h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

According to the D&D 3rd Edition Player's Handbook:
Lawful Good- Crusader- tells the truth, keeps his/her word, hates to see bad go unpunished
Neutral Good- Benefactor- does things for the common good, helpful
Chaotic Good- Rebel (not outlaw, more like the Rebel Alliance in Star Wars)- makes his/her own way but is kind and benevolent, hates bullyish people
Lawful Neutral- Judge- disciplined, follows laws and traditions
True Neutral- Undecided (or the Balance stuff)- usually a lack of conviction, thinks of good as better than evil because they would be preferable neighbors
Chaotic Neutral- Free Spirit- individualist, sometimes careless
Lawful Evil- Dominator- merciless, organized, planned killing
Neutral Evil- Malefactor- cruel, kills for fun
Chaotic Evil- Destroyer (or outlaw, depending on whether or not they're in power)-hot-tempered, vicious


Hope that can help

someone else said some of that already, whoops...

Do Lawful Good people have to be crusader types (i.e. travelling all around righting wrongs) or do the loyal hardworking members of their community that I was thinking of count as well? I got this idea from the Baldur's Gate II manual, which gave an honest and hardworking serf and a kindly and wise king as examples of lawful good people.

I was also thinking that if you're lawful, that means you're very loyal to your society and probably wouldn't want to leave it, You'd leave it to defend it, but not otherwise. I suppose lawful good PCs are that subset of lawful good people who serve their community best by going on adventures, and all those who are just getting on with their lives are NPCs.

Orson Scott Card said something vaguely relevant in the introduction to "Speaker to the Dead". He said that most fantasy and science fiction deals with footloose "adolescent" heroes who wander from place to place, doing good but then moving on (that would be Chaotic Good?), but he wanted to write about "adult" heroes who are rooted in a community and feel some responsibility to it (that would be Lawful Good?)

Shadows of Amn= good
Speaker for the Dead= good

I should have noticed... sort of like the outlaw/destoyer thing, Crusader is what you would call a warrior or fighter type. Loyal hardworking members of the community are definitely lawful good... I'm not sure what they would be called, though.

The alignment system was probably the best idea that whoever designed the 1st D&D had. But I have a feeling there should be one more axis in there...

Imagine a character in these situations:

The character is alone in a cell with reasonable size meals and an ok bed but with no way to get out. After maybe a month, the are given a choice, either to be set free or to spare another's life. (Good vs. Evil)

The character is put in the middle of a maze. Simply observe their behavior. If they run around searching for a way out, they're probably chaotic. If they (possibly after a bit of running) start walking with a hand on one of the walls or something like that, then they're proably lawful.

That second one isn't too great an example, but law vs. chaos doesn't come up as often as good vs. evil.

Hey, that maze thing makes me lawful, and I don't think I am. I thought lawful vs chaotic was all about how you feel about social structure, rather than whether you approach problems in an orderly way. The maze thing seems to work better for evil alignments... the kind of person who would run around randomly probably wouldn't be able/willing to plan enough to be a successful lawful evil dominator, and chaotic neutral/evil types are rather impulse-driven. I can easily imagine a chaotic good character thinking about it and concluding that it was best to approach it systematically, though.

The cell thing makes a lot more sense to me, though I have to ask whether it has an Internet link or at least an infinite supply of books? If so, I'm good for sure, but if not, then perhaps I'd turn evil. Also, don't you think that test is harder on extroverts than on loners like me who would be happy living in a cell with an internet link indefinitely?

BTW, I _will_ incorporate some of your suggestions into the article - I'm just too busy at work to be able to spend much time on h2g2 right now.
Ekaterin.

Yes, maze thing bad... Maybe you could put them in the middle of a forest with other people ethically like them and see if they (eventually) try to set up a community...

1st- read the other forum
2nd- Wonko, you took my some of my points from the other forum
and 3rd- The maze thing is really more of a test of intelligience- if you're smart you'll follow a wall, if you're dumb you might not.

Law and chaos: put someone in a tournament of some sort, where if they finish a quest in time, they get a reward. This also depends upon if they beat the other contestants They get more XP, or power, or whatever is being given, depending on how fast they finished. The reward may or may not be redeemable for gold.(doesn't matter) Anyway, you tell them that they can't go out of there way (maybe there is a straight path to the finish line or something). However, there is a reasonably short side path that gets them a moderate amount of money. see if they go down the path on their way to the finiish.

I think this is a reasonably ok test for law or chaos.

Just, simply, chaotic people might break rules to do something that matches their alignment, and lawful people would find a way to do that using the rules or by the rules.

Rules... should have thought of something like that... cheating is a chaotic act...

No, I was more thinking that going out of your way for a lot extra money was chaotic. Cheating is evil and chaotic and dishonest. More chaotic than evil.

Things finally calmed down at work enough for me to update the article I have a few more questions, though:

If both neutral evils and chaotic evils kill for fun, what's the difference between them? My concept of a neutral evil was someone who'd turned to crime because they didn't have any moral sense and it was easier than making an honest living. So they'd have no compunction about killing someone for money, but they wouldn't be addicted to killing the way chaotic evils are.

(What if you don't care about anyone else, but nonetheless decide that the best way to maximise your own welfare is to make an honest living? Perhaps you apply some form of super-rational logic (see A509690 for a definition) or perhaps you just live somewhere where most criminals get caught. Are you still neutral evil because of your lack of empathy, or have you turned good because you're not harming anyone?)

