@Anduine, i take the caution of read both your posts and @Schneidend posts, and i have to say there's something wrong in your logic dude, but as reading them i didn't found an specific point where you told you slaughter common people lemme ask:
1° - Do you think it's fair game to kill anything that's evil? greedy merchant, beggar children, a hook on the streets?
2° - Does you justify your actions solely on the game engine?
So you do believe that games were made with the intention of having their alignment systems "ferociously torn into, looking for all shades of gray and justifications for any and all actions?"
I believe that some games are capable of deconstructing traditional moral binaries, and that those games can provoke interesting discussions. I just don't think this particular game works in that context, because D&D isn't built that way.
I guess I just don't like the concept of taking games to be a critically serious topic.
From the number of theory readers and essay collections and academic conferences concerning video games these days, I'd say most critics disagree with you.
When I play Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition. My favourite alignment group will actually include (and guys and gals this is what this thread is actually about!)... wait for it....
GOOD, NEUTRAL, EVIL, CHAOTIC, LAWFUL, DIET AND FULL FAT!
Why? Because I love it when Jaheria and Khalid suddenly start fighting Xvar and Montarion... I love it when Minsc rattles Edwin. The talk between the GOOd and the EVIL guys is the most interesting and entertaining.
I will probably play the path of good when I get the game... and my npc character alignments will probably match that by the end... But boy their is gonna be some conflict before I get to the end.
And if people die... So be it. This is a game and as long as I don't take roleplaying into real life such as going down the street and start using the hedgetrimmer as a hackmaster +3 on the kids outside, I think I'll be thought of as Good and respectable (lawful?)
Hang on if I thought about using the hedgetrimmer... does that make me evil? Nooo! Don't start it again....
The purpose of a Paladin's Detect Evil is not for him to be able to say, "ah, here's where the bad guys for this campaign are, so let's kill them." Detect Evil is meant to allow for a Paladin to suspect others of wrongdoing when his other senses fail him, so that he can take the measure of a person and attempt to discern the truth of somebody's intent or work against them if he knows their intent to be harmful to the community. And, keep in mind, that only the Paladin can see what his Detect Evil divines. The ability does not illuminate these truths for others. If, for instance, the Paladin were to detect that Sarevok was Chaotic Evil and gut him in the street, the only thing others would see is some lunatic cutting down a largely well-liked political figure for no reason. Instead, partially because he doesn't want to be arrested and partially because he is LAWFUL, the Paladin is supposed to use this knowledge to work against Sarevok and find proof of his misdeeds, and only THEN make a citizen's arrest or strike the man down.
Err I don't think I said that....the Paladins very reason for existence is to wipe out evil in the name of his god, he is a holy warrior and is not intended to work with evil to meet his goal, his goal is to eradicate evil in the name of his patron...His "Detect Evil" ability is only a tool to serve that end, as are all the abilities his patron bestows upon him.
@ whoever was intimating that good and evil were out dated concepts. life is shades of grey but there are some pretty solid underpinnings of what good or evil is. I realize there is a movement on to muddy the waters about good and evil being interchangeable lately but is just the result of people trying to justify their own bad acts in my opinion.
The argument I saw more often than outdated concepts was that a significant number of Evil personalities view their own actions as good when looking through their particular spectrum.
Re Paladins and Slaying Evil: MAYBE my faith in Helm is wavering, but I would argue that if you can find a way to stop evil without bloodshed and change the hearts and minds then you are truly on your way of defeating evil. Otherwise all you're doing is merely continuing on the same cycle. I'm not advocating that a paladin RUN with evil party members (as I said I wanted to but I couldn't bring myself to, due to paladins not associating with evil), I am arguing however that all killing them does, justified or not, is propagate more evil.
Nor am I arguing that you shouldn't defend yourself, or strike evil down if its happening in front of you. Paladins are still defenders. But as a clear beacon of justice in the world, paladins should not (IN MY OPINION), merely execute people for simply being evil. Should they protect the local populace, yes, but when you get into the realm of preempting evil, you run into a very grey area. It's no longer the black and white paladin world there, unless you play your paladin that way. I play my paladin (even when I use 2hers on her), as a more restrained protector. It's also why my paladins tend to be cavaliers or undead slayers, since those are nice clear enemies for her: demons, undead, dragons. Humanlike beings though (dwarves, elves, humans, gnomes, halfings, heck even orcs) can be infinitely more complicated and complex to deal with.
