Being more pragmatic, non-philosophers recognize the function of society in protecting their individual rights. Chaotic philosophers believe in the power of the individual over his own destiny and are fond of anarchistic nations. They tend to hold that individual actions account for the differences in things and that events in one area do not alter the fabric of the universe halfway across the galaxy. Instead they see the universe as a collection of things and events, some related to each other and others completely independent. The believers in chaos hold that there is no preordained order or careful balance of forces in the universe. Only when a powerful, unbalancing force appears (which almost never happens) need the defenders of neutrality becomes seriously concerned. Fortunately for these philosophers (and all sentient life), the universe seems to be efficient at regulating itself. Philosophers of neutrality not only presuppose the existence of opposites, but they also theorize that the universe would vanish should one opposite completely destroy the other (since nothing can exist without its opposite). For example, if death became ascendant over life, the universe would become a barren wasteland. If enough of these polarities go out of balance, the fabric of reality could pull itself apart. If one factor becomes ascendant over its opposite, the universe become unbalanced. What is important is that all these forces remain in balance with each other. The same is true of good and evil, life and death. Where there is lawfulness, there is also chaos where there is neutrality, there is also partisanship. They hold that for every force in the universe, there is an opposite force somewhere. Those espousing neutrality tend to take a more balanced view of things. Strength comes through unity of action, as can be seen in guilds, empires, and powerful churches. People should not pursue personal vendettas, for example, but should present their claims to the proper authorities. For less philosophical types, lawfulness manifests itself in the belief that laws should be made and followed, if only to have understandable rules for society. Although man does not create orderly structures, it is his obligation to function within them, lest the fabric of everything crumble. Lawful philosophers maintain that this order is not created by man but is a natural law of the universe. The relationships between people and governments exist naturally. One of these represents each characterвЂ™s ethos - his understanding of society and relationships.Д¬haracters who believe in law maintain that order, organization, and society are important, indeed vital, forces of the universe. The three beliefs are law, chaos, and neutrality. Picture these beliefs as the points of a triangle, all pulling away from each other. These nine alignments serve well to define the attitudes of most of the people in the world.ДЄttitudes toward order and chaos are divided into three opposing beliefs. By combining the different variations within the two sets, nine distinct alignments are created. Although alignment defines general attitudes, it certainly doesnвЂ™t prevent a character from changing his beliefs, acting irrationally, or behaving out of character.ДЄlignment is divided into two sets of attitudes: order and chaos, and good and evil. Always consider alignment as a tool, not a straitjacket that restricts the character. use the chosen alignment as a guide to provide a clearer idea of how the character will handle moral dilemmas. The characterвЂ™s alignment is a guide to his basic moral and ethical attitudes toward others, society, good, evil, and the forces of the universe in general. In some cases (especially the paladin), the choice of alignment may be limited. After all other steps toward creating a character have been completed, the player must choose an alignment for the character.

2nd edition ad&d character sheet