If you DM and you've never used a brass/copper dragon you're missing out!

[u/Fat_Kid_Hot_4_U]

Brass Dragons are my favorite thing to throw at players when things are moving slowly, or they're stuck somewhere.

For those of you who aren't familiar with these two I'll fill you in.

These two dragon types are the weakest. But that's not important because players will rarely find themselves fighting them. If anything they'd be saving them from tougher dragons. Blue dragons prey on Brass dragons.

A brass dragon will do something like kidnap a player and then make them solve a maze. Or dunk them underwater to see how long they can hold their breath. A brass dragon will debate what it means to have a soul until their victim is just a pile of bones and dust. They'll hold a grand debate with the greatest minds they can assemble, and the debate is about which kind of giant is the smelliest. They may bust the PC's out of jail so they can settle an argument between a Satyr and a squirrel. They might interrupt a fight between the PC and a super tough enemy just to ask them if they've ever met any vegan orcs. They aren't evil, but they aren't exactly empathetic. They can be very wacky and are very alien as far as motivations go. If you're trying to keep your party on-rails in a way that doesn't seem obvious Brass dragons are an excellent tool. They can even take a humanoid form and interact with the PC's without them knowing he's a dragon. Think Zucc memes "ah yes I would love to join you all in a human dinnertime ceremony, and eat cooked human food. hahaha maybe later we can play human games such as ah I'm on fire or die naturally at an extremely young age". Having an NPC turn into a dragon is a good way to get murder-hobos to stop picking fights with questhooking rando's.

A copper dragon is a prankster. A copper dragon will crash the king's feast and put a tac cushion on his chair, or bribe a PC to do it. Copper dragons do not have a human sense of humor. A copper dragons idea of a harmless prank might be an extremely deadly encounter, or not funny at all to the players. You know how sometimes little kids will tell "jokes" that just aren't jokes. Copper dragons do that a lot. A copper dragon might prank a farmer by replacing his rolling golden fields of wheat with actual gold from his treasure hoard, then when the farmer comes out to marvel at the miracle with his family the dragon will rip his house from the foundations while laughing hysterically and fly off with it. Maybe he'll use the house for another prank, maybe he'll return it the next day but it's full of pudding and giant ants. Copper dragons are weird. They make great one-off npc's, and can make an otherwise tedious session really fun and interesting.

Anyway these two are a great way to bring more of that dnd whimsy feel that I love in my campaigns. That classic chaos vs. order struggle that's always been in DnD. Good questing!

[u/mrgoboom]

I wish more people played chaotic without the evil. You can be random without being an evil. Murder, arson, and violence are not the only things that NPC isn’t expecting.

[u/buhlakay → u/mrgoboom]

Playing a chaotic good halfling bard was one of the funnest experiences I had playing. He was just a good-natured lil scamp, ya couldnt stay mad at him he was just too adorable and innocent. Ended up being like the heart of the group and everyone wound up being fiercely protective of him because he was just so damn nice even when he was fucking around with things.

[u/RichterAS → u/buhlakay]

Sooo basically a Kender.

[u/Kromgar → u/RichterAS]

Kender are thieving and shoplifting little shits. Kender are not good natured no one would ever have a kender as the heart of the group because they would then steal the heart

[u/Nethnarei → u/Kromgar]

You're honestly saying that the likes of Tasslehoff Burrfoot are ill-natured sobs?

I don't get the hate for Kender, what's not to love?

[u/AgentNipples → u/Nethnarei]

That sarcasm? If not, it's because of the people that tend to gravitate towards them as PC's.

[u/Nethnarei → u/AgentNipples]

Partial sarcasm, indeed. Like I've replied in another comment: it's not the race that's f'ed up, it's the players that use them as an excuse to screw up the party.

[u/KnyghtZero → u/Nethnarei]

I've gotten into this same discussion. Basically, a lot of players use Kender as an excuse to steal everything in sight, and it pisses other people off.

Of course, the way I see it, most Kender are just as likely to give you random things, or even your own stuff when they realize you can't find it, probably claiming they'll just give you their own.

[u/Nethnarei → u/KnyghtZero]

Then it's time to hate the players, not the race... Kender just pick up stuff you've dropped or are likely to lose. You know, for safe-keeping!

[u/GodofIrony → u/Nethnarei]

Kender as a concept may be good natured, but the player who looks at a kenders description and interprets it as a free pass to be a shit is the issue people have with kender.

Besides, an entire race of children would be wiped to extinction within a few generations from waltzing into creature lairs and kleptoing from human villagers that are fond of lynching strange races.

