D&D Discussion: Alignment - Nature vs Nurture

[Rain Yupa]

So, psychologists have debated for decades now, whether or not behavior is determined by one's Nature (you're genetically predisposed to certain behaviors, emotions, and reactions), or by one's Nurture (your experiences shape who you will become). It's generally assumed that the answer is 'both', but there's a number of psychologists and doctors who are extremely adamant about one or the other.

But what about your RP characters? Since you designed them, what determines their Alignment, their behaviors? Are they born to be Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil or True Neutral? Are they raised to follow those beliefs?

Discuss!  

[joe-dude667]

Interesting topic.

When I make a character, I personally start from the metagamer point of view. First I start with what class I want to play, then what race works well with the class, then abilities. As for background (and hence forth personality), I base it heavily on ability scores. Since I linked background with personality already, I think I've already setted my choice in this topic quite easily. For instance, if I make a paladin character, they're going to be LG without a second thought. If I make a Sorcerer, they're going to be Chaotic (or possibly Good/Unaligned if we're talking [4E]).

Which brings me to my next point. As much as I love 4th edition, I think I prefer the 3.5 style of alignments. I mean in 4th edition you can be Good (which covers both NG and CG) or Evil (which covers LE and NE), whereas Unaligned covers all the other basses. It's a small complaint, but I like the differentiation of 3.5. Though I guess that was a bit of a tangent from the topic at hand...

Back to the topic of the thread, I'd say it's mostly both - leaning heavily on Nurture. If I make a Paladin/Cleric I'm going to add something to his/her history about spending time in a Temple. Though then again I've made maaaaaaany fighters in my time playing DnD (though with fighters it's mostly [4E], 3.5 fighters are all well and good, but bonus feat's just don't really do much for me), and they all have different flavour. One thing that tends to be consistent with my fighters is if they have low intelligence, they have a really happy background. This doesn't just count for Fighters, I'm just using them as an example because I really enjoy the Fighter class so I make a LOT of them, but it's usually the same for most classes that are fine with a low Int score. In my mind they have a low Int score because they haven't experienced the harshness of the world so are still in a state of blissful ignorance. I should add I like really story-heavy, gritty campaigns - before you start thinking I'm some suicidal freak. =P

Though on the flip-side, my main IRL-PC at the moment is a wizard which I made Unaligned, but is now Good. No major in game event happened that shifted his alignment. I just realised that I play him as if he's somewhere between CG and NG (aka, [4E] Good) than an Unaligned character. The character joined the campaign as a Doppelgänger Wizard multied to bard, with all his skills based as if he was a rogue (high thievery, even higher stealth). After making the character, he was undoubtedly Unaligned. Yet after a year or so of playing him, I've found that he's much more of a Good character than he is Unaligned. Took me a year to convince myself. The DM (NayrVentess from this guild) laughed because he agreed 100%. =P

I guess that means that I think it's how you play your character that decides their alignment. So unless you want to play a Paladin (which in mind is the ultimate LG class, so any other alignment doesn't really work), it's unfair to decide your alignment before you've played a session or two. This argument is mostly based on IRL games, so you may argue that it's a moot point for PBP games such as the games in this guild. None the less, I'm really interested in what other people have to say on the matter!

This was quite a long winded response... But I really find the topic of alignments interesting. >.< Man, I should have gone into politics...  

[joe-dude667]

Just copied that reply into Microsoft Word. 616 words. Compared to most of my university assignments, that was around a quarter of work done. Yet it was soooooooo easy to talk about. If only there was a course about DnD Alignments. I'd be an honour student! >.<  

[iDragow]

For the most part, I build my characters around a central theme. And those themes are usually sub-characters from RPG's that I fell in love with. From there, I just try to play them how I feel the character would react.

When I do make a custom character, I go with an idea (pirate), and build around that. I did notice that Vylal was being rather Good and not very Unaligned... I'll have to change that, the next time he gets to do something.

So... I suppose it would be more Nature than Nurture, since my character's personalities are pretty much figured out before they're entered into a game.  

