Alignment Examples [Archive] - Wizards Community

Alignment Examples [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
babysamurai
10-06-06, 04:34 AM LG: Galahad, Leto, Sturm

CG: Drizzt (sorry), Luke Skywalker, Neo, Anakin Skywalker (young)

NG: Obi Wan Kenobi, Tanis, Yoda

LN: Bannor, Judge Dredd

CN: Han Solo, Marv (extreme), Moonglum (maybe)

N: Sepiriz, The Oracle

LE: Artemis, Darth Vader, Hassassin (angels and demons), Jules, Vincent

CE: The Joker, Yrkoon, The Gemini Killer (exorcist III)

NE: Burke (Aliens), Grima Wormtongue, Moonglum (maybe), Shelob

Of course, these are just a few examples in my opinion.

In your opinion, what are some good exemplars of the alignments?
Solaris
10-06-06, 05:24 AM Hey, yeah! This'll be a LOT better than any of the millions of identical threads we've already had on exactly this same topic.

:dancin: :clap:
babysamurai
10-06-06, 05:26 AM Hey, yeah! This'll be a LOT better than any of the millions of identical threads we've already had on exactly this same topic.

:dancin: :clap:

Oh, come on - stop being so negative.

Turn that frown upside down.
CharlieRock
10-06-06, 09:32 AM going to steal someone else's examples here:
CE= Malcolm (Clockwork Orange narrator)
TN=Dr. Strangelove
LG=Superman
babysamurai
10-06-06, 09:36 AM going to steal someone else's examples here:
CE= Malcolm (Clockwork Orange narrator)

Totally, nice one. Forgot about old Alex.

Also one of my favourite films of all time.
Sunrider
10-06-06, 09:38 AM Which Star Wars character are you?

CG - Obi-Wan (Episode 4 incarnation), Han Solo (Episode 6), Anakin Skywalker (Episode 2)
NG - Princess Leia, Chewbacca
LG - Luke Skywalker, Anakin Skywalker (Episode 1)
CN - Han Solo (Episode 4)
TN - Artoo
LN - Lando Calrissian
CE - Emperor Palpatine (original trilogy - sure, he uses laws and government machinery to get to the top, but doesn't really care for them)
NE - Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt
LE - Darth Vader
babysamurai
10-06-06, 09:55 AM Which Star Wars character are you?

CG - Obi-Wan (Episode 4 incarnation), Han Solo (Episode 6), Anakin Skywalker (Episode 2)
NG - Princess Leia, Chewbacca
LG - Luke Skywalker, Anakin Skywalker (Episode 1)
CN - Han Solo (Episode 4)
TN - Artoo
LN - Lando Calrissian
CE - Emperor Palpatine (original trilogy - sure, he uses laws and government machinery to get to the top, but doesn't really care for them)
NE - Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt
LE - Darth Vader

Accurate breakdown.

Good job.
DwarfPcfan
10-06-06, 10:32 AM Comic book example

LG: Superman, Capt America ( or at least until de Civil War Thread), Commisioner Gordon
NG: Spider-man, Xavier, Batman ( he breaks the law but he tries to enforce them as best he can)
CG: Wolverine, Anarky
LN: Judge Dredd
TN: Death Blow
CN: Marv, Punisher
NE: Luthor, Slade, Lady Siva
LE: Ras Al'Gul, Darkseid, Apocalypse
CE: Joker ( greatest villain ever:P :P :D ), Zgaz, Yellow B******
dizfactor
10-06-06, 11:00 AM No, no, no. The alignment breakdown of the Big Three Star Wars characters goes like this:

LG = Leia
NG = Luke
CG = Han

Leia is a rebel, but in the name of what she considers a higher legal authority. She's a part of the Alliance to Restore the Republic. She's loyal to the laws and legal authority of the Old Republic, and opposes the Empire not only because it's evil but because it's illegal. Within the Rebellion, she's a huge advocate of organization and proper procedure. Moreover, she feels that everyone has a duty to oppose the Empire, and is personally willing to make any and every sacrifice necessary in order to live up to that duty.

Han, on the other hand, is the archetype of Chaotic Good in the first two movies. He's got a good heart, and he wants to help out, but he bristles every time someone tries to rope him into joining something or tries to tell him he's obligated to do something. "I ain't in it for your revolution, sweetheart," and all that. He helps out because he wants to, and when he wants to, but does everything on his own to the greatest degree possible. I mean, look at him in ESB: he's been hanging out with the Rebels for three years. He lives with them, he fights with them, they consider him a hero of the Rebellion, but he still hasn't actually formally signed up. The Rebellion's like a girlfriend he won't marry or even move in with, even though he stays at her place every single night.