Err I don't think I said that....the Paladins very reason for existence is to wipe out evil in the name of his god, he is a holy warrior and is not intended to work with evil to meet his goal, his goal is to eradicate evil in the name of his patron...His "Detect Evil" ability is only a tool to serve that end, as are all the abilities his patron bestows upon him.
And I didn't say the Paladin should work with evil to meet his goal. My argument was against Anduine's idea that it would be perfectly acceptable to kill any random citizen that shows up as Evil under Detect Evil.
I disagree with that last comment - it's not as if other RPGs haven't managed that concept well (ie: Dragon Age, Mass Effect). It's just that BG is based on D&D, and D&D works on the assumption of absolutes: if you're Lawful Good, you're always Lawful Good and can never have a bad day, and if you're Chaotic Evil it's "out of character" to have any kind of compassion for anyone at any time.
Not entirely true. Characters can have tendencies of other alignments. For instance, I had a Chaotic Evil Dark Sun character who didn't really understand the concept of money too well other than that you can exchange it for stuff, so if ever he had too little money to buy a cool magic item, he'd just give it away.
And yet, again i say, Korgan and keldorn stick with each other very well.
The behavior of kill evil everywhere and in any form you find, no matter the deeds or reason but just for the reason that the individual is evil, is a fanatic behavior. Want the perfect example of the "hack and slash all evil in your way"?
That also happens to be the same way that Lirlacor promotes getting rich. All you have to do is have your god tell you the rich are evil. Then you find someone rich and kill em, then find someone richer and kill them too. Hack and slash your way to fortune woohoo.
@Dragonspear Hang on if your god told you to kill all the rich because you were evil... Then you became rich because you took the money, would you have to kill yourself?
Also are you actually a +12 Dragonspear with intelligence and a soul? Just wondering cause of your brother being a +12 Hackmaster... Does he do hedges?
And yet, again i say, Korgan and keldorn stick with each other very well.
The behavior of kill evil everywhere and in any form you find, no matter the deeds or reason but just for the reason that the individual is evil, is a fanatic behavior. Want the perfect example of the "hack and slash all evil in your way"?
Not entirely true. Characters can have tendencies of other alignments. For instance, I had a Chaotic Evil Dark Sun character who didn't really understand the concept of money too well other than that you can exchange it for stuff, so if ever he had too little money to buy a cool magic item, he'd just give it away.
Alignment-wise, though, the question would be why he gives it away - is it a conscious act of charity or simple disposal? Because if it's the former, your reputation would increase in a D&D game, because there's a built-in separation between action and personality (ie: doing a good deed, even if you didn't mean to do it or you did it for selfish reasons, still registers as a Good act).
Alignment-wise, though, the question would be why he gives it away - is it a conscious act of charity or simple disposal? Because if it's the former, your reputation would increase in a D&D game, because there's a built-in separation between action and personality (ie: doing a good deed, even if you didn't mean to do it or you did it for selfish reasons, still registers as a Good act).
Hm, good point. I could argue that if it were simply a matter of disposal he'd throw it on the ground, but still, it's not exactly altruistic either way. Okay, so a better example for that same character is that he cares about the state of the planet Athas, which if you're not familiar has been made largely desolate by a magical technique called defiling that draws arcane energy from the life around you. He wants to overthrow the Sorcerer-Kings and The Dragon, who just keep defiling and making things worse. Granted, a side benefit would be that he could take over a portion of the world for himself, but he also sympathizes with the elemental spirits of the world that suffer as a result because he himself is a genasi.
The argument I saw more often than outdated concepts was that a significant number of Evil personalities view their own actions as good when looking through their particular spectrum.
Re Paladins and Slaying Evil: MAYBE my faith in Helm is wavering, but I would argue that if you can find a way to stop evil without bloodshed and change the hearts and minds then you are truly on your way of defeating evil. Otherwise all you're doing is merely continuing on the same cycle. I'm not advocating that a paladin RUN with evil party members (as I said I wanted to but I couldn't bring myself to, due to paladins not associating with evil), I am arguing however that all killing them does, justified or not, is propagate more evil.
