Never heard of that, in what book is that rule?

Also curious on the source.

@@JessicaMorgani what do you mean you've never heard of that? It's in the first 3.5 dungeon masters guide. A shit ton of stuff could make you lose levels in 3.5.

@@TheAudacityOfHopefulHearts the 3.5 dungeon masters guide.

I play Chaotic Lawful I follow the laws and make my own laws that I follow that go against the law of the land. Things I agree with Slavery, Experiment on people, organs harvest, zombies soldiers, poison people, assassins, investments, taxes, legalize magic, allow technology advancement. The bloated 1: send the infected legion in first to weaken the defenses. Use poison gas canister shot: Poison gas cloud weaken the trench lines. The infected turn into undead The undead march into the trench Send in the prisoners we captured meat shield for the main force Send in the abomination Wear wolf Mech suits Partner: Curses me to be a wear wolf Me: Military Exosuit inventer Friend: Plague and poisons me Brother: Experiment on my DNA Me: Bloated one, abomination, mech suit Me: zombie plant mushroom, Half wear wolf, half dragon, half mech That's my party me: The experiment before campaign Some kingdoms don't agree with all my views and policies.

**Profit intensifies**

I mean profit is just short term for things that I like or help me. And I'm fairly certain we are all for those things whether it be income, land, knighthood, or a demon army to conquer the dumb leafeater lands

@@JEL625 every morning I wake up and curse the stars that I haven't received my demon army yet... Soon though

I love being evil

Apparently LTN made these alignments

Well, lawful evil characters are the easiest ones to blend into party without betraying party ot antagonizing it, cause LE characters actually care for many things that can be considered good: keeping their word, caring for those who you consider friends/loyal servants. Tho when things come out of party staff, it can be sometimes hard.

I would say they are more loyal to a good party than an evil one. Less backstabbing and they can hide behind the heroes good deeds and reputation. Helping them take down baddies in order to eliminate their competition and keep people from looking into their dirty laundry because they are hailed as a hero for it. They also view money as a means to gain power for themselves so they might stick around just for the gold and loot. This works best for an affably evil character who likes to play the long game.

Lawful Evil characters tend to be the easiest to work with for Good characters since while they may be evil they have a set of understandable ethics or motivations.

​@@zeehero7280so do the other evil alignments if you play them properly. The idea that CE, for example, means no moral values or standards of behaviour whatsoever is simplistic and incorrect imo

I’m in a party with two Chaotic Evil characters (new players) as well as others, and though we and the DM let them have their fun often times, the Chaotic Good tenet of “doing whatever is necessary to do what’s right” makes it easier for me to bring them back into the party because Lawful Good character are still bound by whatever “laws” they follow.

I would more say he is true neutral

He's probly chaotic netral. The order he picked is intentionally annoying, but dosn't harm anyone.

Chaotic evil would be making all the allignments wrong

🦀

Lmfao

im hungry neutral it kinda explains how i gained 10 pounds and some how found a way to make it look like im in shape

Lets be honest everybody thinks that CE are the purest of evil but lets be real here, the purest form of evil is LE, why do you think capatilism exists

True neutral is a meme.

@@TheIZproductions Well, for me it's I aspire to be good, but am not moral enough to call myself that in good faith. ... How is true netral more of a meme than any other allingment?

@@robertono2331 that’s probably cause the 10 pounds you gained you probably turned it into muscle, There are a lot of big guys that would be pushing into high triple digits that are Jacked but weigh as much as fat Albert. I believe you are good dude

Having a team lead by a Lawful Good paladin-type containing both a Lawful Evil and a Chaotic Good character to act as the angel and demon on their shoulders from the trope (except it's more like 2 demons, really) makes for amazing team roleplaying if the players have enough chemistry.

Props to anyone who can RP Lawful evil characters properly. It seems kinda difficult & you really need to know what you're doing. Imo it's the hardest alignment to RP properly.

