Alignments and characters

ShapiroKeatsDarkMage

My friends that I discuss D&D with have often had (somewhat long) discussions about which alignment so-and-so would be. This discussions can get very interesting, and I thought I'd carry them on over to here. I'll start by listing an alignment and characters whom I believe to be prime examples of that alignment, so here goes...

Lawful Good: Superman, Captain America, Kenshin Imura, Bright Noah, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Brienne of Tarth, Ned Stark, Optimus Prime(Michael Bay's version is more LE imo).

Neutral Good: Spiderman, Harry Potter, Frodo, Gandalf, Amuro Ray( After the first Gundam series where he was more TN), Luke Skywalker, Finn l'avventuriero(Adventure Time).

Chaotic Good: Robin Hood, Wolverine, Kamina, Judau Ashta, some incarnations of the Doctor.

Lawful Neutral: Judge Dredd, inspector Javert, Rorschach(Watchmen), Mosès the dog(Lupo Alberto).

True Neutral: Shinji Hikari, Doctor Manhattan, Galactus, Taskmaster.

Chaotic Neutral: Elric of Melnibonè, Conan the Cimmerian(at least in the early stories), Deadpool, Jack Sparrow, Lupin the 3rd.

Lawful Evil: Darth Vader, Doctor Doom, The Titans from Zeta Gundam, Haman Karn, Megatron, Sinestro, Daleks and the Cybermen

Neutral Evil: Raistlin Majere, Saruman, Sauron, Loki( Marvel), Larfleeze, Thanos, Palpatine, Sephiroth.

Chaotic Evil: Joker, Gregor Clegane, Ali-Al Saachez( Gundam 00), LOTR's Orcs, Crazy Steve(Frank Miller's version of Batman), Carnage, the Lich(Adventure Time), Kefka.

BelgarathMTH

I agree with most of the picks on your list.

I'm not sure whether Obi-Wan isn't more neutral good, though, since he associates with criminals when it's needed without turning them in or even caring about their crimes, and has defied Yoda and the Jedi Council in times of disagreement. He doesn't think twice about bending or breaking the rules where his own ideas about the Balance of the Force are concerned, or where his own philosophies of training his padawans (Anakin and Luke) are concerned. Then again, he believes in the Order's rules of celibacy and tries to convince Anakin to let Padme go, according to the rules.

I would have also pegged Palpatine as lawful evil, since he gathers and holds his power through legal means (duly elected chancellor, passed proper legislation through the Senate to commission the clone army and associated military buildup, manipulated trade agreements and governmental factions, "owned the courts", etc.) Like Anakin, he wants to enforce order, his own order, on both the galaxy and on the dark side of the Force.

SapphireIce101

Tbh, Kenshin Himura/Hitokiri Battosai is CG. Mostly because, even though he helps people, he definitely goes about it in a terrible way sometimes.

CrevsDaak

Elric of Meliboné isn't Chaotic Neutral. He's Evil down to the very core (even the way he speaks the the Witch when looking for the horn on the last books and how he enjoys torturing the Pang Tan dictator at the end of the last book), and his tendencies are Chaotic (he only does his will until the last book, where he takes directions from Destiny's servants) and/or Neutral.

I think @BelgarathMTH got Obi-Wan perfectly, I also see him as NG.

ShapiroKeatsDarkMage

CrevsDaak said:

Elric of Meliboné isn't Chaotic Neutral. He's Evil down to the very core (even the way he speaks the the Witch when looking for the horn on the last books and how he enjoys torturing the Pang Tan dictator at the end of the last book), and his tendencies are Chaotic (he only does his will until the last book, where he takes directions from Destiny's servants) and/or Neutral.

I think @BelgarathMTH got Obi-Wan perfectly, I also see him as NG.

But on the other hand, he genuinely cares about his friends and loved ones and he sometimes tried to be a hero, failing miserably.

BelgarathMTH

There's almost always an "on the other hand" with this guess-their-alignment game. All human beings are conflicted between their better, rational, loving natures on the one hand, and their animal desires and impulses on the other.

That's why the D&D alignment system is so flawed for analyzing realistic, deep characters or real human beings. But as long as we remember that the D&D alignment system was written as a way to organize war figurines on hex paper and divide them into sides for war gaming, just like black and white pieces in chess, or multi-colored pegs for board games like Sorry, (TSR stands for "Tactical Strategic Resources"), and don't take it too seriously, it's still fun to try to peg fictional characters. I find myself doing it with every book, movie, and TV show despite myself, even though I know the system wasn't really written for that.

