Elan is Chaotic Good? Why?

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Ok, today's comic has reaffirmed something I've been thinking for some time now and been wanting to post. Why is he chaotic good? I've thought from the beginning he was neutral good.

He may do whacky stuff, but that doesn't require a chaotic temperament. That just means he's a goofball.

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.

#2. He appears to have an appreciation of the law in several strips, though none so strongly as today's. He doesn't mind bending it, and sometimes he doesn't recognize what he's doing as being unlawful, but that just more strongly hints at a neutral alignment. He does what he thinks is the right thing.


So is he really chaotic good, or does he just think that as he's not the brightest wand in the hand?

[Morty]

Well, aside from adherence to law, he does act in very chaotic way- he never plans in advance, and always does what seems the best at the right moment, which is chaotic- and opposite to Nale, who tends to create unnecesarily complicated plans.
Besides, I highly doubt someone can be mistaken about own alignment.

[SPoD]

I don't think Elan respects the law at all, I think he respects the people that the law protects.

It takes only the slightest provocation to get him to break the glass; he doesn't care about the law, he cares that stealing someone's merchandise will cause them harm. Once he's told that he can leave the money for the lute, he immediately breaks the law.

Compare it to the Cliffport stealing scene, where he knows that failing to steal stuff will result in someone getting hurt. He doesn't hesitate, because he knows that the damage to the shopkeeper is less than the potential damage to Haley.

At any rate, his behavior is always one of individuality, doing what he thinks is right regardless of what Roy tells him (and remember, Roy is his lawful leader). He breaks rules more often than he follows them, thus, he's Chaotic.

[Sylian]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0206.html

He's Chaotic, because he doesn't care about order much. He is very unpredictable.

[Wojiz]

Chaotic isn't just resisting the law, though Elan has done that, considering the fact that he broke out of prison. Really, though, which devil's advocate is Elan more likely to follow, the one spouting random gibberish or the Lawful one?

[Sylian]

Elan also has a lack of disipline, duty and concentration. If he's standing guard, he's likely to abandon his post if he sees a butterfly.

[SPoD]

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.

This is flat-out false, because he also has an evil guy show up. By your logic, Elan can only be True Neutral, which I don't think anyone would agree with.

[Thanatos 51-50]

I'm tempted to call Elan NG in the way only the naive can be.

Funny, I brought this subject up in the discussion thread before I even saw this one.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Well, aside from adherence to law, he does act in very chaotic way- he never plans in advance, and always does what seems the best at the right moment, which is chaotic- and opposite to Nale, who tends to create unnecesarily complicated plans.
Besides, I highly doubt someone can be mistaken about own alignment.
All of the above can just as easily be explained by stupidity.



It takes only the slightest provocation to get him to break the glass; he doesn't care about the law, he cares that stealing someone's merchandise will cause them harm. Once he's told that he can leave the money for the lute, he immediately breaks the law.
#1. He was willing to wait 15 minutes for the guy to show up before even trying out the door. Lawful or Stupid.

#2. Despite the fact that the city is already destroyed and the owner gone and likely never to see his merchandise again, Elan wasn't about to steal it. Lawful.

#3. Even WHEN they, the lawful guards of the city, tell him he can, he only does it once he leaves some gold. Neutral.


http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0206.html

He's Chaotic, because he doesn't care about order much. He is very unpredictable.
So you're saying Neutral people can't act unpredictably or act goofy?

[Morty]

All of the above can just as easily be explained by stupidity.

By stupidity and being chaotic. Many intelligent -or at least not stupid- people act that way, it's just that in Elan's case it usually ends up in disaster.


#1. He was willing to wait 15 minutes for the guy to show up before even trying out the door. Lawful.

#2. Despite the fact that the city is already destroyed and the owner gone and likely never to see his merchandise again, Elan wasn't about to steal it. Lawful.

#3. Even WHEN they, the lawful guards of the city, tell him he can, he only does it once he leaves some gold. Lawful.

Good, not lawful. He wasn't worried about breaking law, but about denying merchant money for his work.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Good, not lawful. He wasn't worried about breaking law, but about denying merchant money for his work.
I sure didn't read anything like that.

[Morty]

I sure didn't read anything like that.

:elan: "That would be stealing, like in a BAD way!"

I think that kind of implies that Elan doesn't have anything against stealing, but worried about victims. And even then, he doesn't mind stealing "for good cause", like when he and Thog stole clothes in Cliffport.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

:elan: "That would be stealing, like in a BAD way!"

I think that kind of implies that Elan doesn't have anything against stealing, but worried about victims. And even then, he doesn't mind stealing "for good cause", like when he and Thog stole clothes in Cliffport.
Roy, who is lawful good, would steal clothes as a disguise. I mean, he was perfectly willing to escape from jail as well. Roy in fact has shown quite often that he's willing to do things of like nature when necessary.

[SPoD]

All of the above can just as easily be explained by stupidity.

Alignment isn't graded on a curve for your Intelligence score. A stupid person who acts Chaotically is Chaotic; a stupic person who acts Lawfully is Lawful. Why they act that way is irrelevent.


Roy, who is lawful good, would steal clothes as a disguise. I mean, he was perfectly willing to escape from jail as well. Roy in fact has shown quite often that he's willing to do things of like nature when necessary.

So, you're saying that Roy committing Chaotic acts doesn't make him non-Lawful, but somehow Elan committing a single Lawful act DOES make him non-Chaotic???

Sorry, it doesn't track. One Lawful act in a lifetime of Chaos does not make you Neutral Good.

[Tengu]

Woo, alignment thread!

Chaotic characters act spontaneously. Lawful characters act in an orderly manner. None of those have anything to do with following laws.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Alignment isn't graded on a curve for your Intelligence score. A stupid person who acts Chaotically is Chaotic; a stupic person who acts Lawfully is Lawful. Why they act that way is irrelevent.
Intelligence can dictate alot. He doesn't plan ahead? Thats because he doesn't think to. However, if you recall, when he was with Thog he built up a quite an elaborate plan.



So, you're saying that Roy committing Chaotic acts doesn't make him non-Lawful, but somehow Elan committing a single Lawful act DOES make him non-Chaotic???

Sorry, it doesn't track. One Lawful act in a lifetime of Chaos does not make you Neutral Good.
This is not just one lawful act. Its seemed to me he's done a number of lawful things along with chaotic, which seems plenty neutral.

[Squark]

True.

The 15-minute wait sort of thing was, IMHO, due to naivety, not lawfulness.

[EntilZha]

His mommy was Chaotic Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html)

[Guts]

but his dad was lawful evil. i dont think that alignment is inherited (or at least cant be given the probability of which child gets which on a pundell(sp?) square). so i say he is chaotic good by choice and you dont have to have a a lack of foresight or planning to be chaotic per say.

[SPoD]

Intelligence can dictate alot. He doesn't plan ahead? Thats because he doesn't think to. However, if you recall, when he was with Thog he built up a quite an elaborate plan.

It doesn't matter. Intelligence does not dictate alignment, period. (Unless your Intelligence is under 3, which automatically makes you Neutral.) Elan has free will, even if he's not smart enough to appreciate the consequences of his actions. But it is those actions that determine his alignment, not how smart he is. He could just as easily be equally stupid and choose NOT to do anything that could be dangerous, because he can't figure out the consequences; that would be Lawful. But Elan doesn't do that, he throws himself into the situation first, and asks questions later (if at all). That's Chaotic behavior.

A paladin with an Intelligence of 4 could run around committing Chaotic or Evil acts, and claim that it was only because he was too stupid to know better. By your flawed logic, that paladin wouldn't ever Fall. Luckily, the game doesn't work that way. It is actions—not one's ability to rationally predict likely outcomes of those actions—that determine alignment.


This is not just one lawful act. Its seemed to me he's done a number of lawful things along with chaotic, which seems plenty neutral.

Name 50. Because I bet we can name 100 Chaotic acts.

[BlackMageJ]

but his dad was lawful evil. i dont think that alignment is inherited (or at least cant be given the probability of which child gets which on a pundell(sp?) square). so i say he is chaotic good by choice and you dont have to have a a lack of foresight or planning to be chaotic per say.

But Elan was mostly raised by his CG mother. While you can't inherit an alignment genetically, your upbringing is likely to have a huge impact on your behaviour and outlook, and thus alignment. If he grew up watching his mother act in a CG way and learning that that was how to behave, he would likely follow her example and become CG himself.

Conversely, Nale was raised by their LE father, and thus grew up seeing that alignment as 'the best way to act', so he also became LE.

[EntilZha]

But Elan was mostly raised by his CG mother. While you can't inherit an alignment genetically, your upbringing is likely to have a huge impact on your behaviour and outlook, and thus alignment. If he grew up watching his mother act in a CG way and learning that that was how to behave, he would likely follow her example and become CG himself.

Conversely, Nale was raised by their LE father, and thus grew up seeing that alignment as 'the best way to act', so he also became LE.

And that fits in with the whole "Evil Opposite" thing.

[Porthos]

Sigh.

Alignments are Guidelines Not Straight-jackets.

That line gets trotted out a lot, but it doesn't make it any less true. Also, Being Lawful/Chaotic isn't so much about following the laws of the land as it is a viewpoint about the purpose of those laws (otherwise you couldn't have CG Leaders). [NOTE::: I don't care what line taken out of context you want to show me from a rulebook that says otherwise. If the Law/Chaos dichotomy was all about following/not following the Laws of the Land then you could not have a functioning society. Or Alignment system for that matter. :smalltongue: ]

Elan wanted to wait around because the shop keeper (allegedly) promised that he would be back in 15 minutes. Now of course, anyone with a half-way decent WIS score would probably guess that the 15 minutes have long passed. But that's irrelevant to Elan. He truly believed that the shopkeeper would be back in 15 minutes (thus he hadn't abandoned the store) and therefore he shouldn't rob someone of something he didn't need desperately.

After all, he needed the clothes to make his escape from Cliffport (or so he thought at the time). Mr. Lute? Well, that's just a nice little extra. The lute wasn't required to make his escape, and Elan only wanted it to make himself feel better. Hence "stealing in a bad way".

So this isn't a Law/Chaos thing, but a Right/Wrong thing. Once Elan had been reminded that he could just place a bag of money there (which is probably just going to be stolen anyway), he grabbed at it like a shot. Why? Because it solved the Good/Evil dilemma that was raging in Elan's heart. Heck a Lawful Person, knowing that whatever he left behind is just going to get stolen, especially with a now-broken window, probably [b]wouldn't steal the item. Or maybe they would, but come up with an entirely different reason why they would do it.

People can preform the exact same action for different reasons from different philosophical viewpoints. After all, both a Lawful Good person and a Chaotic Good person can work to overthrow the Evil Tyrant. Just because they preform identical actions, it doesn't necessarily follow that the act is inherently more Lawful/Chaotic for one of the people involved.

Or to sum up, Law and Chaos isn't the be all and end all of everything. And, in a bit of a heretical notion for some people around here, intent and action matter to alignment. It wouldn't be a philosophical viewpoint if that wasn't the case. :smallsmile:

[Caledonian]

He may do whacky stuff, but that doesn't require a chaotic temperament. That just means he's a goofball.

