Post/Author/DateTime	Post
CJDragon 10-08-05, 10:55 AM	I admit I am in no way knowledgable when it comes to comics, since theres barely anywhere in england you can buy the good ones, but as I understand it the Punisher is essentially and uber-badass. He is a defender of good, and fighter of evil, but he acts in a very evil way (based on D&D rules). What would his alignment be then? Say for example in game you have a character who would do anything to combat evil. So you include using poisons, stabbing them in the back, double-cross... anything. What would this persons alignment be? He can't be good since he'll commit acts of evil (poisoning), but he can't be evil since he is a defender of good. He can't really be lawful since he has no regards for laws, and he would have to have a very strong code of morals to live by, which isn't really chaotic... So the only alignment left is true neutral, but thats usually either the "sitting on the bench" style, or the person trying to achieve balance between good or evil. Plus again the fact he is a defender of good would mean spells like unholy blight should fully affect him, right? I've been trying to figure this one out for a while, and knowing my luck there is an increadibly simple answer to it and i've been wasting my time, so please help me out.
rbrt_Spade 10-08-05, 10:59 AM	i dont know about this comic but if he/she defends ppl but uses chaotic/lawfull traits i would say ng. he has respect for both. also it depends on his traits,personality to.
Sylian 10-08-05, 11:15 AM	I would say Lawful Neutral if he follows strict disipline, or Neutral if he doesn't... Perhaps even Evil...
Darth_Azalin 10-08-05, 11:30 AM	Going by the Alignment pages in the phb (104-105) he could be the following Not in any order 1. NG 2. CG 3. LN 4. CN - Reaching on this... 5. LE - Reaching on this as well... But that is what I would have to put him down as... any of those based on how he would react to a certain stimlus more often.
Alisair Longreach II 10-08-05, 12:44 PM	The good old Punisher is a psychotic, murderous vigilante who does what he does for revenge. He is Chaotic Evil but in his sick mind he sees himself as a Lawful Good defender of justice and innocents who is willing to make tough moral choices regardless of the consequences.
Phantom Lord 10-08-05, 12:55 PM	I would call him Chaotic Neutral. Chaotic: He has little regard for the law, as he works outside (and sometimes opposed to) the law, and it doesn't seem that he has much in the way of a strict code of conduct. He flies by the seat of his pants. Neutral: He does what he does because he sees it as good. I seriously doubt (and bear in mind here that all of my comic-book knowledge is secondhand) that he would go on a rampage and kill a bunch of 'innocents,' except under the most extreme of circumstances, but while he sees his actions as good, he is motivated by strong emotions, and as such is a 'loose cannon.' While he may try to do good, he doesn't have too much regard for the sanctity of human life, and carries out his vendettas with an unhealthy vengeance. By SW standards he would be another Anakin Skywalker, before he was completely turned to the dark side; he has one foot on the light path, and one on the dark, in a constant state of emotional turmoil.
Thorak 10-08-05, 01:06 PM	Doing evil for good reasons doesn't make you Good, or even Neutral. It makes you evil. Nobody ever does anything they don't think is justified, even Hitler and serial killers. That they think it's "right" doesn't make it so.
rbrt_Spade 10-08-05, 01:11 PM	well the punisher has many many traits and its not easy to find a alignment for him. so im changing from ng to cn/ne
Darth_Azalin 10-08-05, 01:12 PM	The good old Punisher is a psychotic, murderous vigilante who does what he does for revenge. He is Chaotic Evil but in his sick mind he sees himself as a Lawful Good defender of justice and innocents who is willing to make tough moral choices regardless of the consequences. Well I wouldn't call him psychotic (in any of the 2 movies) (if you go comic maybe in War Journal but seriously wasn't everyone that fought in Vietnam suffer from a little psychois.. Murderous vigilante? I don't see this.. Revenge - he solved that when he killed the ones that killed his family.. He then at that moment become a protector of the weak and helpless. But like I said in my first post about the alignment if you go by the phb he is more than likely one of the top 3.
Dragonsblood 10-08-05, 01:30 PM	Just going by the movie, since I haven't read any of his comics, I'd say CN. He is hands down chaotic. He has little regard for the law, and not once does he establish any sort of personal code. Unless you count killing evil people as a code. A vigilante is by definition chaotic, and this man is clearly a vigilante. He is neutral because he kills evil people. He doesn't give them a chance to redeem themselves or just send them to prison, but he doesn't murder innocents.