Nor am I arguing that you shouldn't defend yourself, or strike evil down if its happening in front of you. Paladins are still defenders. But as a clear beacon of justice in the world, paladins should not (IN MY OPINION), merely execute people for simply being evil. Should they protect the local populace, yes, but when you get into the realm of preempting evil, you run into a very grey area. It's no longer the black and white paladin world there, unless you play your paladin that way. I play my paladin (even when I use 2hers on her), as a more restrained protector. It's also why my paladins tend to be cavaliers or undead slayers, since those are nice clear enemies for her: demons, undead, dragons. Humanlike beings though (dwarves, elves, humans, gnomes, halfings, heck even orcs) can be infinitely more complicated and complex to deal with.
Ahh but then you would be a cleric...it is their job to spread the faith a convert others, the PALADIN is the sword arm of the faith. You do not send the artillery to the peace talks.....The Paladin is the warrior not the diplomat. But Im old school and still believe in such things and specializations Actually the original rules were pretty clear if a Paladin wavered in his cause he lost his powers and became just a fighter.
@Anduine, i take the caution of read both your posts and @Schneidend posts, and i have to say there's something wrong in your logic dude, but as reading them i didn't found an specific point where you told you slaughter common people lemme ask:
1° - Do you think it's fair game to kill anything that's evil? greedy merchant, beggar children, a hook on the streets?
2° - Does you justify your actions solely on the game engine?
1. While I'm not aware of how a begging child would show up as evil following only the rules of Baldur's Gate, the answer is yes. Tyr has bestowed me with the ability to Detect Evil, and I will use that ability combined with a short observation of character to guide my hand. However, I do not believe that I need that observation. Detect Evil is infallible, as is my god. It should also be noted that I never mentioned that I kill everything, but I do not believe it would be wrong if everyone of my targets were evil.
2. I justify my actions solely on the game engine because that's what this entire thread and forum is about, even if some people would like to drag in the pen and paper rules. A video game is incapable of utilizing such broad rules to their fullest, and I play D&D *COMPLETELY* differently depending on if it's pen and paper or Baldur's Gate.
And yet, again i say, Korgan and keldorn stick with each other very well.
The behavior of kill evil everywhere and in any form you find, no matter the deeds or reason but just for the reason that the individual is evil, is a fanatic behavior. Want the perfect example of the "hack and slash all evil in your way"?
I definitely never claimed that I was not a fanatic, and that's because I am one. I am a righteous, Lawful Good, crusading, ever-faithful zealous knight of Tyr.
I doubt I would be Lawful Neutral, because that alignment is more concerned with law than it is Good. Oblivion guards are shining examples of Lawful Neutral. Chaotic Good thieves have been known to steal on many occasions, as I'm sure plenty of Chaotic Neutral characters have, but I do not strike any of them down on sight, because they are not evil.
Anduine, Tyr is a Lawful deity of law, order, and justice. He wouldn't approve of killing citizens not convicted of any crimes with no proof of wrongdoing, and any truly Lawful Good, responsible order would strip you of your rank.
Hm, good point. I could argue that if it were simply a matter of disposal he'd throw it on the ground, but still, it's not exactly altruistic either way. Okay, so a better example for that same character is that he cares about the state of the planet Athas, which if you're not familiar has been made largely desolate by a magical technique called defiling that draws arcane energy from the life around you. He wants to overthrow the Sorcerer-Kings and The Dragon, who just keep defiling and making things worse. Granted, a side benefit would be that he could take over a portion of the world for himself, but he also sympathizes with the elemental spirits of the world that suffer as a result because he himself is a genasi.
And that's a perfect example of what I said before: personality should determine alignment, not the other way around. The D&D system would probably just flag that particular configuration of morals and motivations as Chaotic Neutral and be done with it, but even in fiction, characters are rarely so two-dimensional that they can be pigeonholed into a single category.
@shawne I don't see it as pigeonholing so much as trying to gauge a general spectrum of behavior for a person. If, like my genasi you do a lot of brutal killing, cannibalize people in an attempt to "gain their power," and steal stuff for your own gain, you're probably Chaotic Evil. Even if you do all that and then sometimes donate money to local charities, you're probably still Chaotic Evil but with a soft spot for kids with disabilities.
