Recent study shows a correlation between chaos and happiness

[Gift Jeraff]

LAWFUL:
:roy:
:durkon:
:redcloak:
:nale: (possibly not Lawful)
:miko:

CHAOTIC:
:elan:
:haley:
:belkar:
:xykon:
:roach: (not confirmed to be Chaotic, but still a being made of literal [Chaos])
:sabine: (not confirmed to be Chaotic, but still a being made of literal [Chaos])
:thog:


So only 1 Lawful test subject was shown to be smiling, and said subject is, at best, the least Lawful of the bunch.

2 Chaotic test subjects have limited expressions (:xykon::roach:), but still are characterized largely as fun-loving jokesters.

[Muenster Man]

If you would like for this study to be published, you should state any potential conflicts of interest so the scientific community will be more likely to accept your findings.

[Mike Havran]

A very similar correlation can be made between chaos and lack of Wisdom.

[AKA_Bait]

It's probably worth mentioning also that the only smiling and (arguably) lawful subject also happens to be dead.

[Klear]

Too small sample and no control group.

[Vinsfeld]

Therefore: Chaos = Fun

[King of Nowhere]

you piked all the happy chaotic characters and all the unhappy lawful ones. the data is not correctly gathered

[Snails]

V is probably the most unhappy main character, and is presumably Neutralish.

Sabine? Yes, her path happiness is going very well...

I think the sampling methods are pretty skewed.

[littlebum2002]

Lawful Good afterlife: Climbing a mountain
Chaotic Good afterlife: sipping single-malt scotch and smoking cigars rolled in poorly-written legal documents

[Mike Havran]

Lawful Good afterlife: Climbing a mountain
Chaotic Good afterlife: sipping single-malt scotch and smoking cigars rolled in poorly-written legal documents

I don't think Belkar is a good authority on Chaotic Good afterlife :smallwink:

[Domino Quartz]

I note that of the 7 characters listed as Chaotic, 5 are Evil. Therefore, Chaos = Evil. :smalltongue:

[Forikroder]

LAWFUL:
:roy:
:durkon:
:redcloak:
:nale: (possibly not Lawful)
:miko:

CHAOTIC:
:elan:
:haley:
:belkar:
:xykon:
:roach: (not confirmed to be Chaotic, but still a being made of literal [Chaos])
:sabine: (not confirmed to be Chaotic, but still a being made of literal [Chaos])
:thog:


So only 1 Lawful test subject was shown to be smiling, and said subject is, at best, the least Lawful of the bunch.

2 Chaotic test subjects have limited expressions (:xykon::roach:), but still are characterized largely as fun-loving jokesters.

what about Hinjo? hes shown as a pretty fun dude

[EnragedFilia]

Lawful Good afterlife: Climbing a mountain
Chaotic Good afterlife: sipping single-malt scotch and smoking cigars rolled in poorly-written legal documents

So I guess the tavern of infinite one-night stands and the debate hall where you're always right and the dungeon full of monsters that are just strong enough to really challenge you don't count?

[AKA_Bait]

3 of the 5 lawfuls are currently dead (2) or undead (1) and one other has been dead within the past calendar year (Roy). i.e. 80% recent or current death rate. Only 1 of the 7 of the Chaotics is undead and another is arguably dead (Thog). i.e. 28.5% recent or current death rate, if Thog is dead, 14% otherwise. The rate still only goes up to 42% if you include the soon to be dead Belkar.

Conclusion: Being lawful increases the odds of death.

[dps]

I'm not sure either Belkar or Haley are really all that happy, anyway.

[Reddish Mage]

LAWFUL:
:roy:
:durkon:
:redcloak:
:nale: (possibly not Lawful)
:miko:

CHAOTIC:
:elan:
:haley:
:belkar:
:xykon:
:roach: (not confirmed to be Chaotic, but still a being made of literal [Chaos])
:sabine: (not confirmed to be Chaotic, but still a being made of literal [Chaos])
:thog:


So only 1 Lawful test subject was shown to be smiling, and said subject is, at best, the least Lawful of the bunch.

