# What is your D&D Alignment ? (Polls included)



## warxzawa (Aug 19, 2016)

entp. neutral evil, i also tend to get chaotic evil, i like neutral better though


----------



## Jakuri (Sep 7, 2015)

INFP. Got true neutral, neutral good, and neutral good (but leaning chaotic). I consider myself neutral good.


----------



## Gossip Goat (Nov 19, 2013)

Chaotic Good


----------



## Judson Joist (Oct 25, 2013)

INTJ: Neutral Good w/Lawful tendencies


----------



## Peppermint Mocha (Jun 19, 2011)

ISFP - ​True Neutral


----------



## Glitter Polska (Feb 5, 2017)

INTP - Lawful Neutral


----------



## NAP (Nov 29, 2016)

Infp- Neutral Good


----------



## OP (Oct 22, 2016)

INTP, chaotic good, apparently I'm the only one who voted for that :/

On tests that show percentages/scales, I'm pretty close to the middle on both chaotic and good.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

INTJ -- I scored chaotic neutral on this test; I've also tied b/w chaotic and true neutral.


----------



## Tsubaki (Apr 14, 2015)

ENTP - Chaotic Evil

I don't really know why, to be honest. I think their definition of "good" is flawed.


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

Neutral Evil


----------



## Hero of Freedom (Nov 23, 2014)

INFP and hard to decide between neutral or chaotic good. When there isn't a good option I choose "lesser evil" then repeat if it's not "lesser" enough to wear down the bad in my approach to it by "siding" with them temporarily. I like the idea of lawful good sending assistance to the "chaotic good"?

If the situation is that there's a "sea of bad" I would gravitate towards what you know in tropes as "Imperium of Man/FO4 Brotherhood of Steel"-ish groups and factions who use questionable means with good intent at the very least. 

Sometimes they are even whom you might consider "Lawful Evil" by action, but I consider good by intent sometimes when our values on them are at odds.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Chara said:


> INFP and hard to decide between neutral or chaotic good. When there isn't a good option I choose "lesser evil" then repeat if it's not "lesser" enough to wear down the bad in my approach to it by "siding" with them temporarily. I like the idea of lawful good sending assistance to the "chaotic good"?
> 
> If the situation is that there's a "sea of bad" I would gravitate towards what you know in tropes as "Imperium of Man/FO4 Brotherhood of Steel"-ish groups and factions who use questionable means with good intent at the very least.
> 
> Sometimes they are even whom you might consider "Lawful Evil" by action, but I consider good by intent sometimes when our values on them are at odds.


Either good, or communist. You can't be both.


----------



## Sava Saevus (Feb 14, 2015)

Endologic said:


> Either good, or communist. You can't be both.


Eh... there is 'Stupid Good' or 'Lawful Stupid' as alignments that Communists are favored for. (Unfortunately, those alignments are not in this poll)

In theory you could, it would just be very contradictory in practice and glaringly obvious to others above a certain intellectual thresh hold.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

As to me, I'm an INTP currently disguising as an ENTP (which I can get away with because the introverted and extroverted counterpart are most similar to each other due to the relativity of the first dichotomy, let alone that I'm rather on the ambiverted side myself.

I'm chaotic neutral, and voted as such on INTP and ENTP.


----------



## Hero of Freedom (Nov 23, 2014)

Endologic said:


> Either good, or communist. You can't be both.


Completely in your opinion unless you acknowledge you can't be a both good and capitalist then. The Catholic Church in the past before Capitalism was legal when it operated independently would have agreed so too. I also meant in all contexts aside from political, the way you hate on it reminds me of the people who hate on this faction I support because they do questionable actions to keep order and ensure the prosperity/security of their people from chaos or "survival of fittest" elements: http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Saradomin

Wanting free housing, food for all, healthcare, guaranteed jobs or a system where "everybody survives", an end to "survival of the fittest" as an individual lifestyle is "not good" within intention? It didn't even have to be personal and it's always people like you who start crap, this is why I say honestly ISIS is more open minded or reasonable than the alt-right.

If you believe in that lifestyle where only the fittest should live and get the most resources you are evil no matter what you say. Millions die from preventable causes that could have been not but still allowed to happen due to it being profitable. Feudalism and papacy rule where "usury" is banned to capitalism also preferable, which was a planned economy that worked for so long guaranteeing 0 homelessness and unemployment.

