"this society may have failed you, but that doesn't mean I have to." Paladin when speaking to the party Rogue.

@PlayYourRole

2 жыл бұрын

One of my FAVORITE types of character relationships right there

@sinistertwister686

2 жыл бұрын

Our party rogue is nobleman who was too bored with life of luxury and decided that stealing is more interesting than taxes. What should our paladin do?

@Sw0rm

2 жыл бұрын

Don't give up. As my understanding a paladin hasn't broken their oath until they've given up on them. If redemption cannot be achieved then Justice must Fall, and only a fiend is above redemption. Has for ideas on how to approach this, help him become a privateer, convince him that blackmailing corrupt nobles into compliance will be more fun, find a cause he's willing to support or steer him towards a group that honestly deserve to be robbed. I hope this helps somehow. And if justice has to fall you don't have to bail him out of prison but it's nice to see a friendly face in a dark place, pay him a visit.

@MarkusAldawn

2 жыл бұрын

@@sinistertwister686 find a way for them to live an interesting life that doesn't end up hurting other people. If that doesn't work, have it spiral into nemeses. Or the Paladin slowly gains the upper hand (rogue stops stealing, uses their gifts for good, etc) but at the expense of their Good alignment (i.e. the Paladin is using mind control or potions or just manipulation/blackmail).

@bibbobella

2 жыл бұрын

@@sinistertwister686 Agree with them but try to push him towards stealing from the "right" people. "Stealing isn't right....but I think you as a nobleman would know more than anyone that the biggest thiefs in this world are the rich and powerful...so why not challenge yourself a bit? Take from the people that can actually give you a fight back and not from the poor that can do nothing but accept their livelyhood being taken away from them. You said you wanted to do it to have fun but what fun is there in taking from someone that can't hope to retaliate? "

Being a lawful good character doesnt mean following the law to the letter. If a law is unjust, it's a lawful good character's duty to stand up to it. Paladins especially are in a unique position where they can be judge, jury, and executioner, regardless of the laws of man.

@troyamonga0005

2 жыл бұрын

@@mitchryan257 For normal, real people sure. But a LG Paladin of goodness that can literally smell evil in a medieval fantasy society is probably more reliable than whatever alternative the nobles come up with.

@Sanvone

2 жыл бұрын

That whole description doesn't hold up. That's just bad reasoning which crumbles in practice or under scrutiny. First of all the whole connundrum of following letter vs spirit of the law is still within bounds of law. Many would be suprised how many safety precautions most legal systems undertake for such instances. Secondly why would character be (not was or wants) lawful if he considers it something he has to rebel against? Third: being lawful and self-righteous are not the same. Truly lawful person has modesty to realise that he/she isn't omnipotent/all knowing. Thus defers to some sort of "law" as optimal method of dealing with different social experiences. Fourth: you might refer to laws of man as opposed to law of god/natural law (as per doctrinal discourse of positive vs natural law) but in practise we are just humans who play and as such everything is to a degree man made. Additionally if you are just following your deity/religion rules you are lawful because you don't view yourself through other (conflicting?) set of rules. Just embrace the conflict it will bring instead of being good'y two shoes. Lastly as powerful and magical as our characters are they are not flawless. Otherwise playing would be somewhat boring because instead of "if" the only question would be "when" we succeed. Road to hell is paved with good intentions.

@zeehero7280

5 ай бұрын

Then you have the Oath of Conquest, where in many cases your goal is to become the law, in the name of a better order!

@ferdinandavila-soto7233

3 ай бұрын

@@zeehero7280An Oath of Conquest Paladin doesn’t even have to fight for “a better order.” They could easily fight just to gain power for themselves, or even an evil master. It’s perfect for BBEGs.

The greatest quote for me when I researched how to be a Lawful character was, "Lawful Good, doesn't mean Lawful Nice."

Good to hear "how to play these arch-type without being a headache" series. Keep up the good work!

@PlayYourRole

2 жыл бұрын

I'm really enjoying it!! Thank you!

It would be interesting to see a video about “chaotic stupid” to round this out. I see that trope/excuse for disruptive role play more than lawful stupid

@someoneawesome8717

2 жыл бұрын

As someone who typically plays a chaotic aligned character that could be full of good advice

@AuntLoopy123

Жыл бұрын

Fortunately, my own chaotic stupid player is both smaller and slower than two of the other characters. So, when she runs down the road, yelling, "ADVENTURE!" the bunbarian can hop after her, and carry her back to the group, so they can finish planning. It's a thing. Sort of a running gag, now. She's usually still "running" while he carries her, like in a cartoon when the toon runs off a cliff, and doesn't realize there is no ground beneath them. She never GETS anywhere or manages to actually cause a problem. At least, not that way. I'd love to see a video on that, as well. But if not, my advice would be to 1) talk it over with the other players, and 2) try to limit the chaotic stupidity to stupidity that doesn't actually harm the group, or anyone in it, except, perhaps, in very rare cases, and then, let your PC LEARN from it. Story and character growth! Yay! and 3) Know when to unleash the chaos. Sometimes, a bit of chaos is exactly what's needed. But your character can learn when to be chaotic, and when to sit on their hands and hold themselves in order by sheer force of willpower. Even a four-wisdom PC can learn. Broken clocks are right twice a day, after all.

I've plays alot of Lawful characters, usually the only one, and mostly my favorite alignment, Lawful Evil. The big trick is people thing Chaotic alignments mean freedom. I think a Law alignment provides options. it's easy to shoot a target on stable ground and reinforcing traditions while eroding others serves as a means of security and dominance. Sometimes it's just good to be a Party's centering rock, or in a Lawful Evil's case "We've been talking about our plan, and The LE player hasn't spoken up yet, maybe we should reconsider if what we're doing is right." Hope this helps a bit

@kenle2

Жыл бұрын

This reminds me of the trope from Order of the Stick: "Your approval fills me with shame."

Lawful characters are great characters to play when learning how to role play. Because if you give yourself rules for how to react to certain situations, it helps you interact with the party and the world in fun ways.

@Sanvone

2 жыл бұрын

Lawful characters get complicated the longer you play while chaotic always have the excuse of being chaotic. I've played the same LG Paladin for 15 years against stacked opposition of stronger player characters with possibility of death in PvP encounters. Being consisted while restricted by vows/rules is quite a challenge in such scenario. Also to be good lawful roleplay you need to understand the setting (rules, realities etc) to be able to properly position yourself into in-game social hierarchy. So if it can be help for someone first time roleplaying, struggle will start few sessions in if one desires to reach the peak of RP.