The two of them fight like cats and dogs. Leia can't understand why Han won't grow up and accept responsibility and do his all for the cause like she feels he should. It's doubly frustrating because she knows he's Good, but doesn't understand why he can't just play by the rules (act Lawful). Han thinks she's a shrill bureaucrat in an ivory tower who's too hung up on organization and procedure, and can't understand why she can't just pull the stick out of her behind and relax.

Luke is the balance between the two. He goes along with the group when he can, accepting a rank and a formal leadership role in the Alliance, but when the rules get in the way of doing what's necessary for the greater good, he has no problems working on his own and quietly defying the authority of his superiors (most notably when he ignores his orders to rendezvous with the fleet after Hoth and instead goes to Dagobah to pursue his Jedi training).

He gets Han in ways that Leia doesn't, and can sort of mediate for him with Leia and try to get her to loosen up, but at the same time tries to coax Han into playing better with others and joining in with the group. Leia admires Luke's contributions to the group and his willingness to play by the rules, even if he's still a little immature (i.e. not Chaotic, but not Lawful "yet" either). Han also likes Luke, and feels like he would have a lot of potential living the smuggler's life with him (not Lawful, and therefore potentially Chaotic in Han's mind).

In ROTJ, Han moves to NG after he comes out of the carbonite and finally formally joins the Rebellion, accepting a rank and a leadership role. Later on in the EU materials, decades later when Leia gets disillusioned with politics and bureaucracy, she moves to NG, too.

That's pretty much the archetypal relationship between the three good alignments.
Ryngard
10-06-06, 11:14 AM I totally agree with that dizfactor. Though I think that in the later books Luke moves toward LG.
babysamurai
10-06-06, 11:21 AM CG = Han

Han, on the other hand, is the archetype of Chaotic Good in the first two movies.

Really?

I feel Han was the epitome of CN in the first film.

And remember, let’s keep this clean people, I don’t want this to degenerate into an alignment war thread.

Just post anything that “in your opinion” is a good example of a particular alignment.
Label
10-06-06, 11:41 AM TN - Artoo

R2D2 is True Neutral? I don't think so... He's a Sith so he's Lawful Evil.
Starman IX
10-07-06, 03:06 AM Everyone in The Matrix was True Neutral. They were just doing their jobs. Exeption being Cypher, and even then, neutral evil. He wanted to go "home", his methods were just a little extreme.
Lina_Inverse
10-07-06, 03:21 AM LG: Leto

Yes the god emeror is a great example of LG.

NG: Batman

....NO.

Batman is NOT GOOD. This much is BLOODY OBVIOUS. Batman is the definition of Lawful Neutral. He cares for laws and rules, not morality.
Limousine_Liberal
10-07-06, 03:49 AM Batman is NOT GOOD. This much is BLOODY OBVIOUS. Batman is the definition of Lawful Neutral. He cares for laws and rules, not morality.

On the other hand, he violates those laws with stunning regularity. Vigilantes are rarely lawful, and it could well be arguned that he cares about bringing "bad" men to "justice".

In any event, with Batman, it's all a question of "which Batman". Frank Miller's was very different than the 1940s to 50's era/Adam West version (to take the extremes). Batman started out vaguely sinister, but then morphed into someone decidedly good and less of a vigilante (in fact, he was made an honorary member of the police department in one story). Since then he started to grow darker and lighter depending on the writers involved.
Escef
10-07-06, 12:24 PM In no particular order, G1 Transformers:

LG-Optimus Prime
LE-Megatron
NE-Unicron, Quintessans
CE-Sharkticons, Stunticons, Starscream
CG- Aerialbots, Dinobots
NG- Iron Hide, BumbleBee
CN- Those two merc/theif characters in season 3 (one was lizard-like, the other looked like a pig)
LN- the court that banished the Autobots from Earth briefly in season 2
TN- Omega Supreme (was once a good alignment, but has been horribly emotionally scarred by what happened with the Constructicons)

Some of those examples were tough. It was largely a childrens show with black and white morality, so finding Neutrals was a bit of a challenge.
LCD2YOU
10-07-06, 12:46 PM I think we all can agree that all Wizzes here on the board are CE. Only caring for there own whims.

LCD2YOU, signing off on his last post :D

(just kidding for both(?))
Nikeratos
10-07-06, 12:50 PM Everyone in The Matrix was True Neutral. They were just doing their jobs. Exeption being Cypher, and even then, neutral evil. He wanted to go "home", his methods were just a little extreme.

No, no, no. Here they are:

LG - Morpheus, perhaps Zee.
CG - Trinity, Niobe.
NG - Neo.
N - Keymaker, Persephone.
LN - Architect, most agents.
CN - Oracle.
LE - Merovingian.
NE - Cypher.
CE - Smith.
CharlieRock
10-07-06, 01:48 PM Totally, nice one. Forgot about old Alex.

