|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 1:51PM
#811
|
|
|
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Basically if you are playing a chaotic character and aren't rolling dice to make a bulk of your decisions you're likely neutral at best.
That's one of the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
"I rolled a 3, so I jump off the cliff flapping my arms instead of crossing the bridge. Because I'm chaotic."
I dont often agree with Salla, but this is hilarious.
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 2:03PM
#812
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
The problem is all of those things are far to simplistic a description to determine lawfulness or not. The reasoning, or absolute lack thereof in the case of chaotic, behind the actions is what matters. If you act as directed by your greed hatred and bloodlust and do so purposefully and with forethought of it then you could make the case for being lawful, especially if you can back this up elsewhere within your characterization, such as doing these things because that is a tenet of your rules system, or faith, then you can totally make a bid for lawful.
And this takes us back to the Catch-22. All the quotes are the descriptions of non-lawful alignments from the playtest.
I don't think that a personal code of "I always act randomly and in a way to further chaos" should make someone lawful.
Exactly, I agree. Patterns of behavior do not equate to Lawful alignment.
Using that definition means you can argue that sentient beings are inherently Lawful. All sentient creatures make judgment calls based on previous experience and genetic disposition (if you use the nature/nurture approach), so a being's actions will always follow a rational pattern. The only Chaotic entities would be creatures under a Confusion or Insanity spell who did not have control over their own actions.
A better definition might be: Lawful characters side with the current state of affairs in the world. They uphold the status quo and view the current establishment and rule of law as just and fair. Lawful Good creatures like the established world because it facilitates the greatest good towards the many. Lawful Evil creatures like the established world because it facilitates their own selfish and personal goals at the expense of others.
Chaotic characters are opposed to the current state of affairs in the world. They seek to tear down the status quo and view the current establishment and laws as unjust. Chaotic Good creatures seek to disrupt the current state of the world because they believe it to be unfair to the weak, the impoverished, and the disenfrancized. Chaotic Evil creatures seek to disrupt the state of affairs because it prevents them from furthering their own personal goals and desires.
Lawful and Chaotic are subjective, depending on the setting and situation. If the players are defending a righeous kingdom from an orcish horde bent on domination, the players might be Lawful and the orcs Chaotic. If the players are seeking to unseat a tyrant, they might be Chaotic and the king's army would be Lawful.
Sure, it's not a perfect method of determining alignment, but I think that alignment's a mechanic that needs to get tossed out the nearest airlock, so meh.
Also...how much ravenloft do you play? Your explanation completely falls apart in a setting like ravenloft because the alignment lawful good would be impossible because all the world leaders are tyrants for the most part (I'm a little rusty on ravenloft but that is the general jist of it). The alignment system literally cannot have anything to do with the rules of the land because those laws switch from land to land, with some possibly being the complete opposite of eachother. Were your definition used, alignemnt would shift via moving through the various countries of the world. That simply does not work for a system that is to be used for describing who your character is. It must be internalized for that is where the character is defined.
Ravenloft handles alignments totally differently. For example, in Ravenloft, you can't detect Good and Evil - only Law and Chaos. Good and Evil themselves were also handled really differently, with the inclusion of Ravenloft Powers checks for evil actions. But yes, in Ravenloft it would basically impossible to be Lawful Good unless the individual firmly believed that the current state of affairs was good for the people of that town. For example, if the Burgormaster of Barovia thought that rule under Strahd was the best option becuase it was superior to being annihilated by his dark minions.
The problem with Law and Chaos - no, with ALL alignment - is that it's subjective, not absolute. As the Wizard in Wicked puts it,
A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader, or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist
There are precious few at ease
With moral ambiguities
So we act as though they don't exist
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 2:09PM
#813
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader, or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist
There are precious few at ease
With moral ambiguities
So we act as though they don't exist
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 2:11PM
#814
|
Date Joined:
Feb 12, 2009
|
The problem is all of those things are far to simplistic a description to determine lawfulness or not. The reasoning, or absolute lack thereof in the case of chaotic, behind the actions is what matters. If you act as directed by your greed hatred and bloodlust and do so purposefully and with forethought of it then you could make the case for being lawful, especially if you can back this up elsewhere within your characterization, such as doing these things because that is a tenet of your rules system, or faith, then you can totally make a bid for lawful.
And this takes us back to the Catch-22. All the quotes are the descriptions of non-lawful alignments from the playtest.
I don't think that a personal code of "I always act randomly and in a way to further chaos" should make someone lawful.
Exactly, I agree. Patterns of behavior do not equate to Lawful alignment.
Using that definition means you can argue that sentient beings are inherently Lawful. All sentient creatures make judgment calls based on previous experience and genetic disposition (if you use the nature/nurture approach), so a being's actions will always follow a rational pattern. The only Chaotic entities would be creatures under a Confusion or Insanity spell who did not have control over their own actions.
A better definition might be: Lawful characters side with the current state of affairs in the world. They uphold the status quo and view the current establishment and rule of law as just and fair. Lawful Good creatures like the established world because it facilitates the greatest good towards the many. Lawful Evil creatures like the established world because it facilitates their own selfish and personal goals at the expense of others.
Chaotic characters are opposed to the current state of affairs in the world. They seek to tear down the status quo and view the current establishment and laws as unjust. Chaotic Good creatures seek to disrupt the current state of the world because they believe it to be unfair to the weak, the impoverished, and the disenfrancized. Chaotic Evil creatures seek to disrupt the state of affairs because it prevents them from furthering their own personal goals and desires.
