So I'm curious to know which alignments people typically play over others and to try and get a good idea of this I'm going to go to various forums around the internet and post this straw poll in the hope that I'll get a decent amount of results. Mostly because I'm just curious and I'd like to get some sort of answer about which ones are the most popular.
Poll Link: strawpoll.me
Go ahead and post what you voted here if you want. Could make for a fun discussion.
Other urls found in this thread:
>chaotic neutral
You guys are colossal faggots.
Lawful good
Does anyone have that screencap about how LG is the best alignment?
I think people are afraid of LG because they think it means they have to play it as Lawful Stupid. IMHO I think a lot of people pick CN just as a way to dodge the alignment system.
I mostly play flavors Good characters. I'm too much of a goodie-two-shoes in real life to backstab and be selfish, so I mostly float between "Good is its own Law" Paladins and "Good for the sake of Good" other classes.
True neutral. Most flexible and realistic. Lawful evil can be neat though.
Lawful Neutral usually
lawful neutral is the only acceptable choice
Lawful Neutral. I think most people do not have either particularly idealistic or misanthropic goals, and try to do so within the limits of the law, so most people I would regard as LN.
I don't usually roleplay as a fucking alignment because i'm not a raging faggot. So chaotic good i guess.
Started off mainly playing CN/CG characters, been trying out more measured and patient characters falling more towards the lawful side of things, but I just get bored of it usually. Honestly, I prefer hot-headed, balls-before-brains do-gooders as my go-to. Which doesn't necessarily rule out LG, but CG usually fits the bill a little better. Also, no evil, because I'm a big ol' bitchboy.
Why?
I avoid any game with alignments because they are cancer
I've played everything except LG and NE. Not that I wouldn't play those, I just did not do it yet.
There is a tendency towards N, CN and CG though.
True Neutral so I can cast any aligned spell and because alignment is dumb anyway.
LE. I usually play a pragmatic swamper who while morally bankrupt never goes back on his word and dreams of a life where earth destroying crises don't pull him away from shooting arrows into trespassers on his property.
LG after that since a go with the flow adventurer goes with virtually any campaign and backstory.
Chaotic Evil. Fight me.
As if the nature of sapient beings can be described with only nine possibilities. A character's actions should speak for themselves, not via some arbitrary, abstract and vague bingo board.
Lawful Neutral every day.
Everyone should dodge the alignment system because it's horseshit
Lawful Good is basically just Neutral Evil for moral absolutists.
Fight me, brainlets.
I play a character, not an alignment. Where is that option?
From my point of view, Jedi are evil!
pic related
If we’re playing an edition where alignment has no mechanical effect on the rules then I don’t even bother to fill in the blank.
If it does have an effect, I default to True Neutral and straight up tell the DM to adjust my alignment as we play however they see fit.
I roll for my alignment in the majority of games I play in. I should have an even distribution eventually, but the last three characters I've played have been Lawful Evil.
I definitely subscribe to the 'alignment is dumb and needs to be abandoned' belief. If you use alignment, all you've really done is create a character who is incredibly one-dimensional. Real people do good things sometimes and bad things sometimes, in accordance to more complicated ideologies and the nuanced situations they're in. Players should have an idea of their characters beliefs and values to better inform their actions, but those things are far too complex to be shoved into one of nine categories.
Or maybe I dont know what I'm talkin about, I dunno
Lawful Evil, but my party never finds out.
Last four: CN CG LN LG
Come at me.
Most of my characters are morally neutral at the start and then drift where ever depending on the party and what opportunities arise. Haven't played enough games to figure out where I stand but the 2 characters that I have played that didn't die were opposites. One drifted to lawful good, the other to chaotic evil.
This is the way I do it, if I pay attention to alignment at all. It's just such a pointless aspect of character building.
Politician.
chaotic good
not doing the poll though
This the one you're talking about?
if you would just read the section about alignments in the books, you'd realize it says that
>ctrl+f neutral good
>0 results
wtf??
Law and Chaos are two extremes that can lead to more harm than good.
Neutral is clearly the best option.
We don't use have official alignments in the games I play, but my characters have pretty much run the gamut. I do enjoy playing a Chaotic Evil character in a way that is non-destructive to the game, and fits seamlessly in with a more goody-goody party.
CN/N
because fuck your D&D alignment system I have no respect for your Pathfinder premade and a serious case of I-do-what-I-want
That's deep.
I usually run Neutral Good. To be honest I see it as a comfortable starting point for a beginning adventurer.
Anyone else tend to shift alignments over the course of a campaign? Where I begin is rarely where I end and I think my most recent NG character will be turning LN due to the pragmatic nature wars tend to breed in people.
I would fight you but I need to know more. Why do YOU go CE?
but true neutral is the best way to dodge the alignment system and also to avoid the the CN stereotypes
>
Neutral Evil or Neutral Good. Though we don't usually play games with set alignments in em.
