Nale is dead!! (as chaotic evil?)

[Blas_de_Lezo]

As I was reading the strip, I was thinking: "maybe Nale's alignment has changed to chaotic evil or perhaps neutral evil, he doesn't look LE anymore". I was thinking on opening a thread to discuss but as I was reading the possibility of him dying was increasing with his sociopathic speech.

It's not that I regret his death (too many villains, he did his best to keep on top), but was his last action an alignment change?

PD: please Giant, I know you are lately in this mood of killing everyone, but please don't murder Redcloak! :smalleek:

[Nohar]

All his life, Nale acted as Lawful Evil. His last actions won't weight too much in the balance. Please note that rejecting his dad's offer isn't chaotic in my book (murdering Malack may be Chaotic, but is killing someone you worked with preemptly because you were certain that said person was going to kill you chaotic? Though, Haley did something similar with Crystal... Though it may be a stretch).

And Redcloak is fine. For now at least.

[thereaper]

It's too soon for Redcloak to die. Much too soon.

The Giant did make a post at one point implying that he was no longer LE.

In any case, it's entirely possible that Nale may now end up in the IFCC's custody, which would give him the opportunity to realize that he has changed alignments.

[Blas_de_Lezo]

Well, ok, I admit that I opened this thread worried about the mass character killing, not Nale.

I think SoD is one the best comics I'ver ever read, and Redcloak probably one of the best developed characters. I know the Giant is in this George Martin mood of mass character murdering, and I like it because it's all in-character and well played, but OotS world without Redcloak it's not OotS anymore... (and I better shut myself up just in case the Giant prefers himself to shut me up proving that OotS without Redcloak is still fine) :smalleek::smallsigh::smallamused:

[Copperdragon]

I do not think Nale ever was (at least as long as we know him). He thought of himself as LE but given how he acted, he has very much chaotic streaks. I do not think it's enough for CE but I would peg Nale at NE. No matter what he thinks he is (or should be).

Nale only tried to be LE - but he was not.

[RMS Oceanic]

I do not think Nale ever was (at least as long as we know him). He thought of himself as LE but given how he acted, he has very much chaotic streaks. I do not think it's enough for CE but I would peg Nale at NE. No matter what he thinks he is (or should be).

Nale only tried to be LE - but he was not.

Well sometimes trying is all you need (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html).

If we see Nale in the afterlife, my guess is he'll end up with the IFCC through his association with Sabine, thus muddling his ethical alignment even more.

[Shred-Bot]

Well, ok, I admit that I opened this thread worried about the mass character killing, not Nale.

I think SoD is one the best comics I'ver ever read, and Redcloak probably one of the best developed characters. I know the Giant is in this George Martin mood of mass character murdering, and I like it because it's all in-character and well played, but OotS world without Redcloak it's not OotS anymore... (and I better shut myself up just in case the Giant prefers himself to shut me up proving that OotS without Redcloak is still fine) :smalleek::smallsigh::smallamused:

Well without Redcloak, Xykon wouldn't have any interest in the gates anymore, so narratively speaking he is probably safe at least until they reach the final gate.

(unless of course Xykon was serious about giving the Crimson Mantle to Jirix... :smalleek:)

[maxi]

"Lawful Evil" best describes a person who makes his own laws, and then follows then to the letter, even if it kills them. Compare with "Lawful Good", who mostly follow laws, provided by another entity (be it a god or some manner of moral codex). Contrast with "Chaotic Evil" who make laws only to enjoy breaking them later.

Following his own law until it killed him is precisely what Nale did.

[Sylian]

Well sometimes trying is all you need (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html).Was Nale using Chaotic means to fulfill Lawful obligations? Did he act with a personal code of honor? Was he part of some great organization? I'd say he was Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil, not Lawful Evil. Do note that I consider most things that happened in the first 100 comics or so to be shaky at best, since the Giant at that point didn't quite know what he wanted to do with the characters, so Nale calling himself Lawful doesn't really prove much at this point, especially since he's hasn't really acted as if he were Lawful.

Also, the Giant hinted that Nale might not be Lawful. :smallwink:

[Lamech]

YES! Finally, that annoying half threat who wastes the Order's time but fails repeatedly due to utter incompetence.

Okay, he's gonna end up in the IFCC custody, but still.