Seeker95 10-08-05, 01:31 PM	Punisher seeks Justice, regardless of the cost. Justice implies good. No matter the cost implies Chaos. Punisher is Chaotic Good. He will still be wanted for imposing justice outside the law. Law enforcement will consider him a menace. He values the lives of innocents. He goes significantly out of his way to help the innocent. That he kills Evil with no mercy is chaotic, not evil.
CJDragon 10-08-05, 02:09 PM	Seeker95 - Even if he would go as far as to use evil (such as poison) albeit in the protection of innocents, would he still be good? Thorak - I see where your coming from, but in D&D you can use detect evil to ensure the person your killing deserves it. It therefore seems inlikely that he's going to be wrong in his actions like a serial killer would be, since its cosmic forces telling him someone is wrong, rather than his mind, which admittedly can me majorly wrong
Seeker95 10-08-05, 02:56 PM	Seeker95 - Even if he would go as far as to use evil (such as poison) albeit in the protection of innocents, would he still be good?In my opinion, yes. Although the use of poison is an evil act (by the BoVD), "being evil" is more than the consequence of a single action. Punisher is not a Paladin, but he is definitely on the good side. He's the superhero version of Dirty Harry.
Darth_Azalin 10-08-05, 03:37 PM	Just going by the movie, since I haven't read any of his comics, I'd say CN. He is hands down chaotic. He has little regard for the law, and not once does he establish any sort of personal code. Unless you count killing evil people as a code. A vigilante is by definition chaotic, and this man is clearly a vigilante. He is neutral because he kills evil people. He doesn't give them a chance to redeem themselves or just send them to prison, but he doesn't murder innocents. Ok Movie? Theres 2 of them actually. Little regard for the law? He was law enforcement. Personal code... Eye for an Eye.. he doesn't kill or harm people that doesn't deserve it. You say he is neutral because he kills evil people.. The whole aspect of being neutral is not caring about the good or the evil. The people that the punisher goes after are guilty and waiting for him to carry out the sentence.. and since he is the executor of the sentence he has deemed there is no room for redeeming.. And redeemation is something for your higher being to grant you isn't?
Darth_Azalin 10-08-05, 03:38 PM	In my opinion, yes. Although the use of poison is an evil act (by the BoVD), "being evil" is more than the consequence of a single action. Punisher is not a Paladin, but he is definitely on the good side. He's the superhero version of Dirty Harry. Wasn't Dirty Harry law enforcement? And always law enforcement (unlike the punisher)
Seeker95 10-08-05, 06:32 PM	Wasn't Dirty Harry law enforcement? And always law enforcement (unlike the punisher)Your point would be?
Dragonsblood 10-08-05, 10:11 PM	Ok Movie? Theres 2 of them actually. News to me. I'm talking about the one that came out in 2004. Little regard for the law? He was law enforcement. Right....was. We're not talking about the man before he was The Punisher. Personal code... Eye for an Eye.. he doesn't kill or harm people that doesn't deserve it. Not enough to constitute being lawful or even neutral on that scale. You say he is neutral because he kills evil people.. The whole aspect of being neutral is not caring about the good or the evil. Says who? I rated him neutral on the good/evil scale because it sort of balances itself - killing people is evil, stopping evil is good. The people that the punisher goes after are guilty and waiting for him to carry out the sentence.. and since he is the executor of the sentence he has deemed there is no room for redeeming.. And redeemation is something for your higher being to grant you isn't? Your point?
Darth_Azalin 10-08-05, 10:12 PM	Well you said that the punisher is the super-hero verison of Dirty Harry... I for one took that as a knock on Franky But if it wasn't then I stand corrected....
