Roleplaying » Discussions


Discussion: Alignments - Neutral Good

Tags: #Alignments  #Zonnonn 
  • Member
    October 19

    Morning roleplayers! Looks like we're continuing our series (which we're over half with) today, this time we're going to talk about the 'better' side of the filthy Neutrals

    Neutral Good

    So what's up with these folk? Are they only out to do right in the world, regardless of the who says they can, or are they the chilled out hippies who just wanna have a good time and don't care about the worries of the world. Discuss! And make sure you comment on someone else's comment as usual, we all like talking after all.

  • Member
    October 19

    Zonnonn said:

    Morning roleplayers! Looks like we're continuing our series (which we're over half with) today, this time we're going to talk about the 'better' side of the filthy Neutrals

    Neutral Good

    So what's up with these folk? Are they only out to do right in the world, regardless of the who says they can, or are they the chilled out hippies who just wanna have a good time and don't care about the worries of the world. Discuss! And make sure you comment on someone else's comment as usual, we all like talking after all.

    We're getting closer to my favourite! This is a very close second, though, so do have a few words. I'm kind of thinking that a NG person would be inclined to crusade, a vision, and so fit your "out to right the world" thing. It would probably take a lot to rouse them from the drum circle, but once they have the scent of something that matches their ideals, I think they'd be pretty passionate about it and unfettered in their approach to it. They'd make ideal followers of like-minded leaders.

    Those quests in-game in which you need to steal evidence would make a Lawful Good balk, but for a Neutral Good person, the end result is what matters - especially if it rights a wrong.

    In any case, these are good people. To put the needs of an individual over anything else is as purely altruistic as it gets. I like to think they don't care for the detail at first, just the need to help another. They may meet a Khajiit skooma adict and genuinely want to help them, uncaring of the hows and whys. They act on pure empathy, and possibly the most likely to get hurt easily by betrayals or trust issues: The skooma addict reverts to his own addiction and robs them while they sleep (totally unfair generalisation going on. Downright racist, perhaps).

    I think that's why they tend towards being loners, too. To meet another who shares the same point of view is rare, and as they do get hurt easily, learn to be more insular. This could also be a result of their empathy and how easy they find it to relate to another in need. As they age and mature they never lose that desire to help, but past events have made them learn to guard their hearts slightly better.

    To have a NG person as a friend likely means you are blessed for, if you share their passion and vision, you will always be number one in their eyes. A Neutral Good leader would, possibly, always feel conflicted between the needs of the individuals following and the needs of the many, I reckon.

    Edit: NG religion is pobably wishy-washy af :D Imagine a character who has no inclination to any specific deity, yet they act as if they are devout. People scratch their heads, "are you a priest?" when they see the expert use of restoration magics. "No, why do you ask? Do I need justification from higher up to do the right thing?"

  • Member
    October 19

    Neutral Good, also known as the alignment of sweetness and light. They're the good guys, but they don't necessarily follow the law, either because they consider them unjust or conflict with the greater good.

    Neutral Good characters are driven by an internal code of morality, rather than an external one, which is the case for Lawful alignments. A Neutral Good character is not too caught up in Order Versus Chaos; they are concerned with moral goodness, but often not willing to enforce it in others. Sometimes they would have to break the law in order in to uphold it (if you can understand how that works). They might be branded a rebel, murderer, or traitor, but at the end of the day, what they did was for the good of the people.

    TV Tropes defines Neutral Good into two types:

    Passively Good — they have fairly normal lives and ambitions, but will do good as the situation arises. They will help anyone they come across who needs it, then get back to their normal routine. They are most likely to be good towards family, friends, and those within their social circle (if they are a Jerk with a Heart of Gold, to the extent allowed), though they have no issue with helping strangers. They may even do volunteer work or other do-gooding that they find personally satisfying. At the same time, they do not view Good as the concept that defines their lives — for them, Goodness is an obligation, or even just their nature. They will do what Good they like or what needs to be done, and then they will go home and carry on as normal.

