Why do V's four words necessitate an alignment change?

[Hyooz]

It seems to be a common theme in discussions about V. That her four words are somehow selling her soul or something similar for Ultimate Arcane Power, or otherwise obtaining it through questionable or evil means.

I'm not so sure 'all the wrong reasons' necessarily means becoming evil to do so. You can do a lot of things for the wrong reasons without being an evil person. And really, the last thing this comic needs is another major antagonist.

[MickJay]

It's a common theme because it seems plausible, nothing else. Even if V for some reason does turn evil (possibility exists, but not a significant one), it doesn't have to make him an enemy of the rest of the Order, either.

[TheSummoner]

Because V turning evil would be interesting.

[Optimystik]

I'm not so sure 'all the wrong reasons' necessarily means becoming evil to do so. You can do a lot of things for the wrong reasons without being an evil person. And really, the last thing this comic needs is another major antagonist.

"Evil" does not always equate to antagonist. Belkar is a prime example of this.

[Corwin Weber]

"Evil" does not always equate to antagonist. Belkar is a prime example of this.

Tell that to Miko. :)

....erm.... or Roy for that matter. Or Haley now that I think about it....

Ok pretty much everybody but Elan.

[David Argall]

"Wrong reasons" sounds like reasons V would reject normally, which makes an alignment change a definite prospect. It is by no means certain, but when we have a soul hunting devil on the scene...

[Optimystik]

Tell that to Miko. :)

....erm.... or Roy for that matter. Or Haley now that I think about it....

Ok pretty much everybody but Elan.

Miko is an example of the reverse, that Lawful Good doesn't always mean helpful.

I'm not sure what Roy and Haley have to do with being antagonists... they clearly aren't.

[Flame of Anor]

No no, Optimystik, Corwin was saying that Belkar was an antagonist to Miko, Roy, and Haley.

[Innis Cabal]

LAwful Good -never- means helpful

[YesImSardonic]

LAwful Good -never- means helpful


Roy is Lawful Good. Trying to argue against his helpfulness would be an exercise in futility.

[alethiophile]

Roy is Lawful Good. Trying to argue against his helpfulness would be an exercise in futility.

I think the point was that the alignment does not imply, or really have much to do with, the place in the story. Miko and Roy are both Lawful Good, but they are obviously different in terms of helpfulness. Just being LG is not enough to make someone helpful.

[Optimystik]

No no, Optimystik, Corwin was saying that Belkar was an antagonist to Miko, Roy, and Haley.

He antagonized Roy and Haley frequently, but that didn't make him an antagonist. Especially since he saved the latter's life.

To put it another way, he opposed them both frequently, but was never actually their adversary.


Just being LG is not enough to make someone helpful.

That's a far cry from LG -never- being helpful, as Innis tried to argue.

[Wraithfighter]

Partly its the "All the wrong reasons" thing, but think of it like this:

Discovering ultimate arcane power is gonna be freaking huge for V, on a personal level. Maybe a change in how he sees the world. Such things can easily go along with a shift in alignment.

Honestly, I don't see V's alignment changing, but that's partly because I think of V as pretty damn strong in the True Neutral category. Not the "I go both ways" method of TN, but not giving two ****s about good/evil and law/chaos, being more focused on the pursuit of magic.

There's a bit of "Hero's Journey" motif there, too. When the hero gains the 'magic sword' thing, their resolve for the quest strengthens greatly as well. That can also lead to a shift in attitude, and while the classical example is a sorta-good guy becomes Paladin-good, the 'Sith' method works as well.

[Firewind]

It seems to be a common theme in discussions about V. That her four words are somehow selling her soul or something similar for Ultimate Arcane Power, or otherwise obtaining it through questionable or evil means.

I'm not so sure 'all the wrong reasons' necessarily means becoming evil to do so. You can do a lot of things for the wrong reasons without being an evil person. And really, the last thing this comic needs is another major antagonist.

Because all D&D players think that a single Evil act will provoke a sudden and irreversible alignment change.

[Optimystik]

Because all D&D players think that a single Evil act will provoke a sudden and irreversible alignment change.

Well, even if you argue that none of his other acts truly qualify as being evil, bargaining with a devil is generally the kind of thing that lands one on the Baator Bus. Do Not Pass Go, etc.

[hamishspence]

true, but thats more for Pacts. More ordinary bargains, like alliances against a greater threat, are, while shady, much less problematic.

in the Savage Tide arc, its demons rather than devils that are being bargained with- demon lords + eladrins vs Demogorgon.

if its an alliance, rather than V putting own soul on the negotiation table, any step toward Evil will be much smaller- maybe leaving V still in Neutral.

[CaptainIreland]

He antagonized Roy and Haley frequently, but that didn't make him an antagonist. Especially since he saved the latter's life.

To put it another way, he opposed them both frequently, but was never actually their adversary.

That whooshing sound you just heard...that was you missing the joke.

