Poll: what alingment do you play?

Caernarvon · Post by **Caernarvon** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 12:34 am

I've played every alignment from LG to TN. I generally prefer the 3 partially neutral alignments of those (NG LN TN).

Black Hand · Post by **Black Hand** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 2:25 am

I don't agree that the purpose of a RPG is to play your own 'alignment'. The purpose is that you can play a different role, anything you want.

I don't believe that there are many real 'lawful good' paladins, or 'chaotic evil' sorcerers out there, but it's cool to play them in a RPG.

Karembeu · Post by **Karembeu** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 5:49 am

We all have certain point of views, and as much as I value your views Black Hand they still don't agree with what I think.

When playing almost any game,(ranging from the Legend of Zelda back in the mid-late 80's to Baldur's Gate 2 right now), I "make" the character myself or at least as I could imagine myself.

It's all in one's state of mind. No matter how you play the game the choice of character and your character's actions will reflect a small truth what kind of person you really are.

I'm not saying that someone playing a Chaotic Evil character would, when off screen out in the "reality", rampage around slaughtering people and commiting genocide, or whatever....

The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of people play their character/role as they themselves are or at least how they wish they were...which I think in some aspects is the same thing...

It doesn't matter which role you choose it will still be moulded after yourself.

Black Hand you stated that you didn't think that the main purpose of an RPG was to play your own alignment but to play a different role....I say that even though you play a "different" role it will still be YOU....

Black Hand · Post by **Black Hand** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 9:53 am

Well it's just a different opinion. In RPG's I normally prefer to play exactly what I am not. Mostly brute fighter characters, physical strong, but weak in mind.

IRL am not physically strong, have no lust for blood and gore and I hope I'm no airhead either.

So it seems there are different types of roleplayers.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 10:10 am

I think the average gamer will indeed have a natural tendency to play a reflection of himself/herself. Some of us are better than others in "assuming the personae" of someone we are not, i.e. true roleplaying. I am weak in this regard, as I would have a great deal of difficulty thinking like an "evil" character in an alignment sense.

I fully intend to try it out sometime, but I suspect that in conversations with NPC's, I will find it difficult to avoid answering as I (personally) would answer, even if I AM playing a character like, say, Korgan. I will probably have a lot more success playing something closer to home, like true neutral (I think I could role play a "balancer".)

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 10:14 am

Heh heh, have you heard the expression 'sit on the fence' for a neutral/balancer?

And do you know what a spelk is?

KN · Post by KN » Thu Jan 11, 2001 10:33 am

My character is chaotic good but as for picking a alignment that matches my own. I could not do this because I do not believe in the whole concept of good and evil. Its kinda fun to roleplay that it actually exists though.

------------------
"Four thousand throats may be cut in one night, by a running man."
- Klingon Crewman "Day of the Dove"

Seritani · Post by **Seritani** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 10:43 am

Playing Lawful Good Undead Hunter, True Neutral Monk (or LN, don't remember), and Neutral Evil (or LE =)) Swashbuckler!

Kyrian Darkstar · Post by **Kyrian Darkstar** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 10:48 am

I almost always play chaotic good type people. Lawful good is all right at certain times...but in no other alignment can you make sure you're on the side of good while still beating down people and taking stuff that really isn't yours.

I mean, think about it, would a lawful good guy really be ok with taking all those free goodies laying around on tables and bookshelves in houses and other areas? I don't think so. But the chaotic good guys says, "Look, I'm fighting evil and the more that helps me do that, the better off everyone is gonna be. You'll thank me later for stealing that Rogue Stone."

The ends justify the means my friends!

Nighthawk · Post by **Nighthawk** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 10:50 am

My most natural alignment to play is NG or LG...I have a hard time NOT playing almost like a paladin!

In BG2 so far, I've played:

CG Sorcerer
LG Kensai
LG Monk
N Shapeshifter
NG Archer
CG Barbarian - He's not real smart and I'm playing him CN due to the bad influences around him (Edwin, Haer'dalis, and Viconia).

Planned (If I don't get bored or another game doesn't take my attention away first):
LG Undead Hunter
CN (CE?) Assasin - playing evil would be really tough for me, but I may try it.

Anyone else notice that Jahiera is a NG Druid regardless of what her alignment says?

Black Hand · Post by **Black Hand** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:00 am

Originally posted by Kyrian Darkstar:
I mean, think about it, would a lawful good guy really be ok with taking all those free goodies laying around on tables and bookshelves in houses and other areas? The ends justify the means my friends!

A Paladin can't see everything (O.K. perhaps the inquisitor can.), so the thief in the party loots and steals one or the other item...the Pala simply doesn't have to know.

Kyrian Darkstar · Post by **Kyrian Darkstar** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:03 am

A good plan, just hope that little thief never ends up on the business side of Carsomyr!

Black Hand · Post by **Black Hand** » Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:15 am

Suppose that could get quite nasty for the poor thief.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Fri Jan 12, 2001 2:12 am

No, Gruntboy, I don't know what a "spelk" is. Do I want to?

(KN, was it you??) That Kingon quote is cool...I'm still looking for a signature line. In my opinion you have found a good one.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Fri Jan 12, 2001 5:07 am

Heh. A spelk is a tiny bit of wood that gets under your skin and you can't out. Really hurts - zinc usually helps.

Well, if you're neutral, and you "sit on the fence", you get spelks in your a$$!

Old saying updated - people *usually* have to take sides. True Neutral is very difficult to roleplay.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Fri Jan 12, 2001 5:25 am

For me, neutral is what would result in any attempt for me to try to play evil. I don't think I would be able to change my general outlook that much.

Someone said that they don't thing there is such thing as good or evil, and someone also said they thought the whole alignment concept was silly (or whatever). On the first point, if there is no good or evil, what is there? Lots of neutral?? You'd make a FINE druid, my friend...they've already convinced you that they are right....

On the second point, I think the alignment system is an EXCELLENT way of evaluating the personality, standards and lifestyle of a character. I have always found myself applying it to real-life people and situations in something of an unconscious manner, because it is a good way to put a tangible feel to a person's behavior. What I have a problem with in the game mechanics is the requirement for a character to CONFORM to his chosen alignment, or ELSE. Or else WHAT? Why cant (a PC, anyway) change his outlook? It should not be regarded so rigidly.

Edwin · Post by **Edwin** » Fri Jan 12, 2001 6:14 am

Usually chaotic-good....more fun with chaotic evil....

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Fri Jan 12, 2001 6:19 am

I am usually a Neutral Good, being playing True Neutral recently as it is fun trying to find ways to keep a neutral reputation.

------------------
"I claim the right to contradict myself. I don't want to deprive myself of the
right to talk nonsense, and I ask humbly to be allowed to be wrong sometimes."
-- Federico Fellni

I played a blank tape on full volume. The mime who lives next door complained.

KN · Post by KN » Fri Jan 12, 2001 8:02 am

Originally posted by geh4th:

Someone said that they don't thing there is such thing as good or evil, and someone also said they thought the whole alignment concept was silly (or whatever). On the first point, if there is no good or evil, what is there? Lots of neutral?? You'd make a FINE druid, my friend...they've already convinced you that they are right....

The reason I don't believe in good or evil is because I do not believe in god. I do believe that there are positive and negative actions. If you want to associate these with the terms good and evil that's fine, but I don't.

geh4th · Post by **geh4th** » Fri Jan 12, 2001 8:07 am

Okay, I understand. I was never talking about it in the biblical sense, anyway. I am always referring to actions and motivations. I don't thik the alignment descriptions really reflect any kind of religious outlook anyway (associated with a particular alignment) beyond mythical references (if any.)