Dorn's Alignment

epicrakshasas

In my opinion, (this is only from BGEE not BG2EE) Dorn really should be chaotic evil. Mostly my logic just comes from the discussion where he relates how Simmeon and Co. slaughtered an innocent village. Dorn relates how he felt eupohria while standing drenched in the blood of innocents he has just killed. It seems at least that he does have a chaotic evil side. Ideas?

Jarrakul

There's an argument to be made for that, and I'm sure eventually that argument will devolve into the usual arguments over alignment definitions. I will say, though, that while reveling in indiscriminate slaughter is usually considered chaotic evil, Dorn also has some lawful tendencies, like his adherence to his pact and his apparent feelings of group loyalty. Not necessarily massively strong lawful tendencies, but they're there.

JuliusBorisov

I think that the fact that Dorn acts under the guidance of his patron adds a lot to his actions and his feelings about these actions. This is further seen in BG2EE.

I see his "Neutral Evil" alignment as something that shows Dorn's actual self, without the patron's influence. In BGEE, it's hard to imagine that, indeed, but in BG2EE due to some spoilers, it's possible.

epicrakshasas

Jarrakul said:

There's an argument to be made for that, and I'm sure eventually that argument will devolve into the usual arguments over alignment definitions. I will say, though, that while reveling in indiscriminate slaughter is usually considered chaotic evil, Dorn also has some lawful tendencies, like his adherence to his pact and his apparent feelings of group loyalty. Not necessarily massively strong lawful tendencies, but they're there.

I feel like he is more loyal only to charname's power though, as he does go out of his way to point out how everyone else in the party is not loyal to charname.

Jarrakul

@epicrakshasas I actually feel like that's more an expression of his having been burned before. Loyalty is important to him, but he's (rightfully, which is not something I'm used to saying with Dorn) paranoid about disloyalty in those around him.

Skatan

It's kinda funny that loyalty and NE are diametrically opposite. NE char's should (based on in-game alignment descriptions and not PnP) act only in their own interrest. Both CE and LE would have been a better choice imho, but then again, discussing alignments in BG is really futile, hehe..

Southpaw

As I can see it, being loyal to CHARNAME is very in his own interests for Dorn as CHARNAME is a powerful character with lots of potential and has already proven to be able to secure a lot of fighting and loot (which is what Dorn likes and wants).

On the other hand, CHARNAME has shown to be very resourceful in surviving any other betrayal and thus Dorn double-crossing him/her could very easily end with Dorn's death. Dorn is not the type that would "forgive and forget and settle down in the countryside", so adventuring is an important aspect of his life. And where is a better place to stand, than next to this powerful godspawn, so staying on good terms is equally important in Dorn's well-being.

epicrakshasas

With that in mind, it almost seems like after the betrayal by Simmeon, Dorn changed alingments from Chaotic Evil to Neutral Evil.

Quartz

Skatan said:

Both CE and LE would have been a better choice imho, but then again, discussing alignments in BG is really futile, hehe..

True dat. Garrick, Chaotic Neutral? LOL WUT?

Francois

Even if he is distrustful about loyalty it is also a concept that he cares about. A chaotic character would not even think twice about loyalty, let alone spend discussing it.

Also, he does not mind the authority his patron has over him, (so long as the deal seems fair), but he does not have a particular loyalty either. He likes power but does not mind serving, which is typical NE. A CE person would be more resentful about not being in complete command.

Skatan

Francois said:

Also, he does not mind the authority his patron has over him, (so long as the deal seems fair), but he does not have a particular loyalty either. He likes power but does not mind serving, which is typical NE. A CE person would be more resentful about not being in complete command.

I disagree, at least based purely on in-game descriptions of alignements (partly based on 3E as well, from NVN etc). CE creatures are often in packs where the pack leader is the strongest and lead until someone else overthrows him or her. Dorn is lead by both his patron, who is obviously stronger than him, but also by the Baalspawn whom he also believes to be stronger than him ("I am not in danger Dorn, I AM danger", as said by CHARNAME during the talks with Dorn).
Also LE could be applied since Dorn is granted powers by hies deity as long as he follows it's creed, which is slaughter and mayhem. If he for some (unlikely) reason would stray from that path, his patron would remove his granted powers. Thus Dorn must follow the "law" of his patron.

This is why I believe NE is completely wrong, since NE chars follow only their own moral codes, their own will and may indeed be a member in a party, but would backstab any other for their own gain, if possible. Does this fit Dorn? Well it does as well, to some degree, but I believe both other evil alignments fit better.

This is just my own opinion of course, and as said above, discussion about alignments are really interresting but also futile since there are as many interpretations of alignments as there are people playing, hehe

Grum

Neutral evil seems right to me. He only follows his patron because it brings him power. A stronger patron comes around? He'll jump at the opportunity, if it benefits him. Lawful evil bends contracts, chaotic evil does pure mayhem. Neutral evil looks out for #1.

Quartz

My honest opinion on the matter is that Beamdog decided that between his Lawful tendencies and his Chaotic tendencies it about evens out to Neutral Evil.

Beamdog's idea of a conflicted character is one whom contradicts themselves, or something. Their characters are so uninteresting it's actually impressive.

Francois

Skatan said:

CE creatures are often in packs where the pack leader is the strongest and lead until someone else overthrows him or her. Dorn is lead by both his patron, who is obviously stronger than him, but also by the Baalspawn whom he also believes to be stronger than him

The difference is that CE don't enjoy being part of a group unless they are in charge and are naturally averse to organization. I feel that Dorn really doesn't mind. Sure he may betray his boss if it's useful, but that's not his priority.

Skatan

Quartz said:

My honest opinion on the matter is that Beamdog decided that between his Lawful tendencies and his Chaotic tendencies it about evens out to Neutral Evil.

This makes sense.

thelovebat

Quartz said:

Skatan said:

Both CE and LE would have been a better choice imho, but then again, discussing alignments in BG is really futile, hehe..

True dat. Garrick, Chaotic Neutral? LOL WUT?

Yeah he always seemed much more Chaotic Good to me based on what actually happens in the game with him. I'm not sure if when the original Baldur's Gate was made if Bards were limited to only the 3 Neutral Alignments cus he seems much different than the other Chaotic Neutral or True Neutral characters in the game. I'm not sure if it was Bioware's choice or if those were just restrictions they had to deal with at the time to fit within the game.

Gallowglass

thelovebat said:

I'm not sure if when the original Baldur's Gate was made if Bards were limited to only the 3 Neutral Alignments cus he seems much different than the other Chaotic Neutral or True Neutral characters in the game.

IIRC, it's always been the rule that Bards are restricted to alignments which are Neutral on at least one axis. Thus the only way for a Bard to be any sort of Chaotic is to be Chaotic Neutral.

KidCarnival

Your perspective on Garrick depends on the party you have around him. Neutral characters can go either way with their banters, and I had Garrick use his insult lines at Dynaheir and his compliments at Kagain in one case.