What alignment is the character? (Character 4)

[Zhentarim]

These threads do pretty well when I make them and are a good sounding board for my ideas.

My character is an orc barbarian who loves a good fight with those who want a good contest of strength, but who usually reserves his rage for those who pick on the weak or who try to hurt people who can't defend themselves. He prefers to be alone, but will work with others. He also has ideals of freedom, but only fights against authority if he believes said authority is hurting people and if more peaceful options have been exhausted. He doesn't have the patience to sit around and actually run a permanent charity, but he performs random acts of kindness wherever he goes. He is a little slow witted, naive, and shy when he isn't raging. He enjoys a good drink and is usually live-and-let-live about most things. He worships Caden Cailean.

[Cranthis]

Sounds like a fantastic example of chaotic good.

[Sacrieur]

The first step when approaching alignment is separating law/chaos and good/evil. They are distinct and distinct in your character.



loves a good fight with those who want a good contest of strength

This is deceptive because it seems like it should affect alignment, but it doesn't. It's just an aspect of character.



but who usually reserves his rage for those who pick on the weak or who try to hurt people who can't defend themselves

"But" implies a contradiction, but there isn't one here, just to keep that in mind. While you may quickly jump to the conclusion that this is good, it may not be. To determine this more information is needed.

Scenario 1: A starving boy steals a loaf of bread, would your character defend him, knowing the crime?

Scenario 2: The king's nephew attempts to poison the prince and is caught; he is unarmed and completely defenseless. Would your character defend him?

Scenario 3: A slave revolts against his master and makes an attempt on his wealthy owner. The slave master has no way to defend himself; would your character defend him?



He prefers to be alone, but will work with others

Introversion is an aspect of personality rather than alignment.



He also has ideals of freedom, but only fights against authority if he believes said authority is hurting people and if more peaceful options have been exhausted.

He doesn't have an ideal of freedom (unless its personal freedom), if he doesn't wish to take action unless others are being harmed. The last clause is actually irrelevant to alignment. Whether or not you prefer a peaceful resolution is just that: preference. What is peaceful is not always good and in some cases, evil.



He doesn't have the patience to sit around and actually run a permanent charity, but he performs random acts of kindness wherever he goes.

This is the first definitive alignment affecting thing so far, and certainly good.



He is a little slow witted, naive, and shy when he isn't raging. He enjoys a good drink and is usually live-and-let-live about most things.

Irrelevant to alignment.


---

From your description, I can't make any judgment until the scenarios above have been answered.

[Lagren]

These threads do pretty well when I make them and are a good sounding board for my ideas.

My character is an orc barbarian who loves a good fight with those who want a good contest of strength, but who usually reserves his rage for those who pick on the weak or who try to hurt people who can't defend themselves. He prefers to be alone, but will work with others. He also has ideals of freedom, but only fights against authority if he believes said authority is hurting people and if more peaceful options have been exhausted. He doesn't have the patience to sit around and actually run a permanent charity, but he performs random acts of kindness wherever he goes. He is a little slow witted, naive, and shy when he isn't raging. He enjoys a good drink and is usually live-and-let-live about most things. He worships Caden Cailean.

Sounds fairly CG on a first impression to me. Depending on his exact conception of 'Freedom' he could shade towards NG.

Is the thread open for others to contribute characters for discussion as well?

[Zhentarim]

The first step when approaching alignment is separating law/chaos and good/evil. They are distinct and distinct in your character.




This is deceptive because it seems like it should affect alignment, but it doesn't. It's just an aspect of character.




"But" implies a contradiction, but there isn't one here, just to keep that in mind. While you may quickly jump to the conclusion that this is good, it may not be. To determine this more information is needed.

Scenario 1: A starving boy steals a loaf of bread, would your character defend him, knowing the crime?

Scenario 2: The king's nephew attempts to poison the prince and is caught; he is unarmed and completely defenseless. Would your character defend him?

Scenario 3: A slave revolts against his master and makes an attempt on his wealthy owner. The slave master has no way to defend himself; would your character defend him?




Introversion is an aspect of personality rather than alignment.




