I dunno Veeky Forums...

I dunno Veeky Forums, how DO you play a chaotic evil character or a lawful good character without being annoying to the party?

By not making an annoying character.

Simple. Neither means stupid. Somebody post the screencap of the Lawful Good explanation, the good one with the Two Lovers in bed analogy.

Realizing that alignments are a joke and tossing it out the nearest window. Seriously, it's the same reason why characters that are tokens are either the blandest or the most annoying pieces of shit in a given story.

When you attach a label to a character based on superfluous details that have nothing to do with their personality, you end up with stereotypes that are barely characters in their own right.

LG Paladin, you smite the wickid and pity the weak.

As long as the party isnt getting all torture happy you don't need to put your foot down on a lot of things. Hell you can even join a heist if you're stealing something from some evil organization, like a holy avenger being auctioned off by the black network.

CE cultists who are part of noble society but practice in secret were a common occurance in old DnD.

If you're lawful good you only have to generally follow your alignment. As long as you're refraining from overly chaotic and/or evil actions you're fine. You're free to do spur of the moment idiotic things like get drunk and start of fight. Paladins are the only ones with specific edicts, but if you're playing with DMs and players who like torturing baby goblins and it offends your character and you, you gotta rethink the kind of people you're playing with.

Chaotic Evil people aren't lolrandumb stupid.

Their alignment is a cosmic balance thing. They're not crazy gnomes running around burning down houses. They're the shadowy cabal in the dungeon caversn below the town who pray to evil gods for protection and commit human sacrifice for demon guardians and dark powers, but by day they're fine upstaning citizens with two kids and a wife.

By ending up with the alignment instead of thinking about it before; i.e. making a character before thinking about the alignment.

Why the fuck do people write back stories like this? The game you are in right fuckin know should be the most interesting thing that's happened to your character, you nitwit. Players astound me sometimes.

This

Also Chaotic evil is really just someone who is motivated entirely by their own self interest with no respect for the rule of law.
They FOLLOW the law most of the time because not doing so is actively detrimental to their own continued existence. And they join with a party because working in a group is easier and more rewarding than going it alone.
It's that simple.

The most nondisruptive way to play chaotic evil character is a libertarian.

As as addition.
Self interest can also be applied to a persons in group. [Be it friends, family, towns, country etc.]
The distinction between Good, Neutral and Evil being in how they go about fulfilling their interest.
A Good person would strives to help not just their own in-group but others if possible.
A neutral person strives for their in group with concern for not ACTIVELY harming others but no care for others benefit.
While an Evil person strives for their group with no regard for other and will take the most beneficial/efficient route to their goals.

I'm probably not the only person who is bothered by the D&D idea that selfishness=evil.

It's less selfishness. A Neutral person can be selfish.
More like actively willing to murder, torture and harm others if it's convenient to their interests.

my favorite depiction of chaotic evil was a villain in one of those chinese cartoons

she did whatever she pleased on the road to her ambitions, was playful, often pointlessly cruel, but also easily distracted or manipulated. Her actions were never random, but neither was she one to make a plan in advance.

my favorite depiction of lawful good comes from an american TV show protagonist.

A former spy had decades of training and lived by a strict moral code. That moral code belonged to himself, and he didn't always find himself on the good side of the law. He tried hard to avoid bloodshed and always helped a person in need, usually refusing compensation for doing it.

if you're talking about burn notice then michael was definitely chaotic good

I think the real problem with LG is that it is by far the rarest alignment in fiction and in life so the only players who play it well are already LG or at worst NG irl. People tend to play it badly because they have very few examples to go by and end up parroting exaggerated robotic "JUSTICE! FOR THE LIGHT!" two dimensional paladins.

But it's really not that difficult, you put the needs of others before yourself and do the right thing for people who need help all while carrying yourself with an outward code as well in the hopes that those who simply see you can become inspired to do good one day as well. And if the horrendously wicked cross your path, you do what's appropriate given the circumstances - kill them or imprison them. LG doesn't always kill nor do they always give second chances. If you're under the impression that paladins are "I cast detect evil and cut down everyone who pings my radar" then you aren't even on the good spectrum, you are chaotic evil.

And don't lecture your party on petty shit, you don't have to give a sermon and be an annoying shit on why they shouldn't have said some mean words to a guy in a tavern.

in the later seasons absolutely, but in the earlier seasons he played nicer

You need more than just a moral code to be lawful. Lawful is about the interests of the group over the individual, about logic over emotive thinking.

You abandon alignment in favor of more specific personality keywords.

By working with the party instead of trying to be a perfect icon of a one dimensional descriptor, just like every other alignment.

By being willing to change, and have your character grow. If you can accept that your character is going to get physically stronger over the course of your campaign, perhaps you can accept that your character's attitudes and beliefs are going to change over time as well. The Chaotic Evil character tagging along with a party of jolly do-gooders might find some of that jolly do-gooding rubbing off on them, and the do-gooders might wake up one day to realise that perhaps they're not so pure themselves due to their collaboration with Mr Chaotic Evil.

But chances are, if you're playing D&D, you're one of those fucks that goes "this is my character build all the way up to level twenty!", and so character growth isn't based on what's actually going on in the world of the game, but rather a trajectory decided upon before you've started playing your first session.

>le edgy pol-posting

kys faget

No matter what the alignment, every character written as a single unbalanced monotone uncompromising personality trait will turn out to be annoying sooner than later.
One of my favorite characters was a CN wizard that I played as CE despite the DM stubbornly refusing to have my alignment change. Maybe it's not a good example because he was a real annoyance due to certain abrasive personality traits of his, but he recognized and respected the common goal of the party and his need for companions; he generally didn't object to anything the party set out to do and didn't do stuff like murdering them in their sleep or keeping a stash of loot to himself due to "enlightened self-interest".
He did, however, did pretty unsavory things off-screen but nothing that eventually had an impact on the game.

>Sakura Kawaii

Also nice numerals.

Good is about the interests of the group over the individual for the good of the whole lawful is about adherence to the rules of society both stated and unstated with strict adherence to a moral code, which is not necessarily more logical then adapting your conduct based upon the situation.

This one?

>itachi uzumaki
>sakura kawaii

where the fuck do you even find these people

By having their goals and methodology still be generally agreeable to the party at large.

Be true to your beliefs.