He is systematically unsystematic. He's impulsive, wandering, willing to bend rules and abandon minor principles to accomplish his ends. That's Chaotic.

Elan is Good, so he has an appreciation for legal principles that serve Good ends, but he doesn't care about Law for Law's sake.

[Bluelantern]

Sort of off-topic
The "True" Lawfull logic to view the world dictates the preversion of Status Quo and laws, people should obey laws because law must be obeyed and not because laws are "for the greater good". That said, Lawfull characters still can thinks and in other ways and be lawfull because they like discipline and planning. However Lawfull is not "better" than Chaotic, they are both extremes that can be very dangerous and both have traits the are necessary for the "True" Good. Just because a king or ruler uses laws, this don't make him (or the governement) Lawfull, laws are a necessity, but also can be dangerous, like a scalpel can be usefull in a doctor hands or deadly in the hands of a thief. At least this is how I think it SHOULD be in DnD :smallbiggrin:

Back on Topic.
Inteligence (who dictates more theorical thought) don't dictates peoples tastes, including how they prefer to plan or not they actions, A Inteligent Chaotic person will simple prefer improvise, if he don't like planning to the point of never plan anything even when is necessary he probably has a low wisdown score (who dictates more practical thought), but something who acts the opposite, planning EVERYTHING and be unable to improvise or face something umpridictable is likely to also have low wisdown.

Elan is Chaotic Good, because he respect people not rules, he is stupid but has a good heart. He din't realize that the owner wans't going back and is THAT why he would wait for 15min, not because it was "told" him to do so. chaotic people may rather do things in they way, but CG can respect the others enough to do things in another way (occasionally)

Once Elan is presented with the alternative that he can do what he wants without cause "harm" to the shop owner he does it without excitetion.

[Umbral_Arcanist]

Mayhaps he is CG simply because that is the norm for bards. Also for swashbuckling heroes. Honestly, if anyone was to pick his alignment for dramatic reasons it would be Elan...

Also, i think his general need/desire for fairness and being nice seems chaotic to me.

[Eauldure]

Allow me to mention a conversation from 389:
Julio : How were you planning on paying for the diet soda, then?
Elan : 30 ft. per round movement rate.

Well, I don't really see him thinking twice about stealing the coke.

[Porthos]

Also, i think his general need/desire for fairness and being nice seems chaotic to me.

Wouldn't that then make Hinjo Chaotic? :smalltongue:

[Elfanatic]

Allow me to quote Haley:

:haley: He is a bard, he can't be lawfull.

[TheAlmightyOne]

Its not his character its his class. Bards have to be chaotic because its part of the rules governing the OOTS world and he was paralyzed by the unholy blight spell meaning he is good alligned. Hence chaotic good.

[Porthos]

Its not his character its his class. Bards have to be chaotic because its part of the rules governing the OOTS world

Bards can be Neutral as well. :smallsmile:

[Spiryt]

Its not his character its his class. Bards have to be chaotic because its part of the rules governing the OOTS world and he was paralyzed by the unholy blight spell meaning he is good alligned. Hence chaotic good.


BARD
Alignment: Any nonlawful.
Hit Die: d6.


sigh

Nothing about being chaotic.

Still i think that Elan is more chaotic than neutral.

[Valdyr]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html

Panel #9, or 8.5ish.

There you go. Elan's alignment, according to the giant himself. QED.

[factotum]

Why is he chaotic good? I've thought from the beginning he was neutral good.

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.


Well, he says he's Chaotic Good, and since the main characters in OotS appear to know all about the game rules underlying their actions, I think he would know!

As for your point #1, in exactly the same strip you're talking about he got an angel and a demon arguing over the same thing (whether he should save Nale's life). By your logic that must prove he's also neither good nor evil and is thus True Neutral!

[Hushdawg]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html

Panel #9, or 8.5ish.

There you go. Elan's alignment, according to the giant himself. QED.

THANK YOU!

Direct quote for those who don't want to go clicky:



Because you're Lawful, and Chaotic Good am I

[StickMan]

OK your missing the difference between being chaotic and be lawful with right and wrong. Stealing is wrong aka evil Elan is good there for Elan no steal. Its simple he's not going to steal because of the laws he does not steal because he is good.

[Gundato]

Another thing people seem to miss: obeying various laws and being Lawful are not the same thing.

A thief could be Lawful Good if he obeys a code of honour. He breaks the law every five minutes, but he has a code of honour (ie. Won't steal from the needy, etc).

A good ruler could be Chaotic and still obey the laws. Take Shojo for example. To be fair, he never actually broke the law (well, he did break Azure City's laws, but that book has a stick up its butt). He didn't go out of his way to lie or break rules, he just had the best interests of the nation in mind. If didn't always coincide with the laws of the nation, but it also didn't always NOT coincide with said laws.

The best way to think of it is: What is the motivation?

[TheTurnipKing]

Elan is Chaotic. This Banjo demands.

[Impikmin]

I think his appreciation of the law comes from his goodness. Also, the dashing swordsman class means he has too be very righteous, as well as a bit lawful. What he did was respecting the shop owner, not the no stealing law. He HAS stolen before, but that was for the greater GOOD. There is no doubt in my mind he is CG. You are mixing up lawful and good in too many ways...

[Gavin Sage]

Chaotic Good does not mean you ignore basic laws, any more then Lawful Good means you have to obey evil ones. Chaotic Good characters will steal when they have reason to, not simply because they want something. For example, bread to feed children. Elan while he wants a lute it is not vital in a basic survival sense, thus thinks it would be wrong to just take it.

The rest is just a classic Elan gag.

[mockingbyrd7]

Note: Many of these acts dovetail in with wisdom and him being good, but I still consider them Chaotic.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0004.html
Chaotic Act Number One: Acting spontaneously and stupidly in an attempt to help. (This might be also low wisdom, but still.)

Chaotic Act Number Two: Going along with Haley's lie/stealing of Belkar's potion, complimenting her on it afterwards. (When they could have just asked him - Elan was literally bleeding all over the floor. Whether Belkar actually would have given it to him doesn't matter.)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0009.html
Chaotic Act Number Three: Picking up the belt on a whim, out of curiosity.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0010.html
Chaotic Act Number Four: Falling asleep after V's spell, implying short attention span and concentration. (Which is ultimately Chaotic as well as low wisdom.)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0017.html
Chaotic Act Number Five: Acting whimsically and scratching the party name into the wall, when anyone organized or with any sort of forethought (Lawful and wise) would have realized that could have attracted attention to them, which it did.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0024.html
Chaotic Act Number Six: Holding up a big freaking neon red sign that says, "The heroes are here", an obviously unwise and Chaotic act.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0025.html
Chaotic Act Number Seven: Strips naked and runs around like a fool yelling, "WOOOOO! I'M INVISIBLE!" on a whim because he thinks it will help his Hide skill.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0026.html
Chaotic Act Number Eight: Nudity continued, plus randomly saying, "Hey, wanna help me practice my Tumbling skill?"

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0027.html
Chaotic Act Number Nine: Nudity continued, plus arguing with authority (Roy)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0030.html
Chaotic Act Number Ten: Going into the secret door on a whim, without permission, without anyone knowing, for the sake of being curious.

Feeling troubled yet, Tribble? (Go trekkies!) At least one Chaotic act per three comics. That's a pretty Chaotic track record, hmm? If Elan was in every strip, and we are on strip 471, he would have committed...
157 Chaotic acts, not to mention some strips have multiple chaotic acts, double-length, etc. etc.

Should I keep going? I think so. This is fun.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html
Chaotic Act Number Eleven: Staying with the squid thingy without informing the group, and still simply acting whimsically and chaotically.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0035.html
Chaotic Act Number Twelve: Going along with the whole thing, although admittedly all four of them are guilty on that one. Then again, he was the first one to say, "keep searching". And a Chaotic act split four ways is still just as Chaotic.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0038.html
Chaotic Act Number Thirteen: Do I even need to say it? Only a Chaotic character or a Lawful or Neutral character in a VERY silly, defiant, chaotic mood would do that.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0041.html
Chaotic Act Number Fourteen: Going over the top with his song and not realizing V's apparent frustration.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0043.html
Chaotic Act Number Fifteen: Ignoring everything V and Roy said except what he found interesting, opening the door on a whim, out of curiosity, when anyone with a good attention span would have picked up that they did NOT want to open the door yet.

Let's count Lawful acts now.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0007.html
Lawful Act Number One: Sitting patiently while Durkon tried to heal him. (This one's a bit of a stretch.)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html
Lawful Act Number Two: Stopping immediately when Roy said stop and apologizing. (a BIG stretch)

2 vs. 15, and the 2 are both barely able to be considered as Lawful. Have I made my point? *blinks twice innocently*

[Holy_Knight]

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.


Actually, here's something interesting about that. Notice that when the representatives of the alignment show up, the Good angel and the Chaotic angel appear both on the same shoulder, while the Evil angel and the Lawful angel both appear on the other. This suggests that for Elan, each of those pairs goes together.


Woo, alignment thread!

Chaotic characters act spontaneously. Lawful characters act in an orderly manner. None of those have anything to do with following laws.

Agreed. I think the connotations of Lawful give rise to some of the biggest confusion about alignments in the game (especially paladins, but that's another topic).


And, in a bit of a heretical notion for some people around here, intent and action matter to alignment.

Right.


I would add to all this that Elan, probably more than anybody in the strip, is well described as a free spirit. As such, "Chaotic" seems to fit him to a "C" (it doesn't start with "T").

[mockingbyrd7]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html

Panel #9, or 8.5ish.

There you go. Elan's alignment, according to the giant himself. QED.

Not to mention THIS.

Seriously, his alignment is the least debateable out of any of the Order's. I mean, Roy, by your logic, is also Neutral Good at best because he often breaks laws, etc.

[Hushdawg]

.... why is this still going on? Elan plain out says that he is Chaotic Good!


This is almost as pointless as the debates about whether or not Belkar is evil...

[mockingbyrd7]

.... why is this still going on? Elan plain out says that he is Chaotic Good!


This is almost as pointless as the debates about whether or not Belkar is evil...

Or whether or not Durkon is Lawful...

[The Extinguisher]

Just to point out, if Lawful meant following laws, you would never we able to have Lawful Evil.

Or it would seriously reduce your potential for it.

[Porthos]

In fact, when it really comes down to it, the only main character whose alignment is in any question is Vaarsuvius' [yes it's some form of Neutral. But where exactly on the Neutral axis is probably still up for debate]. Haley's used to be a bit problematic, but as the strip has gone on she has been more and more consistent in the CG camp (thanks in no small part to Elan's influence on her).

[Hushdawg]

Just to point out, if Lawful meant following laws, you would never we able to have Lawful Evil.

Or it would seriously reduce your potential for it.

Oh, lawful DOES mean that you follow a set of laws and codes; its just the source of those laws that are up for question.

Example: Hitler's SS troops and Gestapo were following laws perfectly.

I could make an example regarding Homeland Security, but I'll refrain.

