Color Pie

Its the color pie from MTG.

31* sorry

Stay mad.

So what if you're white, but the order you're enforcing is lack of order? Like totalitarian anarchy - ensuring that no semblance of order can ever form or flourish? Where does that sit on the pie chart?

And beyond the Chaotic Lawful scenario I gave, how does it deal with other contradictory alignment states, like Evil Good and Good Evil?

Good Evil: Doing good things for bad reasons; for example, destabilizing and enslaving generations people by providing financial aid in the form of a welfare state.
Evil Good: Doing bad things for good reasons; for example, eliminating poverty by murdering all of the poor.

White Red if you're "enforcing anarchy" whatever that means. White Black if you're enforcing anarchy for the benefit of an in group, or White Red Black if it's some combination of the two.

It means that you eliminate any form of organization that people attempt to create. If a group of people agree upon a way something should be done, you firebomb them so that idea can't spread. You make sure that learning and progress cannot take root - a paragon of absolute chaos.

That's Red/Black. See the Ravnica guilds for examples of the color combinations. You get chaos and emotional stress and blood and gore with Rakdos. They technically have a leader system but they're otherwise filled with debauchery and sin.

You almost always have to cross colors when you make complex characters.

The thing about it is that it's a system based more on motivation than actions. Take your "paragon of absolute chaos". I can craft an argument for what that character could be Black, Red, or Green, possibly White or Blue if I tried hard enough.

The Black character could want that system so that they could take advantage of the chaos.
The Red character could want that system because rules are for faggots and this is real freedom.
The Green character could see civilization and order as unnatural rules.

The White character may think that lawlessness is the best law and they're enforcing it strictly, even if that's retarded.
The Blue character could want to conduct an experiment and observe.

Green?

White?
Black?

I get what you're saying.
I think the point of a chart or a pie or whatever you're using, however, is that any character - no matter how complex - should be able to be pigeonholed by a single 1-3 word label.

You can, you use the colors.

...

But if it leaves room for argument, the system isn't rigorous enough. By saying "blue/black" you should know the character better than his own mother.

Fitting.

see

What is meant by Black being amoral is this. If White is concern with removing as much suffering as possible, Black is more concern with a more realistic system.

player.fm/series/magic-the-gathering-drive-to-work-podcast/403-color-pie-alliances
player.fm/series/magic-the-gathering-drive-to-work-podcast/402-color-pie-conflicts

Ravnica's guilds were based on different D&D alignment pairs, with White being Good, Blue being Lawful, Black being Evil, Red being Chaotic, and Green being Neutral.

Some pairs like Izzet (red/blue -> lawful/chaos) and Orzhov (white/black -> good/evil) didn't make sense, but head Jew MARO said it "reflected the guilds' complex, conflicted nature".

Do these trigger you, boi?
Funny how faggots complain about Counterspell (2 mana to trade 1-for-1), and yet their decks always auto-include 4 Duress/Thoughtseize (1 mana to trade 1-for-1)

Well counterspells are a universal solvent. And you cant duress/thought seize at instant speed in those formats unless your deck is all kinds of fucked up

Is meritocracy moral?
I think it's probably the most effective and fair system, but I wouldn't call it moral because morality conflicts with reality.
Communism is the most moral system ever devised - and it's a complete clusterfuck that destroys everything it touches and produces nothing but misery.

What you want isn't morality, but effectiveness. In a meritocracy, there will be many good but lazy people who will live shitty lives and many bad but hard-working people who will live good lives - in a moral system good people would always live good lives and bad people would always live shitty lives.
Fuck moral systems.

You don't need it because they cost 1 less mana (so you can cast them 1 turn earlier). My point is, it's exactly the same tradeoff, but somehow Counterspell is supposedly "frustrating" to plain against, while Thoughtseize isn't.
Since they got rid of decent countermagic in Standard/Modern, both formats enjoyed their fair share of degenerate decks that needed to be banned because combo decks are unstoppable (Modern has fucking Ponder AND Preordain banned, ffs)

Thats because anything relating to brainstorm is too stronk for those cucks and is an auto include.

Because they help combo too much, and there's nothing to stop combo decks if countermagic is not in the game. Turn 4, here goes Splinter-Twin again, if only there was Counterspell to deal with it, instead of stupid Cancel.
Besides, there are so many cards in the game that punish counters (Boseiju, a plethora of unconterable creatures, the ability to cast from the graveyard, etc.), that even if Counterspell was in the game, it wouldn't be as strong as it once was.

no, 9 alignment works basically fine its just that some players are retarded
MTG color pie is super gay, some colors are about morality while others are about emotion, it means every character is red at some point if they care about anything, every character is black at some point if they make any pragmatic decisions.
additionally white is usually made out to be the good guy color and black the bad guy color when the opposite is true

green isnt just supposed to be the hippie color, emotionally speaking it is supposed to be groupness, if you have strong family ties and would do anything for your tribe/house/clan/country/race then you are probably green.

...

Yeah pretty terrible system tbh

Let me add my 5 cents.

Lawful good: White
Lawful neutral: "half" white. Just the "Order" bit. does not care about morality.
Lawful evil: Black. Parasitic and amoral.

Neutral: Green fits nicely.

Chaotic good: Red and white.
Chaotic neutral: Red.
Chaotic evil: Red and Black

Of course, secondary colours are mandatory if the character has any depth to it.

Good - Bad seems kinda like the White Black axis.

Lawful - Chaotic Also is also kind like the White Red axis.

I would say that Black and White, cointaining moral and amoral tags are present in all characters with more or less intensity. If they are defining traits, they become the main colour, and if the character is neutral, absent of both.

Green, Blue, and Red seem more like ways or styles to accomplish the objectives set by the White-Black axis, and if the character is neutral, these colours are a reason or mission in itself.

Blue a mission for knowledge or possesion of it.
Red for visceral impulse, desire of freedom.
Green a search of equilibrium or mission of growth, personal or common.

You can get a nice system with such colours, but you need to mix them unless the character is quite obsessive or one-dimensional.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the alignment system.

This explains why Republicans want a grand return to "good ol' days", aka the Stone Age.

A better question would be why "White" is yellow.
Btw, it's a shit wheel that locks people into non-flexible archetypes.

Wouldn't blue be meritocratic?

It's still popular in nippon afaik.

GAY

whats that in the middle?

...

nobody cares about the compasses

Be gone heretics! Praise Kek!

Alignments never seem to do much in video games. Even in CRPGs they do very little besides restrict what weapons or class you can use.

A ten pointed star. Go away heretic, it is not for Chaos.

OP is being his usual faggot self I see.

Because they tend to be something that gives you a certain kind of bonus or power, and if you're lucky they'll influence the story a tiny bit.
I wish there were more games where alignment decided meaningful things. Things like locking you out of certain towns or making enemies of people that you could've talked to had you chosen differently, or maybe even giving you an entirely different story depending on what your motivations are.

They are suppose to be a stay in character mechanic instead of the do whatever gets you the best loot system.

You don't seem to have understood what he said.