What is the difference between true neutral and unaligned?Can a PC be unaligned?What's the deal with alignment languages?Can a true neutral character cast spells affected by alignment?What is the difference between a god and a primordial?What is the difference between a god and demigod?Is my D&D 5e Homebrew Necrolyte Race Balanced?What is the difference between Simple and Martial weapons?
Would it be possible to have a GMO that produces chocolate?
Is it possible to create a golf ball sized star?
If I have a 16.67% fail rate (N=24) & I do another 24 tests, what is the likelihood that I get 0 fails by chance?
What is this symbol: semicircles facing eachother
Did the British navy fail to take into account the ballistics correction due to Coriolis force during WW1 Falkland Islands battle?
What to say to a student who has failed?
Can you help me understand Modes from the aspect of chord changes?
Why aren't RCS openings an issue for spacecraft heat shields?
Fried gnocchi with spinach, bacon, cream sauce in a single pan
In an emergency, how do I find and share my position?
Brexit and backstop: would changes require unanimous approval by all EU countries? Does Ireland hold a veto?
How to avoid using System.String with Rfc2898DeriveBytes in C#
Is a butterfly one or two animals?
How to dismiss intrusive questions from a colleague with whom I don't work?
Do ability scores have any effect on casting the Wish spell?
Patching SQL Server 2014 Versus SQL Server 2014 Express
What does どうかと思う mean?
Co-author responds to email by mistake cc'ing the EiC
How should I face my manager if I make a mistake because a senior coworker explained something incorrectly to me?
Are illustrations in novels frowned upon?
What is the difference between true neutral and unaligned?
Which household object drew this pattern?
Configurable API Version for Anonymous Blocks?
Is “I am getting married with my sister” ambiguous?
What is the difference between true neutral and unaligned?
Can a PC be unaligned?What's the deal with alignment languages?Can a true neutral character cast spells affected by alignment?What is the difference between a god and a primordial?What is the difference between a god and demigod?Is my D&D 5e Homebrew Necrolyte Race Balanced?What is the difference between Simple and Martial weapons?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Something I’ve never gotten is that true neutral and unaligned seem to be the same in the long run. The only difference is that unaligned is for wild animals, and true neutral is for intelligent creatures - pne being driven by instinct and the other by choice.
Similarities
- Neither leans towards good or evil nor law vs. chaos
- Both do what seems right at the time
Differences
- The reasoning behind their action is the only one I can seem to find
dnd-5e alignment
$endgroup$
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Something I’ve never gotten is that true neutral and unaligned seem to be the same in the long run. The only difference is that unaligned is for wild animals, and true neutral is for intelligent creatures - pne being driven by instinct and the other by choice.
Similarities
- Neither leans towards good or evil nor law vs. chaos
- Both do what seems right at the time
Differences
- The reasoning behind their action is the only one I can seem to find
dnd-5e alignment
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Questions about alignment tend not to work well in the stack format unless they’re about the raw mechanics. This will likely get closed as POB.
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
8 hours ago
5
$begingroup$
This isn’t really opinion based it’s pretty factual. Asking where does x belong on the axis is opinion based. But this isn’t that. I’m asking what the difference between two seeming similar alignments are which isn’t opinion based. The first being morality and the second about how two things in a system are defined.
$endgroup$
– Mage in the Barrel
8 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Related on Can a PC be unaligned?.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@indigochild I don't think it's dupe, they're not asking if they can be, they're asking how it's different from True Neutral.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While the morality angle may be subjective, this question can be addressed with mechanics. For example, if there are effects that apply to neutral-aligned creatures but not unaligned creatures, or vice versa.
$endgroup$
– MikeQ
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Something I’ve never gotten is that true neutral and unaligned seem to be the same in the long run. The only difference is that unaligned is for wild animals, and true neutral is for intelligent creatures - pne being driven by instinct and the other by choice.
