D&D alignment thread

TerribleIdeas™ said:
You had a garbage DM.

OT - Is "Baltimore Coon" an option? I feel like rioting.
Click to expand...
Garbage DMs are seriously such fucking buzzkills. Drowning a newbie player in jargon is stupid. If you say "I cast X at the Y" and the DM does something more than notify you it's impossible or roll the fucking dice he's just being a shithead and it's fine to leave the table. Railroady DMs with a hateboner for paladins are also shitheels. "Tee hee I'm going to MAKE you fall because you made the mistake of choosing a class I hate." They're usually fedorajockeys too. It's one thing if the campaign is leading to a dark road for the player, but the choice needs to be there.

Thankfully, for every garbage DM there's at least one good That Guy strategy to make him flip the table.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Autistic
Reactions: The Shadow, BoingoTango and (deleted member)
Lawful Good

Fighting back the faggotry, autism, and all forms of degeneracy, one swing of my censer at a time.

e1afcc49c8371fbc46239221f1c79290.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: The biggest iron, Absolute Brainlet, muh_moobs and 2 others
Sprig of Parsley said:
Garbage DMs are seriously such fucking buzzkills. Drowning a newbie player in jargon is stupid. If you say "I cast X at the Y" and the DM does something more than notify you it's impossible or roll the fucking dice he's just being a shithead and it's fine to leave the table. Railroady DMs with a hateboner for paladins are also shitheels. "Tee hee I'm going to MAKE you fall because you made the mistake of choosing a class I hate." They're usually fedorajockeys too. It's one thing if the campaign is leading to a dark road for the player, but the choice needs to be there.

Thankfully, for every garbage DM there's at least one good That Guy strategy to make him flip the table.
Click to expand...

I had a DM that used dragons like weapons on a Monty Haul munchkin faggot that rolled up a Drizz't ripoff; reds tail-slapping gold across the lair to force saves, blacks breathing their acid into the swamp water to cause armour damage, blues the whole of their entry tunnel our of conductive metal and discharging into the metal to fry assholes walking in the tunnel, and more. It was fucking fantastic.

In another game he played in with me, he played the most obnoxious paladin, calling out dukes and knights and everyone else, to intentionally fuck off the DM, who'd decided to be a complete cunt of a rules lawyer. 2 of us knew the guy really well, so we were trying not to piss ourselves as he kept making rolls for "local knowledge: nobility" and "local knowledge: law", just to justify calling out nobles for duels, then forcing them to either accept defeat at first blood, or buying their way out with a donation to his church.
 
  • Winner
  • Autistic
Reactions: Crabbo, BoingoTango and Sprig of Parsley
Hortator said:
@The Ghost of ODB weren’t we just talking about this in chat?

Anyway I have given DND a fair shake, and I have concluded it has too many rules for me

Me: “I uh cast magic missile at the ogre.”

Dungeon master: “But did you assign points into cantrips to enable access to this school of magic and did you consider first how the passage of quickened objects or entities without the persistent agency of hyperagonal media is not possible, and even if possible, would result in instantaneous retromission of the....”

Me: *takes 5 slices of pizza and leaves*
Click to expand...
Just play 5e. Also your DM sounds like a fuckhead if that's anywhere near accurate
 
  • Agree
Reactions: TerribleIdeas™ and Sprig of Parsley
Hortator said:
@The Ghost of ODB weren’t we just talking about this in chat?

Anyway I have given DND a fair shake, and I have concluded it has too many rules for me

Me: “I uh cast magic missile at the ogre.”

Dungeon master: “But did you assign points into cantrips to enable access to this school of magic and did you consider first how the passage of quickened objects or entities without the persistent agency of hyperagonal media is not possible, and even if possible, would result in instantaneous retromission of the....”

Me: *takes 5 slices of pizza and leaves*
Click to expand...
We did! And I was pleased to discover that I have not shifted to Lawful Neutral as I had feared; I am still Lawful Gudboye.

Edit: And I don't play D&D either. I've tried a few times but I'm too self-conscious. But if there are girls there I want to do them.
 
