What is the Alignment for this Character? [Archive] - Wizards Community

What is the Alignment for this Character? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Soichiro Arima
07-10-04, 01:05 PM Good vs. Evil

The person is willing to help anyone who asks for it to the best of their ability provided that the task does not go agenst their personal restrictions. They will help anyone who appears in need of help, such as being attacked, this will be by defending them personaly if they beleive they are able to or quickly finding addional help, if the latter is not possable they will help as bes they can unless it apears it will get the killed or mortaly ingured. They however beleive that slavery is ok and keep slaves for various reasons and uses if possable, they will treat their slaves well but he will still consiter them slaves.

Chaos vs. Law

They will lie, cheat and steal to get what they want if they beleive that they could get away with it but they will only do so if they are unable to attain what they want throw legal means. They follow law that suit them but not laws that impeed them unless they are libal to be caught and punished. They respect athority if they are part of the athority, are an ally of that athority or that athority benefits them in some way (even if only in a little way and there a few things they do to impeed them, they are very resonable). They have completedisrgard for any athority that has opposide veiws as them to the point they will attempt to replace it (character in question is has the ability). They will take orders if they feel that it benfits them or if they deem the issure of the orders a competent commander or if they agree with the orders.

Please thell me the alignment of this character, Btw they are a level 8 Wizard.
The Wasp
07-10-04, 08:53 PM Your character is Chaotic Neutral. He doesn't appear to have any personal morals, and only follows authority when he finds it convenient (or knows that he has to for his safety)

The fact that he has no regard for authority, but forces others to do so (his slaves), tells me that he is rather selfish, and therefore not of good alignment.
Soichiro Arima
07-10-04, 10:03 PM Thank you for the input, so just cause he keeps slaves negate his helpful nature?
RaKhan
07-10-04, 11:52 PM I'd say you're true neutral. You're definitely neutral on the law-chaos axis because you'll do either depending on which suits your needs. If you can attain your objectives by following the law, then you'll do so because it's convenient and allows you to easily blend in as a common man. You're not chaotic because you don't have a distaste for law and order, but you wish to manipulate it if you could to your own whims. I would almost say that you're borderline neutral evil if it wasn't for your helpful nature in general; however, you being supportive of slavery and also "looking out for number 1 while making sure you don't step in number 2" basically precludes you from being a good character. I don't see necessarily anything inherently evil in your behavior regardless how distasteful someone might see it. Bravo! True neutral is pretty much supposed to be the most common alignment among humans.
TinySilverChalice
07-11-04, 10:14 AM I second the vote for True Neutral.
Skrimshaw
07-11-04, 11:37 AM Thank you for the input, so just cause he keeps slaves negate his helpful nature?

YES! slavery is evil! keepin slaves is evil!

You think just if Charles Manson helped a lil old lady cross the street he would be less evil!? Less insane??

In fact many many evil people do nice, helpful things all the time.

How many times have you heard a news reporter interview the neighbor of murderer .. it's always the same. "Gee he was a great guy, a pillar of the commuity. its hard to beleive he was capable. . .etc etc."

I think the question should be,

Does his helpful nature negate his keeping slaves?

The answer, IMHO, is a resounding NO!

IMHO this character (your character???) is Neutral Evil.
Vriishnak
07-11-04, 12:36 PM I don't agree that keeping slaves can be taken as a sure sign that a character is evil; if slavery is an accepted institution in the society they live in, and their slaves are treated well, they can hardly be considered evil for it.

If, on the other hand, the character was raised in a society where slavery was frowned upon, and has experienced a life where all are equal, then it could be argued that keeping slaves is evil.
RaKhan
07-11-04, 02:58 PM Originally posted by Skrimshaw
YES! slavery is evil! keepin slaves is evil!

You think just if Charles Manson helped a lil old lady cross the street he would be less evil!? Less insane??

In fact many many evil people do nice, helpful things all the time.

How many times have you heard a news reporter interview the neighbor of murderer .. it's always the same. "Gee he was a great guy, a pillar of the commuity. its hard to beleive he was capable. . .etc etc."

I think the question should be,

Does his helpful nature negate his keeping slaves?

The answer, IMHO, is a resounding NO!