Also one of my favourite films of all time.

doh . :doh: Alex .... right.Why in the world did I call him .... oops.
Malcolm McDowell played Alex de Large in A Clockwork Orange. heh (Can't believe I did that)
Solnath
10-07-06, 03:40 PM Yes the god emeror is a great example of LG.

I think s/he/it meant the original Duke Leto Atreides, as in Paul's father. He really was LG. The God-Emperor on the other hand... Lawful Something, I'd say Neutral but D&D-wise, Evil.
JulesCARV
10-07-06, 04:00 PM Wall Street:

Bud Fox: CN

Gordon Gekko: CE

Carl Fox: NG?

Lawrence Wildman: LE?

Clerks:

Dante Hicks: N

Randal Graves: CN

Veronica Loughran: LG

Caitlin Bree: CE

Jay: CE

Silent Bob: NE?
Starman IX
10-07-06, 06:14 PM LG - MorpheusWas willing to accept the one he was looking for his whole life was not The One. LG would not go that peacefully.
CG - TrinityFollowed Neo blindly until the end. Yes, she was in love, but it was her job to follow him. Love is just a perk.
NG - NeoMaybe during the beginning. By the end of the first movie he had totally accepted his place in life. By the end of the third, he knew what it was.
LN - Architect, most agents.The Architect could care less about what his creations did, as long as they survived. As for the agents, they were programs, doing there appointed tasks. No free will at all.
CN - Oracle
LE - MerovingianStilll programs. Still doing their jobs. These two just happened to have personalities.
CE - SmithAgent Smith was a program. Virus'd Smith was doing his job to merge with Neo. He just didn't know it.
Limousine_Liberal
10-07-06, 06:31 PM Was willing to accept the one he was looking for his whole life was not The One. LG would not go that peacefully.
Followed Neo blindly until the end. Yes, she was in love, but it was her job to follow him. Love is just a perk.
Maybe during the beginning. By the end of the first movie he had totally accepted his place in life. By the end of the third, he knew what it was.
The Architect could care less about what his creations did, as long as they survived. As for the agents, they were programs, doing there appointed tasks. No free will at all.
Stilll programs. Still doing their jobs. These two just happened to have personalities.
Agent Smith was a program. Virus'd Smith was doing his job to merge with Neo. He just didn't know it.

Are you suggesting that "programs" don't have alignments? In which case, why not take one small step further and say:

Morpheus. Fictional character. He had no free will at all.
Trinity. Fictional character. She had no free will at all.
Neo. Fictional character. He had no free will at all.
Everyone else in The Matrix. Fictional characters. They had no free will at all.

(In fact "He" and "She" is probably wrong, each is merely an "It.")

Many programs in the movie grew to defy their programming...the programs were supposed to "die" at certain points. Most of theMerovingian's henchmenn were "rogue programs" in that they defied this command in their programming in order to continue on. The intent of them was plainly that they be thought of as much as "characters" and the other fictional beings in the movie.
Starman IX
10-07-06, 06:48 PM snipSnarky much? The movie had a theme of (I can't find a better word for it) totalitarianism. Everything had it's place. Everyone had a destiny. Sure, it looked like Smith went rogue, but what did he do in the end? What he was supposed to do all along. Morpheus and Trinity accepted what they were told by a program, if that's not blindly following the machine (and I mean machine as a metaphor) I don't know what is.
Escef
10-07-06, 07:00 PM Snarky much? The movie had a theme of (I can't find a better word for it) totalitarianism. Everything had it's place. Everyone had a destiny. Sure, it looked like Smith went rogue, but what did he do in the end? What he was supposed to do all along. Morpheus and Trinity accepted what they were told by a program, if that's not blindly following the machine (and I mean machine as a metaphor) I don't know what is.

I have to seriously disagree with this. What you're basically saying is that so long as one has a set fate than one can be nothing other than true neutral. Alignment is about action and intent, if you perform good acts for good intent you are good. If you perform good acts for bad intent then your probably neutral, and bad acts with good intent makes you one of the scariest kinds of evil there is.

My point is, if destiny (or whatever greater power that orchestrates everything) crafts your fate as to be a good person, following that fate (consciuously or not) makes you a good person, not neutral. Heck, the best way to get the pawn you shape to perform good acts is to make them good in first place so that they will want to do as you will.
Johnny_Angel
10-07-06, 10:34 PM I totally agree with that dizfactor. Though I think that in the later books Luke moves toward LG.