Similarities
- Neither leans towards good or evil nor law vs. chaos
- Both do what seems right at the time
Differences
- The reasoning behind their action is the only one I can seem to find
dnd-5e alignment
$endgroup$
Something I’ve never gotten is that true neutral and unaligned seem to be the same in the long run. The only difference is that unaligned is for wild animals, and true neutral is for intelligent creatures - pne being driven by instinct and the other by choice.
Similarities
- Neither leans towards good or evil nor law vs. chaos
- Both do what seems right at the time
Differences
- The reasoning behind their action is the only one I can seem to find
dnd-5e alignment
dnd-5e alignment
edited 3 hours ago
V2Blast♦
33.8k5 gold badges123 silver badges212 bronze badges
33.8k5 gold badges123 silver badges212 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
Mage in the BarrelMage in the Barrel
5293 silver badges13 bronze badges
5293 silver badges13 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Questions about alignment tend not to work well in the stack format unless they’re about the raw mechanics. This will likely get closed as POB.
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
8 hours ago
5
$begingroup$
This isn’t really opinion based it’s pretty factual. Asking where does x belong on the axis is opinion based. But this isn’t that. I’m asking what the difference between two seeming similar alignments are which isn’t opinion based. The first being morality and the second about how two things in a system are defined.
$endgroup$
– Mage in the Barrel
8 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Related on Can a PC be unaligned?.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@indigochild I don't think it's dupe, they're not asking if they can be, they're asking how it's different from True Neutral.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While the morality angle may be subjective, this question can be addressed with mechanics. For example, if there are effects that apply to neutral-aligned creatures but not unaligned creatures, or vice versa.
$endgroup$
– MikeQ
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Questions about alignment tend not to work well in the stack format unless they’re about the raw mechanics. This will likely get closed as POB.
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
8 hours ago
5
$begingroup$
This isn’t really opinion based it’s pretty factual. Asking where does x belong on the axis is opinion based. But this isn’t that. I’m asking what the difference between two seeming similar alignments are which isn’t opinion based. The first being morality and the second about how two things in a system are defined.
$endgroup$
– Mage in the Barrel
8 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Related on Can a PC be unaligned?.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@indigochild I don't think it's dupe, they're not asking if they can be, they're asking how it's different from True Neutral.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While the morality angle may be subjective, this question can be addressed with mechanics. For example, if there are effects that apply to neutral-aligned creatures but not unaligned creatures, or vice versa.
$endgroup$
– MikeQ
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Questions about alignment tend not to work well in the stack format unless they’re about the raw mechanics. This will likely get closed as POB.
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Questions about alignment tend not to work well in the stack format unless they’re about the raw mechanics. This will likely get closed as POB.
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
8 hours ago
5
5
$begingroup$
This isn’t really opinion based it’s pretty factual. Asking where does x belong on the axis is opinion based. But this isn’t that. I’m asking what the difference between two seeming similar alignments are which isn’t opinion based. The first being morality and the second about how two things in a system are defined.
$endgroup$
– Mage in the Barrel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
This isn’t really opinion based it’s pretty factual. Asking where does x belong on the axis is opinion based. But this isn’t that. I’m asking what the difference between two seeming similar alignments are which isn’t opinion based. The first being morality and the second about how two things in a system are defined.
$endgroup$
– Mage in the Barrel
8 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Related on Can a PC be unaligned?.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related on Can a PC be unaligned?.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
@indigochild I don't think it's dupe, they're not asking if they can be, they're asking how it's different from True Neutral.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@indigochild I don't think it's dupe, they're not asking if they can be, they're asking how it's different from True Neutral.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
While the morality angle may be subjective, this question can be addressed with mechanics. For example, if there are effects that apply to neutral-aligned creatures but not unaligned creatures, or vice versa.
$endgroup$
– MikeQ
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
While the morality angle may be subjective, this question can be addressed with mechanics. For example, if there are effects that apply to neutral-aligned creatures but not unaligned creatures, or vice versa.