[littlebum2002]

Wow, I totally forgot about that. I always assumed Nale was CE or, at best, NE. Nothing he has ever done has suggested LE in my opinion.

As we saw when Roy entered the afterlife, just because you CLAIM to be an alignment doesn't mean you necessarily are that alignment. He still needed to get tested to prove he was LE.

I think Nale wanted to be LE, but I highly, highly doubt that was his true alignment.

[Rakoa]

Nale called himself LE so that he would fit better as Elan's evil opposite. I don't think he's ever taken an action that isn't better suited to NE or CE.

[masamune1]

"Lawful Evil" best describes a person who makes his own laws, and then follows then to the letter, even if it kills them. Compare with "Lawful Good", who mostly follow laws, provided by another entity (be it a god or some manner of moral codex). Contrast with "Chaotic Evil" who make laws only to enjoy breaking them later.

Following his own law until it killed him is precisely what Nale did.

I don't think that's how it works.

[137beth]

Wow, I totally forgot about that. I always assumed Nale was CE or, at best, NE. Nothing he has ever done has suggested LE in my opinion.

As we saw when Roy entered the afterlife, just because you CLAIM to be an alignment doesn't mean you necessarily are that alignment. He still needed to get tested to prove he was LE.

I think Nale wanted to be LE, but I highly, highly doubt that was his true alignment.

Yea, I think he said he was LE because
a)Tarquin tried to get him to be LE, and
b)It would make him more like Elan's evil opposite.
He was actually NE or CE.

[luc258]

I always thought Nale more neutral evil as well. But I guess it doesn't matter anymore.

[masamune1]

They can be pretty vague terms at times.

Maybe he was Lawful Evil because he planned on running a Lawful Evil Empire or something (if in a very different style from his dad). Or maybe its his devotion to villainous clichés.

[Vemynal]

I think Nale's alignment was either meant to be hard to pin down exactly, and the Giant will never reveal it, *or* Nale's alignment was something other than LE

Awhile back someone created a thread commenting on how Nale has always considered himself LE but rarely acted that way. The Giant responded in a manner that suggested this was intentional. It should be located in the Index of the Giant's comments thread

[SavageWombat]

As we saw when Roy entered the afterlife, just because you CLAIM to be an alignment doesn't mean you necessarily are that alignment. He still needed to get tested to prove he was LE.

Quoted, because more people need to remember this point.

[Infinite]

I've always thought of Nale as LE

EDIT: I meant NE

[masamune1]

What makes you think that?

[Dalek Kommander]

Nale was raised to be lawful evil, but he literally died of rejecting authority. It's actually hard to think of a purer expression of chaos than that.

[masamune1]

Lawful evil characters often reject authority. They reject it in favour of their own.

Pretty sure Tarquin was rejecting authority when he started overthrowing governments and waging wars.

[Gray Mage]

Lawful evil characters often reject authority. They reject it in favour of their own.

Pretty sure Tarquin was rejecting authority when he started overthrowing governments and waging wars.

I'm pretty sure what Kubota has done involved rejecting Hinjo's authority, and that guy is textbook LE.

[Tock Zipporah]

Nale was raised to be lawful evil, but he literally died of rejecting authority. It's actually hard to think of a purer expression of chaos than that.

Rejecting authority because you want your OWN authority to be the one that rules over everything in the world is pretty Lawful Evil.

[137beth]

I'm pretty sure what Kubota has done involved rejecting Hinjo's authority, and that guy is textbook LE.

Kubuto tried to manipulate the system. Nale ignored the system altogether. There's a difference.

[angry_bear]

Kubuto tried to manipulate the system. Nale ignored the system altogether. There's a difference.

He manipulated the system all the time. He agreed to kill the Order of the Stick for Xykon, and he attempted to do so... But first he had them create the circumstances needed for him to retrieve the talisman he was after. He intended to let Elan live if he joined him, but he remembered to ask him to quit the Order first; meaning that he'd still be able to kill every current member of the order of the stick without having to murder Elan as well. (Also, interesting parallel of Nale attempting to kill Elan after refusing to join him, and Tarquin killing Nale after he refused to join him) The next time they actually squared off, he chose a city that specifically avoided using magic to determine alignment and the identity of culprits so that he could frame Elan for the crimes he and the Linear Guild committed.