IIRC, in the later books, Luke becomes so powerful that his power corrupts him and he becomes somewhat evil. I think Leah then trains as a Jedi to take him down; thus fullfilling the prophecy that Anakin would be the one to bring the force back into balance via his children, the twins.
Solaris
10-07-06, 10:49 PM Yeah, but who cares about all that crap? It's just fanfic, endorsed by Lucas so he could have some more money to roll around in.
Silverthumb128
10-07-06, 11:42 PM Jar-Jar was Lawful Stupid. For purposes of this thread, that's an alignment, and he's got the Stupid version of the Celestial template.
Zevox
10-08-06, 12:40 AM NE - Boba Fett
I've got to disagree with that one. Boba was unscrupulous about who he hunted and who he worked for while he was a bounty hunter, and hes ruthless in battle, but hes not evil. Certainly every piece of information that exists about him outside of the movies puts him as morally driven and honest, if not exactly a fan of Jedi (for obvious reasons). Hes probably too ruthless to be good (and of course he does later start training and leading the Mandalorians, not exactly a goodly act given thier creed and history...), but hes not evil. I'd put him as LN or TN myself.

IIRC, in the later books, Luke becomes so powerful that his power corrupts him and he becomes somewhat evil. I think Leah then trains as a Jedi to take him down; thus fullfilling the prophecy that Anakin would be the one to bring the force back into balance via his children, the twins.
Aye, he would up doing more or less that when he went undercover as the apprentice to the Emperor's clone (though it had nothing to do with him becoming too powerful - this was only six years after Endor, hardly the time when Luke was at the peak of his power). Though I'm not sure that had anything to do with that balance prophecy...

Anyway, hm, some of my opinions of alignments for some other Star Wars charcters (side note - time period mostly from the Yuuzhan Vong War or shortly beforehand, since those were the most recent novels I read):

LG - Jacen Solo, Admiral Ackbar, Mon Mothma, most Chiss.
NG - Anakin Solo, Corran Horn, Mara Jade Skywalker, Wedge Antilles.
CG - Jaina Solo, General Garm Bel Iblis, Ganner Rhysode.
LN - Grand Admiral Thrawn, Admiral Gilad Pellaeon.
TN - Talon Karrde (arguably NG).
CN - Booster Terrik, Kyp Durron, Jaina Solo (temporarily, after Anakin's death).
LE - Shimrra, Nom Anor, most Yuuzhan Vong.
NE - Warlord Zsinj, Admiral Daala.
CE - Onimi.

Zevox
Jezmund
10-08-06, 10:54 AM How about examples from Firefly?

NG: Kaylee, Simon
CG: Wash
LN: Mal, Zoe, Shepherd Book, bounty hunter (Objects In Space)
CN: Jayne (evil tendencies), River
LE: Niska, Alliance Operative
CE: Saffron, Reavers

Through most of the series I would have placed Jayne in CE, but as the series goes on I got more and more the sense of CN with evil tendencies.
Pandaemoni
10-08-06, 12:15 PM How about examples from Firefly?

NG: Kaylee, Simon
CG: Wash
LN: Mal, Zoe, Shepherd Book, bounty hunter (Objects In Space)
CN: Jayne (evil tendencies), River
LE: Niska, Alliance Operative
CE: Saffron, Reavers

Through most of the series I would have placed Jayne in CE, but as the series goes on I got more and more the sense of CN with evil tendencies.

This is the problem with alignments...I see nothing "lawful" about Reynolds. He has only a limited sense of honor, direspects every authority save his own, and his trustworthiness and reliability are highly variable depending on the situation. (Being trustwirthy and reliable to your friends and loved ones doesn't really count...even a CE character can l;ove his friends and family.)

Also, when the going got tough, he instinctively did the "good" thing. He only killed evil men (or at least men who were doing evil things) and he riosked himself and his crew to expose the evil of the Alliance and their creation of the Reavers.

I'd place him as NG or CG

As for River, I think she is NG, but crazy. "Crazy" doesn't automatically make you CN, and she too seems to default to doing "good" in crunch times.

The problem with (or perhaps "strength of") the system is that it's easy to disagree. Personally, that's why I do not tend to impose my view of the alignments on my players (so long as they have thought hard about their characters' positions).

I'd probably rate them as:

LG: Simon Tam, Shepherd Book
NG: Kaylee, Inara, Wash, "In her saner moments" River Tam
CG: Malcolm Reynolds, "Crazy" River
LN: Zoe,
CN: Jayne Cobb (evil tendencies),
LE: The Operative, Jubal Early (bounty hunter in Objects in Space...remember, he was a sadist who tortured pets), Adelei Niska
CE: Saffron, Reavers
Lina_Inverse
10-08-06, 05:46 PM I think s/he/it meant the original Duke Leto Atreides, as in Paul's father. He really was LG. The God-Emperor on the other hand... Lawful Something, I'd say Neutral but D&D-wise, Evil.

His actions were certainly good, just a very long reaching good. The golden path wasnt the easiest choice, it was the only choice. Leto sacrafied himself, to bring about a plan that took centurys of planning to benefit mankind into the future for eons. Takeing command of anothers destiny for there benefit is most certainly lawful good.
babysamurai
10-10-06, 05:24 AM I think s/he/it meant the original Duke Leto Atreides, as in Paul's father.

