I consider Samuel Vines from Discworld to be a peculiar Lawful Good character. He's a cynical jerk, but he's also the most honorable character in the series. The law is the boat which Vines rides in a senseless world. When demons tried to possess him, he kicked them out with sheer law and goodnes.
Most people mistakenly think that "lawful good" means "one who does no wrong". Lawful good characters may get drunk--which is neither inherently evil nor unlawful,
i think that's fundamentally wrong. the alignment-based archetypes owe a lot to religion and western cultural mores. to lawful good characters everything is either inherently good or inheretntly evil. to most lawful characters, i think that alcohol would be inherently evil, the way it is to teetotaller christian bigots (or muslims), because they would see it as vice which is inherently evil. a paladin would see alcohol as an agent of impurity in the world, that does no good and needs to be eradicated. and a society ruled by lawful good law-givers (paladins maybe) would be a prohibitionist society, for sure.
@Mathsorcerer , Sometimes, with extreme thread necromancy like this, people click on the thread and start responding to it without noticing the date. It's happened to me before.
I already kind of stirred the hornets' nest talking about my lawful good bias in the "Unpopular Opinions" thread, so I don't think I'll do it again here.
Comments
the alignment-based archetypes owe a lot to religion and western cultural mores.
to lawful good characters everything is either inherently good or inheretntly evil. to most lawful characters, i think that alcohol would be inherently evil, the way it is to teetotaller christian bigots (or muslims), because they would see it as vice which is inherently evil. a paladin would see alcohol as an agent of impurity in the world, that does no good and needs to be eradicated.
and a society ruled by lawful good law-givers (paladins maybe) would be a prohibitionist society, for sure.
four and a half years ago. I am curious--what was the point in quoting me from, literally, page 1?
I already kind of stirred the hornets' nest talking about my lawful good bias in the "Unpopular Opinions" thread, so I don't think I'll do it again here.