[Hushdawg]

In fact, when it really comes down to it, the only main character whose alignment is in any question is Vaarsuvius' [yes it's some form of Neutral. But where exactly on the Neutral axis is probably still up for debate]. Haley's used to be a bit problematic, but as the strip has gone on she has been more and more consistent in the CG camp (thanks in no small part to Elan's influence on her).

Personally I think V is the only one who could be true neutral.
The gender ambiguity kind of plays into that role very well.

[BelkarPwnsAll!]

I like Elan as Chaotic good, like Belkar(Somewhat)! If Elan was lawful good then... UUUUGH! I CAN'T EVEN SAY IT!:yuk: :smalleek: Now, if Elan was ANYTHING like Nale,:nale: the whole comic series would be ruined!:eek:

[Porthos]

Personally I think V is the only one who could be true neutral.
The gender ambiguity kind of plays into that role very well.

I figure it's either True Neutral or Lawful Neutral. I'm still kinda vacillating back and forth on this one, tbh. :smallsmile:

[Kish]

I like Elan as Chaotic good, like Belkar(Somewhat)!

:smallsigh:

If Elan was lawful good then...
...he'd be more like he actually is than he is like Belkar? (Yes, chaotic good is closer to lawful good than it is to chaotic evil in both the general case and the specific Elan case. The axes are not equal.)

[Angela Christine]

I think the solution he accepted was still pretty chaotic. He broke the freaking window! Even if he left enough money to pay for the lute and the window, breaking windows for your own convenience is pretty disorderly. It just isn't done in polite society.

[Tirian]

In fact, when it really comes down to it, the only main character whose alignment is in any question is Vaarsuvius' [yes it's some form of Neutral. But where exactly on the Neutral axis is probably still up for debate]. Haley's used to be a bit problematic, but as the strip has gone on she has been more and more consistent in the CG camp (thanks in no small part to Elan's influence on her).

You have hit on the exact point. There should be little doubt about what alignment is on the (non-existent) character sheets of the PCs, but there will always be debate on whether their current characterization is living up to that entry. Haley's inherent goodness and a more-or-less noble rationale for acts like stealing gold from the party have had more opportunity to show itself over the life of the strip; meanwhile, Vaarsuvius has become more chaotic and more evil (and I among others wonder if V's actions have tended to be more evil than Belkar's actions, although this is the subject of a different thread).

But there is little to wonder about Elan. Lawful characters are guided by an external ethos, while Chaotic characters are guided by a personal conscience. It seems clear that Elan (having been raised by his mother) has guidelines like "don't pillage hard-working commoners unless your need is critical" and "don't knock out the defensive capability of a city" and "believe in Haley", but at the same time his conscience is flexible when supplied with sensible reason or a competing good (or a Suggestion spell).

[Jawajoey]

Obeying the law on occasion does not make one non-chaotic. Chaotic means willingness to do whatever. Obeying the law is an option. Chaotic GOOD implies that they'll be willing to break the law for a GOOD reason, not an evil reason or chaotic reason. That's Elan in spades. Breaking from jail, for a good reason. Stealing, for a good reason. Taking for a greedy reason, but making it better by making it not stealing.

People need to understand that each place on the alignment chart carries its own set of traits. The Chaotic part of Chaotic good is very different form the Chaotic part of Chaotic evil.


Two less related things:

1. People have said that it doesn't matter WHY someone acts chaotically or Lawfully, etc, it matters that they do. I agree, but would like to point out that this is different from intent. Elan does something chaotic, runs around naked, because he is stupid. He is still chaotic. Belkar does something good, save Hinjo's life, for chaotic evil reasons. He is still Chaotic Evil.


2. Jerkiness is not evil. If it were, then Varsuuvius and Roy could be considered evil. But neither of them have done anything that should make them be considered evil. Because there's no such thing as Lawful Rude.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Alright then folks, explain to me then what Neutral Good is. From all I've heard here it almost seems as if that alignment didn't exist.

Either it is a lawful person who does chaotic things from time to time, or its a chaotic person doing lawful from time to time.

If I recall, Chaotic is someone who purposefully and willfully flouts laws whenever they can. Lawful is someone who purposefully and willfully tries to keep to the rule of law whenever they can. Neutral is someone who is not rebellious nor will follow rules unless they think them correct.

I've yet to see Elan doing things for the sake of flouting law.

[Tirian]

2. Jerkiness is not evil. If it were, then Varsuuvius and Roy could be considered evil. But neither of them have done anything that should make them be considered evil. Because there's no such thing as Lawful Rude.

Casting Explosive Runes on (a series of inanimate objects intended to be read by) non-monsters because one does not like the target or because one is researching the target's mental facilities, and then justifying those actions by pointing out that they were "only" intended to cause pain (6-36hp worth, not to mention half damage to anyone within ten feet of the runes)? That's not rude, and it's not neutral-with-evil-tendancies. Answering disrespect with physical harm is textbook Evil.

[Lorde]

That strip exist just to generate yet one more alignment thread.

[Kish]

Casting Explosive Runes on (a series of inanimate objects intended to be read by) non-monsters
Ah ah ah. What's "non-monsters" mean? Intelligent creatures? Good and Neutral-aligned creatures? Or just those who lack green skin and fangs?

[Porthos]

Alright then folks, explain to me then what Neutral Good is. From all I've heard here it almost seems as if that alignment didn't exist.

Either it is a lawful person who does chaotic things from time to time, or its a chaotic person doing lawful from time to time.

If I recall, Chaotic is someone who purposefully and willfully flouts laws whenever they can. Lawful is someone who purposefully and willfully tries to keep to the rule of law whenever they can. Neutral is someone who is not rebellious nor will follow rules unless they think them correct.

I've yet to see Elan doing things for the sake of flouting law.

I'm sorry, but that is 100% incorrect. Case in point Lord Shojo. :smallwink:

Consider the following Thought Experiment. A Chaotic Good individual is in a society with fairly lax laws. And the laws that they do have seem pretty just to the person in question. So, each and every day, the person in question obeys the laws of his society, because they agree with his personal ethics. Now I ask you, would he slowly shift to Neutral Good or (gasp) Lawful Good?

Heck, no! :smallsmile:

Just because someone agrees with the laws around them, it doesn't necessarily follow that they are Lawful.

Consider another point. Elves are traditionally (in DnD) Chaotic Good. Elves have laws in their society. But how can that be the case? Simple. Their laws are more flexible and open to interpretation.

Here's another Thought Experiment. A Lawful Good individual is suddenly forced to move to a society where Ritualized Murder is not only encouraged, but required for all citizens. Would he follow that law? Not if he wanted to remain Lawful Good, he wouldn't. In fact, if he was able, he would try to do everything in his power to get rid of those laws, or topple the society that forces it.

But that's a contradiction, I hear you say. No, it isn't. Because the Lawful Good individual can say, "The Laws of Man are not in harmony with The Laws of The Gods. I choose the follow the Laws of the Gods and get rid of this unjust society."

Remember Chaotic people aren't Sladd and Lawful people aren't Modrons. :smallwink: Good and Evil, in fact, usually is a far more important determining factor in DnD. Don't believe me? Well, after all, Paladins get Smite Evil, not Smite Chaos. A LG god will get along just fine with a CG god, even though they are as opposite in temperament as a LE god.

Now if this was a setting like Elric of Melniboné where there is a war between Law and Chaos, then I would certainly agree with you. But DnD? Nope. It's far more important if you are Good or Evil than if you are Lawful or Chaotic. :smallsmile:

[Tor the Fallen]

Ok, today's comic has reaffirmed something I've been thinking for some time now and been wanting to post. Why is he chaotic good? I've thought from the beginning he was neutral good.

He may do whacky stuff, but that doesn't require a chaotic temperament. That just means he's a goofball.

[quote]#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.

You mean go with purple monkey dishwasher as opposed to 101010101001? I believe that's what we call a gag.


#2. He appears to have an appreciation of the law in several strips, though none so strongly as today's. He doesn't mind bending it, and sometimes he doesn't recognize what he's doing as being unlawful, but that just more strongly hints at a neutral alignment. He does what he thinks is the right thing.

He's not respecting the Law, respecting the fact that stealing from other people is selfish, and hurts them. You know, theft is also evil. He's also too retarded to realize that the shop will likely be looted by hobgobbos and the shopkeep is very unlikely to be back in 15 minutes.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

*waits to see a definition of Neutral Good*

[Wojiz]

Neutral Good is a sense of morality and righteousness without being bound by society it any way; they value their ethics above what society asks of them and maintaining a balance of law and chaos is important, but that good helps maintain that balance.

[Porthos]

*waits to see a definition of Neutral Good*

Mind You, these are guidelines, not absolutes:


Lawful Good, “Crusader”: A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.
Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion.

Neutral Good, “Benefactor”: A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them.
Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order.

Chaotic Good, “Rebel”: A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he’s kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.
Chaotic good is the best alignment you can be because it combines a good heart with a free spirit.

Notice a distinct lack of "following the laws" in the LG description. :smallwink: And while it does say that the CG person "has little use" for laws, it does not say that he will go out of his way to violate them if he agrees with them.

In short, if a societies has an unjust system:
A LG person will tend to work within the system, but if no reasonable alternative exists, will work outside of it.
A NG person will work either within the system or without it, depending on which is more convenient or which he feels has more chance for success.
A CG person will tend to work outside the system to fix it, unless the situation forced him to work inside of it.

Notice the word "tend" in the C/L divide. :smallwink: To put it a slightly different way: The inclination of the LG person is to work within a system to fix it. The inclination of a CG person is to work outside a system to fix it. And the NG person doesn't give two figs about inclinations and just wants to fix it. :smalltongue:

ETA:::: Mind you, this is about a person in his native society (or one similar to it). These rules can (and should) fly out the window when you are visiting a society with "rules" that are violently different than the "rules" that you normally argee with. For instance, a LG character would have absolutely no problem with razing the Mind Flayer enclave in the Underdark to the ground. :smallbiggrin:

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Thank you Wojiz and Porthos. Including those definitions, I've yet to see Elan do anything that would make him any more chaotic good than neutral good.

[Arnen]

Elan is chaotic good because that's what is established on his (metaphorical and non-existant) character sheet.

At no point has Elan ever showed any inclination for following laws unless they also go along with his moral code (i.e. stealing unless you need to is wrong in his mind because it brings harm to others, not just because it's a law). A lute is a lot more expensive than a soda, and it was probably hand-crafted, making it much more damaging to the merchant than to whoever was selling the soda.

[Oberon]

ThI've yet to see Elan do anything that would make him any more chaotic good than neutral good.

How about the aforementioned stealing of clothes and of a soda (almost)? How about blowing up the castle of Dorukan for little or no reason?

[Querzis]

How about the aforementioned stealing of clothes and of a soda (almost)? How about blowing up the castle of Dorukan for little or no reason?