IMHO this character (your character???) is Neutral Evil.

Whoa! Whoa! Settle down there! Slavery isn't necessarily evil, although people could do evil acts via slavery and evil people could own slaves. You don't need to get bent all out of shape by it.

Also, I left the door open that he could be neutral evil, but said with the current info that he's given me (and it's a small amount of info relatively), that he appears to be True Neutral. Now, if he said such a character is Neutral Evil and behaved and thought like he had described, then that is also possible. As you point out, people can put on a facade. He could seemingly look and act like a True Neutral commoner but in his heart he could be Neutral Evil.
Skrimshaw
07-11-04, 05:42 PM You don't need to get bent all out of shape by it

Huh?? well maybe my Grammer somehow came accross as "bent", if so, i apologize.

I think i will agree to disagree on this one however.

I should hope that most Americans and Civil liberty groups will side with me on this one.

Forcing others into a life of servitude and claiming ownership of anothers' life is Evil.

Sighting how it may be "ok" if it's cool with society merely argues to it's lawfulness.

IMHO (in my humble opinion)
Princeoflowlight
07-12-04, 10:03 PM People can't be expected to go against their society for moral reasons. Such people are exceptional. While it may preclude you from being Good (depending on your outlook, and the precise way slavery is instituted in this nation), it certainly doesn't automatically make you evil.
TinySilverChalice
07-13-04, 01:25 AM Another vote for owning slaves not being an Evil act. I've played in a setting with a paladin who owned slaves. She treated them like family and publically discounted anyone she knew to be cruel to their own slaves (being Lawful, she couldn't simply smite them in the streets, but she could snub them really good). Generally, I would say that keeping slaves where doing so is legal is a non-evil, non-good, non-choatic act, but not nessisarily lawful. How one treats their slaves is where alignment really comes in. BTW, what I think is Good or Evil IRL is a totally different story, of course, but that's personal opinion. I do believe we're trying to be objective here.
Skrimshaw
07-13-04, 03:16 PM Those are really great agruements.

Do you all personally and in real life think slavery is not evil!?

Please explain , so we can all understand why you don't think slavery is wrong.
Skrimshaw
07-13-04, 03:23 PM I've played in a setting with a paladin who owned slaves

Ex-Paladin

if not ,

then poor Dming (in my humble opinion)

edit to express no offense i hope
RaKhan
07-13-04, 03:42 PM Originally posted by Skrimshaw
Huh?? well maybe my Grammer somehow came accross as "bent", if so, i apologize.

I hope you were being sarcastic about your grammar while making a spelling mistake as yet another sarcastic point, lest I find you to be too juvenile to debate intellectually with anyone of sound mind.

I think i will agree to disagree on this one however.

I should hope that most Americans and Civil liberty groups will side with me on this one.

Just for the record, ACLU = American Communist Litigation Union. However, this is beyond the scope of the boards, so don't try to bring real life into this debate since this is a fantasy realm.

Forcing others into a life of servitude and claiming ownership of anothers' life is Evil.

That's your opinion that slavery falls under the good-evil axis of D&D alignment, but it's clearly a lawful thing on the alignment scale to support slavery since it is forced or coerced order to a particular society. Granted, most people who would own slaves would probably be evil, but there's another alignment you're forgetting about on either alignment axis: neutrality. LN-aligned societies are very likely to own slaves just as a LE, NE, and true neutral societies. Owning slaves may not be considered "good" and definitely not "chaotic", but it can be considered a neutral thing on either or both axes of alignment.
titlt
07-13-04, 06:29 PM Originally posted by Skrimshaw
Those are really great agruements.

Do you all personally and in real life think slavery is not evil!?

Please explain , so we can all understand why you don't think slavery is wrong.

Well then, most americans of the past were evil for having black slaves? Slavery was VERY common from 18th century backwards, so most medieval people were evil, eh?
Skrimshaw
07-13-04, 09:04 PM Just for the record, ACLU = American Communist Litigation

Please read my post carefully before misquoting it. I will quote it here to make it easier for you.

I should hope that most Americans and Civil liberty groups

please note the word and and the s at the end of the word group

to quote you... Whoa! Whoa! Settle down there! You don't need to get bent all out of shape by it.
Thank you.

