What alignment would this character be?

[SangoProduction]

I'm going out on a limb here, and going to say "some type of Evil", but still, going to ask. It needs to fit in with an evil campaign, and I worry it might not be "evil" enough. We got a session 0 in, and I added the "Virtuoso of Death" theme to him, after deciding "hmm...ok, insanity, and simply having no concept of death (and it's just him playing), might not be quite enough".

Of course, the party isn't all "rape and murder everyone" but still, it's a bit further ahead than my character was. And we are kinda being asked to start a war of sorts, which, I couldn't see my original concept being able to do that.

---------------

I have an insane character. You guys probably know of the madman monk I've been asking about in a couple forums now. Like, insane, in the more or less harmless way, like seeing a rock concert where an otherwise typical bard is playing a lute, or clapping clam shells and tap dancing into a hostile (though not immediately violent) situation. He's normally little more dangerous than a happy drunk.

Though, when he senses combat, his demeanor shifts entirely - it's effectively a different personality. This personality is one that sees a "beautiful death" as the greatest gift one can bestow, and the descent in to madness (which he also "gifts") allows them to see the performance for the art it is...or so he believes. Indeed, an ugly death is more detestable than his own pain - dishonoring the art, and ruining the performance.

This second personality seems to hide patiently, and is more reactive to aggression than to be one to provoke it. Of course, he has absolutely no qualms about finishing a kill (if it's done right), if the second personality has been drawn out.

As far as the "start a war" deal goes, the first personality doesn't understand it, but the second one sees it as an opportunity to practice the true arts, though the thought of so many ugly deaths that the war will undoubtedly be...unsettling for him. Thus, if it's going to happen, he'd do what he can to make the deaths that must happen, True Art.

[Knitifine]

Consult with your DM, who is ultimately the adjudicator of how the standards for morality are in their game.

[Geddy2112]

Generally, your artistic death types are either lawful or chaotic evil. The assassin troubadour, dancer, purveyors of an artistic tradition or discipline(that doubles as a way to kill people) are your LE variants of this trope. Chaotic evils are rarer, but when they do it they normally have a very shock art approach to their "trade" and its a grandiose spectacle of utter brutality-Sander Cohen from Bioshock is this to a T. The thing about both of these types is that they are unlikely to kill just anyone-only those who truly deserve to be subjected to their art or royally pissed them off. They may have to kill others, but they are going to be more likely to use pragmatic methods to get them out of the way, saving their true craft for those on the list.

As some of the fellow playgrounders have written in their guides, they would call the LE variant the rival (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?448542-Compliance-Will-Be-Rewarded-A-Guide-to-Lawful-Evil) and the CE variant the experimentalist (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?446414-No-Limits-No-Regrets-A-guide-to-the-Chaotic-Evil-alignment).

The fact that all of that lies on the inside could easily make it non evil-even good. Double so if you have a jekyl/hyde situation, where the beast lurking within is a monster, but the dude up front is actively trying to hold it back. Plenty of barbarians have rage lurking in them that is similar to the monster you have described.

The thing is-does he like or encourage the other half, or try to suppress it? If he genuinely feels horrible, or when the monster takes charge he tries to make the deaths swift? From what I can tell, he tries to hide it, both by being aloof and the monster not coming out until hostilities break out. He does not seem the type to encourage this to come out, or particularly enjoy it. The fact of war being ugly deaths shows at least some concern for life, but his understanding that it breaks a few eggs is nongood.

I would probably say true neutral/chaotic neutral for the first guy, lawful evil for the second. You might want to try and get the vigilante class mechanic of two alignments for your character approved, if they are really two different personalities and people. Since you have two different people, sets of actions, and worldview, I would split the difference, maybe neutral evil with a small E, or just neutral. Alignments get messy when you have actions and thoughts in somebody that are caused by duress or some form of mental illness.

[SangoProduction]

Consult with your DM, who is ultimately the adjudicator of how the standards for morality are in their game.

Not exactly helpful, as that was obvious. I was asking for community opinions of what they thought. If nothing else, it tends to be interesting the discussion that gets brought up.

[SangoProduction]

Generally, your artistic death types are either lawful or chaotic evil. The assassin troubadour, dancer, purveyors of an artistic tradition or discipline(that doubles as a way to kill people) are your LE variants of this trope. Chaotic evils are rarer, but when they do it they normally have a very shock art approach to their "trade" and its a grandiose spectacle of utter brutality-Sander Cohen from Bioshock is this to a T. The thing about both of these types is that they are unlikely to kill just anyone-only those who truly deserve to be subjected to their art or royally pissed them off. They may have to kill others, but they are going to be more likely to use pragmatic methods to get them out of the way, saving their true craft for those on the list.

As some of the fellow playgrounders have written in their guides, they would call the LE variant the rival (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?448542-Compliance-Will-Be-Rewarded-A-Guide-to-Lawful-Evil) and the CE variant the experimentalist (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?446414-No-Limits-No-Regrets-A-guide-to-the-Chaotic-Evil-alignment).