[Sniffnoy]

This (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12242039&postcount=45) would appear to be the relevant post by the Giant.

[Tock Zipporah]

This (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12242039&postcount=45) would appear to be the relevant post by the Giant.

I don't see anything in that quote that remotely indicates Nale isn't Lawful Evil?

[StreamOfTheSky]

Nale called himself LE so that he would fit better as Elan's evil opposite. I don't think he's ever taken an action that isn't better suited to NE or CE.

QFT.

Nale is basically the poster boy of NE. His over-arching (and arguably, only) character trait is sheer selfishness, self-centeredness, and ego. He had no actual ethical code or compunctions typical of a LE person. He was a tad too organized and methodical to be CE. He did evil solely for his own benefit (primarily, to stroke his ego) and for no other particular reasons. Other than possibly a sense of revenge -- which, considering how overblown his views of being "wronged" were, is just another example of ego.

EDIT: I also suspect that the giant probably originally intended him to *be* LE to be a complete alignment opposite of Elan, and over time just didn't end up portraying him that way and ceased to care about it. Or alternatively, he just lied to Elan.

[Sniffnoy]

I don't see anything in that quote that remotely indicates Nale isn't Lawful Evil?

Well, OK, it's prety indicrect. Note that the relevant bit is not the edit -- it's the "I can't answer that". The quote he's responding to talks about Elan and Nale each having picked up the alignment of their respective parents. If the Giant can't comment on that, then maybe it's not true. And if that's not true, then maybe Nale really isn't Lawful Evil, as he doesn't seem particularly Lawful.

It's a bit indirect, I know. Is there a better one? I can't find one in the Index.

[masamune1]

Lawful Evil can cover a number of bases. It can mean villains who have a methodical mindset, villains who want a more orderly world, villains who follow a certain code....And there are times these things can contradict.

Compare and contrast- one bad guy wants power at all costs and doesn't even pretend to give a damn about anybody but himself, nor does he think his rule is better for the world; however, he has a code of honour that he feels keeps him disciplined and thus more efficient, or which he is otherwise attached to.

Another wants a more orderly world, and is willing to go to any lengths to achieve it. They are totally without a code, seeing it as a hindrance; there are no levels they will not stoop to reach their objective. Yet said objective is to create and maintain a Lawful Evil society, for its own sake.

Both of these types are Lawful Evil, but they are very different kinds of it. Nale is basically the first type, his "code" being his determination to act like a stereotypical bad guy as well as the whole "evil opposites" theme. If Nale has become less Lawful Evil its because he's realised that this was only causing him problems.

Being selfish or sadistic or doing things solely for your own ego doesn't make one not LE. Its about style and other things.

[sr123]

Regarding a character's claims of their own alignment, just remember the extent to which their perception can be deluded.

Elan saw Nale as Lawful Neutral and Hayley as Good (instead of Good-ish), mostly just wanting it to be so. Nale perceived himself as Lawful Evil to fit the opposite twin motif. Redcloak claims the moral high ground over those who claim to be Good, yet he is clearly Neutral or Evil relative to his own moral standard.

The point is, apart from paladins and beings epitomized of their alignment, there are few characters (Hayley, V) who completely grasp where their own actions/beliefs put them relative to their target alignment.

[Tsumeken]

Nale seemed more Chaotic Evil or Neutral Evil toward the end for me. He began making rash decisions and never really seemed to have a plan, just in evil for evil's sake.

[HylianKnight]

No he was definitely LE, even in the end he made no change of character, the charade of their alliance of connivence had simply run its course, but it was a charade all along.

Keep in mind the central conflict between Nale and Tarquin. It wasn't that Tarquin has specific rules for doing things while Nale was a free spirit, it was that Nale's way of doing things was completely different from Tarquin's to the point that he thought Tarquin's rules were asinine.

Their villains. None of them follow higher laws set down by a religion or a government, they decide on their own. And in the case of Tarquin and Nale they led their lives by very different rules.

[masamune1]

No he was definitely LE, even in the end he made no change of character, the charade of their alliance of connivence had simply run its course, but it was a charade all along.

Keep in mind the central conflict between Nale and Tarquin. It wasn't that Tarquin has specific rules for doing things while Nale was a free spirit, it was that Nale's way of doing things was completely different from Tarquin's to the point that he thought Tarquin's rules were asinine.