Ok actaully I won't be posting on this thread anymore, since i am ashamed that so far the bulk of the posters think it ok to take away anothers' freedom.

Feel free to flame me for thinking it wrong to own people. But i won't see it as i will not revisit this thread.

sorry to have wasted your time.
crazysamaritan
07-14-04, 11:07 PM Noticed the slavery debate.

Slavery is evil when one person decides the fate of another.

Slavery is good when one person is devoted to following another person.

I use the distiction given in the Sword of Truth series. In the first case, free will is surpressed. In the second case, being a "slave" is merely a term, since their action mimics someone who is friend/family.

"If you want the true character of a man, see how he treats his infeiriors." If he treats the slaves with love and respect, he is good.
Dalrath
07-14-04, 11:23 PM Chaotic Neutral

Basically your character does what he wants to. He is a decent fellow, unless he is at risk. However he keeps slaves which is considered evil.
nephridious
07-22-04, 03:03 PM My personal opinion is that in that you are definately neutral towards law and chaos.

As far as good and evil your character sounds like he is neutral but could even be good.

And before everone goes off about how slavery is evil, I agree with you it is evil in todays society, but we aren't discussing todays society. Your alignment is based upon what your society is like. If slavery is commonplace and they are treated well, guess what, you are not necessarily evil. If you beat your slaves for missing a spot, then of course.

Oh well, just my two cents, feel free to flame on.
TrailOfDead917
07-24-04, 07:52 PM I'll keep mine short, Chaotic Good.
Terics
07-25-04, 02:35 AM Originally posted by Skrimshaw
Forcing others into a life of servitude and claiming ownership of anothers' life is Evil.

The founding fathers were evil???

While I believe that owning a slave is horribly WRONG, I think that saying somone with a slave is EVIL is going a bit to far.

Oh yeah, Chaotic Neutral.
draegl0th
07-29-04, 11:53 AM Morality in real life is irrelevant in DnD. Whoever thinks otherwise are having an issue distinguishing from fantasy and reality, and should see a psychiatrist immediately.

Now, let's say a life's goal of Mr. Good the Paladin is to expunge an orc horde from <insert name> ruins, once a temple dedicated to his patron deity. Would it be an evil act? Of course not! It's entirely justifiable according to DnD roleplaying guidelines for such a character.

Let's switch to a real life scenario. King Richard, a devout Christian, decides to rid the heretics from Jerusalem, the holy ground of his religion. He will not stop until the so-called Crusade is complete, even though it would kill tens of thousands of his own people and innocent people in the process. If you think this is not utterly selfish and evil, then you must be locked away in a mental institution for world peace and social stability :angel:

Please, no more "Slavery = DnD Evil!" nonsense.
Terics
07-29-04, 05:00 PM um.... Eh? If the paladin forced the surrounding commonfolk into battle and had thousands killed in the process of clensing the temple then I think most people would think him as bad as Richard. Although in his own time richard wasn't thought of as insane and evil... Not by christians anyway. And it woud be a little different if instead of bloodthirsty and undeniably evil orcs it was human followers of a different diety. Morality in D&D is different because alot of the time everything is black and white, orcs are evil and humans are good, if you make a more realistic campaign where pretty much everything is gray it would be alot more like real life.
Tony Vargas
07-30-04, 04:31 PM With respect to Law & Chaos, without knowing more about how he feels about tradition, I'd have to say he's Nuetral. He's not sufficiently rebelious or free-spirited or whatever you want to call it to be Chaotic - he's too willing to be a 'team player,' even if only in self-interest. He's probably not lawful - though, there's something systematic in his thinking (or maybe it's your's showing through), that makes me wonder. 'Lawful' doesn't always mean 'follows the law,' it also has to do with discipline, beleif in tradition, consistency, cooperation, etc... But, just based on the attitudes toward law, authority, and orders, you presented, he's certinaly not lawful. So: Nuetral.

A basic willingness to help others is certainly good, but, as with many nuetrals, though you have that, you don't commit to it in the face of durress and danger. You won't put your life on the line for others, for instance. You're certainly not evil, and, it would only take a little greater, well, courage, really, for you to make it into good territory. So, again: Nuetral.