Well, ok @Anduine, i will not argue anymore with you besides this last post, as your beliefs escape my logic capacity, so it can be a short sight of mine or yours, what doesn't matter really as it ultmost your opinion.
But inside your variables, lemme remember Anomen Chaotic Neutral patch:
His sister was supposedly killed by Saerk Farhhad, Anomen's father enemy and a aknowledge evil merchant. He choose to take revenge against Saerk, so he kill an evil merchant without proof for the sake of revenge. Besides the other factors that happens lemme jump to the conclusion:
In the trial of Radiant Hearth, the act of seek revenge by itself makes anomen be rejected from the order as they don't even know that Anomen killed Saerk's daughter in cold blood (the only witnesses there was the party members, and the running son of Saerk).
This will be the only point i will raise about this matter, it's inside the engine rules and inside the supposedly evil innocent (no proofs against Saerk). Tyr didn't take it very well anyway.
Anduine, Tyr is a Lawful deity of law, order, and justice. He wouldn't approve of killing citizens not convicted of any crimes with no proof of wrongdoing, and any truly Lawful Good, responsible order would strip you of your rank.
Funny. My Paladin's god is Tyr, and if he didn't approve of killing evil in a game, then he would strip me of my powers. I again remind you that I have not been stripped of my abilities. My alignment started and ended with Lawful Good, my reputation is pristine, having never lost a point, and while you do not share this, I see a massive gap between Baldur's Gate, limited by programming, and the pen and paper game, limited only by the DM and the potential of the human mind.
I again offer to provide you with a screenshot displaying my alignment and reputation, and you did not seem interested in the first time I offered this. Your opinion of "would/should" has no weight, as it is not a part of the Baldur's Gate series. Everything I've posted here is strictly following the programming of Baldur's Gate, and I have yet to set foot in the "proper" way to play pen and paper, which I *again* mention that I play in a very different way.
Would you like me to repeat myself again, or will this suffice?
Well, ok @Anduine, i will not argue anymore with you besides this last post, as your beliefs escape my logic capacity, so it can be a short sight of mine or yours, what doesn't matter really as it ultmost your opinion.
But inside your variables, lemme remember Anomen Chaotic Neutral patch:
His sister was supposedly killed by Saerk Farhhad, Anomen's father enemy and a aknowledge evil merchant. He choose to take revenge against Saerk, so he kill an evil merchant without proof for the sake of revenge. Besides the other factors that happens lemme jump to the conclusion:
In the trial of Radiant Hearth, the act of seek revenge by itself makes anomen be rejected from the order as they don't even know that Anomen killed Saerk's daughter in cold blood (the only witnesses there was the party members, and the running son of Saerk).
This will be the only point i will raise about this matter, it's inside the engine rules and inside the supposedly evil innocent (no proofs against Saerk). Tyr didn't take it very well anyway.
I wouldn't know anything about this, as my entire conversation here is based purely on mechanics of the Baldur's Gate series. I've never encountered a trial of the Radiant Heart, nor do I recall encountering a character named Anomen. If it's from a mod or unofficial patch, that certainly explains it, as I play all of my games "vanilla". Tyr may have not taken it very well, but I've never seen text in the game from Tyr, questioning my actions. Until that day occurs, until I see my alignment change, until I see my reputation drop, I have done no wrong. Every opinion on Earth combined into one can never alter that indisputable fact.
@Anduine: Err... Anomen is a PC in Baldur's Gate 2. Fighter/Cleric. Sole romance option female PCs (and the cause of much gnashing of teeth). Kind of necessary for anyone who plays/RPs good parties since he's the only compatible cleric (the other is Viconia).
@shawne I don't see it as pigeonholing so much as trying to gauge a general spectrum of behavior for a person. If, like my genasi you do a lot of brutal killing, cannibalize people in an attempt to "gain their power," and steal stuff for your own gain, you're probably Chaotic Evil. Even if you do all that and then sometimes donate money to local charities, you're probably still Chaotic Evil but with a soft spot for kids with disabilities.
We're saying the same things here. The actions and beliefs of your PC shouldn't have to reside wholly within the characteristics ascribed to specific alignments, it's just that some games make that RPing easier than others. BG doesn't really allow for that kind of nuance, especially since you aren't really treated any differently if you're Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic.
