Mental triage, that is the PERFECT term. My neutral-good characters recognize what laws can bend, which rules can be skirted, in order to help the most.
This is the alignment I aspire to be. My first D&D character was between lawfull and netral good. ... He obays good laws, respects but is not beholden to netral laws, and does not tolerate evil laws.
A better example would've been Spiderman. It's literally his thing to swing around to keep his city safe and sometimes go against the law to help people. But whatever, Batman's good too.
Oh man, "The Punisher" is a classic alignment conundrum. While I've made a series of videos about alignment, I'll still admit that classifying him still eludes me. I'll say CN though. Chaotic, because he's methodical and driven but his whole persona is a vigilante, therefore outside the law. Neutral because he does evil things to evil people, these things clash together and cancel out. But that's my take, Punisher is tough to classify.
I created a character who is neutral good. He works under Dal Krakraac, a powerful lawful evil noble, but he turned the noble into his puppet due to his cleverness. He eventually became a powerful noble who did much good.
Neutral psychotic is that hidden 10th alignment that every player seems to find! LG and CG need to watch out for getting twisted more so than NG, yes. It's that NG flexibility that keeps that alignment more in the clear. I feel NG is the most good as well. The 3rd ed. book calls it "True Good" after all.
interesting you choose the term 'for the greater good' to define neutral good, I've always felt that hearing someone in a position of power uttering that phrase to be a 'kill it, kill it with fire' moment as they tend to be the messiah complex indicator and always seemed more of a lawful neutral or lawful evil expression
Tyrion Lannister is a much better example than batman. He will use lawful institutions if he thinks he can do some good through them, but is not afrain to go against it when it goes against what he thinks is right. He values trying to improve everything for the better in the most effiecient way possible, regardless of whether it is through a lawful society or something different al together. His personal circumstances means that he usually has to work through lawful means to achieve what is good, but his personal outlook is more balanced, and he is quite critical of many lawful organizations. Varys also fits into this alignment quite well. When he is confronting nobility, he has to act like he is loyal to the current order, when infact his personal motivations are to use any means necessary to achieve "What is good for the realm".
Batman is a rouge lawful good. He may not work directly for lawful organizations, but everything he does is about bringing criminals to "justice" through the laws of the societal organizations. The only reason he is rouge is because what he does is rather incompatible with the way the police operates, but if he wasn't a bat, he would definitely work for a police station. It's sort of like trying to apply an alignment to a 'god-like' figure, even if a god or goddess appears to be very good, that does not mean they have to work with the law to achieve good. Superman is also a rogue lawful good, almost the literal embodiment of lawful good. He supports and protects the current institutions of the day, but realizes that his powers could be put to far more use on his own terms than through the restrictions of a police department. His powers are greater than lawful institutions can accomodate for, and so superman goes at it alone, whilst still following the law as closely as possible.
I considered myself NG (can also called "Benefactor") becuz I do good thing becuz I want to, not becuz it is expected of me and I generally follow to the rules becuz it lead good things, not becuz I feel obligated.💖
I'm thinking a huge part of examining an alignment is now "What do they do with limited resources?" I haven't addressed that in the first two but luckily Dark Sun has a handy section on what each alignment might do when water is running out. I think that will inform future videos.
Yes, a NG character's honor is going to be a personal one rather than what society sets out. This lets NG characters live (and die!) in evil societies, doing good deeds until the evil monarch declares "Off with their head!" A LG character in a LE society is going to have all sorts of wires cross in their head, and it might explode!
I have always seen the neutral good character as one that is bound by honor, rather than law. They are free do do what is good and noble, even to the point of flaunting the law to do it. Rather than personal honor; they are bound more likely by societal codes of honor, rather than a personal one. Like, for instance, the samurai who commits seppuku rather than be defeated.
Well it all depends on the individual but LG probably has a set number, CG bases it off how they feel about the server, and NG would combine the two. Maybe start at 10% and adjust it for how good the srver was.
I think it's something a NG character will be faced with. "What do I do to create the most good for the most people?" They might have to aid a criminal gang (not good) so that peasants can get medicine (good).