$endgroup$
– MikeQ
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Unaligned specifically describes the "alignment" of creatures that lack the intellectual capacity to understand morals and ethics, as the Basic Rules describes:
Most creatures that lack the capacity for rational thought do not have alignments—they are unaligned. Such a creature is incapable of making a moral or ethical choice and acts according to its bestial nature. Sharks are savage predators, for example, but they are not evil; they have no alignment.
What this is meant to convey is that a creature that lacks the capacity for moral reasoning can do things which would absolutely be considered evil (or good, or lawful or chaotic) actions, were it a creature with the capacity for moral reasoning, but that doesn't make it actually evil (or good, or chaotic or lawful).
To take an example from popular culture, the common domestic housecat has a reputation for apparent sadism and cruelty based on how it hunts and "plays with its food". Were the cat an intelligent creature who chose to act that way towards its prey, it could quite fairly be called evil; it effectively often tortures prey animals for no practical purpose. However, a cat is not capable of moral reasoning, and it is not reasonable to ascribe an alignment to it - the game makes this explicit by calling such creatures unaligned.
Being unaligned is not the same as being neutral, since being neutral describes an intelligent creature that takes an overall neutral moral/ethical stance, but an unaligned creature could display any manner of cruel, altruistic, random or ordered behaviour without that having any impact on its mechanical alignment.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The reasoning behind their actions is what alignment means
You hit the nail on the head when you said
unaligned is wild animals and true neutral being for intelligent creatures.
Alignment is a choice (most of the time), it's a philosophy and world outlook that a creature capable of thinking uses to interact with the world.
Animals (and certain other things like oozes, aberrations, monstrosities, whatever) lack the intelligence to choose to follow their alignment, they just do. A wolf or a cow or a black pudding doesn't choose to eat things, it just reacts based on instinct. They are amoral (lacking morality).
Carcer pointed out that outsiders like Fiends and Celestials also cannot choose their alignment, it's intrinsic to what they are, but they can still choose their behavior based on their alignment, whereas an unaligned thing doesn't choose at all.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f153917%2fwhat-is-the-difference-between-true-neutral-and-unaligned%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Unaligned specifically describes the "alignment" of creatures that lack the intellectual capacity to understand morals and ethics, as the Basic Rules describes:
Most creatures that lack the capacity for rational thought do not have alignments—they are unaligned. Such a creature is incapable of making a moral or ethical choice and acts according to its bestial nature. Sharks are savage predators, for example, but they are not evil; they have no alignment.
What this is meant to convey is that a creature that lacks the capacity for moral reasoning can do things which would absolutely be considered evil (or good, or lawful or chaotic) actions, were it a creature with the capacity for moral reasoning, but that doesn't make it actually evil (or good, or chaotic or lawful).
To take an example from popular culture, the common domestic housecat has a reputation for apparent sadism and cruelty based on how it hunts and "plays with its food". Were the cat an intelligent creature who chose to act that way towards its prey, it could quite fairly be called evil; it effectively often tortures prey animals for no practical purpose. However, a cat is not capable of moral reasoning, and it is not reasonable to ascribe an alignment to it - the game makes this explicit by calling such creatures unaligned.
Being unaligned is not the same as being neutral, since being neutral describes an intelligent creature that takes an overall neutral moral/ethical stance, but an unaligned creature could display any manner of cruel, altruistic, random or ordered behaviour without that having any impact on its mechanical alignment.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Unaligned specifically describes the "alignment" of creatures that lack the intellectual capacity to understand morals and ethics, as the Basic Rules describes:
Most creatures that lack the capacity for rational thought do not have alignments—they are unaligned. Such a creature is incapable of making a moral or ethical choice and acts according to its bestial nature. Sharks are savage predators, for example, but they are not evil; they have no alignment.
What this is meant to convey is that a creature that lacks the capacity for moral reasoning can do things which would absolutely be considered evil (or good, or lawful or chaotic) actions, were it a creature with the capacity for moral reasoning, but that doesn't make it actually evil (or good, or chaotic or lawful).
