Lawful good is the only acceptable ethical alignment

[Devsman]

It can be fun to pretend, but for your actual day-to-day living, if you are anything but lawful good, you are living life wrong.

[Scurrybt]

Chaotic neutral gang

[Birds]

Messaggio originale di Scurrybt:

Chaotic neutral gang

that's just ne but your actions are selfish less than 50% of the time.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

My prefered is chaotic good : I AM the law (vigilante)
->
but I must say lawfull evil
"bringing order to the universe even if I have to choke the living breath out of it to do it"
has clearly it's attraction too...

[Birds]

Messaggio originale di De Hollandse Ezel:

My prefered is chaotic good : I AM the law (vigilante)
->
but I must say lawfull evil
"bringing order to the universe even if I have to choke the living breath out of it to do it"
has clearly it's attraction too...

that's just lawful neutral. evil and good are about more than means and results, otherwise they are merely interpretations. your goal is law, and you don't care how you achieve it. you don't even have a preference for violence, you're simply willing to enact it.

police brutality is the nature of the world, so it's ln to support it as an extension of law.

cg can't believe in the law as a 'good' and wouldn't claim it as a cause to thinly excuse their actions. that's more of a CE move, which most people play CG characters as. either they admit that their actions have consequences, and that their vigilantism is resultingly evil as it encourages destruction of the law and society in pursuit of ones own selfish goals, or they're insane and cn at best.

[Apollyon]

Messaggio originale di Birds:

that's just lawful neutral. evil and good are about more than means and results, otherwise they are merely interpretations. your goal is law, and you don't care how you achieve it. you don't even have a preference for violence, you're simply willing to enact it.

police brutality is the nature of the world, so it's ln to support it as an extension of law.

cg can't believe in the law as a 'good' and wouldn't claim it as a cause to thinly excuse their actions. that's more of a CE move, which most people play CG characters as. either they admit that their actions have consequences, and that their vigilantism is resultingly evil as it encourages destruction of the law and society in pursuit of ones own selfish goals, or they're insane and cn at best.

As Chaotic Evil, I must correct you. Chaotic Evil believes in self-interest combined with pure freedom. Vigilantism is not self-interest for a Chaotic Evil character by any means, so your argument is false. Vigilantism would fall within Chaotic Good or potentially even Neutral Good, but definitely not Lawful Neutral.

Your argument that "police brutality" is Lawful Neutral is also hilarious, but false. A cop abusing his power would definitely disqualify him from any Lawful or Good alignment, he'd fall more into Neutral Evil or Chaotic Good, depending on how severe his violations are.

[Majestic Turkey]

Messaggio originale di ⛧:

Lawful Evil rules the world.

And if the law won't let you do what you want to do, you change the law or make it not apply to you.

No Chaotic Evil, rules for thee and not for me is the "rules based order". These are people who deliberately do not enforce their own borders to dilute the votes of their own citizens.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

Messaggio originale di Birds:

Messaggio originale di De Hollandse Ezel:

My prefered is chaotic good : I AM the law (vigilante)
->
but I must say lawfull evil
"bringing order to the universe even if I have to choke the living breath out of it to do it"
has clearly it's attraction too...

that's just lawful neutral. evil and good are about more than means and results, otherwise they are merely interpretations. your goal is law, and you don't care how you achieve it. you don't even have a preference for violence, you're simply willing to enact it.

police brutality is the nature of the world, so it's ln to support it as an extension of law.

cg can't believe in the law as a 'good' and wouldn't claim it as a cause to thinly excuse their actions. that's more of a CE move, which most people play CG characters as. either they admit that their actions have consequences, and that their vigilantism is resultingly evil as it encourages destruction of the law and society in pursuit of ones own selfish goals, or they're insane and cn at best.

not at all...

-> a lawfull person OBEYS the law of others..
be them personal boundries, the law of the land, religion laws, and so on.

-> a chaotic person sets his own laws
He totally ignores what Kings, Gods or Morals say... he sets his own path..
so chaotic lawwise does not mean "unpredicatble" it means.. "selfdetermination"


-a neutral person halfways between respecting others and himself..
basicly.. they tend to respect to a degree.. but will rise up.. once things get to bad.


superman would be lawfull good.. he obeys the laws of his country and man.. to the letter
even if they clearly are not fair in his own eyes.

neutral good, would be characters like spiderman and thor.. they follow the law of their goverments to the most part, to a large degree but they not always lisen and go their own path now and than... if they see that for the good.

chaotic good would be characters like robin hood and batman.
they operate fully outside the law.. they do have codes of honour but those are completely their own.. they are bound by no laws of others.

