Does chaotic or neutral evil exist IRL aside from the mentally ill?

Absolutely. Anyone that values freedom over the protection that law gives them is chaotic. Anyone that wouldn't go out of their way to help someone is at least neutral.

Someone that sacrifices to help another is good.
Someone that goes something good without any cost is neutral.
Someone that refuses to help without self benefit is evil.

>>45530057
Neutral evil is just a selfish person, OP. It's literally the alignment for a regular guy who isn't really concerned with altruism or even hospitality (except where it benefits him).

>>45530057

Anon at least 10% of humanity are Perfectly Functional Sociopath, who if not Lawful Evil are surely Neutral Evil. There are working member of the society not just simply mentally deranged.

>>45530145
that's true neutral brah. neutral evil will actively harm other people to benefit himself and those he cares about

>>45530173
>at least 10% of humanity are Perfectly Functional Sociopath
You got some data to back up that claim anon? Or am I just supposed to assume an arbitrary percentage to be truth?

>>45530173
*tips fedora*

>>45530057
None of the alignments exist IRL because alignments are a game mechanic.

Keep D&D garbage in D&D.

>>45530229

But they do. They are the shark that work on wall street who do seel the factory where you work and leave thounsand of people homeless and fuck they own collegue in the back an simply doesn't give a shit. True Neutral mean some kind of balance in the end, but Neutral Evil can still be cruel and still not broke laws and be arrested. Modern world allow a not low amount of sadism to be allowed if you are not dumb, and not all That Guy have puth Charisma and Intelligence has dump stat.

File: 1448932378221.png (234KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 500x400px

>>45530115
law is oriented towards principal, chaos: impulse, neutrality on this axis is pragmatism.

Good is defined by sacrificing yourself for others yes
Evil is sacrificing others for yourself.
Neutrality on this axis is if you do neither of those things.

>>45530287
>True Neutral mean some kind of balance in the end
nah

it just means keeping to you and your own, the idea that you don't owe anyone else anything

>>45530309
not unless you follow the console babby WotC alignment.

True Neutral is TRUE Neutral
>it just means keeping to you and your own, the idea that you don't owe anyone else anything

Is Neutral Evil, in real alignment systems, not believeing you are obligated to help others and a desire to help yourself.

Neutral is a fringe alignment with <0.1% of people being it

>>45530309

If you keep too much on yorself, you end in the evil axis sooner or later. To be true Neutral you are either an emotionless machine or an animal (and I could give the cause that Animal are True Lawful Neutral) a True Neutral does bad thing, good thing, lawful thing and neiutral thing but in the end he doesn't commited to none of them. True Neutral does have problem in harming a person, they aren't just anal about it like Neutral Good or at least think about it. Neutral Evil doesn't care because you are not even a person, the only person he care is himself.

>>45530057
Neutral evil is pretty common. Lots of selfish bastards out there who'll fuck over others for personal gain.

>>45530410

One can say that Humanity default Alignment is Neutral Evil and that the Good guys are the mentally degenerate.

>>45530445
>>45530410
>>45530372
>>45530361
All I see is edgy teenagers who think that everyone in the world is an asshole.

>>45530057
wall streat is a prime example of chaotic evil. They want less regulations to have more freedome for their actions and their all about that money of yourself. So law-less (chaotic) + hyper selfcentered (evil)

>>45530542
>implying they wouldn't still want laws in place to help them achieve their ends
they like law when it suits them, and break it when it suits them. That's neutral evil.

>>45530542
Making money for yourself is not evil. Evil would be to rob. pillage and plunder to make money for yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqXAW2snGMI

>>45530553
i dont know, i mean most wall-streaters are an-caps or libertardians, they want there to be as little state as possible

>>45530057
Well, basically every thug, mafia cartel member, hitman, mercenary, etc that has ever existed.

Also, anyone that puts their personal gain above others well-being.

>>45530560
>Making money for yourself is not evil
This is why i said wallstreat not business man. They want to make money no matter the consequence and as easily for them as possible.

