He doesn't play a chaotic good character

There's a lot of ways to interpret how the character would behave but generally they'll follow the rules they believe in and ensure everyone else follows them as well regardless of whether they agree.

DDD chads rise up

Attached: American Sniper.webm (1280x720, 2.87M)

Which is no different from how people behave in this society so it's the default for people with no imagination.

Glueman?

Attached: Glueman.jpg (305x374, 16K)

>he doesnt play lawful evil

Attached: the chad palpatine.jpg (1920x818, 91K)

Wtf are you on? People beg to be told what to do, they gladly cede personal freedom at every opportunity

What is it called when you only work for yourself? Literally Mercenary tier. Work alone, work for cash only, and duck out of missions when they're impossible or the pay out isn't worth it.

Attached: 6327.gif (1280x720, 795K)

But not you, right? You're different from all of those sheep. That's why you play Chaotic Good for your characters because they're just like you which confirms what I said about it being the alignment people choose when they don't want to roleplay.

Attached: 1452311422593.jpg (273x272, 50K)

>he still falls for limiting his behavior to "good" and "evil" according to the subjective moralities of others

>he doesn't play chaotic good

Attached: BUDDY.jpg (500x500, 23K)

I'd say either chaotic neutral or true neutral.

true neutral

Have fun not being a paladin,sinner.

Attached: Palidin Cat.jpg (576x768, 127K)

Nigger I tend to play neutral evil, I like characters that focus solely on money and pussy

I figured as much. True neutral bordering on chaotic neutral. Fuck everyone and their mission goals/statements.Just pay me motherfucker.

based anime poster.

You know who this guy is but I didn't.

Mind your own business.

High Tier
>Neutral Good
>Neutral Evil
>Lawful Evil
>Lawful Neutral
Mid Tier
>Lawful Good
>True Neutral
>Chaotic Evil
Shit Tier
>Chaotic Good
>Chaotic Neutral

Lawful evil is someone who has bad intentions but sees the use of following the rules. If they were dealing out punishment, they would select the harsher punishment. A true paragon of lawful evil will have never broken a rule but will leave people a lot worse off. The lawful evil character wouldn't be a corrupt government official to get what he wants, corruption is illegal after all. A lawful evil character would be the traffic cop that gives you the maximum fine for speeding, includes the fine for not having a trash bag in your car, having a tail light out, and having part of your license plate covered.

Isn't lawful neutral peak NPC?

alignments are dumb. i do what I want.

Retard, that's a chaotic evil. He's willfully choosing being cruel purely because he's an asshole. Lawful Evil is having strong ambition, not stepping on anyone's toes if you don't have to, and a near complete lack of guilt.

Lawful neutral is just an authority figure who literally does whatever the law states whether they personally agree with it or not, so in some ways it basically is.

>he doesn't exclusively play a kenshiro moralfag

why hasn't Yea Forums grown up over all these years?

Yeah, but I like it for autistic robot characters too.

Cruel and unusual punishment is illegal you fucking fool.

>he doesn't know the true alignments

Attached: truealignment.jpg (1989x1591, 274K)

chaotic neutral is the dionysian soul, ergo based & redpilled

only redditors consider it a meme

I mean doesn't that depend on the setting? Flogging is considered cruel and unusual now, but in a medieval fantasy setting it could be an acceptable punishment.

Lawful Evil is just le epic nazi larper meme

I have never seen a roguish or swashbuckling character played beyond the 1st dimension. They are literal walking memes and never develop beyond that.

Oh hey, it's the guy who keeps making CN characters.

No one likes playing with you.

>motherfucker
Calm down, Jamal. How's your rap career?

not bad, you know how it is. Gotta get them Septums from some fat noble after axing some fool on his behalf. Use it for dem programs, ale, and studio time.

that's just lawful neutral

I like lawful neutral. But I like playing autistic characters

Exactly. Chaotic good is everyone's first playthrough where you want to experience the most in one go.

