Welcome to Gaia! ::

Arian is ranger-esque as well, in some ways.

But she's an outlaw, and kind of the mind set...well-if you WANT her to do something, sometimes she'll up and do the opposite just to reassert her will. She's kind of a bit crazy, honestly.

Very temperamental, and when all else fails/things get too complicated-she resorts to Violence quicker than most. But she grew up in a foreign nation, and then mostly by herself without social norms to learn from/go by.

She couldn't care less about the law, and thinks most forms of Government/groups in power are corrupt, or tend to be.

She's a vigilante who doesn't want to be thought of as 'good'. She does what she feels is right, and sometimes what she knows is wrong IN ORDER to do what she feels is right.

She carries alot of guilt all the same, both for people she's killed/beat the s**t out of simply for doing their jobs or because they were on the opposite side of the law-and for the things she was unable to do or failed to accomplish. She doesn't like the person she's become-but in order to survive, she had to be what she is.

Arian is a character resigned to being outcasted, tainted. She's stubborn and fiery as hell, unwilling to roll over and die-but she's not happy, and really-has never been.

Not to say she's emo or something, her morbid humor and '******** it, I'll do it anyway' attitude keep her from being this...hole of depression to play. xD

She lives a very internal world though, and most of her interactions with others is either kind of odd-or violent. /end rambling.

She likes animals and children. She would go out of her way to save either, honestly. Then again, Arian spends MOST of her time going out of her way to do stuff, so who knows~

I meant good-good in the classical concept of a superhero. A character who can be good-aligned just fine without going out of their way to BE a hero.

Yes, Neutral means that you're not particularly chaotic or lawful. However, just like an actual, living, breathing person, my character CAN be considered either, depending on the situation and how he would react. I don't treat him like a wooden caricature of this archetypal alignment or that one, and because he can sway depending on the situation, I place him as "neutral good", in the context of being neither lawful nor chaotic by and large.

The terms like neutral, or chaotic/lawful or what would make a character good/evil are largely dependent on how you're using them and in what context. In the context I'm using, it's not some sort of absolute alignment or morality, it's a vague basis of what the character is. See also: one of the alignment set-ups where there's multiple variances of good and evil, depending on how close they are to either the absolutes of goood/evil, and to the center line of neutrality, so that there IS, in fact, a "good-good'', and something more along the lines of being a reluctant hero. Different contexts make for different definitions.

And yes, rangers can be good or evil. I never said they couldn't be. I was referring to the fact that both Druids and Rangers usually become involved in heroics reluctantly, unless it fits in with something like threatening a forest. They're moreso "outsiders" of an adventuring party, as opposed to the typical fighter, or wizard.

But yeah, by and large, absolute alignments are useless, which is why I don't particularly care for them, or even apply them heavily to any of my characters. The only exception would be villainous characters, where I feel their alignments can still have a positive affect on how you play them and how their schemes work. Not that you ever see much in the ways of villanous campaigns or planning on Gaia.

So any thoughts on how long until "Fierce" has his judgments in?

I'm ready for round 2!

No? I'm saying that actual people are not absolutely lawful or chaotic in most cases. I never said anything about being good or evil, just the variances between lawful and chaotic. Very few people are really absolutely this or that. A person may work within the law, until they are wronged and feel the need for revenge, and then they go and work outside the law. They may be "good" under a government until they need to rebel, going from being a lawful citizen to a chaotic rebel and still perfectly under the context of being "good", as per the situation stands.



Better yet, you're not understanding the context I'm using them. Until you do, you're pretty much just going to be butting your head against a wall by arguing against something that isn't even per the same definition that you use, but is working on an entirely different basis. Apples and oranges, mate. See: Context.



I never said it was. I said that I placed him as neutral because he wasn't STRICTLY Chaotic or Lawful. See: Context and definition. Your context isn't mine, and therefore your definition doesn't really apply or matter in the situation I was describing. You can disagree all you like, but it doesn't really change the fact that the context I'm using it in is different from yours, and it's pretty much a useless endeavor for either of us to argue against one another's points. See again: Context, and the fact that we're using two entirely different systems of alignment for (which, as I'm sure you know, there's plenty of variances on the alignment system within all the DnD 'verses and editions).