>I avoided a game with race because racism is cancer.
>I avoid a game with age because ageism is cancer.
>I avoided a game with Genders because gender is cancer.
Don't avoid describing your character. The more well developed your character is the more you will be able to role play the character.
What alignment aligns with meme spouting faggot which generally follows the law, but not the laws that go against their idea of the constitution?
I've seen a lot of issues with groups trying to force characters to act within a specific role instead of letting the role develop from the actions
How would general justice seeking work, but when the justice is outside of societal law?
subjectively lawful good
objectively lawful evil
Of course I'm the good guy, I bring order.
Neutral Good, it's my fallback to if i don't get time to talk with the other players when making my character.
Otherwise, I like to play as lawful evil or chaotic good.
I tend to default to CG with an emphasis on good. I guess I just like the idea of doing good for its own sake without compromising based on social norms.
LAWFUL GOOD
I always become the antagonist because my char will straight up m*rder the party for stealing, let alone killing people that aren't attacking.
In my mind there's an "evolutionary" reason why LGs don't exist much.
Either be the nazi sympathizer or the commie partisan. Neutral is boring.
>evilfags BTFO
Why should I limit my character to one aligment at the start of the game. Why shouldn't my characters aligment be decided by his actions in the game?
Neutral good is harder to twist into a sociopath so it's not as popular.
I usually go with LN/NG/TN, in that order. LN is my favorite because it feels like the one least prone to getting distracted with bullshittery. Just get shit done.
I never play Chaotic characters, and rarely Evil ones.
I like Lawful alignments in general. I've played LG, LN, NE, NG, and CN.
LE of the 'ends justify the means, and my ends are more important' kind
CHAOTIC PAPERCLIP
chaotic neutral players are the lowest race
Chaotic Neutral is for people who don't know how to play and have principles
True Neutral is for the blasé little fuckers who do jack shit and hit things
Lawful Evil is only played by sobbing edgelords
Chaotic Evil is pretty much the same, with small exceptions
we lawful good here boys
From Red (least played) to Blue (most played)
Usually either TN, or NG.
>Neutral good: 23%
No surprise.
>Lawful Evil: 7%
Good taste isn't easy to come by.
My only answer.
Tell my waifu I said hello
Neutral Evil. Pragmatic and wholly selfish is a combination that goes well together with my general attitude. The alignment is flexible as well, I get more done with the party and that convenience becomes my moral compass
>Neutral Evil. Pragmatic and wholly selfish is a combination that goes well together with my general attitude.
Are you also intelligent and nihilistic with a wicked sense of humor?
Good point. It's basically pure, unfiltered good.
Neutral Good. You know, the alignment about being a good guy who doesn’t let nonsense get in the way of what’s right? The obviously best alignment.
The law says so.
Voted neutral evil. Then i saw only 2% of players play this alignment. WTF
That's a modestly obscure bit of memery. But in order. No, yes, depends who you ask. I consider it the Bethesda, or skyrim alignment. Where the decision to buy, or steal from the merchant is dependant wholly on your ability to sneak and steal.
>I'm not Chaotic Neutral you dick I'm just bipolar and a drama queen.
Chaotic Evil is fun because your character's moral impulses are driven entirely by themselves. But they're also capable of going entirely as far or responding as quickly as they want.
Once you realize chaotic evil characters have friends, hobbies, preferences, things they enjoy and so on so forth it becomes apparent the alignment is the best. Simply because you CAN quietly stab that guy who shoved you out of the way for no reason when you were walking down the busy street. Or you can accept that it'll cause a little bit too many problems now and add him to the list later.
It's the fact that at any moment, you can choose to just snap. Because you've got the full range of both nice and horrendous actions at your disposal and you're not tied to any arbitrary code.
Good explanation. It's completely possible to play evil characters. The problem is that most people who want to play them are awkward edgelords.
because that person is a bootlicking centrist with no convictions
I can flip that meme and explain that a lot of people who want to play Lawful Good are basically just looking for an excuse to impose their morals on everyone else.
I have seen way too many lawful good meltdowns.
>It's the fact that at any moment, you can choose to just snap.
Sounds like when pressured though such a character could be more easily led to following impulsive as opposed to performing a bit of long-term planning that requires a bit of loss now. Sure anyone when pushed far enough will not give a damn about the law or society's general norms but someone who never really cared in the first place seeing such things as mere things to be adhered to at their convenience does not make me confident that they will put-up with bullshit for as long as LG, NG, LN, TN, LE, or NE regardless of the future benefits that can be reaped from taking hit now.
I do dig your argument though user.
>ut someone who never really cared in the first place seeing such things as mere things to be adhered to at their convenience does not make me confident that they will put-up with bullshit for as long as LG, NG, LN, TN, LE, or NE regardless of the future benefits that can be reaped from taking hit now.
Read my original argument involving friends, preferences, things they enjoy, etc. You simply place a few of those things on the very top of said character's priority pyramid that's relevant to the game at hand. Bam, you have a reason why the character wouldn't betray their friends / cause / whatever.