1. Alignments are a mechanical construct for D&D. They are a gaming mechanic.
2. Alignments only make any sense at all in settings where there is objective good and objective evil. We can argue about good and evil, but ultimately this is subjective. Might I suggest a visit to >>>/his/ if you want to argue philosophy?
3. For purposes of roleplaying, alignments are a gross oversimplification of the morality of an individual. This is OK if you are playing a game where all the characters are two-dimensional (that is, flat in the literary sense), however real people are far more complex than this and the alignment system is not applicable to them as it does not account for much of anything.

>>45530570
I find that hard to believe considering what a hard on Wall Street has for government bailouts. They may call themselves libertarians or get accused of being it by the left, but like almost every big buisness they are actually corporatists who are 100% for government interference on the market because it means less competition.

>>45530560
>robbing, pillaging and plundering only count if you get your hands dirty

The military industrial complex did nothing wrong

File: 1341159955711.jpg (47KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 250x250px

>>45530361
>Wanting to just live your life without getting yourself wrapped up in other people's business is evil
Nah, bro. Being evil denotes that you go out of your way to harm others in order to get what you desire. Indirectly causing someone else's harm because you didn't intervene to stop their attacker is not the same as being the attacker.

>>45530361
It's considered a negative character trait, but calling it evil is a stretch
But irl morality isn't nearly as clear cut as an alignment chart so this whole thread is stupid anyways.

>>45530553
Wanting the mold the laws to suit them is pretty lawful evil

>>45530770
>Being evil denotes that you go out of your way to harm others in order to get what you desire.

No, thats just an extreme evil.

You still go down to the hells for being a selfish bastard who never helps anyone, which is what really matters in regards to alignment.

>>45530057
>Chaotic evil
What is the average African dictatorship?

File: GoodVsEvil.png (44KB, 394x282px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 394x282px

>>45530868
No, evil must hurt things by d&d standards. Just looking out for you and your own is neutral.
I don't get how everyone seems to just make up their own version of alignments when it's written right in the books

File: 1380227759220.jpg (74KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 250x250px

>>45530361
>in real alignment systems
There is no such thing

File: Alignment.png (2MB, 1760x1996px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1760x1996px

>>45530970
it depends on edition

under Gygaxian alignment, if you dont qualify for actively good, you are probably not neutral because its really weird <0.1% of the populaton sort of stuff (like weirdo philosophers/druids) then you are left with neutral evil

>>45530990
True neutral as the balance alignment was always dumb as shit

File: 1421368766451.jpg (238KB, 854x738px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 854x738px

>>45530990
Gygax would consider pic related a shining example of lawful good. Not that he's wrong.

>>45531012
no u

TN as the average man is for moral cowards

>>45531057
The average man IS a moral coward.

>>45530115
80% of American citizens are Chaotic Evil. It is not surprising the USA is an evil country.

>>45531082
exactly, so neutral evil, failure to do good, instead choosing to benefit the self

good benefits others
evil benefits the self
neutral benefits neither

>>45531057
It does not mesh with D&D good vs evil understanding of the universe. Evil is in no way necessary, it is a monstrous, cruel thing, an enemy to be defeated. Eastern style balance does not work there because good and evil are unlike yin and yang

>>45531095
Chaotic evil is self destructive, as many real life criminals and sociopaths are. It does not benefit the self, it is an entropy of the soul.

File: 1438566259155.png (36KB, 195x193px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 195x193px

>>45531095
>neutral benefits neither
But's that's literally impossible. It's better to say that Good is benevolence (actively works to better others), Evil is malevolence (actively works to make others miserable) while Neutral is indifferent (works to better the situation of oneself without actively harming others).

By your definition, only rocks can be neutral.

