these are the only acceptable alignments everything else is for faggots
>>97720035>t. lawfag
>>97720035I kind of agree.The other alignments are all various flavors of, "I do whatever I want, teehee!" because you can justify basically any behavior you want. They're all just different aesthetic variants of doing whatever the fuck you want.
mods?
>>97720035CN mad scientist types are great though.
Drop alignment as the unneeded bullshit it is
>>97720035Actually unironic bootlicker.
>>97720035Wrong, what fucks thing up is mixing them up too much, because usually players are retards unable to employ nuance an subtlety in roleplaying alignments.The simple old fix is asking to your players to pick a PARTY alignment between the extremes (L/G, L/E, C/G and C/E), the individual PC then can then pick any alignment that is one step deviation top from the party one (eg: the party is L/G so the allowed alignments are L/G, L/N and N/B). Simple as.
>>97720035my character makes decisions that aligns with all of them at one point or another
>unprompted seething OP
>>97720577They don't do anything except protect puckeespammer.
>>97720035
>>97720035How does one lawful evil? Evil people do unlawful things.
>>97720035>using alignments
>>97723362>t. Lawful Evil anon in denial
>>97720035If you're playing a game with alignments in 2020+6, you're already at a terminally incurable level of faggotry and DnD Brainrot already. You have my sympathies, OP.
>>97720035alignments are for faggots
>>97720445>>97720035>t. doesn't understand AlignmentNeutral good is the goodest good, more good than Lawful Good because they don't care about going with or against the law, only doing the greatest possible good and taking the most selfless possible action.Chaotic Good believes that the law is oppressive (it usually is), and that it must be opposed for true good to exist.True Neutral is literally just the default for everyone.Chaotic Neutral doesn't care about law, selfishness, or selflessness, they literally just follow their instincts or whims without considering morality or amorality.Chaotic Evil is like chaotic neutral, but they actively seek to fulfill their own selfish desires and seek to sow chaos and actively oppose order on principle.Though really, trying to fit morality into one of nine squares is retarded and >>97720685 is correct. Just as I do not need a made up book of fairy tales to be a good person IRL, I don't need a made up grid of arbitrary moral cubes to play a character who is a good person in my TTRPGs.
>>97723362Lawful Evil is evil that either has a personal line they will not cross in the form of a twisted code of honor, or someone who abuses the letter of the law to perform selfish acts. Basically, it's white-collar crime.
>>97720035Regular reminder that all misunderstandings about the law-chaos axis are resolved when you replace the terms law and chaos with chivalrous and underhanded respectively.
>>97723960>Chivalrous Evil>Underhanded Good
>>97723992Exactly
>>97720445If you think that the law can’t be used to justify doing whatever someone wants, you haven’t been paying attention for the last century or so.
>>97723960>>97723992>My Chivalrous Evil dwarven fighter agrees>My Underhanded Good cleric will go along with it, for now>My True Neutral thief will go along with the group's decision
>>97723554how about you just make a character with a distinct personality, goals, motivations and flaws and act accordingly, instead of applying some artificial toddlers guardrails the character must apply to
>>97723554Lawful Good is being good while tempered with justice, you're acting in good faith and doing so according to a set of principles that others can emulate.Neutral Good is just vibes, that is someone who is good by circumstance instead of principles and not something that can be taught. A Lawful Good hero begets lawful goodness, while a Neutral Good hero begets followers.
>>97720445Neutral Evil literally is the "I do what I want (smirks)" alignment.
>>97720035nah, its poptart time
>>97726940I literally only know this guy from the aurafarmimg tournament of power.
>>97720675are sure you want to defend CN, Anon? are you ready to not only die on that hill, but be mercilessly and relentlessly humiliated and ridiculed and ass-raped on that CN hill?Do we need to go fetch the Teehee Macaroni greentext for you or will you take back your retarded take?
>>97726988Any ingredient alignment is acceptable. Everything from structure neutrality down is mental illness
>>97724851>t. can't read
>>97725145>Lawful Good is being good while tempered with justice, you're acting in good faith and doing so according to a set of principles that others can emulate.Lawful Good is being selfless while also following a code or law, and you are beholden to the law which limits what good you can do, unless that law is objectively evil, in which case you replace it with good law.>Neutral Good is just vibes, that is someone who is good by circumstance instead of principles and not something that can be taught. No, a neutral good character performs selfless acts regardless of who's involved. They seek to do the most true good, not caring about whether or not the law agrees, which makes them more good than Lawful Good.
>>97729704>Ice cream taco is more of a sandwich than a chicken wrapSay you're in the pocket of big ice cream without saying you're in the pocket of big ice cream, or "big cone" as it's called.
