Hm, I suppose that's true. I never got how chaotic good was supposed to work, maybe this is why.

Actually no, the Momticores actually never had poison. I let that paranoia seep into your own game, cause I'm cruel like that.

If they did, then the sword would actually produce venom as well.

And actions are defined by moral thought. Being perfect Neutral just doesn't make sense. It's basically Schizophrenia. There is no rhyme or reason to what they do, cause if there were, it would fall into atleast one of the categories. Been arguein' alignment in my crib son.

I actually prefer Palladiniums alignment system much more, as it always made more sense to me, but DnD is more well known.

Let me get an exert on this:

-DnD Pathfinder on Alignment:


Good Versus Evil





Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil



characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life,



whether for fun or profit.



Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern



for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make



personal sacrifices to help others.



Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.



Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others



and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others



actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some



evil deity or master.



People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have



compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the



commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.





Law Versus Chaos





Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect



authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short



of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences,



resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition,



and do what they promise if they feel like it.



Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to



authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness



can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence



to tradition, self-righteousness, 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 f lexibility.



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 benef it from the potential that its individuals



have within them.



Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has



some respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to



obey nor a compulsion to rebel. She is generally honest, but



can be tempted into lying or deceiving others.

Palladinium's system sounds like it would work for categorizing people in real life, to a certain extent. Just remove the evil sections, because all true human thought in the mentally sane stems from either morality or selfishness.

DnD, on the other hand, does not really work on anyone in real life.

(I looked up the palladinium system earlier, I'm not claiming I read your most recent post that fast.)

Evil in Palladinium is essential selfishness to the extreme. I have no problem with it, I can see people and characters that falls under the evil section in palladinium. (Such as Hitler, Aberrant is an apt description of him, to the T)

Its mainly just agree that Palladinium is opposed to true neutral, they don't believe it exists, and they usually dedicate a small paragraph explaining that in their books

I don't really see a problem with the existence of chaotic good. If you start with the belief that everything that exists now is evil and wrong, then logically as someone who wants things to be good and right, you'd want to change everything. In fact, if everything is the most evil it can be, any change at all would be desirable. That would be chaotic good, right?
And I figure perfect neutral would be having absolutely not a care in the world. You'd have to have no emotions or opinions or ideals. It's not realistic, but it's possible if your brain were to have absolutely no development past infancy.

It would also be a terrible alignment for an RPG character.

I have no problem with chaotic good as well, its my favorite alignment to use. In palladinium, its equivalent would be Scrupulous and Unprincipled, with one leaning to more good, the other leaning to more selfish, but both arguably chaotic good.

Honestly, no idea what to do.

I tried listening to the crowd, you only told me people were talking and telling stories, so I got no insight on any specifics there, so it be a crapshoot to say 'I go to one', no descriptions on the people talking either. No tags lines to draw interest.

"They say the famers daughter..."

"I got turned into a Newt, but I got better..."

"GOD HELP US ALL, I TELL YOU THE TREE'S ARE EVIL..."

Cool, I want to here more about this Newt guy.

Basically, it be better if you gave small exerts of what they are talking about to help draw interests to plotlines, otherwise they might be talking in adult Peanut speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFPXQkZE6hA

I gots the same problem with this group, all I know is that the questions don't interest me, but somehow the answers relieve them. Are they asking what cologne they should wear? How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop? Are we getting oracle answers to zen riddles here?

I need a little more than 'uninteresting.'

They're asking questions about things you don't understand, since you don't have the backstory required. Owstt is there to answer any one question you have about anything, but only the one question. If we end up having you attend another meeting, you'd be able to ask another, or if you were to end up with him outside of a meeting you could talk to him about whatever. Most people ask him things that will help them with a very specific problem they are having, so you won't understand or care about what they want to hear from him. As for the group conversations, I hadn't thought of adding taglines to help you out, so that was my mistake.

the urban edition begins to shut down... again...

Yo, Levi, it's only been 3 or 4 days. chill out. This is hardly the longest we've waited for an update, even ignoring the dead period.

Yeah, sorry, I'm working on a reply. I just got caught up in other stuff for a bit is all.

It's fine :3 Just give us a little heads up if you're going belly up on the RP. So we don't have things being uncertain. Kinda like Gutter's. It's belly up in the Gutter. XD But it's understandable, stuff get's in the way. :3

your exit has been blocked  

was the stuff you put in italics terras thoughts or things she actually said? i have perfectly resonable responses either way, but i need to know which on to use.

" " denotes speech in the English language, while thoughts use ' ', or all italics, or sometimes other methods. I use a combination of both to help make it clear.

Levi and I will be totally unavailable for 2-3 days beginning on thanksgiving.

What day is Thanksgiving? I'm Canadian, so for me it was over a month ago.

I believe it is Thursday. I might be wrong. :/

Yup, Thursday. American thanksgiving is the last Thursday of November, because pilgrims were too cool to give it a set date.

actuly if, we shouldnt be unavalable at all. we just have really early on thursday and really late on friday to post.

It might be three days again, levi.

Well, I don't have a post from levi right now, you know.

I meant that our vacation might be three days. Sometimes we go for two days starting thanksgiving, sometimes three. I think it's gonna be two, though.