Poll of the Day > Why is Neutral Good usually the more popular/common choice?

(+) Yeah! (+)

My first exposure to the alignment chart was with Baldur's Gate II and I ended up choosing Neutral Good as that tends to be my playstyle in most RPGs and a reflection of my personality. Was not till years later I realized that seems to be the common/popular choice in general. Are most people basing their alignment off of their personalities and how they would typically act in real life?

Is it partly because most games do not portray Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, or Chaotic Evil well thus the Good alignments are more preferable? In the Mass Effect series, Renegade Shepard for example seemed more like a jerk than Lawful Evil.

Comment and opinions are appreciated,

Thank you

---

Most players I know pick Chaotic Good, except for the ones who want to play Chaotic Neutral.

"Fuck you, I do what I think is right/what I want, and you can't stop me because I can kill anyone who gets in my way" is like 90% of PC philosophy.

(Also, if players were basing their in-game alignment on real life, 99% of characters would be True Neutral/Unaligned.)
---

Chaotic neutral

just here to fuck some shit up

---

Just checked - the statistics seem to validate my personal anecdotal perception.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/chaotic-good-is-the-most-popular-alignment.666420

Whee!
---

Chaotic Good is akin to a Robin Hood style? I can see plenty of people preferring that approach. Doing whatever they want but still in a good manner. Perhaps it is human nature to not like being told what you can and cannot do?

---

I'd like someone to explain to me wtf lawful evil is? Cause the two don't even sound right together...

---

Lordkill posted...

I'd like someone to explain to me wtf lawful evil is? Cause the two don't even sound right together...

I imagined Lawful Evil as someone like the Sheriff of Nottingham or King John, since I mentioned Robin Hood. What they are doing is evil but they are doing it within the laws of their time.

---

Lawful evil is like an evil dictator as opposed to chaotic evil which would be more like an evil monster just tearing shit up

---

Lordkill posted...

I'd like someone to explain to me wtf lawful evil is? Cause the two don't even sound right together...

Lawful means someone that follows, enforces, or create rules to abide by.
Evil is self explanatory, someone who kills, steals, etc with no regard to anything or anyone affected.

Combine them together and you get a dictator, someone who wants to take over the world, or something like that, e. g. Emperor Palpatine.

---

Lordkill posted...

I'd like someone to explain to me wtf lawful evil is? Cause the two don't even sound right together...

Think Boba Fett or Maleficent

orderly malevolent

---

People like to believe they are a good person

---

TheSlinja posted...

Lawful evil is like an evil dictator as opposed to chaotic evil which would be more like an evil monster just tearing shit up

lawful evil: hitler

chaotic evil: kefka

---

Lordkill posted...

I'd like someone to explain to me wtf lawful evil is? Cause the two don't even sound right together...

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NobleDemon
---

in real life, i think most people would be around neutral good / chaotic good

Yeah, CG and CN have always been by far the most popular in my experience. People think Chaotic is a license to do whatever the fuck they want whenever they want, and honestly only shy away from the CE they secretly lust for because of social stigma.
On the other side of the coin, far too many players and DMs think "lawful" means you have to obey the local laws of the town you're in. Even the ones who recognize that it means having your own personal moral code that you obey, generally get all giddy at the chance to "punish" or "test" the player character for his/her resolve, and possibly make them "fall".

Given how much the deck is stacked against the lawful side in expectations and DM treatment, is it really any shock that hooliganism rules the day?
And yes, I tend to prefer lawful characters. And yes, I am very bitter.

Bulbasaur posted...

lawful evil: hitler

chaotic evil: kefka

hitler is NE

He had no sort of moral compunctions or code, a lot of his ideology was deeply hypocritical/contradicting, and he was a massive ENEMY of the sort of strong hierarchy that LE is known for. If anything, he leans CE given how often he tore up the chain of command and rewrote things to be more all over the place.

streamofthesky posted...

hitler is NE

He had no sort of moral compunctions or code, a lot of his ideology was deeply hypocritical/contradicting, and he was a massive ENEMY of the sort of strong hierarchy that LE is known for. If anything, he leans CE given how often he tore up the chain of command and rewrote things to be more all over the place.

plus he really went bonkers after he became addicted to meth and a bunch of other drugs

---

I didnt know anything about this until I picked up Baldurs Gate on accident. I picked neutral good because its neutral and good. Pretty straight-forward. Usually with extremes in games you lock yourself out of a lot of quests (or entire questlines) from the opposing side, whereas neutral only locks you out of some from both sides.

---

I like Chaotic Good, its more fun.