The fact that all of that lies on the inside could easily make it non evil-even good. Double so if you have a jekyl/hyde situation, where the beast lurking within is a monster, but the dude up front is actively trying to hold it back. Plenty of barbarians have rage lurking in them that is similar to the monster you have described.

The thing is-does he like or encourage the other half, or try to suppress it? If he genuinely feels horrible, or when the monster takes charge he tries to make the deaths swift? From what I can tell, he tries to hide it, both by being aloof and the monster not coming out until hostilities break out. He does not seem the type to encourage this to come out, or particularly enjoy it. The fact of war being ugly deaths shows at least some concern for life, but his understanding that it breaks a few eggs is nongood.

I would probably say true neutral/chaotic neutral for the first guy, lawful evil for the second. You might want to try and get the vigilante class mechanic of two alignments for your character approved, if they are really two different personalities and people. Since you have two different people, sets of actions, and worldview, I would split the difference, maybe neutral evil with a small E, or just neutral. Alignments get messy when you have actions and thoughts in somebody that are caused by duress or some form of mental illness.

To answer your questions (and give my further thoughts):

I don't think the first personality even knows about the second, nor probably really understand what the second does (if it is remembered). I probably think of the second personality as a watchful vulture, which was originally a defense mechanism while escaping (less than peacefully) from his slavery. The second personality eventually developed its own reasons for sitting by and acting as a shield.

It doesn't create its own opportunities for art, but it doesn't squander what it's given. The second probably is more like an opportunistic scavenger than a predator, in this regard. Of course, the last bit still applies. It still has taken a liking to what it does - or perhaps it just takes sanctity in justifying what it does? I dunno. (I haven't gotten to play it through yet. Things normally become more certain when I do.)

During the instructing to cause war and what have you, the second probably took the reigns at least a bit - which is consistent with how he played out in the session 0 where he stopped acting silly, and sat...quietly.

About the war: It's more akin to "Well, it's better me doing it than someone who will make *all* the deaths ugly." At this point, he can't very well go against the master who has called the party to start a war. I'm not sure if it's sanctity for life, or if it's simply some sort of pride thing. Could be both.

Yeah. Hmm. That makes sense The GM did say he was having trouble with the custom magic item he wanted to give me. (Everyone gets 1.) Perhaps that double alignment thing could be an effect of it. That way, at least, I am not just getting things for free).

Of course, it's not as though the second personality is sleeping while the other's in control. So perhaps it makes more sense that the one with a greater will (the second) would overpower the "alignment" of the one who doesn't really contribute to alignments (being mostly neutral, leaning towards evil).

interesting thoughts. Thanks for responding.

[Geddy2112]

I don't think the first personality even knows about the second, nor probably really understand what the second does (if it is remembered). I probably think of the second personality as a watchful vulture, which was originally a defense mechanism while escaping (less than peacefully) from his slavery. The second personality eventually developed its own reasons for sitting by and acting as a shield.
This washes the hands of the first clean, but not scott free. It sounds like he is neutral on the surface, unable to take life or get his hands dirty, so to justify his need/ability to do so, he has Hyde do the dirtywork, and Dr. Jekyl gets to walk away not having done any of the horrible things he needed to do to survive.


It doesn't create its own opportunities for art, but it doesn't squander what it's given. The second probably is more like an opportunistic scavenger than a predator, in this regard. Of course, the last bit still applies. It still has taken a liking to what it does - or perhaps it just takes sanctity in justifying what it does? I dunno. (I haven't gotten to play it through yet. Things normally become more certain when I do.)
This sounds like the motivation behind a lot of neutral evil druids and similar nature types. The scavenger, the apex predator, the envoy of death.


About the war: It's more akin to "Well, it's better me doing it than someone who will make *all* the deaths ugly." At this point, he can't very well go against the master who has called the party to start a war. I'm not sure if it's sanctity for life, or if it's simply some sort of pride thing. Could be both.Although dark, maybe neutral in a pragmatic "if horrible things should be done, at least they should be done properly" sort of sense. If you participate, you can prevent it from being any worse than it will be. Still leans evil, but it is not anywhere close to capital E evil. Soldiers in war following orders...well, it is tricky.


Of course, it's not as though the second personality is sleeping while the other's in control. So perhaps it makes more sense that the one with a greater will (the second) would overpower the "alignment" of the one who doesn't really contribute to alignments (being mostly neutral, leaning towards evil). That is probably the best call, Neutral leaning neutral evil. Using the 5x5 alignment chart, neutral immoral would be a good fit, as you are not super evil, but by no means good.

Overall, I don't see your character having a problem being around other super baddie evil villain types, even though you might not be in it for the same reasons. Your character won't be trying to pull a paragon of virtue on them, and unless they start being stupid puppy kicking evil for the lulz your character is likely not to be bothered by evil acts. Your backstory strongly suggests you would not tolerate slavery from comrades, so if anyone in your party is hellbent on doing so, you need to work that out in advance. It might not be a reconcilable difference.