Of course, it helps that the extremes aren't quite as skewed as, say, Planescape Torment, where even the most deranged and coldhearted player might balk at some of the horrible, horrible things the Nameless One is capable of doing.
@Anduine: Err... Anomen is a PC in Baldur's Gate 2. Fighter/Cleric. Sole romance option female PCs (and the cause of much gnashing of teeth). Kind of necessary for anyone who plays/RPs good parties since he's the only compatible cleric (the other is Viconia).
The last time I played Baldur's Gate using the provided NPC's was somewhere around the year 2000, and I likely only used Anomen once, so I doubt I'd ever remember that. I play solo Multiplayer mode so I can design my party the way I like it, and can avoid any romance or intolerable bickering (Moreso for BG2).
You found him inside the copper coronet, where he ask you to join himself in his crusade for vanish evil (in fact he's asking to join your party ^^).
If you accept him, you discover that he's a squirle from the Order of Radiant Hearth (the paladin stronghold of BG2), and he's trying to prove himself to the order, so they would accept him in their ranks as a knight (cos become a knight is his childhood dream).
Passed a time after he joins you, a sequence of events Anomen will face a difficult choice of patchs (spoilers that i'm not gonna spread here, as you didn't enjoy this NPC experience). Based on his choices during those events, he can be successful in the Radiant Hearth exam or fail it.
If he pass on Radiant Order exam, his alignment change to lawful good, he receive a boost of +4 wisdom permanently and +50.000 quest experience for him. If he fails the Radiant Order exam, his alignment change to chaotic neutral, no wisdom bonus and he receive a minor quest experience reward that i don't remember now.
Despite the way the game act if you pass or fail the exam, there's no right or wrong patch to follow here. If your Main Char is female and was already in romance with anomen, after the Radiant Order exam the romance will split in 2 completly different patchs based if Anomen pass or fail (even in ToB the CN and LG anomen have private romance patchs).
A Chaotic Neutral/Lawful good anomen will have some personal banters for each class, but mostly the game ignored the alignment change and you can face yourself with some inconsistency in certain banters between Anomen and other NPCs (lazy, lazy devs... stc...stc..)
Ps: Anomen is an anomaly in BG2, as he's a dual class fight7/cleric8+ that can reach 5 proficience points (main chars dual or multi fighter/cleric can't pass 2 proficience points in BG and BG2).
By the way, did you play Icewind Dale? You would fit well with that game, the single player campaign is made of 6 pre-made NPC characters there as there no joinable NPC there and the game try to stick solely on it's main saga. I can't say anything about IWD2 however cos i never played it, so i don't know if it's good or no.
@kamuizin: I appreciate you taking the time to provide details of Anomen. I know exactly who you are talking about now, though at first I thought you were discussing BG1 as opposed to the series. I know of Anomen, though not generally by name, as I have no room for him in my custom party. Even putting aside the benefits of having a custom party built the way I like, it has the additional benefit of no banter, romance, or in-party quarrels; all of which I have absolutely no tolerance for.
I have played Icewind Dale several times, and while I enjoyed it, I prefer the BG series. I played but never beat Icewind Dale 2. I really did not enjoy it. The change of D&D editions and the overall feel of the game made me feel like I am playing a weakened form of a non-Infinity engine game.
Funny. My Paladin's god is Tyr, and if he didn't approve of killing evil in a game, then he would strip me of my powers. I again remind you that I have not been stripped of my abilities. My alignment started and ended with Lawful Good, my reputation is pristine, having never lost a point, and while you do not share this, I see a massive gap between Baldur's Gate, limited by programming, and the pen and paper game, limited only by the DM and the potential of the human mind.
I again offer to provide you with a screenshot displaying my alignment and reputation, and you did not seem interested in the first time I offered this. Your opinion of "would/should" has no weight, as it is not a part of the Baldur's Gate series. Everything I've posted here is strictly following the programming of Baldur's Gate, and I have yet to set foot in the "proper" way to play pen and paper, which I *again* mention that I play in a very different way.
Would you like me to repeat myself again, or will this suffice?
I'm trying to have a discussion about alignments in the D&D system in general, and I don't understand why you don't want to make this a mutual exchange on that topic. If you play P&P differently than you play BG, then illuminate me as to how differently. BG handles alignments in such a limited and flawed way, so confining the breadth of our discussion to it seems arbitrary and not conducive to a good dialogue.
