The light and how to swing it!

[*SanguineOrchid]

Well there's a nice topic raging centered around a duel, shall we broaden it and make it an open brawl?

Everyone knows the basics of alignment, it's an aspect we use daily while playing this game. What a lot of people tend to forget though is the difference between using alignment to assist a character and using alignment to excuse a character.

There is a massive difference between the way a Lawful Good Paladin is to act and the way a Lawful Good anything else. Let's clear that up immediately. Paladin's have a personal Code of Honor and usually an Order's Code of Conduct. These aren't always the same thing but both must be adhered to in order to maintain status.

That code is what enforces action on the part of a paladin. For everyone else Alignment is a mental guideline and core reference, not necessarily a compulsion draining the freedom of choice out of them.

An evil person can rescue stray kittens and nurse them back to health, a good person can kill said kittens and view it as a merciful act. It depends entirely on the circumstances.

Good and Evil are completely biased points of view, some villains revel in their evil natures and some heroes mourn their self sacrifice. It has been argued for years back and forth what is and isn't Evil and how the characters view themselves vs the players viewing the characters.

Lawful against Chaotic is less arguable to a degree because both were far more clearly stated for us in the cannon.

A lawful person means orderly mind, preference for controlled situations, prefers organization.

A chaotic person acts more on whim or emotion, prefers freedom of choice for themselves and others above enforced behavior and usually doesn't feel the need to justify themselves to others.

If you organize your desk, house, car and purse and can't stand to see clutter, chances are you are lawful person.

If you have ever claimed that there was organization to the chaos when someone else told you to clean, chances are you are a chaotic person.

Mindset! Laws are laws, some people agree, some people disagree, depends on who the character is far more than what alignment the character is.

All that being regurgitated from various civil discussions *cough-flamewar-cough* over the years, bring your own opinions to bare!

[*Lost and not Found]

In BG1, I used to make a lot of Paladin characters.

It was because I went through the game manual and realized how the class had a minimum of 17 charisma, which in turn granted the character considerable vendor price reductions and such.

Those characters of mine did tend to end up as Fallen Paladins though and I also had my share of Fallen Rangers. I simply could not let that poor cleric of Shar die. In order to protect her from further assaults, my reputation took the turn to downwards, which usually made my characters "fall from grace".

When the Flaming Fist guard said that she was an evil drow, I longed for a reply to tell him back that he had single brow.

The game did have it's share of nonsensical words.


Erm, in reply to that supposedly snarky comment; A Lawful Good character who neglects the "Lawful" aspect of the aligment is Neutral Good.

And since there seems to be a bit of an argument, I kind wish I had been there to witness to whole ordeal... it would allow me to shred your posts apart and have the last word as my meal. :P

The topic got closed. But I still want my last word.

[*Mr_Otyugh]

Now then, as for alignments in general, there's one factor to take on count... how do we view the alignments? You all are only sharing your own views of alignments forgetting the entire thing that there's 'several views of how to handle alignments'... two most notable groups would be:

1) Black and White
- Good is good, evil is evil. Point me the target, I'll smash it. This is the oldest form of DnD gaming (after all DnD started as dungeon crawling and monster bashing game), alignments were extremes and it kept the game simple, there was little to no moral arguments when things were kept simple as this.

2) Shades of Gray
- This is more modern view that makes for moral and ethical dilemmas, suits for players that enjoys arguments of morality and ethics... or just wants to broaden their views on the game and keep things a bit more realistic (rather than game).

The difference would be? Player preference, in PnP you rarely see these arguments because you're often playing with likeminded players, but in the internet, you play with a lot of different people whom have played with their likeminded players and gotten strong feelings of what's right or wrong <,< and that leads to forever vicious circle.

And as ending ;) illustrative example of the result of these different category players colliding with each other:




Personally I just never really tell alignment of my character, I just work them through the basic ideal of the alignment.. it's guideline to pick my characters behavior and personality, talents, history and loads of other things are also determining their behavior... alignment being very tiny part in the end that leads to the decisions of what character can or can't do.

[*Biohazard89]

People listen here..Alignments are Guidelines nothing more.

A set of Moral Guidelines that is individually interpreted by people.

Two Lawful Good Characters is just as prone to fist fight in the street over conflicts of interest as Two Chaotic Evil Characters are.

so please...let people make their own descisions on how the hell they want to RP their alignment.

Thats my two cent anyway.

[*Lost and not Found]

Anyhow, I'd say it is worth to consider the approach set by the setting in regards of the interpretation of aligments, and their relationships.

What I am after here is that in prime world settings, the primary source of conflict lies in the good and evil axis of the alignment chart. It is corny, stereotypical, but it is a concept that surfaces in prime world settings time after a time. Thus we see the Lawful Dwarves and Chaotic Elves setting aside their differences to unite against the "Evil Foe" threatening all that stands good, and fluffy.

But things are somewhat different if you happen to be looking at things through the eyes of a Planar. There is the Blood War, although a conflict of the lower planes it is still an existing conflict between the powers of Order and Entropy.

Even some of the Factions have requirements of proper philosophical alignment for their members, and curiously this line is usually found bordering the Lawful alignments from Neutral and Chaotic. Although it is worth to note how the remainder of Factions do not really bother about such details.

In addition while in the Cage, or any other similar planar neutral ground, it is not that rare to spot a residents of both Lower and Upper Planes walking side by side while having casual discussions with one and the other. There is mutual ground for those who either vow for the aspects of Order, Neutrality, or Entropy.