How about not from a biased alt-right viewpoint?










If you are an advocate for a society principled on "survival of the fittest" over most virtuos then you can't call yourself good no matter what. I grew up in a structure on the side of my family I live with(Still stuck in it thanks to the social immobility of capitalism) that continued/continues to use 'feudalistic' values including political and I don't understand your mindset. People were executed for the smallest things 300 or 400+ years ago in the west by some monarchs that you would have considered good by virtue of heart if you lived during them.

I only say feudalism was less bad than capitalism by virtue of its values, there wasn't any "survival of the fittest" or active competition for resources. Although it sucked you didn't have much freedom "the weak" got sheltered by state, family and church.

Try living in Greece, Southern Europe, NYC and Sydney for a sec as an NF youth.


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

Endologic said:


> Either good, or communist. You can't be both.


Rather chaotic neutral than lawful evil.


----------



## Kajada (Nov 19, 2016)

INFP, Lawful Neutral


----------



## Merisela (Oct 7, 2016)

INFJ-neutral good


----------



## Year Of Caimans (Feb 8, 2017)

INFP - Chaotic Good
No surprise

Self proclaimed as an anarchist/progressist schyzo, realistico-optimistic for the good sake of our damned world's future.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Chara said:


> Completely in your opinion unless you acknowledge you can't be a both good and capitalist then. The Catholic Church in the past before Capitalism was legal when it operated independently would have agreed so too.


I'm aware of and acknowledge the cons of capitalism, it's egoistic nature, and the mass exploitation of individuals it's prone to.

However, people who want to capitalize, but cannot, due to their authoritarian socialist regime, naturally gravitate towards corruption as a loophole for the restrictions placed upon them.

Being restrictive, as well as prone to corruption, are cons of socialism that you ought to accept as well, unless you'd like to admit to being a hypocrite instead.



> Wanting free housing, food for all, healthcare, guaranteed jobs or a system where "everybody survives", an end to "survival of the fittest" as an individual lifestyle is "not good" within intention? It didn't even have to be personal and it's always people like you who start crap, this is why I say honestly ISIS is more open minded or reasonable than the alt-right.


1.
*ISIS is fascist.* No matter how you look at it, ISIS is pretty much as authoritarian-conservative-right as it gets. As a self-proclaimed Marxist, you should logically hate ISIS, but you don't seem to be big on logic. Besides that, ISIS couldn't possibly be less open-minded.

2.
How far are you willing to go in order to establish the babysitter government you so much desire?

Are you willing to rob humans of their free will? ...their right to free speech, expression and opinion? ...their right to free choice? ...their right to be who they are? ...their very desire to live?

People survive in order to live, but why survive if you never get to live?
Survival =/= Living.

Even if the intention is to increase welfare, *infringing on rights is evil*, period.

Rights collectively apply to everyone, and all of them must apply.
*Taking* some *rights away* to more properly enforce other rights *is wrong.*
If some rights can be infringed on, _all rights can be infringed on_, and _there may as well exist no rights at all_.

GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH.



> If you believe in that lifestyle where only the fittest should live and get the most resources you are evil no matter what you say.


~Let's make two clear distinctions~


*1: The distinction between right and privilege*

Rights apply collectively, and cannot be infringed on, at any cost.
Privileges apply individually and are built on top of the foundation we call rights.

Privileges are a double edged sword, and here's what I mean:

What a rich man sees as a fraction of his wealth could mean the world to a poor man, so it's okay to knock the rich man down a peg in order to have the poor man benefit from it.
However, the more we knock the rich man down, the less rich he ends up being, meaning that every peg, as they get taken from him, becomes more and more valuable to the formerly rich man.

Therefore, we must draw a line in order to preserve justice. While small amounts are irrelevant to the rich, it's still their rightful money, and they are, by privilege, entitled to keep the amount that is relevant to them.


*2: The distinctions between argument and person*

One can judge a person according to the content of their speech.
One cannot judge the content of the speech according to the person.

Based on what a person says, one can determine their character. However, once the judgement is made, one must keep their minds open to change due to the possibility of error. Otherwise one is ignorant. It is subjective to attack the character.

However, judging something a person says by the person saying it is completely subjective and unreasonable as well.

Now, applying this to what has been said:

Notice my phrasing: "_X_ is evil, period."
You, however, said: "If you agree with X, _you_ are evil, period."