[Seiryna]

I'd say both, but more Nurture then the other, at least for me. I only play NE characters. can't play good ones >< just something doesn't feel right when I play good chars lol. but sense I always start off as NE people seem to treat me as a backstabbing I'm gonna ruin everything, untrustworthy person, and you know what lol if that's how I'm gonna be treated then that's how my characters usually end up. but on the other hand, my same char. NE will totally be your best friend if you give her half a chance, and get your back in a fight, as long as she gets first dibs on the loot...tho she'll prolly still be a bit sarcastic and pretty blunt when it comes to telling to you stuff lol.... I don't like to sugar coat things XD  

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

i study psychology and it's unfair, in my view, to single out one or the other. Everything is a factor in one's development. In complete confidence here, but my own characters channel my innermost thoughts sometimes. They have aspects of me i'm afraid to show in public.

My OCs have a recurring theme - wanting to do the right thing, but ******** up bad when trying to do good. i never play palies because that's not me - i'm not LAWFUL, but i try to do the right thing IRL. More than anything, i like to be a defender of my friends and family and a striker against those who wish to bring problems. Probably why i lose so many accounts. sweatdrop But my OCs reflect me instead of a central theme.  

[Deadusernamelol]

Heh, interesting indeed.

Well, let's begin with the general character creation before I get too in depth on how I create, design and play my characters. I usually begin my characters by three specific steps before I start working on statistics, since I don't believe in playing the game for numerical game-play. I would rather play for actual role playing; acting as if I were a real person exploring a new world. I usually ask myself “Who am I?”, “What am I?” “What was my childhood like?” When I figure this out, I can usually fill out all the slots of D&D. Such as Race, Class, Alignment, Age, Stats, My Weapon Choices, Spell Choices, and can probably fill out my background history as if it were my own.

Some of my most enjoyed characters are those of natures that are completely opposite of my own. I don't like stereotypical types of characters. I often stretch the limits of alignments when I choose the best set choice of my characters. I'll often play Lawful Good and most dungeon masters will question my “good” nature or if I was acting in a “lawful” manner. While I'm not too interested in 4th edition, I'll enjoy playing alignments such as Lawful Neutral, Lawful Good, Neutral Good or Chaotic Good. Any alignment that wouldn't possibly make me a douche bag to my party later on in the campaign. I find it pointless to play any sort of self-centered, self-aligned or evil character.

Back to the main point, I usually figure it's best to alternate or mix a persons alignment by both developed nature from experiences and one's personality from growth. Like, if I were to play a Dwarf that usually has a pre-disposed nature to being curtly, head-strong and stubborn but was raised among merry Hobbits that loved to share, sing, and play, I'd probably play him a little more open, cheerful yet still head-strong with his decisions and firm in his beliefs. It all depends on my characters back-story, his history.

I suppose it could be said that I don't believe everyone is born “evil” or born “good.” We're all born with a neutral purpose in mind. We grow personalities from watching the world around us.  

[SporkMaster5000]

I'm a big proponent of "both" from a philosophical standpoint, and i play pretty fast and loose with alignment, so I don't know that i really follow one or the other. 4e's "Unaligned" was a particular boon for me, as it lets me have characters waffle back and forth as influences clash.

For instance, Tik-Tok is on the evil side of unaligned because he was raised by kobolds worshipping tiamat, but he hates goblins specifically and wants them all to die horribly because he's just like that.

Characters with simple personalities and/or who i haven't put much thought behind their personalities i tend to favor one or the other though. For instance, Jack just wants to be a hero and live a life of high adventure because of childhood stories, all nurture. Gerash is a maniacal would-be lich because he's just plain evil, all nature.  

[Archfiend Damio]

I to enjoy this topic. Good Show.

Let me start of by saying I am not trying to start an argument. I am merely stating I believe it is Nurture. Everything that happens from how you are treated to how you see other treated to what happens in your life changes you and shapes you into the person you are.

People are very complex and while humans believe they are superior. I believe that humans are a pitiful excuse for an animal and a disgusting excuse for a higher being.

