Mapping Buffy the Vampire Slayer to DnD Alignment

[Yunru]

So a friend mentioned that B:tVS is a perfect example of DnD's alignment.

I don't remember most of it, but Giles represents Lawful Good, the Mayor is Lawful Evil, most vampires are Chaotic Evil, Buffy's Chaotic Good.

What other mappings are there?

 

[MarkB]

A good example, in that such definitions are endlessly debatable as is usually the case with alignment.

Buffy may not have appreciated being the Chosen One, but she doesn't otherwise act particularly chaotic. She works well with others, relies on friends and colleagues to help her plan to combat her enemies, and takes responsibility for her actions.

 

[D1Tremere]

This is a good example of why I hate the alignment system. As Mark said, Buffy worked well with others and followed a code (Lawful), until she didn't. She risked her life to save innocents (Good), until she didn't. All of the characters presented in these stories change "alignment" frequently, as they grow and change or as the situation demands it. The only character in the D&D rules that really needs to worry about alignment (due to the deontological nature of the class) is the paladin. Their conception of morality is defined for them by an outside source, and tied to operant enforcement. Everyone else can, and should, be many things depending on dynamic.

 

[5ekyu]

A good example, in that such definitions are endlessly debatable as is usually the case with alignment.

Buffy may not have appreciated being the Chosen One, but she doesn't otherwise act particularly chaotic. She works well with others, relies on friends and colleagues to help her plan to combat her enemies, and takes responsibility for her actions.

Amusing...
Buffy neutral good
Giles lost lawful good early - he protested a lot but threw a lot of rules out from early on.
Xander chaotic good.


But really Buffy shows much more character evolution than most alignment systems can tolerate.

 

[Seramus]

The more interesting question about alignment is..
Should a single decision ever change your alignment?

 

[Horwath]

The more interesting question about alignment is..
Should a single decision ever change your alignment?

Depends on the decision.

If your LG paladin decidec to murder whole orphanage he goes directly to CE.

If he has had enough of evil cultist and "red tape" of laws and codes for dealing with them and just storms the secret shrine, he might get only to CN.

If he steals for being hungry, I would not change the alignment right away.

 

[mortwatcher]

Tell the alignment to follow you, open the door for it, then shut the door, lock it and burn that house down.
I just don't like the concept of shoehorning someone to play a certain way based upon my own subjective perception of what constitutes good/evil/neutral or the other axis. Fortunately, 5e does a good job of untying even the paladin from the alignments and giving them a general vows to follow.

 

[Imaculata]

but Giles represents Lawful Good, the Mayor is Lawful Evil

I think Ethan Rayne would disagree on your perception of 'Ripper's' alignment.

The Mayor, though a villain, seems to also have some shades of gray. He has a loving father-daughter relationship with Faith and is very well mannered. I think both characters (and most other characters in Buffy) defy the generic alignment system of D&D.

most vampires are Chaotic Evil, Buffy's Chaotic Good

That really depends on the vampire. According to Buffy-lore, vampires are actually (lesser) demons who posses the soulless bodies of humans. Not all vampires are chaotic in their actions. Some are quite methotical and lawful. In season 1 several vampires are loyal to the Master for example.

And remember when Buffy attacked a cop and lied to all her friends about Angel being back alive?

 

[lluewhyn]

This is a good example of why I hate the alignment system. As Mark said, Buffy worked well with others and followed a code (Lawful), until she didn't. She risked her life to save innocents (Good), until she didn't. All of the characters presented in these stories change "alignment" frequently, as they grow and change or as the situation demands it. The only character in the D&D rules that really needs to worry about alignment (due to the deontological nature of the class) is the paladin. Their conception of morality is defined for them by an outside source, and tied to operant enforcement. Everyone else can, and should, be many things depending on dynamic.

Yep. Attempting to match the alignment system to fiction typically shows the flaws of the alignment system. How could you define Giles as Lawful Good when he later murders an individual for the greater good?

The alignment system itself doesn't handle committing acts of extreme evil for good purposes very well, other than to say that the character is now on a slippery slope towards turning evil and will soon act for evil purposes. Nor does it handle the Faith/Mayor relationship very well, where they're both acting evil towards the world but very loving and good towards each other.

There are many characters in genre fiction, especially those with darker tones (lot of the stuff in the 90s), that I would describe as being more Anti-Evil than actually Good. They fight the forces of darkness, but otherwise don't go out of their way to help people, might actually let innocents die in the name of the greater good, and are generally not terribly pleasant to be around.

 

[Yunru]

I think Ethan Rayne would disagree on your perception of 'Ripper's' alignment.

The Mayor, though a villain, seems to also have some shades of gray. He has a loving father-daughter relationship with Faith and is very well mannered. I think both characters (and most other characters in Buffy) defy the generic alignment system of D&D.



That really depends on the vampire. According to Buffy-lore, vampires are actually (lesser) demons who posses the soulless bodies of humans. Not all vampires are chaotic in their actions. Some are quite methotical and lawful. In season 1 several vampires are loyal to the Master for example.

And remember when Buffy attacked a cop and lied to all her friends about Angel being back alive?

I would say those could be covered by character arcs changing alignments, but it's still very shoe-horn-y.