I determine, objectively, what is right and what is wrong.
You determine, subjectively, who is right and who is wrong.

_That's a thing to keep in mind, considering this is about alignment and all._



> Millions die from preventable causes that could have been not but still allowed to happen due to it being profitable. I prefer feudalis and papacy rule where "usury" was banned to capitalism also? Which was a planned economy that worked for so long.


Yeah, go tell that to the single richest person on earth.


----------



## Sava Saevus (Feb 14, 2015)

I agree with this, but you've failed on one account, young padawan.

Warren Buffet > Bill Gates. :wink:

This is hypothetically counting all the wealth that Buffet has given to Bill and the Melinda Gates foundation.

Otherwise, yes. Bill Gates... begrudgingly deserves to be number 1 in wealth.


----------



## Hero of Freedom (Nov 23, 2014)

Have you ever heard of Jacobinism, state intervention to increase liberties born from the libertarian school? Greater social mobility ensures greater freedom, we can follow something like the Yugoslavian model of Socialism where people can have small businesses or be self employed. You just need a good constitution to keep the state in check and make sure it serves its people rather than the other way around, it's easy. From my experience less social mobility destroys your freedoms and I live in a 'household' or family structure that follows feudalistic stuff with 0 concept of things like personal finances, possessions or space. Made possible because of capitalist social immobility, we cannot find jobs, housing and bills/rents are extremely expensive and suck up almost 80-90% of your money.

If you abolish monopolies which is the point of the socialist movement it will lead to greater social mobility which leads to in turn more freedom. If you don't and let the monopolies/their owners suck up everything there will eventually be only two classes left as Karl Marx predicted. One which can't own any real property versus only the other which can afford them and it's happening right now.

If we can afford to fund prisons to house, feed and wash criminals we certainly can fund low budget or minimum housing blocks with those features in it to catch people that fall financially. Alot of "liberal democracies" can have those things without even infringing on rights but not as great as what a socialist state can achieve. Again it's a matter of order and having the state bail you out which the people of Greece and the rest of Southern Europe especially want.

The historical "Marxist-Leninist" Socialism developed by Stalin was a type of real life attempt at implementing "Lawful-Good" and nearly every single "Lawful X" regime that existed before liberal democracy was imperfect and made questionable decisions to ensure people's security. Even the "good kings" during feudal times made mistakes or decisions you people of today would be "crying" at. Ultimately those who lived back the judged which king was good by their intentions and contribution to our prosperity. I would still prefer a Trotskyist/Bolshevik or Yugoslavian economic way for socialism but just explaining the concept of "Lawful-Good" and why people were/would be open to it. @Stachan Might be familiar with this concept though.

Examples of Lawful-Good characters would be the God-Emperor's regime from Warhammer 40k or the guy I mentioned, the writers tried to make them symbolise how the "Lawful-Good" concept or regimes work in practice when applied to reality but alot of people have those characters despite. Or the "good guys" who ensured prosperity and safety but on their flawed side strike at anything that contradicts their Order. This theme is being applied to more and more factions with these "Light and Order" themes within fiction. Unless you are used to "feudal era thinking" to some extent I expect most of you would hate "Lawful Good" guys if you saw them in real life, I would be intimidated and try to stay on their good side or peacefully dismantle them to be "neutral good" but appreciate whatever good things they can do.

In an untamed world you would need these guys as much as you have it to stabilise things and make it safe before you move into the next stage of pursuing liberty. Despite this I am saying "Lawful-Good"(Done in reality) is the "lesser bad" to any "evils". If you sacrifice some rights for the "greater good" or security/prosperity and happiness of people that equates to "lawful-good" but if you do it and "sacrifice the weak for greater efficiency and progress" that's "lawful evil" like the Roman Empire(In concept).


----------



## lookslikeiwin (May 6, 2014)

Hmmm. Naturally I'd say I tend to lean toward Chaotic Neutral, though I am also a Christian and I find that it influences me toward the the Chaotic Good corner of the True Neutral zone. I'm an INTP.


