Skip to content

The Alignment Scale

RnRClownRnRClown Member Posts: 182
I find the alignment system an interesting and complex quandary. I often find myself perplexed when trying to narrow the personality and the actions of a character (from a book or a film) to a definable sum which can then be placed somewhere on the alignment scale, with a degree of confidence that it is fair and correct. I often refer to two sources when looking to refresh my understanding of the nine alignment choices.

The easydamus Alignment Library

Comic book examples from MightyGodKing

I think it would be great to have a thread where folks could put forth a name and receive feedback (if not a straight up answer) as to what alignment corresponds to the character in question.

I was watching a film a few nights back. Babylon A.D. It wasn't particularly good. Nevertheless, the character Toorop, as portrayed by Vin Diesel, piqued my interest. He was clearly a mercenary. Yet he also had a code of honor. He would not hesitate to say harsh words, nor commit harsh actions. He kept his word above all else, even if it meant death. He killed without remorse. He appeared to want freedom above all else. At first I considered him to be of evil alignment, probably neutral (via elimination of lawful and chaotic). At other times he appeared to be cut from the good cloth, with his regard for innocents and the honor to keep his word. Then I remembered his tossing innocents from a submarine (into the icy waters and certain death) as it was submerging to achieve his goals. I then thought perhaps he was a form of neutral, only getting involved when it suited his agenda. So, in short, I cannot pin him. He may be an easy one to determine for those more in-tune with the alignment system.

Would anyone like to warrant an estimation of the alignment of Toorop?

Comments

  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 3,300
    Movies are hard to get accurate aligments because you only see those characters once. Comics and books are easier, cause you get to see how consistent are their actions.

    Some like to say "I'm chaotic neutral" , but then I think "really? Are as chaotic as someone from a Bukowski book?".

  • LemernisLemernis Member, Moderator Posts: 4,318
    edited March 2013
    Well, the way I break down Evil is that is an inclination to maliciously do harm to others (which often includes controlling or dominating people). Good is an inclination to be helpful to others (which often involves self-sacrifice but doesn't have to). Along this axis Neutral seems to represent an attitude that each individual is fundamentally responsible for him or herself, and as such there is no moral obligation to help anyone else; but neither is there any sort of wish to see anything bad happen to anyone else. I.e., it's basically not one's problem what happens to others, good or bad.

    So I don't know the character well enough to say, but my best guess from what you've described is that Toorop may most closely fit LN.
  • DrugarDrugar Member Posts: 1,566
    I wrote a giant post about it some time ago, which boiled down to.

    A character feels society/himself is the best way to him society/him.
    Lawful acts in accordance to society, Chaotic acts in his own manner.
    Good wants what's best for society, evil wants what's best for himself.

    It's way more than that (for example, helping yourself is completely neutral, killing someone to better yourself is evil), but it basicly boils down to that for me.
  • One thing to keep in mind is that none of the alignments necessarily imply "nice," nor do any of them necessarily imply "mean," as Good characters can be harsh and uncompromising, while Evil characters can be affable or punch-clock villains.

    That, and when in doubt, assume Neutral. Even Evil characters often have lines they won't cross, and Good characters have people or causes that they will not support. If you can't pin down a character's alignment, then there's a good chance that they're Neutral and the actions that are throwing you off are exceptions to their normal behavior.

    Of course, that also depends on whether you think that extreme circumstances reveal a person's true character ("Hold a man over a volcano, and on that day you will truly know him") or whether they are exceptions ("Put a gun to a man's head and you can get him to say anything").
    RnRClown
  • RnRClownRnRClown Member Posts: 182
    edited March 2013
    I believe I finally have a good grasp on each alignment, the differences between them, and how they pertain to one another. Thanks almost entirely to reading through easydamus and then re-reading that which didn't quite register on the first attempt. I must be the only person who finds it therapeutic and even a little relaxing. It is a fantastic wealth of knowledge, and understanding on the subject, which they have gathered on their fine website.

    I have always perceived myself as one of two choices. Neutral Good or Chaotic Good. For a brief time I believe both would have been correct. Originally CG before becoming NG. I rolled with that conclusion without ever pausing to reconsider, not once over what is now a 12 year period. Neither accurately portray my essence as an individual, neither in society nor philosophically. They have been outdated for a long time, more than half the period within which they were selected. True Neutral is the most befitting of the alignments. The change is a result of a) not fully understanding the wide scope of each alignment and the exceptions they allow, and b) changing as an individual which should not be surprising from an idealistic 16 year old to a realistic 28 year old.

    Can anyone present any other, more well known examples of True Neutral characters? I am not familiar with Cerebus, nor The Watchers.
    Post edited by RnRClown on
  • True Neutral characters tend not to feature prominently in stories because they lack the motivation or conviction to be active participants in the plot, although most of the "extras" in a story probably qualify. I would argue that "The Dude" from The Big Lebowski would qualify as True Neutral, as he mainly gets bounced around by the story and never makes much of a principled stand on anything.
    RnRClown
  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    Like most alignments, true neutral characters can be played very differently. Some can be very motivated and be people of convictions and principles. I think of those people as being like how I look at politics in the US - it is a two party system and when either party gets too much power they abuse that power, corrupt their own principles and leave the country in worse shape than when there are checks and balances.

    Some are disinterested (like the Dude - good example @Kaigen), some are deliberately not involved (the Watchers, Switzerland, etc.), some might commit themselves to some ideal that isn't inherently good, evil, etc. (such as someone who devotes themselves to magical research or writing the greatest symphony ever done, etc. and will pursue that goal regardless of the impact or lack thereof on anyone else - these are simply secondary concerns compared to value of the goal which itself is neutral), and some are simply agnostic (not that they don't care per se or aren't interested, but they aren't sure what is the best path because the road to hell is paved with good intentions, etc.).

    I think there are a lot of different angles you can come at each of these alignments from and that is the fun of roleplaying.
    RnRClown
  • RnRClownRnRClown Member Posts: 182
    I can see where I fall within the broad range that is Neutral. Disinterested would be the defining sub-category. Agnostic the second most so.

    Motivation may often appear absent from my very being, because of disinterest. Conviction may appear foreign when the most firm of opinions is that ultimately very little matters in the grand scheme of it all, because of uncertainty. Yet when I become interested due to a degree of certainty that all changes. I become hugely motivated with an almost overwhelming conviction to succeed. That also dissipates as quickly as it came about once an end (be it the desired option or otherwise) has been achieved.

    At times I see a lot of Lawful Neutral in myself. As (or if) I achieve that which I desire - certainty - I believe LN may be where I would call home. Then again, Neutral Good could as easily be so. I believe I read once that Peter Parker was a TN before he became Spiderman, as well as during his beginnings as Spiderman. It was only upon the death of his Uncle Ben, and the circumstances surrounding his death, that the lovable web slinger went from TN to NG.
Sign In or Register to comment.