[DND] Which Neutral are you?

[Earl Grey]

NOT A QUIZ! NOT A QUIZ!

-but if you DO want a quiz, the site below has it, and here's the direct link: Alignment Test

And- obligatory disclaimer that this is my personal take on the Alignment stuff and no site actually breaks them down into separate 'facets' like this let alone with names, T/N is just T/N so don't go around Googling it and going "BUT GREY!" -I just find the differences within even this one alignment interesting. So...

As per the site The Alignment System - True Neutral there are interesting 'subsets' of True Neutral, among which are three that I can glean that in short I would describe as the indifferent, the balanced, and the situational. I will paste descriptions from the site that support each.

---

The Indifferent

"Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality."
"represents apathy, indifference, and a lack of conviction."

Example: What I can think of are people in say, the slums who would walk away from someone getting mugged (neither Evil nor Good, and neither Lawful nor Chaotic) because they're just so desensitized- there's nothing they can do, or even a rich kid doing the same "None of my business,"- either way, a genuine lack of care or just pent up, jaded piles of apathy. Whether this is an actual personality or a jaded state / form of a personality is completely up to debate. Probably an actual personality.

The Balanced

"The "true" neutral looks upon all other alignments as facets of the system of many things. Thus, each aspect--evil and good, chaos and law--of things must be retained in balance to maintain the status quo; for things as they are cannot be improved upon except temporarily, and even then but superficially."
"Each thing exists as a part of the whole, one as a check or balance to the other, with life necessary for death, happiness for suffering, good for evil, order for chaos, and vice versa. Nothing must ever become predominant or out of balance. Within this naturalistic ethos, humankind serves a role also, just as all other creatures do. The may be more or less important, but the neutral does not concern himself or herself with these considerations except where it is positively determined that the balance is threatened."
"However, a true neutral being with a highly philosophical outlook may hold that law, chaos, good, and evil are all necessary forces in the universe. But all are of equal import, and none should be allowed to take precedence over another, unless an imbalance should be perceived--in which case corrective steps must be taken until the balance is righted once again."

Example: angry grape man Thanos and le snap- I believe he is T/N instead of XE because the core of the ideal is 'balance'- T/N can act as any other alignment in order to achieve that, as per the bolded- whether or not their perception of im/balance is actually true or apparently fair in any way. And how his snap works does not take into consideration the L/C or G/E matters- if you're in the unlucky 50%, prepare to not feel　s o　g o o d
(Also I haven't actually watched the movie but you get what I'm saying- so if he actually is different in the movie I have nada idea, but the general idea is clear)
These characters are heroes to a ruined world and doom to a paradise. Can seem anywhere between LG to CE in their endeavours.

The more 'passive', mundane variety of this alignment is probably- think of the most stubborn, stonewalling person who just WILL NOT TAKE SIDES, OTHERWISE IT'S NOT FAIR! Despite the verbal equivalent of bashing their head with a rock that they're not making sense. Yeah. Think a mother who has 5 kids, 4 are millionaires and 1 is a sickly one struggling with college loans, and of those 4 millionaires 3 are spendthrift crackheads. But, she still distributes their inheritance in the will 'equally'- otherwise, it's not fai-
Oh god. Did I just describe the bad underbelly of communism with a DND alignment?
(And no! This is not Lawful-aligned! Their argument is just 'balance', not adherence to law! If the person goes against it, then they are actually Neutral or Chaotic, and if they say comply to doing a certain thing because it is the law, then they are Lawful)

The Situational

"True neutral characters are concerned with their own well-being and that of the group or organization which aids them. They may behave in a good manner to those that they consider friends and allies, but will only act maliciously against those who have tried to injure them in some way. For the rest, they do not care. They do not wish ill on those they do not know, but they also do not care when they hear of evil befalling them. Better for others to suffer the evil than the true neutral and his allies. If an ally is in need, the true neutral will aid him, out of genuine love or because he may be able to count on that ally a little more in the future. If someone else is in need, they will weigh the options of the potential rewards and dangers associated with the act. If an enemy is in need, they will ignore him or take advantage of his misfortune."