1E had alignment right, imo
>>97723554>Just as I do not need a made up book of fairy tales to be a good person IRL, I don't need a made up grid of arbitrary moral cubes to play a character who is a good person in my TTRPGs*fedora tipping intensifies*
>>97723992Underhanded good is using the power of friendahip to beat up one fucking guy.
>>97720035Evil takes from the weak to make themselves stronger, Good protects the weak, and Neutral doesn't do either. At least that's the simple way I run it in my world.
>>97730062Simple and decent measuring stick, that.
>>97729767An ice cream TACO is a TACO, not a sandwich, because sandwiches are defined by their structure rather than their components. A chicken WRAP is a WRAP. YOU are a sick, sick man
>>97730304By the gods I will vanquish you and your beloved Earl of Sandwich in the name of my liege lord, Lord Wrap of Burrito. All the lands of Sandwich and surrounding are his by right! Under his rule ice cream will be outlawed for breakfast, and subs will be made legal once again.
>>97720035I write True Neutral during chargen and let the DM decide what my alignment is later based on my actions.
>>97720035>Lawfag more accepting of Evil than any other alignmentDamn did you really have to give the game away
>>97720035CN CAN be good, but sadly most of the time it's just some fag tourist going "LOL! I'm so random and edgy" trying to be Jack Sparrow,
>>97720438tru
>>97720035>alignmentsReal retard hours
>>97741513>I came to the D&D board and saw D&D and now I am mad, how can this be happening to me?common nogames problem
>>97741548>D&D boardWarhammer board, cuck. You only exist in the shadow of our greatness to feast on the dingleberries in our taint.Snack up, bitch!
>>97720035Remove Chaotic Good and the alignment system makes perfect sense. It hurts the symmetry but LG and CN are made more retarded to accommodate CG. The "Good" aspects of CG can be shifted to LG or NG. The Chaos aspects of CG can be shifted towards CN otherwise CN is the literally mentally ill alignment.
>>97744635I prefer the wfrp 1e axis arrangement:Law Good Neutrality Evil Chaos...that foolows the idea that altruism is just some step removed from the collectivist extreme manifested by law while egoism (being "evil") is towards the individualist (solipsistic) ideal that chaos entails.>inb4 doesn't work like that reeee!It's just a deliberate choice apt in simplifying the alignment concept towards singular ideas, imo leagues better than trying to encapsulate the notion in a gay ass political coordinates meme matrix.
>>97723554>>t. doesn't understand Alignment
>>97720035LG vs. CECG vs. LEthese are the only narratively satisfying ttrpg stories possible.
>>97720035>>97720445Alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive. At no point has it ever prevented anyone from doing whatever the fuck they want. Fucking retards.>>97720685You not understanding alignment does not make alignment bad. It only reveals you as a fucking idiot.
>>97749152I'm going to assume you haven't read the old DND books where alignment was tracked and adjusted
>>97750181NTA but tracking and adjusting reinforces their point? A PC could write LG on their sheet and they would still be able to do whatever the fuck they wanted, it would simply shift them accordingly along the axis.Hence, alignment is descriptive. If it was prescriptive, the LG paladin could never do shit that was unlawful or evil and they would never fall.
>>97750181I have. Your alignment will change based on your actions. This is in itself an example of how alignment is not prescriptive, but descriptive. You're literally referencing evidence contrary to the point I was already rebuking. You're an actual honest-to-god fucking imbecile.
>>97725145Neutral Good is objectively the most good alignment. Your lack of understanding doesn't change that.
>>97729959The idea that having a moral compass of your own is fedora-tier is certainly a take. An unusual take, not a trad take, perhaps not a sane take, but a take nonetheless.
>>97749067>No LG vs LG.>No consistently good, principled warrior of righeousness, who always does the right and kindly thing, going up against a terrible monstrous foe, that for all their tyranny, is principled and holds a strict code of honour/morality.>No great clashes between good and evil, fought by two foes who can understand and sympathize with the other, but are driven by conviction and an unwavering commitment to end the other.OP does not writefag.
>>97754879>having a moral compass of your ownGet this right, you can have your own moral compass handcrafted after years of studying the human condition, AND you don't have to type like a 2012 redditer who just discovered there are other athiests online and you want to seem smart and cool.
>>97754837No. Neutral Good is just Good without any consideration for Lawful or Chaotic. It's entirely possible that someone within either of the others are gooder than someone that's teethering on the apathy of true neutrality.>>97729959>>97754972Semitic slave retard.>>97754940I'm pretty sure you meant to write>LG vs. LEBut I actually think that inter-alignment conflict is sorely underwritten and underexplored, especially for how often it happens. There's no inherent reason why two Lawful Good rulers, for example, would not come to blows over fundamentally conflicting interests or beliefs.