>thinking anyone cares enough to read all that
I like characters who tread the line of morality. Characters who do horrible things with good intentions, characters who are all about logic over feelings, or characters whose actions and beliefs are moulded by circumstance. I find these characters can easily have their own progression, their own story that writes itself as part of the DMs own campaign.
I kind of wish it would happen this way. Your actions develop your alignment, instead of the other way around. I really think it would open up roleplaying a lot more if characters were a summation of their actions than being beholden to being a certain way. At the very least it'd be more realistic.
I typically do this as well. It's part of the challenge of playing a Paladin in my most recent game for me, since you're forced to maintain your moral compass and your methods, even if they're sometimes ineffective.
I’ve really come to enjoy playing greasy con-men and shady salesmen, ones not necessarily with a heart of gold. Neutral Evil from my understanding just seems like the best place to put these guys so it’ll get my vote. But I really enjoy just letting alignment be guided by my character’s actions naturally through the campaign no matter what.
Neutral good or true neutral because i am not that good at roleplaying and thoose two are the easiest for me
Most of the time I play a Big Damn Hero that skews NG.
Aside from that, I like Lethally Pragmatic characters that I would call LE, but I aim for Raymond Reddington who would be atypical LE at best.
My recent record is blemished by a dip into CE with a party-loyal murderous merc, not a baby-eating edgeboy.
nice
Last three: NG, LE, LN
TN for me. Mostly because I don't care about alignment enough to actually spend much time wondering about it. And it isn't as if any GM is very likely to complain that you're not being neutral enough even if your character leans a bit too much towards law or good.
Lawful is not about adhering to the laws of the land, though. And many if not most people do plenty of petty crimes that no-one really cares about much if adhering to the rules would actually inconvenience them, such as littering, jaywalking, etc.
I play the full suite of lawful alignments as well as chaotic good and chaotic neutral. If I were to say I have a default character, which I don't, he would be chaotic good. The only things I don't play are chaotic evil, for obvious reasons, and characters who are neutral along the lawful-chaotic axis. It's hard for me to imagine a character like that who I would consider interesting.
You can easily describe them with just two: Follows or does not follow . So why could you not place them into more categories?
I'm not a big fan of alignments, but your specific objection to them is pretty fucking stupid.
I bet you also only play human nonmagical characters too. And you also only have sex in the missionary position for the sake of procreation.
It's not a binary choice, user. Unless you're playing OSR or have a specific alignment restrictions(such as being a Paladin in 3.x), most (good) GMs will allow you to change your alignment during play if it turns out that you're not playing in a way that meshes well with your current one. What you write on the character sheet during creation is only your best guess at how your character will behave once you breathe life into them.
Lawful
Because while good and evil exist, the eternal struggle is between law and chaos. Good and evil are in your actions and the decisons you make but ultimately mean little to the eternal conflict.
>Lawful is not about adhering to the laws of the land, though.
It is not necessarily about laws, but for the vast majority of people it is.
>And many if not most people do plenty of petty crimes that no-one really cares about much if adhering to the rules would actually inconvenience them, such as littering, jaywalking, etc.
This is true, however, so you are right in that my previous statement is probably incorrect.
>It is not necessarily about laws, but for the vast majority of people it is.
No, it's about a code of conduct you (try to) adhere to. For someone like a cop it might be the local laws. But a normal person probably doesn't even think about it in those terms. Serious crimes are something you just don't do, because you don't want to be fined or go to jail. It's not about conviction or honor or greater good: it's just the path of least resistance.
>No, it's about a code of conduct you (try to) adhere to
And most of the time, for most people that code aligns with the law, for the reasons you list (least resistance, conviction, honor, greater good).
>It's not about conviction or honor or greater good
You're conflating the good-evil axis with the lawful-chaotic axis here. Lawful merely indicates that they obey their code of conduct. Following a personal code out of following the path of least resistance doesn't change that the code is being followed.
>And most of the time, for most people that code aligns with the law, for the reasons you list (least resistance, conviction, honor, greater good).
Most of the time, most people don't have a a well-defined code of conduct. If you had them try to draw up one, they would end up something very different from the legal system. They don't follow the law because it aligns with their code and they're lawful, they follow the law because they're neutral and following the law is the path of least resistance.
>You're conflating the good-evil axis with the lawful-chaotic axis here.
None of the concepts I mentioned have anything to do with good-evil axis. An Evil character can justify their actions with honor or greater good just as easily as a Good one.
>Lawful merely indicates that they obey their code of conduct. Following a personal code out of following the path of least resistance doesn't change that the code is being followed.
But it's not their personal code: They're following it because that's the path of least resistance, NOT because it's their personal code. And whether or not it aligns with their personal code of conduct is irrelevant; doing something because you'd be punished for doing something else is strictly a neutral action, not a lawful one.