He doesn't have an ideal of freedom (unless its personal freedom), if he doesn't wish to take action unless others are being harmed. The last clause is actually irrelevant to alignment. Whether or not you prefer a peaceful resolution is just that: preference. What is peaceful is not always good and in some cases, evil.




This is the first definitive alignment affecting thing so far, and certainly good.




Irrelevant to alignment.


---

From your description, I can't make any judgment until the scenarios above have been answered.

1. "Get behind me, boy," Puncho barks at the young man as the guards approach who were chasing the child. "If you guys know what's good for you, you'll leave the boy alone."
[intimidate check to frighten guards away]
(If that fails, he picks the boy up and puts him in a safe place and attacks the guards as they approach, going into rage mode if the other gaurds persist after the first couple rounds)

2. "Well, Well! Did you seriously think you could just take the throne like that? I'm going to give you a chance to explain yourself, then I'm going to pound your face."
(Whether or not he actually attacks depends on his motive)

3. "Attack! I'll hold your so-called 'master' down and even let you get the first punch in? It doesn't feel good to be helpless, does it, 'master'?"

(His ideal of freedom is personal freedom)

[Zhentarim]

Sounds fairly CG on a first impression to me. Depending on his exact conception of 'Freedom' he could shade towards NG.

Is the thread open for others to contribute characters for discussion as well?

Yes, the more the merrier.

[Sacrieur]

1. "Get behind me, boy," Puncho barks at the young man as the guards approach who were chasing the child. "If you guys know what's good for you, you'll leave the boy alone."
[intimidate check to frighten guards away]
(If that fails, he picks the boy up and puts him in a safe place and attacks the guards as they approach, going into rage mode if the other gaurds persist after the first couple rounds)

This scenario may seem the most straightforward but is the most deceptive. Defending a thief and committing violence against people who haven't harmed anyone isn't a good act. Similarly, it's not evil either. It's a chaotic act because it opposes authority with violence and intimidation.



2. "Well, Well! Did you seriously think you could just take the throne like that? I'm going to give you a chance to explain yourself, then I'm going to pound your face."
(Whether or not he actually attacks depends on his motive)

These actions are neutral, but on the law/chaos axis. It's lawful to defend the crown against a traitor, but chaotic to take justice into your own hands.



3. "Attack! I'll hold your so-called 'master' down and even let you get the first punch in? It doesn't feel good to be helpless, does it, 'master'?"

Chaotic and evil. For opposing what is assumed to be the slaver's right over his property determined by the rulers of the land, it is chaotic. Aiding to knowingly help harm someone and even kill him is an evil act.


Based on these responses: chaotic neutral, with good inclinations. He does as he chooses with his own system of values which probably won't make sense to those around him due to a lack of external consistency. Further, he seems perfectly willing to commit evil acts out of a sense of vengeance or self-righteous judgment.

[Zhentarim]

All 4 characters I've made have been intended as different alignments, but they always are judged as a variation of either CN or CE. This one may be CG, but I was going for NG.

[Cranthis]

All 4 characters I've made have been intended as different alignments, but they always are judged as a variation of either CN or CE. This one may be CG, but I was going for NG.

Well the alignment system can be fairly loose on some things. I can see it as NG as well as CG, but it honestly feels like its leaning towards CG. You could still say NG, and I don't think a dm would disagree.

[Lagren]

This character is a vampire, who was turned against her will. She feeds entirely from volunteers, mostly members of her household staff, and is careful not to permanently injure anyone with too-heavy feeding. (Assume vampires aren't automatically evil by templating.)

She has a deep-seated need for control, and will absolutely refuse to be another's servant: no authority save her own is acceptable. Due to many decades of survival as a vampire, she is paranoid by most standards, though she is of the opinion that it's not paranoia if they're really out to get you. In order to protect herself from those who would harm or control her, she gathers whatever power she can.

While she does not brook any challenge to her authority, she is fiercely protective of anything she considers 'hers', which extends to all her servants and those few she trusts as allies.

This character believes in the existence of absolute evil and good in the world, and does not hesitate to act in order to destroy evil when she sees it. She has a particularly personal and violent hatred for all those who would dominate or enslave others, but is blind to her own controlling tendencies. She thinks of herself as a surgeon who cuts disease out of the world: however, a small part of her insists that she is the diseased one, as a vampire.

