I'm thinking Neutral Evil for this one, how about you?

[atemu1234]

An enemy I designed a while back is, as we would say, "a bad guy".

He was a simple diviner who stumbled across the existence of an eldritch entity who consumes planets (think elder evils + galactus, with lots and lots of undead). In order to make something that can fight it, he gathered together armies, forced them to war with one another, in the hopes that it would create proper heroes whok can face it.

His frame of mind is that whoever he kills is an inevitable cost that must be paid, in order to create someone who can save them all. He fully recognizes what he has done, and that he may well be put to death for it, but still does it to save everyone else.

He's a quintessential villain with good intentions, so I'm thinking Neutral Evil. Anyone else?

[ZamielVanWeber]

He is taking the simplest way to a solution, which is extreme violence in this case. Even if his intentions are pure his actions are not, so I would vote him NE.

[Red Fel]

I'm definitely in agreement on the E component. My question is on the N component.

Here's why: He sounds principled. Not just planned or dedicated, but seriously principled. He wants to do whatever it takes to locate and produce the ultimate heroes to stop the ultimate Evil.

When an enemy starts showing strong, unwavering principles, in my mind he starts to move towards L. I'm not saying he must be LE, but it raises the question in my mind. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the character to determine whether this is the case.

I agree on the E, absolutely; I question the N, but I think it's certainly a possibility. C is obviously right out.

[SangoProduction]

I'd go for chaotic evil. It's not a desire to rule - Lawful evil. It's not a selfish desire - neutral evil. It does involve violence without mercy - chaotic evil. It wouldn't be the most "chaotic" of the chaotic evils, but basically from your description, he's killing people en mass, regardless of his intent.

[Riculf]

He reminds me of the Operator in the film Serenity. He was building a better world, but not for him. Even in his own eyes he was a necessary "monster". A character like that is driven by rules and would be Lawful Evil.

[Shining Wrath]

I think his organized approach sounds Lawful, but the random measures by which he hopes to produce a champion or champions - a survival of the fittest method - sounds chaotic.

So I'm comfortable with NE. And while he's a total bastard, I hope he does succeed in stopping the planet eater.

[Psyren]

Neutral = "generally, the ends justify the means - so long as they don't get underfoot."
Lawful = "the means always matter too." (i.e. how you do something is just as important as doing it - Tarquin/RC.)
Chaotic = "the means don't matter at all." (i.e. how you do something is irrelevant as long as you do it - Xykon.)

I'd peg this guy at Neutral Evil, because his personality seems like "win at all costs." He would sacrifice anything, even his personal principles, in order to ultimately win - but only if he absolutely needed to. He would have no problem clinging to his framework until then.

[Segev]

My instinct, and therefore first reaction, would be to say he sounds more Lawful Evil, to me. However, Psyren's analysis seems the best (and better than what I could come up with to justify LE).

That said, I will still try to analyze why my gut still says "LE."

I think it stems from how he has a master plan, and he actually seems to have a "for the greater good" mindset. While Neutral [blank] can have that kind of mindset, it is absolutely NOT a Chaotic one, and thus inherently leans towards Law to some degree.

His means are not particularly Chaotic; sure, he's using Survival of the Fittest, but that isn't really random so much as it is exploiting randomness to produce order.

I am, perhaps more than I would like, a rather Lawful person. I like things planned out, and I tend to stick to a plan even if it is starting to look like a less-good option than alternatives just because it's what I had planned, unless I stop and force myself to re-examine. I am always uncomfortable being spontaneous, and equally uncomfortable abandoning a planned course of action (even for good reasons).

I also am a Computational Intelligence expert. Swarm Intelligence and Genetic Algorithms - both of which operate on a "survival of the fittest" paradigm - are two of my favorite problem-solving techniques. What he's doing here is an amoral Swarm Intelligence algorithm. He's using competition to sort for the optimal combatants. Despite the artificial GA and SI algorithms relying on random number generators (or at least approximations thereof), they are not chaotic in their overarching design nor final results. A little unpredictable, but even heuristic algorithms can be, especially in hard problems where you cannot analytically know the optimum.

I think the question to ask is: would he abandon this plan for something else as soon as he saw some way which would possibly achieve his goals better, or would he play it safe and stick with what he's invested in unless and until he knew it was unquestionably less effective by a marked amount? How wedded to his ways is he? How cautious in changing plans once set?