Their villains. None of them follow higher laws set down by a religion or a government, they decide on their own. And in the case of Tarquin and Nale they led their lives by very different rules.

I imagine Malack did.

[DaveMcW]

It's a bit indirect, I know. Is there a better one? I can't find one in the Index.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15364378&postcount=36

[Morquard]

Lawful Evil can cover a number of bases. It can mean villains who have a methodical mindset, villains who want a more orderly world, villains who follow a certain code....And there are times these things can contradict.
Thank you, finally someone mentions that.

Not all LE characters are the same. So saying "Nale wasn't like Tarquin, so he can't be LE" or "Nale didn't do X when he was in Y, so he can't be LE" aren't necessarily valid.

The Giant made a large arc out of what different things LG can mean. We have Roy, we have Miko and we have Hinjo and O-Chul. They're all very different, and they're all very much LG. Well except Miko at the end, but that's a different story, she was LG at least till she fell (or she'd have fallen before)

In the same way LE can mean many different things.

[masamune1]

Also, some are more Evil than Lawful, some more Lawful than Evil.

Nale (if LE) is probably more the former, Malack more the latter, and Tarquin a fair balance (though maybe leaning towards Evil).

With Malack its also the case that he is devoted to a Lawful system that is (despite his protestations) apparently inherently Evil; he is devoted to an evil god, and he is / was more or less aware of that. But does that mean that everyone who follows it is LE?

[Sniffnoy]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15364378&postcount=36

Ah! That must have been what I was remembering! Thanks for digging that up!

[Scow2]

Compare and contrast- one bad guy wants power at all costs and doesn't even pretend to give a damn about anybody but himself, nor does he think his rule is better for the world; however, he has a code of honour that he feels keeps him disciplined and thus more efficient, or which he is otherwise attached to.

Another wants a more orderly world, and is willing to go to any lengths to achieve it. They are totally without a code, seeing it as a hindrance; there are no levels they will not stoop to reach their objective. Yet said objective is to create and maintain a Lawful Evil society, for its own sake.

Both of these types are Lawful Evil, but they are very different kinds of it. Nale is basically the first type, his "code" being his determination to act like a stereotypical bad guy as well as the whole "evil opposites" theme. If Nale has become less Lawful Evil its because he's realised that this was only causing him problems.

Being selfish or sadistic or doing things solely for your own ego doesn't make one not LE. Its about style and other things.However, Nale breaks his personal code (Read: Whenever it's inconvenient) far too often to truly be Lawful, and does nothing to reconcile himself with it. Relevant quotemine from the Giant:
A Lawful character who operates strictly by a personal code, on the other hand, is responsible for punishing herself in the event of a breach of that code. If she waves it off as doing what needed to be done, then she is not Lawful, she's Neutral at the least. If she does it enough, she may even become Chaotic. A truly Lawful character operating on a personal code will suffer through deeply unpleasant situations in order to uphold it, and will take steps to punish themselves if they don't (possibly going as far as to commit honorable suicide).

People think that using the "personal code" option makes life as a Lawful character easier. It shouldn't. It should be harder to maintain an entirely self-directed personal code than it is to subscribe to the code of an existing country or organization. This is one of the reasons that most Lawful characters follow an external code. It is not required, no, but it is much, much easier. Exceptions should be unusual and noteworthy. It should be an exceptional roleplaying challenge to take on the burden of holding yourself to a strict code even when there are no external penalties for failing.

Hmm... I got ninja'd

[masamune1]

I think that definition is too strict though. I mean, I agree that being Lawful shouldn't be easy, but he makes it sound like if you break that code and don't discipline yourself even once then you are not Lawful, rather than just slightly less Lawful than you were before. Especially if there are cases where breaking that code really was the only option (say, if they had a life or death situation with only two options, and both involve breaking their personal code).

Also, there are characters like Tarquin who don't seem to have any code- internal or external- but who are Lawful Evil because of their methodical nature and organizational skills and inclinations. You could argue that his code is pragmatism, but I think that is kind of stretching the definition a bit. Tarquin is only Lawful because it serves his evil plans to be- and even if he isn't, there are other characters (not in this story necessarily, but out there) who are. He is Lawful by nature- that's how his mind works. It might actually be harder for him to not act in a Lawful manner, because it goes against his nature and how he prefers doing things.

