nobody uses the system right except me.Maybe it's about time you realise there's only one common factor.
>>970941>Maybe it's about time you realise there's only one common factor.I was taught the old ways well after I got into 3rd edition, and this is also discounting the entire OSR movement as a whole. Nice try though. Very cute.
>>970971>Nice try though. Very cute.Cringe. Go tip your fedora at someone else.
>>961082you're supposed to roleplay, not self insert you dating sim fags
>>970978I am roleplaying. Roleplaying a better version of myself that lives in a fantasy world.
>>970971>old ways>3rd editionI can't believe I actually spent most of the thread arguing with you
>>970999To clarify, old ways being Pre-WotC, I.E. 0D&D, Basic/Expert, AD&D 1e & 2e. Which are commonly referred to as a group called Old School Renaissance.>Maliciously misinterprets my statement as hard as possible>"I can't believe I actually spent most of the thread arguing with you"I CAN believe I spent most of the thread arguing with you.
>>971016First of all, nobody fucking cares about the "old ways" in regard to alignment. Gygax literally said the only correct way to play Lawful Good was to genocide every town you came across where the slighest misdeed showed itself and let god sort them out. Nobody fucking takes it seriously. Even actual players and DMs who went through that age and remember it fondly tend to agree that it evolved for good reason once it got past being just a combat simulator that gives a vague excuse for a setting as background for the action.Second of all, if you learned about them AFTER that age had passed, you didn't "learn the old ways". You got told what they were like by someone who was probably biased in some way about them. And that's assuming that wasn't just from second hand knowledge from people that also learned about them from someone else that actually had played during it.
>>961082Based (on good decisions).
>>971039>Gygax literally said the only correct way to play Lawful Good was to genocide>>Maliciously misinterprets my statement as hard as possible>>"I can't believe I actually spent most of the thread arguing with you">I CAN believe I spent most of the thread arguing with you.You're just going around in circles at this point. Gygax did indeed say that killing evil was a Lawful Good act, yes. But this is a cartoonish representation of such, and I'm not going to indulge you on that.>Nobody fucking takes it seriously.Because everyone uses it as a personality test, which is why bad DMs can't make it work.>You got told what they were like by someone who was probably biased in some way about them.This is a laughable amount of assumptions. How do you know I didn't learn them from Frank Mentzer directly, exactly? He's still alive and hangs around cons (or did until Twitter got wind of things). Additionally, what does it matter if it WAS second hand knowledge or not? Are you stating you can't read a book and learn from it if you weren't there directly? True things hold up to scrutiny anon. It would be one thing if I learned from *A* singular source then proclaimed this as gospel, but most people who earnestly learn things will often corroborate with other sources.Also, none of this has anything to do with the original alignment argument, FYI.
>>963396>>963430Druids can be lawful neutral tho.
>>971066Your arguments are "I know the guy at Nintendo and he told me what games are they working on" and "While you were getting laid, I was studying the rulebook from two editions ago". All while presenting the most childish interpretation of the alignment system I've ever seen. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously? Even more, do you actually fucking expect me to believe you're in contact with anyone worth a shit? Give proof.>Also, none of this has anything to do with the original alignment argument, FYI.What, the argument that Chaotic Good literally doesn't exist? Coupled with more than a few insinuations that neither does Lawful Evil? Yeah, great argument.
>>971096>Chaotic Good literally doesn't exist>neither does Lawful Evilthat sounds exactly like what a lawful evil character would say
>>971096>Your arguments are "I know the guy at Nintendo and he told me what games are they working on"??? Cite the post and the interpretation of this?>"While you were getting laid, I was studying the rulebook from two editions ago">Doing research is edgy and fedora lord!>while presenting the most childish interpretation of the alignment system I've ever seen.You mean the logically sound one I've presented? If you have issues with it, attack the idea. All you're doing now is resorting to ad hominem.>Even more, do you actually fucking expect me to believe you're in contact with anyone worth a shit?Anon, the Late 70's wasn't that long ago, and up until their death, Gygax and Arneson could be met and played with, and they also wrote very often on the way they played D&D. Why do you think this post that you "Didn't read lol" >>970747is quoting Gygax from 2005?The fact that you're demanding proof for a really unamazing feat is more evidence of your schizophrenia than anything else.>the argument that Chaotic Good literally doesn't exist?lul wut?Cite the post and the argument?
>>971132>lul wut?>Cite the post and the argument?>>963305What do you think you've been arguing this entire time, you absolute brainlet? The argument you've been defending this whole thread is that Chaotic Good literally doesn't exist, same as you've been advocating this entire time that a Chaotic character literally cannot engage with rules or laws at all, and since laws are inherently right, then Lawful Evil must not exist either.
>>971157Not me, chump.
alignments don't exist
>>971163So? You've been defending THAT argument the entire time. You've been arguing that a CG literally cannot make a situation better or topple an evil empire or kingdom or what have you and leave a better system behind, with that argument fitting that original post perfectly. Don't act now like you didn't realize when this entire response chain all leads to that post and you've been arguing exactly that point.