[Volkov]

Partly its the "All the wrong reasons" thing, but think of it like this:

Discovering ultimate arcane power is gonna be freaking huge for V, on a personal level. Maybe a change in how he sees the world. Such things can easily go along with a shift in alignment.

Honestly, I don't see V's alignment changing, but that's partly because I think of V as pretty damn strong in the True Neutral category. Not the "I go both ways" method of TN, but not giving two ****s about good/evil and law/chaos, being more focused on the pursuit of magic.

There's a bit of "Hero's Journey" motif there, too. When the hero gains the 'magic sword' thing, their resolve for the quest strengthens greatly as well. That can also lead to a shift in attitude, and while the classical example is a sorta-good guy becomes Paladin-good, the 'Sith' method works as well.

V was stunned by the goblin cleric's unholy blight thus putting V in any of the good alignments.

[kusje]

V was stunned by the goblin cleric's unholy blight thus putting V in any of the good alignments.

Don't forget neutral. And the fact that alignments can change.

[docstrange]

I see alignment this way: it describes what a character, in his or her heart of hearts, thinks is right. Lawful good characters think order is important, and that one must place the needs of others first. That doesn't mean she will never do anything chaotic or evil: it just means she KNOWS that what she's doing is wrong. Similarly, a chaotic evil character thinks it's everyone for himself and that an individual is right to do harm to others and ignore the rules, for his own benefit... a chaotic evil character may act altruistically, but not because he felt he needed to, or even should.

By this way of thinking, a character's alignment changes only if his or her sense of what is right changes. As a practical matter in a D&D game or story, the character's alignment changes when there have been enough actions observed that it is no longer plausible to belive that the character could self-justify those actions within the view of his or her current alignment.

I could see cases where one action makes an alignment change. Take a paladin who would sooner die than willingly commit an evil act. If the paladin commits the act and doesn't die, then there is a problem isn't there? If so, it is no longer plausible that the character has an LG mindset, and the alignment has to change. In cases of alignment less strict than that, you'd have to see a pattern of behaivor over time to make the call.

[hamishspence]

Possible, but not entirely consistant with other D&D sourcebooks, where the Evil character is genuinely of the belief that what they are doing is Good, or for the Good of others. LE in particular tend toward this- zealous.

When they know its "wrong" but do it anyway, thinking the evil acts are necessary but still evil, thats more like The Operative in Serenity.

you could, however, have a CE a bit like this too- V in V for Vendetta, taken a bit further, might fit- thinks freedom and the ending of tyranny justifies doing things like torturing his own ally.

on single act change- the general rule is it takes multiple acts, but the same section in DMG says there are exceptions.

Classic example of Good to Evil in 2nd ed PHB- Paladin burns village to stop plague outbreak, considering the deaths of innocents (and uninfected) OK if it prevents more people dying in a country-wide outbreak. The book said he should immediately change to Evil.

[Ramidel]

I generally don't consider 2e material canon for 3e-related alignment calls. That was the first edition where the core material itself tried to really work with what the alignments meant, and it didn't do too well at all.

As docstrange noted, 3.5 uses virtue ethics, where it's your moral compass (admittedly, as an omniscient viewer sees it) that determines your alignment as such. If you are a Lawful Good person you believe as the Lawful Good alignment dictates, and occasional slips don't make you Evil.

[The Extinguisher]

The "for all the wrong reasons" intrigue me. I don't believe it has to do with the wrong reasons for wanting the power, but rather, the wrong reasons for saying the words.

I predict it will be something very interesting. And full of capital letters. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0393.html)

[Kaihaku]

It seems to be a common theme in discussions about V. That her four words are somehow selling her soul or something similar for Ultimate Arcane Power, or otherwise obtaining it through questionable or evil means.

I'm not so sure 'all the wrong reasons' necessarily means becoming evil to do so. You can do a lot of things for the wrong reasons without being an evil person. And really, the last thing this comic needs is another major antagonist.

"All the wrong reasons" don't necessarily mean "All the Evil reasons", they might mean, as seems to be the case, committing an evil act like selling one's soul for power in order to save lives. Which should happen next comic and hopefully this ceaseless debate will end very nicely. :smallwink:

[hamishspence]

Fiendish Codex 2, and Champions of Ruin, both 3.5, went for "acts first, beliefs/attitudes second" No matter how altruistic your motives, routinely and consistantly Doing Evil will net you an evil alignment.

Fiendish Codex 2 showed the other side- even if your thoughts/personality are nasty (and Lawful) you can't get into Nine Hells without doing Evil acts, and "most people are only weakly aligned and do not generally commit acts strong enough to register as Lawful, Chaotic, Good, or Evil"

So, actions matter- a lot. Often, more than motives.

[The Minx]

V turning evil makes sense, since the fiends will want a return on their investment (assuming it is indeed they who are going to be providing the power, as recent events suggest). It would hardly do for them to give complete and total ultimate arcane power to someone good-aligned, would it? :smallsmile:

[Lilivati]

I don't think it necessitates it one way or the other- but neither does it exclude.