Poll: What's your perferred alignment?

[TheTinyMan]

Personally, I tend to play games the way I'd react in real life. In Mass Effect 2, this resulted in a full Paragon meter and about 3/8ths of a full Renegade meter by the time I was done.

There's rarely reason to be rude or dishonest even to my enemies, and I want to fix shit, not make it worse...but sometimes, a Krogan just needs a good headbutt.

 

[JasonKaotic]

Completely good. Usually. As fun as playing evil is, I always feel bad when I make evil decisions in games and let down characters I like. If it's a game where you're not really disappointing anyone you care about, like the original Fable, I'll always go evil. But that sort of game is a minority. If it's a game like inFamous 2 or Mass Effect where the characters you'll be letting down have really grown on you, which is most of them, I'll go good, but I'll do an evil playthrough after.
Although I still felt bad for letting down Nix.

 

[Ralen-Sharr]

on the D&D scale, I really have to say "chaotic good"
Lawful good means you obey the law, even if the law is unjust or unfair

Chaotic good mean you do good, regardless of whose toes you are stepping on.

 

[Nabirius]

Chaotic good for the win, whats the fun in doing the right thing if you don't rub the authorities face in it.

 

[Cybele]

Chaotic neutral. I'll save a village from a monster and then rob every house in said village.

 

[RemuValtrez]

I generally go Neutral, so I can do what is needed to get what I want.

 

[Inkidu]

Using the nine D&D alignments, which are good, but hardly cover every conceivable area of morality...

You know is chaotic-neutral just a guy who's random, or is he a full-blown bipolar psychopath?

Anyway, I'd have to say neutral good. Laws are overrated, and some people just need killing so why not ascribe to a higher moral code? I mean no one really thinks they're evil.

 

[vivster]

neutral good

because i like to help good people and slay the dicks
also new bows are expensive so i have to "borrow" sometimes

 

[Tilted_Logic]

I pretty much make choices based on how I'd react in the situation, so for the most part I play the benevolent attitude card. Although when it comes time to dish out justice I tend to reciprocate in the most appropriate way valid to the situation, i.e. an eye for an eye. Some Buddhist I'd be. >.>

 

[GeorgW]

Depends on the game. If you're forced to be all out one alignment to get the most of the game, e.g. inFAMOUS, I'll always go evil first.
If it simply has an alignment system but doesn't enforce it, like Mass Effect, I'll just do whatever I feel like, usually resulting in neutral.

 

[everythingbeeps]

I guess mostly good. I can take the occasional karma hit, but for the most part I do all the right things.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Chaotic Good is my preferred alignment, doing the right thing but in my own way and sometimes making sure it benefits myself as well as others.

I also like true neutral but most videogames HATE this, you only get benefits for pure good/evil and neutral is just how you start the game which sucks like being neutral has no advantages whatsoever (tell that to a diplomat)

 

[ckam]

I would consider myself Chaotic Good, from the tropes page. That or Chaotic Neutral.

 

[Soisait]

True evil (neutral evil). Why? It's all about me!!!

 

[RheynbowDash]

Chaotic Neutral with occasional good tendencies.

This. But VERY occasional.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

I start on chaotic neutral and go done from there, mid game I'm like: "Oh sh*t I've turned out to be some helping douchebag, let's murder someone before I can't get the evil ending anymore."

Mostly I'm disappointed by the options my character choses from, mostly they are not evil enough.

 

[AnarchistFish]

Why are mostly good and mostly evil one option?

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

My preferred alignment is chaotic neutral.

Sure, I would more or less do the right thing, but I would usually do it on my own terms (or what I personally believe is right).

 

[Mathak]

Chaotic good. Lawful good is just too restrictive. It basically means you'd still have to hold up and enforce the laws of an unjust society, simply because those are the laws. Nah, when in a game where you have the power to change things, why wouldn't you?

That's a common misconception, actually. Lawful good means you follow your own moral code that may not neccesarily coincide with local laws. If a paladin kicks down the door of the local Lich King's castle the Lich isn't going to weasel out of a righteous asskicking by pointing out he made asskickings illegal. The paladin's personal code takes precedence over the law.

Lawful good all day erry day.

Are you sure? Bearing in that my minimal experience with the alignments comes from a few brief games of DnD 3.5 and some light Baldur's Gate, I thought the whole appeal of chaotic good was that it was about doing "The Right Thing", regardless of society's current beliefs?

When it comes to Paladins I know they have to follow their chosen God's laws above the laws of man, but wouldn't a lawful good, agnostic warrior or mage have to obey the laws to remain lawful good?

Without an official Paladin Code (tm) to follow it's a bit of a tricky situation, but generally lawful good will weigh laws to see if they uphold a lawful good standard. If they do, they'll keep to them. If not, they'll ideally work within the law to enact the desired changes, but if necessary they'll just ignore the law and uphold their own moral code (for example, if he/she's in a lawful evil empire with legal slavery).

Chaotic good characters do not so much weigh the law itself, as more the situation at hand. The law may be good (no stealing), but if someone's threatening to starve a chaotic good character'll generally approve breaking the law to steal some food.

But of course, there's lots of shades of grey imaginable, which is where moral conflicts and roleplay opportunities come in.

 

[Taham]

Mostly good, but sometimes someone gets on my nerves. I then attack them... is that evil?