TN, with, really, a pretty believable outlook.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Soichiro Arima 07-10-04, 01:05 PM	Good vs. Evil The person is willing to help anyone who asks for it to the best of their ability provided that the task does not go agenst their personal restrictions. They will help anyone who appears in need of help, such as being attacked, this will be by defending them personaly if they beleive they are able to or quickly finding addional help, if the latter is not possable they will help as bes they can unless it apears it will get the killed or mortaly ingured. They however beleive that slavery is ok and keep slaves for various reasons and uses if possable, they will treat their slaves well but he will still consiter them slaves. Chaos vs. Law They will lie, cheat and steal to get what they want if they beleive that they could get away with it but they will only do so if they are unable to attain what they want throw legal means. They follow law that suit them but not laws that impeed them unless they are libal to be caught and punished. They respect athority if they are part of the athority, are an ally of that athority or that athority benefits them in some way (even if only in a little way and there a few things they do to impeed them, they are very resonable). They have completedisrgard for any athority that has opposide veiws as them to the point they will attempt to replace it (character in question is has the ability). They will take orders if they feel that it benfits them or if they deem the issure of the orders a competent commander or if they agree with the orders. Please thell me the alignment of this character, Btw they are a level 8 Wizard.
The Wasp 07-10-04, 08:53 PM	Your character is Chaotic Neutral. He doesn't appear to have any personal morals, and only follows authority when he finds it convenient (or knows that he has to for his safety) The fact that he has no regard for authority, but forces others to do so (his slaves), tells me that he is rather selfish, and therefore not of good alignment.
Soichiro Arima 07-10-04, 10:03 PM	Thank you for the input, so just cause he keeps slaves negate his helpful nature?
RaKhan 07-10-04, 11:52 PM	I'd say you're true neutral. You're definitely neutral on the law-chaos axis because you'll do either depending on which suits your needs. If you can attain your objectives by following the law, then you'll do so because it's convenient and allows you to easily blend in as a common man. You're not chaotic because you don't have a distaste for law and order, but you wish to manipulate it if you could to your own whims. I would almost say that you're borderline neutral evil if it wasn't for your helpful nature in general; however, you being supportive of slavery and also "looking out for number 1 while making sure you don't step in number 2" basically precludes you from being a good character. I don't see necessarily anything inherently evil in your behavior regardless how distasteful someone might see it. Bravo! True neutral is pretty much supposed to be the most common alignment among humans.
TinySilverChalice 07-11-04, 10:14 AM	I second the vote for True Neutral.
Skrimshaw 07-11-04, 11:37 AM	Thank you for the input, so just cause he keeps slaves negate his helpful nature? YES! slavery is evil! keepin slaves is evil! You think just if Charles Manson helped a lil old lady cross the street he would be less evil!? Less insane?? In fact many many evil people do nice, helpful things all the time. How many times have you heard a news reporter interview the neighbor of murderer .. it's always the same. "Gee he was a great guy, a pillar of the commuity. its hard to beleive he was capable. . .etc etc." I think the question should be, Does his helpful nature negate his keeping slaves? The answer, IMHO, is a resounding NO! IMHO this character (your character???) is Neutral Evil.
Vriishnak 07-11-04, 12:36 PM	I don't agree that keeping slaves can be taken as a sure sign that a character is evil; if slavery is an accepted institution in the society they live in, and their slaves are treated well, they can hardly be considered evil for it. If, on the other hand, the character was raised in a society where slavery was frowned upon, and has experienced a life where all are equal, then it could be argued that keeping slaves is evil.