I think a great example of a would-be Lawful Good character in D&D is Tenya Iida from My Hero Academia. He's a virtuous person who respects the rule of the law and wants to uphold the high moral standing of the hero class, which does have a tendency of making him a bit of a stick in the mud at times. However, when his classmates do something he doesn't condone or believes to be contrary to the hero code (eg, when he, Deku, Kirishima, and Momo go to rescue Bakugo in season 3), he doesn't tattle on his classmates, he doesn't give them a long-winded self-righteous speech on why they shouldn't, nor does he stop them; instead, he opts to go with them in the interest of making sure they're safe and that they don't get into trouble. What the group is doing might technically go against Tenya's moral code, but he's able to work around it to where he doesn't feel like going along with it causes him to abandon his morals.

In the other direction is what I call chaotic stupid, or chaotic neutral. Not because its a bad alignment, but because so many people use it as a free pass to act like a psychopath, and pretend like there should be no consequences. Home alignment of the murderhobo.

@MiniCerberus991

2 жыл бұрын

I'm set to play a chaotic neutral gunslinger that just wants to save his true family by any means necessary. any tips on how to avoid that common fallacy?

@travisdunbar1886

2 жыл бұрын

@@MiniCerberus991 Headphone warning for his intro music, but this youtuber, GuildmasterDan, presents the view on alignment I like. Here is his playlist for the series: kzread.info/dash/bejne/pnummbOEgrDUYsY.html Again, headphone warning. He has HORRIBLE audio editing, but an excellent explanation of the material.

@martinnussbaum3435

2 жыл бұрын

@@MiniCerberus991 Sounds like you already have a pretty good handle on it. You have a single overarching value that rationalizes all other choices. You don't go out of your way to cause chaos, but chaos will out when it prevents you from saving your family from whatever the threat is.

@tom_curtis

2 жыл бұрын

@@MiniCerberus991, first, good choice of alignment for a character with that attitude. Second, a chaotic neutral character will typically be goal focused. They may be willing to do 'whatever it takes' to achieve that goal, but they will only do that when they have reason to think it advances that goal (or other, subsidiary goals they have). Third, chaotic neutral characters may think of themselves as willing to do whatever it takes, but in fact they are not. There will be some limits on what they are willing to do. (If there are not, they are blurring into chaotic evil). You should think about what your characters actual limits are; and also about whether or not you are more willing to cross them in the heat of the moment than when in a calm position; and if so, how will the regret of having done so effect your character.

Can you make a video on playing someone on the evil alignment chart without... y'know... being the 2nd bbeg. I'm gonna combine it with this video for a lawful evil tiefling fiend warlock (sensing a pattern?) Thanks!

@eloidasarmi6815

2 жыл бұрын

You probably should play like Comedian from Watchmen. You are not a good noodle, but you are working with your party because of...reasons)

@PlayYourRole

2 жыл бұрын

I think I can get to that! I made one for that as one of the very first videos on my channel, but it could probably do with an update at this point

@WilliamWhyles

2 жыл бұрын

@@PlayYourRole danke schön

@WilliamWhyles

2 жыл бұрын

@@eloidasarmi6815 here's my concept. The only reason that he works with the party, is because he knows that he can't do the thing on his own. And if he's doing the thing that the party doesn't like (such as killing the only person with information about ___) they'll get kicked out... or worse

@jacksonh6797

2 жыл бұрын

While I’d also love a video on the topic, figured I might as well share some the big tip I’ve figured out via playing an evil character or two: The most important thing to consider right away is finding a reason to work with the party. Whether it be because their goals align with your own or you just like having someone to take a hit for you, giving that question thought is crucial in figuring out why the group would stick together.

The thing that tends to trip people up is that they seem to think laws and rules can't be nuanced, which is rather silly. For a real-world example: murder is illegal, but killing in self-defense can be legal. And the law spells out what conditions do and do not constitute self-defense. Sometimes exceptions to the rules are rules themselves. Similarly, a Lawful character's code doesn't have to be completely black-and-white. It doesn't have to be "I will *never* kill anyone, *ever*." It could be things like "I won't kill anyone who didn't attack me first", or "I won't kill someone who's surrendering." And it's not like a character's code can never change - rules and exceptions can be added or removed to accommodate situations you hadn't thought of before they came up. Again, that's how the real law works - it's not completely static, sometimes it has to adapt. Though as you said, it's important to keep the initial reason for the code in mind - if you're making exceptions all the time just for the sake of convenience or gratification, then yeah, you're probably not really Lawful.

@LordDarkhelm

2 жыл бұрын

Yep. My party was very shocked when my Lawful Good military character went and slaughtered his way through an enemy compound without much care. He spared people who surrendered, but he was there on an assignment to eliminate the opposition and almost everyone was an active combatant. Did he do it? Yes. Was he happy about it? No way.

I think that problems arise often when players start to "do what my character would do" instead of playing a game with other players. The player will argue endlessly because everyone is playing their character. No one is willing to compromise. That's when you realize that these character would never work together. A paladin denouncing a thief to the law is not worst than said thief going and stealing for fun. Also, GM where alway's way too quick to strip the paladin from his power, which in turn put pressure to the player to "do what's right".

Throwing my hat in the ring. A Paladin I play is a self-conscious and low-energy Dragonborn, who started out as an Oath of Devotion. However, they didn't really have an oath in mind, or some kind of rule to follow really. They were just trying and attempting to copy the man they look up to. An Oath of Devotion Paladin who took in my big scaly teddy bear when he was venturing around the empire, lost as to what he should do. Now, he did switch to Oath of Redemption after a talk with a female Dragonborn, War domain Cleric of Bahamut, and much deep thought. However, he still doesn't really have a personal rule, or rules, that he's following. He's literally coasting by, using the basic shit that's listed for Oath of Redemption. It is so interesting to watch play out, because he will by all means just stand on the sidelines, and watch things play out. If a fight breaks out, however, everyone knows that they can count on him should things turn sour. Outside of combat, he'll jump in and be pro-active whenever no one else is around, or when something really doesn't sit right with him on a personal level. So part of his journey is discovering what rule, or rules plural, he wants to live by.

Tl;dr 1.Remember you are not always restricted by law, but by your moral code. 2.Find loopholes to bend your moral framework to fit in better because you're only doing it for the powers you get.

I'm more of a chaotic good guy usually and I've never played a lawful character until a few months ago, maybe beacause of the lawful stupid stereotype or maybe just because I didn't feel like it. But I have to say that, if not played superficially, is an incredible experience and it is as rewarding as it is difficult to play. Maybe I've made it more difficult that it needed to be by making a lawful good barbarian lol but it's a lot of fun nonetheless

As a DM I always start off explaining the meaning (according to my interpretation and understanding, being the DM) of the alignment chart. Most players use it as a replacement for a personality or goal, specially the new players, but once I give them this little speech, they play with far more depth. It's a morality system, not a legal system. Being an evil alignment doesn't mean you're trying to usurp the BBEG, it means you're self-serving. You will put yourself above others, which isn't immoral; you might be the last bastion against overwhelming odds. Preserving you can save countless others, after all. Saving a king preserves his good standings with other houses and lands, his training in logistics, prevent collapse of trade routes which would starve the locals. One man very easily can be worth thousands of good souls. Chaotic means you do not follow the law as strictly as a divine missive, you care more for the nature of the law and it's proper use/application. Perhaps you have lost faith with the letter of the law being used as a loophole, and care for its victims. You might views those who believe blindly in the law as childish. Lawful means you follow the law because without laws or legal repercussion we would collapse as a society and people. Faith in justice can protect the powerless, let them sleep in peace. Lawlessness breeds victims like rats, and you will not allow it. Even a rusted shield, flawed as it is, can catch an arrow and so it must be preserved. Good is a sense of altruism, possibly to the point of martyrdom. Perhaps you hate seeing others suffer; knowing you can easily bear the weight of struggle encourages you to shoulder another's burden. Or maybe you are simply penitent, haunted by previous failures you cannot bear to live through twice in one life. You might even be a pure soul, whose sense of virtue is steeled by seeing those who need a hero. Whatever you're reasoning, you would rather suffer before others do. A sacrifice of one beloved soul can turn a cowering crowd into a zealous mob, after all. And neutrality? You just aren't polarized like your counterparts. Situations change, circumstances change; your decision making reflects the truly grey world we live in. Some days cruelty is more helpful than kindness in helping someone grow. Some men are too cruel and blackened to deserve kindness or forgiveness. Some days a monster must be saved in order to kill a god.

0:52 That's why the commandment's proper translation is "thou shalt not murder."

I Do have some points i'd bring up with this. the first is malevolent DM's, I've seen alot of DM's go out of their way to try to screw over a paladin or a character with a code of honor. The other point is that i've seen people try to abuse the yes/and to the point of ruining the game for other people manipulating the dm into getting more of what they want.

@jojbenedoot7459

2 жыл бұрын

"No, but" can also be used in improv, but should be used VERY SPARINGLY in comparison to its alternative

@skyeshi3570

2 жыл бұрын

@@jojbenedoot7459 for us he used it every session almost

My best lawful neutral character was an Oath of Multiverse Balance paladin in planescape themed game. He fast enough realised, that trying to balance things out at the lower level is useless in the scape of the whole multiverse. So he decided to murder all the deities, which can adjust balance in any way. And when you are going to kill dozens of hundreds of gods, what's wrong with rogue killing somebody? It's insignificant mortal business, it's not that much of a deal xd

@PlayYourRole

2 жыл бұрын

Love that! The eventual changing of a mind based off circumstance is a huge part of developing characters

@WhyYouMadBoi

2 жыл бұрын

Ok what makes him lawful then? Neutral sure but none of what you said makes it seem like a lawful character rather just a neutral one

@eloidasarmi6815

2 жыл бұрын

@@WhyYouMadBoi he kinda lives by the law of his oath. It's not transparent from the text above, but I tried to play him very consistent in his decisions and all.

@WhyYouMadBoi

2 жыл бұрын

@@eloidasarmi6815 Ok so what's his oath? Afterall a law gotta be spoken or at least be consistent. I mean he is a oath if the multiverse balance paladin. There gotta be something. I'm going to take a guess and say its a homebrew subclass in a 5e game.

@eloidasarmi6815

2 жыл бұрын

@@WhyYouMadBoi nah, it was homebrew in Savage Worlds: Planescape)

The best way to look at lawful characters is through Deontological/Kantian ethics. So, basically you bring it down to categorical, and hypothetical imperatives. I personally prefer virtue ethics, but if you handle it correctly you can easily create a code of conduct for your character that allows for the necessary freedom an ethical theory requires while still remaining lawful good.

@nicovelardita8619

2 жыл бұрын

Hi, sorry if I bother you but could you expand in your "best way to look at lawful characters". I'm interested but no so big in philosophy myself.

I think the problem with Lawful good in the DnD community is because most people just think its way more restricting than it actually is. Like you said, your lawful good character doesn't have to follow the actual law, they can follow a personal code or a creed, or a law of a higher organization. Like I feel like people forget that both the Mandalorian and Hal Jordan are Lawful Good characters(Hal is a bit more debatable but I still think the argument is very strong.), but people don't often think of them this way because they do things that are considered "against their law" but if you really examine it closer, its not that simple. The mandalorian never breaks his code, he's just hyper aware of EXACTLY what he promised to do, and as a result, will do things that walk the line of breaking it without doing so. For instance, he was payed to deliver Grogu to the empire, so he did that. However, he never promised that he wouldn't come back later, kill everyone and take the child back. It seems like he broke the code, but he really didn't. and thats a great example of a kind of lawful good character thats easier to play, somebody who honors their code but can find ways of working around it to do the smart or the right thing.

I just found your channel and now I'm dying to get a group together again, your videos are so great for new character ideas and how to help everyone have fun!

dude watching this on 3/9 22...you have 32k subscribers...good job mate....love the content...even though sometimes I slightly disagree.

Also, Othar Tryggvassen in Girl Genius (comic) is a GLORIOUS example of this type.

Eyyy, goal reached! Either that or I'm having a fever dream. Anyways, I'm tryna say well done or good luck ^^. Love the content.

Paladins had an entry in 2nd edition that made me understand paladins completely. Their was a line in the book that said "how can a paladin travel with people that don't follow their code?". The answer was a good paladin should be able to understand and realize their code is harder then other peoples and they walk a path that few can follow, and that they should attempt to guide other people to follow their code and not shun them for not having the same level of inner strength. So you could in fact, if it wasn't blatantly evil, let things slide, but you couldn't however attempt to ignore that it happened. You could attempt to get others to follow your code, but you didn't have to assume they would.

Somtimes oaths can feel very nebulous to players. I find that it helps to think of marital vows, or the Hippocratic oath. In a marriage you have stumbling blocks placed in your path and you find ways to forge ahead because of the commitment you've made. Doctors swear to do no harm, but will perform a risky surgery, or prescrib a risky drug if the potential for good is high enough

Great discussion as always!

I've heard of chaotic stupid before, but this is the first I've heard of lawful stupid. Now I want to know about neutral stupid

Would love to see a video like these but on how to deal with (in general) when the party has very different moral codes just like the lawful good paladin and a chaotic neutral rogue. Tips on how to roleplay these differences without shutting them down all the time, but sometimes (like the example here of "stealing because it's fun). Because I want to be able to ACT like i have a different alignment and not just reprimand the rogue for doing something bad (with just words), while also not just being the annoying paladin every time.

Been loving this new series so far! And if it’s not to much to ask may I request a guide on how to play a lazy/laid back character without necessarily being useless to the party. Hoping to see more of your content and keep up the good work!

@MayHugger

2 жыл бұрын

Could try to min max a character with a strong multi class combo, that way when they finally decide to do something they still feel powerful, and this way the minmaxing is more balanced since they aren’t always wrecking everything, just when they want to.

@m.flamingo9063

2 жыл бұрын

@@MayHuggerAye that Sounds like a good idea, thanks for the advice!

@MayHugger

2 жыл бұрын

@@m.flamingo9063 No problem :)

There was a lot of good food for thought in this video that I'll be thinking about. It also makes me want to hear your thoughts on playing chaotic aligned characters and what that means.

Love this. Now make a video about how to play an evil character without making the party kill you

I never play Lawful Characters and only play Chaotic Neutral with occasional dips & jumps into Chaotic Good/Chaotic Evil or in 1 incident a purely Chaotic Evil Character.

If you are lawful enough you become the knight errant, meme machine

@PlayYourRole

2 жыл бұрын

You either die a fleshed out character, or live long enough to see yourself become a meme

I have never seen a better representation of what a Lawgul Good Character would be played as for The sake of The party. Really good indeed.

This is good life advice too tbh 👍 be kind to each other everyone out there

Lawful characters without exasperating legalism is like ice cream without cream

Migs Mayfeld to Din Djarin, "So is it you can't take off the helmet, or you can't show your face? 'Cause there's a difference."

Ok, we need stupid as allignment. Like in "lawful stupid, chaotic stupid, stupid neutral"

My suggestion for the next video? Idc as long as theres a musical number

@PlayYourRole

2 жыл бұрын

Please, you don't know what you're asking for. Nobodies ears deserve that treatment 😭

Two things I would say to remember is loopholes and specific wording if up holding your work paladin style is your thing don't make any promises you can't or won't uphold instead phrase it in a way that doesn't actually hold anything against you a example would be promising that *you* won't do anything as long as the villain doesn't do anything to their friends they have the party immediately attack and soon as the villain hurts a party member you are free to attack. Working with those restrictions is really fun for roleplay trying to figure out how to phrase a promise for loophole especially on the spot.

Very good points. The only issue is when your GM basically railroads you if you don't act the way they feel you should have acted. I actually have never played DnD but I have played other tabletop games like RoleMaster and Anima. The GM for RoleMaster was a very petty narrow minded guy. For example I was playing an Evil Ranger that used his summoning powers to feed a dragon. I lost my powers because a god I did NOT worship or get my powers from cut me off. In RoleMaster, at least how he was running it, Rangers were Channeling users that were given their powers from gods, either a specific one or just the general pantheon. I chose to get my powers from one the goddess of demons, darkness, and sacrifice. I lost my powers because I went against the rules the nature goddess set. When I brought up that I wasn't a worshiper of that god he said it wasn't appropriate that I got my powers from the other god. I had played that character for about a year before it was "inappropriate". It was because he wanted us to fight that dragon not feed it and have it go away.

Awesome job with these videos, keep up the good work! And if I may add onto your points, another key question I feel that's important to ask for a lawful character is the actual laws or codes they adhere to, since governments aren't the only source for those. For example, sticking to your "party rouge stealing" scenario, say the lawful character is a paladin sworn to a deity who highly promotes pacifism alongside the usual law-abiding stuff you'd expect, but the party is in a highly militaristic society/culture where trial by combat is the typical response for crimes. Does the paladin still call out the rouge, thus forcing them into a violent situation and harm's way? Which set of laws/values does the paladin act upon, between the specific commandment to pacifism which their deity values, or to that society's laws/traditions (which would still be held generally important towards the deity), and why?

I am playing a lawful neutral vedalken wizard, but everyone in my party is on the chaotic neutral/evil spectrum. So it makes it hard to roleplay. Part of the campaign is we are wanted for a murder we didnt commit - but my party regularly kills random NPCs, and steal from every person they come across. Its frustrating to play, as my character has to be the moral compass, to no avail. Its really hard to play without my character getting into conflict. Not to mention my character is the only one who cares about clearing our name - and hes the only one with loved ones that could be affected if we dont clear our name. Its a very unbalanced game and its frustrating as hes learning that sometimes violence/stealing is necessary but they arent growing at all

@koppunch

3 ай бұрын

A thought I have made to myself so that My ofter really lawful good characters can cooperate with scumbags is basically the fact that maybe in your lore, you can make the character work through the scumbags to pursue a greater good. When you cannot fix the bigger picture, center on your own.

What is the difference between pue Neutral/other 4 partial Neutrals? I think of Chaotic Neutral as does things on a whim and is to free spirited or Apathetic to really put thought into actions... But Lawful Neutral??? No clue how that or even harder to imagine Neutral Evil/Neutral Good are as Things in the first place. Can you think of Character examples from media that fit these mind sets so its easier to understand?

I loved your other “how to play” videos before, but something was missing. Turns out all you needed was a camera. Now it is perfect.

Our Rogue found a loot stash in a church. It was unclear whether the church was abandoned or not. So my Paladin took his cut of the loot, then put it back where the rogue found it, and added his own money to replace the missing coin. I figured the last thing we needed was to piss off some god.

Does a character who's lawful to the law of a king thats arc is that they learn that it doesn't align with their own personal values have to change alignment?

Are you familiar with soccer? Do you know Sergio Ramos? I swear you look a lot like him lol Good videos bro

I came for Hall Jordan, stayed for tips on role playing Hall Jordan

I often to do away with the code entirely favoring the ideas that relate to the name of the oath. This changes the role play dramatically, and creates what I feel is a more fitting style of role play for the paladin. The way I see it is that the name says it all for a vengeance paladin they would seek vengeance on the behalf of other or seek their own vengeance for themselves, but their oath could be anything as long as you can point to it and say that relates to vengeance in someway.

Favourite alignment ? True neutral. Not because its boring, but because of the insane versatility. If I play a character who is flawed in some way, is out looking for himself, but doesn't want to harm anyone else. If I play characters who think through situations and produce the best solution for himself and others without jumping into situations. A character who has no rules except those he created himself (and breaks constantly) for the benefit of himself and sometimes others he cares about. He is not a martyr, he is not a tyrant. He is a survivor who functions with an end-goal, and will make and break any amount of rules to get there. He takes care of those around him, to build trust because he understands that that is the smartest thing to do. He would never sacrifice an arm to save someone else who couldn't pay him back, but would for a trusted friend who was worth the arm. He has a goal in his mind, whether it's wealth, or power, or survival, and everything is a piece in the puzzle. He can't be completely described by the L/C G/E system, and in some way is above it, hence - True neutral.

the power of brain! thinking about stuff! then thinking some more about it!

I agree, Lawful characters can be really fun and interesting. In one of my main games at the moment I play a Lawful Good Artificer Artillerist. He's a decently well ranked member of the military of the big nasty racist empire of that world. But he believes that letting things go to chaos, even if the current order isn't great, will just hurt more people or hurt people even more. His hope is to become a high enough ranking member of society to be able to start improving things from within the system. Sadly, in a party of Chaotic Good and Chaotic Neutral characters he struggles to avoid brain aneurisms on a daily basis. I mean, these are the kind of people who would probably be out joining freedom fighter/terrorist (depending on perspective) groups normally.

a good example of paladins in pop culture are the jedi knights-tell obiwan he's an idiot. Robert parker's Spenser and the knights of the cross from the harry dresden stories. you could also see it in the good guys in the magnificent seven, all men who follow a code of honor

@Aquilenne

2 жыл бұрын

There's also the Surgebinders from Stormlight Archive, in multiple styles, though the Windrunners (Good leaning) and Skybreakers (Law leaning) are probably closest to what your typical person expects of a paladin.

I like the idea of a lawful stupid character with anger issues

Can you make a “How to play druid” vid? As someone who has played a lot of druids, I can testify that a classic “protector of the forest” druid is really hard to work with.

Good video

When it comes to lawful characters, one major question for me is, what kind are they? Everyone comes from somewhere, has fgrown up and is educated in some way and thus has experience with some code of ethic or laws. When they go out there, being all lawful (even lawful stupid if need be) whose laws and rules do they preach and live by? Those they have grown up with and know and likely even see as the rightful ones or those of the place they are at the moment? An example with extremes could be pickpocketing and how it is handled if caught. The place they come from is only giving a slap on the wrist and a stern talk even on repeat while where they are now it is beheading even for minor things. The first place has minor things like pickpocket happen all the time, the other place is barely knowing any crimes and it might even be a large public spectacle when punishing the criminal. Now add to it the criminal is a good friend and partymember. The first extreme should fight this cruelty and injustice with every step, the other should hand their own friend over to have them punished if they want to stick with the law... or maybe should think about it quite strongly even more so if they are not Lawful Evil which likely would fit the kind of punishment in the second case and realize not every law should be handled the same way. Personally, I like the first variation... the character comes with some kind of belief what is good and correct and what is not and it does not even need to be some codified laws and they will live by it even if they are in some region they never had even heard about before and even less, knowing their laws.

Do a why you should play the dm

Watched this out of curiosity but only just started the video, but general rule of thumb for me was that LAWFUL means that that person has a strict moral code, and CHAOTIC people are ones without. GOOD is selfless and EVIL is selfish. Captain America in civil war. breaking the law to help his friend, because friendship is a value to him. Lawful good. Batman, breaks bones in the name of Justice by any means necessary without the use of guns. lawful good. Hellboy, saves the world because his friends want him to, CHAOTIC good.

That psychology can actually be helpful OUTSIDE of the game too. A lot of irl people can vastly benefit form this lesson.

My character doesn’t kill, so she’s learned how to use her wit and illusions to get what she wants

For me, the way that CG has typically been described is a very "ends justify the means" play style. How exactly does this differ from the lawful playstyle in this video where things can typically go in a morally gray area?

After playing a Chaotic Good bard my second character is now a Lawful Good Dwarven Cleric and DAMN I do constantly struggle. Example: we meet bandits, easy. They say they steal from rich to help orphans. Ha! Insight check! Really good roll. They are totally honest. But we have contract to catch them. But orphans. But... AAAAAH! It is actually pretty interesting inner conflict but I miss being totally Chaotic and doing things at first impuls :P

@thereseemstobeenanerror1219

2 жыл бұрын

You should still put them in jail regardless of what they're doing they're stealing. It doesn't matter what the rationality is.

i generally play Chaotic characters because i myself am a chaotic individual, but recently, i joined my buddy's pathfinder game as a Lawful Neutral Armiger fighter looking to take the prestige class Hellknight once the requirements and required story events happen. now to those who don't know Hellknights, they are some of the most strictly Lawful groups in Pathfinder. their leadership tend towards Lawful Evil, but individual Hellknights don't have to be. so far, I've had an interesting time considering who my other party members are: a Half-Giant grenadier Alchemist, and a pair of Drow Siblings who fled their home after backstory stuff i only know out of character. luckily, my GM has ruled that in this corner of Golarion, Drow are really uncommon so my friends playing the Drow Siblings are able to pass themselves off as Elves from the Far east or something. i am worried for them once we come across the Order of the Nail of which my character is a part of and one of the more educated Hellknights recognizes them as Drow. I am hoping i become a Full Fledged Hellknight before then and can convince my superiors that i can keep my companions in check. so far they haven't done anything overtly wrong, the sister is a Witch that has a pet demon spider (it's really small and not obviously demonic) and the brother is... i can't remember the class of the top of my head but it involves taking abilities from the souls of slain enemies. from my character's perspective: the sister is creepy (mostly because of the spiders) but so far nice, the Brother is honorable and a good fighter, and the Half-giant is smart for his kind.

I made a lawful-stupid character who was a Ranger who would obey the law of the nation his in because his Int was below 10. He could care less what the party did to get the mission done as long as the mission got done.

I remember when first getting into DnD with college friends, we'd debate about choices characters would make because of alignment. Quickly discovering that the morality axises are not so simple. Characters do not exist in their alignment but rather through the choices that they make. Not all evil characters are murderous psychopaths and are capable of doing good if it aligns with their goals/values or perhaps as a means to an end

@reachfanatic1234

2 жыл бұрын

I agree fully it’s all about intention (most of the time)

@MatthewSmith-pv6gd

2 жыл бұрын

I think the problem is trying to dictate actions by alignment when it's internal in nature. To me at least, good means the character has empathetic motives. That is they care how their actions effect other people. Evil characters on the other hand will do whatever they will do, but just aren't motivated by the effects on others, rather something more selfish typically. The evil character may well do something good, like save orphans from a fire for example, but they just don't do it because they care about what happens to the orphans. Instead they might do so for a reason like they will gain clout, and thereby power, in the city.

The first time I really sat down and tried to make a “lawful” character, I wanted to play as morally grey character as I could. Conquest paladin, motive: desires status and the power of a brigade of personally trained soldiers (his own warrior nation/castle if you will). His targets for recruitment: bandits why?: bandits, RAW, are often times people down on their luck and are in a bad situation, wether it be the worship of a non-aproved deity, inability to pay your dues on time, a bad decision that marred your record etc. I had made the IRL connection of how the justice system works in America, you get caught, fined, jailed for a period of time, then released with a mark on your record. You get fired because people with a record are a security risk, no one wants to hire you because of said mark except for dead end jobs. This leads to staying that thin line, ending up homeless, or going back to what got you jailed in the first place out of DESPERATION! Bandits realistically, after jail time, would go right back to banditry, because it’s the only thing they can do to survive. My character, would spare their lives, put into perspective what a rut loop their lives have become and offer an alternative: “come with me, I will teach you how to fight, I will feed your will and ambitions, where others see a dredge of society, I see potential untapped. I will forge your rusty iron into peerless steel. I will find those that can further your skill and you will be proof that it was foolish to forsake the forgotten” He would train them 4v him, take them on missions appropriate/slightly above their level and let them earn coin and experience. Build their confidence and resolve.

The only place to get rooms was a baudy house. The party was surprised when my plaidin didn't object. I paid the ladys to stay away from my party and spent the night talking to them to take a new path.

I have a friend who only plays lawful stupid characters. I don't think it's because he likes the archetype, but because he just doesn't get the hint. Like, his thought pattern: "This ship captain was kind enough to sail us through dangerous waters, and even off the path a little bit, for a reduced price because the druid was goodberry feeding the crew. But when the party's pit-stop turned out to be an ancient dragon's hoard, and we didn't recover anything from it during our escape, now the ship captain is the bad guy because she doesn't want to travel with the idiots who angered an ancient dragon." (Granted, the ship captain still took us to our final destination, but refused to give us a return trip. We're lucky she didn't toss us in the sea right then and there.)

As a very lawful person, this is just good life advice on how to get along with people.

So, I am that person who uses weighted dice, but they are weighted towards the average so I can reduce the standard deviation of the dice roll to get higher rolls without arousing suspicion.

It's also possible to play a "lawful" character that isn't centered around law or even rules at all. That's because "lawful" can also just mean the opposite of chaotic. To give a real world example think of two people going on a road trip. One is chaotic, the other lawful. The chaotic character is fine just doing whatever and winging it. But the lawful one would make sure all their bags are packed properly, would want some kind of pre-planned schedule or itinerary, etc.

@Sanvone

2 жыл бұрын

What you refer isn't lawful but being orderly. At such even Chaotic character can be orderly.

"lawful good is more about following your morals even if they are wrong you dont need to follow the actual law"

I think if you play it right, it can be great to play a lawful character that's doing something that can be debated as stupid. One of my favorite protagonists is Emiya Shirou in Fate stay night. He wants to be a superhero but... well that would be extremely complicated to explain to someone who didn't see fate stay night as a whole but he pretty much knows his ideal is a dead end dripping with needless struggles and hypocrisy, but he's still doing it. And fate stay night is an incredibly interesting reflexion about the mere concept of heroism

@mitsunitaiko1742

2 жыл бұрын

@Wind Rose I... I can't say what you even mean by that

Interesting scene: Lawful Good paladin watches with a smile, while another party member blatantly breaks the local laws (maybe it's a dry town, and they are having a drinking party in the town square). Person who knows paladin is lawful good: How can you let them do that? Aren't you supposed to be lawful good? Paladin: Ayep. PWKPILG: Well, then, as a lawful good paladin, aren't you supposed to uphold the law? Paladin: Ayep. PWKPILG: But, they're breaking the law! Right in front of you. Paladin: Ayep. PWKPILG: Well, then, aren't you going to stop them? Paladin: Nope. PWKPILG: But, they're breaking the law! Paladin: Which law? Whose law? PWKPILG: The local law! The law passed by our townmaster! Paladin: Yeah, but I'm not from this town, and never voted for the townmaster. I uphold MY law from MY home. Now, if anyone starts juggling goslings, you let me know. I'll put a stop to it, right sharpish. That's illegal for a reason, and I will uphold that law, until the day I die! But I don't give a hoot about drinking parties in the town square. Why, I know of a place where it's the law that there MUST be a drinking party in the town square on the second Tuesday of every month. Should I arrest you for NOT drinking? It is, in fact, the second Tuesday of the month, after all. PWKPILG: Wait, what? Paladin: Fortunately for you, I'm not from that town, either.

A couple thoughts. Maybe a Part 2 on malicious compliance, and DMs providing the players loopholes - for ex rogue flippantly steals from rich person. Paladin sees. This is a Bad Thing In The Eyes of God(Name Inserted Here). Paladin knows the laws of the land, including arcane law where a representative of Aforesaid God can expropriate x amt/percent of funds from the rich to bless the poor. Validates the amount stolen, returns excess (if any) and tells the rogue "Don't do it where I can see you, or let me exercise the law and speak to them as you do it."

@quendi5557

2 жыл бұрын

This is me getting up on a soapbox and saying that paladins don't need to worship a god. They just have an oath. Sorry it's just I don't often give my paladins a god they follow and with a cleric say, they are married to the idea of a god because it's tied to their mechanics but a Paladin may do that action you suggested because of a creed they follow in addition to that oath. sorry if this is me getting obnoxious I just don't like confining paladins to knights of a god because that takes away a lot of what I find enjoyable about making a paladin.