2 Chaotic test subjects have limited expressions (:xykon::roach:), but still are characterized largely as fun-loving jokesters.

This study has a strong sampling bias, which limits its scientific application to proving arguments on the forums. :smalltongue:

[snikrept]

New data draws a recent study into question
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Tarquin.png
http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/celiasmiley.png
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/lien.png

[Shred-Bot]

New data draws a recent study into question
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Tarquin.png
http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/celiasmiley.png
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/lien.png

BREAKING NEWS: Celia, Tarquin, and the entire Sapphire Guard are all secretly agents of Chaos! Dun dun DUN!

[martianmister]

Wait, Celia is Lawful? I always see her as NG.

[genderlich]

Wait, Celia is Lawful? I always see her as NG.

She's a lawyer... I'm pretty sure her alignment has been clearly stated in some way, but I'm too lazy to go look.

[martianmister]

She's a lawyer...

A lawyer doesn't have to be Lawful (like a ruler).

[Porthos]

Wait, Celia is Lawful? I always see her as NG.

According to the CL&G thread, it's mentioned in Don't Split the Party (ETA: After checking my copy it is in fact mentioned in commentary that she is Lawful Good).

And "I don't make the crazy rules, I just twist them to my purpose" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0278.html) is a hallmark of at least some Lawful characters. :smalltongue:

[Bulldog Psion]

An intriguing study. Do you mind if I quote it, with proper citations, of course? :smallbiggrin:

[Amphiox]

To pass peer review, studies must have proper statistical analysis.

A Fisher Exact Test on your data set gives p = 0.24. p < 0.04 is the threshold for significance.

We need a larger sample!

[EnragedFilia]

To pass peer review, studies must have proper statistical analysis.

A Fisher Exact Test on your data set gives p = 0.24. p < 0.04 is the threshold for significance.

We need a larger sample!

Well at least the damn lies were funny!

[Amphiox]

However, if we add in the 4 new data points, and increase the stringency to "ecstatic teeth-baring grinning", we get 0/9 vs 3/7, and that gives us p = 0.06. A strong trend!

Furthermore, if we posit that there exists an absolute maximum level of happiness above which it is impossible to exceed (or a maximum level of unhappiness below which it is impossible to sink), we can pretend that we have justification for using a one-tailed Fisher test instead of a two-tailed Fisher test, and that gives us p = 0.03.

Significance! Time to submit for publication! Yeehaw!

(Note: Xykon and the roach were counted as negative data points due to the ambiguity resulting from their lack of muscles of facial expression. If we allow them to be positive the significance gets even better!)

[Ramien]

Are you sure the correlation isn't between chaos and pretending to be happy? Thog has obvious anger management issues, Sabine is obviously just trying to seduce someone, Belkar does not know true happiness due to the simplicity of his protobrain (see the research of Vaarsuvius), and Xykon really doesn't have emotions, since emotions require glands and hormones and such. More importantly, he hasn't had a really bad cup of coffee in how long?

[Amphiox]

Well at least the damn lies were funny!

Oh no! Hilarity can producing smiling and grinning faces independent of level of happinness. A confounding variable!

Now we need another control group....

[Amphiox]

Are you sure the correlation isn't between chaos and pretending to be happy? Thog has obvious anger management issues, Sabine is obviously just trying to seduce someone, Belkar does not know true happiness due to the simplicity of his protobrain (see the research of Vaarsuvius), and Xykon really doesn't have emotions, since emotions require glands and hormones and such. More importantly, he hasn't had a really bad cup of coffee in how long?

The proper citation is (Vaarsuvius et al)....

[Gift Jeraff]

Are you sure the correlation isn't between chaos and pretending to be happy? Thog has obvious anger management issues, Sabine is obviously just trying to seduce someone, Belkar does not know true happiness due to the simplicity of his protobrain (see the research of Vaarsuvius), and Xykon really doesn't have emotions, since emotions require glands and hormones and such. More importantly, he hasn't had a really bad cup of coffee in how long?

