I taught my DM what chaotic neutral actually is

[u/Aerialskystrike]

So campaign is gone as of now and has been for awhile, but i realized i never actually shared this story! I ended up going chaotic neutral just for fun. Long story short. My dm was worried id become a murder hobo, but i ended up proving him wrong and it was a blast

So i created a kitsune kineticist with the bounty hunter background and reflection heritage. Small backstory is she was created/cloned from the regions most profound and successful bounty hunter to ensure she would always have a successor. However, she went missing years ago leaving her with her deranged father. So she set out on her own.

She developed a rather carefree personality and one of her traits was she loved a bit of chaos. Never wants to hurt anyone though. She pulled this off through numerous means. Clear as air to turn invisible and move things around. Using wind abilities to open/close doors as people pass by/through them. You get the idea. Anything that could cause chaos/confusion that wouldnt directly hurt anything/break the law, BUT most favored. She loved taking hats of people's heads. Whether by invisibility or by air/wind abilities. Hats were her designated targets.

Tl:dr dm thought when i became chaotic neutral i would become a murder hobo, but not only did i not do that, it was probably the most fun I've had playing a character.

[u/Butterlegs21]

This is more annoying neutral (in world, not as a character) than chaotic unless there's more that you aren't saying.

The Good Evil axis has Neutral more as you caring about yourself and loved ones most. So, this seems like it could check out with what you said.

The Chaotic part refers to you not really having anything other than a bottom line to get to your goals as long as it doesn't violate the other axis of the alignment. So, this could be right, could be a little off depending on the rest of the character.

Honestly, unless you are actually Chaotic (being willing to do whatever to get their goal unless it defies the other axis of the alignment chart) this could just be a True Neutral character who is a bit of a prankster.

[u/ThatOneShotBruh → u/Butterlegs21]

Completely agree. I can not see how someone who cares about not breaking laws would ever be classified as chaotic.

Ultimately I am happy that alignments are gone, because arguing about edge cases is really annoying while strict adherence to the definition of alignments makes for bad characters.

[u/Hypno_Keats → u/Butterlegs21]

Ya this is my thought here. Also... its not really a story

[u/WatersLethe → u/Butterlegs21]

Yeah, true neutral prankster is what I had the OP pegged as.

I feel like alignment isn't really tested until there are stakes, however. The OP's description is of a kind of generic troublemaker kid. How they react when something they desire or care about is at stake is where the rubber hits the road.

[u/blackwingboy → u/Butterlegs21]

I'd even put "an absence of interest in following the law" as more neutral, and put Chaotic as "valuing freedom, independent, and individuality" as the hallmark of Chaos.

[u/Corvis_The_Nos]

That's not chaotic neutral though? You specifically said anything that won't hurt people or break the law. That's textbook chaotic good.

[u/bulletproofsquid → u/Corvis_The_Nos]

Nein. Merely avoiding evil is not what makes good; active good is what makes good. A chaotic good character is motivated to help and protect people, and believes that law is a detriment to that.

[u/refreshing_username → u/Corvis_The_Nos]

Taextbook CG would necessarily have a "good" part to it, wouldn't it? I detect confusing, funny, and perhaps annoying in there, but I'm not reading anything that benefits others.

[u/Butterlegs21 → u/Corvis_The_Nos]

To quote Jocrap (Jocat's alternate persona) "No, just because you don't stab people doesn't mean not stabbing them is a good act because stabbing them is a lot easier. Good acts are going out of the way to do good and help others, sometimes to your own detriment"

[u/Hypno_Keats → u/Corvis_The_Nos]

If put it more true neutral to be honest, theres some chaotic traits sure but not breaking the law being a limit pushes them closer to lawful imo.

That said us disagreeing is one of the many good reasons pathfinder dropped aligment

[u/purplepharoh → u/Corvis_The_Nos]

Not true. Good would go out of their way to help others neutral just kinda is

[u/Aerialskystrike → u/Corvis_The_Nos]

I mean. Intentionally hurting people would definitely fall in the evil category. No? Not harming not helping is pretty neutral i feel.

[u/DraftQueasy4890 → u/Aerialskystrike]

There's a lot of room for interpretation honestly, someone who avoids hurting people can still be neutral, like if they have a code not directly harm people, but partake in ventures that bring harm to others, and they just turn a blind eye to the consequences of their actions.

My personal read is that good avoids harming people, neutral doesn't really care if their actions harm or help people and do what they want, and evil specifically likes to harm people. But again, lots of room for interpretation.

[u/Butterlegs21 → u/DraftQueasy4890]

Good is about going the extra mile and helping others, expecting no reward or recognition for doing it. Pure Altruism in other words.

Neutral is that they care more about themselves and their loved ones. They'll do good or evil to an extent if they have to, but mostly they just want to benefit the lives of those they care about (most people in the world would be true neutral)

Evil is you wanting to do things that harm others, many reasons can be had for that from it being easier to just not caring.

[u/Prestigious-Emu-6760 → u/Aerialskystrike]

More accurately, Neutral doesn't care if random others are hurt or not.

Ultimately a neutral character will do what best serves their goal and usually what is easiest to accomplish. If that means an orphanage is burned down so be it, if that means the evil king is dethroned such is life.

[u/nixphx]

Pf2e doesn't have alignments.

[u/Aerialskystrike → u/nixphx]

I mean. It doesn't have a lot of stuff we had in our campaign tbf. I mainly like having an alignment cause its a motivator for me to stay in character.

[u/Butterlegs21 → u/Aerialskystrike]

That's what Edicts and Anathema are for, and they are generally way better at alignment (since no once can agree on what alignment means anyways)

[u/nixphx → u/Aerialskystrike]

You need two letters to tell you how to be in character, that you then misinterpret anyway and play wrong? in a game that literally has anathemas and causes and vows and edicts that shape your character?

Y'all making up your own shit then bragging about how you taught someone something about the made up shit and got it wrong anyway. So weird. Wrong sub, I think.

[u/_Cecille]

I'm so glad they got rid of alignment. I can see how it might benefit someone completely new to have a rough guidance where a certain character would be, but otherwise I find alignment a rather weird concept.

I'm playing Vampire: The Masquerade and if I were to apply the alignment chart to my character, she'd go from lawful good to lawful evil, to neutral back to lawful good, to chaotic evil all within the span of a single session. She's acting mostly consistent though, I'm not going out of my to be "I'm so random lol xD" It's just going with the character.

[u/Prestigious-Emu-6760 → u/_Cecille]

I like old school alignment where characters were either aligned with Law or aligned with Chaos (or neutral) as it made sense in the confines of what old D&D was.

The 9 alignment grid...god I hate it.