    Actively Good — for them, Goodness is an Ideal as well as (or less likely, instead of) an obligation. They devote themselves to a life of Goodness and doing Good is the most important thing in their lives, or one of at least. They believe in doing what is Right and may sacrifice personal happiness, perhaps even in advance, in pursuit of that. If they are not an Ideal Hero, they admire and seek to imitate them. This type wants to do good, to go out and have adventures and to right wrongs and fight evil, but might be unprepared for the harsh realities they have to face, though they will probably have strong enough principles and beliefs that this will not stun them for long. Alternatively, Comes Great Responsibility is in play and they feel that doing good is their duty — this does not make them Lawful Good, but means that they will do good regardless of whether Lawfulness is in play.

    Examples of Neutral Good characters are:

    - The Minutemen (Fallout 4)

    - Geralt of Rivia (The Witcher)

    - Daenerys Targaryen (A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones)

    - Some of the Marvel/DC superheroes

    - Robin Hood

  • Member
    October 19

    This is probably my favorite alignment, around 80% of the characters I play in every RPG are of this alignment.

    According to my scales a NG would be someone who's out to do good but will break the law every once in a while if it stands in the way of the greater good, basically the typical RPG hero who isn't a paladin. They have a lot of freedom yet can stay pleasing for people who like being a "hero" or at least being good and helpful.

  • Member
    October 20

    I don't know, I just feel like NG characters are a little... straightforwards? Uncomplicated?

    Don't get me wrong, that's not necessarily bad - a character which is bland in one area (alignment, in this case) can make up for it elsewhere (actions, backstory). And obviously NG characters make some of the best heroes. They don't have the "Chaotic" tag, which makes them somewhat more reliable in a team. It's just that... this alignment is very straightforwards.

    I don't know - I just feel like slapping "Lawful" onto a character instantly doubles their depth of character.

    Ebonslayer said:

    According to my scales a NG would be someone who's out to do good but will not let the laws get it their way, basically the typical RPG hero who isn't a paladin. They have a lot of freedom yet can stay pleasing for people who like being a "hero" or at least being good and helpful.

    You might be confusing Neutral Good with Chaotic Good, here?

  • Member
    October 20

    KaiserSoSay said:

    Passively Good — they have fairly normal lives and ambitions, but will do good as the situation arises. They will help anyone they come across who needs it, then get back to their normal routine. They are most likely to be good towards family, friends, and those within their social circle (if they are a Jerk with a Heart of Gold, to the extent allowed), though they have no issue with helping strangers. They may even do volunteer work or other do-gooding that they find personally satisfying. At the same time, they do not view Good as the concept that defines their lives — for them, Goodness is an obligation, or even just their nature. They will do what Good they like or what needs to be done, and then they will go home and carry on as normal.

    So they're kinda like the stereotypical 'greatness thrust upon them' protagonist then? Goodness is integral to their being but the other typical morally sound principles, ie Order, aren't. I like it, and the 'Jerk with a Heart of Gold' concept as well, gotta love TV Tropes!

    Oh and Geralt is definitely the epitome of NG to me. Wants to help and is generally in the right place even if the law disagrees. Do you think there's an argument for him being Lawful Good instead? I mean he does only help if there's money involved, which is down to his Witcher principles which could be considered a 'Law' for his case.

    soly said:

    I don't know, I just feel like NG characters are a little... straightforwards? Uncomplicated?

    Don't get me wrong, that's not necessarily bad - a character which is bland in one area (alignment, in this case) can make up for it elsewhere (actions, backstory). And obviously NG characters make some of the best heroes. They don't have the "Chaotic" tag, which makes them somewhat more reliable in a team. It's just that... this alignment is very straightforwards.

    I don't know - I just feel like slapping "Lawful" onto a character instantly doubles their depth of character.

    Eventhough like Ebon this is probably my most played alignment, I do agree with you a bit. Neutral takes away any interesting quirks or moral dilemmas a Chaotic or Lawful character would have as they don't give a shit about the law, and being Good is a tad generic especially as most protagonists end up being good. There's definitely room for depth like Phil said, but maybe it's a little more subtle, which to be fair would be hard to roleplay but could lead to some interesting conceptual characters at least.

