My take on alignment.

[Parallel Streaks]

If THOSE are what my choices are I think I'll go either insane or nihilistic. Choices choices.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

If THOSE are what my choices are I think I'll go either insane or nihilistic. Choices choices.

Unless you're talking about becoming violently insane, I think those would both classify as True Neutral.

 

[Daffy F]

The closest one to me is probably Chaotic neutral. Because that's me.

 

[Parallel Streaks]

If THOSE are what my choices are I think I'll go either insane or nihilistic. Choices choices.

Unless you're talking about becoming violently insane, I think those would both classify as True Neutral.

Fucking hell, arbitrary borders for alignments are everywhere. I'll be what Hannibal Lector is, that'll do me just fine.

 

[no one really]

Did you ever fucking read a D&D Player's Handbook?

Here's a few examples that are often the most (in my experience) misunderstood.

Lawful Good: The character does what is "right" the vast majority of the time *within the bounds of the law*. You caught someone you suspect to be a serial killer but have no proof? Gotta let him go. Most average people are Lawful Good to a greater or lesser degree, if only to stay out of jail.

Chaotic Good: The Character does whatever is nessecary for the Greater Good. Commander Shepard from Mass Effect 1 & 2 played as a Paragon is an excellent example of Chaotic Good. Kill a baby to save humanity? Baby is so dead, I'll deal with the repercussions later.

Lawful Evil: The Character adopts a "Conform or Die" stance about the world and the people in it. These are the rules, you follow them or we do horrible things to you and/or your family. Christianity and Catholosism is a good example of Lawful Evil... "Believe in our god or suffer for eternity in the fires of hell". (yeah, whatever, send me your religious hate in a PM)

Chaotic Evil: The Character does what they want, when they want for reasons that may only make sense to them. The average gang-banger could be considered to be Chaotic Evil.

Lawfull evil according to D&D.

 

[no one really]

Just think how acward it would be to explain why I use the bodies of a diseased police officer's family to do my evil biddings RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM...

 

[Macgyvercas]

Here's the descriptions from WotC Alignment test, taken from the Player's Handbook.

Spoiler: Click for wall of text

Lawful Good
Also known as: ?Crusader?

A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. They combine a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. They tell the truth, keep their word, help those in need, and speak out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion.

Neutral Good
Also known as: ?Benefactor?

A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. They are devoted to helping others. They work with kings and magistrates but do not feel beholden to them. The common phrase for neutral good is ?true good.? Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias toward or against order.

Chaotic Good
Also known as: ?Rebel?

A chaotic good character acts as their conscience directs them with little regard for what others expect of them. They make their own way, but they?re kind and benevolent. They believe in goodness and right but have little use for laws and regulations. They hate it when people try to intimidate others or tell them what to do. They follow their own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society. Chaotic good is the best alignment you can be because it combines a good heart with a free spirit.

Lawful Neutral
Also known as: ?Judge?

A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs them. Order and organization are paramount to them. They may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or they may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government. The common phrase for lawful neutral is "true lawful." Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot.

Neutral
Also known as: ?Undecided?

A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. They don?t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutrality is a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil. After all, they would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, they?re not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run. The common phrase for neutral is "true neutral." Neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion.

Chaotic Neutral
Also known as: ?Free Spirit?

A chaotic neutral character follows their whims. They are an individualist first and last. They value their own liberty but don?t strive to protect others? freedom. They avoid authority, resent restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, they would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those different from themselves suffer). The common phrase for chaotic neutral is "true chaotic." A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but their behavior is not totally random. They are not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it. Chaotic neutral is the best alignment you can be because it represents true freedom both from society?s restrictions and from a do-gooder?s zeal.

Lawful Evil
Also known as: ?Dominator?

A lawful evil villain methodically takes what they want within the limits of their code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. They care about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. They play by the rules but without mercy or compassion. They are comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but are willing to serve. They condemn others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. They are loath to break laws or promises. This reluctance comes partly from their nature and partly because they depend on order to protect themselves from those who oppose them on moral grounds. Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains. Some lawful evil people and creatures commit themselves to evil with a zeal like that of a crusader committed to good. Beyond being willing to hurt others for their own ends, they take pleasure in spreading evil as an end unto itself. They may also see doing evil as part of a duty to an evil deity or master. Lawful evil is sometimes called ?diabolical,? because devils are the epitome of lawful evil. Lawful evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents methodical, intentional, and frequently successful evil.

Neutral Evil
Also known as: ?Malefactor?

