[D&D rant] I hate the...

domino

Killed a Man to Become an
RPGnet Member
Validated User
I'm mildly distressed with the way a Rog 1/Fighter 2 (for example) has vastly different skill points depending on when it took its Rogue level.
 

Q99

Genderpunk
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
I hate it when alignments are used as personality types.

I hate it that monks can't be chaotic- Shaolin was full of anti-government rebels.
 

Asmodai

Warrior Kobold
RPGnet Member
Validated User
I hate it when alignments are used as personality types.

I hate it that monks can't be chaotic- Shaolin was full of anti-government rebels.
I was about to quibble and point out that it meant having a disciplined mind and lifestyle, not dedication to any particular government.

Then I immediately thought of the disorganized, lecherous, drunkard monks that make up the majority of monk characters in most anime.
 

Tharkun

Peak oil coming soon
Druids bug me too. Especially since Clerics of Nature, exist.
Why do Druids bug you? They're nothing like a Cleric. They get their own unique abilities (e.g. Animal Companion, Wild Shape) Druids have more abilities that are Nature centric than a Cleric with the Nature or Plant Domains.
 

Q99

Genderpunk
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
I was about to quibble and point out that it meant having a disciplined mind and lifestyle, not dedication to any particular government.

Then I immediately thought of the disorganized, lecherous, drunkard monks that make up the majority of monk characters in most anime.

That also goes into the previous point about personality-types; being disciplined or not doesn't make you chaotic, it's a personality function.


Robin Hood was disciplined in archery and dedicated to stealing from the rich.

A government official can be a drunken lazy lout but a stickler for the rules and a strong supporter of laws.



Now, a lot of chaotic types are going to be less disiciplined because their worldview often doesn't require it, but I don't think it's a requirement.
 

Halloween Jack

Equipped with Bubble Lead
Validated User
I hate it when alignments are used as personality types.

I hate it that monks can't be chaotic- Shaolin was full of anti-government rebels.
Fighting against the government has zip, zero, zilch, nada, nothing to do with whether or not you're chaotic.
 

Q99

Genderpunk
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Fighting against the government has zip, zero, zilch, nada, nothing to do with whether or not you're chaotic.
It has a whole lot more to do with it than whether or not someone has ADD :)

Fighting against the local order is pretty chaotic. Well, more specifically fighting against an imposed order to make things freer and less ordered is one of the epitomes of chaotic-ness and the big example of the alignment from day one. Of course one could be fighting the government in order to impose a harsher regime or so on, but rebelling tends to be on the chaotic side of methods.

Demons rebel; Devils just assasinate the guy on top and reveal the old guy had documents naming him as a heir, and chaos has to be about the philosophy because everyone else on the alignment chart is a philosophy and it'd be lonely if it was left out.
 
Last edited:

Sankarah

Not Quite a Grognard
RPGnet Member
Validated User
It has a whole lot more to do with it than whether or not someone has ADD :)

Fighting against the local order is pretty chaotic. Well, more specifically fighting against an imposed order to make things freer and less ordered is one of the epitomes of chaotic-ness and the big example of the alignment from day one. Of course one could be fighting the government in order to impose a harsher regime or so on, but rebelling tends to be on the chaotic side of methods.

Demons rebel; Devils just assasinate the guy on top and reveal the old guy had documents naming him as a heir.
It's really a question of methodology. Supporting the government is (generally) lawful, though not always; you might be a crazy assassin enforcing the government's dictates, and care more about getting paid than enforcing the law. Similarly, opposing the government is (generally) chaotic, though not always; you might easily rebel against the current government in order to put the rightful ruler of the realm back on the throne, and you might similarly revolt to replace a dysfunctional or oppressive regime with a more egalitarian one. Both circumstances entail exceedingly lawful goals, regardless of methods employed in the short term.

Heck, consider the architects of the American Revolution. Are they chaotic because they rebelled against British rule, or are they lawful because they then went on to create their own highly ordered government? It really depends on which set of actions characterized their normal behavior.
 

Dagor

Registered User
Validated User
Heck, consider the architects of the American Revolution. Are they chaotic because they rebelled against British rule, or are they lawful because they then went on to create their own highly ordered government? It really depends on which set of actions characterized their normal behavior.
If they're not clearly either, then they were probably neutral on that axis. ;)
 

Q99

Genderpunk
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Yea, they can be neutral. Honestly? I say chaotic (well, at least some of them, they weren't a monolitic entity). They made a government much more freedom based than any around at the time and they specifically set up checks and balances to prevent a hierarchal system from forming. They designed a system for the sole purpose of keeping things freer and less controlled than they had been used to before.


"All men are created equal" is a rallying cry of the chaotic.


you might easily rebel against the current government in order to put the rightful ruler of the realm back on the throne, and you might similarly revolt to replace a dysfunctional or oppressive regime with a more egalitarian one. Both circumstances entail exceedingly lawful goals, regardless of methods employed in the short term.
Replacing a dysfunctional regime with a smoother functioning one is a good act more than a law/chaos act (or possibly just neutral; more efficiancy doesn't nessesarily fall anywhere, it depends a lot on how the government in question is supposed to function), and replacing an oppressive one with a more egalitarian one is decreasing the authoritarian/lawfulness and increasing the freedomness, which falls in the realm of further on the chaos axis. Neither are increasing the lawfulness so I don't think they could be counted as lawful goals.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom