This one should be interesting, because no doubt we'll get into whether "Chaotic Neutral" is just code for "Batshit Crazy" or "Annoyingly goofy". But here goes: what characters of pop culture, literature, or history would you consider 'exemplars' of the CN alignment?
Nemesis the Warlock (and Deadlock of the ABC Warriors)
Lucifer from the Vertigo version of him where he walks away from Hell and simply doesn't want anyone telling anyone else what to do
Tuco - from the good the bad and the ugly
Riddick
I have deliberately avoided the obvious insane people and those that roll a dice or flip a coin before taking action. I am looking at you Two face and you Crazy Eyes (Orange is the New Black).
I'd say Jack Sparrow, but he seems more CG by now.
Characters that have lots of machiavellian plans and don't seem to fit any other alignment well because they're so complex and dabble in so many shades of gray tend to fit well here.
Curly Howard.
I agree with most of those above.
First that came to my mind: Eddie Haskell (Leave it to Beaver).
Non sequitur? Yes!
A man, a plan, a canal - Panama!
I like tacos!
What definition of Chaotic Neutral are we using here? Because if we're going by the 1E DMG, I'm nominating Heath Ledger's Joker. :)
Quote from: RPGPundit;841841This one should be interesting, because no doubt we'll get into whether "Chaotic Neutral" is just code for "Batshit Crazy" or "Annoyingly goofy". But here goes: what characters of pop culture, literature, or history would you consider 'exemplars' of the CN alignment?
Harley Quinn.
Highly intelligent, educated, and a giver of no fucks whatsoever. She might qualify as crazy, but the version Paul Dini used in the cartoon was more of a free spirit than delusional (except when it came to loving the Joker).
Quote from: jeff37923;842032Harley Quinn.
Highly intelligent, educated, and a giver of no fucks whatsoever. She might qualify as crazy, but the version Paul Dini used in the cartoon was more of a free spirit than delusional (except when it came to loving the Joker).
Yeah, I'd have to agree. She doesn't regret taking lives, but she doesn't really go out of her way to do it.
Beni Gabor in the mummy. He carried every religious symbol, switched from one team to the next, then turned on them when the mummy seemed too powerful. Completely CN in my opinion
So to be Chaotic Neutral you either have to be batshit insane or terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought.
If...IF...Chaotic Neutral is a legitimate alignment, you have to do better than than that.
Quote from: Motorskills;842336So to be Chaotic Neutral you either have to be batshit insane or terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought.
If...IF...Chaotic Neutral is a legitimate alignment, you have to do better than than that.
Didn't I do that earlier?
Riddick being I think a great example.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;842026What definition of Chaotic Neutral are we using here? Because if we're going by the 1E DMG, I'm nominating Heath Ledger's Joker. :)
"I'm an agent of Chaos."
Quote from: RPGPundit;841841This one should be interesting, because no doubt we'll get into whether "Chaotic Neutral" is just code for "Batshit Crazy" or "Annoyingly goofy". But here goes: what characters of pop culture, literature, or history would you consider 'exemplars' of the CN alignment?
This is the hardest alignment in my view. I would have check, but I feel like it is also the one that has changed the most in the rules.
I would say Jim Morrison as he was presented in the movie the Doors was a pretty good candidate for Chaotic Neutral.
How about Mace Bishop (Jimmy Stewart) from Bandolero?
Every time someone (including his own brother Dee, played by Dean Martin) asks him why he did something his answer was the same:
Dee Bishop: [incredulous] You robbed a bank? You, Mace?
Mace Bishop: Well, Dee, the bank was there... and I was there... and there wasn't very much of anybody else there... and it just seemed like the thing to do. Y'know, it's not like you didn't - something you never heard of. Lots of people rob banks for all sorts of different reasons.
Dee Bishop: [bemused] You just walked into a bank and helped yourself to ten thousand dollars 'cause it seemed like the thing to do?
Mace Bishop: That's about the way it was, yeah, as, as well as I can remember, yeah.
Quote from: jibbajibba;841857Nemesis the Warlock (and Deadlock of the ABC Warriors)
From what I read of Nemesis he was fairly orderly and organized. Well more than most anyone else in those comics. ahem.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;842345This is the hardest alignment in my view. I would have check, but I feel like it is also the one that has changed the most in the rules.
I would say Jim Morrison as he was presented in the movie the Doors was a pretty good candidate for Chaotic Neutral.
Yeah.
Base interpretation is that its chaotic without anything to define it. And really that could be any sort of relatively odd or crazy characters from Mel Brooks to Pinkie Pie.
The big thing is that there is neither maliciousness nor kindness in it. Or if it is, its incidental or accidental to the general randomness.
The real issue though is. How is the player playing it? Because trying to go on a serious adventure or talk to the mob whole Joe is playing the accordion and throwing pies is at times going to put the stress test on someone elses patience.
I think a very large amount of criminals who care only or mostly about themselves but aren't actively vicious or malevolent fit in the C/N mold.
Many of Clint Eastwood's western killers fall into here also.
Riddick is a great one.
Basically for the non-psycho C/N just look to the hard-bitten mercenary, pirate, vigilante, etc.
Quote from: Doughdee222;842005I agree with most of those above.
First that came to my mind: Eddie Haskell (Leave it to Beaver).
That makes perfect sense and though I've watched LITB many times I'd have never thought of that.
If I'm sticking to comics, and I like pulling my examples from there, Spawn.
Unpredictable, neither good nor evil, and not "batshit insane".
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;842345This is the hardest alignment in my view. I would have check, but I feel like it is also the one that has changed the most in the rules.
I would say Jim Morrison as he was presented in the movie the Doors was a pretty good candidate for Chaotic Neutral.
Actually, yeah.
JG
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;842345I would say Jim Morrison as he was presented in the movie the Doors was a pretty good candidate for Chaotic Neutral.
Interesting and very different example.
Do you mean it because of the whole 'freak the mundanes' angle?
Quote from: RPGPundit;842840Interesting and very different example.
Do you mean it because of the whole 'freak the mundanes' angle?
The definition of Chaotic Neutral that has stuck in my mind most over the years is the 2E definition. Which is actually a bit different from the 3E one. 2E describes them as guided almost entirely by their own whims, being incredibly difficult to deal with, and viewing evil and good as irrelevant. It also calls it the alignment of lunatics and madmen. It has been a a few years since I've seen the movie, but I mean it because of how the film portrayed him more than the reality of who he was as a man (though aspects of the real Jim Morrison certainly feel chaotic neutral to me). In the movie he feels like someone who well beyond concerns of good and evil, and he was in real life very influenced by Nietzsche, which I think fits that part of Chaotic Neutral and the movie was trying to highlight through some of his actions. So in that sense I think the freak the mundanes angle is part of my reasoning. Also, the movie really exaggerated his persona to the point that he looks like a blue print for a chaotic neutral character to me. He was intensely impulsive and would do things like light fires just to see what happened or provoke a reaction.
The Doors was a pseudo-mystical, incoherent mess, which meant that as a biography of Jim Morrison, it was PERFECT. :D
JG
For all its bad reputation, CN is probably the most fitting alignment for adventurers: the footloose scoundrel treasure hunters who are self-interested but not evil.
Think Han Solo, especially early on.
Karl Edward Wagner's version of Kane is probably CN. He spends most of his time fighting evil only because it gets in his way. But he'll kill good guys if they trouble him too.
Many cartoon characters are more or less CN, particularly the Warner Bros. ones: Elmer Fudd, Daffy Duck, Foghorn Leghorn, Tazmanian Devil, etc. Although they also veer toward the "batshit crazy" side too.
Taz hate water.
Are there more serious people who are CN?
Quote from: RPGPundit;843933Are there more serious people who are CN?
Arguably Michel Foucault.
Like I said, arguably.
JG
Some of these examples are great. I never completely understood the 1E definition of CN as an alignment. Sometimes I thought it was kind of like how scientists speculate that such and such thing is an example of a positive such and such thing. There must therefore be an opposite, negative such and such thing, (even if we haven't found one yet) and Gygax included it because it just logically followed there had to be an opposite for Lawful neutral on the table.
Quote from: IggytheBorg;844134Some of these examples are great. I never completely understood the 1E definition of CN as an alignment. Sometimes I thought it was kind of like how scientists speculate that such and such thing is an example of a positive such and such thing. There must therefore be an opposite, negative such and such thing, (even if we haven't found one yet) and Gygax included it because it just logically followed there had to be an opposite for Lawful neutral on the table.
So it's basically the dark matter of alignments.
jg
Until now, that is how I sometimes thought of it.
Would the Hulk be chaotic neutral? I don't think he favors good over evil TOO much. He just wants to smash whatever's bothering him at the moment. And he sure as hell doesn't give a damn about laws and rules.