A neutral evil villain does whatever they can get away with. They are out for themselves, pure and simple. They shed no tears for those they kill, whether for profit, sport, or convenience. They have no love of order and hold no illusion that following laws, traditions, or codes would make them any better or more noble. On the other hand, they don?t have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil villain has. Some neutral evil villains hold up evil as an ideal, committing evil for its own sake. Most often, such villains are devoted to evil deities or secret societies. The common phrase for neutral evil is ?true evil.? Neutral evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents pure evil without honor and without variation.

Chaotic Evil
Also known as: ?Destroyer?

A chaotic evil character does whatever their greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive them to do. They are hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If simply out for whatever they can get, they are ruthless and brutal. If they are committed to the spread of evil and chaos, they are even worse. Thankfully, their plans are haphazard, and any groups they join or form are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can only be made to work together by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him. The demented sorcerer pursuing mad schemes of vengeance and havoc is chaotic evil. Chaotic evil is sometimes called "demonic" because demons are the epitome of chaotic evil. Chaotic evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents the destruction not only of beauty and life but of the order on which beauty and life depend.

That should cover everything. I'm Chaotic Neutral.

 

[number4096]

I think the whole alignment system is the worst aspect of D&D, being retardedly simplified and restrictive (especially if you've got a DM who's strict with the rules), but as a role player I do of course have my own view of the alignments:

Lawful Good: Law and order for the good of all.
Lawful Good characters value law and order over everything else. Like all Good characters they honestly want what's best for everyone. They just strongly believe law and order are necessary to make a world where everyone can be happy, and that there must be a strong force to preserve that order, with extreme prejudice if necessary. After all, people cannot live in peace if their safety cannot be guaranteed, and as long as there are people willing to hurt others for fun and profit, there must be a powerful presence of order to protect the innocent. He values order over almost everything else, but mostly out of a strong belief that in the end it's the best thing for everyone. While the nature of such order can be almost anything, I do believe that it has to be something external, be it a law or a deity's commands or a knightly code. Just a personal code of conduct isn't enough to qualify as Lawful Good, otherwise Robin "steal from the rich, give to the poor" Hood wouldn't be the iconic Chaotic Good character.

Neutral Good: Anything for the greater good.
A Neutral Good character just wants to help. Honestly. They want everyone to be happy, and they don't care how this is achieved. One day they'll uphold the law to protect the innocent, and the next they'll break the law to feed the poor. This isn't out of randomness, but simply because to them everything is secondary to doing good. They'll do anything to minimize harm and maximize the amount of people they can help. They don't necessarily mind breaking some skulls if there's no other way, but they prefer a solution where everyone walks away happy. Of course, such solutions are in short supply in most role playing games.

Chaotic Good: Freedom is the greatest good.
Like all Chaotics, the Chaotic Good character has a deep aversion for laws and regulations. They believe such rules only serve to oppress people and limit the freedom which is every sentient being's right. He believes the world would be a much better place if people would just stop bothering each other and live their lives the way they want to. Of course, he's usually not naive and realizes that there are people who would abuse such liberties, but he prefers to deal with them on a case-by-case basis and on his own terms, rather than relying on laws to prevent such behavior.

Lawful Neutral: There must be order.
Like the LG archetype, the Lawful Neutral character believes strongly in law and order. However, unlike the other two Lawful alignments, this order is not a means to an end for him. To him, order is a goal of its own, perhaps a more important goal than anything else. Be it out of a sense of honor, duty, obligation, religion, or anything else, the Lawful Neutral character will follow the law to the letter, and expects no less from others. As always, the source of this law might be different from character to character, but his rigid and uncompromising attitude towards it does not.

True Neutral: Balance in all things, or I just don't give a shit.
I feel there are two types of Lawful Neutral. The most iconic is the version most commonly ascribed to D&D Druids: There is a reason for everything, and the world must be in balance in order to function. They believe that Law, Chaos, Good and Evil are all necessary parts of the natural world, and that none is inherently better or more desirable than the rest. They usually prefer a state of peace and inactivity, but they will rise up and take action when they feel the balance is threatened or disturbed.
The other kind of True Neutral is a more passive approach to alignment. They are the people who really don't care about the different alignments. They do what seems like a good idea at the time, but have no real preference for malice or compassion, order or freedom. They act mostly in their own interest, but without getting overly selfish or greedy. They can be mean or kind at times, and they can be obedient or anarchistic, not out of any kind of personal conviction but because it happens to suit them at the time. Non-sapient creatures have this alignment by default.