Darth_Azalin 10-08-05, 10:19 PM	News to me. I'm talking about the one that came out in 2004. Original one came out in 1989 and starred Dolph Lundgren and Louis Gossitt, Jr. Right....was. We're not talking about the man before he was The Punisher. Not enough to constitute being lawful or even neutral on that scale. Personal code or moral compass is CG Says who? I rated him neutral on the good/evil scale because it sort of balances itself - killing people is evil, stopping evil is good. I guess all I would have to say to that is depends on your moral code... You kill a person that is sentence to death but its alright because its legal? Your above statement about "Killing people is evil" would mean that the government is corrupt and an evil entity. And "Stopping evil is good" is another moral code issue.. Example.. the war in Iraqi.Your point? Meaning hes probably more like CG then anything else.
omnigeist 10-09-05, 12:49 AM	Comic book characters or any characters dont really have a "set" alignment, they, like the people of this world can change often. So really you have to decide what counts for yourself. (some things dont count for Marvel) If you decide The End (a marvel series where they go through and show how people die or groups disband) is a part of your truth, The punisher***SPOILER*** ***SPOILER**** has decided that all people are evil, deserve to die, and that he is the one to do it, then he is off in the deep end of chaotic evil. And if (I think) Vol2 of marvel Knights is true, ***another spoiler if youre this interested you probably already know*** then he is a good guy who just happened to go to hell, and angels gave him holy ray-guns.
Prof. Pacali 10-09-05, 11:48 AM	My personal opinion is that the punisher is Neutral Evil, although he believes himself to be good. The reason I say neutral is that although he breaks the law, he does it ina systematic fashion, rather than haphazard way. He won't kill people he believes to be innocent, but he will kill anyone he considers a "villain" without mercy, or remorse. When you compare him to the other Marvel heros who kill, he is definitely evil. Take Wolverine for example. While he does kill, he does so only when he is in a berserker rage, or to avenge the innocent. He always feels remorse for his killings, even talking with Nightcrawler (who is as close to a priest as the X-men have) about his guilt over taking life, and failing to save lives. Wolverine could be considered Chaotic Good. The Punisher feels justified in breaking the law, killing people, and other acts of mayhem in his one-man war on crime.
dngnb8 10-09-05, 12:17 PM	The Punisher is not evil. He avenges those who have been wronged, this is a good act. However, he is not necessarily good. He will kill someone who is good, if he thinks he did something wrong. He doesnt take the time to verify the facts before exacting revenge. I see the punisher as Chaotic Neutral. IMHO, this is the most dangerous of alignments, even worse the CE. With CE you know where it stands, with CN, you dont have a clue. The Punisher loses sight of his goal, through his thirst for revenge. He is a good example of an alignment change. He started out Chaotic Good, but his thirst for revenge itself, has overtaken the reasons, and now he is Chaotic Neutral.
Dragonsblood 10-09-05, 02:00 PM	Personal code or moral compass is CG OK fine, his personal code makes him chaotic. That's what I was saying originally...However having a personal code in and of itself does NOT make someone good. I guess all I would have to say to that is depends on your moral code... You kill a person that is sentence to death but its alright because its legal? Your above statement about "Killing people is evil" would mean that the government is corrupt and an evil entity. And "Stopping evil is good" is another moral code issue.. Example.. the war in Iraqi. No, the government is a neutral entity (corruption is another subject of debate...). The death penalty (assuming we put aside wrong convictions) are also consistant with what I said earlier. Killing people is evil, stopping evil is good, which to me, balances as neutral.
tuffn00gies 10-09-05, 02:07 PM	The good old Punisher is a psychotic, murderous vigilante who does what he does for revenge. He is Chaotic Evil but in his sick mind he sees himself as a Lawful Good defender of justice and innocents who is willing to make tough moral choices regardless of the consequences. Ditto. He commits chaotic and evil acts. It doesn't really make a difference at all that he thinks (or even that you think) he's doing it in the pursuit of a good goal.
Seeker95 10-09-05, 04:00 PM	Ditto. He commits chaotic and evil acts. It doesn't really make a difference at all that he thinks (or even that you think) he's doing it in the pursuit of a good goal.Nor does it matter that you think his acts are evil. It does not make them evil. In D&D, killing evil is good. Punisher kills evil. In D&D, Punisher is good. The Law / Chaos / Neutral arguments seem pretty solid in every direction.
Aladdar 10-09-05, 04:09 PM	And this is why I hate the DnD alignment system. It's way too confining. It's also the reason that most peoples evil characters are so profoundly evil, we don't get a chance to skirt with the line of evil because then we get automatic alignment changes. Life doesn't have alignments. I'd like to find a system that loses it completely.