Thus a Lawful Good Planar might have hard time picking a side in a scuffle between his Lawful Evil and Chaotic Good compatriots.




(As a side notice, although it is rare, even the Fiends turn Stag time to time.)




To determine alignments of my characters, I'd say you are either going to have spend time worth a campaing with them or take a peek into the server vault. :P

(Lawful characters might be an exception, it is so much fun yell "I am the law" once in every five minutes.)

[*WhenWizardsWar]

Ahh the eternal alignment discussion.

Years ago i would have much to say but I learned along time ago to not touch this with any length pole.

Everyone has their own ideas on how alignments should be portrayed, yes there are some set in stone with certain class's but 99% of the time its up the the person playing each character to determine his or her interpretations of right and wrong, disucssion is healthy as long as people dont get enflamed over it, I urge caution to whom ever posts here because of the counltess discussions ive seen every one of them has ended up extra crispy.

[*Reptiller]

Pooh alogments,mah pissss u :P


And really,we had a paladin of fking SUNE there,didnt we?

[*Psionic-Entity]

Pooh alogments,mah pissss u :P


And really,we had a paladin of fking SUNE there,didnt we?

There's actually an order of paladins of Sune in dnd sourcebooks. Actually, there's even a feat in complete adventurer that lets you multiclass paladins and bards, and it's recommended for similar dieties in non-grayhawk worlds. I'd actually have quite a bit of respect for someone who was able to pull off a paladin of Sune appropriately, it would be quite a difficult thing to RP.

Also... 2 cents. The only time alignment should matter to anyone in NWN2 is when someone is obviously playing drastically far off of their alignment, but using a set alignment to take advantage of classes or features that would otherwise be unavailable. Good aligned assassins, lawful-RP fighters who take barbarian or bard levels for powergaming reasons, and the C.E. Banite doom necromancer who doesn't like weapons or abilities with damage against evil. There's also the true-neutrals who should realistically have an alignment, but they're less of a problem.

Anyways, point is alignment shouldn't come up unless someone is using it to cheat. If a discussion starts, it's usually because a player says "I'm alignment X so I did Y" and another player doesn't agree. Not explaining your character to other people in an OOC way is usually the best way to avoid these debates. DMs can take care of that, if it gets out of hand.

[*Product of Void]

Alignments suck, if others know your alignment they are more willing to tell you how to RP it much as folks will say a X class can not do Y. NO, they can people can rp their character how ever they feel in my book long as these things follow.

1. They are having fun
2. they are creating fun for others
3. they are not an ass ooc
4. they do not break rules.

I truly hate the limitations of alignments on classes. There is a book were paladins can be CG or CE. Its a chosen warrior of certain deity. Enforcing the ideals of said deity and seeking to remove those against it.

In 2nd I remember writing a list of code of conduct. Though that was the first and only time I have played one it is not my preferred class.

Best way to look at alignments is traits, like flaws.

One arm, one eye, has a limp, scars, wears perfume, smells, etc.

Alignments are the same to an extent.

Good = good will to others and do not seek to harm others on purpose.
Evil = Ill will towards others or extremly selfish, uncaring about others or even enjoying their suffering.
Neutral = a fence sitter they might care about others or not. Perhaps nature is more the concern and the balance there of. Slaying another is very possible though doubtful they will put the effort into torturing them for days, nor will they seek to give their last coin to some dirty child on the street.

Lawful is organized , chaotic disorganized. Though there can be many traits of an organized or disorganized mine.

You can even have a villain who does what they do seeing it as a means to the ends towards the greater good, or unaware of what they do is actual EVIL acts.

Weither or not a Paladin follows or breaks a code is strictly up to the player.

I see my view of rp is simple that everyone sucks at it and the worst insult I can do to another player is to tell them how to run their class or their character. My own rules or expectations for rp I fail often how can I expect others to be better. Its best to accept how someone plays or avoid it if uncomfortable. (one reason all my characters will be an utter failure in love).

To many use alignments to limit their character, or get stuck in a rut of what a certain alignment means. Some servers I have seen them Re-write alignments to the point that all are law abiding. At the end of the day it does not matter long as everyone has a good time, who cares.


*edit* just saw psionic's post. There is a major thing with alignments mechanically that is rather exploitative. If you take an odd alignment and get smite infidel almost everything works then. OR if you play an enchanter, you MUST choose neutral due to only mindblank or level 20 monks are immune. Protection of neutral does not exist.

[*TheorumOfNeutrality]

I think it's important to add that paladins do not have a strict, specific way they need to be played. Paladins are not LN. When you're LN, it's all about order. Structure.

Adding in the factor of goodness complicates things greatly. Can a LG character break laws to maintain goodness, or keep laws that inhibit goodness? An answer I've found in another setting does a good job, in my opinion, of fleshing this out: A paladin does the best they can to promote goodness within the structure of the law.

If the law is corrupt, then a paladin would most likely follow that law, while promoting goodness in legal ways. While a normal LG character could break away from that corrupt law, a paladin would not.

I sort of wish 'Paladin' was its own alignment.

In the case of this duel... I wasn't there, so I couldn't say much about what went down. However, if I were playing a paladin, I would make my character try to convince both parties to not kill each other, and use peaceful means to settle their differences, and if this failed... Well. It isn't illegal, so what're ya gonna do? But, thats just me, and other characters will differ.

So, in conclusion, play your paladin however you feel is appropriate - but, that could just be the Chaotic Neutral in me talking.