@BrotherSkodidi

2 жыл бұрын

@@quendi5557 I'll give you that. The players I've GM'd have tied their oath to a deity, their choice. But you're right, the key point is an oath.

@quendi5557

2 жыл бұрын

@@BrotherSkodidi still could work though, sorry about the money not rant.

In a game right now where I'm playing a Treant Shaman (both homebrew) where I'm Lawful good. My code is to not kill unless provoked. If the spirits mean for you to die in a different way then me or my party killing you, then I will try to make sure that happens as it is disrupting the natural order. I tried to stop our artificer and necromancer from stealing from an old man shop keeper that they knocked unconscious and stole a Portable Hole. When I confronted them in character, the artificer player said "Aw cmon man, I'm doing it to help the party. Plus this is my one guilty pleasure character" If stealing from an old man shopkeep, leaving bars without paying, seducing every woman under the sun, and overall being a dick is your idea of fun and you condone this behavior then frankly youre playing D&D wrong.

To be fair to those who “Lawful” is there favorite choice playing anything to an extreme or interfering with the party’s plans is annoying as hell.

We shall, "Agree to disagree." @5:20 was the perfect response why the Lawful Character (LC) steps in (if this is a tenant of their code) when he notices the Rogue stealing the item the party needs to proceed forward. The DM's job is to provide multiple opportunities to acquire the object. It's the players (plural) job of finding a creative way in doing that. If that means distracting the LC by making them the "look out," sure. If that means they charm/persuade/intimidate/"challenge" the NPC's for the object, great. If they need to perform some task, o.k.. This also means that the player, GM, and other party members need to communicate away from the table if they choose to play a LC where their code can be disruptive. Pacifist players can be some of the most memorable characters at a table if communication with all affected parties is done before it comes up at the table. In your above example, the rogue gets outed by the LC. They spend a night in jail. The party loses "faction" with the NPC's but the LC has demonstrated his moral conviction and a new path forward is presented to the party after they are released from jail so they can move the plot forward. I.e. The next morning the Head Priest (or one of their subordinates) shows up to their cell after hearing what transpired the night before in the King's chamber. They task the party with retrieving a sacred amulet that was recently stolen (Let's play to the LC tenants) while he will persuade the king to give the object in question to the party upon success. Now the amulet that the party is tasked to retrieve was actually stolen by the Head Priest decades ago. And the people the party is going after are the rightful owners. How do they get the amulet? How do they get the object the king possesses? And how does the LC quantify their code with the mission ahead? Can the players find a way to have the amulet remain in the rightful owners hands while getting the object from the King and the LC character not violating his code? I foresee many dice rolls by everyone (and not just the rogue) to accomplish the tasks at hand. This looks like a great 2 to 3 sessions (in my book).

even the "rouge steals sth and paladin sees it " example can be solved in a lot of ways ... maybe the paladin goes back to the shop and pays for it ... maybe the paladin agrees to do a quest for the person stolen from ... there can be many ways

great video, but did it scare anyone else into thinking they had dead pixels on their monitor?

I get your point, but we time history is full of lawful people that refused to kill. They also went on to do some very amazing things without killing one enemy soldier despite them trying to kill them. I do agree with you on your overall message. As a DM I've had to have sidebar convos with players being lawful stupid or stupid evil, and tell them to grow tf up.

The very 1st Dungeon Master I played with back in advanced dungeons and dragons 1st edition used to say that if your paladin isn't actively under at least 1 assassination attempt from at least 1 party member you're probably not role playing properly. Frankly, I kind of miss the incentive to murder the PC fool enough to want to be God's cop

Personally, I think what you suggest is a betrayal of the alignment. You can be a lawful character and do the things you say, but you can't be a capital L, oathmaking lawful character and do so. The lawful alignment is devoid of intention- that's the good-evil axis- law is about conduct. Just as you would *never* suggest a good character overlook an itsy bitsy torture, you can't expect a lawful character to overlook wanton larceny. Maybe one or two, but to continue to abide it means you aren't really lawful- you are bending the law where it suits you or your motives, like a neutral character would. So what do I suggest? Stop being capital L lawful, or don't play with chaotic characters. Is that so controversial? We already suggest not allowing evil characters if you aren't ready for friction as a good character- the law-chaos axis should theoretically be just as incompatible. You can't have both, played to their full ends, without tension. Sometimes that tension can be fun, but if your searching for advice like this, it probably isn't to you.

@grampaseri

2 жыл бұрын

Agree with this. A lot of the advice comes across as making a lawful character a neutral one. The idea all the characters get along and agree on everything seems unrealistic, tension between individuals is inevitable and using those moments for roleplay even if it diverges from party goals and plot is a good thing for well-developed and developing characters.

You know I would say that Paladins don't follow rules and a code in order to get powers. They have powers because they were willing to submit themselves to following a code. An important distinction. And I think any true Paladin, when faced with doing what they felt was right, and what they felt would let them keep their powers, would do what they thought was right. Also, I think a Paladin can easily work in any group that isn't a bunch of murderhobos. Any setting worth its salt would have rules in place that make it legal to salvage things from dungeons, as a way to incentivize adventurers into clearing dungeons out. Bam. Rogues have a perfectly legal way to make money. And if the party needs to steal a magical gem from a merchant in order to save someone from a curse, then I think even a Paladin who has sworn to not steal would make an exception. Sometimes the skills of a thief can be put to good cause. But just stealing money from someone just because? Yeah, a Paladin should speak up about such things. If you are playing in a group with a Paladin you should realize that some roleplaying opportunities aren't going to go unchallenged.

It's alot simpler, if the paladin notices the rogue for trying to steal something, then it's the rogues fault for being caught......

Another thing to keep in mind is all legal systems are built around a few centric purposes. For example all laws pertaining to the tax system boil down to fund the government. Since this one verys why is there a draft or conscription?..

Why your character believes in a code and When the code is challenged is more important than what the code is. Otherwise they’re just a robot following programming.

Most of my lawful characters were mostly people who kept their word, had a code, and didn’t question orders/contracts given to them. At less that’s what I thought as lawful, love to hear others definition of lawful as it can be seen in may ways.