  • Winner
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: muh_moobs, TerribleIdeas™ and (deleted member)
I think it's fine if people use alignments to loosely define their character's morals supplemented by traits, flaws, and bonds. I think most people lean too heavy on alignment and let it completely rule their character. I personally find that sort of mentality a little unrealistic. Of course I've always been of the opinion that morals aren't so cut and dry so...
 
  • Feels
Reactions: TerribleIdeas™
DDBCAE CBAADCBE said:
I think it's fine if people use alignments to loosely define their character's morals supplemented by traits, flaws, and bonds. I think most people lean too heavy on alignment and let it completely rule their character. I personally find that sort of mentality a little unrealistic. Of course I've always been of the opinion that morals aren't so cut and dry so...
Click to expand...
The alignments can be useful insofar as they help players like paladins who get their power from gods know where they can step to keep in the good graces of their gods. Rather than being a function that you plug a situation into and it tells you how to respond, it become an element you have to roleplay around and with. In this case the alignment is more of a religion instead of an ingrained personality trait, which can be interesting if, for example, a lawful good paladin worshiping a god of law sees a lord do something morally wrong but legal, like collecting taxes at the limit of what his subjects can pay to the point where they live in poverty. The paladin knows that if he steps in it could disrupt the peace, but at the same time he has witnessed an injustice to the populous and he can't let that stand unanswered and the longer he lets it go on the more these innocent people have to suffer. How does the paladin handle this? There are a ton of ways, and adding in an extra element of complication such as an alignment can make it more interesting. Going chaotic would save the lives of the peasantry in the here and now, but your god may punish you for that or require a penance, and the surrounding lords wouldn't trust you and may stonewall you when you are trying to do other good things down the line that requires their help. Going the lawful or neutral route would be slow, and later when your quest takes you back to the town, the folk are doing better but you learn about those who died while waiting for you to work it out with the lords/king lawfully.

But most GM's don't bother to go that deep.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: TerribleIdeas™ and DDBCAE CBAADCBE
REGENDarySumanai said:
Druids are always on the neutral spectrum and possibly the autism spectrum. Also, Judge Dredd is Lawful Neutral.
Click to expand...
Druids can also be neutrals because they find ethics and morals to be meaningless prattle cooked up as poor substitutes for knowing how to survive at all costs, and Nature cares nothing for how goodly or how orderly one is, only that one does what one needs to survive and propagate. Druids can be interesting to roleplay, depending on alignment, background, stuff like that. Are they purely utilitarian? Are they more principled in their neutrality? Are they bored with moral and ethical arguments? Do they feel morals are irrelevant, but Nature values order/disorder? Do they feel uncompelled by order and chaos as constructs of society, but sincerely wish for good outcomes for all? Are they nasty misanthropes who take survival of the fittest a bit too far?

So mildly autistic maybe.
 
Sprig of Parsley said:
Druids can also be neutrals because they find ethics and morals to be meaningless prattle cooked up as poor substitutes for knowing how to survive at all costs, and Nature cares nothing for how goodly or how orderly one is, only that one does what one needs to survive and propagate. Druids can be interesting to roleplay, depending on alignment, background, stuff like that. Are they purely utilitarian? Are they more principled in their neutrality? Are they bored with moral and ethical arguments? Do they feel morals are irrelevant, but Nature values order/disorder? Do they feel uncompelled by order and chaos as constructs of society, but sincerely wish for good outcomes for all? Are they nasty misanthropes who take survival of the fittest a bit too far?

So mildly autistic maybe.
Click to expand...
I roleplayed my TN druid as someone who just wanted his farming business to thrive again after aliens kept fucking up his deliveries, anything else was just for exploration and business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sprig of Parsley
Chaotic Good...or in other words leave me alone...

Most Chaotic Good characters don't constantly break the law, but they cannot see much value in laws, or do not see the value in laws that do not function solely to punish evil. They believe that their own consciences are their best guides, and that tying themselves to any given code of conduct would be limiting their own ability to do good. They do not get along with anyone who tries to instill any kind of order over the Chaotic Good character or others, believing these people to be restricting their freedom and the freedom of others; however, most Chaotic Good characters will respect the right of others to impose strong codes of conduct on themselves. Chaotic Good characters often focus very strongly on individual rights and freedoms, and will strongly resist any form of oppression of themselves or anyone else.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back