Align this character.

[DragonLancer]

When your primary method of information gathering ruins other people's lives it's tough to say you're "Neutral".

Welcome to the time of the inquisition. Suppoesedly doing good by torture and murder. But thats a discussion for another time. I see that being something suitable to a devoted "letter of the law, over the spirit of the law" dedicate LN.

This depends somewhat on the setting but a pregnant woman who isn't supported by a man can be completely ostracized from society and unable to support herself financial during the late term of the pregnancy.

You are assuming thats the case. We don't have that information. The setting/world of this character may be different and that she won't be ostracised. I think you are focussing too hard on this aspect.

 

[DevoutlyApathetic]

Welcome to the time of the inquisition. Suppoesedly doing good by torture and murder. But thats a discussion for another time. I see that being something suitable to a devoted "letter of the law, over the spirit of the law" dedicate LN.

Absolutely nothing has been said that indicates the character is invested with authority by any legal body. All we know is he thinks the quickest way to find out who hired you is to inflict extreme amounts of pain. Is this how you think a cop should act?

Also I would seriously avoid calling the Inquisition into any moral discussion as a standard against which others may be measured.

You are assuming thats the case. We don't have that information. The setting/world of this character may be different and that she won't be ostracised. I think you are focussing too hard on this aspect.

At minimum she'll have 3 to 4 months of her life where she'll be incapable of performing useful labor and her body is used to grow a foot soldier for Mr Wonderful. Now add in the 15+ years of financially supporting a foot soldier to be.

This is if it's one of those rare cultures where this isn't extremely social frowned upon.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Hmmm.... I'd peg him as PC - Player Chaotic. Very typical incompatible mish mash of easy "good" traits and evil when "something needs to get done" or the player wants to vent on the "bad guy". If he really needed an alignment he would be CE in my book - the chaos coming from his tendency to try to fool himself into thinking he's good.

 

[Brazeku]

This is why I use an alternate alignment system.

Antagonist/Moralist.

 

[Quartz]

I think we need some information on the cultures and the deities in the campaign. By medieval standards, his behaviour would be LG - remember that torture was a standard technique - though his womanising, a somewhat chaotic bent, would prevent paladinhood. In Greyhawk, he'd likely be a LN worshipper of Hextor. By modern standards, he's all over the place, so a straight neutral fits best.

 

[AnonymousOne]

True Neutral, lawful neutral.

The aversion to tyranny lend s him to automatically distrust all state governance. However the term 'Lawful" could apply to a code of honor which this character ascribes to.

 

[Squire James]

I'm going to assume he did all these things as a true pattern of behavior, and none of these are something he did once or twice and got blown out of proportion (boy, I've seen that before!). His "baseline" actions appear Lawful Good, so I'll start him out as "paladin pure" Lawful Good and issue "strikes" for Chaotic or Evil behavior. Three strikes and he's out of Lawful Good. Here we go (WARNING: lots of subjective thought ahead!):

Let's start with the women. This is chaotic behavior in nearly all cases, since Law would (usually) dictate that a man should marry and stick to one woman. If he fails to leave means of support it would be slightly evil if the omission was intentional, or "true neutral and unwise" if accidental. None of this is strong enough to pull an otherwise Lawful Good person out of the alignment in my opinion. I'd call it "one strike" toward Chaotic.

The torture is clearly the worst of the offenses, and most likely to threaten the Lawful Good alignment. A pattern of this behavior would foul up Paladin status, though Grey Guards are practically expected to act like this. I call it "two strikes" toward Evil. Not enough to move the alignment by itself, but any reinforcement will do the trick.

The limb-beating itself is "value neutral" in my opinion. Fundamentally, it doesn't matter if he's using a severed limb or a sword to beat someone. What matters is the results. If he is dealing capital punishment to someone who "needs killing", then I see nothing evil or chaotic about it. Now, if he's KILLING people who ought not to be killed, this could be as serious as a full alignment change toward Chaos and Evil. I don't sense this to be the case, so for purposes of this discussion I'd say it's "neutral angry" and let it go at that.

The sterilization issue is probably what will provide that "final push" to another alignment. In my opinion the only situation where this is Lawful Good behavior (or enough so that I wouldn't count any "strikes") is if the subjects were rapists. For most stupid or useless men, their gonads is all they have left! It's not QUITE as bad as killing them, but really close. I'd call it "two strikes" toward Evil, possibly three. His behavior is quite Lawful Evil here.

