GameBanshee Forums

So as the thread title asks, which alignment(s) do you most frequently play and for what reason? Is it dictated by chosen class, or is it more a reflection of who you are ?

My characters invariably fall somewhere between chaotic neutral and chaotic good, roughly my range in RL. Usually, I play chaotic good, but in truth my alignment often results from my mood during character creation.
I have never successfully played Lawful Good or any of the Evil designations, both are just too extreme for me. I prefer alignments that allow for shades of grey.

Note: I have set up the poll so that you can vote for more than one option

Chaotic Neutral is fun. U get to be crazy. I chose Chaotic Good cuz I almost always use the same character in Single and he was Chaotic Good.

*eek* Typos..
@Fable, if you see this could you please correct the title? Thanks!

For me it depends of whether i include Paladins and/or Rangers.

I really like the Evil Npc's (Edwin, Korgan & Viconia)
Korgan has great (IMO) dialouge and is a powerhouse, Edwind has the most spells and Viconia is , well, just kinky & powerful and great for romance.

But i also love/like Paladins and Rangers (and Jaheira, of Course), and having a Ranger protagonist become fallen in underdark is waaay Suckey, happened to me in my 'weak' Party Buildup. Urrrghh!!**

For general party feel, a vote for NG, let's you do some quests as you like depending on build, and your rep. isn't to low at the start, ergo better prices and more goodwill.

I'm most comfortable playing Neutral Good characters because it fits my nature in Real Life. I can't play Evil characters, and I can't play Neutral characters if being Neutral means "maintaining the balance between good and evil" or "being crazy". I can't play a Chaotic Good character because I don't believe that the end justifies the means and I believe that some law and order is good for people; but I can't play a Lawful Good character, either, because I would never put laws ahead of people's interests.

The D&D alignment system isn't perfect, of course, and it tends to be a bit misleading. For example, I don't believe that every Evil character is a monster who attacks everyone else on sight; it's much more subtle than that. Essentially, I believe that an Evil person is willing to do anything to get what he or she wants, and he or she feels justified on the basis of his or her belief system. "Might makes right" is a good example an Evil philosophy. It doesn't necessarily make someone a monster, but it is definitely evil by all that Good people hold dear.

I don't think that a Good person should kill every Evil person he or she meets on sight. For example, even though my old boss is evil incarnate, I don't think that gives me the right to murder her. When I play a Neutral Good character, I do fight against Evil, but I tolerate the existence of Evil creatures if they're not doing any harm and haven't done anything to deserve to death. On the other hand, I won't tolerate them rising to power, and if they already have power, I do my best to strip them of it (if I don't have to kill them).

Of course, in a hack-and-slash game like BG2, killing your opponents is usually the only option.

In some of my games, I experimented with a Chaotic Neutral character to see how well I could develop a Neutral philosophy. Whereas a Good character puts people's rights above all else, I think a Neutral character puts a "cause" above all else, even at the expense of other people's rights. My Neutral characters did not hesitate to kill anyone if they thought it served a noble purpose.

The leader of one of my Chaotic Neutral parties believed that too much power in the hands of one individual or one group of people is an evil thing, because power always corrupts. To her, there was no organization, group, regime, or institution whose very existence would not lead to exploitation and suffering. Her goal was to kill creatures who craved power for the sake of power, to destroy organizations who trampled the "little people", and to disarm the entire Sword Coast so that no group could dominate all other groups by force of arms. By her own definition, she was opposed to Evil, but I wouldn't call her a Good character at all.

I orefere lawfull neutral. Liked the discription the first time i played in BG1, and play it almost in every game since.

My characters usually evolve through the game.
I don't like it when a character is created and he seems frozen in time. My characters changes as people betray him, save him etc.

The world changes, why don't most characters?

heh lawful neutral isnt even an option....


i almost always play Neutral Good
i beleive fully in laws but i do not think they must be followed verbatim. i beleive paladins spend too much time trying to discipline people then to see what the real problems in the world are. they confuse not fitting in with society as being evil (take Huck Fin for example). i like doing things for others and dont care much for wealth and i beleive neutral good to be the purest alignment. when i play neutral evil i act just like i do as neutral good but dont mind if i kill somebody. evil doesnt mean you have to care only about urself, u can have the most honest/loyal/ freindly/ caring character be evil by the fact that he kills without conscience and enjoys it when he does.

chaotic good, tis closest to my ideal persona. i hate laws that to me seem unjustified and will challenge them.

unfortunately i don't always follow this in real life...

