Hi, I'm new player and I'm having a hard time figuring out what neutral/neutral means and how it differs from evil/chaotic. If the only constants in my character's behavior are that I'm amoral (NOT immoral, mind you, but truly amoral) and if I'm also joyfully selfish then what category do I fit under? Especially if everything else about my character's behavior may vary wildly from moment to moment. One moment I'm kind, the next quite petty, etc.

I'm also trying to understand Nexus as a neutral/neutral cabal. How exactly does it fit into the world of Thera? And how would I go about joining a cabal if it's the right fit?

Thanks in advance.

Thank you. Those responses were helpful.

Let me flesh out the idea I have in my mind a bit, because I think it's maybe too vague at this point. My character is amoral in that he doesn't believe in any absolutes. If asked, is killing wrong? Or is saving a child from a fire right? My character's answer will always and only be, "It depends." I define immoral instead to be believing and knowing that killing is always wrong, and doing it anyway. To me that's much more inline with an idea of "evil."

My character does believe in a natural order, and perhaps you can describe that as a belief in "balance", but he also believes that no individual or group is *responsible* or even *able* to enforce that order or balance. He believes a deeper intelligence arises naturally when all beings pursue their own aims selfishly. Therefore his own role in the greater scheme of things is the same as that of any other being in Thera. He pursues his own aims joyfully and selfishly, his mind free from the mire of moral judgements. For example, that might mean watching an "evil" player get beat down by group of much more advanced "good" players, and then when that player returns to his corpse, quietly planting a nice item in his inventory and walking away. There's no overt attempt to restore balance in my character's actions. It is as it is. He was moved in that moment to kindness, he trusted his own *selfish* impulses, and acted as he felt moved to, without a cloud of moral judgments muddying his mind.

I also didn't mean to suggest my character was deeply fickle, although he will APPEAR that way to others who don't understand him. The kindness that I described in that moment was right for my character in that moment. In another moment, another situation, again following selfish impulses, he might do something else. For example while exploring naked and on the verge of starvation, he might happen on a loaded corpse and do a full loot, again following his own selfish impulses without consideration of any moral implication. Though others will certainly call this "petty" or "greedy", they don't necessarily understand his actions from within his mind.

That seems NN to me. There's no *self-imposed* order in my character's actions. At times his actions seem chaotic to others. But there's a belief that a deeper order arises in his selfishness, and he does follow that guiding principle with impeccable constancy.

From what you describe, I'd go with chaotic neutral.

Chaotic neutral characters can have all kinds of reasoning and motivation. Chaotic ethos doesn't necessarily mean the character is insane, criminal, completely random. My most recent character was chaotic, but she was neither insane nor random, and she never broke the law. She was, however, whimsical, quirky, and took unpredictable approaches various situations - ergo, chaotic.

Basically the consensus is that it is outcome that determines ethos/alignment, not motivation. An evil character might think his actions are holy and good, but ultimately, if his actions are evil, he is evil. This is a discussion we've had before. Similarly, if a character thinks he is reasoned but his actions are random by all outwards appearances, I'd say that it qualifies as chaotic.

That said, it's highly improbable anyone is going to nitpick whether your character has a neutral or chaotic ethos. It's rarely that important of a distinction.

I'll also add that, in CF, there are a number of ways to interpret alignment behavior, especially evil and neutral. The most frequently encountered problem where there is no meeting of the minds between immstaff and the player, is that there is a certain level of random wanton murder that is no longer neutral.

The neutral character, I think (of either of Twist's varieties - whether apathetic or balance-principled) has a *notion* of ethical behavior, but he chooses to breech ethics based on circumstances or perhaps personal gain, but he makes his choice mindful of ethics.

The evil character rejects ethics entirely (or, for more creative roleplay, completely twists ethics into something good people would consider aberrant and vile.)

The neutral character acknowledges that murdering the random elf sitting at the Crossroads minding his own business is an evil act, but he still might do it if there is a particularly compelling reason to do so. The good character will not kill the elf at all unless it's entirely unavoidable, and even in that case, may offer warning or make recompense. The evil character needs no more reason than, "Sweet! Easy kill!"

I don't think you can play NN as amoral and get away with it unless you've got a really niche role and some great RP chops.

I view NN as one of two things - either someone who really cares about the balance in CF (Nexun-y type) or one who really DOESN'T care.

If you're trying for the "doesn't care" outlook, a good example from literature might be Kitiara from the first three Dragonlance books (Dragons of XXX). She used to run with this group of do-gooders that included a paladin and a CG ranger type, but she got a better offer and became the head of the army of the evil badguys.

She's not crazed, and she doesn't change from kind to petty to flirty to dour...that's not NN, that's multiple personalities, and probably chaotic.

Her allegiances may sway, but her NN role is that she always looks out for number 1. She wouldn't kill some traveler alongside the road for the 20 copper coins he might have while she's wearing a full suit of armor, but if she were starving and penniless and dressed in rags? Yep he's a dead man.

Hope that helps.

There are some pretty good descriptions of how your eths/align should play out in the academy if you look into the pool there. (Or is it the mural?)

Neutral is an alignment I've always had problems with RPing out, I usually tend to play good or evil instead. And if I do play neutral, it's usually neutral/orderly or neutral/chaotic. heh

Joining a cabal:
I usually try to find members of the cabal I wish to join, talk to them and try to get them to recommend me to their leaders. If I'm feeling confident (or maybe my char is.) I'm going straight to the leaders.

Some cabals I sent notes to first, introducing myself and that I am availible should my services be needed.

But I have played chars too that I've had the intention of joining a cabal with but due to role restrictions, I've refused to make the first contact, this however, can take a lot of time, and might even end up with your being cabaless. That route is all about being noticed.


Nexuns in Thera are keepers of balance. Both balance between magic/none-magic (They generally just want magic to be as strong as it can be.) and balance between alignments and ethos. They have cabal powers that allowes them to gauge how strongly either side tips, light, darkness, orderly, chaotic, the strength of the veil. (The strength of the veil affects the strength of magic in Thera. A thick veil weakness magic, makin spells fail, potions fail etc. A thin veil makes spells to be cast for free sometimes.)

I hope this helps!

Always shoot first and then call whatever you hit the target.