It could be cool, as it would be one of those rare hauntings that's beneficial. So many are malicious in fiction, some are benign, but a beneficial ghost is rare. Well, it wouldn't be friendly to LE sorts but it would help those few good aligned types who meet it.
Thanks! I think that could be NG behavior if the manipulator in question shoulders some of the danger himself, and does not tell others to do things that he would not. He could be a benefactor to a group without them knowing, but if he's just sending them out into dangerous places so he can remain safe, that's not good. Dumbledore was willing to go into harm's way for the students, so he seems NG.
Hmm, maybe, but seems more Chaotic to me with the trickery. Still, NG doesn't care about Law or Chaos, they care about getting the good job done and keeping people safe. So a NG character could do that, yes, as long as the badness didn't occur.
Oh, the evil alignments use "For the Greater Good!" with masterful results. They use it even better than Neutral Good folks! The difference is that NG genuinely means it. LE says it, but then sets out conquering planets to bring everyone under the banner of the Tau empire.
Hey, nice series! Quick question, would you say that a good manipulative character, that being a character that steers other people in a game or in real life behind the scenes toward a certain good outcome such as a `greater good`, like manipulating a party into going into a cave to get a weapon to kill an evil creature would be considered Neutral Good? A club at my university was discussing what the alignment Harry Potter's Albus Dumbledore was, due to the character's manipulative aspect.
First i thought that this moral or alignment system was very clear and easy to comprehend and you can easily define a participial character .But we had an argument whit some friends of mine and i found that not to be true.The character that we were arguing about was the Punisher - or the one that we know from the movies whit Thomas Jane and Dolph Lungren - first i was quick to deem him chaotic good, but it seems that hes much to methodical and driven by some sort of personal code (law) to be ..
Batman is Neutral Psychotic. Going by your brief descriptions of CG & LG, both of those alignments could be twisted by evil rather easily. For me, NG is the most good of the alignments. Not bound by the rigidity of LG nor the capricious nature of CG. They strive to do what they can with what they have.
Yeah, Its funny, too, because I know so many people who try to write these sort of odd, not exactly friendly, but not quite evil ghosts and take flack for doing things halfway (like the ghost should be out to get someone, or something like that) The ghosts in Hogwarts pop into mind. Not really helpful, but mostly harmless.
At times, I've wondered what would happen if the spirit of an LG, or NG character was left lingering in an LE society. One would think they would try and encourage other NG characters to pick up where they left off; but since doing so would lead to their deaths as well, I think the spirit might continue to try to do good in other ways. Or go completely insane.
Thanks! I forgot to mention it because it's a term I stole from "Hell on Whells" but "Immoral Mathematics" is a phrase from that show to describe the same thing.
I would consider my thief neutral good. Sure he steals from people, he breaks the law, and is a criminal... But he steals to help those that can't help themselves... He is basically a Robin Hood type character
Hey, just had a small game where one character, a transmuter wizard, and another group were given tasks to do to prevent something bad from happening. The other characters decided they would try to do some of it and ditch the rest, leaving the wizard with the mess the other characters had to deal with as his part was done. And so some he tricked the rest of the characters into finishing their part so he wouldn't be landed with the whole work load. Would you see this as NG behaviour?
I had a strong disagreement over this with one of my players. Basically in my campaign the neutral good empire has 2 courts, religious and imperial. Imperial courts are a usual court with a judge and randomly selected jury with no divination permissible as evidence. The religious courts were set up in response with the jury being selected from the victim and his peers and the judge being a paladin or cleric or lesser devotee in smaller cases with divination permissible as evidence. He claimed that an NG society would never do such as thing as have kangaroo courts as it wasn't a fair trial. I said that they would to ensure that criminals that they know through their divinations are guilty aren't on the streets to cause more anguish. Who do you think was right?
Neutral good is simply good. Neutral good individuals do not act out of respect towards order, nor personal liberties. THey act to uphold what is good, whether by acting on laws or flaunting them. I personaly feel the Hobbits of the Shire could be considered neutral good, they work individualy on their fields but band together in each others defece. They do not work for each other, they work to better their lot in life, but when the need arises they are willing to risk a lot for one an other.