To take an example from popular culture, the common domestic housecat has a reputation for apparent sadism and cruelty based on how it hunts and "plays with its food". Were the cat an intelligent creature who chose to act that way towards its prey, it could quite fairly be called evil; it effectively often tortures prey animals for no practical purpose. However, a cat is not capable of moral reasoning, and it is not reasonable to ascribe an alignment to it - the game makes this explicit by calling such creatures unaligned.
Being unaligned is not the same as being neutral, since being neutral describes an intelligent creature that takes an overall neutral moral/ethical stance, but an unaligned creature could display any manner of cruel, altruistic, random or ordered behaviour without that having any impact on its mechanical alignment.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Unaligned specifically describes the "alignment" of creatures that lack the intellectual capacity to understand morals and ethics, as the Basic Rules describes:
Most creatures that lack the capacity for rational thought do not have alignments—they are unaligned. Such a creature is incapable of making a moral or ethical choice and acts according to its bestial nature. Sharks are savage predators, for example, but they are not evil; they have no alignment.
What this is meant to convey is that a creature that lacks the capacity for moral reasoning can do things which would absolutely be considered evil (or good, or lawful or chaotic) actions, were it a creature with the capacity for moral reasoning, but that doesn't make it actually evil (or good, or chaotic or lawful).
To take an example from popular culture, the common domestic housecat has a reputation for apparent sadism and cruelty based on how it hunts and "plays with its food". Were the cat an intelligent creature who chose to act that way towards its prey, it could quite fairly be called evil; it effectively often tortures prey animals for no practical purpose. However, a cat is not capable of moral reasoning, and it is not reasonable to ascribe an alignment to it - the game makes this explicit by calling such creatures unaligned.
Being unaligned is not the same as being neutral, since being neutral describes an intelligent creature that takes an overall neutral moral/ethical stance, but an unaligned creature could display any manner of cruel, altruistic, random or ordered behaviour without that having any impact on its mechanical alignment.
$endgroup$
Unaligned specifically describes the "alignment" of creatures that lack the intellectual capacity to understand morals and ethics, as the Basic Rules describes:
Most creatures that lack the capacity for rational thought do not have alignments—they are unaligned. Such a creature is incapable of making a moral or ethical choice and acts according to its bestial nature. Sharks are savage predators, for example, but they are not evil; they have no alignment.
What this is meant to convey is that a creature that lacks the capacity for moral reasoning can do things which would absolutely be considered evil (or good, or lawful or chaotic) actions, were it a creature with the capacity for moral reasoning, but that doesn't make it actually evil (or good, or chaotic or lawful).
To take an example from popular culture, the common domestic housecat has a reputation for apparent sadism and cruelty based on how it hunts and "plays with its food". Were the cat an intelligent creature who chose to act that way towards its prey, it could quite fairly be called evil; it effectively often tortures prey animals for no practical purpose. However, a cat is not capable of moral reasoning, and it is not reasonable to ascribe an alignment to it - the game makes this explicit by calling such creatures unaligned.
Being unaligned is not the same as being neutral, since being neutral describes an intelligent creature that takes an overall neutral moral/ethical stance, but an unaligned creature could display any manner of cruel, altruistic, random or ordered behaviour without that having any impact on its mechanical alignment.
answered 7 hours ago
CarcerCarcer
34.2k6 gold badges111 silver badges174 bronze badges
34.2k6 gold badges111 silver badges174 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The reasoning behind their actions is what alignment means
You hit the nail on the head when you said
unaligned is wild animals and true neutral being for intelligent creatures.
Alignment is a choice (most of the time), it's a philosophy and world outlook that a creature capable of thinking uses to interact with the world.
Animals (and certain other things like oozes, aberrations, monstrosities, whatever) lack the intelligence to choose to follow their alignment, they just do. A wolf or a cow or a black pudding doesn't choose to eat things, it just reacts based on instinct. They are amoral (lacking morality).