@@5-Volt somehow it comes very easy for myself, most successful character so far being a LE Fiendlock strolling party in the direction character wanted

Yes, I agree. Lawful evil is actually a very fun alignment. Honestly, it's a lil' neutral when roleplayed right. Selfish, hurts people for gain. Honestly I think car dealers are lawful evil bards, roleplayed right.

"The Neutral Evil character will kill a merchant and take his money. The Chaotic Evil character will kill the merchant and burn his money." What you're describing here is shortsighted idiots, not evil characters. Neither of these alignments would do this if they are any level of competent. That's the problem with how people play evil characters, they hear evil and think that means they must always do the worst thing possible while twirling a moustache. The idea of shaking someone down for protection money like that also doesn't really gel with lawful either. A lawful evil character should be about using rules and laws to their benefit what you're describing is evil, but you're not using rules and laws to achieve it. Frankly I'd say it slots better into neutral evil, don't care about the rules and it makes getting the merchants money easier and less messy long term. Even a chaotic evil character isn't just going to murder someone at the drop of a hat if only because they know it can cause problems for THEM.

Goku’s alignment

Chaotic can also be an active and deliberate rejection of established codes or social norms - not necessarily a "don't think things through" kind of personality. For example, an anarchist that actively fights against an unjust political system, or a progressive activist who opposes religious tradition could be a chaotic type personality.

I'll add to the previous comment that chaotic can also be someone who doesn't allow the rules to stop them, especially if they think those rules are counter-productive. (It can also be someone who is trying to have "fun", by their own definition, and is especially amusing on immortal/long-lived characters who need a bit of chaos thrown into everything they do, just to keep it interesting.) That all said, I think of the alignments as what it is that restricts you or governs your choices. So a person who is a good alignment is going to try to do good when the choice presents itself, and this is more important to them than other motivations. Likewise, someone of an evil alignment is going to put themselves or their group/guild/cause/whatever above others and sees no problem with it being at others' expense. Though to actually be evil, the "at other's expense" needs to be a bit more of the focus. Neutral, however, is perhaps the most pure version of doing things for the self or cause. Going back to the idea of alignment being what restricts or governs you, a Lawful/True/Chaotic Neutral person isn't concerned with whether an action is good or evil, but they would also not see a point in going out of their way to do good or evil either. So while they might not be too bothered if someone would be hurt by their actions, they're also not going to hurt people if there's no reason to. A better way of seeing it might be pragmatism, in the case of Lawful Neutral. Chaotic Neutral is more often the spontaneous kind of chaos you mentioned, but where it's chaos for the sake of chaos, while still not crossing the line too much to either side of good or evil. (For the record, this all mattered more back in earlier D&D days when certain actions you took could cause an alignment shift if you dipped too far into another alignment compared to your stated one.) True Neutral is I think the most misunderstood alignment, and the only one I disagreed on his assessment of. It's not people who are indecisive. It's people who don't care if something is good or evil, or lawful or chaotic. Their only concern is what they want. Again, neutral being the most pure form of doing things for the self, this is the pinnacle of that. They will follow the rules when it suits them, or break them when it doesn't. Likewise, they may do a lot of good to help people when it serves them, and then betray or step on people if that serves them better. But at no point is the morality (good or evil) of the actions what directs them. While I usually play Chaotic Good characters myself, I've played all the alignments at some point, and one of the most entertaining was a True Neutral one, who actually ended up the party leader partly because he was good at what he did, and partly because everyone ended up in his debt somehow. He was actually very candid about the fact that he kept everyone around solely because they were useful to him, and most were okay with that, since he wasn't trying to sugarcoat it. Deciding to help or betray people who came to us was totally dependent on if he felt it would benefit him, now or in the future. He sometimes could be simply offered a bigger sum of money to choose one or the other, but more often he preferred to have people owing him a favor, or a bigger reward in the future. He was far from indecisive though, and once you played with the character for a short time, you could generally tell what he would do. Since it was always what would result in the best benefit/outcome for him, he was pretty consistent. He saw no point in people who were restrained by moral obligations, or who went out of their way to hurt others. Both seemed like a waste of time to him. (All of that said, he did notice a trend, that doing "good" tended to get more people owing you favors/rewards, and doing "evil" tended to pay better in raw gold, so sometimes it just depended on what he was short on at that moment.) All you really had to do was make sure whatever "bad" things you did were kept under wraps, and the "good" was talked about, to keep up a positive reputation and get you more jobs/rewards. It was amazing how many NPCs in the campaign actually though he was a good guy. He was actually not good or bad, just sassy, practical, and ultimately self-serving. It just so happened that (acting) good served him better most of the time.

