IMO most PC parties are chaotic -- they're generally inclined towards "solve the problem and don't worry about details such as rules and laws".
For example, suppose there's someone you're pretty sure is a bad guy, and you think there's information about his Evil Plan in his home. Do you:
Break in to find the evidence.
Collect information without breaking in, then take it to the local justice to obtain the local equivalent of a search warrant, and using that, make a legal search.
The vast majority of PCs choose option 1. Which is the chaotic option.
This is actually one of the fundamental problems with D&D: DMs usually limit their players ability to pick 2 because that would mean less adventure. Usually, they design the government to either be corrupt or to have some other reason to refuse the warrant. Or they put in a time limit and say that the villain will remove the evidence in the time it takes for them to obtain a warrant. Also, more non-combat solutions = less XP for players, so this can often deter them from the legal, less violent route.
In short, speaking out of personal experience at least, players are often railroaded into breaking in. The DM usually makes this a choose between good or evil and just ignore the fact that law and chaos matter in it too. Don't get me wrong, moral conundrums are great. But what makes them greater is when the rules of the game and the person enforcing those rules and giving you that conundrum actually allows more choices than one.
IMO most PC parties are chaotic -- they're generally inclined towards "solve the problem and don't worry about details such as rules and laws".
For example, suppose there's someone you're pretty sure is a bad guy, and you think there's information about his Evil Plan in his home. Do you:
Break in to find the evidence.
Collect information without breaking in, then take it to the local justice to obtain the local equivalent of a search warrant, and using that, make a legal search.
The vast majority of PCs choose option 1. Which is the chaotic option.
This is actually one of the fundamental problems with D&D: DMs usually limit their players ability to pick 2 because that would mean less adventure. Usually, they design the government to either be corrupt or to have some other reason to refuse the warrant. Or they put in a time limit and say that the villain will remove the evidence in the time it takes for them to obtain a warrant. Also, more non-combat solutions = less HP for players, so this can often deter them from the legal, less violent route.
In short, speaking out of personal experience at least, players are often railroaded into breaking in. The DM usually makes this a choose between good or evil and just ignore the fact that law and chaos matter in it too. Don't get me wrong, moral conundrums are great. But what makes them greater is when the rules of the game and the person enforcing those rules and giving you that conundrum actually allows more choices than one.
Those were my (unvoiced) thoughts. It's also just not fun doing it properly. Too much bureaucracy and also it shifts the limelight from the party to the arresting sheriff. Although, I'd still award the XP for non violent solutions, I try not to punish players for not just hack 'n' slashing.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Keep in mind that "Lawful" isn't restricted to respecting local government. Characters like the Punisher, who have a strict personal code, also qualify. Doing things "properly" depends on the frame of reference.
Beyond the ethical implications, seems like Breaking and Entering is kind of part of how the game was designed to be played. Heck, some character's are equipped with thieves' tools and proficiency in using them.
Characters are given Combat Weapons and Damage Dealing Spells; it seems almost expected that a party is going to have a couple of combat session between long rests, whether or not they are unavoidable or morally justifiable. And Characters are given Proficiencies in Deception, Intimidation, Stealth, Sleight of Hand, and Spells to trick the minds and the senses of other creatures; I think using those things, as they were intended, is generally considered okay. in game, in most contexts.
Ethically problematic, if this was done in real life, sure, but I don't think that these sorts of things are inherently problematic to the game, or generally take away from anyone's fun or offend anyone else at the table (I suppose depending on the exact situation; I mean, probably best not to use thieves' tools to break into orphanages, to murder extra adorable orphans in their sleep, with weapons and spells, but that seems kind of obvious).
Those were my (unvoiced) thoughts. It's also just not fun doing it properly. Too much bureaucracy and also it shifts the limelight from the party to the arresting sheriff. Although, I'd still award the XP for non violent solutions, I try not to punish players for not just hack 'n' slashing.
Oh, I agree that it's less fun, and the reasons for rules against vigilante tactics in the real world don't tend to apply to RPGs, but that doesn't make any of it not chaotic (which does not mean ethically problematic; chaotic is not evil).
