Flexibility in Alignment.

[EBass]

I doubt many would argue that Miko stays truer to the letter of the "Lawful Good" alignment than Roy. While Roy is willing to overlook some "moral flexibility" on the part of say Elan or Haley if they perform slightly moraly dubious actions if it for the greater good. He's even willing to overlook Belkar's psychotic madness as long as he retains a measure of control over his actions. Such things would never be allowed if Miko was the PC leading the party.

However I would say such inflexibility of Alignment actually makes Miko MORE vulnerable to a polarity switch in alignment on the "good/evil" scale rather than the "Lawful/Chaotic" scale.

In a situation like which we have just witnesses Miko will follow what she believes in without thought for the possible consequences if she is wrong. It would be very easy to go down a path of evil believing it to be the path of rightousness, by the time she realises her fault its far too late for her. We've seen similar things in media in the past (think Anakin/Darth Vader)

I would say despite Mikos overbeating self rightousness she is incredibly vulnerable to a polarity shift in alignment as if she is tricked or mistaken into believing the evil path to be the rightous one she will still follow it without restrictions giving no quarter to her enemies down her path, which on this path will be the "good guys".

Thoughts?

[Iranon]

I agree with your conclusion; often a an alignment conflict can reach a 'bend or break' threshold.

Roy's lawful good alignment frequently hides in a corner, not just in his behavious towards his teammates but in his own actions (King of Nowhere, Elan's abduction, negotiation with Shojo...).
While that in a way makes him 'less lawful good', it also means he's used to not living up to his standards and will recover from severe tests of his alignment more easily. I can't see him going 'Farewell, remorse; all good to me is lost. Evil, be thou my good' under any circumstances.

Someone like Miko is much more likely to break, and we might be right in the middle of that. Although I think a straight plunge into Evil would cheapen a perfectly interesting character, it would not be entirely unrealistic.

[Steward]

Someone like Miko is much more likely to break, and we might be right in the middle of that. Although I think a straight plunge into Evil would cheapen a perfectly interesting character, it would not be entirely unrealistic.

It's like that Aesop's fable about one tree that was really rigid and one tree that swayed and bent in the wind. When a storm came, the rigid tree broke and flexible tree swayed with the wind until the storm was over and it was able to stand up straight again.

[EBass]

But was the flexible tree ever the same again?

[Erk]

Roy isn't held by the constraints Miko is. If he does a chaotic neutral action, he is not going to lose his fighter bonus feats... the worst that could conceivably happen to him is alignment change, and I think his general trend and playstyle are still LG. Alignments are a guide, not a tether, for everyone but Paladins.

Plus, of course, Miko is crazy. But her actions are clearly more Lawful than Good. It makes sense since she started as a Monk with just the lawful restriction and therefore presumably comes from a background that emphasised Law over Good. I would say Roy is more consistently Good than Lawful, and not as close to either "edge" of the alignment grid.

[Demented]

But was the flexible tree ever the same again?

I'm doubtful Aesop had ever seen a palm tree. And even if he had, it's hard to find a palm tree in firm ground that hasn't been planted by man. (Their roots are impossibly shallow). But if he had, he'd be able to answer quite firmly: Yes.