  • October 20

    Hmmmm,  Something has occured to me that leaves me a bit confused about the differences between Lawful-Neutral-Chaotic

    We basically understand that a Lawful person likes Law and Order and that a Chaotic person values Freedom/Choice at the expense of the Law.  Where does Neutral fall?  I mean you can't not care right?  You have to fall on oneside of that fence or the other because to not choose either favors chaos everytime meaning you say your character is NG but in reality they are CG since everytime the Law comes up they take no sides which favors Feedom/choice and hinders law.

    In other words not picking a side is picking a side, and that side is Chaos.

    So my question is whats the difference between NG and CG I cannot think of a situation inwhich the two alighnments would disagree.

  • Member
    October 20

    Vargr White-Tree said:

    So my question is whats the difference between NG and CG I cannot think of a situation inwhich the two alighnments would disagree.

    The idea I'm walking away with is that it's a difference in degree: just how far is the character willing to stray from the law? Also a degree in who is going to benefit from the character's actions. It seems to me that a NG character does what he or she can to stay within the law, but also recognizes that sometimes it's easier to do good by stepping out of bounds. A NG character also probably won't step terribly far out of bounds. CG characters, on the other hand, probably don't care a whole lot about how they go about doing good so long as their actions promote their good objectives. The ends, in this case, will justify the means (even if those means go waaaaay past what good people would define as a norm for good behavior).

    NG characters also seem to adhere to a more utilitarianist philosophy--providing the greatest good to the greatest number of people. CG characters, on the other hand, may focus only on a select group or individual as opposed to spending a lot of time worrying about whether or not their actions are helping the majority of members in their society.

    Either way, NG and CG characters are usually my go-to... I have a lot of fun playing them :D

  • Member
    October 20

    I beg to differ about NG being weaker on the roleplay side because of their "neutral" status. They aren't chaotic so that means they won't shove aside the law on a whim, they only do it when it's absolutely required, but unlike lawful they'll actually do something. For instance, let's say a friend of the character was sentenced to execution for one reason or another, a lawful good would leave them to their fate because they have faith in the system, a chaotic good would attempt to break them out immediately without even considering a second idea, and a neutral good would try everything they could to get them out but go shady when legal ideas go dry and finally break them out as a last resort after those are gone.

    soly said:

    You might be confusing Neutral Good with Chaotic Good, here?

    Yeah, it does look a bit like that, huh? I've changed it to better suit NG.

     

  • Member
    October 22

    Vargr White-Tree said:

    So my question is whats the difference between NG and CG I cannot think of a situation inwhich the two alighnments would disagree.

    I think Shin explained it pretty perfectly. To me, CG has no respect/adherence to the law, and if not actively going against it will pay it no regard whatsoever. A NG character will understand that the law is there for a reason, and will comply with it whenever possible, but when worse comes to worse will not let it stop them from doing what they see as right. I guess it's easier to say that NG breaks the law for 'the greater good' (although there will be exceptions), while CG breaks the law whenever they want, to put it in layman's terms.

    Ebonslayer said:

    I beg to differ about NG being weaker on the roleplay side because of their "neutral" status. They aren't chaotic so that means they won't shove aside the law on a whim, they only do it when it's absolutely required, but unlike lawful they'll actually do something. For instance, let's say a friend of the character was sentenced to execution for one reason or another, a lawful good would leave them to their fate because they have faith in the system, a chaotic good would attempt to break them out immediately without even considering a second idea, and a neutral good would try everything they could to get them out but go shady when legal ideas go dry and finally break them out as a last resort after those are gone.

    That's an interesting example, Ebon, and I think it sums up NG pretty well. CG will go straight to a breaking them out and won't hesitate to do whatever's necesarry, ie kill, to do what they see it good, but an NG will obey the law as far as possible before they take actions into their own hands.