Quote from: IggytheBorg;844134Some of these examples are great. I never completely understood the 1E definition of CN as an alignment. Sometimes I thought it was kind of like how scientists speculate that such and such thing is an example of a positive such and such thing. There must therefore be an opposite, negative such and such thing, (even if we haven't found one yet) and Gygax included it because it just logically followed there had to be an opposite for Lawful neutral on the table.
Yeah, a lot of problems with alignment comes from the idea that because a lot of Good and Lawful people want to promote Goodness and Law for their own sake, that means that Chaotic, Neutral and Evil people are dedicated to promoting Chaos, Neutrality and Evil for their own sake giving you barking mad definitions of neutrality being stuff like "wants to make sure that there isn't too much good or too much evil so will ally with whichever side is weaker."
You just don't need people sitting down and planning out how to maximize the amount of evil in society for there to be lots of evil around.
Quote from: IggytheBorg;844812Would the Hulk be chaotic neutral? I don't think he favors good over evil TOO much. He just wants to smash whatever's bothering him at the moment. And he sure as hell doesn't give a damn about laws and rules.
That's another great example.
JG
Quote from: RPGPundit;843933Are there more serious people who are CN?
If we take a delve into real life,
Hunter S. Thompson is most likely that. You can always use the character he inspired,
Spider Jerusalem as an example - his moral moments were punctuated by absolute amorality, and although he hardly "lacked a conscience", he didn't seem motivated by any sort of desire of good towards his fellow man (rather the opposite).
Anansi is another classic one, as is
Coyote, several incarnations of
Loki, and many other trickster gods. Although certainly featuring in humorous stories, the characters themselves are not humorous. Rather far from it.
As much as Game of Thrones is overrated and over referenced, it's still good.
Sandor Clegane has no loyalty but to himself, and is hardly good or evil.
Lieutenant Kilgore might slam into Chaotic Evil, but his motives really aren't really pure evil. He just really, really, really happens to enjoy war. And napalm.
Peter Pan is as joyful as he is murderous, and known to switch sides at a whim. Don't trust Disney.
How does Crowley's Law of Thelema "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" fit in?
Any true anarchist group though the idea on an anarchist organization always filled me with amusement.
I think the key with CN is to be aware that it can be a giant rage monster like the Hulk but it could also be the quiet loner sitting in the corner of the bar minding his own business.
If you think about Fight Club the narrator (Ed Norton in the movie) is probably CN. He has effectively decided to opt out of the world. However he lacks any drive to do anything about it and doesn't want to take any action.
Tyler Derden however chooses to promote Chaos actively, thus providing the drive the narrator lacks, but in doing so he has to adopt a set of rules as Project Mayhem needs organisation to work. Does that make him L or is he still CN as his aims are to create a anarchic end state?
CN types
i) Mad - Hulk
ii) Random - Dice Man
iii) Loners - Riddick
iv) Anarchists - Twelve Monkeys
v) Rebels - James Dean
I'd say Han Solo at the beginning of Star Wars: A New Hope. It's not until the end of the movie that he turns out to shift over to Chaotic Good.
Quote from: Omega;842498Yeah.
Base interpretation is that its chaotic without anything to define it. And really that could be any sort of relatively odd or crazy characters from Mel Brooks to Pinkie Pie.
The big thing is that there is neither maliciousness nor kindness in it. Or if it is, its incidental or accidental to the general randomness.
The real issue though is. How is the player playing it? Because trying to go on a serious adventure or talk to the mob whole Joe is playing the accordion and throwing pies is at times going to put the stress test on someone elses patience.
Pinkie Pie has been CG at times.
Quote from: GreyICE;844999If we take a delve into real life, Hunter S. Thompson is most likely that. You can always use the character he inspired, Spider Jerusalem as an example - his moral moments were punctuated by absolute amorality, and although he hardly "lacked a conscience", he didn't seem motivated by any sort of desire of good towards his fellow man (rather the opposite).
Actually, I think if you read his stuff, it's pretty clear HST had a profound moral sense. He was just completely jaded by the time he started seriously writing, a utopian anarchist smart enough to know (unlike most utopian anarchists) that he lived in a world that he absolutely knew would never be as good as he imagined it had the potential to be.
Quote from: jibbajibba;845001How does Crowley's Law of Thelema "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" fit in?
Not at all. However, the (total mis-)interpretation some people have made of the Law of Thelema could fit CN.