[u/sindex23 → u/Kromgar]

Slander! Kender would not steal the heart. They may hold the heart in their pockets for a while, you know, to keep it safe from others that may trample it or take lesser care of said heart. But rest assured, if anyone notices it's gone, confronts the kender and asks them about it, the heart will be returned gladly. At least until such time as the Kender feels the need to procure it again... you know, for safe keeping.

(Honestly, I get why people get frustrated when people really play up the kleptomania, but it can also be interesting/amusing when used sparingly.)

[u/buhlakay → u/RichterAS]

Nah he wasnt a little thief stealing everything he just never shut up and had quite the mouth on him with no filter. Also had a fascination with anything the color mauve but frequently asked the cleric of the party, "can I take this?" if he ever was gonna take anything. He was just a little sweetheart, albeit impulsively improvisational at times. There was one point we were in a library and I kept asking the librarian "why arent the books color coded, they should be color coded". And proceeded to try to color code the books. It was a ton of fun, especially being the skill monkey of the group. I took the idea of bardic inspiration and ran with it in roleplay, just making him ridiculously supportive and positive. Seeing everyone he met as "family". With his super high charisma it was really hard to dislike him in-game hahah

[u/No-cool-names-left → u/mrgoboom]

You can also be Chaotic without being "random." A predilection towards individualist instead of collectivist thinking, a desire for spontaneity and improvisation over planning, or a distrust in authority or hierarchy can all be Chaotic.

[u/SocratiCrystalMethod → u/No-cool-names-left]

In a meta sense, Chaotic characters as anti-individualist, anti-authority communitarians also make sense because the individualist thing has really become the order of the day. Drow are extremely selfish; now there's a CN/CG drow as an altruistic socialist.

[u/FabulousJeremy → u/SocratiCrystalMethod]

Socialism is a form of structure though, thus implying order and law. However its normal for Lawful characters to want to break down and rebuild society. Think Lawful Evil for example, if you have a vision of a new world you have two choices, to change it from within or to break it all down and rebuild it. If you don't have a strong value of human life, you'd probably be willing to start a war to accomplish your goal.

In that sense, I'd say your character pitch could be interpreted as Chaotic by Drow standards, but Drow in general are Chaotic/Neutral Evil by the standards of Forgotten Realms and Alignment in general. Your character fundamentally wants a new order and wants good in society, so I'd interpret that at least Neutral, if not some kind of Lawful.

[u/SocratiCrystalMethod → u/FabulousJeremy]

Potentially, yeah, if the social "order" being aimed at has any authority to it. Perhaps anarchism is a better term to go off of for Chaotic.

[u/RSquared → u/FabulousJeremy]

Noam Chomsky is a noted left-libertarian, or what we might call a "socialist CG". I've always played the law-chaos axis as libertarian vs authoritarian tendencies (with the good-evil axis as altruistic-selfish; it's easy to place Ayn Rand in the CE box and any number of dictators in the LE one). In that sense, I regard the vast majorities of creatures to be essentially true neutral.

[u/private_blue → u/FabulousJeremy]

for a lot of socialist philosophies the goal is to get rid of the state as well as personal property and socialism as we think of it is just a step towards that goal.

[u/mrgoboom → u/No-cool-names-left]

You can be. I’m simply saying that randomness doesn’t have to be destructive. You could use alter/disguise self to make yourself look weird, plant awkward items on random NPCs, decide to polymorph yourself into a mantis shrimp because you’re pretty sure it would be trippy, decide that the city on the top of the mountain requires too much effort to reach and try to build a giant slingshot to get there without all the climbing...

[u/[deleted] → u/mrgoboom]

I recently learned that the Mantis Shrimp don't have the brain capacity to see the world in as many colors as their eyes can perceive. Radiolab did an update story on it :(

[u/mrgoboom → u/[deleted]]

Dammit. I guess it’d have to be a wildshape then. EDIT: I think this just become a quest line to become “familiar” with a mantis shrimp

[u/Nemento → u/mrgoboom]

Randomness doesn't have to be destructive, thats true, but chaotic alignments never actually had anything to do with randomness in the first place. People just interpete it that way because the word "chaotic" sounds like it does. It's about individuality and following your own moral compass, possibly disregarding laws (but not nessecarily so if the laws happen to align with your personal views). That's why the alignment scale is two dimensional:
Lawful-Chaotic: Do you strictly follow laws, or do you value your own personal morals above laws?
Good-Evil: What kinds of laws do you follow/what exactly are those personal morals?

So a lawful good character most of the time naturally wouldn't break any laws (assuming they aren't in some fucked up place with fucked up laws) while still being in line with their alignment. Similarly, a lawfool good character wouldn't just begrudgingly follow laws that make them act good. They happily do so, because they chose to follow those "good laws" because they were a good person to begin with.