Yeah, actually, it does. That's the ENTIRE point, is that different contexts breed different definition. I'm working within a different context than you are, and therefore whatever you're using to argue your point with is largely irrelevant, because you're trying to apply different definitions and concepts to a context that they aren't relevant to. It makes your definitions/characterizations as wrong in MY context as my definitions are wrong in YOUR context. See again: Apples and oranges.



That's not what I suggested, or said. It has nothing to do with jumping psychopathically from one tangent to the next, like you're suggesting. The fact that you suggest it at all is just proving my point that we're using two entirely different contexts where your definitions don't even apply. It doesn't make you wrong, anymore than your definitions make me wrong. Just two different theories/systems of how the alignments work together.

I personally don't care if you disagree with what I'm saying (because, again, we're working within two different theories here), but if you're not going to take ten seconds to figure out that we're working with two separate contexts/ideas of how the "alignments" work and that our definitions are mutually exclusive (that is to say, the MO by which they work is different), then you're pretty much just going to be flapping your lips together, much as I would be if I tried to 'correct' your definitions or suggestions. If I were using the same contexts as you, THEN it would make sense. I'm not, so we can drop the argument, because it's not going anywhere so long as we're practically discussing two entirely different ways of how the system works.



Good thing I'm not, nor am I basing my concept of the alignments on it, right? Because I'm pretty sure I never said a damn thing about AD&D. If you want, you can google search the alignments, there's a system that's much more expansive than just the strict chaotic/lawful/neutral, good/evil/neutral system. See again: Using two different systems, which is like comparing apples and oranges. If I were working within the same system as you, it would make sense to argue. I'm not. That's pretty much the end of it.

TL;DR: Different systems, your definitions aren't applicable because you're not using the same context as I am. You can keep arguing if you like, but it's going to amount to absolutely jackshit because we're not even working within the same system here. It's like two people arguing about character creation, and one is playing WoD and the other is playing Rifts. It's entirely useless to argue, because we're not even talking about the same ******** system. It's apples and oranges. Or, maybe two different species of oranges, because we're using variances of (roughly) the same system.

Reach: I would guess tomorrow night, since today is the 4th and all.

Wall of text.

This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. This is a wall of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or imagery to break up the constant stream of text. It doesn't have indentations or quotes or im-

Damn kids. Also, score for unintentional optical illusion.

[Pounds his right fist onto a table loudly.]

Don't ******** make me take you to a court of law again, Microwave Man. I won the last case, this'll be no different.

Just hitting on that-

Terribly vague. First off, vandalism is very much an issue that has entirely different thoughts brought up in the mind when spoken of to different individuals.

Hell, a morally "correct" individual could help the neighborhood watch for 2 weeks because of a few molestations in the area, then go spray-paint because they see it as an expression of art [I know, there are too many assholes who spray-paint a poorly written name of theirs onto stop-signs and bridges, but bare with me] - and they would indeed fit your description. That does not make them neutral - but it doesn't negate them being neutral either, nor does it make them "insane, indecisive, a liar, or chaotic;" it depends on the individual, the circumstances, the region the action is performed in, the motivation, etc. These sweeping categorizations of "alignment" are something I always stray from when creating a character; for instance, roleplay profiles on Gaia, if there's ever a field for "alignment," I leave it blank because an individual changes situation-to-situation and may be deemed a variety of different alignments based on how others look at it.

An individual who does things a society would view as good solely to bolster his reputation and gain power for himself would be, by several definitions, either "Neutral" to some degree or Lawful Evil based opn how you look at it, because his actions and his intentions are in complete conflict; the fact any "good" comes of what they do is completely coincidental to their agenda, because they're basically putting on a mask of heroism solely to reap profits from others. Yet often times, this premise is overlooked and people oversimplify it to "UHH, IF HE FOLLOW DA LAW AND HE NICE, HE LAWFUL _GOOD_ LALALALA" -

Apples and oranges, Darth? I more liken it to apples and tractors.



That's it. Courtroom #14 on Monday. You're getting shat on, literally and metaphorically.