Oh, I agree that it's less fun, and the reasons for rules against vigilante tactics in the real world don't tend to apply to RPGs, but that doesn't make any of it not chaotic (which does not mean ethically problematic; chaotic is not evil).
Chaotic is not Evil, and for my taste, all Evil, in the game, isn't necessarily completely off the table, but taking away from fun for others, is (i think that can be a fine balance).
How can you be (or do things that are) chaotic, naughty or even evil (evil adjacent, maybe), in a way that is fun for everyone at the table? What lines are okay to cross and which ones aren’t?
Session Zero: As a GM I often layout what alignments are ok for a game and what are not.
Evil Actions that are ok: This is harder if you are new to a group or have a new player. So again as a GM I might list things that are ok and not ok for a new player as well as explain what is ok in the game we are running. This can vary by setting and game system.
Evil or not Evil: This can be very depending on the situation and background. The issue I have seen is a player(s) just doing evil things because they think it is entertaining or trying to be entertaining for a select segment of the group.
It can be a problem depending on the group and the objectives of the game.
For example I was watching a tournament game of 3.X while waiting for my next MtG game and saw 2 out of 6 players being silly chaotic evil and ended up dyeing, shortly after that the other 4 players died and they did not get a chance to move onto the next game as they did not have enough points. The game was an elimination of players based on a number of things they did and the group did with prizes at the end.
I have also had other experiences in home games and in tournament games I have played in.
I myself prefer to tell people if evil PC's are ok or not ok as well as if running with new players and I think it is necessary what obnoxious alignment play might look like.
IMHO there is a big difference in chaotic actions and evil actions and playing alignments obnoxiously.
@ spammdc, I think you make some good points . I might like to know what you would list as "Okay" and "Not Okay" re: Evil, Chaotic, (or anything else) and "what obnoxious alignment play might look like". I think that was more the sort of thing I was asking about orignally. You made the point that some of the problemaic player choices are made with the intention of being fun/funny/silly/entertaining; I kind of enjoy the fun/funny/entertaining aspect of roleplaying and social interactions in the game (maybe not so much the silly), do you have any rules or tips of how to be fun/funny/entertaining in the proper amount, without being unintentinally obnoxious or disruptive, making all about me/my character or lessing the enjoyment of other people?
How can you be (or do things that are) chaotic, naughty or even evil (evil adjacent, maybe), in a way that is fun for everyone at the table? What lines are okay to cross and which ones aren’t?
Session Zero: As a GM I often layout what alignments are ok for a game and what are not.
Evil Actions that are ok: This is harder if you are new to a group or have a new player. So again as a GM I might list things that are ok and not ok for a new player as well as explain what is ok in the game we are running. This can vary by setting and game system.
Evil or not Evil: This can be very depending on the situation and background. The issue I have seen is a player(s) just doing evil things because they think it is entertaining or trying to be entertaining for a select segment of the group.
It can be a problem depending on the group and the objectives of the game.
For example I was watching a tournament game of 3.X while waiting for my next MtG game and saw 2 out of 6 players being silly chaotic evil and ended up dyeing, shortly after that the other 4 players died and they did not get a chance to move onto the next game as they did not have enough points. The game was an elimination of players based on a number of things they did and the group did with prizes at the end.
I have also had other experiences in home games and in tournament games I have played in.
I myself prefer to tell people if evil PC's are ok or not ok as well as if running with new players and I think it is necessary what obnoxious alignment play might look like.
IMHO there is a big difference in chaotic actions and evil actions and playing alignments obnoxiously.
@ spammdc, I think you make some good points . I might like to know what you would list as "Okay" and "Not Okay" re: Evil, Chaotic, (or anything else) and "what obnoxious alignment play might look like". I think that was more the sort of thing I was asking about orignally. You made the point that some of the problemaic player choices are made with the intention of being fun/funny/silly/entertaining; I kind of enjoy the fun/funny/entertaining aspect of roleplaying and social interactions in the game (maybe not so much the silly), do you have any rules or tips of how to be fun/funny/entertaining in the proper amount, without being unintentinally obnoxious or disruptive, making all about me/my character or lessing the enjoyment of other people?
