D&D 5E A different take on Alignment

[tetrasodium]

The alignment is pointless/alignment is perfect debate has a fun little wrench.. Dexter Morgan is a strict Cap L Lawful Cap G Good Paladin. He does good finding the right bad guy at work then in his spare time goes above & beyond searching out evil people that he not only checks background in the DB but goes further by watching them to make sure they are still going to ping evil with detect evil. He does all of that while minimizing the evil doer's suffering and following the code given to him by a higher power (police chief Harry). Even when his own safety was at risk from Doakes Dexter still didn't kill him.

When lawful good includes dexter morgan it's useless

 

[doctorbadwolf]

When lawful good includes dexter morgan it's useless

I’m not sure you’re right about the lawful part, as I don’t think that anyone with a code they follow is lawful, but overall no, the quoted statement isn’t true at all.

Dexter both wants to do good, and does good. Only the specific modern philosophy that violence is never good, but only ever a necessarily evil at best, has any problem with him being Good.

 

[tetrasodium]

I’m not sure you’re right about the lawful part, as I don’t think that anyone with a code they follow is lawful, but overall no, the quoted statement isn’t true at all.

Dexter both wants to do good, and does good. Only the specific modern philosophy that violence is never good, but only ever a necessarily evil at best, has any problem with him being Good.

It's not his code. Its THE Code of Harry. Invalidating the code of harry invalidates every excuse used to justify a lawful good paladin tied to a god like pelor or something at the same time.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's not his code. Its THE Code of Harry. Invalidating the code of harry invalidates every excuse used to justify a lawful good paladin tied to a god like pelor or something at the same time.

And if a chaotic person uses an external code to keep his chaos from cause harm, he doesn’t become lawful by doing so. He’s just a person that is capable of self-reflection and of mitigating his own struggle with self control.

My point is that Dexter isn’t a Paladin. He’s a an example of a Good assassin. Whether he is Lawful, Chaotic, or Neutral, I’m largely unconcerned with. Not all characters are as clear on one axis as they are on the other, which leads back to the point of the OP.

Not all characters need to be defined by both axis, and we don’t need to determine them together. Dexter is Good, regardless of what other alignment he has.

 

[Maxperson]

And if a chaotic person uses an external code to keep his chaos from cause harm, he doesn’t become lawful by doing so. He’s just a person that is capable of self-reflection and of mitigating his own struggle with self control.

My point is that Dexter isn’t a Paladin. He’s a an example of a Good assassin. Whether he is Lawful, Chaotic, or Neutral, I’m largely unconcerned with. Not all characters are as clear on one axis as they are on the other, which leads back to the point of the OP.

Not all characters need to be defined by both axis, and we don’t need to determine them together. Dexter is Good, regardless of what other alignment he has.

I wouldn't call Dexter good. He has a deep seeded need to murder people. He just channels that into murdering other murderers in a vigilante justice style. He isn't working for an authority. He isn't doing so because he wants to help people, since he really doesn't understand those sorts of feelings. Dexter is just following the channel that his father set down for him.

I'd peg him at LE, really. He's got his code and is very methodical in his procedures and life, but he's doing what he does to sate his personal need to murder other humans.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I wouldn't call Dexter good. He has a deep seeded need to murder people. He just channels that into murdering other murderers in a vigilante justice style. He isn't working for an authority. He isn't doing so because he wants to help people, since he really doesn't understand those sorts of feelings. Dexter is just following the channel that his father set down for him.

I'd peg him at LE, really. He's got his code and is very methodical in his procedures and life, but he's doing what he does to sate his personal need to murder other humans.

I think that falls apart as early as the latter part of season 1, but certainly later.

The code keeps him safe, and exists to control him so that he doesn’t do evil, but he absolutely does care about others, he just doesn’t understand how those feelings work and why he feels them. He never tries to turn the code into a tool to justify just doing what he wants, and even allows himself to remain in danger from people who suspect him (and then the narrative saves him by getting those people killed or having them act against type or whatever) because they aren’t murderers and so he cannot assassinate them.

I don’t think it’s sensible to say that a desire to kill makes you evil, regardless of what you do about it. He does good, and he follows the code in order to ensure he is doing good, not evil.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I mean this is exactly my issue. A literal serial killer like Dexter can be 'good' because his 'type' is an acceptable target?

Like, I'm imagining playing in a game with a GM who feels this way and them being horrified when I hunt down and bring monsters like Dexter or Frank Castle to justice and not letting my smite evil or detect evil work on them.

The argument is that it make it easier to identify bad guys and... something about monster behavior... but here the bad guys aren't being identified.

 

[tetrasodium]

And if a chaotic person uses an external code to keep his chaos from cause harm, he doesn’t become lawful by doing so. He’s just a person that is capable of self-reflection and of mitigating his own struggle with self control.

My point is that Dexter isn’t a Paladin. He’s a an example of a Good assassin. Whether he is Lawful, Chaotic, or Neutral, I’m largely unconcerned with. Not all characters are as clear on one axis as they are on the other, which leads back to the point of the OP.

Not all characters need to be defined by both axis, and we don’t need to determine them together. Dexter is Good, regardless of what other alignment he has.

Here is the pf/3.5 lawful good blurb, the wording for both is the same then the 5e lawful good blurb. He's not CG because he deeply cares what others think. He's not NG because he goes to an extreme degree well beyond "best they can" even when doing so puts him in great risk as Doakes shows repeatedly right up till the end

He investigates evil & works to make sure justice is directed towards the right person at work then keeps doing that in his off time right down to the modern day equivalent of detect evil taken one step further by watching the person who pings evil to make sure they are still evil. Also it's not "chaos" that he struggles with it's an emptiness he calls the dark passenger he takes great pains to direct towards good

 

[Aldarc]

This is where I strongly disagree. I’ve seen people have confusion about how a devil is supposed to think and act, and used alignment to explain why they are the way they are, because they are literally

Once again. Noted.

 

[Oofta]

I could see the argument that Dexter was LN (not that I've ever seen the show).