What's the Other Half of Saga's Alignment?

[Vilidius]

Hi all

So this is my own contribution to the Rift debate, but I think that anyone who has played in Saga has a valid opinion.  So I've started the poll here and I hope everyone will vote.

Here's the problem.  In Rift there are two factions.  From the inevitably biased presentation of each side, both are "good" and are justified in their actions.  One side is definitely Lawful in the sense that they follow the orders of their Gods, enforce their rules for what they perceive as the common good (sometimes brutally) and insist that disobedience to the Gods and the natural order is what's wrong with the world at present.  The other side is definitely Chaotic in the sense that they reject to Gods, raise personal freedom as the highest good, and substitute science (of a sort) for faith in the Gods.

Now, there's a lot of world lore going on here but that isn't the point of the poll I'd like to ask.  When attempting to local Saga as a guild, we're left with an old problem.  Those from DnD will recognize the old alignment system of Good/Neutral/Evil and Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic.

Leaving aside the Good and Evil part, it would help me a lot to know what people think of Saga on the Law/Chaos spectrum.  There's no right or wrong answer.  I'm just interested in thoughts here.

Thanks,
Val

[Jezerai]

heh.  That's more of a per character question than a per guild question.  Saga's philosophy, at least since I have been a member has been good/neutral and, at least in my opinion, covers all of the answers you've given as long as they are prefaced as good/___

[Alirrin]

Having come in to Saga in EQ2, I have a different experience than it appears EQ1 folks did. In EQ2, Saga was all about being a family of Qeynos residents. It was a place of peace and humor. 

One thing it never was, in my experience, was a group with a "mission" or a dedication to any sort of cause. They were obedient of the laws of the land, but not blindly so.

If you came to Saga, what mattered was how you acted towards others and who you were at heart. If you were a good person at heart, you could be welcomed. Sunbeam and Mab are good examples - an ogre and a troll, both refugees from Freeport who didn't fit in there. They were welcomed without prejudice because they showed they were worthy of it.

So to me, Saga is neutral good.

[Jasyn]

Through my experiences (which are admittedly biased toward EQ2 since I was an outsider looking in prior), if I gotta choose, I'll choose neutral although I see it more on a bell curve, with fewer of us having been on the extreme ends (strongly lawful, strongly chaotic) and biased more toward the middle responses (somewhat more lawful/chaotic on either side of neutral, which is right at the center).

[PinkRose]

I see equal parts of Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic.
Not more neutral, but averaged out it would be neutral.
Maybe slightly less Chaotic.
So...
Lawful  = 3
Neutral = 5
Chaotic = 2

[Lilica]

I would have swapped the law and chaos numbers, to be honest.   

Not to be so I am (deliberately) standing in direct opposition to exXO's example, but the chaos component, to me, is representative of individual freedoms, personal liberty and the choice of the common citizen.  In EQ2 terms, all the law you need is mandated by Qeynos - but Saga herself stands for those things which lift up individuals, in fellowship and by oneself.  Her strictures are simple and few, more reflective of morality (good-evil) than ethos (law-chaos).  Even Qeynos herself places few laws on you, other than 'common sense' and 'decency to your fellow sentient' requirements.

I guess, in summary, I agree with Quince...'neutral good'...but emphasizing that spark of freedom that society does not.

[Scrib]

I've gone with the neutral option because we welcome the whole range from lawful to chaotic. Which end of the spectrum we lean towards varies depending upon the characters we have in the guild at the time.

[Noa]

Can you be both lawful and chaotic?  Perhaps depending on which suits your situation at the time?  As it applies to Saga, I would say that most follow the law when the law suits our moral implications.  However, most would not be opposed to breaking the law if the need arose.  I think that Saga may follow the law of the land, but is guided by a moral compass.

[Titia]

That's more of a per character question than a per guild question

To me that sounds like a validation of a chaotic nature: providing they remain within the realm of 'Good', everyone can take its own personnal approach to solve a situation. Some might go toward the law, others deal with it in a personal way regardless of the legal aspects.

That is my vision for the EQ2 version of Saga, EQ1 was far more lawful good.

[Vilidius]

Can you be both lawful and chaotic?  Perhaps depending on which suits your situation at the time?  As it applies to Saga, I would say that most follow the law when the law suits our moral implications.  However, most would not be opposed to breaking the law if the need arose.  I think that Saga may follow the law of the land, but is guided by a moral compass.

No, frankly, I really don't think you can be lawful and chaotic at the same time.  Much as there was a lot of stupidity in 1st edition Advanced D&D, I think they got that right.

If you only follow the law when you agree with the law then you aren't lawful.  At best you are neutral.  Chaotic doesn't imply breaking the law just because you can even when you agree with the law.  That's just perverse.  Chaotic implies doing what you're going to do regardless of what the law says.  And that sounds to me what you're describing.