My final assessment is: "one strike" toward Chaotic and "four strikes" toward Evil. This would land him in Lawful Neutral territory with "one stike" in both Chaos and Evil still outstanding.

Any thoughts on my analysis?

 

[Tarek]

I recently came across a character, and would like to get your opinions on his alignment. I'll list a few points on his morals and let the thread go on from there.

1 He would never harm a child or defenseless person.
2 He wants to save the world from a tyrannical and thoroughly evil organization.
3 He'll give the shirt off his back to a stranger if that would help them.
4 Staunchly loyal to his friends.
5 Won't keep rewards from quests, preferring to give it back to the town or to another worthy cause.
6 Uses torture as his primary questioning technique for prisoners.
7 Has, on several occasions, beaten someone to death with their own limbs. (This was their punishment for a crime, most likely hurting children or the defenseless.)
8 A fervent believer in eugenics, he has sterilized many useless or stupid people along his travels.
9 Seduces women in every town he comes across, hoping to sire an army along the way (ala Ghengis Khan).

So, what's the verdict? I've heard every alignment offered up as an answer, so I'm eager to see what the bright minds of EN World have to say.

-TRRW

1. Good.
2. Irrelevant. Motives don't matter for alignment, actions do.
3. Good.
4. Could be either Lawful or Chaotic. Conan was very loyal to his companions.
5. Good. Not an indicator of either law or chaos.
6. Evil.
7. Evil, probably chaotic, as judgements seem to be rendered on the spot and nothing given says anything about his authority to do so, if any.
8. Evil, probably chaotic, as again he is rendering judgement without due process.
9. Definitely chaotic, probably evil.

I would put this person at Chaotic Neutral, tending towards evil.

What most people forget about Chaotic ethics, is that a chaotic person can have a very strong code of conduct, it's just that the chaotic person does not feel bound by the values, beliefs, and laws of the society in which he lives.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I'm going to assume he did all these things as a true pattern of behavior, and none of these are something he did once or twice and got blown out of proportion (boy, I've seen that before!). His "baseline" actions appear Lawful Good,

I disagree. Everything listed is a baseline action, and his lawful and good traits should not be given default status.

The torture is clearly the worst of the offenses, and most likely to threaten the Lawful Good alignment. A pattern of this behavior would foul up Paladin status, though Grey Guards are practically expected to act like this. I call it "two strikes" toward Evil. Not enough to move the alignment by itself, but any reinforcement will do the trick.

I, on the other hand consider torture as a default status to mean that the character is evil, and it would take a lot to move them towards neutral.

The limb-beating itself is "value neutral" in my opinion. Fundamentally, it doesn't matter if he's using a severed limb or a sword to beat someone. What matters is the results. If he is dealing capital punishment to someone who "needs killing", then I see nothing evil or chaotic about it. Now, if he's KILLING people who ought not to be killed, this could be as serious as a full alignment change toward Chaos and Evil. I don't sense this to be the case, so for purposes of this discussion I'd say it's "neutral angry" and let it go at that.

wow. I think that opening line needs to be sigged, but other than that....

I'd say beating someone to death is an evil form of execution as it involves more suffering than is needed to accomplish the goal of death. It is basicly torturing the person to death, more firmly establishing that character as a sadist. The fact that they are in agony from the loss of a limb at the same time adds a bit of gorey flavor.

Any thoughts on my analysis?

I disagree with both your starting point and the weight you give different factors. I would either start with him as an evil sadist and see if anything redeemed him or start with neutral and see which ways his traits pulled him.

 

[Will]

I vote CE. No tendency about it.

He's a selfish bastard who happens to have high-minded ideals that he chooses to apply as he sees fit. Torturing as 'primary questioning technique' shows a casual attitude towards cruelty, beating someone to death with their own limbs is chaotic, eugenics is thoroughly evil, seducing women along the way is chaotic and possibly evil (does he lie and pressure them?).

By way of reference, I think it's perfectly possible to have a character with LG motives and goals who is thoroughly CE... typically, a revolutionary/committed warrior who will HAPPILY do anything and everything to save the kingdom, and doesn't see a contradiction between breaking the law to save the law.