This was interesting. I would have thought evil alignments would be more popular overall.
I've played every alignment at this point and I think I've probably had the most fun with the three lawful alignments. I find that chaotic alignments are hard to do well unless the DM works with you to put you in situations where you can highlight it without causing massive disruption to the plot. Freeing slaves is a great example of chaotic good in action. Neutral alignments are good if you just want to playing this as they go, with neutral good being somewhat altruistic and neutral evil being somewhat selfish.
I think the reason that evil wasn't more poplar as a played alignment was a result of most DMs disallowing it, as it's easier for most DMs to manage a Good/Neutral party fighting Evil than to manage an Evil or Evil/Neutral party fighting Good/Neutral.
For example, 28.97% of people said they had played Lawful Evil and of the remaining 71.03%, 39.76% (55.98% of people who had not tried it) said they'd want to try LE.
I used to play with a DM who used to disallow CE because he thought the only way it could play out as a murderhobo. He ended up changing this oppinion after we played a campaign where I started as a NG witch. I ended up doing some of the most evil stuff possible to grow in power as well as sabotage the societal norms (We were in a anti-arcane i nquidition era.) After all was said and done I thought over everything that was done and only then realized that I was VERY chaotic evil. But the DM was okay with it because everything I was doing pushed the plot forward.
Lookin over the results of this survey, the thing I disagree with personally is that it seems people think evil is inheritley more difficut to play in a group game or manage to move the plot forward. From my own personal experience I find this to be untrue, but it requires someone to have a better idea of Evil than 'hey I'm evil so I'm just gonna do whatever insane thing crosses my mind'. But that isn't a problem with evil, it's a problem with a player trying to be an asshole.
I like my group, but I usually bar at least Chaotic Evil as when it's allowed we degenerate into stupid backstabbing evil pretty quickly. My group seems to be under the impression that Chaotic Evil means no long term planning and no allies.
CE doesn't really mean "no allies", it means more like "alliances are short-lived and fickle." A CE PC/NPC will still work with others, but only so long as it suits them.
This was interesting. I would have thought evil alignments would be more popular overall.
I've played every alignment at this point and I think I've probably had the most fun with the three lawful alignments. I find that chaotic alignments are hard to do well unless the DM works with you to put you in situations where you can highlight it without causing massive disruption to the plot. Freeing slaves is a great example of chaotic good in action. Neutral alignments are good if you just want to playing this as they go, with neutral good being somewhat altruistic and neutral evil being somewhat selfish.
I think the reason that evil wasn't more poplar as a played alignment was a result of most DMs disallowing it, as it's easier for most DMs to manage a Good/Neutral party fighting Evil than to manage an Evil or Evil/Neutral party fighting Good/Neutral.
For example, 28.97% of people said they had played Lawful Evil and of the remaining 71.03%, 39.76% (55.98% of people who had not tried it) said they'd want to try LE.
(Not counting NE/CE, of course)
I used to play with a DM who used to disallow CE because he thought the only way it could play out as a murderhobo. He ended up changing this oppinion after we played a campaign where I started as a NG witch. I ended up doing some of the most evil stuff possible to grow in power as well as sabotage the societal norms (We were in a anti-arcane i nquidition era.) After all was said and done I thought over everything that was done and only then realized that I was VERY chaotic evil. But the DM was okay with it because everything I was doing pushed the plot forward.
Lookin over the results of this survey, the thing I disagree with personally is that it seems people think evil is inheritley more difficut to play in a group game or manage to move the plot forward. From my own personal experience I find this to be untrue, but it requires someone to have a better idea of Evil than 'hey I'm evil so I'm just gonna do whatever insane thing crosses my mind'. But that isn't a problem with evil, it's a problem with a player trying to be an asshole.
I like my group, but I usually bar at least Chaotic Evil as when it's allowed we degenerate into stupid backstabbing evil pretty quickly. My group seems to be under the impression that Chaotic Evil means no long term planning and no allies.
CE doesn't really mean "no allies", it means more like "alliances are short-lived and fickle." A CE PC/NPC will still work with others, but only so long as it suits them.