Comments
1° - Do you think it's fair game to kill anything that's evil? greedy merchant, beggar children, a hook on the streets?
2° - Does you justify your actions solely on the game engine?
When I play Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition. My favourite alignment group will actually include (and guys and gals this is what this thread is actually about!)... wait for it....
GOOD, NEUTRAL, EVIL, CHAOTIC, LAWFUL, DIET AND FULL FAT!
Why? Because I love it when Jaheria and Khalid suddenly start fighting Xvar and Montarion... I love it when Minsc rattles Edwin. The talk between the GOOd and the EVIL guys is the most interesting and entertaining.
I will probably play the path of good when I get the game... and my npc character alignments will probably match that by the end... But boy their is gonna be some conflict before I get to the end.
And if people die... So be it. This is a game and as long as I don't take roleplaying into real life such as going down the street and start using the hedgetrimmer as a hackmaster +3 on the kids outside, I think I'll be thought of as Good and respectable (lawful?)
Hang on if I thought about using the hedgetrimmer... does that make me evil? Nooo! Don't start it again....
@ whoever was intimating that good and evil were out dated concepts.
life is shades of grey but there are some pretty solid underpinnings of what good or evil is. I realize there is a movement on to muddy the waters about good and evil being interchangeable lately but is just the result of people trying to justify their own bad acts in my opinion.
My brother was a hackmaster +12
@Immagikman
The argument I saw more often than outdated concepts was that a significant number of Evil personalities view their own actions as good when looking through their particular spectrum.
Re Paladins and Slaying Evil:
MAYBE my faith in Helm is wavering, but I would argue that if you can find a way to stop evil without bloodshed and change the hearts and minds then you are truly on your way of defeating evil. Otherwise all you're doing is merely continuing on the same cycle. I'm not advocating that a paladin RUN with evil party members (as I said I wanted to but I couldn't bring myself to, due to paladins not associating with evil), I am arguing however that all killing them does, justified or not, is propagate more evil.
Nor am I arguing that you shouldn't defend yourself, or strike evil down if its happening in front of you. Paladins are still defenders. But as a clear beacon of justice in the world, paladins should not (IN MY OPINION), merely execute people for simply being evil. Should they protect the local populace, yes, but when you get into the realm of preempting evil, you run into a very grey area. It's no longer the black and white paladin world there, unless you play your paladin that way. I play my paladin (even when I use 2hers on her), as a more restrained protector. It's also why my paladins tend to be cavaliers or undead slayers, since those are nice clear enemies for her: demons, undead, dragons. Humanlike beings though (dwarves, elves, humans, gnomes, halfings, heck even orcs) can be infinitely more complicated and complex to deal with.
The behavior of kill evil everywhere and in any form you find, no matter the deeds or reason but just for the reason that the individual is evil, is a fanatic behavior. Want the perfect example of the "hack and slash all evil in your way"?
http://torment.wikia.com/wiki/Vhailor :
Vhailor from Planescape: Torment, an lawful neutral aligned fanatic.
That also happens to be the same way that Lirlacor promotes getting rich. All you have to do is have your god tell you the rich are evil. Then you find someone rich and kill em, then find someone richer and kill them too. Hack and slash your way to fortune woohoo.
Also are you actually a +12 Dragonspear with intelligence and a soul? Just wondering cause of your brother being a +12 Hackmaster... Does he do hedges?
I was merely stating one of my favorite quotes form Lirlacor ("my brother is a hackmaster +12)
1. While I'm not aware of how a begging child would show up as evil following only the rules of Baldur's Gate, the answer is yes. Tyr has bestowed me with the ability to Detect Evil, and I will use that ability combined with a short observation of character to guide my hand. However, I do not believe that I need that observation. Detect Evil is infallible, as is my god. It should also be noted that I never mentioned that I kill everything, but I do not believe it would be wrong if everyone of my targets were evil.
2. I justify my actions solely on the game engine because that's what this entire thread and forum is about, even if some people would like to drag in the pen and paper rules. A video game is incapable of utilizing such broad rules to their fullest, and I play D&D *COMPLETELY* differently depending on if it's pen and paper or Baldur's Gate.
I definitely never claimed that I was not a fanatic, and that's because I am one. I am a righteous, Lawful Good, crusading, ever-faithful zealous knight of Tyr.