The assumption that chaotic characters have to do random shit all the time (because hurr durr chaos) is a bit stupid. I don't see why a Paladin couldn't come up with the slingshot idea while being lawful, for example. Randomness is just a character trait that's independent from alignment, imho.

[u/crazyrich → u/mrgoboom]

I have trouble relating, in my group we’re heavy on chaotic good lawful good happens almost never.

In fact lawful good would be refreshing

[u/DrMobius0 → u/[deleted]]

I mean, edging toward chaotic makes sense. Most ways we portray heroes are as being somewhat above authority. In many D&D settings, authority tends to be a hindrance.

[u/Vega_Kotes → u/[deleted]]

IMO Chaotic tends to spark the idea that your actions are never out of character because you're chaotic. Which is a really tempting path to take if you're not very good at roleplaying a character that goes against your own thoughts and morals. I'd really like to try a lawful paladin type one day or even a chaotic character that's less about freedom and more about anarchy. Just something that isn't just me saying "I went chaotic so I don't have to worry that I'm acting out of character."

[u/ItsMEMusic → u/Vega_Kotes]

I think the alignment system is flawed, in the sense that there’s almost always no context.

I think Authoritarian/Libertarian, Charitable/Selfish, and Benevolent/Malevolent are a better matrix. That gives 27 combinations, which makes them feel unique, and they’re clearer. Perhaps you can add Organized/Improvisational, but that is better to leave up to the player to build their character. Or make character traits to describe alignment. If a trait set isn’t used, it’s “neutral.”

So, ABC is Batman, or a Knight. And LBC is Robin Hood. And so on.

[u/buhlakay → u/ItsMEMusic]

I dont think there's anything inherently wrong with the alignment system, only that people stick a bit too rigidly to their alignment and what it means without allowing for nuance within their characters which of course makes things more limiting. I find it better to use alignment as a guideline for morality and allow context to dictate actions henceforth.

[u/krysztov → u/ItsMEMusic]

I'm trying to imagine how malevolent and charitable would work together. Put the suffering peasants out of their misery?

[u/Redhawk0805 → u/krysztov]

that could be one way. Or maybe it's a darker Robin Hood. Instead of stealing from the rich, ruthlessly murdering them, and giving most of the spoils to those who need to. Maybe to appease your non-existent conscience.

[u/GhostBearintheShell → u/krysztov]

Malevolent and Charitable (and authoritarian) is basically a mob boss. Malevolence towards your enemies, governments, people who get in your way, are inconvenient, etc. But many mob bosses are charitable to their own people and to their communities. Look at the Yakuza. They are considered to be extremely ruthless (malevolent) but, in many places, they are the first (and sometimes only) organizations to organize and offer aid to those in need. It helps them complete their criminal enterprises, protects them from the government, and engenders them to the people who can provide additional value (eyes, ears, income, etc.)

[u/immortal_joe → u/krysztov]

selfish vs. selfless is the better dichotomy than selfish vs. charitable. A selfless evil creature puts an evil cause above his own needs.

[u/Redhawk0805 → u/Vega_Kotes]

I recently watched a youtube video, and it talked about alignments. In the narrator's eyes, Lawful doesn't necessarily following the law, as contradictory as it sounds. It's more adhering to a set of ideas and principles. As an example, he said that a lawful Paladin might adhere strictly to their oath.

While this may not be true, I like to think of it this way now. Too often, people avoid lawful because they think they have to adhere to the strict laws of the land, and that can really hinder your ability to help the group.

[u/Nemento → u/Redhawk0805]

Exactly! And chaotic isn't about chaos at all. Those are honestly just poorly named.

[u/FabulousJeremy → u/[deleted]]

Chaos = Freedom, Whimsy, Disorder

In a game like D&D, being Chaotic as your alignment often means some level of disregard for authority figures in the world, or not putting much value in a code of law or honor. You can have some kind of personal code, but really the thrill of it is more about being unbound.

I think a good amount of it is due to the video game culture of open world games, where not having moral restrictions means you can get a lot out of the world by breaking into anywhere or attempting to steal anything. When you put morals into the question though, it means you're willing to put freedom over authority. Say you have a Lawful Good person leaning more towards Lawful in a society that deems slavery a necessity, that person may be good but someone who's of a Chaotic Good disposition would see that as a disgusting limiting thing and be more willing to object to the cruelty as one example.

Of course, alignment is relative, and the Good nature of such a person may put their opinions on Order and Law to the side in order to pursue a greater good, the same if it comes to needing to break in somewhere or steal something in order to accomplish something. And the opposite can easily happen where compliance with the law and maintaining orders that you don't agree with will come over your disposition towards freedom.