What you are asking is often very hard to put into simple statements but I find much easier after having played in or observed a game for a time.
For example a friend of mine had to make a written and oral presentation for a grant to use RPG gaming to help disabled people for a private business to get state and federal approval. So he proposed looking at each participant's case and seeing what emotions/acts/things they needed to work on and what what might trigger them and then how a GM would plan games around those things and try and create a system to track how it helped the people that needed help.
In a group of close friends it is often easy to know what they and you like and do not like but if you have new players or join a new group it can be tougher. An example I use is if you are running an investigation game do you have actual crime scene photos, or do you go in the other direction and just use simple terms to describe the events to investigate.
So i guess the best way is to talk to be GM's about their game and for new GM's to talk to players about how their game is run and what to expect during one of their game sessions. It might be something as simple as we take a 1-2 hour break during the game and go to a bar and get pizza and drink alcohol, or we have a couple of players to are very allergic to nuts so we have to be carful with any nut products, or we require players to buy new dice every time we start a new campaign (often levels 1-19), we a have long time player that makes the same PC every time is this an issue, we are a group of heavy smokers, etc.
Being comedic, good, evil, stoic, promoting your deity, order, government style, country, etc can be done in a fun way but it can also drag a group down. The best way for this to be dealt with is communication between GM's and players. Another big factor is how much time does your group play? If you play for a short time often players like combat over "talking" and shopping, but again your group may be the opposite and prefer all talk and shop and 30 min of combat for every 10 hours of game play.
From my personal experience as I said above since about 2014 I hade some people I played with say they were tired of too much bad language but I knew some people on the other side of the country that could not talk without 3+ bad words in a sentence. So they play or look to play in games that language is not simply the standard way people talk.
I would recommend for a group to make a list of what is ok and not ok and update it as necessary and possibly for every game system. In general i do the same for rules, classes, races, magic items, monsters, etc in my session zero notes for players (if I have time).
So in this case I might say I am planning on running an evil game and these evil actions are ok and these evil actions are not ok and if a player wants to play a NG PC here are the difficulties you might or will have. I try and do this before I spend a lot of time creating material for the game but sometimes I get the world design bug and before I know it I am 30+ hours into a build.
I hope that helps a bit but I can see that there are no hard and fast rules besides do not hire mixed martial arts and weapon art people to portray monsters and NPC's unless your players want to experience such a game.
Nishi is a young Wood Elf (only 24 years old) so I play him as a very exciteable teenager. Prankster fits him pretty well, also he often acts before he thinks. The example above was just the first thing that popped into my head. (sadly that campaign is on hiatus, so I haven't played him in a long while)
It's a lovely bit of character devlopment and really adds to the flavour of the character as well as injecting a nice shot of humour into the adventure. However, Chaotic refers to their view of society, law and order. An example of a Chaotic character (if rather generic and bland) is if the law says that you must get the local authority's permission to leave one of the divisions of the kingdoms, then the Chaotic character might chafe against that rule and just go where they want and refuse to request permission from the authority. A Lawful character, by contrast, would probably insist on requesting that permission as a matter of principle.
"Chaotic says kill him now and keep others safe, for the greater good" <-- why would Chaotic say to kill him now? Chaotic does not automatically mean murder-hobo.
Read literally the very next sentence after you finished quoting me.
A Chaotic character could also decide "Huh, you (the prisoner) don't seem like the bad guy to me, I'll find the one who's actually responsible for the crime instead."
Sure, if we fundamentally alter the scenario I gave to make the prisoner innocent. Even if we do...this doesn't contradict what I said:
"By no means are all expressions of Chaotic evil or tinged with evil[...]" - taken from my closing statement of the argument.
On the other hand, a Lawful character could go "I don't care if you're guilty or not, the King said you need to be executed and what the King says is the Law!" which does not seem very Good to me.