Harming innocents is the definition of DnD Evil

Funnily enough I started with a CN character in my first ever campaign... and ended up as the most responsible character of the bunch and the de facto leader, despite despising both authority and exerting it. Tbf, my CN character was a bit more of a "live and let live, idgaf" and "no step on snek" kinda guy than anything that ended up being an adventurer out of spite for conventional work, so I guess it makes sense I ended up the less murder-hoboey of a bunch of newbies.

I personally really enjoy CN when played properly, you don't go out of your way to harm or help others, yet you're willing to do so if they get in the way of your plans.

@@sunjian9818 I play CN mostly, and its just "If you pay me, I will literally do whatever you ask. But you better damn well pay or imma set your life on fire"

@@vert3432 I would classify that as neutral evil, as "literally anything" includes the closest things to objectively morally evil acts such as murdering children

i also love lawful neutral. it can also hold the character type of someone driven by a very rigid personal code - maybe others don't even understand it. if you become powerful enough you may be regarded as a force of nature that can only be evaded by playing by the rules

Revolution cannot occur without dismantling the status quo! - Chaotic Good character before slaughtering a small town's worth of guards

I think chaotic neutral gets a massive bad wrap because of newbies, but chaotic neutral veterans actually tend to be very chill. And this kinda actually goes for all alignments on periods where they got a bad wrap. CN is just the most prominent nowadays. For the record. Chaotic Neutral rookie: What you said. Chaotic Neutral Veteran: you played 3.5 with a GM that stuck to the ruled as written and have PTSD about the alignment rules. Now for those that don't know. In 3.5 there was rules for alignment change, and every time you switched alignment you loss a level. You're playing evil but do one too many good deeds? loose a level you girl scout. You're playing lawful but break the evil tyrant's obviously evil laws one too many times? You should've lobbied for reform you chaotic revolutionary, loose a level. Etc. And the kind of GMs that actually cared about this are the kind of GMs that would say "true neutral is for animals/constructs." But guess what. Chaotic Evil? All you had to do to keep that alignment is steal something every once in a while and not stop crimes unless you're payed. Piece of cake!

@@thosebloodybadgers8499 Ehh,thats evil thing to do already because there more peaceful ways of dealing with that

@@skell6134 the status quo will never relinquish its power peacefully, komrade

@@thosebloodybadgers8499 Never gonna know until you try You can always do the slaughter later if this plan fails

Neutral evil is about caring about party,but as long as you have some profit from them,you wouldnt throw away your party on first opportunity,but might consider idea of leaving them on too dangerous situation . ,.

A really fun Neutral Evil (or, to be fair, more a True Neutral leaning evil) character is to actually have empathy and love. Have people you care about. But... why care about anybody besides that? You like your party, but everybody else? Nah. What does it matter if a few children are being tortured to death in that evil castle over there? Actually, the idiots in your party might rush into it and get themselves killed. Best to just cover it up. What they don't know won't hurt them. And let's try not to get caught doing it. We'd hate everybody calling us evil or something when we're just looking out for them. Etc, etc. Obviously, this is going to be a bit of a pain for the DM. You'll have to wrangle the character concept into having *some* motivation for adventure. Money, status, power, anything will work. But while playing, you get to live out how an amoral psychopath would while desperately trying to hide the fact that you're an amoral psychopath