Thorak 10-09-05, 05:04 PM	Nor does it matter that you think his acts are evil. It does not make them evil. In D&D, killing evil is good. Punisher kills evil. In D&D, Punisher is good. I disagree with killing evil being Good in D&D. For one, it depends on circumstances. A greedy merchant might ding as Evil under a Detect Evil, but that doesn't make it a Good act for the Paladin to cut him in twain. For two, killing is the domain of Evil. As the PHB says, "Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others." If I enjoy torturing people to death, I'm Evil. Even if I restrict that to people who've intentionally hurt others. Because my moral view accepts hurting others as a good thing. For a Good character, killing isn't the first choice. It's a necessity one is forced into to protect one's self and others. And the Punisher enjoys hurting and killing people. Just because he limits it to people he sees as badguys doesn't mean he's Good.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 10-09-05, 05:06 PM	In D&D, killing evil is good. No. You are wrong. Killing evil is not good. It is a neutral act at best. Unless you want to argue that a balor is good, because they kill evil every day.
allenchan 10-09-05, 05:32 PM	I think the Punisher deffinately falls into the "The Ends Justify The Means" type of Evil (imo, champions of ruin does a good job of breaking down various types of evil characters, far better then bovd). In any case, I cant decide if it's Chaotic or Neutral. He also fits, imo, the description of fallen inquistors, "he never faces the self-doubt or moral dilemmas that heroes of less conviction must deal with. It is this overwhelming confidence in his own ability to define what is right and wrong, however, that sometimes leads [him] into darkness... convinced of their own moral purity, fallen inquisitors pursue their vile agenda without ever feeling doubt...". I vote NE.
Rotipher 10-09-05, 05:59 PM	Killing Evil is not Good. *STOPPING* Evil is Good; stopping Evil by killing it is a means which the genuinely Good resort to, only if alternatives are unavailable or would cause harm to the innocent. The Punisher doesn't *have* to kill criminals to stop them from hurting others; he could leave them for the police, like other superheroes do. But he LIKES killing them, which is an Evil motive, even if he deludes himself that he's acting as an instrument of justice. I would classify the Punisher as Lawful Evil, in the sense of being "evil with a cause". Yes, he breaks the laws of the land, but he excuses his own murderous rampages by thinking of them in terms of a strict, unforgiving code of 'justice' (= punishment, from which he gets his very name) untempered by mercy or compassion. Indeed, he'd fit perfectly well into the PS faction of Mercykillers, a faction strongly represented by Lawful Evil adherents. As for the Evil aspect of his alignment, that's self-evident in the fact that he *chooses* to kill -- it's long since ceased to be about personal revenge and has become his means of self-empowerment, a totally selfish motivation -- whereas countless other superheroes exact justice without murdering a single criminal. The very fact that he's a hypocrite who, were he to meet another villain-slaughtering vigilante, would surely attempt to kill such a person for crimes _identical to his own_, confirms this: he's holding the rest of the world to a moral standard he exempts himself from, as all Evil beings tend to do (remember Gollum's grousing about "nasty hobbitses"?).
DevilKiller 10-09-05, 07:04 PM	The Punisher seems Lawful Neutral to me. I think the D&D alignment system is pretty lame though, especially if you try to interpret it too strictly. I think the fact that people so frequently disagree about the alignments of famous fictional characters is good evidence of this.
Seeker95 10-09-05, 08:03 PM	No. You are wrong. Killing evil is not good. It is a neutral act at best.Yet in the description of Lawful Good, it notes that Alhandra, a paladin, relentlessly opposes evil without mercy. Now I understand that "relentlessly" doesn't mean "must kill" but for the most part a paladin is desinged to *keill* evil. The sword? A lethal weapon. Smite evil? A lethal special ability. The alignment? Lawful Good. Killing Evil is a good thing.
nome. 10-09-05, 09:21 PM	Yet in the description of Lawful Good, it notes that Alhandra, a paladin, relentlessly opposes evil without mercy. Now I understand that "relentlessly" doesn't mean "must kill" but for the most part a paladin is desinged to *keill* evil. The sword? A lethal weapon. Smite evil? A lethal special ability. The alignment? Lawful Good. Killing Evil is a good thing. Not necessarily. Paladins are the strong arm of the law. They're good, but they take the jobs where good must fight because it has to. They don't kill for fun, and they don't kill when there is a better option. "Opposing evil without mercy" is neutral or evil, no matter what the book says, because mercy is an essential part of good.