+Born Winter They are basically like Fascists. they believe in the natural order, justice and truth, a core set of principles to live by. Without strict rules governing behavior or methods AND they do everything to avoid degeneracy. The ends justifying the means, they refuse to work towards goals that are petty or false, because that is evil or unjust. Especially when they believe in a religion, that gives them the meaning and fervor needed to pursue those goals. The problem is that the Fascists (Neutral Good) don't hate Monarch's (Lawful Evil) like the book suggests they do, because those Monarch's provide absolute rule which Fascists condone temporarily in order to achieve a Organic Society, so its not a perfect fit but close enough.
Batman isn't neutral good because as you said "For the greater good" if batman was Neutral Good then joker would have been killed long ago, he would have also taken out Ra's Al Ghul and taken over the League of Assassins.
I don't know my alignment anymore, I thought I was neutral good now I'm told I'm lawful good. I love to help people but I still value myself. I'd buy a video game for myself but If I saw a kid wanted that game I'd buy it for him. what am I
.. chaotic.And his definitely not a goodie too shoe since he is wiling to hurt or even maim members of the authority and even innocents to reach his goal (tough he will never kill a innocent) so he is not evil . He has a sense of purpose to go against evil doers at the cost of self sacrifice . He seems to take pleasure in torching evil people so what aliment is he from.
So if Nuetral Good is a good mercenary, that would be like a good version of Boba Fett...Samus Aran? You yourself said super heroes. I see Spider man as a more consistently nuetral good character than batman. but where would you put the Avatar? He's answering to a higher authority (the spirits and past avatars) but he's not above starting the occasional uprising. Korra tried to hunt down the Equalist revolutionary terrorists, but also threatened Tarlok when he was abusing his authority. I would aspire to be Nuetral Good...but I keep getting lawful nuetral. C'mon, I don't think the law is the final good. But neither is freedom. Too many ghettos with crooks and thugs running things through fear and ignorance? That's not freedom. I use to aspire to be lawful good as an idealistic teenager, cuz it seemed perfect-even to the point of being self destructive. So I would be Social Moral-between lawful nuetral and nuetral good, leaning in one of 4 ways based on situation. Rarely true nuetral. Ideally leaning lawful good, but I would be more than satisfied nuetral good. If my freedom has limits, so does your authority. As being one of the few guys in a D&D group that has mostly a lawful nuetral tone, it's kind of hard for me to not be annoying. It seems in this group, good people get walked on. Be nice to rise up, though. I am beginning to despise lawful neutral, because they are so afraid of sides...it's like the military. The military may not be evil, but the environment makes it easy for nuetral evil people in real life to take advantage and stay under the radar. So I respect this neutrality system, but I also like the 5x5 deal, too.
I took a quiz on alignments. I got Neutral Good. So I watched this. I get it more, thanks.
Summed up in one line: "I do what is best for society, even if I am to oppose society's norms."
Mental triage, that is the PERFECT term. My neutral-good characters recognize what laws can bend, which rules can be skirted, in order to help the most.
I'm fond of calling this "The Classic Superhero Alignment".
This is the alignment I aspire to be.
My first D&D character was between lawfull and netral good.
...
He obays good laws, respects but is not beholden to netral laws, and does not tolerate evil laws.
A better example would've been Spiderman. It's literally his thing to swing around to keep his city safe and sometimes go against the law to help people. But whatever, Batman's good too.
Seriously some awesome insight. This is amazing
Oh man, "The Punisher" is a classic alignment conundrum. While I've made a series of videos about alignment, I'll still admit that classifying him still eludes me.
I'll say CN though. Chaotic, because he's methodical and driven but his whole persona is a vigilante, therefore outside the law.
Neutral because he does evil things to evil people, these things clash together and cancel out.
But that's my take, Punisher is tough to classify.
My aligment, in this life and the next. No doubt.
NG could respect LG easily, yes. NG is the flexible one, doing good where and when they can so if they must lie to protect someone, no problem.
I created a character who is neutral good. He works under Dal Krakraac, a powerful lawful evil noble, but he turned the noble into his puppet due to his cleverness. He eventually became a powerful noble who did much good.