Or how about the awesome list Mockingbird as done on page two? Chaotic and lawfull as almost nothing to do with law. The biggest difference to remember between chaotic or lawfull people is the intent. Good and evil is usually more because of the action itself then the intent behind it (yeah its really convenient to say you killed that children to save the world...that doesnt make you a good guy though). Lawfull people do things because its their duty, chaotic people do things because they feel like it. Lawfull people become what they were raised to be (a lawfull guy raised in a LE society is automatically evil and vice versa) while chaotic people become what they want to be (thats why chaotic good drow exist). Lawfull people are orderly and predictable, chaotic people are wild and a bit crazy (not insane, crazy). As everyone as said before me, you mistake good and lawfull act. Chaotic GOOD people wont steal from everyone when they want because they are good and good guys dont do that.

Elan alignement is the only one, with Belkar (yes hes CE) I have absolutely no doubt about. Durkon sounds LG but sometimes he actually act LN. Haley is usually CG but she has done lots of CN actions. I'm not sure but I think Roy alignement as changed to NG during the comic, we havent saw is lawfull side in a while. And V alignement is really a though one...I'm almost sure hes neutral on the moral side but Lawfull neutral or true neutral, I just cant decide.

[Tirian]

How about the aforementioned stealing of clothes and of a soda (almost)? How about blowing up the castle of Dorukan for little or no reason?

The first was because (to him) the good of rescuing Haley outweighed petty theft (and he clearly regretted the necessity). The second was because Intelligence is Elan's dump stat.


Ah ah ah. What's "non-monsters" mean? Intelligent creatures? Good and Neutral-aligned creatures? Or just those who lack green skin and fangs?

*shrug* "Non-monster" means Miko and Belkar, and if you truly don't appreciate the difference between them and a hobgolblin or a black dragon then I doubt you'd accept any explanation I could provide. Regardless of their alignments or skin color, they are people who are under the protection of the party in which V travels and people who V evidently chooses not to kill. To intentionally cause pain to such people, in my mind, is a grave moral failing.

[EntilZha]

Or whether or not Durkon is Lawful...


In "On the Origin of PC's" Durkon is clearly established as being Lawful (p. 19)


And since Elan himself says he's Chaotic Good in #445, that settles it.

[Corwin Weber]

I think a lot of you are writing your own alignments (and how you view them) into this discussion.

Lawful characters will obey stupid laws.

Chaotic characters will reject good laws.

This would be why most people are some variety of neutral. Ethical alignment is modified by moral alignment.... which is why a Paladin will refuse to follow the aforementioned ritual murder law. It's an evil act, and good/evil trumps law/chaos in this case. He'll probably get twinges about breaking the law.... but they get put to the side because the law itself is evil.

Lawful Good - Believes law to be in the best interests of most people and that laws should promote moral behavior. Evil laws should not exist, but where they do exist they should be removed or changed rather than disobeyed. Example of this alignment: the stereotypical District Attorney or Legislator.

Neutral Good - Believes law to be important, and to be something which protects people, but is not the be all end all of good. Is entirely willing to work within an existing social order, but is also willing to reject it if they feel it's too restrictive. Example of this alignment: most good people.

Chaotic Good - Believes law to be restrictive, repressive and unnecessary. Laws exist only to ensure one group has power over another. Will ignore them as a matter of course, and if they happen to obey them it will be largely a matter of coincidence. Example of this alignment: Anarchists.

And since they've come up:

Lawful Neutral - Doesn't especially care about whether an act is good or evil, merely that it maintains order. Order is its own good. Example of this alignment: Stereotypical bureaucrats.

Lawful Evil - Power is expressed through the creation and enforcement of laws. Evil desires should be protected and encouraged through an established legal system. (This assumes the individual considers themselves to be evil. Make that 'my position, power and desires should be protected and encouraged through an established legal system.') Example of this alignment: The power base in a totalitarian state. The Inner Party.

Chaotic Neutral - Me me me. Sociopaths fall into this category, with overlap into Chaotic Evil. Laws are irrelevant and should be rejected out of hand. Good and evil are likewise meaningless concepts and should be used or ignored as one sees fit. Example of this alignment: Sociopaths and those who exist outside of society.

True Neutral - In general, either feels that law/chaos and good/evil are meaningless or simply doesn't feel the need to take a moral or ethical stand. Beings who lack the capacity for moral and ethical judgements, (such as most animals) also fall into this category. Example of this alignment: None given. This is one of the hardest alignments to pin down and there are simply too many different possible types of examples to list here.

Bottom line:

Lawful characters will go out of their way to obey laws and respect order.

Neutral characters will not go out of their way to obey laws and respect order.

Chaotic characters will go out of their way to reject laws and order.

Good characters will go out of their way to avoid harming an innocent.

Neutral characters will not go out of their way to avoid harming an innocent.

Evil characters will go out of their way to harm an innocent.

Mix well and you have an alignment system.

[The Extinguisher]

Chaotic Neutral - Me me me. Sociopaths fall into this category, with overlap into Chaotic Evil. Laws are irrelevant and should be rejected out of hand. Good and evil are likewise meaningless concepts and should be used or ignored as one sees fit. Example of this alignment: Sociopaths and those who exist outside of society.

All your alignments descriptions seem a bit off, and very restrictive. There's more than one way to play an alignment.

I'm responding to this, because I have an example of another CN character, competly different from what you described. To illustrate my point.

A chaotic neutral who sees that a kitten is about to be crushed by a cart. He will save the kitty, and make sure it's safe. Then, he turns on the man who was going to run it over (whether and accident of not) and proceded to beat up, running him over with a cart to 'show him how it feels to be run over.' He doesn't kill him, but leaves him on the road. He then procededs to chase the kitty.

So yeah, more than one way to play an alignment. More then two, more then three. As long as it's withing the alignment 'grid' you can do it.

[I'm da Rogue!]

The problem with Elan is that his lack of intelligence sometimes explains why he's doing things without a thought.
If he was smarter, we could say he's CG for sure.
But I think he does all these coz he's really chaotic.

Elan is Chaotic Good because:
He's the "mirror" twin of Nale.
Nale is LE (there's no doubt about it, judging from his perfect evil plans).
LE's opposite alignment is CG.
So, Elan is CG.

It's just math:smallwink:

[Setra]

Elan is Elan.

He's good, and from what I can tell, known to act chaotically.

I for one, think that stupidity is part of ones alignment, not an exception to it. I believe this has been said earlier.

I think, possibly, the most chaotic thing Elan has done is when he "had fun" with Samantha.

Not to mention running through the streets of Azure City invisible.

[Thanatos 51-50]

LAw is equivlent, in my mind, to "order". The Island of Recluse is, for example, a Lawful Neutral government.

Elan acts by an established Order (Genre Conventions, "like, a Bardic rite of passage... or something", "ts like, in the Bard Code," et. cetera.), however, there can also be no doubt that Elan often disregards Order, rational though, and planning (see: "Wanna help me practice my Tumble skill?" and "I'm on an adventure!"). He does this while strictly Adhering to Bardic LAw (Order, and LAwful alignment, etc.), but doesn't forget to have fun and forget the Order, even willing to try new things to see if they work out better (Streaking in a dungeon).

^
One mildly convoluted, self-defeating rant later, I'm just gonna say I think Elan is NG.

[RyQ_TMC]

Your first argument would make him True Neutral, as he also listens to Good and Evil. Secondly, about his "not stealing" thing... Hasn't it occured to you that stealing is simply NOT GOOD, and it doesn't matter it's against the law? Technically, breaking the glass, taking the lute and leaving gold is ALSO against the law. All I'm saying.

EDIT: And, Rogue, I repeat what I've said in another thread - Elan lacks WIS, not INT. He gets 6 skill points, making his INT 12-13, and also wouldn't be able to come up with witty repartee every Dashing Swordsman needs, if he lacked INT.

[Setra]

I thought Bards got 6 skill points base, if he had an int of 12, wouldn't he get 7?

[evileeyore]

Two things:

First to throw fuel on the fire, Elan can be Lawful, by the RAW (Rules As Written). Yes I wrote can.

There is nothing stopping a Bard from becoming Lawful. However so long as they are Lawful they cannot take any further bard Levels.

So how about Elan for Paladin anyone?

Second:


And, Rogue, I repeat what I've said in another thread - Elan lacks WIS, not INT. He gets 6 skill points, making his INT 12-13, and also wouldn't be able to come up with witty repartee every Dashing Swordsman needs, if he lacked INT.False.

Witty repartee is purely a Charisma driven talent. Indeed the Dashing Swordsman gets to add his CHA bonus to his damage, not his INT. Your thinking of Duelist.

Also, Elan lacks INT. Trust us, he lacks INT.

[Ancalagon]

He lacks both.

[Emperor Ing]

So how about Elan for Paladin anyone?
nah, too unpredictible and stupid, Chaotic stupid!?

[Snipers_Promise]

Elan is Elan...... Lets just leave it at that. :smallsmile:

[David Argall]

V alignement is really a though one...I'm almost sure hes neutral on the moral side but Lawfull neutral or true neutral, I just cant decide.

V is definitely good. See PHB, p. 297, Unholy Blight "...good creature...causes it to be sickened...creatures who are neither evil nor good...are not sickened." And...

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html

Belkar is evil. The rest of the party is good. End of story.

[factotum]

V is definitely good. See PHB, p. 297, Unholy Blight "...good creature...causes it to be sickened...creatures who are neither evil nor good...are not sickened."


That's weird, because the SRD description of Unholy Blight specifically states that neutral creatures ARE affected by an Unholy Blight. Which one is right? (And, perhaps more to the point, which one did Rich use as a reference when he was drawing that strip?).

[jamroar]

That's weird, because the SRD description of Unholy Blight specifically states that neutral creatures ARE affected by an Unholy Blight. Which one is right? (And, perhaps more to the point, which one did Rich use as a reference when he was drawing that strip?).

Neutrals don't get sickened, but still take half damage from the blight (will save to half again). You can't really tell from V's statement in the one panel whether V is being sickened, or is just failing his will save against the blight.

[Luklan]

I skipped ahead after reading 'please give me a definition of Neutral Good'



Neutral Good characters occupy an indistinct middle-ground. They espouse the ideals of good and none other. As a rule, they don't care whether good is imposed through laws and customs or encouraged by temples and philosophers; they just want good to flourish. When lawful good societies begin legislating every detail of their citizen's lives, the neutral good character becomes impatient. They support law when it promotes good, but not law for it's own sake. Similarly, they like the idea of personal freedom, but they're not sure everyone should have it; too much freedom gives evil-doers to much room to prosper. Like chaotic good adventurers, neutral good ones fight evil because it's evil, but it certainly doesn't help to have the backing of legal authority whenever possible.

Neutral Good characters in societies that tolerate evil resist evil to the extent they can, without actively working to overthrow the government. They protest injustice, sometimes engaging in civil disobedience since unjust laws are useless and not binding in their view

The difference between NG and CG is this, basically.

Chaotic Good characters don't give a flying tarrasque about the law. Again, to quote



[Chaotic Good Characters] have no confidence in the ability of laws and social mores to train people in good behaviour. Indeed, they have seen all too often how people hide behind rules and laws as an excuse for evil or at least irresponsible acts.


I hope that clears it up.

[Corwin Weber]

All your alignments descriptions seem a bit off, and very restrictive. There's more than one way to play an alignment.