Yes, I meant Duke Leto, not Leto II "The God-Emperor", he/it, if anyone/thing, transcended all alignments.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
babysamurai 10-06-06, 04:34 AM	LG: Galahad, Leto, Sturm CG: Drizzt (sorry), Luke Skywalker, Neo, Anakin Skywalker (young) NG: Obi Wan Kenobi, Tanis, Yoda LN: Bannor, Judge Dredd CN: Han Solo, Marv (extreme), Moonglum (maybe) N: Sepiriz, The Oracle LE: Artemis, Darth Vader, Hassassin (angels and demons), Jules, Vincent CE: The Joker, Yrkoon, The Gemini Killer (exorcist III) NE: Burke (Aliens), Grima Wormtongue, Moonglum (maybe), Shelob Of course, these are just a few examples in my opinion. In your opinion, what are some good exemplars of the alignments?
Solaris 10-06-06, 05:24 AM	Hey, yeah! This'll be a LOT better than any of the millions of identical threads we've already had on exactly this same topic. :dancin: :clap:
babysamurai 10-06-06, 05:26 AM	Hey, yeah! This'll be a LOT better than any of the millions of identical threads we've already had on exactly this same topic. :dancin: :clap: Oh, come on - stop being so negative. Turn that frown upside down.
CharlieRock 10-06-06, 09:32 AM	going to steal someone else's examples here: CE= Malcolm (Clockwork Orange narrator) TN=Dr. Strangelove LG=Superman
babysamurai 10-06-06, 09:36 AM	going to steal someone else's examples here: CE= Malcolm (Clockwork Orange narrator) Totally, nice one. Forgot about old Alex. Also one of my favourite films of all time.
Sunrider 10-06-06, 09:38 AM	Which Star Wars character are you? CG - Obi-Wan (Episode 4 incarnation), Han Solo (Episode 6), Anakin Skywalker (Episode 2) NG - Princess Leia, Chewbacca LG - Luke Skywalker, Anakin Skywalker (Episode 1) CN - Han Solo (Episode 4) TN - Artoo LN - Lando Calrissian CE - Emperor Palpatine (original trilogy - sure, he uses laws and government machinery to get to the top, but doesn't really care for them) NE - Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt LE - Darth Vader
babysamurai 10-06-06, 09:55 AM	Which Star Wars character are you? CG - Obi-Wan (Episode 4 incarnation), Han Solo (Episode 6), Anakin Skywalker (Episode 2) NG - Princess Leia, Chewbacca LG - Luke Skywalker, Anakin Skywalker (Episode 1) CN - Han Solo (Episode 4) TN - Artoo LN - Lando Calrissian CE - Emperor Palpatine (original trilogy - sure, he uses laws and government machinery to get to the top, but doesn't really care for them) NE - Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt LE - Darth Vader Accurate breakdown. Good job.
DwarfPcfan 10-06-06, 10:32 AM	Comic book example LG: Superman, Capt America ( or at least until de Civil War Thread), Commisioner Gordon NG: Spider-man, Xavier, Batman ( he breaks the law but he tries to enforce them as best he can) CG: Wolverine, Anarky LN: Judge Dredd TN: Death Blow CN: Marv, Punisher NE: Luthor, Slade, Lady Siva LE: Ras Al'Gul, Darkseid, Apocalypse CE: Joker ( greatest villain ever:P :P :D ), Zgaz, Yellow B******
dizfactor 10-06-06, 11:00 AM	No, no, no. The alignment breakdown of the Big Three Star Wars characters goes like this: LG = Leia NG = Luke CG = Han Leia is a rebel, but in the name of what she considers a higher legal authority. She's a part of the Alliance to Restore the Republic. She's loyal to the laws and legal authority of the Old Republic, and opposes the Empire not only because it's evil but because it's illegal. Within the Rebellion, she's a huge advocate of organization and proper procedure. Moreover, she feels that everyone has a duty to oppose the Empire, and is personally willing to make any and every sacrifice necessary in order to live up to that duty. Han, on the other hand, is the archetype of Chaotic Good in the first two movies. He's got a good heart, and he wants to help out, but he bristles every time someone tries to rope him into joining something or tries to tell him he's obligated to do something. "I ain't in it for your revolution, sweetheart," and all that. He helps out because he wants to, and when he wants to, but does everything on his own to the greatest degree possible. I mean, look at him in ESB: he's been hanging out with the Rebels for three years. He lives with them, he fights with them, they consider him a hero of the Rebellion, but he still hasn't actually formally signed up. The Rebellion's like a girlfriend he won't marry or even move in with, even though he stays at her place every single night. The two of them fight like cats and dogs. Leia can't understand why Han won't grow up and accept responsibility and do his all for the cause like she feels he should. It's doubly frustrating because she knows he's Good, but doesn't understand why he can't just play by the rules (act Lawful). Han thinks she's a shrill bureaucrat in an ivory tower who's too hung up on organization and procedure, and can't understand why she can't just pull the stick out of her behind and relax. Luke is the balance between the two. He