Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
Lawful Neutral, not Legal Neutral 
29th-Jul-2009 01:12 pm
MC Frontalot - Nerdcore Rising
In addition to the game I'm going to be running which I posted about a few days ago, I'm going to be playing in a new game soon. My plan is to play a rogue with the Ascetic Rogue feat so he can multiclass monk. I want him to have the abilities of a monk, but he's not going to be an actual monastery monk. I view him more as a rogue who prefers to fight hand to hand (and is good at it). I don't want to play lawful good, and lawful evil is not an option for this game (even if it was it's my least favorite alignment and I probably wouldn't play it). So to meet the alignment restriction and be something I want to play, he needs to be Lawful Neutral.

I don't usually play lawful characters. I also usually come up with a character concept first, then think of how to build it, this time I went the other way around. The concept I came up with is that he's a member of a mafia type criminal organization. They have a strict code of conduct, but they're engaged in illegal activities. I think that fits the spirit of the intended alignment requirements without forcing me to play a cleric of St. Cuthbert who wants to put everyone in jail for spitting in the street.

I'm planning on putting together his code of conduct and will probably base it on the mafia's ten commandments as posted on wikipedia.

So what do you all think? Think this is a fair way to play a Lawful Neutral character? Or do you think I'm trying to skirt the rules so I can play a criminal monk?
31st-Jul-2009 02:27 pm (UTC)
This is a bit off topic, but if 4e seemed limited back when it came out, you might want to take a look now (or at least next March when PHB3 comes out). The game has expanded really fast, so that you have a ton more choices now. It's like the difference between playing a Fighter with only the PHB feats, and playing a Fighter with every other book (except that Fighters are awesome). PHB3 is also breaking the mold on a lot of classes and options, keeping them inline and fitting with the game but using varied mechanics and ideas and stuff.

Character building was a pretty lame exercise for 4e when it first came out (in part because the complexity was moved from choices in character creation to choices in character play, but that was hard to see unless you had a decent adventure to get those choices), but it's gotten vastly more interesting recently. The system still has it's multitude of flaws (Skill Challenges, etc), but may be worth taking another look if you're interested in trying something new :)
31st-Jul-2009 02:33 pm (UTC)
i have the books, and my group has played on occasion. i find it much easier as far as game play, especially for the dm. there are quite a few things about it i don't care for. but i'll certainly take a look at the new books and probably will end up playing it again. i feel like an old fuddy duddy but i still prefer 3.5 and feel like i probably always will. unless 5.0 goes old school.

Edited at 2009-07-31 02:34 pm (UTC)
2nd-Aug-2009 08:34 pm (UTC)
Well, Magic 2010 is kickin' it old school these days, so maybe D&D will follow.

(And if they come out with a new D&D edition every year I will cry.) (Although WotC doesn't care about me anyway, since I don't plan to buy their new books...)
This page was loaded May 19th 2019, 10:26 pm GMT.