Lord Ian Stark 10-09-05, 09:25 PM	Punisher is CN with evil tendancies.
mikey_ak 10-09-05, 10:44 PM	Definately Chaotic Neutral. He uses whatever means necessary to accomplish what he deems justice. Who to go after is based upon his personal judgement, not any decision of the law. No action is out of the question to bring justice to those he believes deserve it.
Thorak 10-09-05, 11:16 PM	Yet in the description of Lawful Good, it notes that Alhandra, a paladin, relentlessly opposes evil without mercy. Now I understand that "relentlessly" doesn't mean "must kill" but for the most part a paladin is desinged to *keill* evil. The sword? A lethal weapon. Smite evil? A lethal special ability. The alignment? Lawful Good. Killing Evil is a good thing. That doesn't mean killing Evil is Good. It means that it is often necessary to protect people, and that Paladins are trained to fulfill that purpose. A distasteful requirement, not something that is Good in and of itself, but something necessary to keep Evil from getting the upper hand. Your argument is supportive of the idiocy that is detect-smiting; paladins indiscriminately killing anything that dings as evil on their evildar. Up to and including helpless Orc babies and an evil prisoner who is begging for you to spare their life.
MadBlue 10-10-05, 12:11 AM	I'd say that someone like the Punisher would be LE with the Touch of Benevolence Feat from CoR (or is at least roleplayed like a character who has taken that Feat). I can easily picture a Lawful Evil character who follows a god like St. Cuthbert but feels that the tenets of the church are too soft on evildoers, and that Good and Neutral are too squeamish when it comes to interrogation tactics. He'd see being Evil as a kind of personal sacrifice made in order to see that greater Evil does not go unpunished. MadBlue
MadBlue 10-10-05, 12:27 AM	Your argument is supportive of the idiocy that is detect-smiting; paladins indiscriminately killing anything that dings as evil on their evildar. Up to and including helpless Orc babies and an evil prisoner who is begging for you to spare their life.Not only that, but the flavor text says "smite evil foes" and their code requires them to "punish those who harm or threaten innocents". As far their reaction to most Evil NPCs goes, the only stipulation is that a Paladin will never knowingly associate with one. I knew, sooner or later, we'd agree on something. ;) In the game I'm running right now, one of the Paladin player's goals is to try to redeem as many defeated Evil foes as he can - aside from Evil outsiders, undead and those who associate with undead (he's a follower of Lathander) - so he often employs a truncheon. Of course it makes things a bit more complicated for the party and for me as DM, but on the other hand, it makes things interesting as well. MadBlue
Seeker95 10-10-05, 08:59 AM	Not only that, but the flavor text says "smite evil foes" and their code requires them to "punish those who harm or threaten innocents".And this description matches the Punisher quite well. he does not kill someone who [i]might[/]i hurt innocents. He kills those who have already harmed innocents. That he is psychotic (similar to Batman) may place him outside the alignment system, as insanity does not have a alignment. But viewing his mothods and his actions, he is still Lawful Good. However extreme they may be, his actions are methodical (he researches, tracks, hunts, and executes), meticulous (he uses all available resource to acocmplish this task); and goal oriented. These are signs of a Lawful alignment. That he shows no mercy is reflective of his Lawful nature, and is independent of Good or Evil. He is more likely to find the favor of Pelor (the sun shines equally upon all -- even the dehydrated) than that of Heironeous, but Mercy is not a determinant of Good; nor is its absence an Exclusion of Good. However violent they may be, his actions are directed solely toward the criminal. He may treat the drug dealer in the same fashion as the murderer, but this again is reflective of his Lawful nature. He has disdain for a legal system that places the letter of the law above justice. This guides his actions. He has Vengeance as his objective (he has long since ended his own need for Revenge, when he avenged the death of his family). He is an Avenging agent. He is Good, even if others do not like, approve, condone or respect his actions. And if he is ever caught, and faces a court of law, he is guilty of his crimes. Punisher in D&D terms is an Avenger. He brings retribution upon the criminal. In a modern society, in which the individual does not have the authority to deliver justice, he is a criminal. In D&D where adventurers have such authority by the very nature of the game, he is Good. And his methods are Lawful, even if they are "against the law". He is no Paladin, because he does not confuse Justice with Honor. Nor does he sacrifice Justice to Honor. And he certainly does not place them as equals. But the Paladin is merely one type of Lawful Good. Punisher, Batman, Superman --> all are lawful good. Each views "law" quite differently. And society views the actions of each quite differently. Society might call Superman Good, Batman Neutral and Punisher Evil. But that is today's society. Today's society would deem every D&D adventurer evil: enter the homes of sentient creatures, kill them, take their stuff. I equally posit that Punisher is psychotic (similar to Batman) and this may place him outside the alignment system, as insanity does not have an alignment.