Sure, and that is a pretty good example if what.it means to be Lawful. But no one is saying that Lawful=Good and Chaotic=Evil. Instead, reread my closing statement to my argument:
"By no means are all expressions of Chaotic evil or tinged with evil...but the problematic ones often do and the problematic aspects often stem from that aspect. It does make sense to group the two aspects alignment together when talking about alignment and potentially problematic behaviours."
Chaotic behaviours that can be problematic are often ones that have a degree of Evil incorporated into them excused as being Chaotic - like summarily executing prisoners.
Sorry, I should not reply to posts when I'm tired, I got all hung up on that sentence. 😅
You're right, I just feel like if the "Chaotic character turns into a murder hobo" it's more of a "problematic player" problem then a problem with the alignment. Not solely of course, but I feel like that's a big part of it. 🤔
I can only speak for myself, but while 99%* of my charas are Chaotic Good, I could never do "evil" decisions, they just make me personally feel bad.
*the 1% who isn't Chaotic Good, is my Neutral Good Drow Paladin, because I would love for him to have the [Tooltip Not Found] and it requires the character to be Neutral Good.
**I have a lot of characters I would love to play, but only actually played a Wood Elf Druid and a Drow Ranger so far.
You're right, I just feel like if the "Chaotic character turns into a murder hobo" it's more of a "problematic player" problem then a problem with the alignment. Not solely of course, but I feel like that's a big part of it. 🤔
I 100% agree that that is not the fault of the alignment system. It is the fault of the player, and even without alignment, you can still play an evil murder hobo, just without many roleplaying tools to help you do so. However, I think Linklite is saying that people who are chaotic are more likely to be evil, not that they must be murder hobos. In other words, I think both of you are right. 😊
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
I think it is important to say again that since I have been playing since 78, I have played PC's many ways and maybe most ways people have listed above but now I do have a preference and how I play can change depending on the group, system, campaign and where the game is (home, game store or tournament).
So yes I have played what people call a murder hobo, insane PC, sticky fingers, divide the party into groups and work against the other groups, just make anything and play with a just bought module and all home brewed system and setting. So I can say that what has been and what is now is very different and has varied at time dramatically with groups and even guest players.
So make a list of what you like and enjoy and what you dislike and hate, talk to the GM and other players and find a way forward. If you cannot then I hope you can find a game and group that works for you.
I also think that there are times a GM may break from their agreement with the group. So if the group does not like gore there maybe a time a GM would describe something in gory detail or the group does not like killing things and gets all of their food from magic and they enter an no magic area and thus have to figure out how they are going to eat.
Chaotic and Evil aren't synonyms, and you're correct there...but the way Chaotic is often interpreted is really Evil-Lite. The oft-cited example is a prisoner who is guilty of a capital crime, if it's going to be dangerous to get him back to face the legal system, Lawful would insist on going by the book and getting him back, Chaotic says kill him now and keep others safe, for the greater good. Okay I'm being very black-and-white and simplified there, but it's just to illustrate a point. In reality, the Chaotic attitude in this instance is quite selfish and denies others their rights (as well as the public good of having trials) in order to keep oneself (or one's allies) safe. Sounds a little bit like...Evil?
By no means are all expressions of Chaotic evil or tinged with evil...but the problematic ones often do and the problematic aspects often stem from that aspect. It does make sense to group the two aspects alignment together when talking about alignment and potentially problematic behaviours.
Incidentally, I wouldn't describe Nishi as being Chaotic from your example. Certainly, being a prankster can be associated with being Chaotic...but Lawful doesn't mean Boring and can have a sense of humour too, and pranks are entirely within their nature as well. Perhaps there is a greater context that shows it to have stemmed from his Chaotic nature...but it doesn't really scream Chaotic to me. It is chaotic to be sure, but not Chaotic.
Treatment of captured/surrendered prisoners is one of my chaotic/evil-lite (or straight-up evil) playstyle weaknesses. (I think the kind of situation that you described creeps me out a little, maybe gives me anxiety, and I’d feel more comfortable killing the prisoner, so that gets translated into what my character suggests to the rest of the party).
I’m trying to branch out with my most recent character and try to be much more good and less chaotic; it might be a process. It seems like it’s a lot harder for me to roleplay a Lawful Good character is a way that seems fun, funny and interesting.
