|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:35AM
#1
|
|
|
The definition of Lawful Good.
A Lawful Good character believes it is important to be orderly, in addition to being good.
A Neutral Good character will resort to either Lawful or Chaotic strategies, for a given situation, whichever seems to achieve the most good.
A Neutral Good character strives to do more good than a Lawful Good character does. The Lawful Good character struggles to find a compromise between doing good but also maintaining order and predictability.
A business investor can align with Lawful Neutral, if wanting order and predictability to maximize profit. Such an investor might resort to either Good or Evil strategies, whichever seems to achieve the most reliable means of a profitable but legal corporation.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:38AM
#2
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
What does this have to do with the playtest? Alignment hasn't even been included in the most recent playtest.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:42AM
#3
|
|
|
In the most recent playtest packet too, Alignment is listed as part of the Bestiary document.
If Alignment exists at all, I hope it has clear and useful - and intuitive - definitions that help understanding, rather than obfuscate it.
Lawful Good ≠ more Good than Good
To think Lawful Good is more good than Good is just confusing. Then what exactly would “Good” mean, if not Good?
Pure Good is Neutral Good. Lawful Good is something else.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:43AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
I'm not even going to get into the ways in which you've mis-cast lawful (hint: law=/=predicatable), because the real problem isn't defining any one alignment. The problem is that alignment tries to be too many things and fails at most of them.
Until people decide what alignment is, and apply that consistently, defining any one alignment is pointless.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:48AM
#5
|
|
|
I agree with Rampant about alignment trying to cover too many concepts.
Personally, for me, the difference between Lawful and Chaotic is identical to:
Lawful = social collective
Chaotic = personal individual
In this sense of lawful Yang and individual Yin, I see how a person self-identifies. Is the person moreso a member of a larger social group (family, clan, gang of friends, tribe, town, region, citizen)? Or is the person more “their own person”, free and unique, at the expense of behaving reliably (responsibly and predictably) according to the expectations of the larger social group?
The Lawful Good person will find it just as hateful to do something that will violate social convention, as something that will be evil, predatory, benefiting at the *expense* of others.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:52AM
#6
|
|
|
So a Lawful Good character is someone who wants to do good, but also views themselves as necessarily part of a larger group identity. Such as a “good citizen”.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 7:58AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Can you give an example of a situation where the LG character would have to compromise between the Good and Lawful aspects?
In the end, this is exactly why I will never use alignment restrictions in my games. Alignment is a spectrum, and people fall into more than one category depending on any number of factors. At most I use it as a general guideline, like any other aspect of your character's personality. Just like with those other aspects, characters are not one dimensional when it comes to alignment.
It also illustrates nicely why I don't use "beings of pure law and good" in my games, to use just one example.
I think the best thing that can be done with alignment is to leave it nebulous, just like other personality choices. Each group is then free to define it as they wish. For example, you can define Lawful as "social collective" and Chaotic as "personal individual". Others may define them by the existence (or lack) of a code of conduct. Still others may define them with regards to law and order, or any number of definitions.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 8:00AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
I guess that makes sense, since a lot of these interpretations go hand in hand. A more social group tends to be more bound by code and unified, while an individualistic group is the opposite. Anyway, I don't know what this thread has to do with playtesting either (except incorporation of L. Good npcs or what have you in the documents?) Character wise, I'm cool with it being fluff to help inspire. Leave the mechanics for modules.
Disgruntled ghost of the Knights of W.T.F.
(Keep D&D alive, end the edition wars!)
"And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Disclaimer: Most of my posts are based on opinions (and are sometimes humorous, other times inspirational)
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 8:00AM
#9
|
|
|
A Lawful Evil character is someone who wants the *group* to benefit predatorially, by preying on “weaker” groups.
For example, “racists” in this sense, are Lawful Evil.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 14, 2013 - 8:07AM
#10
|
|
|
Can you give an example of a situation where the LG character would have to compromise between the Good and Lawful aspects?
Sure. A classic example of a Lawful Good dilemma is the heir to the throne (a prince or princess) who seems to need to kill their parent, who seems an out-of-control tyrant (king or queen).
For the sake of Good (the most good for the most people) and for the sake of Lawfulness (the honorable social order of a citizen of the realm), the person must struggle against Evil (a predatory tyrant) and against Chaos (the tyrant may be throwing laws and customs into disarray and provoking civil unrest or bringing shame to a government with an honorable reputation).
You can narrow the above dilemmas. The ethics about killing could involve Good concerns (maybe the monarch can repent?) versus Lawful concerns (even if the monarch repents, the damage done to realm may be too late to repair).
Also, even if Alignment remains non-mechanical, it still needs to have clear definitions if the game refers to it at all.
|
|
|