Carcer pointed out that outsiders like Fiends and Celestials also cannot choose their alignment, it's intrinsic to what they are, but they can still choose their behavior based on their alignment, whereas an unaligned thing doesn't choose at all.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The reasoning behind their actions is what alignment means
You hit the nail on the head when you said
unaligned is wild animals and true neutral being for intelligent creatures.
Alignment is a choice (most of the time), it's a philosophy and world outlook that a creature capable of thinking uses to interact with the world.
Animals (and certain other things like oozes, aberrations, monstrosities, whatever) lack the intelligence to choose to follow their alignment, they just do. A wolf or a cow or a black pudding doesn't choose to eat things, it just reacts based on instinct. They are amoral (lacking morality).
Carcer pointed out that outsiders like Fiends and Celestials also cannot choose their alignment, it's intrinsic to what they are, but they can still choose their behavior based on their alignment, whereas an unaligned thing doesn't choose at all.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The reasoning behind their actions is what alignment means
You hit the nail on the head when you said
unaligned is wild animals and true neutral being for intelligent creatures.
Alignment is a choice (most of the time), it's a philosophy and world outlook that a creature capable of thinking uses to interact with the world.
Animals (and certain other things like oozes, aberrations, monstrosities, whatever) lack the intelligence to choose to follow their alignment, they just do. A wolf or a cow or a black pudding doesn't choose to eat things, it just reacts based on instinct. They are amoral (lacking morality).
Carcer pointed out that outsiders like Fiends and Celestials also cannot choose their alignment, it's intrinsic to what they are, but they can still choose their behavior based on their alignment, whereas an unaligned thing doesn't choose at all.
$endgroup$
The reasoning behind their actions is what alignment means
You hit the nail on the head when you said
unaligned is wild animals and true neutral being for intelligent creatures.
Alignment is a choice (most of the time), it's a philosophy and world outlook that a creature capable of thinking uses to interact with the world.
Animals (and certain other things like oozes, aberrations, monstrosities, whatever) lack the intelligence to choose to follow their alignment, they just do. A wolf or a cow or a black pudding doesn't choose to eat things, it just reacts based on instinct. They are amoral (lacking morality).
Carcer pointed out that outsiders like Fiends and Celestials also cannot choose their alignment, it's intrinsic to what they are, but they can still choose their behavior based on their alignment, whereas an unaligned thing doesn't choose at all.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
GreySageGreySage
17k4 gold badges60 silver badges107 bronze badges
17k4 gold badges60 silver badges107 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
To be precise, the text is also clear that for fiends and celestials, alignment is not a choice - they are what they are because it's fundamental to their nature. A devil is lawful evil by instinct and nature rather than by deliberate choice. The distinction is that the devil is smart enough to introspect and understand that its actions are lawful and evil, even if it doesn't have a real choice about behaving that way.
$endgroup$
– Carcer
7 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Might be worth pointing out that outsiders that change alignment become something else entirely. Zariel as an example (p10 MTOF), outsiders like angels and devils lack a dual nature (soul and body) so their entire being changes if they "fall" or "rise" so to speak.
$endgroup$
– Slagmoth
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f153917%2fwhat-is-the-difference-between-true-neutral-and-unaligned%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Questions about alignment tend not to work well in the stack format unless they’re about the raw mechanics. This will likely get closed as POB.
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
8 hours ago
5
$begingroup$
This isn’t really opinion based it’s pretty factual. Asking where does x belong on the axis is opinion based. But this isn’t that. I’m asking what the difference between two seeming similar alignments are which isn’t opinion based. The first being morality and the second about how two things in a system are defined.
$endgroup$
– Mage in the Barrel
8 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Related on Can a PC be unaligned?.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@indigochild I don't think it's dupe, they're not asking if they can be, they're asking how it's different from True Neutral.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While the morality angle may be subjective, this question can be addressed with mechanics. For example, if there are effects that apply to neutral-aligned creatures but not unaligned creatures, or vice versa.
$endgroup$
– MikeQ
7 hours ago