RaKhan 07-11-04, 02:58 PM	Originally posted by Skrimshaw YES! slavery is evil! keepin slaves is evil! You think just if Charles Manson helped a lil old lady cross the street he would be less evil!? Less insane?? In fact many many evil people do nice, helpful things all the time. How many times have you heard a news reporter interview the neighbor of murderer .. it's always the same. "Gee he was a great guy, a pillar of the commuity. its hard to beleive he was capable. . .etc etc." I think the question should be, Does his helpful nature negate his keeping slaves? The answer, IMHO, is a resounding NO! IMHO this character (your character???) is Neutral Evil. Whoa! Whoa! Settle down there! Slavery isn't necessarily evil, although people could do evil acts via slavery and evil people could own slaves. You don't need to get bent all out of shape by it. Also, I left the door open that he could be neutral evil, but said with the current info that he's given me (and it's a small amount of info relatively), that he appears to be True Neutral. Now, if he said such a character is Neutral Evil and behaved and thought like he had described, then that is also possible. As you point out, people can put on a facade. He could seemingly look and act like a True Neutral commoner but in his heart he could be Neutral Evil.
Skrimshaw 07-11-04, 05:42 PM	You don't need to get bent all out of shape by it Huh?? well maybe my Grammer somehow came accross as "bent", if so, i apologize. I think i will agree to disagree on this one however. I should hope that most Americans and Civil liberty groups will side with me on this one. Forcing others into a life of servitude and claiming ownership of anothers' life is Evil. Sighting how it may be "ok" if it's cool with society merely argues to it's lawfulness. IMHO (in my humble opinion)
Princeoflowlight 07-12-04, 10:03 PM	People can't be expected to go against their society for moral reasons. Such people are exceptional. While it may preclude you from being Good (depending on your outlook, and the precise way slavery is instituted in this nation), it certainly doesn't automatically make you evil.
TinySilverChalice 07-13-04, 01:25 AM	Another vote for owning slaves not being an Evil act. I've played in a setting with a paladin who owned slaves. She treated them like family and publically discounted anyone she knew to be cruel to their own slaves (being Lawful, she couldn't simply smite them in the streets, but she could snub them really good). Generally, I would say that keeping slaves where doing so is legal is a non-evil, non-good, non-choatic act, but not nessisarily lawful. How one treats their slaves is where alignment really comes in. BTW, what I think is Good or Evil IRL is a totally different story, of course, but that's personal opinion. I do believe we're trying to be objective here.
Skrimshaw 07-13-04, 03:16 PM	Those are really great agruements. Do you all personally and in real life think slavery is not evil!? Please explain , so we can all understand why you don't think slavery is wrong.
Skrimshaw 07-13-04, 03:23 PM	I've played in a setting with a paladin who owned slaves Ex-Paladin if not , then poor Dming (in my humble opinion) edit to express no offense i hope
RaKhan 07-13-04, 03:42 PM	Originally posted by Skrimshaw Huh?? well maybe my Grammer somehow came accross as "bent", if so, i apologize. I hope you were being sarcastic about your grammar while making a spelling mistake as yet another sarcastic point, lest I find you to be too juvenile to debate intellectually with anyone of sound mind. I think i will agree to disagree on this one however. I should hope that most Americans and Civil liberty groups will side with me on this one. Just for the record, ACLU = American Communist Litigation Union. However, this is beyond the scope of the boards, so don't try to bring real life into this debate since this is a fantasy realm. Forcing others into a life of servitude and claiming ownership of anothers' life is Evil. That's your opinion that slavery falls under the good-evil axis of D&D alignment, but it's clearly a lawful thing on the alignment scale to support slavery since it is forced or coerced order to a particular society. Granted, most people who would own slaves would probably be evil, but there's another alignment you're forgetting about on either alignment axis: neutrality. LN-aligned societies are very likely to own slaves just as a LE, NE, and true neutral societies. Owning slaves may not be considered "good" and definitely not "chaotic", but it can be considered a neutral thing on either or both axes of alignment.
titlt 07-13-04, 06:29 PM	Originally posted by Skrimshaw Those are really great agruements. Do you all personally and in real life think slavery is not evil!? Please explain , so we can all understand why you don't think slavery is wrong. Well then, most americans of the past were evil for having black slaves? Slavery was VERY common from 18th century backwards, so most medieval people were evil, eh?
Skrimshaw 07-13-04, 09:04 PM	Just for the record, ACLU = American Communist Litigation Please read my post carefully before misquoting it. I will quote it here to make it easier for you. I should hope that most Americans and Civil liberty groups please note the word and and the s at the end of the word group to quote you... Whoa! Whoa! Settle down there! You don't need to get bent all out of shape by it. Thank you. Ok actaully I won't be posting on this thread anymore, since i am ashamed that so far the bulk of the posters think it ok to take away anothers' freedom. Feel free to flame me for thinking it wrong to own people. But i won't see it as i will not revisit this thread. sorry to have wasted your time.