Having said that. I feel that humans while yes are animals also have a strange abnormality. Free will. The power to ignore nearly anything they want. A wolf hunts to live not because it wants to because it needs to. Because something in its brain says kill or be killed and it does it. Humans live to eat. We eat because we can, we deny our bodies what they need and we do it all because we have the choice to. Do you think that animals would do the same things they do now if they could rely on thought instead of instinct? Its an interesting question. But honestly I believe that the only reason animals don't is because they lack the ability to do so. The necessary tools. Because of this a would will always be a wolf and wont differ much from the next wolf. But a Human is vastly different then the next. Because they see around them absorb and react. That's why I think its nurture.

Now back to the real topic:

Alright so in the end I have many different factors into why a character is the Alignment it is but for the first part I usually base it on a few things to start off: Race, Class, and Prestige Class I plan to aim for. There tend to be other factors such as back ground and lifestyle but this is where I start. Lets take one of my current characters. He will actually be a fun one because of all his multiclassing.
The Race is an interesting one sense race can very from different creatures from the freedom loving elves to the hardened and stern dwarves. I find myself looking at these factors first. The character I am focusing on is human. While humans can be anything from the lowest of low to the greatest of great its often in my opinion looking at human nature they tend not to lean to one side or the other of the moral code. In this I usually have freedom to be whatever with a human but then again I stick to what I know. In this case I went with CG for a final Alignment I say final because its not what the character started as.

Due to his background the characters father was a ridged, self righteous, law biding citizen (LG is beyond my norm btw). So he trained his son to be the same. In a world of war and monsters death at every turn it may be harder to see who is the good guy and who is the bad guy some times. I started him Lawful Neutral because of his fathers influence and because of his class choices.

His class choices were interesting to say the least. The final result ended with Sword Sage 1/Monk 2/Swashbuckler 3/fighter 2 eventually to hit Duelist PrC. Now in this case I started the class choices before I made this part of the background. I started in that he and his brother were apprenticing under his fathers teaching when a raid on there town struck (Because every hero has a good raid for motive). His father was mortally wounded and his brother was taken. The group was actually a preexisting well know band of bandits know only as 'The Raiders.' I placed the boy in a port town and had the raider part of a 'naval fleet' for the raiders.
His fathers mortal wound eventually led to him being sent away for training with a group of monks that had techniques like the ones his father was teaching him. This of course led to his levels in monk. Keeping tabs on the scum of the underworld all he could, while training with the monks. He eventually found information of his brother, still alive, on a raider ship fighting to keep his head and his morals afloat.
He turned his back on the monks even though they warned him to do so would forsake ever being able to learn further with them revenge was not something the taught. He gained this ships trust and learned the ropes as a raider on the ship being brand a raider and having to act as one he kept close to his bother as they planned to escape. This of course led to the 3 Levels of Swashbuckler and his Alignment shift to CN.
After a botched escape attempt by his bother and he. His bother was killed and he marked a traitor. He was captured like a slave and placed. He was eventually sold for a fair price to an area. The time he spent in the area led to his fighter and because of a chance encounter he met a man that could help him train more. The man was too old to fight any longer but was not free as such he was doomed to spend his life serving the area. He passed his teachings to the boy and with it set his morals straight. Eventually leading him to CG. Revenge wasn't his motive any longer it was to do right in times even when the law could not. To step beyond the line to do the right thing. Winning his freedom he set out with a band of like minded people.

That's why he is a Chaotic Good Sword Sage 1/Monk 2/Swashbuckler 3/fighter 2/Duelist -

There tends to be a lot of factors when I choose an alignment but the skeleton is Race, Class, and PrC. What fallows is the end result I want to play and what fits the characters background and how did he get there.

In this case it was the world itself around him that changed him into the man he needed to be.
But he very well could have been a Lawful person as it was almost if trained by his father or even the monks. I believe that the world around someone really shapes what kind of people they become.

Nothing is programed that can't be rewritten and nothing is told that can't be forgotten. How you are raised may mean nothing when it comes to the world and the world may mean nothing to how you are raised. Truly for me alignment can be one of the most fun to choose.
Its all about how you want to play the character how you want to become this person and how you would react given the situation. Some would grow strong relying on the law and teaching to guide them to do right others will take the beaten path relying on nothing but doing the right thing to guide them.

Sorry for the novel the background was kind of necessary.