goes along with the group when he can, accepting a rank and a formal leadership role in the Alliance, but when the rules get in the way of doing what's necessary for the greater good, he has no problems working on his own and quietly defying the authority of his superiors (most notably when he ignores his orders to rendezvous with the fleet after Hoth and instead goes to Dagobah to pursue his Jedi training). He gets Han in ways that Leia doesn't, and can sort of mediate for him with Leia and try to get her to loosen up, but at the same time tries to coax Han into playing better with others and joining in with the group. Leia admires Luke's contributions to the group and his willingness to play by the rules, even if he's still a little immature (i.e. not Chaotic, but not Lawful "yet" either). Han also likes Luke, and feels like he would have a lot of potential living the smuggler's life with him (not Lawful, and therefore potentially Chaotic in Han's mind). In ROTJ, Han moves to NG after he comes out of the carbonite and finally formally joins the Rebellion, accepting a rank and a leadership role. Later on in the EU materials, decades later when Leia gets disillusioned with politics and bureaucracy, she moves to NG, too. That's pretty much the archetypal relationship between the three good alignments.
Ryngard 10-06-06, 11:14 AM	I totally agree with that dizfactor. Though I think that in the later books Luke moves toward LG.
babysamurai 10-06-06, 11:21 AM	CG = Han Han, on the other hand, is the archetype of Chaotic Good in the first two movies. Really? I feel Han was the epitome of CN in the first film. And remember, let’s keep this clean people, I don’t want this to degenerate into an alignment war thread. Just post anything that “in your opinion” is a good example of a particular alignment.
Label 10-06-06, 11:41 AM	TN - Artoo R2D2 is True Neutral? I don't think so... He's a Sith so he's Lawful Evil.
Starman IX 10-07-06, 03:06 AM	Everyone in The Matrix was True Neutral. They were just doing their jobs. Exeption being Cypher, and even then, neutral evil. He wanted to go "home", his methods were just a little extreme.
Lina_Inverse 10-07-06, 03:21 AM	LG: Leto Yes the god emeror is a great example of LG. NG: Batman ....NO. Batman is NOT GOOD. This much is BLOODY OBVIOUS. Batman is the definition of Lawful Neutral. He cares for laws and rules, not morality.
Limousine_Liberal 10-07-06, 03:49 AM	Batman is NOT GOOD. This much is BLOODY OBVIOUS. Batman is the definition of Lawful Neutral. He cares for laws and rules, not morality. On the other hand, he violates those laws with stunning regularity. Vigilantes are rarely lawful, and it could well be arguned that he cares about bringing "bad" men to "justice". In any event, with Batman, it's all a question of "which Batman". Frank Miller's was very different than the 1940s to 50's era/Adam West version (to take the extremes). Batman started out vaguely sinister, but then morphed into someone decidedly good and less of a vigilante (in fact, he was made an honorary member of the police department in one story). Since then he started to grow darker and lighter depending on the writers involved.
Escef 10-07-06, 12:24 PM	In no particular order, G1 Transformers: LG-Optimus Prime LE-Megatron NE-Unicron, Quintessans CE-Sharkticons, Stunticons, Starscream CG- Aerialbots, Dinobots NG- Iron Hide, BumbleBee CN- Those two merc/theif characters in season 3 (one was lizard-like, the other looked like a pig) LN- the court that banished the Autobots from Earth briefly in season 2 TN- Omega Supreme (was once a good alignment, but has been horribly emotionally scarred by what happened with the Constructicons) Some of those examples were tough. It was largely a childrens show with black and white morality, so finding Neutrals was a bit of a challenge.
LCD2YOU 10-07-06, 12:46 PM	I think we all can agree that all Wizzes here on the board are CE. Only caring for there own whims. LCD2YOU, signing off on his last post :D (just kidding for both(?))
Nikeratos 10-07-06, 12:50 PM	Everyone in The Matrix was True Neutral. They were just doing their jobs. Exeption being Cypher, and even then, neutral evil. He wanted to go "home", his methods were just a little extreme. No, no, no. Here they are: LG - Morpheus, perhaps Zee. CG - Trinity, Niobe. NG - Neo. N - Keymaker, Persephone. LN - Architect, most agents. CN - Oracle. LE - Merovingian. NE - Cypher. CE - Smith.
CharlieRock 10-07-06, 01:48 PM	Totally, nice one. Forgot about old Alex. Also one of my favourite films of all time. doh . :doh: Alex .... right.Why in the world did I call him .... oops. Malcolm McDowell played Alex de Large in A Clockwork Orange. heh (Can't believe I did that)
Solnath 10-07-06, 03:40 PM	Yes the god emeror is a great example of LG. I think s/he/it meant the original Duke Leto Atreides, as in Paul's father. He really was LG. The God-Emperor on the other hand... Lawful Something, I'd say Neutral but D&D-wise, Evil.