Moradin

I would say Gregor Clegane is more Neutral Evil than Chaotic. After all, most of what he does, he does following the law or the orders of Tywin, not for the sake of being a disruptive being that takes satisfaction in committing evil acts. The fact that he does get satisfaction out of these evil acts is perhaps an extra for him, but not his only motive.
Also, Gandalf is IMO a pure Lawful Good character. He does things for the sake of it, and he's ready to sacrifice himself for greater good; something an NG character would think about twice. Also, when he suspects Bilbo's ring to be the One, he seeks Saruman's advice before acting, following "procedure" you would say. A more NG character would have probably acted on instinct alone (I know I would have, and I'm NG ).
By the same meter, I would see Frodo more as a True Neutral character. Sure he's a good hearted fellow, but that's just because he doesn't actively commit evil acts. That alone doesn't necessarily make him Good in my opinion. He was simply caught in events bigger than him. And let's not forget that had the company not been there for him, he would have probably fallen under the complete influence of the ring.

I saw you interestingly identified Rorscharch as LN and Dr Manhattan as TN. I would totally agree with you. But in light of these, how would we identify the Comedian and most importantly Ozymandias? I would see the comedian as a pure CN badass, while Ozymandias is more Lawful Evil for me. Which is interesting because the difference between him and Rorscharch could not be more striking.

bello risentirti dopo tanto tempo @ShapiroKeatsDarkMage !

ShapiroKeatsDarkMage

The Comedian is CE cuz he shot a pregnant chick.

Moradin

@ShapiroKeatsDarkMage , although I would tend to agree with you, is that sufficient to describe him as CE? He was part of the Minutemen after all, if not for dispensing his own form of "justice". As far as we know he's always tried to move within the boundaries of "law", working for the government after the Minutemen were outlawed, for example. Is one single episode enough to make him CE? I would argue that Jack the Ripper or Pacciani were CE. The Comedian? Not convinced.

scriver

I'd argue that Rorschach is Neutral Evil. He probably started out more on the neutral side (of the good-evil axis), but by the time the comic takes place there's nothing redeeming about him.

Comedian is also pure CE. There's no indication in the story that he ever were into vigilantism for any other reason than that he liked violence and hurting people. Rorschach at least has a clear point in which the world breaks him, but the Comedian don't really show any signs of ever having been anything other than a sadistic sociopath.

Ozymandias though is much more interesting. Remember that he only commits the atrocities he does for the sole purpose of saving the world and mankind from complete destruction and only after it is on the brink of destruction. I can't really say that that is enough to bring him up to LN (said atrocities were still atrocities, after all) but it's worth keeping in mind when one says he is LE. It's feels kind of weird calling the guy who saved the world "evil", but when you save it by killing millions it's not exactly like there is anywhere else you can end up.

Kaltzor

SapphireIce101 said:

Tbh, Kenshin Himura/Hitokiri Battosai is CG. Mostly because, even though he helps people, he definitely goes about it in a terrible way sometimes.

I think he more or less walks a fine line between Neutral Good and Chaotic Good, he accepts the goverment to be in the right and the laws to be good, which is more on the Neutral side... but chaotic in that he will go around them to do good if he needs to.

Nuin

The D&D alignment is meant to be more of a guideline in more recent versions, so it makes a bit more sense now.

-Kenshin is definitely Neutral Good-Chaotic Good. He doesn't seem to particularly care how the greater good is upheld (for one thing, he regularly associates with well-meaning "criminals"). He is also known to resort to dangerous force when provoked by corrupt/evil governments and government officials.
-Gandalf is Lawful Good imo. He's not the lawful stupid type, though. If you think about it the only reason Gandalf doesn't use his magic indiscriminately is because he is forbidden from interfering directly, and unlike Saruman Gandalf took his responsibilities very seriously. He lets a lot of things slide, but consider that he must be under constant pressure to use his magic, whether to save his friends/innocents against non-supernatural dangers or strike down characters like Grima Wormtongue/the Steward of Gondor.
He also answers to a higher power, and they might have different rules up there.
-Galactus is Lawful Neutral imo, because like Gandalf Galactus has a will, a purpose and a mission that he takes very seriously (according to the wiki, his purpose is to correct "the imbalances between the conceptual entities Eternity and Death"). He simply doesn't care about good or evil.