----------



## heymoon (Nov 26, 2016)

ISFP and neutral good.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

INTJ Chaotic Neutral


----------



## earlydazee (Feb 20, 2017)

ESTP | chaotic neutral 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stachan (Jul 8, 2016)

INFJ True Neutral


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

INFP 
Neutral Good


----------



## DemonAbyss10 (Oct 28, 2010)

ISTP: True Neutral (Although I do see myself more chaotic neutral at times)


----------



## sinaasappel (Jul 22, 2015)

Esfj: true neutral.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Based on your answers to the quiz, your character’s most likely alignment is Lawful Neutral.

*Lawful Neutral ISTJ*

A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government. The common phrase for lawful neutral is "true lawful." Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot.

 WTF most ISTJs are this alignment. :/ I'll take it as a sign of me becoming healthier and better informed about life.


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

ESTJ Neutral Evil.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

lookslikeiwin said:


> Hmmm. Naturally I'd say I tend to lean toward Chaotic Neutral, though I am also a Christian and I find that it influences me toward the the Chaotic Good corner of the True Neutral zone. I'm an INTP.


Hey - also an INTP (currently pretending to be extroverted to piss certain elitists on this site off)

I distinguish "believing in something" and "thinking something is real".
Religion, to me, are the myths that belong to and may be a defining part of one's history and culture.
However, I don't believe these myths are real. While some parts of the bible may have historical plausibility, most parts are just stories.
In terms of existence, I think God is as real as Ra, Zeus, Jupiter, etc. I reject the existence of any deity for reasons the world isn't ready yet for that I may or may not one day publish.

_Now, according to this, do you just "believe in" God, or think that God is real and believe in that deity?_


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

narcissistic said:


> ESTJ Neutral Evil.


I don't really give a shit anymore about you lying to yourself about being an extrovert, but considering that STJ seems to fit, and I'm currently disguising as my extroverted psychological counterpart myself, I'll not be a hypocrite about this and let it slide.

Now *your alignment*, however, is *undoubtedly plausible*.

(In case you're too apathetic and/or ignorant to read my signature, I'm Chaotic Neutral.)


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

Endologic said:


> and I'm currently disguising as my extroverted psychological counterpart myself.


Finally got some fresh air have you now?


----------



## lookslikeiwin (May 6, 2014)

Endologic said:


> Hey - also an INTP (currently pretending to be extroverted to piss certain elitists on this site off)
> 
> I distinguish "believing in something" and "thinking something is real".
> Religion, to me, are the myths that belong to and may be a defining part of one's history and culture.
> ...


That's a bit of a derailment, but I trust in God. Which also means I must believe in his existence, and the evidence of who he says he is.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

narcissistic said:


> Finally got some fresh air have you now?


Air generally isn't fresh behind a mask.


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

INFP Neutral Good


----------



## President of Aether (Dec 11, 2016)

ISTJ - Lawful Neutral. Surprise, surprise.


----------



## Sava Saevus (Feb 14, 2015)

@*Endologic* @narcissistic
Just kith already.


----------



## Bunny (Jul 11, 2015)

xSFP & I got Neutral Good _didn't expect that_ but I'm not sure if I'd be more of a True Neutral or not.


----------



## Hero of Freedom (Nov 23, 2014)

At the same time people forget "Lawful Good" doesn't always have "Lawful Nice" in it, the only thing that separates it from being "Lawful Evil" is doing what they do to achieve the greater good. Morality and Honor over pragmatism in their goals. "Lawful Evil" does questionable actions for "Greater Efficiency" and pursues "Efficiency over honor and morality". The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout 4(If you've ever played) are "Lawful Good" while insitutute's "Lawful Evil". I think that would be the best examples of how they differ in comparison when they're applied to something close to the "human world". Both "Lawful Good/Lawful Evil" involve the sacrifice of some "rights" to maintain the order.

So the Roman Empire(Before embracing Christianity and abolition of slavery) was intended to be "Lawful Evil", sacrificing rights/what is right for efficiency and Feudal Europe was intended to be "Lawful Good" in theory sacrificing some rights in the name of what was believed to be good and righteous.


----------



## Finny (Jul 17, 2015)

True Neutral - ENTP


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

INTP, Chaotic Neutral


----------



## BranchMonkey (Feb 23, 2017)

It's been a while since I took a test to determine that. (I have never played the game.)

I was Human Neutral with some addition the tests I've since seen do not include which would equate, I think, now, with True Neutral.


----------



## Luci Ferre (Jul 24, 2016)

Neutral


----------



## SilverFalcon (Dec 18, 2014)

INTP - (true?) Neutral.