JulesCARV 10-07-06, 04:00 PM	Wall Street: Bud Fox: CN Gordon Gekko: CE Carl Fox: NG? Lawrence Wildman: LE? Clerks: Dante Hicks: N Randal Graves: CN Veronica Loughran: LG Caitlin Bree: CE Jay: CE Silent Bob: NE?
Starman IX 10-07-06, 06:14 PM	LG - MorpheusWas willing to accept the one he was looking for his whole life was not The One. LG would not go that peacefully. CG - TrinityFollowed Neo blindly until the end. Yes, she was in love, but it was her job to follow him. Love is just a perk. NG - NeoMaybe during the beginning. By the end of the first movie he had totally accepted his place in life. By the end of the third, he knew what it was. LN - Architect, most agents.The Architect could care less about what his creations did, as long as they survived. As for the agents, they were programs, doing there appointed tasks. No free will at all. CN - Oracle LE - MerovingianStilll programs. Still doing their jobs. These two just happened to have personalities. CE - SmithAgent Smith was a program. Virus'd Smith was doing his job to merge with Neo. He just didn't know it.
Limousine_Liberal 10-07-06, 06:31 PM	Was willing to accept the one he was looking for his whole life was not The One. LG would not go that peacefully. Followed Neo blindly until the end. Yes, she was in love, but it was her job to follow him. Love is just a perk. Maybe during the beginning. By the end of the first movie he had totally accepted his place in life. By the end of the third, he knew what it was. The Architect could care less about what his creations did, as long as they survived. As for the agents, they were programs, doing there appointed tasks. No free will at all. Stilll programs. Still doing their jobs. These two just happened to have personalities. Agent Smith was a program. Virus'd Smith was doing his job to merge with Neo. He just didn't know it. Are you suggesting that "programs" don't have alignments? In which case, why not take one small step further and say: Morpheus. Fictional character. He had no free will at all. Trinity. Fictional character. She had no free will at all. Neo. Fictional character. He had no free will at all. Everyone else in The Matrix. Fictional characters. They had no free will at all. (In fact "He" and "She" is probably wrong, each is merely an "It.") Many programs in the movie grew to defy their programming...the programs were supposed to "die" at certain points. Most of theMerovingian's henchmenn were "rogue programs" in that they defied this command in their programming in order to continue on. The intent of them was plainly that they be thought of as much as "characters" and the other fictional beings in the movie.
Starman IX 10-07-06, 06:48 PM	snipSnarky much? The movie had a theme of (I can't find a better word for it) totalitarianism. Everything had it's place. Everyone had a destiny. Sure, it looked like Smith went rogue, but what did he do in the end? What he was supposed to do all along. Morpheus and Trinity accepted what they were told by a program, if that's not blindly following the machine (and I mean machine as a metaphor) I don't know what is.
Escef 10-07-06, 07:00 PM	Snarky much? The movie had a theme of (I can't find a better word for it) totalitarianism. Everything had it's place. Everyone had a destiny. Sure, it looked like Smith went rogue, but what did he do in the end? What he was supposed to do all along. Morpheus and Trinity accepted what they were told by a program, if that's not blindly following the machine (and I mean machine as a metaphor) I don't know what is. I have to seriously disagree with this. What you're basically saying is that so long as one has a set fate than one can be nothing other than true neutral. Alignment is about action and intent, if you perform good acts for good intent you are good. If you perform good acts for bad intent then your probably neutral, and bad acts with good intent makes you one of the scariest kinds of evil there is. My point is, if destiny (or whatever greater power that orchestrates everything) crafts your fate as to be a good person, following that fate (consciuously or not) makes you a good person, not neutral. Heck, the best way to get the pawn you shape to perform good acts is to make them good in first place so that they will want to do as you will.
Johnny_Angel 10-07-06, 10:34 PM	I totally agree with that dizfactor. Though I think that in the later books Luke moves toward LG. IIRC, in the later books, Luke becomes so powerful that his power corrupts him and he becomes somewhat evil. I think Leah then trains as a Jedi to take him down; thus fullfilling the prophecy that Anakin would be the one to bring the force back into balance via his children, the twins.
Solaris 10-07-06, 10:49 PM	Yeah, but who cares about all that crap? It's just fanfic, endorsed by Lucas so he could have some more money to roll around in.