Neutral psychotic is that hidden 10th alignment that every player seems to find!
LG and CG need to watch out for getting twisted more so than NG, yes. It's that NG flexibility that keeps that alignment more in the clear.
I feel NG is the most good as well. The 3rd ed. book calls it "True Good" after all.
interesting you choose the term 'for the greater good' to define neutral good, I've always felt that hearing someone in a position of power uttering that phrase to be a 'kill it, kill it with fire' moment as they tend to be the messiah complex indicator and always seemed more of a lawful neutral or lawful evil expression
Tyrion Lannister is a much better example than batman. He will use lawful institutions if he thinks he can do some good through them, but is not afrain to go against it when it goes against what he thinks is right. He values trying to improve everything for the better in the most effiecient way possible, regardless of whether it is through a lawful society or something different al together. His personal circumstances means that he usually has to work through lawful means to achieve what is good, but his personal outlook is more balanced, and he is quite critical of many lawful organizations. Varys also fits into this alignment quite well. When he is confronting nobility, he has to act like he is loyal to the current order, when infact his personal motivations are to use any means necessary to achieve "What is good for the realm".
Batman is a rouge lawful good. He may not work directly for lawful organizations, but everything he does is about bringing criminals to "justice" through the laws of the societal organizations. The only reason he is rouge is because what he does is rather incompatible with the way the police operates, but if he wasn't a bat, he would definitely work for a police station. It's sort of like trying to apply an alignment to a 'god-like' figure, even if a god or goddess appears to be very good, that does not mean they have to work with the law to achieve good.
Superman is also a rogue lawful good, almost the literal embodiment of lawful good. He supports and protects the current institutions of the day, but realizes that his powers could be put to far more use on his own terms than through the restrictions of a police department. His powers are greater than lawful institutions can accomodate for, and so superman goes at it alone, whilst still following the law as closely as possible.
I think so too. A very common adventurer alignment.
I considered myself NG (can also called "Benefactor") becuz I do good thing becuz I want to, not becuz it is expected of me and I generally follow to the rules becuz it lead good things, not becuz I feel obligated.💖
I just made a neutral good paladin he will be going with the oath of the ancients. Due to their flexibility
I'm thinking a huge part of examining an alignment is now "What do they do with limited resources?" I haven't addressed that in the first two but luckily Dark Sun has a handy section on what each alignment might do when water is running out. I think that will inform future videos.
Here's what they said at some D&D alignment description: "If Neutral Good was a drinking game most DM's would be dead within two encounters".
Yes, a NG character's honor is going to be a personal one rather than what society sets out. This lets NG characters live (and die!) in evil societies, doing good deeds until the evil monarch declares "Off with their head!"
A LG character in a LE society is going to have all sorts of wires cross in their head, and it might explode!
I have always seen the neutral good character as one that is bound by honor, rather than law. They are free do do what is good and noble, even to the point of flaunting the law to do it. Rather than personal honor; they are bound more likely by societal codes of honor, rather than a personal one.
Like, for instance, the samurai who commits seppuku rather than be defeated.
Oh yes. Soooooo many superheroes are this alignment. Spiderman is the NG mascot.
I'm committing to a schedule of each Thursday. So in 6 weeks, it's NE's turn to get theirs, and getting theirs is what NE does!
Well it all depends on the individual but LG probably has a set number, CG bases it off how they feel about the server, and NG would combine the two. Maybe start at 10% and adjust it for how good the srver was.
@Onionkid99 You know who's Neutral Good, Sengoku Basara version of Date Masamune.
I think it's something a NG character will be faced with. "What do I do to create the most good for the most people?" They might have to aid a criminal gang (not good) so that peasants can get medicine (good).
Sounds like the drug/crime lords in Brazil (making their own quarantine laws when the Brazilian government didn't)
It could be cool, as it would be one of those rare hauntings that's beneficial. So many are malicious in fiction, some are benign, but a beneficial ghost is rare. Well, it wouldn't be friendly to LE sorts but it would help those few good aligned types who meet it.
Thanks!
I think that could be NG behavior if the manipulator in question shoulders some of the danger himself, and does not tell others to do things that he would not.