I guess Good vs Evil and Chaotic vs Lawful, in the context of the game comes down to how much your actions are constrained by ethical or legal consideration. (And then, there might also be the possible contrraint of actions having consequences).
I also really like the flexibility that “Chaotic” seems allow for in terms of finding creative solutions to problems.
Maybe there is fun to be had in finding creative solutions with a more constrained set of options.
Chaotic doesn't need to cross lines, it's just following your own set of rules vs following laws. It doesn't mean you just do stuff on random whims.
Vigilantes are a great example of chaotic like Batman.
Also when I do evil at a table I generally play it as someone who's ultimately self serving. I don't go into the whole "haha steal from the party" or murder every person I find, but someone that looks out for themselves only, does things to advance the selves first and foremost as well.
I'm not running out to save the world from evil because we are heroes, I'm doing it for the treasure, items and powerbase I can build. If some NPC is trapped and I'm the only one that can save em but I might die in the process? Well hope they had a good connection with their God cuse I'm not risking myself. Run across some crime syndicate doing crime stuff and wanna bribe me to look the other way? Got it just make the payment worth my time. Etc etc
Following your own rules can also be lawful. Lawful neutral lists following a personal code as one example of it.
Lawful good (LG) creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society. Gold dragons and paladins are typically lawful good.
Neutral good (NG) folk do the best they can to help others according to their needs. Many celestials are neutral good.
Chaotic good (CG) creatures act as their conscience directs, with little regard for what others expect. Copper dragons and unicorns are typically chaotic good.
Lawful neutral (LN) individuals act in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes. Modrons and many wizards and monks are lawful neutral.
Neutral (N) is the alignment of those who prefer to steer clear of moral questions and don’t take sides, doing what seems best at the time. Druids are traditionally neutral, as are typical townsfolk.
Chaotic neutral (CN) creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else. Many rogues and bards are chaotic neutral.
Lawful evil (LE) creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order. Devils and blue dragons are typically lawful evil.
Neutral evil (NE) is the alignment of those who do whatever they can get away with, without compassion or qualms. Yugoloths are typically neutral evil.
Chaotic evil (CE) creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust. Demons and red dragons are typically chaotic evil.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is actually one of the fundamental problems with D&D: DMs usually limit their players ability to pick 2 because that would mean less adventure. Usually, they design the government to either be corrupt or to have some other reason to refuse the warrant. Or they put in a time limit and say that the villain will remove the evidence in the time it takes for them to obtain a warrant. Also, more non-combat solutions = less XP for players, so this can often deter them from the legal, less violent route.
In short, speaking out of personal experience at least, players are often railroaded into breaking in. The DM usually makes this a choose between good or evil and just ignore the fact that law and chaos matter in it too. Don't get me wrong, moral conundrums are great. But what makes them greater is when the rules of the game and the person enforcing those rules and giving you that conundrum actually allows more choices than one.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Those were my (unvoiced) thoughts. It's also just not fun doing it properly. Too much bureaucracy and also it shifts the limelight from the party to the arresting sheriff. Although, I'd still award the XP for non violent solutions, I try not to punish players for not just hack 'n' slashing.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Keep in mind that "Lawful" isn't restricted to respecting local government. Characters like the Punisher, who have a strict personal code, also qualify. Doing things "properly" depends on the frame of reference.
Beyond the ethical implications, seems like Breaking and Entering is kind of part of how the game was designed to be played. Heck, some character's are equipped with thieves' tools and proficiency in using them.
Characters are given Combat Weapons and Damage Dealing Spells; it seems almost expected that a party is going to have a couple of combat session between long rests, whether or not they are unavoidable or morally justifiable. And Characters are given Proficiencies in Deception, Intimidation, Stealth, Sleight of Hand, and Spells to trick the minds and the senses of other creatures; I think using those things, as they were intended, is generally considered okay. in game, in most contexts.