Neutral good and chaotic good are also hard to distinguish, IMHO. I used to think I must be chaotic good because I hated the gossipy and intrusive society of school and wished people would leave me alone and not tease me because I preferred to spend my free time with books and computers rather than socialising. However, my friend told me that I was neutral good and "you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone" was a neutral rather than chaotic philosophy of life. I think he's right - now that I'm grown up, I am happily living in a society that allows me the freedom and privacy I need. Is it possible to be chaotic with respect to one society (one that strongly conflicts with your own inclinations) but neutral or even lawful with respect to a society that fits with how you naturally are?

Finally, we have Robin Hood for chaotic good and Hitler for lawful evil, but are there canonical examples for the other alignments? (Fictional characters are fine - I'd be surprised if active/balanced true neutrals exist in the real world.)
Ekaterin.

Hm... Genghis Khan might be CE... with looting and plundering.
That's kinda hard...

I, at 1st thought, would hve picked CG for myself, but after thinking about it, I decided that I'm probably NG... chaotic is more like antisociety, so someone who would run away is CG...

Bad example of NE- Voldemort from HP-best I can think of...

Chaotic good people would be agains conformity and stuff.

Someone who is evil doesn't become neutral because they are isolated and have no way to be evil. Alignment is not the absolute best way of measuring a persons character

How about this... Alignment can be determined by what someone will go out of their way to do. A good person will go out of their way to help sombody, a evil person to harm or hurt somebody, and lawful person to perhaps make rules and a chaotic person to oppose rules or something. Chaotic is hard.

Lawful good combines being good with making rules and/or following rules, thus they make rules that help innocents or are just and fair.

Neutral is quite difficult for this way though. Perhaps neutral is if someone is neither primarily.


One dimensional alignment: simple: good vs. evil; complex: chaos versus law
2 dimensional alignment: simple:law, chaos, good or evil; complex: 9 tiles of each alignment
3 dimensional alignment: difficult, perhaps though if there were a third of even a fourth axis,, it would all work out better.
Suggestions:? maybe conformity vs. change; true to alignment or varying(ouch!); ambitous or content; any more?

No, chaotic is very easy... they will not go out of their way to do anything.

Suggestion: Instinctive vs. something.

I think chaos is more anti-rules or exercising freedom or simply trying to do what you want to do that matched your other axis and trying to find a way to do it whether or not there are rules related.

How about CE: orcs, we've seen 'em in LOTR...
Netreul(not balanced): if you simply rely on instincts like hunger, fright, this very rarely if ever applies to humans that are not babies.

chaos is not not going out of your way, its randomness and unpredictableness and unexpectedness.

Oh, I see you updated your page! Thanks for putting me on there!

I'm sure more ideas will cross my head... none at the moment

More info: (gotten from the D&D Hero-builders handbook)

The good-evil axis is the "moral" axis and the law-chaos axis is the "ethical" axis.

There's a 36 question quiz that helps you determine your characters alignment, you just answer the questions as they would. Some of the law-chaos questions:

Do you respect the leaders in your family? Choices from "Their words guide my actions"(L) to "They're out of touch with reality"(C)

How would you view a lifelong commitment to a single romantic partner? Answers from "I'm waiting to find such a romance"(L) to "Tie yourself to one person? Huge mistake."(C)

Do you insist on repayment when lending money to friends? Answers from "Yes, and I write up a contract so there is no misunderstanding"(L) to "No, they just owe me a favor"(N)

Are you still in touch with childhood friends? Answers from "Yes, we correspond regularly"(N) to "No, and I don't have anything in common with them anymore.

Another about respect, this time of the community...

Do members of your community shun, avoid, or mock you? Yes, they don't understand me is (C), some is (C) No, I'm usually normal is (N) and I set the standard for normal is (N)

If you would stand for office or seek to represent the interests of the community publicly, thats lawful. Otherwise, Neutral.

Respect of country authority...

If you wwere offered a resonable amount of reward, would you spy for another hostile foreign country? YEs, my nation can be knocked down a peg is (C), yes, their secrets mean little to me is (C), No I might get caught is (N) and No I would never violate their trust is (N)

Do you rely on the government to enforce contracts and property rights? Yes is lawful, no is neutral

Confession to a crime (that you did do) is lawful, otherwise neutral.

Expressing revolutionary political opinions even when there is punishment for that is chaotic, otherwise neutral.

When you are traveling, you witness an assault. You are ordered to testify, even though it will delay your traveling significantly.
Slip out of town is chaotic. Deny you saw anything is chaotic. Remain reluctasntly, testify, and leave is Lawful andremain in case further testifying is needed is even more lawful.

Choosing a high paying job over a secure and steady one is chaotic, otherwise lawful

Opinion of best path to wealth:
Being lucky and in the right place at the right time is very chaotic
Staying flexible to take advantage of oppotunities is chaotic.
following a long term plan with little risk is lawful
hard work and perseverance is lawful.

If you accepted a job or contract, when the task ba=ecame suddenly more dangerous would you continue? Yes is neutral, no is chaotic

BTW, there is a +1 and a +2 for each thing on each uestion, the more extreme being the +2 of course. You add up your scores in each area and the one that is highest is what your character probably is. The other half of the test is mostly good-evil questions.


Thats all the ethical questions.