She is of the opinion that no tactic can be off the table in a real battle: she will not hesitate to resort to assassination, torture, etc, if she believes it is necessary. She fights with ruthless efficiency, intending to end any conflict in a swift and crushing victory for her and hers.

She might worship Ilmater, Shar, Talona, Azuth, Tymora, or Oghma.

What alignment is she?

[ManicOppressive]

*snip*

I think you're being a little bit too deliberately obtuse. I also think a willingness to resort to violence first is most definitely an evil inclination, and a willingness to find peaceful solutions is definitely a good inclination. That's not to say there are no peaceful evil beings and no violent good beings, but violence is definitely a factor in alignment.

--

I'd say you're on track for neutral good. I don't see a strong chaotic inclination, which would be more characterized by an active rebelling against authority. The way you describe him, he seems to only run into trouble with authority when the authority is evil in some way--that's an element of being good, not an element of being chaotic.

Defending the weak is definitely a good inclination as well. Obviously there can be quibbles over specific situations, but broadly speaking, it's a good inclination.

All in all, assuming he really keeps to what you say, I'd say Neutral Good. Definitely not Lawful, definitely not Evil. So yeah, Neutral Good leaning Chaotic, imo.

[Cranthis]

Lagren's Vampire is barely Lawful Neutral, and on the downward slide into Lawful Evil.

[Zhentarim]

This character is a vampire, who was turned against her will. She feeds entirely from volunteers, mostly members of her household staff, and is careful not to permanently injure anyone with too-heavy feeding. (Assume vampires aren't automatically evil by templating.)

She has a deep-seated need for control, and will absolutely refuse to be another's servant: no authority save her own is acceptable. Due to many decades of survival as a vampire, she is paranoid by most standards, though she is of the opinion that it's not paranoia if they're really out to get you. In order to protect herself from those who would harm or control her, she gathers whatever power she can.

While she does not brook any challenge to her authority, she is fiercely protective of anything she considers 'hers', which extends to all her servants and those few she trusts as allies.

This character believes in the existence of absolute evil and good in the world, and does not hesitate to act in order to destroy evil when she sees it. She has a particularly personal and violent hatred for all those who would dominate or enslave others, but is blind to her own controlling tendencies. She thinks of herself as a surgeon who cuts disease out of the world: however, a small part of her insists that she is the diseased one, as a vampire.

She is of the opinion that no tactic can be off the table in a real battle: she will not hesitate to resort to assassination, torture, etc, if she believes it is necessary. She fights with ruthless efficiency, intending to end any conflict in a swift and crushing victory for her and hers.

She might worship Ilmater, Shar, Talona, Azuth, Tymora, or Oghma.

What alignment is she?
Tough one...

My first instinct is true neutral, as I saw a little of everything. I really should be getting to bed, though.

[ManicOppressive]

This character is a vampire, who was turned against her will. She feeds entirely from volunteers, mostly members of her household staff, and is careful not to permanently injure anyone with too-heavy feeding. (Assume vampires aren't automatically evil by templating.)

She has a deep-seated need for control, and will absolutely refuse to be another's servant: no authority save her own is acceptable. Due to many decades of survival as a vampire, she is paranoid by most standards, though she is of the opinion that it's not paranoia if they're really out to get you. In order to protect herself from those who would harm or control her, she gathers whatever power she can.

While she does not brook any challenge to her authority, she is fiercely protective of anything she considers 'hers', which extends to all her servants and those few she trusts as allies.

This character believes in the existence of absolute evil and good in the world, and does not hesitate to act in order to destroy evil when she sees it. She has a particularly personal and violent hatred for all those who would dominate or enslave others, but is blind to her own controlling tendencies. She thinks of herself as a surgeon who cuts disease out of the world: however, a small part of her insists that she is the diseased one, as a vampire.

She is of the opinion that no tactic can be off the table in a real battle: she will not hesitate to resort to assassination, torture, etc, if she believes it is necessary. She fights with ruthless efficiency, intending to end any conflict in a swift and crushing victory for her and hers.

She might worship Ilmater, Shar, Talona, Azuth, Tymora, or Oghma.

What alignment is she?