He could be a benefactor to a group without them knowing, but if he's just sending them out into dangerous places so he can remain safe, that's not good. Dumbledore was willing to go into harm's way for the students, so he seems NG.
Hmm, maybe, but seems more Chaotic to me with the trickery. Still, NG doesn't care about Law or Chaos, they care about getting the good job done and keeping people safe. So a NG character could do that, yes, as long as the badness didn't occur.
Oh, the evil alignments use "For the Greater Good!" with masterful results. They use it even better than Neutral Good folks!
The difference is that NG genuinely means it. LE says it, but then sets out conquering planets to bring everyone under the banner of the Tau empire.
Hey, nice series!
Quick question, would you say that a good manipulative character, that being a character that steers other people in a game or in real life behind the scenes toward a certain good outcome such as a `greater good`, like manipulating a party into going into a cave to get a weapon to kill an evil creature would be considered Neutral Good?
A club at my university was discussing what the alignment Harry Potter's Albus Dumbledore was, due to the character's manipulative aspect.
First i thought that this moral or alignment system was very clear and easy to comprehend and you can easily define a participial character .But we had an argument whit some friends of mine and i found that not to be true.The character that we were arguing about was the Punisher - or the one that we know from the movies whit Thomas Jane and Dolph Lungren - first i was quick to deem him chaotic good, but it seems that hes much to methodical and driven by some sort of personal code (law) to be ..
Batman is Neutral Psychotic.
Going by your brief descriptions of CG & LG, both of those alignments could be twisted by evil rather easily.
For me, NG is the most good of the alignments. Not bound by the rigidity of LG nor the capricious nature of CG. They strive to do what they can with what they have.
Yeah, Its funny, too, because I know so many people who try to write these sort of odd, not exactly friendly, but not quite evil ghosts and take flack for doing things halfway (like the ghost should be out to get someone, or something like that) The ghosts in Hogwarts pop into mind. Not really helpful, but mostly harmless.
Yep, Robin Hood and his band are a group of Neutral Goods and Chaotic Goods, working against a Lawful Evil sheriff and Neutral Evil goons.
At times, I've wondered what would happen if the spirit of an LG, or NG character was left lingering in an LE society. One would think they would try and encourage other NG characters to pick up where they left off; but since doing so would lead to their deaths as well, I think the spirit might continue to try to do good in other ways. Or go completely insane.
Sounds NG to me. It's the "I wanna help people any way I can" that's NG. They don't care how they help, they just help.
Thanks! I forgot to mention it because it's a term I stole from "Hell on Whells" but "Immoral Mathematics" is a phrase from that show to describe the same thing.
I would consider my thief neutral good. Sure he steals from people, he breaks the law, and is a criminal... But he steals to help those that can't help themselves... He is basically a Robin Hood type character
Great Video man!!!
I follow the law because I honestly think it helps people, maybe I'm just neutral good with lawful leanings
I'm definitely a neutral good through and through.
My real life alignments
Cool! Yeah NG is my favorite, and thanks!
Batman that doesn't kill joker(thus not truly serving good) is not neutral good. He is adhering to order. That's lawful tendency.
Hey, just had a small game where one character, a transmuter wizard, and another group were given tasks to do to prevent something bad from happening.
The other characters decided they would try to do some of it and ditch the rest, leaving the wizard with the mess the other characters had to deal with as his part was done. And so some he tricked the rest of the characters into finishing their part so he wouldn't be landed with the whole work load.
Would you see this as NG behaviour?
... Yes? Well maybe true netral?
Hehehe good trick
I really can't think of any beneficial ghosts. Except maybe Slimer.
Thanks!
So am I! It is fun!
I consider my oc neutral good with lawful tendencies, if he had to pick a side he prefers a life of law,but he knows when it is time to rebel
I had a strong disagreement over this with one of my players. Basically in my campaign the neutral good empire has 2 courts, religious and imperial. Imperial courts are a usual court with a judge and randomly selected jury with no divination permissible as evidence. The religious courts were set up in response with the jury being selected from the victim and his peers and the judge being a paladin or cleric or lesser devotee in smaller cases with divination permissible as evidence.