Then you have characters who value order at all costs or above all else, and will utilise any means to attain it. Darth Vader comes to mind- he wants to bring order to the galaxy. He may adhere to the Sith code but it doesn't sound like things like the Rule of Two or the selfish pursuit of power for its own sake are what he is about, so I don't think so. I think he has no code and no rule he will not break in pursuit of his goal- yet, said goal is the creation and enforcement of a Lawful Evil empire (including the overthrow of its Neutral Evil Emperor).

[Tsumeken]

Wait a moment.... *grabs PHB, reads, and laughs*

Uhhh... Nale was a bard and they can't be Lawful... <.<

:smallfrown:I feel bad I didn't think about that earlier.

[hamishspence]

Don't think Nale's ever been hinted as having any bard levels.

As he puts it: "I'm a multiclass fighter/rogue/sorcerer who specializes in enchantment spells"

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html

[Tsumeken]

Ah, well then that goes to that he is mostly likely Chaotic or Neutral since Sorcerer's and Law aren't usually bedfellows. Though he must be high lvl to be able to cast Dimension door. Twice I think since it fizzled the first time.

[Unisus]

Wait a moment.... *grabs PHB, reads, and laughs*

Uhhh... Nale was a bard and they can't be Lawful... <.<

:smallfrown:I feel bad I didn't think about that earlier.

Actually Nale explicitely is NOT a bard, as he learned from his father that bards are underpowered - what he did not know was, that his father didn't mean that bards are a weak class, but that they are so strong they should have more power in the world.

[sr123]

Nale was a bard and they can't be Lawful...

"I'm a multiclass fighter/rogue/sorcerer who specializes in enchantment spells" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html)

The joke is that Nale chose to multiclass such that his build is virtually identical to that of a single-class bard. On the other hand, Nale claiming to be LE was more about maintaining the "evil opposites" theme that was so important in assembling the original LG, hence my skepticism that he actually believes he's LE.

Also, isn't it odd that a bard cannot be lawful but a rogue can?

[Chantelune]

Nale went to great lenght to have a build strongly resembling a bard... without actually taking any bard level. If anything, that allowed him to be something else than chaotic.

[hamishspence]

Also, isn't it odd that a bard cannot be lawful but a rogue can?Rogue skillset can be used for a variety of professions.

Rogues used to be called Thieves (and weren't able to be LG, though they could be LN or LE) - but now, they're not intrinsically tied to lawbreaking.

[Calemyr]

The way I always read good and evil in a D&D sense was in regards to others vs self. The two are inverse.

Good: What must I sacrifice to help others?
Evil: What can others sacrifice to help me?
Neutral: What can I get for myself without hurting others?

Lawful Good: Laws are to the benefit of everyone. I will obey.
Lawful Evil: Laws can be made to benefit me. They will obey.

Chaotic Good: The laws are a shackle for everyone. I will not be bound.
Chaotic Evil: The laws are a shackle for me. I will not be bound.

In that sense, I would count Nale as Lawful Evil. He wants others to adhere to his rule, his orders, his law. If he just wanted or needed their help, if he didn't care what they did as long as he profited in the end, I could buy neutral, maybe even chaotic. But he wanted to be in control. He wanted the Guild to obey him, and he wanted to impose his sense of structure on others. That's lawful.

[Tragak]

On the "flip" side (though I feel I'm agreeing more than I'm disagreeing), Chaotics and Lawfuls disagree primarily on loyalty.

Chaotics are only loyal to people: Sabine follows Nale and Haley/Elan follow Roy specifically because they love (romantically in the first case, companionately in the second) and respect their leaders as capable individuals who have proven that they know what they're doing, rather than because Nale and Roy happen to be higher on some chain of command

Lawfuls are at least as loyal to positions as they are to people: the Sapphire Guard obeyed a leader they believed to be senile because the established hierarchy said to let him die before he could be replaced. They could've insisted that his nephew step up early so that a more capable person would fill the position, but they declined to do so

Chaotic Evils can still desire to be conquering overlords (just see Xykon and Ganonron), they would just want personal authority rather than formalized authority over their subjects; they would feel that their own power should be enough that they don't need to hide behind any semblance of legitimacy. "I'm the boss because you obey me," rather than Lawful Evil's "You obey me because I'm the boss."