Ethically problematic, if this was done in real life, sure, but I don't think that these sorts of things are inherently problematic to the game, or generally take away from anyone's fun or offend anyone else at the table (I suppose depending on the exact situation; I mean, probably best not to use thieves' tools to break into orphanages, to murder extra adorable orphans in their sleep, with weapons and spells, but that seems kind of obvious).
Oh, I agree that it's less fun, and the reasons for rules against vigilante tactics in the real world don't tend to apply to RPGs, but that doesn't make any of it not chaotic (which does not mean ethically problematic; chaotic is not evil).
Chaotic is not Evil, and for my taste, all Evil, in the game, isn't necessarily completely off the table, but taking away from fun for others, is (i think that can be a fine balance).
@ spammdc, I think you make some good points . I might like to know what you would list as "Okay" and "Not Okay" re: Evil, Chaotic, (or anything else) and "what obnoxious alignment play might look like". I think that was more the sort of thing I was asking about orignally. You made the point that some of the problemaic player choices are made with the intention of being fun/funny/silly/entertaining; I kind of enjoy the fun/funny/entertaining aspect of roleplaying and social interactions in the game (maybe not so much the silly), do you have any rules or tips of how to be fun/funny/entertaining in the proper amount, without being unintentinally obnoxious or disruptive, making all about me/my character or lessing the enjoyment of other people?
What you are asking is often very hard to put into simple statements but I find much easier after having played in or observed a game for a time.
For example a friend of mine had to make a written and oral presentation for a grant to use RPG gaming to help disabled people for a private business to get state and federal approval. So he proposed looking at each participant's case and seeing what emotions/acts/things they needed to work on and what what might trigger them and then how a GM would plan games around those things and try and create a system to track how it helped the people that needed help.
In a group of close friends it is often easy to know what they and you like and do not like but if you have new players or join a new group it can be tougher. An example I use is if you are running an investigation game do you have actual crime scene photos, or do you go in the other direction and just use simple terms to describe the events to investigate.
So i guess the best way is to talk to be GM's about their game and for new GM's to talk to players about how their game is run and what to expect during one of their game sessions. It might be something as simple as we take a 1-2 hour break during the game and go to a bar and get pizza and drink alcohol, or we have a couple of players to are very allergic to nuts so we have to be carful with any nut products, or we require players to buy new dice every time we start a new campaign (often levels 1-19), we a have long time player that makes the same PC every time is this an issue, we are a group of heavy smokers, etc.
Being comedic, good, evil, stoic, promoting your deity, order, government style, country, etc can be done in a fun way but it can also drag a group down. The best way for this to be dealt with is communication between GM's and players. Another big factor is how much time does your group play? If you play for a short time often players like combat over "talking" and shopping, but again your group may be the opposite and prefer all talk and shop and 30 min of combat for every 10 hours of game play.
From my personal experience as I said above since about 2014 I hade some people I played with say they were tired of too much bad language but I knew some people on the other side of the country that could not talk without 3+ bad words in a sentence. So they play or look to play in games that language is not simply the standard way people talk.
I would recommend for a group to make a list of what is ok and not ok and update it as necessary and possibly for every game system. In general i do the same for rules, classes, races, magic items, monsters, etc in my session zero notes for players (if I have time).
So in this case I might say I am planning on running an evil game and these evil actions are ok and these evil actions are not ok and if a player wants to play a NG PC here are the difficulties you might or will have. I try and do this before I spend a lot of time creating material for the game but sometimes I get the world design bug and before I know it I am 30+ hours into a build.
I hope that helps a bit but I can see that there are no hard and fast rules besides do not hire mixed martial arts and weapon art people to portray monsters and NPC's unless your players want to experience such a game.
Sorry, I should not reply to posts when I'm tired, I got all hung up on that sentence. 😅
You're right, I just feel like if the "Chaotic character turns into a murder hobo" it's more of a "problematic player" problem then a problem with the alignment. Not solely of course, but I feel like that's a big part of it. 🤔
I can only speak for myself, but while 99%* of my charas are Chaotic Good, I could never do "evil" decisions, they just make me personally feel bad.