[Askari]

I grew up on pen-and-paper Dungeons and Dragons, so the whole Lawful/Chaos/Good/Evil thing is pretty familiar turf for me. But I thought it might be good for a quick review, for those that didn't play it.

Most of my experience with Saga is in EQ2, and I can definitively say that I have seen the complete spectrum of Law through Chaos in how characters are played in EQ2.

I think the main vibe I get from EQ2 is the sense of "general goodness" and a strong sense of "family". A lot of the Paladins had a Lawful Good vibe. A few of the more quirky characters had a Chaotic Good vibe, and I'd say most characters were somewhere in between with a Neutral Good vibe. There may have even been some characters sliding into Lawful-, Neutral-, or Chaotic-Neutral, by being willing to do bad things to bad people.

But we may be in danger of overthinking all this...   


Law vs. Chaos:
The third edition D&D rules define law and chaos as follows:

Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.

Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has a normal respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to obey nor a compulsion to rebel. They are honest but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others.

Askari: I think this definitely reinforces the idea that Guardians are more Lawful and Defiants are more Chaotic in Rift.


Lawful Good:
Lawful Good is known as the "Saintly" or "Crusader" alignment. A Lawful Good character typically acts with compassion, and always with honor and a sense of duty. A Lawful Good nation would consist of a well-organized government that works for the benefit of its citizens. Lawful Good characters include righteous knights and paladins

Lawful Good characters, especially paladins, may sometimes find themselves faced with the dilemma of whether to obey law or good when the two conflict—for example, upholding a sworn oath when it would lead innocents to come to harm—or conflicts between two orders, such as between their religious law and the law of the local ruler.

Neutral Good:
Neutral Good is known as the "Benefactor" alignment. A Neutral Good character is guided by his conscience and typically acts altruistically, without regard for or against Lawful precepts such as rules or tradition. A Neutral Good character has no problems with co-operating with lawful officials, but does not feel beholden to them. In the event that doing the right thing requires the bending or breaking of rules, they do not suffer the same inner conflict that a Lawful Good character would.

Chaotic Good:
Chaotic Good is known as the "Beatific," "Rebel," or "Cynic" alignment. A Chaotic Good character favors change for a greater good, disdains bureaucratic organizations that get in the way of social improvement, and places a high value on personal freedom, not only for oneself, but for others as well. They always intend to do the right thing, but their methods are generally disorganized and often out of alignment with the rest of society. They may create conflict in a team if they feel they are being pushed around, and often view extensive organization and planning as pointless, preferring to improvise.

While they do not have evil intentions, they may do bad things (even though they will not enjoy doing these things) to people who are, in their opinion, bad people, if it benefits the greater good.

Lawful Neutral:
Lawful Neutral is called the "Judge" or "Disciplined" alignment. A Lawful Neutral character typically believes strongly in Lawful concepts such as honor, order, rules and tradition, and often follows a personal code. A Lawful Neutral society would typically enforce strict laws to maintain social order, and place a high value on traditions and historical precedent. Examples of Lawful Neutral characters might include a soldier who always follows orders, a judge or enforcer that adheres mercilessly to the word of the law, and a disciplined monk.

Characters of this alignment are neutral with regard to good and evil. This does not mean that Lawful Neutral characters are amoral or immoral, or do not have a moral compass, but simply that their moral considerations come a distant second to what their code, tradition, or law dictates. They typically have a strong ethical code, but it is primarily guided by their system of belief, not by a commitment to good or evil.

Neutral:
Neutral alignment, also referred to as True Neutral or Neutral Neutral, is called the "Undecided" or "Nature's" alignment. This alignment represents Neutral on both axes, and tends not to feel strongly towards any alignment. A farmer whose primary overriding concern is to feed his family is of this alignment. Most animals, lacking the capacity for moral judgment, are of this alignment. Many roguish characters who play all sides to suit themselves are also of this alignment.

Some Neutral characters, rather than feeling undecided, are committed to a balance between the alignments. They may see good, evil, law and chaos as simply prejudices and dangerous extremes.
Druids frequently follow this True Neutral dedication to balance, and under Advanced Dungeons & Dragons rules were required to be this alignment. In an example given in the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook, a typical druid might fight against a band of marauding gnolls, only to switch sides to save the gnolls' clan from being totally exterminated.