I'm responding to this, because I have an example of another CN character, competly different from what you described. To illustrate my point.

A chaotic neutral who sees that a kitten is about to be crushed by a cart. He will save the kitty, and make sure it's safe. Then, he turns on the man who was going to run it over (whether and accident of not) and proceded to beat up, running him over with a cart to 'show him how it feels to be run over.' He doesn't kill him, but leaves him on the road. He then procededs to chase the kitty.

So yeah, more than one way to play an alignment. More then two, more then three. As long as it's withing the alignment 'grid' you can do it.

Alignment by its very nature is restrictive. Taking a moral or ethical stand restricts your behavior. This is why most people, as I said, are some flavor of neutral. The fact that these restrictions may prove to be inconvenient doesn't change this fact.

[Jefepato]

He gets 6 skill points, making his INT 12-13, and also wouldn't be able to come up with witty repartee every Dashing Swordsman needs, if he lacked INT.

If he gets 6 skill points, his INT is 8-9. Bards get 6 + INT modifier, and humans get an extra.

[Rasumichin]

Alignment by its very nature is restrictive. Taking a moral or ethical stand restricts your behavior. This is why most people, as I said, are some flavor of neutral. The fact that these restrictions may prove to be inconvenient doesn't change this fact.


First of all, "restrictive" does not mean "being left with only one possible way of acting in a given situation".
No real human being is as stereotyped in his way of acting as your suggestions imply.

Second, being neutral does not mean "having no alignment".
It means that you are either to uncaring or to undecided to devote yourself to an extreme of any alignment axis or that you are searching for a balance between 2 or all ends of those axises (NG, for example, gets its neutral aspect from balancing an ordered, functional society with personal freedom).

Neutral characters might be more pragmatic in their decisions, or more down to earth, or less fervent in their believes, or whatever, but this also implies that they are, in general, more "middle of the road" than other characters and less likely to commit acts that are very evil or very good.

Yes, this means that they are "more like normal people", but being normal is a restriction of behaviour, too.


Oh, and as far as your example for CN is concerned, there might be some evil tendencies included.

This is, of course, possible, even though a true sociopath might be much more prone to becoming evil.
But good tendencies are just as likely for a characters who is neutral on the good-evil axis.
What makes you think that neutrality as far as good and evil is concerned leads to an inclination towards evil?
Sounds like paladin logic to me.:smallwink:

CN characters can be sociopaths, but also harmless excentrics, people placing themselves outside of society's conventions- or just people who primarily mind their own business and want to be left alone.

Or they could be people who would otherwise be TN, but are chronic liars (being untrustworthy also falls under chaotic).
Or complete nutcases.

Asuming that all people with a given alignment will act the same is just plain wrong-for any alignment.

[Corwin Weber]

Don't know why that double posted.

Anyway, you all are missing the point. The extremes in the alignment system are there for a reason. They are restrictive and they are to an extent, unrealistic for most people in the real world.

The various alignments can of course be interpreted in various ways, but some of the mental gymnastics I see here are actually kind of amusing. Some of you want to see Belkar as anything other than CE. While I'll agree that he's currently trending CN, (mostly due to the restrictions of the MoJ...) he's still fundamentally CE. Miko never left LG. She had a borderline psychotic interpretation of LG behavior, but was still fundamentally LG. Roy is currently (aside from being dead) trending NG, but is still basically lawful.

The fact that so many people want to redefine what they see as their own personal alignment in such a way as to fit their favorite characters is amusing, to say the least.... but inaccurate.

[Corwin Weber]

First of all, "restrictive" does not mean "being left with only one possible way of acting in a given situation".
No real human being is as stereotyped in his way of acting as your suggestions imply.

Second, being neutral does not mean "having no alignment".
It means that you are either to uncaring or to undecided to devote yourself to an extreme of any alignment axis or that you are searching for a balance between 2 or all ends of those axises (NG, for example, gets its neutral aspect from balancing an ordered, functional society with personal freedom).

Neutral characters might be more pragmatic in their decisions, or more down to earth, or less fervent in their believes, or whatever, but this also implies that they are, in general, more "middle of the road" than other characters and less likely to commit acts that are very evil or very good.

Yes, this means that they are "more like normal people", but being normal is a restriction of behaviour, too.


Oh, and as far as your example for CN is concerned, there might be some evil tendencies included.

This is, of course, possible, even though a true sociopath might be much more prone to becoming evil.
But good tendencies are just as likely for a characters who is neutral on the good-evil axis.
What makes you think that neutrality as far as good and evil is concerned leads to an inclination towards evil?
Sounds like paladin logic to me.:smallwink:

CN characters can be sociopaths, but also harmless excentrics, people placing themselves outside of society's conventions- or just people who primarily mind their own business and want to be left alone.

Or they could be people who would otherwise be TN, but are chronic liars (being untrustworthy also falls under chaotic).
Or complete nutcases.

Asuming that all people with a given alignment will act the same is just plain wrong-for any alignment.

Actually it would be why alignments are defined in the first place.

[Rasumichin]

Actually it would be why alignments are defined in the first place.

The alignment system has always bothered me and still does (even though how some people apply it bothers me more), but, given a certain amount of flexibillity and common sense, it can at least be less of a pain in the ass.

Alignments are -at least by 3.5, this was a bit different back in 2nd Ed., where i started to hate the alignment system- defined as a number of options, not as a straitjacket.

If Belkar is -as you have posted and as i would sign any time- still CE, why doesn't he act like Xykon?

Because there's always more than one way to play an alignment, even if it is an extreme one.

After all, one of them cares for no one, wants to rule the world and does not mind the risk of destroying it, while the other is at least able to combine his desire for bloodshed and cruelty with a quest to save all of creation and to be somehow attached to people other than himself.

[Corwin Weber]

Belkar doesn't act like Xykon because he'll gradually weaken to the point where he can't do anything at all if he does. Aside from the MoJ, he's nowhere near as powerful as Xykon. He couldn't get away with it and he knows it, hence his willingness to work with the group.

And now that you mention it.... on his own scale he very much does act like Xykon. He's entirely willing to sacrifice subordinates, kill more or less randomly, and do whatever he has to to gain power for himself.

Alignment isn't a straightjacket, but it isn't some team or club either. It's a shorthand description of a set of moral and ethical beliefs and actions and in D&D is in fact objectively defined. Move away from those objectively defined beliefs and actions, and you're no longer that alignment.

[Vhaidara]

Ok, today's comic has reaffirmed something I've been thinking for some time now and been wanting to post. Why is he chaotic good? I've thought from the beginning he was neutral good.

He may do whacky stuff, but that doesn't require a chaotic temperament. That just means he's a goofball.

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.

#2. He appears to have an appreciation of the law in several strips, though none so strongly as today's. He doesn't mind bending it, and sometimes he doesn't recognize what he's doing as being unlawful, but that just more strongly hints at a neutral alignment. He does what he thinks is the right thing.


So is he really chaotic good, or does he just think that as he's not the brightest wand in the hand?

1: You could hold the same ground for the Angel-Devil thing right before that.

2: I think that is kind of the same basis as :thog: not having an alignment. Elan appriciates it, but doesn't like being bogged down in the technicalities.

[Holy_Knight]

Thank you Wojiz and Porthos. Including those definitions, I've yet to see Elan do anything that would make him any more chaotic good than neutral good.

VT, I have a question for you. What would you count as evidence of this? People have given several reasons why neither the angel/demon thing nor the "respect/disdain for the law" thing you mention in your OP are very good reasons to think Elan's not Chaotic. They've listed several occasions of impulsive, free-spirited behavior on Elan's part, which strongly suggests a Chaotic nature. That seems to me like the bulk of the evidence counts in favor of Elan's Chaoticness, not against it. (Of course, he himself claims to be Chaotic Good as well, but I take it your contention is that his actions don't bear this out, so for purposes of this discussion we won't take that as settling the issue.) So, my question, then--what would you take as establishing that Elan is in fact Chaotic Good, rather than Neutral good?

[Rasumichin]

And now that you mention it.... on his own scale he very much does act like Xykon. He's entirely willing to sacrifice subordinates, kill more or less randomly, and do whatever he has to to gain power for himself.

Xykon would, for example, not have minded Shojo being slain.
Belkar did, not because he couldn't do otherwise, but because he liked the old geezer.
Belkar is actually able to care for people other than himself.
Even if he could get away with it, he would not kill Elan, and most likely also not Haley and Durkon.
Xykon would just off everyone if it benefitted him.
This does not make Belkar nonevil, since he still enjoys killing sentient beings just for the fun of it, but he is not the completely detached, uncaring supervillain Xykon is and this is not only a difference in capabillities, but also in his personality.


Alignment isn't a straightjacket, but it isn't some team or club either.

No, it's more like a believe or philosophy, but more general.
Being more general on a topic with great complexity automatically brings a certain degree of uncertainty with it, but also allows for more flexibillity.


It's a shorthand description of a set of moral and ethical beliefs and actions and in D&D is in fact objectively defined. Move away from those objectively defined beliefs and actions, and you're no longer that alignment.

Of course.
But still, you can interpret it more narrow or allow for some variation and make the extreme alignments more accessible.
This makes the alignment system both more playable and more realistic and allows for a greater scope of character's personalities.


You are, of course, free to use a more rigid interpretation of alignments in your game, but for most groups, the benefits of such an approach will be extremely limited.

I wouldn't want an alignment system that defines everybody who is neither a zealot nor a lunatic as "at least partially neutral" at my gaming table.

[The Extinguisher]

Alignment by its very nature is restrictive. Taking a moral or ethical stand restricts your behavior. This is why most people, as I said, are some flavor of neutral. The fact that these restrictions may prove to be inconvenient doesn't change this fact.

No. Alignments aren't "you can only be like this."

A good example, from the comic, no less. Roy, Hinjo, and Pre-Fall Miko. All Lawful Good, all very different people.

Remember, alignments are a grid. You aren't limited to the extremes.

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3240/alignmentss0.png

[Corwin Weber]

Belkar liked Shojo because Shojo was willing to publically humiliate paladins. No conflict here. Had Shojo seriously crossed him and not been surrounded by heavily armed paladins Belkar wouldn't have hesitated to kill him.

Xykon has yet to kill Redcloak. Again, he likes and needs him.

On the opposite face, Xykon is entirely willing to douse his minions with lemon pepper and honey mustard and send them to be eaten by a random monster. Belkar is entirely willing to use the redshirts as test shots in a catapult. Again, matter of scale.

[Spiky]

I'm responding to this, because I have an example of another CN character, competly different from what you described. To illustrate my point.

A chaotic neutral who sees that a kitten is about to be crushed by a cart. He will save the kitty, and make sure it's safe. Then, he turns on the man who was going to run it over (whether and accident of not) and proceded to beat up, running him over with a cart to 'show him how it feels to be run over.' He doesn't kill him, but leaves him on the road. He then procededs to chase the kitty.

Um, that exactly the same. He defined CN as a sociopath, and that is what your example is.

[Snipers_Promise]

No. Alignments aren't "you can only be like this."

A good example, from the comic, no less. Roy, Hinjo, and Pre-Fall Miko. All Lawful Good, all very different people.