*the 1% who isn't Chaotic Good, is my Neutral Good Drow Paladin, because I would love for him to have the [Tooltip Not Found] and it requires the character to be Neutral Good.
**I have a lot of characters I would love to play, but only actually played a Wood Elf Druid and a Drow Ranger so far.
I 100% agree that that is not the fault of the alignment system. It is the fault of the player, and even without alignment, you can still play an evil murder hobo, just without many roleplaying tools to help you do so. However, I think Linklite is saying that people who are chaotic are more likely to be evil, not that they must be murder hobos. In other words, I think both of you are right. 😊
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.I think it is important to say again that since I have been playing since 78, I have played PC's many ways and maybe most ways people have listed above but now I do have a preference and how I play can change depending on the group, system, campaign and where the game is (home, game store or tournament).
So yes I have played what people call a murder hobo, insane PC, sticky fingers, divide the party into groups and work against the other groups, just make anything and play with a just bought module and all home brewed system and setting. So I can say that what has been and what is now is very different and has varied at time dramatically with groups and even guest players.
So make a list of what you like and enjoy and what you dislike and hate, talk to the GM and other players and find a way forward. If you cannot then I hope you can find a game and group that works for you.
I also think that there are times a GM may break from their agreement with the group. So if the group does not like gore there maybe a time a GM would describe something in gory detail or the group does not like killing things and gets all of their food from magic and they enter an no magic area and thus have to figure out how they are going to eat.
Treatment of captured/surrendered prisoners is one of my chaotic/evil-lite (or straight-up evil) playstyle weaknesses. (I think the kind of situation that you described creeps me out a little, maybe gives me anxiety, and I’d feel more comfortable killing the prisoner, so that gets translated into what my character suggests to the rest of the party).
I’m trying to branch out with my most recent character and try to be much more good and less chaotic; it might be a process. It seems like it’s a lot harder for me to roleplay a Lawful Good character is a way that seems fun, funny and interesting.
I guess Good vs Evil and Chaotic vs Lawful, in the context of the game comes down to how much your actions are constrained by ethical or legal consideration. (And then, there might also be the possible contrraint of actions having consequences).
I also really like the flexibility that “Chaotic” seems allow for in terms of finding creative solutions to problems.
Maybe there is fun to be had in finding creative solutions with a more constrained set of options.
Chaotic doesn't need to cross lines, it's just following your own set of rules vs following laws. It doesn't mean you just do stuff on random whims.
Vigilantes are a great example of chaotic like Batman.
Also when I do evil at a table I generally play it as someone who's ultimately self serving. I don't go into the whole "haha steal from the party" or murder every person I find, but someone that looks out for themselves only, does things to advance the selves first and foremost as well.
I'm not running out to save the world from evil because we are heroes, I'm doing it for the treasure, items and powerbase I can build. If some NPC is trapped and I'm the only one that can save em but I might die in the process? Well hope they had a good connection with their God cuse I'm not risking myself. Run across some crime syndicate doing crime stuff and wanna bribe me to look the other way? Got it just make the payment worth my time. Etc etc
Following your own rules can also be lawful. Lawful neutral lists following a personal code as one example of it.
Lawful good (LG) creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society. Gold dragons and paladins are typically lawful good.
Neutral good (NG) folk do the best they can to help others according to their needs. Many celestials are neutral good.
Chaotic good (CG) creatures act as their conscience directs, with little regard for what others expect. Copper dragons and unicorns are typically chaotic good.
Lawful neutral (LN) individuals act in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes. Modrons and many wizards and monks are lawful neutral.
Neutral (N) is the alignment of those who prefer to steer clear of moral questions and don’t take sides, doing what seems best at the time. Druids are traditionally neutral, as are typical townsfolk.
Chaotic neutral (CN) creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else. Many rogues and bards are chaotic neutral.
Lawful evil (LE) creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order. Devils and blue dragons are typically lawful evil.
Neutral evil (NE) is the alignment of those who do whatever they can get away with, without compassion or qualms. Yugoloths are typically neutral evil.
Chaotic evil (CE) creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust. Demons and red dragons are typically chaotic evil.