Silverthumb128 10-07-06, 11:42 PM	Jar-Jar was Lawful Stupid. For purposes of this thread, that's an alignment, and he's got the Stupid version of the Celestial template.
Zevox 10-08-06, 12:40 AM	NE - Boba Fett I've got to disagree with that one. Boba was unscrupulous about who he hunted and who he worked for while he was a bounty hunter, and hes ruthless in battle, but hes not evil. Certainly every piece of information that exists about him outside of the movies puts him as morally driven and honest, if not exactly a fan of Jedi (for obvious reasons). Hes probably too ruthless to be good (and of course he does later start training and leading the Mandalorians, not exactly a goodly act given thier creed and history...), but hes not evil. I'd put him as LN or TN myself. IIRC, in the later books, Luke becomes so powerful that his power corrupts him and he becomes somewhat evil. I think Leah then trains as a Jedi to take him down; thus fullfilling the prophecy that Anakin would be the one to bring the force back into balance via his children, the twins. Aye, he would up doing more or less that when he went undercover as the apprentice to the Emperor's clone (though it had nothing to do with him becoming too powerful - this was only six years after Endor, hardly the time when Luke was at the peak of his power). Though I'm not sure that had anything to do with that balance prophecy... Anyway, hm, some of my opinions of alignments for some other Star Wars charcters (side note - time period mostly from the Yuuzhan Vong War or shortly beforehand, since those were the most recent novels I read): LG - Jacen Solo, Admiral Ackbar, Mon Mothma, most Chiss. NG - Anakin Solo, Corran Horn, Mara Jade Skywalker, Wedge Antilles. CG - Jaina Solo, General Garm Bel Iblis, Ganner Rhysode. LN - Grand Admiral Thrawn, Admiral Gilad Pellaeon. TN - Talon Karrde (arguably NG). CN - Booster Terrik, Kyp Durron, Jaina Solo (temporarily, after Anakin's death). LE - Shimrra, Nom Anor, most Yuuzhan Vong. NE - Warlord Zsinj, Admiral Daala. CE - Onimi. Zevox
Jezmund 10-08-06, 10:54 AM	How about examples from Firefly? NG: Kaylee, Simon CG: Wash LN: Mal, Zoe, Shepherd Book, bounty hunter (Objects In Space) CN: Jayne (evil tendencies), River LE: Niska, Alliance Operative CE: Saffron, Reavers Through most of the series I would have placed Jayne in CE, but as the series goes on I got more and more the sense of CN with evil tendencies.
Pandaemoni 10-08-06, 12:15 PM	How about examples from Firefly? NG: Kaylee, Simon CG: Wash LN: Mal, Zoe, Shepherd Book, bounty hunter (Objects In Space) CN: Jayne (evil tendencies), River LE: Niska, Alliance Operative CE: Saffron, Reavers Through most of the series I would have placed Jayne in CE, but as the series goes on I got more and more the sense of CN with evil tendencies. This is the problem with alignments...I see nothing "lawful" about Reynolds. He has only a limited sense of honor, direspects every authority save his own, and his trustworthiness and reliability are highly variable depending on the situation. (Being trustwirthy and reliable to your friends and loved ones doesn't really count...even a CE character can l;ove his friends and family.) Also, when the going got tough, he instinctively did the "good" thing. He only killed evil men (or at least men who were doing evil things) and he riosked himself and his crew to expose the evil of the Alliance and their creation of the Reavers. I'd place him as NG or CG As for River, I think she is NG, but crazy. "Crazy" doesn't automatically make you CN, and she too seems to default to doing "good" in crunch times. The problem with (or perhaps "strength of") the system is that it's easy to disagree. Personally, that's why I do not tend to impose my view of the alignments on my players (so long as they have thought hard about their characters' positions). I'd probably rate them as: LG: Simon Tam, Shepherd Book NG: Kaylee, Inara, Wash, "In her saner moments" River Tam CG: Malcolm Reynolds, "Crazy" River LN: Zoe, CN: Jayne Cobb (evil tendencies), LE: The Operative, Jubal Early (bounty hunter in Objects in Space...remember, he was a sadist who tortured pets), Adelei Niska CE: Saffron, Reavers
Lina_Inverse 10-08-06, 05:46 PM	I think s/he/it meant the original Duke Leto Atreides, as in Paul's father. He really was LG. The God-Emperor on the other hand... Lawful Something, I'd say Neutral but D&D-wise, Evil. His actions were certainly good, just a very long reaching good. The golden path wasnt the easiest choice, it was the only choice. Leto sacrafied himself, to bring about a plan that took centurys of planning to benefit mankind into the future for eons. Takeing command of anothers destiny for there benefit is most certainly lawful good.
babysamurai 10-10-06, 05:24 AM	I think s/he/it meant the original Duke Leto Atreides, as in Paul's father. Yes, I meant Duke Leto, not Leto II "The God-Emperor", he/it, if anyone/thing, transcended all alignments.