My first inclination here is Lawful Neutral, though leaning toward True Neutral. The Lawful in my mind only comes from her demand of loyalty from others. A lack of willingness to serve others doesn't preclude her being lawful, since she's not apparently obligated to anyone.

Wanting to destroy evil is *not* enough to make a character good. Torture is shaky, and definitely pushes one toward evil, especially if it's frequent or used when not absolutely necessary. Though personally, to my mind, "evil acts in the service of good" where the evil act explicitly does not harm any non-evil directly is pretty neutral.

So yeah, my final thought would be Lawful/True Neutral.

[SirNMN]

you say she has servants is she of the nobility?

members of her household staff,

[Âmesang]

Have you taken a look at Wizards' online alignment test (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b)? It has 144 or so questions regarding a character's outlook on family, friends, community, king and country, crime and punishment, and business and the economy.

It's worked well enough for myself so far… or at least my answers matched up with the preconceived alignment I had in my head for a particular character (even when multiple attempts have produced different answers at times). I keep meaning to take it again and this time print out the results to save for roleplaying purposes (in case any of the above topics ever come up at the table).

[Mystral]

These threads do pretty well when I make them and are a good sounding board for my ideas.

My character is an orc barbarian who loves a good fight with those who want a good contest of strength, but who usually reserves his rage for those who pick on the weak or who try to hurt people who can't defend themselves. He prefers to be alone, but will work with others. He also has ideals of freedom, but only fights against authority if he believes said authority is hurting people and if more peaceful options have been exhausted. He doesn't have the patience to sit around and actually run a permanent charity, but he performs random acts of kindness wherever he goes. He is a little slow witted, naive, and shy when he isn't raging. He enjoys a good drink and is usually live-and-let-live about most things. He worships Caden Cailean.

That's easy, chaotic evil of course.

Okay, seriously now. He sounds like Neutral Good to me. The only other contender is Chaotic Good, but his general tolerance of authority and steadyness in kind acts speak a different language. Most parts aren't about alignment one way or the other, like that he is slow witted or enjoys a good drink.

[Sian]

that the orc is slowwitted does have an influence ... its a clear marker for being Paladinesque Stupid Good/Lawful Stupid

[Millennium]

My character is an orc barbarian...
I'd call this character CG. My instincts are to put him close to the line between Chaotic and Neutral: what tips him toward the Chaotic side is that I'm reading his views on freedom as a strong commitment, and his limited tolerance of authority as a bow to pragmatism.


This character is a vampire...
I'm going to say LE, albeit a very unorthodox sort (almost like the "Aberrant" alignment in the Palladium system). The Lawful part is easy: her care to feed only from volunteers and only nonlethally, in the face of a vampire's all-consuming need to feed, must take incredible levels of discipline and self-control. There's no way that wouldn't bleed over into the rest of the vampire's life and personality, and as we read in the description, it does. It's a very interesting take on Law, but there is no mistaking it for not being Law.

But the character's inclinations against Evil can only be called twisted. She hates domination of the sort she was subjected to, but she does feel a strong need to control, and she is utterly ruthless about it. The things she protects, she seems to define as possessions. She is willing to delve into things that Good and in some cases even Neutral characters would be extremely uncomfortable with, in order to get what she wants. In many ways, the Evil aspect of her personality reminds me of Belkar: a useful "enemy of my enemy" of Good, but not so much an ally of it. You need to make absolutely sure that you point her at the bad guys and keep her pointed that way, or you risk being bitten.

[Zanos]

This character is a vampire, who was turned against her will. She feeds entirely from volunteers, mostly members of her household staff, and is careful not to permanently injure anyone with too-heavy feeding. (Assume vampires aren't automatically evil by templating.)

She has a deep-seated need for control, and will absolutely refuse to be another's servant: no authority save her own is acceptable. Due to many decades of survival as a vampire, she is paranoid by most standards, though she is of the opinion that it's not paranoia if they're really out to get you. In order to protect herself from those who would harm or control her, she gathers whatever power she can.

While she does not brook any challenge to her authority, she is fiercely protective of anything she considers 'hers', which extends to all her servants and those few she trusts as allies.