@@StarryxNight5 I find concept of hiding fact that your character is psycho pretty nice tho,it makes some good stuff for roleplay and i just love Neutral evil alingment in general Also yeah,as neutral evil i can just have some nice chat with party and then few hours later cut off fingers of random bandit because he did dare to do spying on my party XD

That's a good way of thinking of it. Neutral alignment is sort of like, an understanding that you can trust an order of paladins with your life as long as you are just and honorable to them, but it might be best to backstab a devil so hard they will never be a problem again before they do the same to you

I mean chaotic good is pretty flexible. Being good means you'll try to help people if you can, it doesn't mean you're an idiot. That's the problem most people playing to alignment forget, your character is probably not an idiot.

@@shadenox8164 Grom hit thing with big stick well. But know not to rush to fight when he alone. Grom most big brain of tribe.

I tend to see Neutral as: "Everything, including those with good intentions have the potential to be harmful when taken to excess. Selfishness, chaos, order and benevolence all have potential to cause harm. What's most important is levelling power disparities so that no group gets so powerful that it's given free reign to run rampant."

Yes

yes

yEs

Lord Tzeentch, well met.

Good Evil: You generally don't want to cause any harm, but money is money and you gotta come out on top. Evil Good: Screw morals, I'm killing that thief and taking their stuff.

Literally me. My favorite alignments are CN and LE for exactly this reason plus my love of classic villains.

Some day we'll get to play an actual character again instead of DMing. Don't give up hope, man.

Chaotic Evil Tiefling Bloodrager who just loves to kill and prefers to kill those who put up an actual challenge, joins up with the heroes because at least this way he can kill anyone as long as they try to attack the party, plus plenty of challenge.

@@roxythelipstickpixie72 Probably this character wouldnt be a good team player,lol Cleric gonna have a hard time managing party's hp like that XD

My favorite CE character is one that the party doesn't realize they're CE because even though they have no morals and will do absolutely anything to get what they want, they just so happen to want very innocent things. Recently played a character like this whose only desire was to collect hats and rats.

@@DefinitelyNotOmegon Classic Hat and Rat Collector, of course. Love the good old I'm chaotic evil truly, but I got everything I want so I'm so I'm set.

I haven't played D&D but to make the Chaotic Evil alignment work you need intelligence. For example using magic to mess with people's minds, secretly mutate people into monsters due to mad science, and plotting to become the BBEG in order to bring about a Chaotic world full of nightmares is how it could be played.

Lawful neutral and chaotic neutral are about as common as TN. No shortage of people in the other brackets as well. My guess would be around 70% in those 3 alignments. The rest fairly evenly distributed between the various good end evil alignments.

A newbie playing CG can be one of the worst alignments. A veteran playing CG can be one of the best. Same with LE and LN. CN is either awful or a 3.5 veteran with PTSD. CE and True Neutral is almost always terrible. NG is almost always boring as hell. And LG is only slightly less boring than NG unless played by a veteran.

@@thespanishinquisition4078 What about NE ?

@@skell6134 Same as CN, except instead of PTSD they're the reason the CN guys got PTSD to begin with.

@@thespanishinquisition4078 Can you explain what NE possibly have done in 3.5 edition that people got ptsd ? . -.

@@skell6134 Oh no it's not what NE did. It's rule sticklers. NE right now (with exceptions these are all just stereotypes) is played by two kinds of people, the ones that want to play as absolute assholes, and the ones that back in 3.5 were massively into the rules and would apply them to alignment, and still refuse to do so. Because back in 3.5 you HAD to be NE to be certain races or even things like a lich. So how does this relate to PTSD? Well. 3.5 had rules for alignment change. Basically, if you roleplayed something other than your stated alignment, it would change. This change came with a penalty, however, you lost a level. No I'm not kidding you lost an entire damn level, which at high levels means a lot of xp, for that. Playing an evil character and do one too many things? Loose a level. Playing a good character and backstab someone? Loose a levek. Playing a lawful character and break the obviously evil laws of the tyranical overlord of doom? Loose a god damned level... But hey, guess what? Good had rules, law had rules, evil for some reason had rules... Chaos didn't. And back in the day True Neutral wasn't an alignment, it was what constructs and animals had, not something for sapient beings... So the only alignment you could choose if you wanted to avoid having damocles' sword over your head was CN. Hence, the kind of people who are still following the alginemnt rules and choosing NE for that reason are the very reason the veterans still picking CN purely out of not wanting to deal with that stuff do so.

