What Alignment is Rorschach?

[Mallus]

Many, many folks here would argue that you are too quick to define utilitarianism ("the ends justify the means") as good.

Mind you, that's my take on what Alan Moore is doing in Watchmen. He posited that Veidt may be right in order to criticize a moral system in which Veidt could be right. I'm not defending utilitarianism, at least not here or before a second cup of coffee.

In some ways Watchmen is a bit of kangaroo court (of ideas). But I won't hold that against it.

 

[Umbran]

His moral code is so absolute, he's unwilling to compromise, not ever, even if it means the end of the world.

Well, this raises a question - is it that he's unwilling to compromise, or actually unable to do so?

In 3e, neutrality was used to handle animals, and those creatures unable/incapable of making moral or ethical judgments. In the story, several characters remark that he's outright insane, and this is at least partly supported by the character history - there is a point where he snaps.

If, at the end, his mind is such that he cannot choose to do otherwise, then he isn't aligned any more than a wolf or a force of nature.

 

[davethegame]

I think we've seen Rorshach pegged as every alignment except NE (and I may have just missed it).

This just highlights that alignment is and has always been a poor system that has never managed to accomplish its purpose. I like that 4e removed mechanical effects based on alignment, but it would have been much better to just remove it entirely.

Plus it's given D&D fans something to argue about since the Internet was created.

After discussing this thread with a friend, we were able to spin off a number of fake alignments that people nonetheless play. Both "Rorscach" and "Batman" would reasonably fit in there.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

All I know is Rorschach tickles me in all the same places that "Wulf Ratbane" tickles me.

(Which should probably cause me to lie awake at night...)

 

[Wombat]

Give me more ammunition for "Why Alignment Simply Doesn't Work".

But it is obvious when you think about it -- Rorschach's alignment is Batman...

 

[Dragonblade]

Rorschach is my hero.

 

[balard]

I think Rocharch started as a Lawful Good, and than went downhill. He has values, he do what he do by the greater good. The point is that he was getting more and more cynical as the time passes. He started to see everyone as guilty and evil, and the laws and the society weak and decaying.

He is Lawful Good Insane. He does so much Chaos and Evil in the name of Lawful and Good that his mind snaps. He is True Neutral, in the way he goes both sides of the spectrum many times in a day. He is TN not because the tries to be in the middle, or because he is a instinctive person, but because he act as a Lawful Chaotic Good Evil person. That is his insanity.

Rocharch is a deeply complex character, almost all of then falls in the True Neutral, Lawful Batman, or Chaotic Awesome aligment spectrum.

 

[AFGNCAAP]

FWIW... IMO, here's what Rorschach's AL would be:

3.X AL: Lawful Neutral
4e AL: Unaligned.

For 3.X, I'd say Lawful Neutral because he adheres to a personal belief system (the absolute black & white view of the world) and acts accordingly. He wouldn't be good, IMO, because he does things that aren't good to bad people (which, according to his viewpoint, is totally acceptable). It fails to account for the shades of grey common throughlout life, and the very grey area in which he himself operates (which I'm not sure if he's aware of or not—if he were, I doubt he'd have such an absolute black & white about things).

Also I'd argue Lawful Neutral because he's strongly adhering to a personal code, along the same lines as a samurai (whose code may conflict with the local laws of the area he's traveling in, esp. a samurai character in a typical pseudo-European setting—he's following a code, just not necessarily the code used by his local equivalents).

For 4e, I'd say Unaligned, more or less for the same argument. He's not Lawful Good because he does some decidedly non-Good actd, & because he doesn't use the system itself to try to carry out justice (he believes in a code, but not the system).

Then again, a core idea behind D&D is that there are supernatural forces and genuine absolutes of concepts such as "good" and "evil", and the existence of supernatural beings that act accordingly to those absolutes. While it can incorporate the "shades of grey" of the real world ala Unaligned (because, really, that would be the dominant AL IMO), there's the existence of pure good & pure evil in the world (angels, demons, devils, deities, etc.)

(However, keep in mind that even the most powerful beings aren't genuinely flawless & all-powerful—hence the 4e backstory of devils & the like).

 

[Mallus]

Rorschach's alignment is Batman.

Well said!

 

[Mistwell]

I think the point of Watchmen was to break down the comics "alignment" system, as Alan Moore saw it at the time. And Rorschach was one of the chief tools used to make that point.

It's therefore not surprising that Rorschach doesn't fit into the D&D alignment system well, and answers vary across the spectrum. As many have said, he does not fit that system well, intentionally so. That was the point - to break the "alignment" system of pop culture assumptions about morality and ethics.