Remember, alignments are a grid. You aren't limited to the extremes.

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3240/alignmentss0.png

Well Said.

[Corwin Weber]

Well Said.

Not particularly. It avoids the point. Some people lean more toward one side of their alignment, others toward another. That diagram also essentially ignores the existance of neutrality as a distinct alignment.

[Ithekro]

Neutral would just be a circle on the chart centered on the middle. The closer you are to an axis on either plus or minus, that is what Neutral you would be, Outside the circle you are more clearly defined by two axis. But even with this you are still defined by your tendencies on a two axis plane Neutral is not a third axis as there is no positive or negative to define it.

[Corwin Weber]

Except that in D&D neutral is in fact a clearly defined alignment.

[TheNovak]

Maybe this'll be even clearer?

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n197/TheNovak/alignmentgrid.png

Mapped onto there with more effort than I'm willing to expend are distinct borders to each alignment. Just overlay the standard 3x3 alignment grid on that, and you're set.

[Corwin Weber]

Except for one teensy little problem.

YOU'RE MISSING FOUR DISTINCTLY AND SPECIFICALLY DEFINED ALIGNMENTS.

[Tolkien_Freak]

Not particularly. It avoids the point. Some people lean more toward one side of their alignment, others toward another. That diagram also essentially ignores the existance of neutrality as a distinct alignment.

Not true, neutrality happens to fall directly on one or both of the axes (or as the case may be, close to it/them).

[comicadv]

Well, aside from adherence to law, he does act in very chaotic way- he never plans in advance, and always does what seems the best at the right moment, which is chaotic- and opposite to Nale, who tends to create unnecesarily complicated plans.
Besides, I highly doubt someone can be mistaken about own alignment.

Hello this is Elan we're talking about...He can mistake anything!:smallbiggrin:

[TheNovak]

Except for one teensy little problem.

YOU'RE MISSING FOUR DISTINCTLY AND SPECIFICALLY DEFINED ALIGNMENTS.

...Because apparently you never learned how to read a grid, I updated it for you.

Jesus, is it really that hard to fill in the blanks?

[Corwin Weber]

Not true, neutrality happens to fall directly on one or both of the axes (or as the case may be, close to it/them).

Look.... waving your hand at a graph and saying 'Oh, they're in there somewhere, see? Squint!' doesn't help you out here.

[Corwin Weber]

...Because apparently you never learned how to read a grid, I updated it for you.

Jesus, is it really that hard to fill in the blanks?

And now you have it right. Separate and distinct alignments with separate and distinct patterns of behavior.

[Tolkien_Freak]

Look.... waving your hand at a graph and saying 'Oh, they're in there somewhere, see? Squint!' doesn't help you out here.

If you want to overlay a grid, fine. But without the grid, it actually does, if you specify where the area is (as I did).

[Luklan]

Look.... waving your hand at a graph and saying 'Oh, they're in there somewhere, see? Squint!' doesn't help you out here.

But that's... The way... Graphs... work...

...Okay, I don't mean to flame here, but it really deserves it. You failed mathematics throughout high school, didn't you? Especially where graphs are concerned?

That graph is easily the best way to show alignment. You could even do it on a scale basis. 0 in the middle for neutral, and 100 at the very edges for 'Ultimate *alignment*'

Edit; Hey, Novak? Do you mind posting a 'before editting' of your own grid? I'd like to see how obvious it really was.

[evileeyore]

Here, graph and grid to make it easy for the learning impaired. The yellow lines represent the graph, the red ones the grid.

http://www.geocities.com/evileeyore/seizurealignments.bmp

Hopefully the afterimages will last long enough you won't forget...


BURN THEM IN WITH FIRE!!!!

[SmartAlec]

And now you have it right. Separate and distinct alignments with separate and distinct patterns of behavior.

Go with the graph. It works.

It gives you have people who are:

- 100 points Lawful and 100 points Good (Extreme Lawful Good)
- 100 points Chaotic and 100 points Evil (Extreme Chaotic Evil)
- 45 points Lawful, 45 points Good (True Neutral, with lawful/good tendencies)
- 45 points Chaotic and 45 points Evil (True Neutral, with chaotic/evil tendencies)
- 60 points Good and 60 points lawful (Lawfulish Goodish)
- 25 points or less either way (True Neutral).

And everything else. If you give us just the 3x3 grid, then essentially what you're saying is "No-one can ever change their alignment., or if they do, then their entire personality is rewritten from the ground up." It can't be that way. So the nine alignments are not as distinct as you think.

After all, who says they're distinct anyway? All Lawful alignments have some similarities. All Good Alignments have similarities. Haven't you ever heard of a 'moral compass'? Saying 'Good' is just like saying 'North', but there are lots and lots of potential compass points on a compass, even if it only shows four.

Edit: To use an earlier example, and to pluck some numbers out of the air (so don't go debating these, they're just an example):

Roy: 75 points Good, 70 points Lawful (Lawful Good, with a slight emphasis on Good, and slightly coloured by cynicism and world-weariness)
Hinjo: 90 points Good, 90 points Lawful (Lawful Good, law and good balanced, idealistic)
Pre-fall Miko: 60 points good, 95 points Lawful (Lawful Good, with a heavy emphasis on Law)

There you go; three individuals with the same alignment but three different personalities courtesy of the graph.

[Snake-Aes]

Alright then folks, explain to me then what Neutral Good is. From all I've heard here it almost seems as if that alignment didn't exist.

Either it is a lawful person who does chaotic things from time to time, or its a chaotic person doing lawful from time to time.

If I recall, Chaotic is someone who purposefully and willfully flouts laws whenever they can. Lawful is someone who purposefully and willfully tries to keep to the rule of law whenever they can. Neutral is someone who is not rebellious nor will follow rules unless they think them correct.

I've yet to see Elan doing things for the sake of flouting law.

now that is plain wrong.

A better synonymous for "Lawful" is "orderly". Lawful means being consistent, being organized, being used and likely to plan and act with some forethought.
Chaos is inherent freedom, it's a person often careless, and always placing the prsent situation as priority, there's no planning, just the "now".

You have to MIX that with the Good-Evil axis. Good means respecting the others well-being. Evil means caring only about yourself, or just not caring about others enough to not make them suffer.

Lawful Good = Someone who cares about the others and doesn't act on improvise unless utmost necessary
Chaotic Good = Someone who prizes freedom above all else, and doesn't do what he doesn't agree with unless it might bring suffering to others
Lawful Evil = Someone who doesn't refrain from doing anything to get what he wants, and plans all his actions in order to benefit the most from it
Chaotic Evil = Someone who does whatever he wants, whenever he wants. Period.

Of course, there are other interpretations of those extremes, but these are a good example...

Elan's case in #471 is: He wanted a lute. He saw one in the shop and read the sign of "Back in 15 minutes". His low wisdom made him actually believe the shop owner would be back in said time, thus making it unnecessary to just go and grab it. The guards said he would have to do it NOW, and the best way was to compensate the owner for the lute, which he did, at least in his mind, for his low wisdom(again) made he believe the shop owner would come back and get the money.

[Ozymandous]

Ok, today's comic has reaffirmed something I've been thinking for some time now and been wanting to post. Why is he chaotic good? I've thought from the beginning he was neutral good.

He may do whacky stuff, but that doesn't require a chaotic temperament. That just means he's a goofball.

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.

#2. He appears to have an appreciation of the law in several strips, though none so strongly as today's. He doesn't mind bending it, and sometimes he doesn't recognize what he's doing as being unlawful, but that just more strongly hints at a neutral alignment. He does what he thinks is the right thing.


So is he really chaotic good, or does he just think that as he's not the brightest wand in the hand?

Everything Elan does is "chaotic" i.e. ruled by his emotions and what he thinks he should do at the time. That's almost the text book definition of the chaotic alignment.

As for what he did today, that has zero to do with "lawful" or the "law"; he didn't want to take the lute without paying because that would be bad. That's where his "good" aspect comes into play.

Hence Chaotic Good. A "neutral" aligned type would be less prone to completely doing what they "felt" was right and more prone to weigh things on their own merit, not necessarily doing what "felt right" and neither doing things because their internal moral code or the strict "law" dictated it must be so, both of which represent a more chaotic or lawful alignment.

[berrew]

Since there is a definitive answer to the OP that several here have posted (and immediately sprung to mind, really - the song stuck in my brain for a bit), I am hoping that he edits that OP to say "Question answered by The Giant in strip #445 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html) - Elan is CG", to prevent folk from wasting 30 minutes of their life speculating on something that's a known quantity.

I am sure that other debates will continue to rage hotly in this thread - but that particular question is moot.


*** Edit: After rereading the OP, it seems that the OP feels that Elan might be mistaken in his own alignment. I am unsure if that is possible in D&D, but perhaps? ****

[Luklan]

*** Edit: After rereading the OP, it seems that the OP feels that Elan might be mistaken in his own alignment. I am unsure if that is possible in D&D, but perhaps? ****

Well, characters don't know what their alignment actually is in D&D. They just know what ideals they wish to live up to, and emulate that.

But the characters in Order of the Stick know all the rules that govern their universe, such as attack rolls and damage rolls. Heck, back in the beginning, Durkon was missing a goblin just because he forgot to add on the bonuses given by Elan's Bard song :smallamused:

So no, it is pretty much impossible to not know your own alignment as a OotS character.

[Tolkien_Freak]

[QUOTE=Luklan;2818830]That graph is easily the best way to show alignment. You could even do it on a scale basis. 0 in the middle for neutral, and 100 at the very edges for 'Ultimate *alignment*'/QUOTE]

I agree with that analysis. 0, 100, and -100 aren't the only numbers that exist.

To improve on SmartAlec's set:
Lawful Good: 100-50 law/chaos (shall we say X axis?), 100-50 good/evil (Y axis)
Neutral Good: 50--50, 100-50
Chaotic Good: -50--100, 100-50
Lawful Neutral: 100-50, 50--50
True Neutral: 50--50, 50--50
Chaotic Neutral: -50--100, 50-50
Lawful Evil: 100-50, -50--100
Neutral Evil: 50--50, -50-100
Chaotic Evil: -100--50, -100--50

I would describe myself as 45,85. It'd be a fun project to go through and assign numeric values to characters' alignments.
(Hm, maybe this is an improvement over D&D's system...?)

[Luklan]

Amusingly, that's the system they use in NWN (Neverwinter Nights). Dunno about it's half-arsed sequel though...

Except it's more like;

Chaos-Law 0-100 (0 for uber chaos, 100 for uber law)
Evil-Good 0-100 (0 for uber evil, 100 for uber good)

With neutral being 50, on both scales.

So you could be a paladin as anywhere between 75-100 good, or 75-100 lawful :smallamused:

[Tolkien_Freak]

Amusingly, that's the system they use in NWN (Neverwinter Nights). Dunno about it's half-arsed sequel though...

Except it's more like;

Chaos-Law 0-100 (0 for uber chaos, 100 for uber law)
Evil-Good 0-100 (0 for uber evil, 100 for uber good)

With neutral being 50, on both scales.