>>971191>So? You've been defending THAT argument the entire time.No? I don't know where you got that idea from, or learned how to count, but I was actually defending >>964853, and my first post in this thread is >>970257, none of which contradict what I've been saying, sooooo...take your meds?
>>961082>game full of special snowflake donut steel companions>regular human fighter is the most based and respectable out of the bunch
>>971213I respect the hell out of a guy who in a world of sorcery, dragons and other mythic shit decides "I'm gonna hit shit" is gonna be his MO
>>971207So your entire argument then this whole time is that a LG character inherently has the right to change society as he sees fit through the same means a CG character would because the L in his character sheet says so? But the CG character isn't allowed even though they're his own means?Even when faced with examples of a CG character who did exactly that and did a good job of it in the form of Conan? Which you sure as hell were glad to refute as a "failure" even though it explicitly wasn't in story and it was simply done as a demonstration of Conan's incorruptible spirit.
>>971226>So your entire argument then this whole time is that a LG character inherently has the right to change society as he sees fit through the same means a CG character would because the L in his character sheet says so? But the CG character isn't allowed even though they're his own means?No, not in the slightest. Have you even been reading what I've been saying?My argument has always been that a Lawful person does not have to sit by and abide by rules set forth by a tyrannical dictator, and can elect to remove the dictator, and this would be an act of Good. I have never once stated a Chaotic character could not do so, and have even pointed to posts where I have demonstrated that.This has gotten really silly to a point of wasting both of our times. If you aren't even going to read the arguments at hand and just knee jerk react to all of them, then why do you continue to post?>Which you sure as hell were glad to refute as a "failure" even though it explicitly wasn't in story and it was simply done as a demonstration of Conan's incorruptible spirit.Cite the post where I stated it was a failure. While you're up there looking, reread the actual arguments.You will receive no more (You)'s until you start citing the post directly, by the way. This gross misinterpretation of the argument can only be considered malicious, so I'll need some good faith from you if you expect me to continue this.
>>971257I have given several quotes that show that rebellion is a chaotic act that a lawful character would only take as last resort. Which, by the same rule, that means a chaotic character can also resort to making laws and establishing a government if that will further his own chaotic good goals, which are guaranteeing the freedom of everyone involved. AS SAID BY THE FUCKING RULES. And yet this is a scenario which you absolutely refuse to accept because of some garbage "personality vs philosophy muh old school DnD I know better than anyone I've ever met" bullshit. By your own logic, a lawful character can break the rules as much as he wants, and a chaotic character can't, ironically enough. And with no reasoning other than "The word Lawful written on my character sheet empowers me to do so".>Cite the post where I stated it was a failure.>>970413>He in fact created a lawful system despite being Chaotic, and in the end, held true to his roots and abandoned the system in favor of Chaos because he decried it as not worth it.>>970472>I was referring to him convincing his children not to take the throne, which essentially seemed to demolish the system.>>970521>Humans make mistakes, anon.>This gross misinterpretation of the argument can only be considered malicious, so I'll need some good faith from you if you expect me to continue this.This after being the first to insult me by calling me immature, childish and quoting cringy ass interpretations of zoomer speech at me? Fuck you. Kys.
>>971286>I have given several quotes that show that rebellion is a chaotic act that a lawful character would only take as last resort.>would only take as a last resortExcuse me, what? Where did you state that? Because the ENTIRE chain started out of this:>>970300>>or overthrowing or replacing the system he deems unworthy or unsatisfactory to meet the needs>Welcome to CG anon.>Which, by the same rule, that means a chaotic character can also resort to making laws and establishing a government if that will further his own chaotic good goals,Which is why I pointed at Conan several times as a Chaotic character using a lawful system as a deep and nuanced, well-made character.>AS SAID BY THE FUCKING RULESWhich rules? That quote you never sourced posts ago?>ou absolutely refuse to accept because of some garbage "personality vs philosophy muh old school DnD I know better than anyone I've ever met" bullshit.Jesus christ dude, I was starting to get mad at your malicious interpretations, but seeing this unironically made me realize you're a little unhinged and calmed me down a bit.>>Cite the post where I stated it was a failure.>>>970413 (You)>>>970472 (You)NONE of those state the system failed.>>>970521 (You)>>Humans make mistakes, anon.THIS was simply in reference to the fact that he made a personal mistake, not an objective one.You ALSO glossed over in that same exact post>Clearly following the ideals of Law went counter-current to his actual ideals of Chaos, so he did indeed give up on the system proclaiming it wasn't worth it, despite running it very successfully.So...good job?>>This gross misinterpretation of the argument can only be considered malicious,Still stands true.I think you should take a break if you want to tackle this seriously. Getting emotional over this stuff which you decried as "the worst system in D&D" isn't really healthy for you.
>>961825I don't even play DnD but it seems your argument against all alignments is the thought process behind a person's actions which is pretty much the point of an alignment.