Chaotic Neutral:
Chaotic Neutral is called the "Anarchist" or "Free Spirit" alignment. A character of this alignment is an individualist who follows his or her own heart, and generally shirks rules and traditions. Although they promote the ideals of freedom, it is their own freedom that comes first. Good and Evil come second to their need to be free, and the only reliable thing about them is how totally unreliable they are. Chaotic Neutral characters are free-spirited and do not enjoy the unnecessary suffering of others, but if they join a team, it is because that team's goals coincide with their own. They invariably resent taking orders and can be very selfish in their pursuit of personal goals. A Chaotic Neutral character does not have to be an aimless wanderer; they may have a specific goal in mind, but their methods of achieving that goal are often disorganized, unorthodox, or entirely unpredictable.

An unusual subset of Chaotic Neutral is "strongly Chaotic Neutral", describing a character who behaves chaotically to the point of appearing insane. Characters of this type may regularly change their appearance and attitudes for the sake of change, and intentionally disrupt organizations for the sole reason of disrupting a lawful construct.

Lawful Evil:
Lawful Evil is referred to as the "Dominator" or "Diabolic" alignment. Characters of this alignment see a well-ordered system as being easier to exploit, and show a combination of desirable and undesirable traits; while they usually obey their superiors and keep their word, they care nothing for the rights and freedoms of other individuals and are not averse to twisting the rules to work in their favor. Examples of this alignment include tyrants, devils, undiscriminating mercenary types who have a strict code of conduct, and loyal soldiers who enjoy the act of killing.

Like Lawful Good Paladins, Lawful Evil characters may sometimes find themselves faced with the dilemma of whether to obey law or evil when the two conflict. However, their issues with Law versus Evil are more concerned with "Will I get caught?" versus "How does this benefit me?"

Neutral Evil:
Neutral Evil is called the "Malefactor" alignment. Characters of this alignment are typically selfish and have no qualms about turning on their allies-of-the-moment. They have no compunctions about harming others to get what they want, but neither will they go out of their way to cause carnage or mayhem when they see no direct benefit to it. They abide by laws for only as long as it is convenient for them. A villain of this alignment can be more dangerous than either Lawful or Chaotic Evil characters, since he is neither bound by any sort of honor or tradition nor disorganized and pointlessly violent.

Examples are an assassin who has little regard for formal laws but does not needlessly kill, a henchman who plots behind his superior's back, or a mercenary who switches sides if made a better offer.

Chaotic Evil:
Chaotic Evil is referred to as the "Destroyer" or "Demonic" alignment. Characters of this alignment tend to have no respect for rules, other people's lives, or anything but their own desires, which are typically selfish and cruel. They set a high value on personal freedom, but do not have any regard for the lives or freedom of other people. They do not work well in groups, as they resent being given orders, and usually behave themselves only out of fear of punishment.

It is not compulsory for a Chaotic Evil character to be constantly performing sadistic acts just for the sake of being evil, or constantly disobeying orders just for the sake of causing chaos. They do however enjoy the suffering of others, and view honor and self-discipline as weaknesses. Serial killers and monsters of limited intelligence are typically Chaotic Evil.

[Jezerai]

Thank you, Askari!  While I was aware of these definitions in a general sense, it is so helpful to have them laid out.  I think I will copy this and post with a sticky.

[Noa]

Thanks for the posts, Val & Askari.

I am Lawful most of the time.  I am Chaotic when I need to be.  I am rarely neutral, though my opinion typically lies on one side or the other but I suppose sometimes in a state of not caring. 

[Janthos]

I see the Guild itself as being more of a neutral good , with the varied members are of differing alignments ... though they gravitate towards good with the prefix portion changing by character. Like Jan for instance .... he is a former Paladin who still holds to most of the code , but sees that sometimes laws do not account for certain things and has taken matters into his own hands. He just knows not to make that public knowledge , would just say that "matters have been dealt with" and go about his business.

Like with a certain , kind of recent , RP thing with one of the Guild Paladins being controlled by a Necromancer , Jan "dealt" with the situation and just doesn't let anyone inquire to deeply into how.

[Anaris]

Having come in to Saga in EQ2, I have a different experience than it appears EQ1 folks did. In EQ2, Saga was all about being a family of Qeynos residents. It was a place of peace and humor. 

One thing it never was, in my experience, was a group with a "mission" or a dedication to any sort of cause. They were obedient of the laws of the land, but not blindly so.

If you came to Saga, what mattered was how you acted towards others and who you were at heart. If you were a good person at heart, you could be welcomed. Sunbeam and Mab are good examples - an ogre and a troll, both refugees from Freeport who didn't fit in there. They were welcomed without prejudice because they showed they were worthy of it.

So to me, Saga is neutral good.

That.

Through my experiences (which are admittedly biased toward EQ2 since I was an outsider looking in prior), if I gotta choose, I'll choose neutral although I see it more on a bell curve, with fewer of us having been on the extreme ends (strongly lawful, strongly chaotic) and biased more toward the middle responses (somewhat more lawful/chaotic on either side of neutral, which is right at the center).

And that.