this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
142 points (99.3% liked)

Dungeons and Dragons - Memes and Comics

3133 readers
2 users here now

A community for Dungeons and Dragons Memes and Comics

/c/DnD Network Communities

Rules (Subject to Change)

"Title" - [Comic Name]

e.g. "Krak of Dawn" - [Swords Comic]

*Does not apply to memes

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The difficult question is if a chaotic evil character would follow a law that is in their self interest.

I don't think they would. I think they'd break the law anyway, even if it went against their own interests, because their nature is pure lawlessness.

Chaos, to me, implies an inherent lawlessness that is itself the character's goal. They break the law for its own sake, because they want laws to be broken (i.e. for the lulz)

[–] MycelialMass@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I gota disagree. Breaking every law would basically make them anti-lawful. You could always predict their behaviour in this case which IMO is absolutely not chaotic.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are lots of different ways to break laws!

There just has to be a way to differentiate neutral from chaos, because your interpretation is that they both break or follow laws depending on the circumstances. No difference.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

It's all in the interpretation, alignment is a squishy subjective thing, but I rule the difference as the chaotic character absolutely does not care. Even if told "The punishment for doing what you're doing is X", and X is really bad for them and so they should try and avoid it out of self-interest, they just wouldn't care.

A neutral character can be swayed by the legal consequences of their actions, even if the law isn't especially important to them.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's an interesting point of view. I've never really seen it that way, but I can appreciate that. I see it more as a complete disregard for the law, rather than actively trying to break laws. It'd be pretty silly if a chaotic evil character, on hearing that feeding the homeless is illegal, would go around sharing his rations with homeless people "for the lulz".

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago

Neutral, to me, is a complete disregard for the law. Chaos is actually being anti-law

A chaotic evil character would feed the homeless, but also it would be poisoned or something. For the lulz

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think lawlessness isn’t the best way to think of it. But rather a resentment that someone is making them do a thing. They don’t murder people because it’s illegal they murder people because they want to and then get pissed off that there’s a law against it

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago

Oh yes, definitely. They abhor all rules and restrictions, whether they come from society or the king or even within themselves.

Chaos is that impulse you got as a child when you were told not to do something stupid, knew it was stupid to do, and then did it anyway because fuck you I won't do what you told me!