Guys. D&D and the games based on it are hack-and-slash games about killing things. Alignment is just a tool to describe why you kill things.>Lawful Good: kill for justice>Neutral Good: kill when there's no other choice>Chaotic Good: kill for justice, but also doesn't care if it's against the law>Lawful Neutral: Kill for justice>Neutral: Kill only if there's no other choice>Chaotic Neutral: Kill because it made sense at the time>Lawful Evil: Kill for justice>Neutral Evil: Kill because it benefits you>Chaotic Evil: Kill so you can have sex with the corpse
>>972630i don't get it
>>972637Double meaning of salt.
>>961184Neutral Good, bby. Empty all of yourself as a vessel for others.
>>963113Imagine unironically seething so hard because of someone's shitposting.
>>971070Yes because they only do what is good for them. It doesn't matter whether it is good or evil. They should also ignore any laws. So a rouge could save the world as long as it pays better than destroying it.
>>962726>Not YHWH AND whatever blasphemous fucking potato diety your tiny tribal brain come up with
>>961082>>Class: Fighter>Not CHADmage
>>962906>Chaotic Neutral is the best
>>961260I mean you do you, but you'll never be a woman
>>962906CN is ADD. For you zoomies, that was the popular diagnosis to drug kids before autism.
No need to let this die
>>961082>Gender: Female>Race: Drow>Class: Barbarian>Alignment: Chaotic Evilbring it on, pussyboy
>>971122>neither does Lawful EvilEkhm, ever heard of Blackguards? And I don't mean african-american security staff this time
>>965440Deep gnome sounds based.
>>961082Nothing wrong with male and human, but fighter is boring and being libertarian sucks.Ranger or Cleric are Fighters, but actually fun. Not a Paladin, because Paladin is just a shit Cleric.Neutral Good, Lawful Neutral and True Neutral are the only good alignments depending on what sort of a person are you.
>>971122More like (((Lawful Evil))), amirite?>>976427Blackguards usually aren't lawful.
All these post about races, alignment, etc. I'm just a mage and want to study the magical arts for gods sake!
>>976718>Implying that's a cursed boomer image.Fuck Twitter. Grill man is based.
>>961082> human Fucking why?! Why not go all the way and make a trully vanilla lawful good paladin then you generic NPC!
>>976919I know this is a meme but it really is so fucking lame.
>>976917And what's wrong with Paladins? Or being Lawful Good?
>>963305>it matters only that the rules are uniformly enforced without fear or favorSo, something that has literally never happened outside of poorly-written fantasy?
True Neutral is the best alignment. It is the most inhuman and superior alignment. The one concerned only with the Iron Law of nature: Survival of the fittest.
>>976929yesisn't that what most CRPGs are?
>>976945>The one concerned only with the Iron Law of nature: Survival of the fittest.>Implying.
>>961230>he thinks arbitrarily acting on things that make you angry is "good" rather than following his principles to heart
>>976921>omfg I want to be a fackin' good monster person!!!!t. not white
>>977187>t. not whiteBut I am white. I just think picking the same thing every time is boring.
>>977187mutt cope as proved in many threads before
>>977330so you are a mutt then?
>>976921as opposed to elf rangers, tiefling tumblrshit or drow edgelords?exoticism is fun for a little but quickly gets stale
>>977337>elf rangersHow about literally anything else with elf?>tiefling tumblrshit ???> drow edgelordsPart of it is how you play the character. You can have a lawful good drow.>exoticism is fun for a little but quickly gets staleOnly if you lack imagination. Making the exact same character everytime can still happen with different races, classes, and alignments but it's more rare- and the results are more dissimilar than they would be if they didn't change those 3 things.
>>977333cope, you will never be white
>>977341>literally anything else with elfSo a human with pointy ears is leagues more interesting than a regular human how?>???tieflings have a reputation to be played by tumblrinas that want special snowflakes mary sues>You can have a lawful good drowmore likely you'd just make the tried and tested Drizzt clone and move on
>>977357uhh you will never be a woman
>>977356>So a human with pointy ears is leagues more interesting than a regular human how?Different lore. Humans in-universe are basically the everyman everytime.>more likely you'd just make the tried and tested Drizzt clone and move onYou don't know me, bitch.
>>977361You will never be Sneed.
>>977362>Humans in-universe are basically the everyman everytime>even though humans in most fantasy have vastly different cultures, history and mindsetsit's like looking at Earth and viewing all humans as American.
>Gender: Female>Race: Elf>Class: Warlock>Alignment: Neutral evil
>>977370>it's like looking at Earth and viewing all humans as American.I mean...
>>977367you will never have sex
>>977382You will never learn the true nature of your parents.
>>977362>t. always picks elf/drow ranger/warlock
>>977385you will never know your father
>>977386My last character was a human bard. Last one was a human mage. I do love the fantasy of warlocks though.
>>977387You will never be your father.
>>977392you will never be (you)
>>977398You will never know (you)
>>977400>>977398Can I get a (You)?
>>977400you will never know (me)
>>977406You will never show (me)
>>977409you will never show (you)
>>977413Me will never show (me)
>>977421So less...(Mouse Apu is based.)
>>977438Close to running out of frogs here, bro...
>>977442I am alone...
>>977451Great end to this saga.
>>977453frenship never ends fren
>>977457it can be (you) fren never give up
what did i stumble upon