The part where they ensure everyone else follows the rules is important. A neutral character wouldn't try to change the behavior of other people.

He's under the control of m*rality
Chaotic Neutral is the thinking man's alignment

Attached: PreciousImpoliteGopher-size_restricted.gif (500x280, 965K)

>entire game about working for a chaotic evil character and helping them do what they want

Paladins are fags

>this much autism

I will smack your sinner existence with divine smite

Shut your whore mouth. Johnny is based af.
youtube.com/watch?v=h9hx5XdAaxQ

Oh yeah lay your hands on me, big boy.

Attached: 1451525768433.jpg (960x540, 120K)

Paladin larpers are the fucking worst

Attached: 1515265089666.jpg (350x454, 28K)

pixy is lawful evil

Attached: 1553376400337.jpg (554x432, 41K)

my longsword will be on your head,filthy sinner.

Maybe you are thinking of lawful neutral. That leans evil.

The harshest punishment allowed by the law isn't cruel and unusual. A lawful evil character isn't going to choose life in jail over the death penalty. Unless it happens that the life in prison sentence will cause more suffering somehow and is legal. When they execute someone they will choose the worst punishment they are legally allowed to.

The character is evil after all, and anything that maximizes suffering is what they will do.

As long as its within the law and they don't use it for personnal gain,
It shouldn't cross to evil even if they force everyone to obey the law.
I personnaly think they're drones or rumbas

reddit tier post, try again

you are right.
I only paladin in vidya,in irl pnp games,I play Human Australian.
Just a ranger but wears shorts and had huge calves.

>dionysian soul
>ergo based & redpilled
You mean pathetic Nietzschefag

What stat adjustments do australians get?

I think your core misunderstanding of lawful relies too heavily on an established and enforceable system of law in the environment the character is is living in. Using this logic nothing but a sentient, fully conscious and moral organism could be lawful which is clearly not the case. Lawful characters are moral but morals can be compromised. The lawful part refers to how stubborn they are about those morals. Chaotic characters in contrast are much more pliable with their own morals and as you might expect more unpredictable with their motivations. Lawful characters can at first glance appear unpredictable if their behavior doesn't align with what you might expect but that's only because you're not privy yet to what motivates them.

Some of the most enjoyable characters to role play (both as and with) are lawful characters with unconventional motivations.

Post your weight, user. Prove to us that you're not a subhuman too.

An example might be, you get caught stealing bread and the punishment for the crime is 1 month to 1 year in jail.

A lawful good character will sentence you for one month.

A lawful neutral character will sentence you for somewhere in between depending on damages you did in stealing.

A lawful evil character will sentance you for a year.

A neutral good character might give you community service instead.

A chaotic good character will let you go free since you might have needed the bread since you were starving.

A neutral character will choose a sentance that might involve you doing baking bread to replace the lost bread, just paying the price for the bread or something to ultimately replace the stolen stolen bread.

A chaotic evil character might punch you, recruit you to steal more bread, or something that will cause disorder but not necessarily cause more suffering.

A neutral evil character will give you maybe a month in jail or less and then blackmail you into stealing more bread for them.

A chaotic evil character will most likely just kill you unless they think they can use you in some capacity to cause more suffering to others.

90% of the time Chaotic Neutral is just "Imma do whatever gets me the most loot." It's literally the nigger alignment.

You mean the based alignment
>chaotic evil twice

I define morality systems by 2 metrics.

What's your stance on hurting innocent people?
Good - Strongly against it, avoid whenever possible.
Neutral - I'll do it if it's necessary
Evil - I'll do it whenever I want

Do you care about following rules?
Lawful - Of course, always look to procedure to tell you what to do.
Neutral - I'll break them if necessary.
Evil - I'll do whatever I want.