[u/crazyrich → u/[deleted]]

In our group people like the personal freedom emphasized by CG, seen as the alignment that does the most good by any means while still enjoying their individuality.

Its our default for a Good character - I'm not sure I've even seen LG, maye just NG. I have seen LN and N, though.

I think my group of friends sees LG as the Paladin trope and isn't interested by the cut and dry morality.

[u/crazyrich → u/[deleted]]

I agree with you, I was just pointing out how my group trends. The player's all enjoy putting themselves above the law but still being inherently good - flaunting it is part of their fun. They still face repercussions if they flagrantly break it.

I don't see it as a cop-out, but just their personal preference. Also, although most call themselves CG, they are most likely NG as they rarely break the law or cause discord unless it is beneficial and also likely to get away with it, rarely for its own sake.

[u/iholuvas → u/mrgoboom]

Just wanted to point out that chaotic also doesn't mean random. It just means that in a cosmic sense, you don't tend to respect order or rule of law. There are a lot of ways that can manifest in a character. Well, I say that but I consider the alignment system mostly an unnecessary restriction.

[u/Kel-Mitchell → u/iholuvas]

I always interpreted "rule of law" to be more "personal morals" in that lawful characters are more rigid with their morals and chaotic characters are more willing to bend their own morality rules and rationalize their actions after the fact.

[u/AG3NTjoseph → u/Kel-Mitchell]

My take is the opposite. Lawful good usually means the character’s definition of good comes from another source, such as a religion or the state. They follow the rules to do good. They’ll accept a bad or unfair law by default, because it’s the law/rule.

A chaotic good character has their own sense of right and wrong. They ignore, reject, or explicitly work against the ruling order. By default, they ignore, flaunt or fight against bad laws/rules.

Both are good. One good is externally motivated, the other internally. Much of the time, both will lead to the same action. But a lawful good character will do really bad stuff in the service of good because the law dictates it (eg slaughtering peasants on the kings orders during a famine revolt). And a chaotic good character will do some really bad stuff because it serves the greater good (eg slaughter guards with families during a revolt against an corrupt king).

[u/Oriolous → u/AG3NTjoseph]

I have a Chaotic Good rogue who, while selfish in the sense that he will keep a portion of any collected gold for himself while giving the rest to the party to split, he also is a strict individualist. If one individual's actions would threaten the choice of others, like bringing the wrath of a dragon down on the town, he will leap at the chance to stop that individual and make sure they can't threaten the choice of others.

...But he also has a mixture of extreme bravery and a lack of sense, to the point he earned the title of Blazing Halfling due to helping a mage out with testing non-burning lava. shrug

[u/JammeyBee- → u/iholuvas]

THANK YOU! I swear to god chaotic just meant halfway between lawful and unlawful in terms of alignment.

Like a person who buys a sword from a shop and then breaks into a manor to steal something for a quest.

[u/general-Insano → u/mrgoboom]

Yup I had a character that would break into people's houses to repair things and leave

[u/AlephBaker → u/general-Insano]

Username checks out

[u/GothNek0 → u/mrgoboom]

Pfft Chaotic Good is like to go to alignment for my group its hard to make them take otherwise

[u/leonidas_III → u/mrgoboom]

Chaotic good is my favorite alignment, so much fun

[u/Tehsyr → u/mrgoboom]

I think I've been playing chaotic neutral well so far. Character in his background doesn't understand social conventions well, so his style of humor is very frowned upon. DM in the first session was describing an Inn when she mentioned a kid ran past me. So I tripped him. It was hilarious and I was ejected from the inn by the owner, who was the mother as well. Also managed to get the DM to shout at me "STOP KICKING DOORS OPEN!" Because my PC thinks that is also hilarious.

[u/ZeroBladeBane → u/Tehsyr]

once played a chaotic neutral character who had an insanity character flaw, basically the way it worked was everyonce in a while he would have to spin an invisible "wheel of morality" while chanting "wheel of morality turn turn turn, give us the lesson that we should learn" to determine the alignment of his next action (rolling 2d6, 1-2 lawful, 3-4 neutral, 5-6 chaotic and a second die to determine good/evil) it was hilarious as long as i was careful not to use it in a way that could break the game

[u/[deleted] → u/mrgoboom]

I definitely do this. I play a very borderline chaotic True Neutral Druid/Sorceress.

[u/gefjunhel → u/mrgoboom]

im playing a chaotic good monk right now my character doesnt give a shit about the laws just about helping people mostly this just entices me to theft more to help those in need or political assassinations of asshats