Lawful Evil: "Stealing is wrong...taxes and property redistribution is perfectly valid."

I thought chaotic neutral is stealing from everyone and keeps it for yourself then chaotic evil is stealing from everyone for the hell of it

Yeah, I think murder hobos would probably fall under chaotic evil.

On quiz i got Neutral evil leaning to True Neutral,and so thats the two alingments i would play most probably

Bro got “soul read” by an alignment table. I’m done with y’all 😂 STOP! But have your fun.

Most people in real life are Lawful Good just because they don't want to go to jail.

​@@dangerousdays2052Isn't that closer to lawful neutral?

…okay uh, I’ve gotten to the lawful good part of the video and uh… don’t judge me! My essay length KZfaq comments could be MUCH worse.

Sorry I'm late to this comment, but I have a lot of experience in the game and picked up a lot of common traits and stereotypes from players and NPCs. Also do a lot of research into the community, with all this knowledge going into making this series sound uncannily predictive lol

This dude just pulled over a its just like me fr fr

You see, that's the misconception people have about LN and LG. LN is respecting rules because they exist, LG is respecting rules because they help people or keep bad people in line. The way I like to think of it is that the second letter is what you do, and the first letter is what you use to do it. A lawful good person wants to do good, and they want to use the law to do it. A chaotic evil person wants to do evil and will use chaos to do it. Neutral is "Whatever *shrugs*". NG is a person who will do "whatever *shrugs*" to do good, and LN is a person who uses law to do "whatever *shrugs*".

I like that idea of lawful neutral. Im playing baldurs gate 3 and this is how I play my drow rogue. I try to adapt to a situation, not following a code or doing things just because. Im not evil, but im not a charity either. I like to do good or evil when its necessary, when it isn't difficult or benefits me and the party as long as its not an extreme.

Campaigns banning evil alignments in the first place is why players are forced to play CN

@@MurakamiTenshi I mean I don't think it's unfair to want players to do the right thing in your game focused on doing the right thing and stopping some big bad guy doing the distinctly wrong thing. Like that description applies to a LOT of campaigns and bypassing that by playing the closest thing to evil without *technically* being evil gets annoying real quick.

@@MurakamiTenshi I think that an indication of a mismatch between the player and the campaign.

Evil alignments being banned and loner edge lords aren't chaotic neutral's fault, it's the fault of the players not playing the alignment they chose. The fun way to play chaotic neutral is by playing a wildcard, a character who's only with the party because there's a shared interest in the moment. It becomes a fun challenge for the DM to make a good story that'll keep the wildcard's interests aligned with the party while also creating tension for the players that one of their party members might turn on them at any moment. It's certainly not for everyone and if you want to play a pure good power fantasy it's certainly far from ideal but otherwise it's a really fun dynamic to have in a party

@@ICantThinkOfAFunnyHandle The problem with the wild card is that the player is responsible for deciding why their character would stay with the group, not the DM. If the character wouldn't stay with the group, the payer needs to think up a different character. I've never seen anyone play Chaotic neutral in a way that was anything other than a way for the player to make the game less fun for the DM and other players.

You're a Lawful good

a bit edgy there arnt we

@@satan1149 nah it was just a joke about what he was saying in the start, I'd realistically place myself as lawful neutral probably

Don't be saying that, this dumb crap is wy I love this channel.

@@Greenknight3 it's also why I love this channel, and is the reason I liked this video