>>45531112
what you are describing is Chaotic NEUTRAL

a CE is a much more reasonable person that a CN as described >>45530990

>>45531114
yes, it does clearly say in "my" (the official AD&D alignment system) that TN is the narrowest of alignments and basically only druid cultists are ever of this alignment

>>45531095
By >>45530990's definition of true neutral, neutrality benefits everyone, since the preservation of good and evil is necessary for a functioning universe. True neutrals are actually the ultimate altruists, sacrificing both desires of the self and humanitarian concerns for the benefit of creation itself.

>>45531143
>since the preservation of good and evil is necessary for a functioning universe.

No, thats simply what the druids believe, it is not necessarily actually true.

>>45531153
The reality of it doesn't matter. To the druids it's true, and so their intent is to preserve the world.

>>45531114
very few can be true neutral.

But lawful neutral is easy as fuck, you just benefit the law, you look neither at if it benefits yourself or others, only if it follows the law.

>>45530229
True Neutral sides with the underdog always. NE looks after him/herself and no-one else.

NE could be a sociopath who breaks the law and betrays people when it serves their interests.

LE would at least try to stick to a deal they have made and won't betray people if they have given their word unless they can think of a way to semi-legally weasel out of it.

>>45531153
>>45531171
yep, if you think it to the end, druids are of neutral good alignment.

>>45531134
So pretty much every edition since AD&D has confused chaotic evil with chaotic neutral.

Originally, good is supposed to be commies and evil is capitalists, and neutrals are just crazy people. Interesting.

>>45530057
>Does chaotic or neutral evil exist IRL aside from the mentally ill?
>Neutral Evil
The US.
>Chaotic Evil
I got nothing.

>>45530057
selfish assholes are neutral evil.

>>45530057
Yes, they're generally unhappy, angry, lonely people, but they exist.

>>45530517

Everyone is an asshole, you too Anon.

>>45531190

>True Neutral sides with the underdog always.

Complete nonsense and basically unplayable.

Evil is selfish
Chaos is unbound

Blood war gives a good sense to chaotic evil. While devils want to conquer, to own everything for themselves through ownership, demons want to destroy everything.

To kill is to take life. This is why it is Evil.
Desire to destroy everything is unbound selfishness. You do not have to literally gain something for some action to be considered selfish. To destroy, so that others cannot have something, is true selfishness.

Chaotic Evil destroys at will. Lawful Evil does not want to destroy, he wants to hoard. Neutral Evil is not bound by the tennants of the law chaos axis, he acts by situation.

>>45530970
That's because you define good and evil based on the newer books. Older books are a lot less shy about calling someone evil. 3rd editon was especially bad - you needed to go out of your way to kick puppies to be evil.

>ctrl+f politicians
>0 results
I bet you people think that every single pedo scandal magically has nothing to do with rich faggots

>>45530057
Yes.

>>45531091
>US is the second most charitable nation in the world according to one study
>another study says US gives the most foreign aid, giving almost three times as much as the second place
Must mean the rest of you are even worse.

File: TechnicallyCorrect.jpg (43KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x376px

The stupidity in this thread regarding Alignments has rustled my gamer jimmies and most of you are not welcome at my table.
The stupidity in this thread regarding real life has rustled my human jimmies and most of you are not welcome in my species.

First, let's just ignore the /pol/, agreed?

Second,
>>45530276
>None of the alignments exist IRL because alignments are a game mechanic.
>>45530643
>1. Alignments are a mechanical construct for D&D. They are a gaming mechanic.
Technically, these anons are correct and discussing it can only end in a pointless and stupid argument, which is kind of our shtick at /tg/.
I would add that Alignments are concepts of ideals and as such one cannot practically apply them to real life.
But what if we could?

>>45530057
>Does chaotic or neutral evil exist IRL aside from the mentally ill?
By singling out these two alignments, this question assumes that the others *do* exist IRL.
So therefore, arguing whether Good, Evil, Law, or Chaos exist is pointless.
The question asks if a person can be NE or CE and not mentally ill.
The answer is yes of course. Evil is not insanity.
There is an entire application of psychology regarding whether or not criminals were mentally capable and aware of their actions, not that I care to discuss the validity of this.
Any individual willing to commit evil acts to achieve their ends is evil. (Assuming such evil outweighs their good)
Many that pursue such evil disregard law and order to some degree.
The severity of that disregard is what marks them NE or CE.
Gang members seeking to gain power and wealth might be an example of NE, whereas someone taking advantage of a riot to enjoy acts of violence or theft might be an example of CE.

continued....