----
what makes them good is they have the interest of others at heart, often setting it before their own interest.
======================================

evil thus is setting your OWN interest first.

a lawfull evil would be like darth vader.
paart of the legal goverment.. very strict trained.. so he obeys plenty of laws.. but he clearly only cares for himself.
or nazi would be another group.. very diciplined and orderly.. but clearly for their self interest.


lawfull neutral....
would thus be STRICT adherance to the laws of God, Man, and Morals.
but would be balance between self interest and that of others.

which I not find fitting.
-I still prefer setting the needs of others before myself.
-but it is I who determines those rules..

so neutral good or chaotic good.

and lawfull evil.. is what you fall in.. if you go dark..
you may start neutral good.. not following a few laws...
"the end justifies the means"

than you bend more.. turning chaotic good
"I give people what they need (in my opion) not what they ask for"

and if the people logically rebel against that and states try to capture you for the vigelante you are..
you mighht go lawfull evil..
-> to end the rebels and state opression against what you try to build.. you decide you will have to become the goverment.. but by doing so you turned dark...
and before long.. keeping order is all you are doing.. without time to actually do good.

[Birds]

Messaggio originale di Superbia:

Messaggio originale di Birds:

that's just lawful neutral. evil and good are about more than means and results, otherwise they are merely interpretations. your goal is law, and you don't care how you achieve it. you don't even have a preference for violence, you're simply willing to enact it.

police brutality is the nature of the world, so it's ln to support it as an extension of law.

cg can't believe in the law as a 'good' and wouldn't claim it as a cause to thinly excuse their actions. that's more of a CE move, which most people play CG characters as. either they admit that their actions have consequences, and that their vigilantism is resultingly evil as it encourages destruction of the law and society in pursuit of ones own selfish goals, or they're insane and cn at best.

As Chaotic Evil, I must correct you. Chaotic Evil believes in self-interest combined with pure freedom. Vigilantism is not self-interest for a Chaotic Evil character by any means, so your argument is false. Vigilantism would fall within Chaotic Good or potentially even Neutral Good, but definitely not Lawful Neutral.

Your argument that "police brutality" is Lawful Neutral is also hilarious, but false. A cop abusing his power would definitely disqualify him from any Lawful or Good alignment, he'd fall more into Neutral Evil or Chaotic Good, depending on how severe his violations are.

le argument. misconstruing two arguments as one is chaotic, but you're doing it in a lolrandom way. that's simple ne giggles and ♥♥♥♥♥, nothing more, and the structure of your thoughts themselves have a hard time leaving the lawful spectrum of argumentation.

brutality isn't an abuse, it's the purpose of police. only someone who wanted to encourage a culture of abuse would frame their behavior as unintentional.

[Apollyon]

Messaggio originale di Birds:

le argument. misconstruing two arguments as one is chaotic, but you're doing it in a lolrandom way. that's simple ne giggles and ♥♥♥♥♥, nothing more, and the structure of your thoughts themselves have a hard time leaving the lawful spectrum of argumentation.

brutality isn't an abuse, it's the purpose of police. only someone who wanted to encourage a culture of abuse would frame their behavior as unintentional.

Lmfao, are you ok man? Thanks for the laugh, but pull yourself together.

Police brutality implies acting outside the confines of the law, it's definitely not the purpose of a law-enforcer.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

basicly

lawfull good
-will obey and respect all the rules of the state, god, and society, and respect all moral boundries others give
-will place the interest of others before his own
**
in case these 2 conflict.. he will pick the law.. he will obey the law.. like if a nazi asks him to tell where is ann frank hiding.. he will point her out.. for he is not allowed to lie.. and the nazi is the legal goverment. he will not break the law even if it conflicts him.


neutral good
-will mostly follow the rules of the state, god and society, and respoct most moral boundries
-will place the interest of others before his own.
**
in case these 2 conflict, he will balance..
**he will break the law a little if the gain in the interests of others is more
**he will obey the law if the harm to the interests of others is minimal
-> he might tell a white lie to not hurt someones feelings, he might pick some fruits on the day of rest to feed an orphan..

chaotic good
-will not care for any rules set by others
-will place the interests of others before his own
**
will always do what is good, no matter the price to him or others, he not care what others think of him or how they are hurt.. the end justifies the means.

lawfull neutral
-will obey and respect all the rules of the state, god, and society, and respect all moral boundries others give
-will balance the interests of others and his own
**
is usually the most stric law abiding of all, as laws generally are communal, he won't break a single law.
if the law feels very unfair to him, he might try to become a lawyer and look for legal loophoops
or if his religion is opressed he will just switch to balance things back in his favor..
he will use the law as a tool, but will never break it.