Any views on playing a chaotic neutral character without them being... well, what a lot of people THINK they're like? I have a character concept that treats the CN alignment as a liminal state; they've been isolated from the larger world most of their life and would be very influenced by the actions of her friends/traveling companions, and I wonder if that would be a fun and appropriate way to handle things.

I...I don't know PYR. This video kinda feels like a cop out...no, that's not the right phrase I think? It feels like the message of this video is best boiled down to "Play a Lawful character, right up until the point your party needs you to look the other way. At which point you should compromise because resisting is gonna make things unfun for them." I'm sorry, I probably just didn't understand what you were trying to say, but the take away *I'm* getting is that you're better off just not playing a Lawful character.

So much of this can also be on a DM that is managing how strict the player has to play that role; and party makeup. LONG time ago I tried playing a paladin, and the DM expected me to try and get weapons/armor items back to the family members of those the party I was in had slain instead of letting the party loot, the DM was creating issues that shouldn't have been there. Another example, is the Paladin really going to worry about stealing an item to complete a mission, when who you are stealing it from had taken it illegally anyways; again what is the character feeling this, or is the DM demanding it? Also if I'm lawful good, why is the character hanging out w/a party full of chaotic characters, or worse? That in and of itself is going to create conflict, strife and annoyance, DM needs to make sure everyone is basically on the same page during character creation.

I believe my current PC is rather neutral-good than lawful-good (but it really depends on the definition). But he is a knowledge cleric, and it's his duty to collect and share knowledge. So, he can't destroy any knowledge, even a really evil one (actually, he believes it's no such thing as "good" or "evil" knowledge). It led to an interesting dilemma when he found the description of a really complicated evil ritual (he eventually decided it wasn't his decision and told everything to the lord). And it will be even more interesting if or when (I believe it will happen, but it's up to DM) he will find his (high elf) race ancestors' technologies that could be used both to save thousands of intelligent creatures and to create weapons of mass destruction.

I actually want to play a Lawful Stupid “thou shalt not kill.” A Half-Orc orphan born with magical powers (Divine Soul) was dropped off at a monastery to his godly parent, and raised to be pious. However, he was temperamental and rebellious, often acting up and sneaking out. There were bandits that would take some of the trade goods the monks brought into town. The Orcish child objected to their treatment, despite the elders’ dismissals. So he went out and attacked the bandits. In retaliation, they burned the monastery to the ground, killing everybody he loved, on the grounds of breaking their deal for protection. Distraught over his actions, the Half-Orc teen vowed to never again bring harm to another intelligent being. But he still wants to avenge his adopted family, despite this vow. So he joins a group of adventurers, hoping to find that bandit tribe again, and have them either atone or fall to his allies. This build will never use damaging spells or weapons. Things like Sleep, Hold Person, Web, etc are fine with his vow. This leaves him with the job of healing and controlling the battlefield.

"Lawful" in D&D is easily the most misunderstood term. It has nothing to do with what any areas laws are. It's about being orderly, disciplined and regimented. The military is a perfect example. Everyone lining up exact distances apart, standing the exact same way. Everyone marches in a set formation. Yes sir, no sir. A clear chain of command. Everyone wakes up at the same time, everyone goes to sleep at the same time. The entire day is scheduled. All of their gear is stowed in the exact same orderly way. Everything in its place, everything is orderly. Now, take the exact opposite of all of that. Everyone hanging out here and there. There may be a leader, but everyone usually just does their own thing. Go to sleep when you're tired, wake up when you're rested. Toss everything into a pile, and dig through it when you need something. Clearly chaotic. Using the term "lawful" was a complete misnomer. If the party goes into the city, and that city has a law that everyone has to wear a funny hat, hop on one foot, and quack like a duck on Tuesdays, if a DM punishes a paladin or monk for not doing that, the DM should be smacked in the head. However, the vast majority of normal laws are put in place to provide order to society, so they usually align with how a lawful character would normally operate. The overlap doesn't mean they're one in the same, though. Now, for the paladin specifically, you add in their own divine code of conduct as dictated by their deity. A paladin will never forgo the immediate good for the sake of the greater good. It flat out states that in the 1st edition AD&D PH. However, concerning the example in the video of a thief stealing, the paladin's code is their own to bear, not anyone else's. They don't go around imposing their own code on other people unless those people are acting in direct violation of the paladin's specific code. If the thief is robbing a poor family blind, the paladin would step in. If the thief is pickpocketing a key from a corrupt guard, or, as a better example, pickpocketing the gold that the corrupt guard extorted from the poor family, to give back to said family, that's an entirely different story. Unless theft is considered antithetical to their deity's dogma. As for the "yes, and" scenario, no. The first rule of D&D is "as long as everyone's having fun, the books are just a suggestion." However, when you have a group that sits down and agrees to a set of rules, and plays by those rules, if one of the players randomly claims his fighter can summon dragons from his ass, you don't say "yes, and" You say "No, no you don't." You're roleplaying, not playing make believe like little kids. There are rules and limits, that's what separates roleplaying from improv and playing make believe. If you don't want to be hindered by those limitations, then you don't want to roleplay. You want to play make believe. Pick up a stick, go outside, and pretend its a +10 lightsaber. More power to ya, I hope you have fun, but that's not roleplaying. I'm sorry, but it just isn't.

You can also make a lawful stupid character interesting IF the reason he's stupid is a deep and known trauma (like the one time he didn't uphold the code of not talking to stranger it led to a parent dying from theft attempt). It doesn't have to be public knowledge, but just be the consistent reason he offers when asked. Also, solving this problem should be one of the main arc for this character (so he can open himself up and not become tedious, redemption should be possible, not easy).

For those that did play the 1E-2E Paladin that caused the birth of the term Lawful stupid, the Paladin had no choice but to not only be lawful and good but they had to make the party do the same by rules as written. If the didn’t they stopped being a Paladin and since to be a Paladin you has to have your Charisma (not strength) as your highest stat you became a really not very good fighter. Some DMs liked to mess with a Paladin and party members the same making being a Paladin. Hard unless the Party and DM made him keep looking away when something had to be stolen or some hi jinx has to happen. (Look up clips of BA Barcus ATeam being knocked out for a clip on KZread). Also, you may have heard that Rangers had to be good in that same time but rangers were more easily usable because they could be Chaotic good and did not have to make the party do anything. And while the DM may get tired of you setting traps and whipping up on a Drow outpost and messup your final assault be thinking they can make you kill Drow children, you could really just kidnap them take them with you and try to raise them yourself. So it was hard to loose your Ranger status.