POLL: Alignment

Remove all ads!

Huh? And what the heck is wrong with elves?

Heck yeah! Tell it like it is!

 

It's called Being Smart Enough To Not To Get Into Trouble

 

True: despite Bion's protestations, who's never broken a law when they thought it was either a)silly, b)unethical or c)unenforcable? People are naturally opportunistic when it comes to the law (do I need to say "mp3 music downloads"? No? Thought not. ), so they'll often break "little" laws without thinking, because they don't expect any repercussions, and don't agree with either the law in question or how it's enforced. That's why I see myself as TN rather than LN, in the context of AD&D.

Although I have to add that the alignment system is clearly a strongly Lawful person's attempt to pigeonhole people's characters and beliefs in what is (let's face it) an exceptionally crude, over-simplified, generalisation. There's nothing fundamentally insightful about the alignment system; it's just role-playing shorthand. Arguably, "true" roleplaying would be better off without it, as there'd be less pressure to conform to alignment stereotypes (and yes Drizzt Do'urden: I am looking at you!).

 

I would've thought I was Chaotic Good but according to this:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b

I'm true neutral, which I think is correct because I usually just go with the flow of things.

Also I think it's the best RP because you can choose to adventure with a paladin or scheme to take over the city by ANY means neccessary


Oh .. and I would think if you were chaotic evil you couldn't give a rats buttocks whether you were in trouble or not

 

CE, not CS - I am evil, not stupid

 

Chaotic Good. Do the right thing but do it my way.

 

Gaming: CG (I would be this in RL if I was trying to bring good to the land through use of my sword, sadly you get arrested for it nowa-days)

Other peoples perceptions in RL: LN (I dont believe this as I seem to lack compassion, respect and concideration for others... plus I have previous)

My perception in RL: CN (I just don't show it as much as I used to)

 

What makes you CE Arabwell? Do you work part-time in Guantanemo?

 

Either that or she works for Microsoft!

 

No, no, those would be where the LE people work

The only boss I have is myself

 

Conversely, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably...

...A lawful duck. Sure we have some amount of free will, but that doesn't mean that we haven't been conditioned to behave a certain way. In fact, we habitually expect people to behave very lawfully countless times during the day. It's a basic assumption. They might drive 8mph over the speed limit, but they're on the right side of the road and their not driving down the middle of the lane; they're not going to take that extra chair in your table in a good restaurant; they're going to speak in conventional patterns to signify the beginning and end of a conversation; they're going to have a minimum level of personal hygeine, etc. And think about hygeine; someone might stand out if they have, say, a slightly quirky sense of dress, or if they haven't bathed for a couple days, etc. But imagine transporting a medieval person dressed in burlap who hasn't bathed for two weeks and has no concept of deoderant.

We react to movies, tv, advertisements in given ways: that's trained. We read novels: trained. We hold credit cards, we pay off mortgages or pay rent, etc etc. How many examples do we need here?

And to say: no, I'm not lawful cuz I download mp3s and drive 8mph over the speed limit? Come on. Where's the big picture? This is like a group of portuguese missionaries in 16th C Japan, trying to explain to a crowd of shintoists how incredibly different are the franciscans and the dominicans.

Alignment is such a strange concept. It's kinda useful as a guide for behavior, but notice that neither the law/chaos nor the good/evil axis mean anything at all to psychologists. Take the MMPI or something like that instead. The reason alignment always seems so compelling is due to its quasi-religiousity: good and evil, heaven and hell, or even brahma/law/creation, vishnu/neutrality/preservation, and shiva/chaos/destruction.

 

@ Bion:
You're not even talking about laws anymore! Reactions to movies, reading a book? What the heck else are you supposed to do with a book, eat it? We do these things because it's the only even slighty sensible thing to do. It seems more like you're arguing that since everyone has some basic things that are similar, we must all be identical.
Now, I do have to admit that the whole alignment system (any system really) is a lawful way of trying to organize a subjective subject. But it's an attempt to differentiate different kinds of people from each other, not to compare people in general to some kind of universal standard. The alignment system is meant to take into account the similarities in the human race and their various personalities. If everyone fit into one category, there would be no purpose to the system. There wouldn't even be a reason to think about the subject!

So, in conclusion, please celebrate our diversity, reather than WHINE about our similarities.

 

What else happens when we're at school: we're *trained* how to read, how to apprehend and categorize information. We are also *trained* from an early age to watch films and tv, and we all have incredibly sophisticated visual and aural languages for media. In the art world, every once in a while there's an upsurge in "outsider art", which includes folk art, art of children and the insane, art by self-trained artists, etc; it reflects anxiety that the art world regulates its artists through institutional training, so all the work produced by these artists are essentially pushing the institutional line, whatever their subject. The only way to find free expression or critique in art, then, is to look outside the boundaries of institutions.

Today, we all live our lives within the boundaries created for us by very powerful institutions, which have educated us, which heal us when we are sick, which sell us things and buy our labor, etc. The fantasy world of DnD, however, relates civilization (in ODnD, civilization = law) vs. monsters in the wilderness and dungeon (monsters = chaos). Each of us are very much the products of civilization; no matter how much we might try to differentiate ourselves from eachother, we would seem nearly identical in how we thought and responded to someone outside our modern civilization. In CRPG terms, if someone were to wave a cursor over our heads, it would read "townsperson."

 

@Bion - I don't quite agree with you. If you obey the law *only* because you are forced to, you can be chaotic. There are many people doing their best to find holes in regulations. Lawful person is someone that believes in "law and order".

Simple example. Let's say that we have a situation when someone can steal something without being noticed. "C, N - Good" person won't steal because it's wrong, "Lawful not-Evil" won't as well because it's against the law, if also "Good" because of both reasons. "Lawful Evil" is an interesting example, maybe someone who'll try to steal and then mix up somebody ? I don't know about "true Neutral", but I guess those of remaining alignments (CN, CE, NE) wouldn't mind stealing.
Do you really think that most people won't steal in that case (being LN as you wrote) ? I don't know where you live, but from my observation, there are many that would. In fact in many cases that happens...

 

Well, I had this whole long rant typed up in response to Bion, but it looks like Arendil beat me to it. He did a better job of expressing himself, too. So I'll just leave an excerpt:

Hmmm... Ummm... No.

You are the only person I have EVER heard say that D&D relates civilization to law. Not all townspeople are law-abiding (can anyone say shoplifting?) and many monsters are lawful, or even good, though I'm guessing (and hoping) you didn't really mean that the way it sounded.

 

Nay. You can be an LN druid or ranger. That's hardly a champion of civilisation. Actually, D&D's Lawful alignment is much more about law as in legal rules than what we would expect from an alignment system if we had one. Things are so black or white in D&D; reasonable laws you don't have a problem obeying unless you're a bastard or generic thief or smuggler. Or tyrannical laws you don't need to treat like real laws because you're a goodie anyway or a non-evil neutral. And so on and so forth. In our world, we have Dumb Laws (tm). Something D&D doesn't really know.

 

Sorry to undercut you, chevalier, but rangers have to be good (LG, NG, or CG) and I'm pretty sure druids have to be TN.

 

In 2E, yeah, but in 3E not any longer. Any alignment for rangers and anything neutral for druids.

 

Nevermind. Wait, there can be evil rangers?!

 

Yeah, think of them as poachers or similar. NWN pulls off examples of Rangers-gone-bad (e.g. Montgomery "Sureshot" Weatherson and his zoo). Personally, I think it makes perfect sense in this context.