true nuetral
-will mostly follow the rules of the state, god and society, and respoct most moral boundries
-will balance the interests of others and his own
**is like a trader.. he needs laws of the land and a stable society to run
and he makes sure to both deliver a decent product, and make a nice sum
---
in case the two conflict he is just pragmatic.. he bends whatevever suits.

chaotic neutral
-will not care for any rules set by others
-will balance the interests of others and his own
He will do whatever he please.. if you are better off than him, he robs you.. if you are poorer.. he may give you.. he will push people aside to get his seat in the train.. but if he sees an old lady.. he might just give it up.. this time..
he seeks balance.. in all things.,. like thanos;)

lawfull evil
-will obey and respect all the rules of the state, god, and society, and respect all moral boundries others give
-cares only for his own interest
**
expect these to be the rulers or the hencman of absolute dictators, whatever god, or ruler promises them the most gain.
they will however NEVER disobey the rules, even if it conflicts with their self interst.
they never will backstab their leader, they never will break a deal with their god.
they may seek advantagious masters and deals.. but they will honour them even if they not that advantagious anymore.

neutral evil
-will mostly follow the rules of the state, god and society, and respoct most moral boundries
-cares only for his own interest
***
greed! they like order.. likely to weak to be masters themselves.. they will follow society.. but if they see an opportunity.. they will totally backstab.. like romulans.. in star trek.. always plotting.. even though for the most part they obey their state..

chaotic evil
-will not care for any rules set by others
-cares only for his own interest
->
100% self interest they will do whatever they can, murder, rape, plunder, pillage..
they will take from the weakest as those are the easiest targets.. all they care for is what gives THEM pleasure and fortune.. no matter how many others they have to crush into despair to get it.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

by the above definions... I fail to see lawfull good as true good.
for if one has not the ability to tell a lie to prevent the law from doing evil.. or break a fast to feed the hungry.. how is that good?

no I'd say neutral good is most good.

[Apollyon]

Messaggio originale di De Hollandse Ezel:

chaotic evil
-will not care for any rules set by others
-cares only for his own interest
->
100% self interest they will do whatever they can, murder, rape, plunder, pillage..
they will take from the weakest as those are the easiest targets.. all they care for is what gives THEM pleasure and fortune.. no matter how many others they have to crush into despair to get it.

Well put, I agree with this.

[Fake]

Lawful on the Streets.
Chaotic in the Sheets.

[funewchie]

One DM once described Lawful vs. Chaotic in a good way.

You're driving a car and come up to a 4-way stop sign. You can see in every direction, and there are no other cars around. No traffic cameras, no other cars on the road. No one will know what you do, one way or the other.

Do you still stop for the stop sign?

If "Yes", then that's Lawful. You're following rules for the sake of following the rules.
If "No", then that's Chaotic. You only follow rules when it benefits you to.

Because, obviously if a cop is sitting there, everyone stops for the sign. Even Chaotic people do, because they don't want to deal with the trouble.

He mentioned it, as someone asked how Chaotic Evil creatures could form a village.
The DM explained it was a case of "might makes right".

They're Chaotic, but they serve the strongest warrior, because they know if they don't follow his rules, he can kill all of them.
They follow his laws because they'll die otherwise, so they know it's in their best interests to do so until he's overthrown.

(Meanwhile, Lawful people would follow the laws, because that's "just the way things are done".)

[Birds]

Messaggio originale di funewchie:

One DM once described Lawful vs. Chaotic in a good way.

You're driving a car and come up to a 4-way stop sign. You can see in every direction, and there are no other cars around. No traffic cameras, no other cars on the road. No one will know what you do, one way or the other.

Do you still stop for the stop sign?

If "Yes", then that's Lawful. You're following rules for the sake of following the rules.
If "No", then that's Chaotic. You only follow rules when it benefits you to.

Because, obviously if a cop is sitting there, everyone stops for the sign. Even Chaotic people do, because they don't want to deal with the trouble.

He mentioned it, as someone asked how Chaotic Evil creatures could form a village.
The DM explained it was a case of "might makes right".

They're Chaotic, but they serve the strongest warrior, because they know if they don't follow his rules, he can kill all of them.
They follow his laws because they'll die otherwise, so they know it's in their best interests to do so until he's overthrown.

(Meanwhile, Lawful people would follow the laws, because that's "just the way things are done".)

Neutral doesn't exist under this rubric. A neutral person would simply stop forever, a superbly insane option.

Most people are at least partially neutral irl, and this causes them to interpret various alignments in ways which reflect themselves. Rather than their identities being aberrant components of these alignments.