crazysamaritan 07-14-04, 11:07 PM	Noticed the slavery debate. Slavery is evil when one person decides the fate of another. Slavery is good when one person is devoted to following another person. I use the distiction given in the Sword of Truth series. In the first case, free will is surpressed. In the second case, being a "slave" is merely a term, since their action mimics someone who is friend/family. "If you want the true character of a man, see how he treats his infeiriors." If he treats the slaves with love and respect, he is good.
Dalrath 07-14-04, 11:23 PM	Chaotic Neutral Basically your character does what he wants to. He is a decent fellow, unless he is at risk. However he keeps slaves which is considered evil.
nephridious 07-22-04, 03:03 PM	My personal opinion is that in that you are definately neutral towards law and chaos. As far as good and evil your character sounds like he is neutral but could even be good. And before everone goes off about how slavery is evil, I agree with you it is evil in todays society, but we aren't discussing todays society. Your alignment is based upon what your society is like. If slavery is commonplace and they are treated well, guess what, you are not necessarily evil. If you beat your slaves for missing a spot, then of course. Oh well, just my two cents, feel free to flame on.
TrailOfDead917 07-24-04, 07:52 PM	I'll keep mine short, Chaotic Good.
Terics 07-25-04, 02:35 AM	Originally posted by Skrimshaw Forcing others into a life of servitude and claiming ownership of anothers' life is Evil. The founding fathers were evil??? While I believe that owning a slave is horribly WRONG, I think that saying somone with a slave is EVIL is going a bit to far. Oh yeah, Chaotic Neutral.
draegl0th 07-29-04, 11:53 AM	Morality in real life is irrelevant in DnD. Whoever thinks otherwise are having an issue distinguishing from fantasy and reality, and should see a psychiatrist immediately. Now, let's say a life's goal of Mr. Good the Paladin is to expunge an orc horde from <insert name> ruins, once a temple dedicated to his patron deity. Would it be an evil act? Of course not! It's entirely justifiable according to DnD roleplaying guidelines for such a character. Let's switch to a real life scenario. King Richard, a devout Christian, decides to rid the heretics from Jerusalem, the holy ground of his religion. He will not stop until the so-called Crusade is complete, even though it would kill tens of thousands of his own people and innocent people in the process. If you think this is not utterly selfish and evil, then you must be locked away in a mental institution for world peace and social stability :angel: Please, no more "Slavery = DnD Evil!" nonsense.
Terics 07-29-04, 05:00 PM	um.... Eh? If the paladin forced the surrounding commonfolk into battle and had thousands killed in the process of clensing the temple then I think most people would think him as bad as Richard. Although in his own time richard wasn't thought of as insane and evil... Not by christians anyway. And it woud be a little different if instead of bloodthirsty and undeniably evil orcs it was human followers of a different diety. Morality in D&D is different because alot of the time everything is black and white, orcs are evil and humans are good, if you make a more realistic campaign where pretty much everything is gray it would be alot more like real life.
Tony Vargas 07-30-04, 04:31 PM	With respect to Law & Chaos, without knowing more about how he feels about tradition, I'd have to say he's Nuetral. He's not sufficiently rebelious or free-spirited or whatever you want to call it to be Chaotic - he's too willing to be a 'team player,' even if only in self-interest. He's probably not lawful - though, there's something systematic in his thinking (or maybe it's your's showing through), that makes me wonder. 'Lawful' doesn't always mean 'follows the law,' it also has to do with discipline, beleif in tradition, consistency, cooperation, etc... But, just based on the attitudes toward law, authority, and orders, you presented, he's certinaly not lawful. So: Nuetral. A basic willingness to help others is certainly good, but, as with many nuetrals, though you have that, you don't commit to it in the face of durress and danger. You won't put your life on the line for others, for instance. You're certainly not evil, and, it would only take a little greater, well, courage, really, for you to make it into good territory. So, again: Nuetral. TN, with, really, a pretty believable outlook.