Lawful and Chaotic are subjective, depending on the setting and situation. If the players are defending a righeous kingdom from an orcish horde bent on domination, the players might be Lawful and the orcs Chaotic. If the players are seeking to unseat a tyrant, they might be Chaotic and the king's army would be Lawful.
Sure, it's not a perfect method of determining alignment, but I think that alignment's a mechanic that needs to get tossed out the nearest airlock, so meh.
Also...how much ravenloft do you play? Your explanation completely falls apart in a setting like ravenloft because the alignment lawful good would be impossible because all the world leaders are tyrants for the most part (I'm a little rusty on ravenloft but that is the general jist of it). The alignment system literally cannot have anything to do with the rules of the land because those laws switch from land to land, with some possibly being the complete opposite of eachother. Were your definition used, alignemnt would shift via moving through the various countries of the world. That simply does not work for a system that is to be used for describing who your character is. It must be internalized for that is where the character is defined.
Ravenloft handles alignments totally differently. For example, in Ravenloft, you can't detect Good and Evil - only Law and Chaos. Good and Evil themselves were also handled really differently, with the inclusion of Ravenloft Powers checks for evil actions. But yes, in Ravenloft it would basically impossible to be Lawful Good unless the individual firmly believed that the current state of affairs was good for the people of that town. For example, if the Burgormaster of Barovia thought that rule under Strahd was the best option becuase it was superior to being annihilated by his dark minions.
The problem with Law and Chaos - no, with ALL alignment - is that it's subjective, not absolute. As the Wizard in Wicked puts it,
A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader, or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist
There are precious few at ease
With moral ambiguities
So we act as though they don't exist
no dissagreement here. thats why if you watch my definition and bucket system it really just matters how you frame yourself. Gets alignment to stop being a straitjecket and more of a thought sparker. Basically any character can subjectively be any of the alignments. My definition and bucket system are sort of designed to make you think on a deeper level to get into the mind of your character. Why make a system dependent on hard lines when the subject matter it pertains to is fluid and subjective. Instead make it a subjective system used only to spark thought.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 2:22PM
#815
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader, or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist
There are precious few at ease
With moral ambiguities
So we act as though they don't exist
Thanks!
In all seriousness, Alignment is a silly abstraction. If a player wants to prove they're a Paladin, then they should act like one. If they don't know what that entails, then their god was wrong to choose them for the task. If your character's a Warlock who struggles against the dark influence that granted their powers, then role-play it. Players don't need an Alignment to tell them what to do any more than they need to take a Flaw saying their cooking is awful.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 3:56PM
#816
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Ok, so following a set patterned behavior must mean you have a code, and thus are lawful.
How would you classify the following descriptions (and why):
"You follow your whims."
"You do whatever you can get away with."
To me, all of these describe a set patterned behavior.
Really, following your whims is some kind of Lawful behaviour.
Really?
Great now Two-Face is some kind of Lawful criminal because he always randomly chooses what he does.
Great, now (thanks to the wonders of quoting out of context) everyone thinks I believe crazy stuff that I don't actually believe. I guess it is my own fault for not putting on the Irony tags.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 4:08PM
#817
|
|
|
Why is the term 'restriction' being used almost universally in this debate? For me, and I'm one of those alignment using grognards, I think of them as requirements.
Restriction speaks of an open entry to all being narrowed whereas requirement starts from an exclusive position.
Do you consider it a restriction that Wizards are Int based?
I don't see much difference in a class requiring a certain outlook in addition to a decent minimum in whatever personal attribute(s).
As for the alignment narrative it should be part of each relevant class description. Shade the text to highlight the optional nature and have the wording flow naturally with or without the shaded text. Realistically the game must work with and without alignment.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 4:10PM
#818
|
|
|
Great, now (thanks to the wonders of quoting out of context) everyone thinks I believe crazy stuff that I don't actually believe. I guess it is my own fault for not putting on the Irony tags.
It did seem odd.
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 4:11PM
#819
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Great, now (thanks to the wonders of quoting out of context) everyone thinks I believe crazy stuff that I don't actually believe. I guess it is my own fault for not putting on the Irony tags.
It did seem odd.
Heh heh.
Well, I am sure of one thing. The sheer length of this thread, and the crazy number of alignment threads that have popped up, tells me that alignment is a dicey issue, and not something that the designers should use bluntly.
My guess: they will end up handling alignment in the same way as they are handling healing: heaps of modules so that each group can adjust the system to work for them. In this case, it really doesn't matter what the book says in the Monk class section, because the section on alignment will make it clear that everything is up for grabs; talk to your DM to find out what version they are using.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 15, 2012 - 4:59PM
#820
|
Date Joined:
Apr 19, 2009
|
I'm sorry, but to me? Requiring Lawful for a Monk kind of makes sense. I just don't see them as a Chaotic class. Want a Chaotic Street-Fighter? Maybe they'll make a 'Brawler' Specialty that you can take with your fighter so you can have the unarmed combat without having the belong to a monastic order.
One thing that always disappointed me was the requirement of Lawful Good for Paladins in 3E. When Unearthed Arcana came out and released the other optional types of paladins (Paladin of Freedom, Paladin of Tyranny, Paladin of Slaughter I think they were?), I liked them a lot more, especially that their abilities changed depending on their alignment.
I don't know. Alignment has always been a minor thing in our circles - mostly just another step to try and flesh out a character.
|
|
|