I doubt I would be Lawful Neutral, because that alignment is more concerned with law than it is Good. Oblivion guards are shining examples of Lawful Neutral. Chaotic Good thieves have been known to steal on many occasions, as I'm sure plenty of Chaotic Neutral characters have, but I do not strike any of them down on sight, because they are not evil.
I don't see it as pigeonholing so much as trying to gauge a general spectrum of behavior for a person. If, like my genasi you do a lot of brutal killing, cannibalize people in an attempt to "gain their power," and steal stuff for your own gain, you're probably Chaotic Evil. Even if you do all that and then sometimes donate money to local charities, you're probably still Chaotic Evil but with a soft spot for kids with disabilities.
But inside your variables, lemme remember Anomen Chaotic Neutral patch:
His sister was supposedly killed by Saerk Farhhad, Anomen's father enemy and a aknowledge evil merchant. He choose to take revenge against Saerk, so he kill an evil merchant without proof for the sake of revenge. Besides the other factors that happens lemme jump to the conclusion:
In the trial of Radiant Hearth, the act of seek revenge by itself makes anomen be rejected from the order as they don't even know that Anomen killed Saerk's daughter in cold blood (the only witnesses there was the party members, and the running son of Saerk).
This will be the only point i will raise about this matter, it's inside the engine rules and inside the supposedly evil innocent (no proofs against Saerk). Tyr didn't take it very well anyway.
I again offer to provide you with a screenshot displaying my alignment and reputation, and you did not seem interested in the first time I offered this. Your opinion of "would/should" has no weight, as it is not a part of the Baldur's Gate series. Everything I've posted here is strictly following the programming of Baldur's Gate, and I have yet to set foot in the "proper" way to play pen and paper, which I *again* mention that I play in a very different way.
Would you like me to repeat myself again, or will this suffice?
Of course, it helps that the extremes aren't quite as skewed as, say, Planescape Torment, where even the most deranged and coldhearted player might balk at some of the horrible, horrible things the Nameless One is capable of doing.
Str: 18/52
Agi: 10
Con: 16
Int: 10
Wis: 12
Cha: 13
You found him inside the copper coronet, where he ask you to join himself in his crusade for vanish evil (in fact he's asking to join your party ^^).
If you accept him, you discover that he's a squirle from the Order of Radiant Hearth (the paladin stronghold of BG2), and he's trying to prove himself to the order, so they would accept him in their ranks as a knight (cos become a knight is his childhood dream).
Passed a time after he joins you, a sequence of events Anomen will face a difficult choice of patchs (spoilers that i'm not gonna spread here, as you didn't enjoy this NPC experience). Based on his choices during those events, he can be successful in the Radiant Hearth exam or fail it.
If he pass on Radiant Order exam, his alignment change to lawful good, he receive a boost of +4 wisdom permanently and +50.000 quest experience for him.
If he fails the Radiant Order exam, his alignment change to chaotic neutral, no wisdom bonus and he receive a minor quest experience reward that i don't remember now.
Despite the way the game act if you pass or fail the exam, there's no right or wrong patch to follow here. If your Main Char is female and was already in romance with anomen, after the Radiant Order exam the romance will split in 2 completly different patchs based if Anomen pass or fail (even in ToB the CN and LG anomen have private romance patchs).
A Chaotic Neutral/Lawful good anomen will have some personal banters for each class, but mostly the game ignored the alignment change and you can face yourself with some inconsistency in certain banters between Anomen and other NPCs (lazy, lazy devs... stc...stc..)
Ps: Anomen is an anomaly in BG2, as he's a dual class fight7/cleric8+ that can reach 5 proficience points (main chars dual or multi fighter/cleric can't pass 2 proficience points in BG and BG2).
By the way, did you play Icewind Dale? You would fit well with that game, the single player campaign is made of 6 pre-made NPC characters there as there no joinable NPC there and the game try to stick solely on it's main saga. I can't say anything about IWD2 however cos i never played it, so i don't know if it's good or no.
I have played Icewind Dale several times, and while I enjoyed it, I prefer the BG series. I played but never beat Icewind Dale 2. I really did not enjoy it. The change of D&D editions and the overall feel of the game made me feel like I am playing a weakened form of a non-Infinity engine game.