AArgh.. I really was asleep at the switch when I created this thread. Sorry about forgetting Lawful Neutral. If that is your choice just note it in a post. I'm not sure there is a way to edit polls, even for the mods, I know there was some trouble doing this just after the forum format changed.

Chaotic Good is my most often played alignement.
It gives me freedom to do pretty much what my character wants, as long as it is for the "greater good".

I occasionally like to play Chaotic Neutral (instead of evil) because that gives me much more freedom, because now my character can act from case to case instead of having an underlying aligntment of Good vs. Evil.

I only play Lawfull Good when playing paladins, and even then I can't really roleplay it. There are to much chaotic in my roleplaying

I almost never play evil. I just don't have it in me to roleplay evil.

I'm a goody-two-shoes (High School teacher in real life), so I always play a Good character. My PCs believe in a lawful, ordered society, but don't like Monarchy, so they don't go with Lawful or Chaotic.

Neutral Good!!!

That way, I can be nice to Viconia.

[QUOTE=Albert Rose]... My PCs believe in a lawful, ordered society, but don't like Monarchy, so they don't go with Lawful or Chaotic.
...[/QUOTE]


I'd expect a teacher would like laws and rules to keep the kids under control.

missed one...lawful neutral...

that gets me pickpocketing ferret for familiar... cheesy..

For the Familiars : Lawfull Neutral or Chaotic Neutral : Ferret & Cat, both excellent familiars!

For me...

90% of the time it's lawful evil. It's the closest thing to the actual plausible behaviour of a realistic person in a game world. MInd you, I'm not that scary, really, in play - first playthrough, I had the first six characters I ran into in my party as long as I could, because I didn't have the heart to kick any out, so I guess I'm sort of a pirate with a cream filling, eh?

The odd thing is that, back when I was a punk I usually played good mages, now I overwhelmingly play evil melee types. Wierd, huh?

Chaotic neutral !!! Crazzy Crazzy Crazzy! ......... heh

I normally play either Neutral Good or Chaotic Good characters. Sometimes I'll go for a True Neutral view, though not excessively. I'm mostly Neutral Good in real life, though I tend to be a bit anti-establishment sometimes, so I think it'd be safe to say inbetween NG and CG.

I enjoy the occasional insane Chaotic Neutral PC, and the Lawful Evil PC. I find that LE is much more evil incarnate then CG (I cheer for Baator in the Blood War).

Its rather unfortunate that they didn't add an alignment changing system in BG2, like the one they had in Planescape: Torment (it was done really nicely, you got points for Good/Evil, and Lawful/Chaotic).

I ALWAYS play Neutral good, unless I play a Paladin. This is because I played it when I beat the game with an Assassin, well it was before hell .

In real life, I think I am Chaotic good. I act cccrrraaazzzyyy but I am really good.

Chaotic doesn't always equal crazy.

I always play Chaotic Good characters because apart from suiting my real life persona the most, I think Chaotic characters are actually the most "good" type of good...lol. I don't really understand any Lawful types, Lawful good is okay as law and order can promote goodness in society, but it can also create evils, whch these type of characters can never accept. I find almost all the LG characters I meet in the game to be insufferable, even if I support most of their actions. Neutral good I actually very much agree with, but it just feels too passive...if you look at the real heroes of the realms, you'll find a greater number of CGs amongst them than NGs. CG is just total dedication and belief in good, and that is why I have played this alignment probably 98% of the time.

As for neutrals...I can have them in my group but LN is almost exactly what I'm against (to relate to real day like, "yes I'll support Hitler..." I think not!). However Xan is a cool NPC LN. TN and CN are both pretty unreliable so I don't tend to like characters who have these alignments.

I'm completely against all evil alignments and have never played one for more than 5 minutes. I sometimes keep evil characters in my partner in hope to try and help them see the good path, e.g. Viconia. I also carry Edwin around a lot because he is very powerful, and you want someone like that in a GOOD team rather than wandering around in evil persuits, right?