Well, lying is chaotic so you're right!

[Koo Rehtorb]

I question your methodology, sir.

[Ramien]

The proper citation is (Vaarsuvius et al)....

Are you sure? I don't recall Vaarsuvius having any other co-authors of the study, which would rule out the 'et al' part.

Then again, I also didn't properly prepare a works cited page, so it should have read more like (Vaarsuvis, "Binary states in a halfling proto-brain," OotS #335 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html))

But my last paper was written a couple years ago, so I'm sure my formatting is a little off, and darn you to heck for even making me look for my Little, Brown Handbook.

[Bogardan_Mage]

New data draws a recent study into question
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Tarquin.png
http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/celiasmiley.png
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/lien.png
Don't forget an extra Chaotic counterexample:
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png

[JSSheridan]

Maybe the Lawful subjects are more concerned about building a legacy they can take pride in rather than trying to be happy. :smallwink:

[Amphiox]

Are you sure? I don't recall Vaarsuvius having any other co-authors of the study, which would rule out the 'et al' part.

Then again, I also didn't properly prepare a works cited page, so it should have read more like (Vaarsuvis, "Binary states in a halfling proto-brain," OotS #335 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html))

But my last paper was written a couple years ago, so I'm sure my formatting is a little off, and darn you to heck for even making me look for my Little, Brown Handbook.

The co-author's Blackwing, of course! That soul-link deal means he has to be co-author of everything Vaarsuvius does....

[F.Harr]

Well at least the damn lies were funny!

Hell-yeah!

[Chessgeek]

I'm not sure what I'm more frightened by: the people who took this seriously and questioned it or the people who took this seriously and supported it.

[Gift Jeraff]

Don't forget an extra Chaotic counterexample:
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png

OBJECTION: These were all made by a third party, not Rich himself! They are propaganda made by the Lawful to trick you into thinking you are better off with them.

#TeamNeutral

[Mikhailangelo]

A very similar correlation can be made between chaos and lack of Wisdom.

As wisdom increaseth so too increaseth sorrow

[Amphiox]

I'm not sure what I'm more frightened by: the people who took this seriously and questioned it or the people who took this seriously and supported it.

Who took this seriously?

[F.Harr]

Who took this seriously?

Not me, but I'm about to.

I wish I were chaotic.

There, now I'm done. :D

[Gift Jeraff]

Using this data, what are the alignments of the other smilies?

[martianmister]

Using this data, what are the alignments of the other smilies?

TRUE NEUTRAL:
:vaarsuvius:
:mitd:

[Gift Jeraff]

TRUE NEUTRAL:
:vaarsuvius:
:mitd:

But what about
:smallredface:
:smallmad:
:smallfurious:
:smallfrown:
:smalleek:
:smallcool:
:smallyuk:
:smallconfused:
:smallwink:
:smallbiggrin:
:smalltongue:
:smallannoyed:
:smallsmile:
:smallamused:
:smallsigh:

[Geordnet]

Furthermore, if we posit that there exists an absolute maximum level of happiness above which it is impossible to exceed (or a maximum level of unhappiness below which it is impossible to sink), we can pretend that we have justification for using a one-tailed Fisher test instead of a two-tailed Fisher test, and that gives us p = 0.03.
Wouldn't it be a one-tailed test anyways, since you're looking for a certain level "or happier"?

Besides, wouldn't a linear regression model be more appropriate?

[martianmister]

{table]|LAWFUL| NEUTRAL |CHAOTIC
GOOD|:smallfrown: :smalleek:|
:smallredface: |
:smallsmile: :smallwink: |
NEUTRAL|:smallannoyed: :smallsigh:|
:smallconfused: |
:smalltongue: :smallbiggrin: |
EVIL|:smallfurious: :smallmad:|
:smallyuk: |
:smallamused: :smallcool: |[/table]

[Liliet]

I think the proper name would be not "correlation between chaos and happiness", but "correlation between chaos and smiling". That's quite different, smiling isn't equal to happiness. Also, you need more test subjects for better vailidity.