---

"Neutral Good"

"You're one of the most understanding creatures who ever roamed the Earth. People like you are the referees of life, as you've mastered all moral points of view. In such a short time, you've figured out how to balance the good with the evil. A keen sense of order keeps you out of the wicked zone, while a healthy dose of "idgaf" saves you from appropriating a savior complex."

Eh. I guess I'm a better person than I thought. Thanks pointless quiz.

---

Because most people think that they're good and not as beholden to laws as they are. Most developed nations have citizenry who are conditioned to obey laws almost from birth.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

(Also, if players were basing their in-game alignment on real life, 99% of characters would be True Neutral/Unaligned.)

Once again, not really, no.

---

Chaotic Good, I try to do what I think is right but people usually get fucked up in the process

---

wwinterj25 posted...

"Neutral Good"

"You're one of the most understanding creatures who ever roamed the Earth. People like you are the referees of life, as you've mastered all moral points of view. In such a short time, you've figured out how to balance the good with the evil. A keen sense of order keeps you out of the wicked zone, while a healthy dose of "idgaf" saves you from appropriating a savior complex."

Eh. I guess I'm a better person than I thought. Thanks pointless quiz.

ITP: winter proves he lied in an online quiz

Lawful evil = China
Chaotic Neutral = America

And Lawful good is usually very strict in what they think is right and wrong, and can actually be looked on as evil by some of the other alignments because of that.

Thou shalt not have sex before marriage, sell thy body, or imbibe alcohol or drugs!!!

Most would consider someone who tries to enforce all that fairly evil indeed!!

From a standard point of view of someone who is generally kind and considerate, neutral good is as close as you'll get.

IF you generally care for others but hate to be tied down, don't like laws, and want to choose your own path towards goodness, then you are probably chaotic good (I'm somewhere between Chaotic and Nuetral good I think).

True Neutral and Chaotic Neutral are probably the most common alignments in real life though sadly.

---

streamofthesky posted...

ITP: winter proves he lied in an online quiz

Yeah? Prove it!

---

I pretty much always get chaotic neutral in quizzes, with a rare chaotic good.

I also end up sliding over to chaotic neutral when playing D&D with dynamic alignment.

Staying true neutral is hard guys.

because neutral good is the only one that is generally the every man

mostly everyone in real life wants to help people when they can just because it's the right thing to do

the crazy psychos or diehard goody goody lawfollowers are the .1% of the population

For most CRPGs, usually no benefits to being Evil, and worse, the games punish you for even a slight evil tendency. because the devs don't put enough effort and content to support evil and allow you to complete the main story. for example, just a single evil act could lock you out of major cities, e.g. shops. thus a huge handicap for evil characters.
---

Mead posted...

Chaotic neutral

just here to fuck some shit up

https://i.imgur.com/bmdUN9H.png

---

fantomas418 posted...

in real life, i think most people would be around neutral good / chaotic good

In real life, most people are True Neutral (or "Unaligned", if you go by 4e). Basically, you don't have strong enough opinions to hold an extreme stance, and tend to react to situations based on context.

The average person tends to obey laws they morally agree with, but will tend to break laws based on their own convenience, their chances of getting caught, and the degree to which they will be punished if they are caught. They're not rebels who completely disregard laws or codes of honor for moral or selfish reasons, but they're also not paragons of obedience, loyalty, and honor who are willing to always sacrifice self-interest to keep their word or follow the laws and rules of any organization, institution, or political entity they're a part of.

In the same way, no matter how much people would like to believe otherwise about themselves, most people aren't "Good" either. Good is self-sacrificing, and will generally judge other people's needs and well-being over their own. People can be good, but it's more often after they've satisfied their own hierarchy of needs and helped out friends and family. But they'll also overlook (or even facilitate) injustice or inequality as long as it benefits them.

Most of the alignments outside of True Neutral would be extremely rare in the real world. But that's the point - PCs are exceptional people who have taken up lives that the average person would never be able to maintain. They're driven, they have extremely strong opinions, and they're willing to fight for them, one way or another. So they can be incredibly heroes, rebellious champions, or even total monsters, in the way that Bob from Accounting really isn't going to be in the real world. It's part of why people love pretending to BE these fantasy characters so much.



streamofthesky posted...

and honestly only shy away from the CE they secretly lust for because of social stigma.

Even beside that, most DMs won't allow players to play Evil characters, either because they feel like epic fantasy adventures should be about heroes and not cruel and selfish villains, because they're afraid Evil characters will make party dynamics utterly terrible, or because either they or their players misunderstand what Evil IS.

Basically, you can be an Evil character without having to murder or betray everyone you meet at all times. Evil doesn't have to be impulsive and stupid (though obviously Chaotic Evil will tend to be). Evil characters can still obey rules, maintain alliances, or even love others without being a complete unsympathetic one-dimensional monster.

