Winternight
First Post
You jsut waited for that post:Atridis said:A-HA!!
How long did you have to lurk?
Or did you have a script?
Alignment - What am I?
- Thread starter Winternight
- Start date
How long did you have to lurk?
Or did you have a script?
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
I say Lawful Neutral. He seems to focus on a set of rules in deciding who to kill, who to release, who to ask into service, and who to enslave. His goal is to establish a kingdom with tax laws, for the purpose of building a capital for that kingdom. That is all lawful, and it all seems to be the goals of this character. Good and evil are not the focus of this guy...it's his personal code of conduct and goals, all of which seem lawful, that are the focus.
Matt Lazarus
First Post
I think that humanity as a whole tends towards lawful evil. We like structure and we tend toward a morality that is convieneint to the system where we live.
DonaldRumsfeldsTofu
First Post
I'd have to say True Neutral with streaks of evil, good, law, and chaos.
-Being the antagonist of evil doesn't necessarily qualify you as good. Just because he goes off and kills Drow and Ghouls doesn't make him good. In fact, indiscriminately killing Drow in my book is a borderline evil act. Drow are "Usually Lawful Evil", right? If that's true, than 10 to 40 percent of all Drow are not Lawful Evil. So Drow aren't inherently evil, that's just the culture's disposition. So going out and slaughtering Drow because they're Drow isn't Good. Now, if you had a good character with an Intelligence of six that thought that all Drow were demons, than it killing all Drow would be a good act. It's the intention, not the end, that decides what the act is
-The act of killing isn't evil. Murder in cold blood is evil. Killing a bunch of Chaotic Evil Orcs to save innocent prisoners and torturees isn't evil.
This character seems mostly concerned with himself. He doesn't seem particularly malevolent or benevolent, but is both on occasion. Nor does he seem conforming or rebelling, but has tendencies towards both. Saving innocent people from evil entities is good. Enslaving the people you saved is evil. Going out and pillaging strongholds without permission from the authority is chaotic. Dreaming of forming an authoritarian state in which all people are taxed 33 percent of their income is lawful, and most likely evil. This character seems a tad wishy-washy, which isn't a bad thing. I'd call him Neutral. He seems as good as he is evil. He isn’t strongly either
-Being the antagonist of evil doesn't necessarily qualify you as good. Just because he goes off and kills Drow and Ghouls doesn't make him good. In fact, indiscriminately killing Drow in my book is a borderline evil act. Drow are "Usually Lawful Evil", right? If that's true, than 10 to 40 percent of all Drow are not Lawful Evil. So Drow aren't inherently evil, that's just the culture's disposition. So going out and slaughtering Drow because they're Drow isn't Good. Now, if you had a good character with an Intelligence of six that thought that all Drow were demons, than it killing all Drow would be a good act. It's the intention, not the end, that decides what the act is
-The act of killing isn't evil. Murder in cold blood is evil. Killing a bunch of Chaotic Evil Orcs to save innocent prisoners and torturees isn't evil.
This character seems mostly concerned with himself. He doesn't seem particularly malevolent or benevolent, but is both on occasion. Nor does he seem conforming or rebelling, but has tendencies towards both. Saving innocent people from evil entities is good. Enslaving the people you saved is evil. Going out and pillaging strongholds without permission from the authority is chaotic. Dreaming of forming an authoritarian state in which all people are taxed 33 percent of their income is lawful, and most likely evil. This character seems a tad wishy-washy, which isn't a bad thing. I'd call him Neutral. He seems as good as he is evil. He isn’t strongly either