File: Neutral.jpg (31KB, 353x270px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 353x270px

>>45537213
Fourth, y'all cannot into neutral.
The neutral between Good and Evil is not a purgatory of purity.
It's more like neutral on a transmission.

>>45530289
>Neutrality on this axis is if you do neither of those things.
>>45530287
>True Neutral mean some kind of balance in the end,
>>45530361
>Neutral is a fringe alignment with <0.1% of people being it
>>45530990
>under Gygaxian alignment, if you don't qualify for actively good, you are probably not neutral because its really weird <0.1% of the population sort of stuff
>>45531095
>neutral benefits neither
>>45531186
>very few can be true neutral.
>>45531190
>True Neutral sides with the underdog always.

Declaring that the only/correct/proper definition and use of True Neutral is the one that renders the entire Alignment unusable under all but the rarest of conditions is STUPID.
It is the equivalent of declaring that a door with a sign saying, "This door must always remain closed." should be permanently sealed shut.
There is technically a basis for that line of thought, but it really just shows a lack of imagination or willingness to find an answer that actually makes sense.


>>45530309
>it just means keeping to you and your own, the idea that you don't owe anyone else anything
>>45530970
>Just looking out for you and your own is neutral.
>>45531012
>True neutral as the balance alignment was always dumb as shit
>>45531114
>Neutral is indifferent (works to better the situation of oneself without actively harming others).
These anons know what's up.
Although for the record, I love characters fanatically devoted to True Neutral Balance. But as a rare addition to the Neutral Alignment, not as the entity of it.

continued...

File: HermesHasQuestions.jpg (30KB, 495x373px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 495x373px

>>45537784
Fifth, a minor point.
>>45530517
>All I see is edgy teenagers who think that everyone in the world is an asshole.
Seconding that the "Most people are Neutral Evil." crowd are talking out of their asses.
Not saying I don't think NE is out there a lot, just saying I don't trust those poll numbers.


Sixth: The Most Important Thing:
No alignment, least of all neutral, is a pristine white can of paint that, once tainted by a drop of black, is forever grey.
Good people do evil things.
Evil people do good things.
Neutral people do both and neither.
(I would add that I do agree that at a certain point, remaining neutral in the face of evil *becomes* a lesser evil act, but that point is highly debatable.)
>>45531082
>The average man IS a moral coward.
I think this is largely true.
Neutral people are the silent majority that go along to get along.
Whenever a real person is dissected for their alignment, the usually end up close to True neutral.
It's the extreme ends of the axis you have to watch out for, they act like PCs.

Mortals are not capable of pure alignments
alignments are important to classify outsiders

>>45531091
Chaotic Bait - Neutral Bait - Lawful Bait

>>45536411
Best answer

>>45538222
CAN'T STUMP
A
N
'
T

S
T
U
M
P

seriously though, he's a meme candidate, I'll be voting for Rand

>>45541055
Anon, I've got bad news...

>>45537213
>But what if we could?
You would first need to define the alignments. A hedonistic alignment chart would have little resemblance to a stoic one.

>>45541055
Nobody tell him

>>45538222
He said "apart from the mentally ill" anon

>>45530057
There are no alignments in real life. Go outside some more.

>>45530057
Chaotic Neutral is like a rebelious hobo teen punk dude.

Neutral Evil is con artists or marketers, politicians etc. Online Scammers.

>>45530057
You know what i hate about the alignment system?

GOOD and EVIL are ludicrous

Selfless Vs. Selfish makes much more sense.

>>45544955
Smite Selfish doesn't have quite the same ring to it.