This character believes in the existence of absolute evil and good in the world, and does not hesitate to act in order to destroy evil when she sees it. She has a particularly personal and violent hatred for all those who would dominate or enslave others, but is blind to her own controlling tendencies. She thinks of herself as a surgeon who cuts disease out of the world: however, a small part of her insists that she is the diseased one, as a vampire.

She is of the opinion that no tactic can be off the table in a real battle: she will not hesitate to resort to assassination, torture, etc, if she believes it is necessary. She fights with ruthless efficiency, intending to end any conflict in a swift and crushing victory for her and hers.

She might worship Ilmater, Shar, Talona, Azuth, Tymora, or Oghma.

What alignment is she?
The line pretty much ensures an Evil alignment. "Do what must be done" is pretty much restricted to people with the big E in their alignment. If you would torture someone in order to accomplish goal X, where goal X is anything, you're Evil. That's how D&D handles it, anyway.

Protective of whats 'hers' and a need for control seems to indicate Lawful. I'd say LE.

[Lagren]

you say she has servants is she of the nobility?

Yes, now. (Being a vampire for a few decades while actively seeking power will do that to you.)


So yeah, my final thought would be Lawful/True Neutral

I'm glad to see you struggling a bit over the alignment before settling on your decision. :smallbiggrin:


Have you taken a look at Wizards' online alignment test (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b)?

This gives me Neutral Good for my vampire. Interesting!



I'm going to say LE, albeit a very unorthodox sort (almost like the "Aberrant" alignment in the Palladium system).


Glancing at the Palladium system, "Aberrant" might fit - but I would definitely also consider the "Unprincipled" selfish alignment if I were playing her there.


"Do what must be done" is pretty much restricted to people with the big E in their alignment. If you would torture someone in order to accomplish goal X, where goal X is anything, you're Evil. That's how D&D handles it, anyway.

And yet the Grey Guard prestige class exists, allowing you to be a LG paladin who tortures people. Even D&D morality has some nuance to it.

[Zhentarim]

I get true neutral

[Zanos]

And yet the Grey Guard prestige class exists, allowing you to be a LG paladin who tortures people. Even D&D morality has some nuance to it.
Not really. The Gray Guard code of conduct still states that you must never willingly commit an evil act. Torture is always an evil act. Gray Guard just lets you revolving door your class features.

[Zhentarim]

What about a Necromancer (bones oracle) who lives on an island who is constantly creating undead and raising her own power and influence both through studying her mystery and by leading a cult of wannabe "immortals". Once she became powerful, she made a deal with the local government that she would respect their laws and aid them as necessary so long as they let her continue her research and let her add to her following.

[Zanos]

Not a lot of information to go on with that one. How true she is to the pact, and how she treats her cultists both definitely matter. Cult is such a dirty word.

Just on the information you gave? If creating undead creatures is an evil act in your world, NE. If it isn't, TN.

[Zhentarim]

Not a lot of information to go on with that one. How true she is to the pact, and how she treats her cultists both definitely matter. Cult is such a dirty word.

Just on the information you gave? If creating undead creatures is an evil act in your world, NE. If it isn't, TN.

She is as true to the pact as she has to be to appear fully committed. The members of her religious movement are treated well, but she makes it clear she is the leader and she would hypothetically slay a member who tried to overthrow her or wanted to leave the group. She treats those loyal to her like family, however. She looks after them, keeps them well, listens to their woes, and makes sure they all live decently. If she thinks she can get away with it and the reward is great enough, she will perform acts of terror, blame it on someone else, then collect a reward for capturing that person. She loosely venerates Asmodeus, finding wisdom in the infernal monograph. To answer the same questions from earlier:

1. "It appears we have an urchin."
(Casts hold person on the boy as he approches, and if that fails, attempts to catch the boy"
"Guards, I caught this theif stealing bread. I gladly turn him over to you. Do I get a reward for my efforts?"
(Diplomacy check to get reward)

2. "Well, well! It looks like I caught a rat!"
(Casts hold person on traitor, and calls guards)

3. "For a price, I can help you with your 'rebellion' issue."

[Cranthis]

Sounds Lawful evil to me. Turning these people over to the law, instead of doing whatever you feel like with them, shifts you just abit to the left of Neutral Evil.