I'm sure there's plenty of people out there with more D&D experience than me. I'm trying to figure out what alignment a character that's popped into my head would be, and for the life of me, I can't figure out one that fits her personality based on the Oh So Helpful descriptions as listed in the BG2 character creation process.
Basically, she's somewhat of an assassin, though I hesitate to assign that sterotype to her. She is very hedonistic, quite vain and more than a little selfish. She is, however, very loyal to those few individuals who earn her trust..no mean feat to accomplish. She despises chaos in whatever manifestation. She's quite determined, and once she sets her mind on obtaining a goal, she won't stop until she's achieved what she wants and doesn't much care what she needs to do to get it, though killing is generally her last resort. (Killing tends to be bloody, you know, and all that blood makes *such* a mess on her wardrobe. Besides, why kill someone when you can wheedle your way into their good graces instead?)
I don't really see her as an 'evil' person, per se, but I'd certainly not label her as good either. She's not any champion of balance or whatnot, so true neutral is really out, though that would strike me as the most natural. She's not the type to care how exactly something gets done, and will take one side on a whim and then flip to the other as quickly as not. Don't know. Hoping someone might have a suggestion based on such a brief character sketch.
Thanks!
Alignment Query
Started by Xadrana, Dec 01 2004 11:26 AM
14 replies to this topic
#2
-Ashara-
-Ashara-
-
- Guest
Posted 01 December 2004 - 11:55 AM
Druidical True Neutral is just one of the 'neutral' types. However, while you said she is not Evil, to me she sounds like a Neutral Evil. Evil because for her ends justifies the means and she does not have moral scruples the way she is described - she'd lie, steal or kill; neutral, because she neither is an obedient citizen, nor a rogue who delights in creating havok and destroying authority.
#3
-Quiet Lurker-
-Quiet Lurker-
-
- Guest
Posted 01 December 2004 - 11:58 AM
Well, your character is loyal to her allies, and according to your description, would not stoop to wanton betrayal, so that would put her either as Lawful or Neutral (more towards Lawful, but it depends on exactly how far she would go and how much weight she places on loyalty. Does she always follow through on her contracts?)
As a general rule, most assassins are of evil alignment, though there are always exceptions. Ask this question of the character: Does she kill another sentient being for nothing more than money/reward? If so, she is evil; if not she is Neutral or Good (unlikely).
Of course, much of the alignment question is open to debate.
In my humble opinion, motivations are more important than deeds for alignment.
For example:
A character can perform a "good" deed, for example killing a tyrant, but if she's in it for the money (hired), then she is not necessarily "good."
Another character can perform the same deed and collects the same reward, but if her primary motivation is to dispose of the evil overlord accepts the rewards as an added bonus (i.e. she would have done the same thing if there was no reward) Then this character can be considered "good."
As a general rule, most assassins are of evil alignment, though there are always exceptions. Ask this question of the character: Does she kill another sentient being for nothing more than money/reward? If so, she is evil; if not she is Neutral or Good (unlikely).
Of course, much of the alignment question is open to debate.
In my humble opinion, motivations are more important than deeds for alignment.
For example:
A character can perform a "good" deed, for example killing a tyrant, but if she's in it for the money (hired), then she is not necessarily "good."
Another character can perform the same deed and collects the same reward, but if her primary motivation is to dispose of the evil overlord accepts the rewards as an added bonus (i.e. she would have done the same thing if there was no reward) Then this character can be considered "good."
#4
Andyr
-
- Member
- 2318 posts
HERR RASENKOPF
Posted 01 December 2004 - 03:35 PM
If you mean Assassin as in the 3rd edition Prestige Class, then the character has to be of an Evil alignment to qualify.
If not, then, whatever.
If not, then, whatever.
"We are the Gibberlings Three, as merry a band as you ever did see..." - Home of IE mods
< jcompton > Suggested plugs include "Click here so Compton doesn't ban me. http://www.pocketplane.net/ub"
< jcompton > Suggested plugs include "Click here so Compton doesn't ban me. http://www.pocketplane.net/ub"
#5
toughluck
-
- Member
- 71 posts
Posted 01 December 2004 - 04:01 PM
Evil. I guess that goes beyond question. "Killing tends to be bloody, you know, and all that blood makes *such* a mess on her wardrobe. Besides, why kill someone when you can wheedle your way into their good graces instead?" - Evil is generally described (or even 'defined' in D&D) as "egoistic."
Since she doesn't have too much scruples for breaking law, or obeying it when it benefits her - neutral.
Neutral Evil it is, I guess. If she was Lawful Evil, she would prefer to use the law in her favour, stay away from breaking it, but use it to her gain. In one word - politicians are generally lawful evil, some of them neutral or chaotic evil :-)
Since she doesn't have too much scruples for breaking law, or obeying it when it benefits her - neutral.
Neutral Evil it is, I guess. If she was Lawful Evil, she would prefer to use the law in her favour, stay away from breaking it, but use it to her gain. In one word - politicians are generally lawful evil, some of them neutral or chaotic evil :-)
#6
-Quiet Lurker-
-Quiet Lurker-
-
- Guest
Posted 01 December 2004 - 06:32 PM
Since she doesn't have too much scruples for breaking law, or obeying it when it benefits her - neutral.