Most of my lawful answers would be towards friends and family and most of the chaotic towards state - I tend not to give blank cheque of loyalty.


----------



## sostenuto (Nov 28, 2014)

I can sort of relate to True Neutral sometimes, but overall I think Lawful Neutral is the best fit.


----------



## deviants (Dec 16, 2016)

ENTP, Chaotic Neutral.


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

esfp
neutral good
I don't care too much about the rules.
But I do care about doing the right thing.
Sometimes, the right thing runs counter to the rules.


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

Any remarkable trends yet? I want to see how much I deviate. Not _whether_ I deviate, mind you - it's simply a matter of how much.


----------



## sloop (Jan 19, 2015)

INFP - chaotic neutral


----------



## Scoobyscoob (Sep 4, 2016)

ENTJ - Lawful Good


----------



## Mange (Jan 9, 2011)

Chaotic good maybe... or chaotic neutral


----------



## prodo (Feb 12, 2017)

INTP
Chaotic neutral.


----------



## prodo (Feb 12, 2017)

INTP
Chaotic neutral.



_Accidentally double posted, suppose I'm not making a very good first impression on the community... Would delete if I knew how_


----------



## hexmeister (Nov 18, 2015)

ISFJ - true neutral


----------



## Starflier (Feb 16, 2017)

INFP - Neutral good.


----------



## Tazzie (Jun 5, 2016)

ISFP/Lawful Neutral


----------



## Owtoo (Aug 20, 2015)

I usually get True Neutral in this, but the last time I took it I think I got Lawful Neutral, which I didn't agree with as much.

- INFP


----------



## Jaune (Jul 11, 2013)

It kind of varies depending on my mood but I think chaotic neutral is a good estimate for me.


----------



## Jakuri (Sep 7, 2015)

Usually true neutral or neutral good; in another survey I got neutral good, but leaning toward chaotic. I voted for neutral good.

INFP


----------



## Quads (Mar 8, 2017)

ENFP, Neutral Evil (THOUGH I HIGHLY DISAGREE, I THINK I'M CHAOTIC NEUTRAL THANK YOU VERY MUCH)


----------



## Waveshine (Mar 18, 2011)

ENFP, chaotic neutral


----------



## Epictetus (Apr 26, 2012)

CN for the win.


----------



## OHtheNovelty (Aug 14, 2016)

ISTP here. True Neutral.

I think everyone is an extremist. I can't explain it well, but I just find all sides to hold no appeal to me. I find nothing appealing about being a goody-two-shoes, nor do I find it appealing to join the dark side while ignoring the concept of the ass-kicking bitch, Karma.

I dunno, I can't explain it well how I feel about not liking any side. I just don't.


----------



## Bijoux (Nov 7, 2016)

ISFP ~ True Neutral


----------



## zerouva (Mar 25, 2017)

True Neutral.

Don't know my type yet. :bored:


----------



## sicksadworlds (May 4, 2015)

ISFP Chaotic neutral, I'm sure i'm neutral, but not that sure about being chaotic, but every test i get chaotic so..


----------



## Syvelocin (Apr 4, 2014)

ENFP. I can tell you I'm not lawful or evil. I get Chaotic Neutral the most so I go with that one, but I've also gotten Chaotic Good and True Neutral.


----------



## Flamme (Apr 8, 2017)

ISTP, True neutral (followed very closely by Chaotic neutral by one point in the tests).


----------



## Snowflake Minuet (Feb 20, 2016)

INFJ, most likely Neutral Good.


----------



## isn't anything (Apr 6, 2017)

true neutral
i've taken several alignment tests and gotten both true neutral and neutral evil, so i'd say i'm somewhere inbetween those two


----------



## PaladinRoland (Jan 11, 2014)

INFP. 

Lawful Neutral. :kitteh:

...Maybe because I'm a neutral Paladin... 
I'LL SMASH THEM EVIL FOOLS :angry:
... :shocked: Hey there... pretty lady, want to hang out tonight? Oh, you're a succubus? That makes it even better. :kitteh:


----------



## bigstupidgrin (Sep 26, 2014)

Usually test neutral good or true neutral.

If I ever get into a game of DnD again I'd love to play Chaotic neutral or lawful evil. Acting as a brat (on stage) was a lot of fun for me.


----------