If he's willing to change based on a rapid, ruthless cost/benefit analysis, he's probably closer to NE than LE. If he's more likely to, once set upon a plan, stick with it barring very strong reasons to change, he's probably closer to LE.

[Geddy2112]

An enemy I designed a while back is, as we would say, "a bad guy".

He was a simple diviner who stumbled across the existence of an eldritch entity who consumes planets (think elder evils + galactus, with lots and lots of undead). In order to make something that can fight it, he gathered together armies, forced them to war with one another, in the hopes that it would create proper heroes who can face it.

His frame of mind is that whoever he kills is an inevitable cost that must be paid, in order to create someone who can save them all. He fully recognizes what he has done, and that he may well be put to death for it, but still does it to save everyone else.

He's a quintessential villain with good intentions, so I'm thinking Neutral Evil. Anyone else?
Using force, starting wars, violence and might making right? Totally evil, no questions there. I do vote for lawful, or at least lawful leaning. Chaotic evil is not about paying costs, or sticking their own neck out for anything. Risking your life for a principle-textbook lawful. Lawful evil is also far more likely to recognize their actions are "wrong", at least in the context of society, and most in the context of good vs evil. If your villain is caught, tried and killed I am fairly certain they would stand by their actions, and if death is the price for saving the world, your villain should wear that badge with honor. Lawful evil all the way.


I think his organized approach sounds Lawful, but the random measures by which he hopes to produce a champion or champions - a survival of the fittest method - sounds chaotic.

Enter the LN and CN druid debating about nature-is it chaotic order or ordered chaos?

[Lorddenorstrus]

He reminds me of the Operator in the film Serenity. He was building a better world, but not for him. Even in his own eyes he was a necessary "monster". A character like that is driven by rules and would be Lawful Evil.

I have to agree, this was my first thought as well. I feel a need for a little more information to be completely accurate on his alignment.. as he also does kinda fit NE. But the recognition of possibly being put to death for his own actions is what makes me think he's LE.

[Baroknik]

While I don't have a problem with the NE/LE calls, I do think that another option could be addressed: LN

I say that mostly because I could see an inevitable using this plan as the "most efficient" means of producing a solution. If sentient life on the plane cannot compare to the value of the plane itself, then no sacrifice of life is unworthy of saving the plane.

It may not be nice, but if the good of the plane is what's intended and the mortal deaths are attempted to be minimized, I don't see it as necessarily evil -- just really, really cold.

[goto124]

Hard to peg this murderhobo as non-Evil though...

May I ask, why is it important to nail down a character's alignment? Alignment-based spells and requirements?

Also, this is an NPC, and OP is the DM right?

[atemu1234]

Hard to peg this murderhobo as non-Evil though...

May I ask, why is it important to nail down a character's alignment? Alignment-based spells and requirements?

Also, this is an NPC, and OP is the DM right?

I like to have a decent idea of alignment for characters I make (yes, I am both the OP and the DM).

To answer some other things, for more information:

-He was (read:was) a high-level StP Erudite specializing in Divination. While divining, he came across this creature floating through the 'verse (he also made telepathic connection with it, which almost killed him). He grasped its intention; to come to the prime material, scourge all traces of life from it and create legions of undead.
-He knew there were no heroes on the plane capable of taking down this monstrosity; he knew that to be ready, they would have to be created.
-He used his immense power to slightly alter events; create war, famine, and disease to cause the deaths of millions, but prepare a few for what was to come.
-He himself has spent millenia alive, by using Quintessence to preserve his body while he Astral Projects.
-He has caused many changes to the multiverse, among the chiefest was making it so both the Githyanki and the Githzerai live in the Underdark instead of on foreign planes, to preserve himself (he knows that Sword + Astral Traveler's Umbilical = Bad news), while he continues to cause war and chaos.
-He wants a set of heroes (the PCs) to be able to challenge the creature he saw coming.
-He was formerly a good person (wife, kids), but knew that to save the world itself, he had to be the worst being imaginable.
-He is responsible for the return of several "major players"- Liches dead for centuries, Warlords rising, and almost all of the nations in this (homebrewed campaign setting) owe their existence to him.
-He would like nothing better than to not have to do this, but he knows that if he doesn't, the plane is doomed.