Instead of the apathy or lack of care of the Indifferent, this Situational T/N is removed and calculating. They are more thorough, and see things through a value/loss lens instead of a "I can't do anything/I don't care, so why bother?" they also differ from the Balanced in that they don't necessarily uphold a strict philosophy of, well, 'balance' and are more adaptable, less rigid. The other alignments are likely to see them anywhere between spineless or two faced, probably see them as particularly dangerous because at the core, they are beholden to no one. The smarter ones probably come across as slimy opportunists. They can't be recruited, neither can those who manage to buy their loyalty be sure that their loyalty would remain. "If this isn't a good deal anymore, we no longer have a deal." This subtype can also appear anywhere between LG and CE, but probably not as much as the Balanced would.

---

While this is not serious, feel free to post if you have thoughts about it. Otherwise, have fun sorting yourself- or your characters! Within a sorting system.
Sortception.
But yeah. Characters, DND or not. Post about them, let us hear about them!

Also it's 5AM and I've only slept 3 hours in the past 24, prime time for typoitis to act up. Will probably do a reread and cleanup later.
Also, mods, if this really actually belongs to Fluff (the other DND thread apparently doesn't though) I'm sorry, and please move it

 

[Andy]

I was born with a heart full of indifference.

'Situational neutral' sounds rather close to Neutral Evil to me.

 

[The Cat]

I prefer to think of Neutral Evil as Truly Pragmatic. But I don't need to. It is what it is. Such is life.

 

[Andy]

I prefer to think of Neutral Evil as Truly Pragmatic. But I don't need to. It is what it is. Such is life.

Yeah, an evil character isn't necessarily dedicated to evil as some sort of philosophy. Being ruthless is a means to an end, not a goal unto itself.

 

[1487610420]

yes.

 

[Schrödinger's Name]

Why do you only want to collect the Neutrals, what's your plan?

I already hate that first question of the test. None of the answers fit MEEEE.

I would say, guess if you'd like to know.

Secretly I just want to know how people perceive me.

 

[Earl Grey]

Why do you only want to collect the Neutrals, what's your plan?

I like that you asked.
The other alignments seem more 'clear cut', and people have an easier time playing them. Say, a Lawful Good can range anywhere between boring Oath of Devotion Paladin to a raging Oath of Vengeance Paladin (which while a stretch can still be a LG depending on your God and how you play, and can even be fun to attempt to keep them pure LG because playing Paladin is basically walking a constant moral tightrope). Lots of fun options. I see a lot of people, however, having confusion on how TN gets played and teetering to the other alignments on the scale while 'trying to stay neutral', which while is an option, isn't the only way to play a TN- but they don't know that.

I already hate that first question of the test. None of the answers fit MEEEE.

Which? That quiz shuffles the order of the questions every time you take them.

 

[Schrödinger's Name]

I like that you asked.
The other alignments seem more 'clear cut', and people have an easier time playing them. Say, a Lawful Good can range anywhere between boring Oath of Devotion Paladin to a raging Oath of Vengeance Paladin (which while a stretch can still be a LG depending on your God and how you play, and can even be fun to attempt to keep them pure LG because playing Paladin is basically walking a constant moral tightrope). Lots of fun options. I see a lot of people, however, having confusion on how TN gets played and teetering to the other alignments on the scale while 'trying to stay neutral', which while is an option, isn't the only way to play a TN- but they don't know that.

Ooh I see, interesting explanation. I'll definitely try to read more about it. For now, there isn't anything useful I can say.

Which? That quiz shuffles the order of the questions every time you take them.

Huh? This didn't happen to me. I already clicked on that site a few weeks ago and this question "Family elders are expressing disapproval of you to the rest of the family." popped up first. It still does now. So yeah anyway, that question.

 

[Yuurei]

Situational.

When someone does do something to me that I see unjust I will go after them like a honey badger. And remember, honey badger don’t care how many times you sting him. He’s getting that sweet, sweet, honey ( except this time the honey is revenge)

 

[Luminous]

Why do you only want to collect the Neutrals, what's your plan?

I already hate that first question of the test. None of the answers fit MEEEE.

I would say, guess if you'd like to know.

Secretly I just want to know how people perceive me.

I hate that quiz, honestly.

 

[Morpeko]

I test as chaotic neutral/evil on that test. I don't think it's a good test.

I'd probably be indifferent neutral in those three options. But none of the above really.