So you could be a paladin as anywhere between 75-100 good, or 75-100 lawful :smallamused:

True. I just chose 100--100 as 1) it's more reflective of the graph's structure (the axis runs through the middle, not at the edge), and 2) it doubles your possible precision with double the range.

[berrew]

<snip>
So no, it is pretty much impossible to not know your own alignment as a OotS character.Yeah - I apologize. I meant to say, "in OoTS", not "in D&D". If Elan knows enough to tell someone to add in a combat modifier, then he certainly knows his own alignment.

[Luklan]

True. I just chose 100--100 as 1) it's more reflective of the graph's structure (the axis runs through the middle, not at the edge), and 2) it doubles your possible precision with double the range.

And considering who we're trying to convince here of the fact that alignments aren't straightjackets, extra accuracy is more important... :smallamused:


Yeah - I apologize. I meant to say, "in OoTS", not "in D&D". If Elan knows enough to tell someone to add in a combat modifier, then he certainly knows his own alignment.

Well, actually, it was Roy who pointed it out. But yeah, I mean, if they can talk about adding '+1 to hit from Elan's bard song' or +5 swords, then I'm sure they know their own alignment. Or, my favourite example, is V in this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0243.html) strip. Last frame.

[tainsouvra]

If I recall, Chaotic is someone who purposefully and willfully flouts laws whenever they can. You recall incorrectly.

"Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility." ~D&D rules

Free-spirited, adaptable, flexibile, reckless, arbitrary, irresponsibile. If that does not describe Elan to you, I don't know what to tell you.

(edit)
As an added thing, if he consistently flouted established rules whenever he could, that would be following a strict and impersonal guideline--a non-chaotic action. I don't believe a definition of chaos would involve following a rule no matter what the consequence, even that one...do you?

[Ichneumon]

Nale is Lawful Evil, so Elan must be CG.

[Baalzebub]

I'm just waiting for the moment in which Rich Burlew will post in this thread and say: "Elan is CG people!! Jeez!! :smallmad:" just like that "Belkar is NE" thread.

Yeah... I'm waiting for him :smallcool:

[Calemyr]

The quotes example:
Lawful

There were things that Done and things that were Not Done, and when a thing is Done, that's what I'll Do.

Neutral

I'm not the sort to put myself forward, you know. I don't like to rock the boat or nothin'. But I find what you're doing offensive and I'm not puttin' up with it!

Chaotic

The purpose of law is to tell a man who is and how he should behave, and to that I say no. I will decide who I am and how I'll behave!

There's an anime called S-Cry-ed out there that, in my opinion, displays an excellent study in terms of the political alignment axis by presenting three people of intensely different political leanings while all three should probably be placed firmly in the "good" category. I hope this makes sense to those of you who have not seen this excellent series.

Lawful

The character of Ryuhou whole-heartedly believes in discipline, order, and duty. Scarred by his mother's death during an attack by a monster, Ryuhou came to the belief that when you accept your place in society, when you work for the society and you put it's benefit before your own, then you can live a fullfilling and ultimately happy life. Those who refuse to fit in are selfish and dangerous barbarians that must be dealt with before they can harm society and the people it protects. And when those in power prove to be harmful to the society and the order, Ryuhou shows them the same ruthless determination.

Neutral

The character of Tachibana at first appears no less lawful than Ryuhou, but the truth is he is neutral. Tachibana acts as law enforcement because he has become accustomed to the benefits of society and the satisfaction of his own position within it. However, when he loses that satisfaction and those benefits are endangered, he abandons that society. Afterwards, he does what he can to still assist the people he fought to protect as a smuggler, a role in which he found equal satisfaction. In other words, Tachibana's actions were always motivated by personal benefit and an altruistic nature - whether he worked with the law or against it had no overpowering value for him.

Chaotic

The main character of the show, Kazuma, is the epitome of chaos. He acts on emotion and instinct, never thinks things through, and puts absolute value on his own identity. He hates to be told what to do and despises labels such as class or rank with a passion. While he puts faith only in himself, he cares for other people and will fight and die (if need be) to protect their freedoms and becomes enraged when others try to force their beliefs or order on anyone, especially those in no position to resist. He distrusts Ryuhou's society because he thinks it strips away individuality, leaving only mindless automatons living out their meaningless days with vapid smiles. He holds that you cannot make a man happy, that it is their choice and anything else is a lie.

Elan is an individualistic soul, though not militantly so. He acts based on his emotions and with little to no forethought, and displays no regard for law or societal mores. What he does value, however, are people. He listens to Roy because he considers the LG Fighter to be his best friend, not because he considers Roy his leader. May other points have already been discussed around here, but allow me to say one more thing: To be neutral, there has to be some indication of balance, and Elan's chaotic nature far and away outweighs any lawful tendencies he may occassionally exhibit. There's no getting around it: the boy is chaotic.

[nifler]

Sigh.

Alignments are Guidelines Not Straight-jackets.

That line gets trotted out a lot, but it doesn't make it any less true. Also, Being Lawful/Chaotic isn't so much about following the laws of the land as it is a viewpoint about the purpose of those laws (otherwise you couldn't have CG Leaders). [NOTE::: I don't care what line taken out of context you want to show me from a rulebook that says otherwise. If the Law/Chaos dichotomy was all about following/not following the Laws of the Land then you could not have a functioning society. Or Alignment system for that matter. :smalltongue: ]

Elan wanted to wait around because the shop keeper (allegedly) promised that he would be back in 15 minutes. Now of course, anyone with a half-way decent WIS score would probably guess that the 15 minutes have long passed. But that's irrelevant to Elan. He truly believed that the shopkeeper would be back in 15 minutes (thus he hadn't abandoned the store) and therefore he shouldn't rob someone of something he didn't need desperately.

After all, he needed the clothes to make his escape from Cliffport (or so he thought at the time). Mr. Lute? Well, that's just a nice little extra. The lute wasn't required to make his escape, and Elan only wanted it to make himself feel better. Hence "stealing in a bad way".

So this isn't a Law/Chaos thing, but a Right/Wrong thing. Once Elan had been reminded that he could just place a bag of money there (which is probably just going to be stolen anyway), he grabbed at it like a shot. Why? Because it solved the Good/Evil dilemma that was raging in Elan's heart. Heck a Lawful Person, knowing that whatever he left behind is just going to get stolen, especially with a now-broken window, probably [b]wouldn't steal the item. Or maybe they would, but come up with an entirely different reason why they would do it.

People can preform the exact same action for different reasons from different philosophical viewpoints. After all, both a Lawful Good person and a Chaotic Good person can work to overthrow the Evil Tyrant. Just because they preform identical actions, it doesn't necessarily follow that the act is inherently more Lawful/Chaotic for one of the people involved.

Or to sum up, Law and Chaos isn't the be all and end all of everything. And, in a bit of a heretical notion for some people around here, intent and action matter to alignment. It wouldn't be a philosophical viewpoint if that wasn't the case. :smallsmile:

Oh, THANK YOU, person who gets the idea. :elan: is crying 'cause of lack of people like you.

[Jalor]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html

Panel #9, or 8.5ish.

There you go. Elan's alignment, according to the giant himself. QED.

DingDingDing! We have a winner!

[Merlin the Tuna]

It doesn't matter. Intelligence does not dictate alignment, period. (Unless your Intelligence is under 3, which automatically makes you Neutral.)Unless you're undead, in which case you're evil. Unless you're both undead and an elf, in which case you may be good again.

Look, alignment is a goofy hat that people can put on characters so D&D remains a game of adventuring and exterminating entire races instead of automatically being a game of complex rationalization. Dealing with courts and philosophers isn't as important when you can just say "I killed him because he was a goblin, and nobody likes goblins because they're capital-e Evil." The Law-Chaos axis in particular is wonky, and as a result is even harder to agree on, particularly because the original descriptions of the alignments are so vague.

Alignment is dumb. As soon as you start trying to be smart about it, it poops on your face. Don't think too hard and you'll be okay.

[Kaerbek]

Ok, today's comic has reaffirmed something I've been thinking for some time now and been wanting to post. Why is he chaotic good? I've thought from the beginning he was neutral good.

He may do whacky stuff, but that doesn't require a chaotic temperament. That just means he's a goofball.

#1. In one of the strips he has chaos and law appear before him. A chaotic fellow wouldn't have to ask both sides, he'd go with chaos.

#2. He appears to have an appreciation of the law in several strips, though none so strongly as today's. He doesn't mind bending it, and sometimes he doesn't recognize what he's doing as being unlawful, but that just more strongly hints at a neutral alignment. He does what he thinks is the right thing.


So is he really chaotic good, or does he just think that as he's not the brightest wand in the hand?


¡FOR THE LOVE OF OPRAH MAN! I just can't believe I'm reading this!!!! aaarrrhhhhgggg!!!!


So, hum, btw, Belkar is Chaotic Neutral........................................... ......

Oh, right, and V's actual gender is half-dromedary, lets not forget that xD

oh, oh, oh! of course! Xykon is totally sooo.. Lawful evil!!! ¡yay! didn't you notice??


¡Oh God, kill me now!

http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/5571/godkillae7.jpg

[Baalzebub]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html

Panel #9, or 8.5ish.

There you go. Elan's alignment, according to the giant himself. QED.

Yup. I'm just waiting for Rich to come over and shouts Elan's alignment to all of you. :smallmad:

[Hushdawg]

V is definitely good. See PHB, p. 297, Unholy Blight "...good creature...causes it to be sickened...creatures who are neither evil nor good...are not sickened." And...

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html

Belkar is evil. The rest of the party is good. End of story.

Dude, you really need to re-examine the description and what is happening in the comic.

All that comic established is that Belkar is evil and that Durkon failed his will save against being sickened.

All the rest of the party are just expressing the feeling associated with the Unholy Blight spell instead of just saying "oh, this is causing damage or only half damage to me"

[Corwin Weber]

'Alignment is not a straightjacket' does not mean the same thing as 'alignment is a name that I get to define any way I want.'

Geez.... some of you people apparently have neutral good characters who have no problem with ritual sacrificial killings of the innocent. But hey, you say they're still NG, so they're apparently still NG. So it's all good, right?

[Ithekro]

I would think those people are thinking more of LN, TN, and CN than NG.

[Rasumichin]

Geez.... some of you people apparently have neutral good characters who have no problem with ritual sacrificial killings of the innocent. But hey, you say they're still NG, so they're apparently still NG. So it's all good, right?

What gave you that idea?
All people here are saying is that there's evil characters who are more evil than others, or chaotic characters who are less chaotic than others and so on.

Let's take a look at the axis model laid out on the previous pages.
-100 is obviously the most evil thing in the multiverse.
At some point, evil with shades of moral neutrality begins (say, -60).
Further up the line, e.g. at -30, neutrality with evil tendencies begins.
To be neutral with good tendencies, one would have to move up to +30 in this example.

If the Snarl gets -100 on the moral axis (in the OotS-verse, he's an obvious candidate for this), making it absolute evil, Xykon would be somewhere around -90.
Still utterly evil, but not as inherently corrupt as the Snarl.
Belkar could be around -80.
Xykon is worse, but the Belkster is still far from being borderline neutral.