+1 Calve size
-1 Geography (they see a giant spider and think it is normal)
+1 poison resit.(but they have no idea they have been poisoned,even if they 0vomit blood.)
+1 calve (I know I already said that)
+3 fear reaction to snake attacks.
-2 Driving/-7 Fuel consumption (PRE APOCALYPSE ONLY)
+2 Take punch (They just seem able to take a punch)

All of these stats are in the bible.

chaotic evil would steal more bread and leave you to take the blame

Oops meant "chaotic" on that last line but I'm sure most people could realize that.

Based

You should acknowledge at least that your understanding of the alignments needs some work if evil and chaotic mean the same thing.

>he has a youtube channel too
damn

Attached: 51387583_10214006199851932_8253128582407127040_n.jpg (320x240, 6K)

Or I just typed the wrong word.

No, simpleton. You gave the identical description for evil and chaotic. You didn't just mix up the word. You gave them both the same definition. That's the point, and that's the problem. Your understanding is lacking. There should be a clear distinction between chaotic and evil.

I want read this but instead will post a cat whistling.

Attached: Ready To Eat Spaghetti.jpg (480x360, 17K)

You made the right decision.

Attached: Crocodile .jpg (640x434, 38K)

An evil person doesn't care about hurting people, a chaotic person doesn't care about following rules. What's wrong with that? Does a person have to wake up in the morning and think "Ah, better make sure I break at least 5 laws and murder at least 10 children today" in order to be chaotic evil? That seems like a cartoonishly simple requirement, like only saturday morning cartoon villains are truly evil. If something gets in their way they'll overcome it by any means necessary, regardless of laws or morals. But if nothing gets in their way, they won't take a detour to make sure they commit their chaotic evil quota for the day.

Attached: Thumbs Up Fren.jpg (472x420, 23K)

He has pretty funny Q&A videos of the weirdest shit he's done in porn.

Retard. According to you there would be no difference between a neutral evil character and a chaotic neutral character.

Attached: 1383016297697.jpg (227x257, 41K)

I'm basically just saying they're rigid and uncompromising lot who follow the to a T LIKE a robot

If chaotic and evil are the same, chaotic good, chaotic neutral, lawful evil, and neutral evil can't exist.

*law

I fucking hate chaotic good players. They allways just do random shit for the "omg so randmo lol xD :3" and screw up the party

Neutral people weigh things back and forth. They have morals, but they're willing to compromise on morals sometimes depending on the severity of the situation. Like
>"Hmm, I'm hungry. I could steal some bread, but is it worth the risk that I'll get caught stealing? How much will I be hurting the baker by cutting into his profits? Just how hungry am I right now, do I absolutely need to hurt the baker and break the law to get this bread? Hard to say"
Whereas the lawful and good character will never or almost never compromise their desire to not hurt the baker no matter how hungry they get. And chaotic or evil characters will take the bread without ever thinking twice.

>They allways just do random shit for the "omg so randmo lol xD :3" and screw up the party
Is this real?
Also why not pick an alignment?

Chaotic good/evil are videogame rpg "pick all the good/evil options" because I can.

The entire point of neutrality is that a character sometimes goes one way and sometimes another. You're acting like neutrality is it's own, unique option in the middle, which it's actually just meant to be that a character is flexible between the other options.
You're also trying to act like morality can ever possibly have any kind of hard set rules. Morality is almost all grey area. Rarely can a character perfectly conform to whatever their alignment says in every possible situation, and rarely can any situation have clearly defined good/evil or lawful/chaotic options. These 3x3 alignment systems are just meant to be vague guidelines, not hard rule sets. At the end of the day every character motivation can be broken down to either "strongly cares about _____, somewhat cares about _____, or cares very little about _____", _____ being whatever moral conundrum they're currently facing.

Why is Johnny chaotic?
This is a legit question

yes
Meant *why not AVOID picking an alignment.*
No need.

The top 3 alignments are
- Chaotic goodl
-True neutral
-Lawful evil
Notice a pattern ?