Evil and Chaotic generally have the same problem - with mature and experienced players, they're fine. It's only when you're playing with people who don't really understand Alignment or are just murderhobo munckhins who don't care about Alignment except as an excuse for disruptive behavior that they become problems. But those types of people are going to be problems no matter what Alignment they have (they're the same types who tend to play Lawful Good as uptight intolerant assholes).

Chaotic Neutral is really only a problem if someone uses it as an excuse to do whatever they want regardless of consequences or logic. Or if they go with the usual misinterpretation that Chaotic Neutral means spastic random idiot. But again, those are usually cases where the problem is the player, not the Alignment.
---

Amuseum posted...

For most CRPGs, usually no benefits to being Evil, and worse, the games punish you for even a slight evil tendency. because the devs don't put enough effort and content to support evil and allow you to complete the main story.

It's also a holdover from the time where being seen to "encourage" players to be evil would get concerned parent groups coming after you with pitchforks and torches. It's part of why GTA was always a favored target once it started getting popular - you're encouraging children to be criminals!

It's not so much a concern now, but old habits can die hard, especially for larger developers who are more worried about reputation and sales than artistic aesthetics.

Though it's also like you touched on - having a distinct "Evil" path which is radically different from the "Good" path would effectively require the developer to make two entirely different games, which would raise costs far beyond what most developers are willing to eat for something that minor. Which is why most Evil characters wind up being "Evil guy who has to stop someone else from being even more Evil", where you play through 99% of the story exactly the same as the "Good" guy would, in spite of the fact that you'd lack the motivation to save the world simply because it's the right thing to do. At best, you might get a different ending cutscene where you conquer the world yourself.
---

why is it called true neutral instead of neutral neutral

cowards

---

agesboy posted...

why is it called true neutral instead of neutral neutral

cowards

Because in the original version of the game, it tended to be a more specific niche for people who literally went out of their way to balance their actions to maintain neutrality. So it's less "neutral through apathy" and more "Neutral via constant conflicting action".

That idea eventually evolved more into the concept of "Balance", and it's the motivating principle behind characters like Mordenkainen (Gary Gygax's old D&D character) and druids in general (who tend to ignore human needs and morality in favor of defending nature).
---

It works out better when alignment is considered to be just your spiritual alignment rather than a pigeonmark of your personality.

Someone Lawful Evil might work for Sithis and the Dark Brotherhood, but someone Lawful Good might, too; As a holy assassin they could go after the demons that other's in the Dark Brotherhood lack the ability to go after (and the kind of people who get marked for death are usually not very good people in the first place). Someone Chaotic Evil would probably be attracted to the idea of the Dark Brotherhood, but find they can't follow the rules so they lash out in other ways... a narrative strifeline.

Keeping track of character's lifelines and strifelines can help forge a better narrative

Actually, since strifeline is a word I just made up to describe this.... .... maybe I should use it in something

---

Because it's the only logical way to live: Following your own moral compass instead of someone else's rules.

Whether or not one's moral compass functions is a separate topic.

---

Maybe I'm a misanthrope, but I suspect most people would actually end up on the evil spectrum if they were being honest with themselves. Then again, if they're evil, why would they be honest with themselves?

---

i feel like the desire to avoid trouble would plant people more into neutral territory than evil

---

Neutral Good is the lowest common denominator pick that relates to the most people. Hive mind if you will.
If anything I'd align myself Chaotic Neutral because of the lulz.

---

Neutral Good is basically "I'm a decent person but I recognize that following a strict moral code isn't always the best way to act on that," which is pretty much "Morality: Common Sense Edition."

---

Amuseum posted...

For most CRPGs, usually no benefits to being Evil, and worse, the games punish you for even a slight evil tendency. because the devs don't put enough effort and content to support evil and allow you to complete the main story. for example, just a single evil act could lock you out of major cities, e.g. shops. thus a huge handicap for evil characters.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

It's also a holdover from the time where being seen to "encourage" players to be evil would get concerned parent groups coming after you with pitchforks and torches. It's part of why GTA was always a favored target once it started getting popular - you're encouraging children to be criminals!

.......*snip*

Interesting points yer folks make and ones I can agree with. Sorry ParanoidObsessive, I liked the points yer made but did not want to make my post a wall-o-text with quotes. I do wish we can hide or collapse portions of our posts.

I do feel very few games ever truly accommodate a "good" and "evil" route properly. Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura might be one of the few that kinda offers an "evil" route without letting you deviate from the main quest.


---

InfestedAdam posted...

I do feel very few games ever truly accommodate a "good" and "evil" route properly.