He claimed that an NG society would never do such as thing as have kangaroo courts as it wasn't a fair trial. I said that they would to ensure that criminals that they know through their divinations are guilty aren't on the streets to cause more anguish.
Who do you think was right?
Fuck kangaroo courts goes against free will
Neutral good is simply good.
Neutral good individuals do not act out of respect towards order, nor personal liberties. THey act to uphold what is good, whether by acting on laws or flaunting them.
I personaly feel the Hobbits of the Shire could be considered neutral good, they work individualy on their fields but band together in each others defece.
They do not work for each other, they work to better their lot in life, but when the need arises they are willing to risk a lot for one an other.
+Born Winter They are basically like Fascists. they believe in the natural order, justice and truth, a core set of principles to live by. Without strict rules governing behavior or methods AND they do everything to avoid degeneracy. The ends justifying the means, they refuse to work towards goals that are petty or false, because that is evil or unjust. Especially when they believe in a religion, that gives them the meaning and fervor needed to pursue those goals. The problem is that the Fascists (Neutral Good) don't hate Monarch's (Lawful Evil) like the book suggests they do, because those Monarch's provide absolute rule which Fascists condone temporarily in order to achieve a Organic Society, so its not a perfect fit but close enough.
Batman isn't neutral good because as you said "For the greater good" if batman was Neutral Good then joker would have been killed long ago, he would have also taken out Ra's Al Ghul and taken over the League of Assassins.
2:56 The greater good.
Woot! It's fun!
It's all about MINES!
nice vid
I'm a neutral good in real life too
I'm waiting for NE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't know my alignment anymore, I thought I was neutral good now I'm told I'm lawful good. I love to help people but I still value myself. I'd buy a video game for myself but If I saw a kid wanted that game I'd buy it for him. what am I
.. chaotic.And his definitely not a goodie too shoe since he is wiling to hurt or even maim members of the authority and even innocents to reach his goal (tough he will never kill a innocent) so he is not evil . He has a sense of purpose to go against evil doers at the cost of self sacrifice . He seems to take pleasure in torching evil people so what aliment is he from.
Sounds somewhere between chaotic netral, and chaotic good.
Neutral good kinda reminds me of Han Solo.
+CeNTuRiOn33100 nah he'd be straight up Chaotic Good
+Jake Belmont hej ended up as CG, but I would argue that he started out CN
I would say Chaotic Good
So if Nuetral Good is a good mercenary, that would be like a good version of Boba Fett...Samus Aran? You yourself said super heroes. I see Spider man as a more consistently nuetral good character than batman. but where would you put the Avatar? He's answering to a higher authority (the spirits and past avatars) but he's not above starting the occasional uprising. Korra tried to hunt down the Equalist revolutionary terrorists, but also threatened Tarlok when he was abusing his authority.
I would aspire to be Nuetral Good...but I keep getting lawful nuetral. C'mon, I don't think the law is the final good. But neither is freedom. Too many ghettos with crooks and thugs running things through fear and ignorance? That's not freedom.
I use to aspire to be lawful good as an idealistic teenager, cuz it seemed perfect-even to the point of being self destructive.
So I would be Social Moral-between lawful nuetral and nuetral good, leaning in one of 4 ways based on situation. Rarely true nuetral. Ideally leaning lawful good, but I would be more than satisfied nuetral good. If my freedom has limits, so does your authority.
As being one of the few guys in a D&D group that has mostly a lawful nuetral tone, it's kind of hard for me to not be annoying. It seems in this group, good people get walked on. Be nice to rise up, though. I am beginning to despise lawful neutral, because they are so afraid of sides...it's like the military. The military may not be evil, but the environment makes it easy for nuetral evil people in real life to take advantage and stay under the radar. So I respect this neutrality system, but I also like the 5x5 deal, too.
Sounds NG to me. It's the "I wanna help people any way I can" that's NG. They don't care how they help, they just help.
Thanks!
Sounds NG to me. It's the "I wanna help people any way I can" that's NG. They don't care how they help, they just help.
Sounds NG to me. It's the "I wanna help people any way I can" that's NG. They don't care how they help, they just help.