Chaotic Neutral: My way is the best way, for me.
Allow me to start by saying that I really, really dislike the "lol I'm random and unpredictable and kind of crazy~!" kind of Chaotic Neutral. To me, Chaotic Neutral characters are all about freedom. A Chaotic Neutral character is (not surprisingly) a mix between the TN and CG alignments, in that he shares the CG's love for freedom and dislike for laws that limit such freedom in any way, but also has the TN's disregard for anything but himself. He won't help you get your kitten out of a tree, but he won't beat you up for your lunch money either. He's got a very strong individualist streak, but that doesn't necessarily make him a loner. He lives for his own enjoyment, and it's not surprising if that enjoyment means being around other people. It's just that he won't inconvenience himself to help others, nor will he try to harm them in any way if he can avoid it. That doesn't mean he can't do good or evil if the fancy strikes him, but it's not in his nature to go out of his way for either one, and he'd rather just let people do their thing as long as they let him do his.

Lawful Evil: Law and order for the good of... me.
The Lawful Evil character believes in order as a tool to be used not for the good of all, but for his own benefit. He wields laws as both his weapon and his shield, and manipulates them in such a way that he always comes out on top. He uses the law to get what he wants, and when in trouble will hide behind the law in order to protect himself. After all, others might suspect or even know he's up to no good, but good luck trying to prove it if he never actually broke the law. Lawful Evil characters are often patient and skilled deceivers, manipulating others to do their dirty work for them. That doesn't mean they won't use violence themselves if necessary, but they prefer to let the law do their work for them, with a little help here and there to nudge the proceedings in the right direction. and by "the right direction" I mean "whichever direction is most convenient for them".

Neutral Evil: The more I let you have the less that I'll be keeping for me.
Neutral Evil characters are selfish to the bone. There's nothing they wouldn't do to benefit themselves, and other people are nothing more than potential ways to improve their own situation. They might not usually go out of their way to harm people all the time, but they won't hesitate to kill a person for a bit of money, or even just for fun. They don't see the use in helping other people unless there's something in it for themselves, and even then they are more likely to kill the farmer and take his gold rather than go kill the rats in the cellar for a reward, if they thought it'd be quicker and/or easier. They might not care much for laws and regulations, but they don't have any real trouble with them either as long as they don't conflict with their own interests.

Chaotic Evil: Fuck it all, fuck this world, fuck everything that you stand for.
Chaotic Evil characters are the psychopaths. Like all Evil characters they are utterly selfish, but unlike the others they lack the ability to function in an orderly society. They are wild and unpredictable, able to kill a man just because he looked at him funny, and without any regard for the consequences. The only 'society' they are able to function (and perhaps even thrive) in is an animalistic place where they can exercise the right of the strongest. Other than that they are loners, shunning others as they are shunned by them. Other people are nuisances at best, and squishy things that make funny noises when you gut them at worst. They are completely unable to abide by any rules other than their own violent urges.

Wow,now that was elaborate.Just a few things concerning your interpretation and mine:

Lawful Good:Very close to my version

Neutral Good:Close,but a little more on the ethical side rather than the instinctual side(Unless i readed wrong.)than my version.Good interpretation.

Chaotic Good:Less spontaneous and unpredictable than my version.This version seems more about keeping a different kind of order more accented on freedom than just doing things as they come to mind.Interesting interpretation.

Lawful Neutral:Almost the same.

Strict Neutral:First version:Looks like a Lawful Neutral from my version that believes in balance and rigidly follows it.
Second version:Almost the same.

Chaotic Neutral:Resembles my version of Strict Neutral,but with more accent on freedom.

Lawful Evil:Sounds like my version of Strict Neutral,But more accented on using the law specifically.

Neutral Evil:Sounds like my version of Strict Neutral,the pragmatism especially.

Chaotic Evil:Sounds like my version of Strict Neutral,but angrier and more easily irritated.

Overall well detailed and interesting.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

Lawful Good: Law and order for the good of all.
Neutral Good: Anything for the greater good.
Chaotic Good: Freedom is the greatest good.
Lawful Neutral: There must be order.
True Neutral: Balance in all things, or I just don't give a shit.
Chaotic Neutral: My way is the best way, for me.
Lawful Evil: Law and order for the good of... me.
Neutral Evil: The more I let you have the less that I'll be keeping for me.
Chaotic Evil: Fuck it all, fuck this world, fuck everything that you stand for.

Wow,now that was elaborate.Just a few things concerning your interpretation and mine:

Lawful Good:Very close to my version

Neutral Good:Close,but a little more on the ethical side rather than the instinctual side(Unless i readed wrong.)than my version.Good interpretation.