Neutral Evil it is, I guess. If she was Lawful Evil, she would prefer to use the law in her favour, stay away from breaking it, but use it to her gain. In one word - politicians are generally lawful evil, some of them neutral or chaotic evil :-)
Being Lawful does not mean that one has to follow the laws of society. Lawful Evil is rather tricky to roleplay. An example of a Lawful Evil assassin would be one who always "finishes the job" once a contract have been made. (i.e. they put some weight into their 'word')
A Lawful Evil character may even have a personal Code of 'Honor.' For example a Lawful Evil mercenary may refuse to kill people in their sleep, instead preferring to wake them up before slaughtering them. Others may refuse to kill children, while at the same time, have no compunctions about killing their parents.
#7
oralpain
-
- Member
- 589 posts
Posted 01 December 2004 - 06:48 PM
I think more information is necessary to really beable to tell. From that basic discription the character could be almost any alignment except for LG.
If I HAD to make a guess based on what you have said, it would be a toss up between TN and CN, leaning to Chaotic Neutral. Maybe True Neutral with chaotic tendincies.
The "despises chaos in whatever manifestation" is extremely ambiguous and does not suggest an alignment in of it self.
Lurker is correct in saying that being Lawful does not necissarly have anything to do with following laws.
A Lawful character will likely have some sort of personal code and will always make an effort to follow his/her OWN laws. The will generally (but not always) keep their word, but won't usually have any problems with trying to twist it. In the end they will prefer a well ordered system where everyone has a place based on whatever the LE person feels is most important.
If I HAD to make a guess based on what you have said, it would be a toss up between TN and CN, leaning to Chaotic Neutral. Maybe True Neutral with chaotic tendincies.
The "despises chaos in whatever manifestation" is extremely ambiguous and does not suggest an alignment in of it self.
Lurker is correct in saying that being Lawful does not necissarly have anything to do with following laws.
A Lawful character will likely have some sort of personal code and will always make an effort to follow his/her OWN laws. The will generally (but not always) keep their word, but won't usually have any problems with trying to twist it. In the end they will prefer a well ordered system where everyone has a place based on whatever the LE person feels is most important.
Edited by oralpain, 01 December 2004 - 06:59 PM.
#8
Xadrana
-
- Member
- 9 posts
Posted 01 December 2004 - 08:41 PM
Aye, it is a bit of a tricky one. I was more or less leaning towards lawful or neutral evil and true neutral. I'm not overly fond of the whole alignment thing in general..much more fun to have a character's actions define him or her rather than being assigned a cookie cutter stereotype by two little words on a character sheet.
My thanks for the input.
My thanks for the input.
#9
oralpain
-
- Member
- 589 posts
Posted 02 December 2004 - 07:53 AM
Alignments are just guidelines. They are not meant to be a straight jacket.
When in doubt use true neutral and assign a tendency to it. If the character's outlook changes significantly in the future so can the alignment.
When in doubt use true neutral and assign a tendency to it. If the character's outlook changes significantly in the future so can the alignment.
#10
-Quiet Lurker-
-Quiet Lurker-
-
- Guest
Posted 03 December 2004 - 03:48 AM
Aye, it is a bit of a tricky one. I was more or less leaning towards lawful or neutral evil and true neutral. I'm not overly fond of the whole alignment thing in general..much more fun to have a character's actions define him or her rather than being assigned a cookie cutter stereotype by two little words on a character sheet.
Alignments are not laws to be followed but a summary of beliefs, all characters have beliefs and thus all characters have alignments. Alignments, like beliefs, can change albeit gradually. Characters (most characters) act on their beliefs and thus according to their alignments, thus a "good" character can't just go slaughter a village for no particular reason and still believe in "good" can she?
To determine a character's alignment, ask yourself: what does the character believe in?
On the Good-Evil scale: do your character's beliefs tend towards love
, charity :^^: , mercy 
, helping the helpless, and all those other goody-two-shoes nonsense or are they more like "HAHA! I'm going to kill you because I can!" 
or "Give me your lunch money!" On the Lawful-Chaotic scale: does your character have a certain set of strict principles that s/he follows? Does your character serve another unquestioningly (or at least obediently)? Does your character believe in planning? Is your character a compulsive gambler?
#11
fallen_demon
-
- Member
- 451 posts
barely untraind assasian
Posted 04 December 2004 - 08:52 PM
evil characters don't have to kill b/c they can. Someone who kills and causes harm to others only when it can benefit themselves would still be evil.
Edited by fallen_demon, 04 December 2004 - 08:55 PM.
"I choose to believe what I was programed to believe."
Futurama quotes rock
Futurama quotes rock
#12
toughluck
-
- Member
- 71 posts
Posted 04 December 2004 - 11:33 PM
fallen - if someone kills because they can, and it strikes them as something natural and/or entertaining, should be considered chaotic neutral or chaotic evil.
#13
fallen_demon
-
- Member
- 451 posts
barely untraind assasian
Posted 05 December 2004 - 07:50 PM
I know that. I did not say someone who does that shouldn't be considerd evil, rather that that is not the only possible way a character can act to be considered evil, which the above post implied.
"I choose to believe what I was programed to believe."
Futurama quotes rock
Futurama quotes rock
#14
fallen_demon
-
- Member
- 451 posts
barely untraind assasian
Posted 05 December 2004 - 07:50 PM
double post
Edited by fallen_demon, 05 December 2004 - 07:51 PM.
"I choose to believe what I was programed to believe."
Futurama quotes rock
Futurama quotes rock