DrowSmurf 10-10-05, 09:10 AM	i dont know if anyone has said this, but poison isnt evil...
Seeker95 10-10-05, 11:06 AM	i dont know if anyone has said this, but poison isnt evil...The use of poison is listed as an evil act in the Book of Vile Darkness. This line has been the cause of many an argument, since the book is adored or reviled by an equal number of folks. Published by WotC, it is considered "official" by many. Published for "mature audiences only", one wonders how its rules can apply across the board if a large number of players aren't supposed to buy it!
DrowSmurf 10-10-05, 11:20 AM	hmmm... thats odd... i thought poison was just against a paladins code... but whatever... i personally dont see poison as evil...
Seeker95 10-10-05, 11:26 AM	i personally dont see poison as evil...Hence the great debate. :D
DrowSmurf 10-10-05, 11:30 AM	well i can obviously see poison that kills as evil... or even straight con damage poison... but poison that reduces dex or str... or just knocks you out shouldnt be all that bad... i dont see it as any different from sneak attack, its just a cheap shot... and rogues can still be paladins going into the rogue/paladin PrC from Complete Adventurer... umm Devoted Inquitistor? or is that the cleric one...? and i dont think the Punisher is chaotic... i see CN as slightly crazy.. insane... does anything for fun... i think he may be true neutral if not LN because he plans things out too well for a crazy person.... and he was an FBI agent or CIA or something correct? therefore he could possibly be an ex-paladin or something along those lines... i think he is NOT chaotic and possibly Lawful
Prof. Pacali 10-10-05, 04:38 PM	The Punisher seems Lawful Neutral to me. How is the Punisher Lawful in any way? Last time I checked, the law here in New York forbids citizens from even owning an uzi, let alone taking out a crack house with one. By going on his one-man crusade, the Punisher is breaking the law, not upholding it.
Seeker95 10-10-05, 05:11 PM	How is the Punisher Lawful in any way? Last time I checked, the law here in New York forbids citizens from even owning an uzi, let alone taking out a crack house with one. By going on his one-man crusade, the Punisher is breaking the law, not upholding it.Your inability to see how the Punisher is lawful lies in your equating "lawful" with "the law". If this were so, how would any of the residents of the Nine Hells be "lawful"? Punisher is "lawful" insofar as he is methodical and consistent. He follows a set of rules (whether society approves of them or not). He follows a code (whether society approves of it or not). He sets specific objectives, and works diligently to meet them. Lawful does does equal "the Law". From the SRD: Lawful "Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
NehpetsTtocs 10-10-05, 06:14 PM	I haven't read a Punisher comic in a long time; however, in the late eighties/early nineties, I bought them all like mad. He seems good to me. Aside from being exceptionally violent, I don't remember him killing civilians or going after his enemies with reckless abandon. Things might have changed in fifteen or so years, but I don't remember him not caring about peripheral damage. The only good person I ever saw him shoot was Wolverine. Anyway, I thought he was an exceptionally honorable character. He was a hate-filled sort of person with a heavy hand, but he pretty much only killed gangsters and the like. I'm tempted to argue that he's lawful good, as he followed his own moral compus fairly strictly. He kept his word, etc. He was a very predictable character. He just didn't follow the law as laid out by the US constitution. I can't believe he was neutral-good, because in his earlier comics, he wouldn't even work with other heroes (like dare devil, although he did show up in spiderman a few times).; he was without compromise. He wasn't really chaotic, as he was very predictable and methodical in his approach. The reader didn't have to guess how the Punisher would respond to any given circumstance. I can't say he was evil; he didn't hurt innocents. He was a vigilante, but not in the style of vigilante groups you see on the news like the PLO. UDA or IRA, who have no problem killing civilians who get in the way (even those who agree with them). The Punisher was cruel to his enemies, but he didn't accept collateral damage. He was careful to avoid it. I think he's definitely lawful, good or neutral, but I'm not sure as to which.