Chaotic Good:Less spontaneous and unpredictable than my version.This version seems more about keeping a different kind of order more accented on freedom than just doing things as they come to mind.Interesting interpretation.

Lawful Neutral:Almost the same.

Strict Neutral:First version:Looks like a Lawful Neutral from my version that believes in balance and rigidly follows it.
Second version:Almost the same.

Chaotic Neutral:Resembles my version of Strict Neutral,but with more accent on freedom.

Lawful Evil:Sounds like my version of Strict Neutral,But more accented on using the law specifically.

Neutral Evil:Sounds like my version of Strict Neutral,the pragmatism especially.

Chaotic Evil:Sounds like my version of Strict Neutral,but angrier and more easily irritated.

Overall well detailed and interesting.

NG: I did mean it more in an ethical sense, but I don't disagree that it can be a more instinctive sense as well, and the two aren't mutually exclusive. It's just that in my experience the ethical kind of 'heroic goodness' is used in RPGs far more often than the more nurturing instinctual kind.

CG: My interpretation of Chaotic Good stems more from the characters most often used to illustrate it than actual 'chaoticness'. For example, Robin Hood wasn't all that chaotic and unpredictable (he was to a certain extent, but it wasn't a defining character trait), he just broke a lot of laws to do what he thought was best. As I mentioned in the CN part, I very much dislike characters that are all about being chaotic and random just for the sake of being chaotic and random, which definitely influenced my take on the Chaotic alignments.

SN-1 (I'm used to calling it TN myself, but it's the same thing so who cares): I do agree that it looks a lot like a LN character with a hardon for balance, but once again I'm going by the archetypes here. The balance-loving Druid is the True Neutral archetype in D&D, so my interpretation of this alignment is mostly based on that. I think the main difference is that the Druid's philosophy is a lot less strictly defined than a LN character's. The LN character has something solid and well-defined to hold on to: a written law, an official order, a code of conduct, etc. A Druid has only the much vaguer sense of 'balance' to guide him, and what that means can change depending on the situation.

CN: This is, for me, the alignment that is most difficult to accurately describe. It's easy to fall back on "does whatever he feels like without any real reason other than he feels like it", but that gets dangerously close to that randomness I dislike so much (no really: you bring something like a lolrandom Chaotic Neutral Kender to my table, I will murder you(r character)). So yeah, it pretty much is a TN character with a strong desire for freedom and individualism, but in the same way that a NG character is a TN character with a strong sense of compassion and altruism.

LE: Well, it doesn't have to be the law specifically, but any kind of system that they can take advantage of. The way I see it, they either abuse the system, or manipulate the system to be abusive.

NE: I'm not very fond of the old cliche of villains doing evil for evil's sake, and this influences my take on all the Evil alignments. The way I see it, all Evil characters are primarily driven by selfishness, in a fairly wide meaning of the word. They only care about their own interests, and damn everyone who gets in their way. While many Neutral characters may have a very pragmatic outlook on life, they usually aren't prepared to step over the corpses of their competitors just to satisfy their own urges, which is what defines Evil characters. Be it a bandit robbing people for their money, a tyrant slaying all who disagree with him, or an evil wizard on a mad quest for revenge, they will actively harm others without hesitation in order to reach their goal, while a Neutral character takes a more 'live and let live' stance in that he might not go out of his way to help others, but he generally doesn't want to harm them either. He does value his own life more than that of (most) others, but he doesn't regard other people as mere objects to be used and abused either.

CE: I don't think our versions of CE are all that different. My take on a CE character is someone who acts on his darkest, most primal urges. The more intelligent sort of CE character might be able to hide these urges from others in order to gain some acceptance, and might even become skilled at faking emotions to manipulate others, but ultimately they are different from everyone else because they lack empathy or conscience. They might not all be raving maniacs, but they do all have a strong disregard for rules as well as human lives, and when involved in a (perceived) conflict, they'll default to violence to solve it.

 

[number4096]

hURR dURR dERP,what do you think the alignments of a lunatic or sadist would be?

 

[Beowulf DW]

I read somewhere that alignments should be viewed as guides or ideals, not strict rules.

My take on LG is a belief that laws are meant to allow people to live happily, without others taking advantage of them. A lawful good character will recognize and tolerate government corruption, but only to a certain point. At this point, a LG character will attempt to rectify the situation in whatever way she/he can, even if this means violent rebellion. A lawful good character is concerned with justice for all, and accepts that in extreme situations-and only in extreme situations-the law may be inadequate. The "good" half of the alignment will discourage a "Knight Templar" mindset, because a good person will make an attempt at understanding or even empathy before passing judgement on others.