More often than not, trying to accommodate an "evil" route consists of offering the player a choice between "pet puppy" and "kick puppy," with the "neutral" route being unlocked by alternating between petting and kicking the puppy. It's not exactly the most organic approach.

---

adjl posted...

More often than not, trying to accommodate an "evil" route consists of offering the player a choice between "pet puppy" and "kick puppy"

I prefer "pet kitten" and "eat kitten".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD71ip1osM4
---

I thought Chaotic Good was the most popular. but yes, Neutral Good is probably what most people in the real world are. But we like to think we are Chaotic Good

ParanoidObsessive posted...

In real life, most people are True Neutral (or "Unaligned", if you go by 4e). Basically, you don't have strong enough opinions to hold an extreme stance, and tend to react to situations based on context.

The average person tends to obey laws they morally agree with, but will tend to break laws based on their own convenience, their chances of getting caught, and the degree to which they will be punished if they are caught. They're not rebels who completely disregard laws or codes of honor for moral or selfish reasons, but they're also not paragons of obedience, loyalty, and honor who are willing to always sacrifice self-interest to keep their word or follow the laws and rules of any organization, institution, or political entity they're a part of.

In the same way, no matter how much people would like to believe otherwise about themselves, most people aren't "Good" either. Good is self-sacrificing, and will generally judge other people's needs and well-being over their own. People can be good, but it's more often after they've satisfied their own hierarchy of needs and helped out friends and family. But they'll also overlook (or even facilitate) injustice or inequality as long as it benefits them.

Most of the alignments outside of True Neutral would be extremely rare in the real world. But that's the point - PCs are exceptional people who have taken up lives that the average person would never be able to maintain. They're driven, they have extremely strong opinions, and they're willing to fight for them, one way or another. So they can be incredibly heroes, rebellious champions, or even total monsters, in the way that Bob from Accounting really isn't going to be in the real world. It's part of why people love pretending to BE these fantasy characters so much.

Even beside that, most DMs won't allow players to play Evil characters, either because they feel like epic fantasy adventures should be about heroes and not cruel and selfish villains, because they're afraid Evil characters will make party dynamics utterly terrible, or because either they or their players misunderstand what Evil IS.

Basically, you can be an Evil character without having to murder or betray everyone you meet at all times. Evil doesn't have to be impulsive and stupid (though obviously Chaotic Evil will tend to be). Evil characters can still obey rules, maintain alliances, or even love others without being a complete unsympathetic one-dimensional monster.

Evil and Chaotic generally have the same problem - with mature and experienced players, they're fine. It's only when you're playing with people who don't really understand Alignment or are just murderhobo munckhins who don't care about Alignment except as an excuse for disruptive behavior that they become problems. But those types of people are going to be problems no matter what Alignment they have (they're the same types who tend to play Lawful Good as uptight intolerant assholes).

Chaotic Neutral is really only a problem if someone uses it as an excuse to do whatever they want regardless of consequences or logic. Or if they go with the usual misinterpretation that Chaotic Neutral means spastic random idiot. But again, those are usually cases where the problem is the player, not the Alignment.

I play ad&d 2nd and i maintain my position that most people are neutral good

adjl posted...

More often than not, trying to accommodate an "evil" route consists of offering the player a choice between "pet puppy" and "kick puppy," with the "neutral" route being unlocked by alternating between petting and kicking the puppy. It's not exactly the most organic approach.

In some cases, the "evil" route does feels more like being a jerk than actually being evil. I find that a bit funny as there are cases of well written evil villains but I can also see why it can be challenging to create an "evil" route on par with NPC villains without essentially creating a whole new route in a game where we have the choice of alignments.

---

How would one classify characters that do the right thing for the wrong reasons? The Piccolos, Vegetas, Punishers, and Rick Sanchezs of the world?

---

Rick Sanchez is chaotic neutral/ chaotic evil

Vegeta is lawful evil(saiyan), then chaotic evil(frieza saga) then chaotic good (buu saga)

Piccolo is all over the place.

Punisher is lawful evil most def.

---

EvilMegas posted...

Punisher is lawful evil most def.

Really? Perhaps I am not familiar enough with him but I thought he is more or less a vigilante taking out criminals. I thought that would place him more as chaotic good.

---

InfestedAdam posted...

Really? Perhaps I am not familiar enough with him but I thought he is more or less a vigilante taking out criminals. I thought that would place him more as chaotic good.

he is definitely lawful

I guess Id say lawful neutral because he is setting out to do good usually, but some of the stuff he does is pretty evil and sadistic

---

I mostly choose it because I believe doing what is right should matter more than obeying laws and regulations.

---