And by the way, this model, which offers clear and distinct borders for each alignment, but still allows to differentiate, does not exclude the possibility that there's different reasons for alignments, or different ways to llive up to your alignment.

A true neutral person, for example, might be apathetic to concepts such as good and evil, law and chaos, not caring about things on a larger scale than his everyday life; or he might have decided that, after carefull consideration, he prefers to stay agnostic towards the issue, unable to determine which side to take; or he might harbor some exotic belief that the multiverse should be in balance and therefore no side should be taken.

3 completely different outlooks/moral compasses, yet all are clearly TN and would suffer alignment change if they would behave accordingly.

[Tolkien_Freak]

I think what Corwin is saying is that they're Neutral GOOD - using the numeric system, their alignment would be -50 to 50 Law/Chaos, 50 to 100 Evil/Good. It doesn't seem to me that anyone with that high of an Evil/Good alignment score would be able to stand back and let that happen. TN or NE I can understand, but NG, no.

[Rasumichin]

I think what Corwin is saying is that they're Neutral GOOD - using the numeric system, their alignment would be -50 to 50 Law/Chaos, 50 to 100 Evil/Good. It doesn't seem to me that anyone with that high of an Evil/Good alignment score would be able to stand back and let that happen. TN or NE I can understand, but NG, no.

I completely agree, but who on this thread wouldn't?
That's what im wondering about, since Corwin implies in his last post that some of us here would have a different opinion on that matter, which i can hardly imagine.

[F.H. Zebedee]

Besides, I highly doubt someone can be mistaken about own alignment.
*Miko**Miko*

But otherwise, yeah. Elan's Chaotic Good. Haley has at points danced on the edge of Chaotic Neutral (almost selling an evil person into slavery for money), but Elan's always been thoroughly Chaotic Good. He generally is afraid of hurting people, but otherwise will lie and deceive if it reaches his perceived goals. He's extremely impulsive, to the point where almost any action seems to be a good one to him.

[ImaginalDisc]

Besides, I highly doubt someone can be mistaken about own alignment.

One word rebuttal: Miko.

Wait, someone said that all ready. Blast.

[Snake-Aes]

*Miko**Miko*

But otherwise, yeah. Elan's Chaotic Good. Haley has at points danced on the edge of Chaotic Neutral (almost selling an evil person into slavery for money), but Elan's always been thoroughly Chaotic Good. He generally is afraid of hurting people, but otherwise will lie and deceive if it reaches his perceived goals. He's extremely impulsive, to the point where almost any action seems to be a good one to him.

She always said she was Lawful Good, and as far as I know she's still lawful good. Sorry.

[Corwin Weber]

I think what Corwin is saying is that they're Neutral GOOD - using the numeric system, their alignment would be -50 to 50 Law/Chaos, 50 to 100 Evil/Good. It doesn't seem to me that anyone with that high of an Evil/Good alignment score would be able to stand back and let that happen. TN or NE I can understand, but NG, no.

What I'm saying is that a lot of people here seem to think that they get to re-write the alignment definitions on a whim when they're clearly defined, especially with regards to ethical alignments. Some of the arguments I've heard on this forum in general basically ignore the difference between law and chaos in a way that they'd never even consider doing with good and evil.

[David Argall]

Dude, you really need to re-examine the description and what is happening in the comic.

All that comic established is that Belkar is evil and that Durkon failed his will save against being sickened.

All the rest of the party are just expressing the feeling associated with the Unholy Blight spell instead of just saying "oh, this is causing damage or only half damage to me"

"Can't think.", "Can't move.", "Overwhelmed by pure evil", and dropping your sword, are not representative of mere hp damage. They are much more appropriate to "sickened", which is a drop in basic ability. So all 5 failed the save. The comments are of a sort. They do not allow us to say anybody was not sickened.

[The Extinguisher]

It was said that Durkon was the only one who was sickened. Hence the fact that he is all different from the rest.

[David Argall]

It is claimed that only the dwarf was sickened, but the claim is simply not supported by the text. What we have is statements by each of the other damaged individuals that is consistent with their ability to react being hurt, that they were sickened. Since the comments are each different, we can not draw any conclusion that says one of the 5 is not good. We have to assume all are good.

We can add the comment of the evil cleric, calling all of them pure hearted. Since he didn't realize Belkar was evil, we can't deem him a perfect authority, but he remains a witness who should have been able to see if someone was not sickened by the spell. Instead he seems to be sure they all were.

And the very nature of the joke here obviously works best if all members of the OOTS except Belkar were good.

[Tolkien_Freak]

It is claimed that only the dwarf was sickened, but the claim is simply not supported by the text. What we have is statements by each of the other damaged individuals that is consistent with their ability to react being hurt, that they were sickened. Since the comments are each different, we can not draw any conclusion that says one of the 5 is not good. We have to assume all are good.

We can add the comment of the evil cleric, calling all of them pure hearted. Since he didn't realize Belkar was evil, we can't deem him a perfect authority, but he remains a witness who should have been able to see if someone was not sickened by the spell. Instead he seems to be sure they all were.

And the very nature of the joke here obviously works best if all members of the OOTS except Belkar were good.

Agreed. Though at that time Rich may not have been sure of everything (it is only #11), so we can't make it say 'yes, V is definitely Good' or anything of the sort.

[David Argall]

Agreed. Though at that time Rich may not have been sure of everything (it is only #11), so we can't make it say 'yes, V is definitely Good' or anything of the sort.

A point [especially since sicken was being treated as "lose 1-4 rounds of action" rather than "act inferiorly for 1-4 rounds"], but it still gives us the default, and we now need proof that V is no longer good, not proof he/she is good.

[Iranon]

The Unholy Blight does not conclusively answer anything.

From a mechanical point of view, the effects shown hint at stunned rather than sickened, in which case it is a vastly uprated homebrew.

The nature of the damage (pure evil tugging at your soul or something like that) might make it look like more than it is rules-wise... even with the modest damage suffered by Neutral characters.
Being on the receiving end of a vigorous kick in the junk might only be 2 points of nonlethal damage, but I wouldn't roleplay it that way.



There is plenty of minor evidence for V being non-Good. S/h/it enjoys blowing people up far more than is healthy, was shown indifferent to the plight of the dirt farmers and seems to have no compunction against using magic for sinister ends (from a little sexual humiliation over an unspecified 'tampering with the fundamental natural order' to binding souls).

[I'm da Rogue!]

And, Rogue, I repeat what I've said in another thread - Elan lacks WIS, not INT. He gets 6 skill points, making his INT 12-13, and also wouldn't be able to come up with witty repartee every Dashing Swordsman needs, if he lacked INT.

At strip #50 (Elan & Nale finding out they're twins),
Elan's first reaction is of a person with an Intelligence of 10 or lower. 12-13 is definetely NOT Elan's INT... Come on!
I don't think that a Dashing Swardsman needs INT, that's the dwelist.
Even if Elan got 12 skill points per level, I would still believe that he's stupid. Not just a lack of wisdom, but both int and wis. I think his intelligence is lower than his wisdom.

[factotum]

Even if Elan got 12 skill points per level, I would still believe that he's stupid. Not just a lack of wisdom, but both int and wis. I think his intelligence is lower than his wisdom.

Well, it doesn't really matter what you believe when the rules completely disagree with you--Elan has to be around Int 12 to get the 6 extra skill points he got when he was upgraded to 3.5. Most of the time Elan acts more childish (e.g. lacking Wisdom) than stupid anyway.

[lavidor10]

V says he can't cast cantrips. Plus... he is stupid.

[Snake-Aes]

Well, it doesn't really matter what you believe when the rules completely disagree with you--Elan has to be around Int 12 to get the 6 extra skill points he got when he was upgraded to 3.5. Most of the time Elan acts more childish (e.g. lacking Wisdom) than stupid anyway.

Giant already said Elan was talking about the increase from 4 to 6 skill points per level of bards in the 3.5 update, not how many points he gained.

[Tyrmatt]

Elan, despite being a grown man is still a child at heart and Mummy's lessons that "Stealing is Wrong" are still as important to him as the air he breathes. He's Chaotic because he's a stereotypical bard and Good because his mama raised him right. Nuff said. :)

[Kish]

Well, it doesn't really matter what you believe when the rules completely disagree with you--Elan has to be around Int 12 to get the 6 extra skill points he got when he was upgraded to 3.5.

I've seen lots of people claim him saying "six new skill points" in comic #2 proves his Intelligence is--something. It varies widely. None of them have ever explained why; maybe you'll be the first. Why would changing from 3.0 to 3.5 give only a bard with 12-13 Intelligence six skill points?

[jamroar]

I've seen lots of people claim him saying "six new skill points" in comic #2 proves his Intelligence is--something. It varies widely. None of them have ever explained why; maybe you'll be the first. Why would changing from 3.0 to 3.5 give only a bard with 12-13 Intelligence six skill points?

Bards get 6 skill points per level + INT modifier in 3.5 (Instead of the old 4 per level+INT mod, which is why it is noteworthy). Therefore Elan must have a INT modifier of exactly 0, giving him an average INT of 10 or 11.

However,

shouldn't he have gained an additional 2 + ((level -1) x 2) points retroactively from the gains to his initial and previous Bard levels as well? Well, maybe it'll come in as a plot point later when he's in dire need for a trained skill and discovers he has unallocated points

[Kish]

Bards get 6 skill points per level + INT modifier in 3.5 (Instead of the old 4 per level+INT mod, which is why it is noteworthy).

Yes, I'm aware of that fact. What of it? Elan didn't gain a level, he just got converted from 3.0ed to 3.5ed.

[Twilight Jack]

Bards get 6 skill points per level + INT modifier in 3.5 (Instead of the old 4 per level+INT mod, which is why it is noteworthy). Therefore Elan must have a INT modifier of exactly 0, giving him an average INT of 10 or 11.

However,

shouldn't he have gained an additional 2 + ((level -1) x 2) points retroactively from the gains to his initial and previous Bard levels as well? Well, maybe it'll come in as a plot point later when he's in dire need for a trained skill and discovers he has unallocated points

Alternately, he could gain 6 from the class, lose 1 for an Intelligence of 8, then gain it back through the virtues of being Human (1 extra skill point per level).

That's if we're actually trying to parse that much meaning out of his song in the second ever comic.

[RAGE KING!]

I dont see that any of this is relevant. I thought we already established that the 6 new skill points thing was for the upgrade from 3.0-3.5 therefore his intelligence cannot be discerned from that comic. we already know he is stupid. also, i personally consider elan a better character as chaotic good, then he would be if he were neutral good. Him being chaotic good is justified, and i think it´s better...:elan:

[Hushdawg]

I think people are missing the point here.. if Elan's dump stat was INT then he'd be like Thog and be a complete moron. However, Elan is very goofy and doesn't think things through. When he is in a tight spot he is able to come up with a good plan and work things through; I think Wisdom is his dump stat since that came into question when he wanted to cross-class into cleric.

I think Elan probably has a 10-11 INT as others have said, this does not make him stupid, it actually puts him at the AVERAGE for humans.

His WIS on the other hand is probably an 8.