To be faaaiiiiir. The alignment system exists to provide a role play guideline. If you have a party member that is any of the evil options you should expect dick behavior from that character. If you dont want that, then that should have been discussed in session zero.
Played for my first time and was confused with a lot but the whole alignment thing made sense, I picked my alignment and then the DM is just like "fuck off that's stupid only dumb idiots pick that alignment that's not allowed we will change that later"
And it was like well what the fuck is it even for then if you don't like my choice
I have a current character that is a thief. It wasn't my first choice, but I chose them specifically because the rest of the part is super goody two shoes kinds of players and I thought that it would create interesting storylines to have some difference of opinion and gameplay. I do my best to not be overly disruptive or evil.
In my character sheet I have a line that I wrote day one that essentially says 'when needing to choose between the high risk/high reward option, and the safe/low reward option, I will always choose the risky one'
We all knew this but I still get flak for being the one with a more neutral alignment. Everytime I even think about stealing something all of a sudden every NPC has a tragic backstory and every mark is a nice old lady and the entire party is begging me not to.
As a result I don't really feel like I can actually roleplay as the character. Any attempt to make a roleplaying choice is met with frustration that I would possibly choose a risky option or bring even tangential harm to some NPC.
I don't want to be the stereotypical edgy rogue disrupting the party but I also feel like the other people aren't really roleplaying and viewing the party as a monolith instead of a collection of characters. It's a weird balance to strike.
Tell.me about it I was about to off myself when our "tax collecting vampire" went on some 30 minute roleplay about collecting taxes and yet I'm not allowed to be a chaotic character
I do think it's a tough balance to play a chaotic character in a way that's fulfilling to other players in the game.
30 mins of tax collecting has a relatively low impact in the world, but if you are being chaotic and want to smash up a shop and extort the owner that can have a real impact on the world. Figuring out the right moments to bring that roleplaying element into the mix is where I struggle.
I'm a wizard who wants new magic so ya idk how I wouldn't be chaotic
And no tax collecting has a huge impact because it apparently effects all the shop keepers and who we interact with... Sorry but I'm playing a fantasy game I don't want to hear a monologue on taxation
It might be boring but you gotta work with your party to tell the story together. If you really can't stand it talk with your party and DM outside of the game.
And new magic doesn't sound inherently chaotic. A wizard learns spells by reading books. You could be a tomb raider or treasure hunter. You could do experiments that are ethical and write down the research. Chaotic is a character choice not something you were forced into.
Yeeeaaah that's when you have to chat to your DM about it. Something along the lines of "hey, I made this character to differ somewhat from the rest of the party, and it feels like I'm getting pushed into a box for the sake of everyone else. Could I not get to stretch my thieving legs every so often without having the whole world come down on me?".
The problem is that those players often won't call their alignment evil; they'll call it "chaotic neutral" and convince themselves that any evil dish-ish behavior they want to engage in somehow falls under that.
If you have a party member that is any of the evil options you should expect dick behavior from that character
Gotta disagree with you there. Being evil does not equal being a dick. It just means you're character is self serving. An evil character can still have a family and care for his friends/teammates. But he puts them before others. If given the choice to save a village or save a teammate, he'd choose the one that best benefits him, which is likely the teammate.
I've played plenty of evil characters that aren't dicks, in the sense that they are "evil". Like sure he wants power and sees his teammates as pawns, but they are useful pawns, and he's grown to like them.
But I'm the other hand my character will not tolerate a chaotic evil party member. I'm not above exiling and/or killing a character who is an active hinderence to the rest of the party, player or not. I have in the past warned fellow players that if their character doesn't stop getting in the way of every single activity we do it'd end in a fight to the death which my assassin will not lose.
I would like to point out though, there is a distinct difference from being a dickhead, and being immoral. I suppose an evil character could be both, but ime being a douschnozzle puts people off from wanting to play, whereas making questionable decisions makes more sense. Just a thought though.
Even outright evil characters usually need a reason to be assholes. I played a lawful evil PC that (mostly) worked well with the rest of the good aligned party. Yeah, he killed a good few people, but never without a good motivation (usually political schemes or money).
He wasnt just randomly a dick to everyone just because he was evil.
I've been playing for a relatively short time, about 5 years. I hear people say this irl fairly frequently, whether they play D&D or not. Not necessarily for big illegal things, but taking half of the office pastries in the morning or parking over multiple spots because they feel like it were both justified this way.
People don't need to justify their behaviour in a campaign
But we're talking about a game which produces two meanings for "their". It's the reason irl, IC, OOC and other acronyms exist. There's inherent ambiguity in who is being referred to at any given point in time without proper nouns.
Add on to that, alignment system being used as carte blanche justification is an issue in game, but not in real life.
There is no reason to assume the OP was talking about irl, and every reason they were talking in game. Hence the ensuing confusion.
What's with the down voting? I literally had to carve my freshman roommate in college out of my life after he stole my food and medicine claiming that he's chaotic evil. He took my PS3 home with him for winter break while I was taking a final and told me I should expect this cause he's a chaotic evil rouge. He then brought it back with my save data wiped because "I complained about him borrowing it". I was very happy when he dropped out. anyone that uses an alignment to justify real world behavior is an asshole.
Edit: to clarify I had never played D&D with him, and I wasn’t aware of him playing either at the time.
Holy shit. Do people actually do this? I think everyone is misunderstanding OP because the complaint is always in game people using alignment to justify shitty decisions. But I wouldn't have even imagined that people would use it in the real world.
I really don't know how people misread your title or post, I thought it was clearly just about morons using it irl. That's why you compared it to the real life practice of horoscopes
Because most people don't do what the OP says so most people famailir with the game are going to assume they meant in game.
And you can compare an in game thing to IRL behavior.
Because people using their alignment in game to be an asshole is the same as people irl using their horoscope to be assholes IRL.
So most people are going to with what they know and most people know alignment applies to character in the fantasy game.
Hell I've seen people apply alinment IRL and but it's usual to the aftermath of a situation like describing an act as chaotic good later on but I've never heard some one describe themselves qnd using a fantasy game mechanic to describe themselves like people do with horoscopes.
So this meme being about IRL stuff heavily sounds like a more personal experience for the OP rather then something most people can remotely relate to.
I have a Neutral (affably) Evil sorcerer. He is just ridiculously selfish and transactional. He isn't out there commiting atrocities, but if he could say, shank someone in the mids of a civilization sacrificing ritual to attain godhood in their stead, he wouldn't think twice.
258
u/adroth90 Mar 25 '21
To be faaaiiiiir. The alignment system exists to provide a role play guideline. If you have a party member that is any of the evil options you should expect dick behavior from that character. If you dont want that, then that should have been discussed in session zero.