If a character was "Dexter like" how would you classify their allignment?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I am thinking Chaotic Good.

Dexter is motivated to act for the greater good of humanity even if that steps outside the lines.

[Goober4473]

Definitely Lawful. He steps outside the law, but not his own moral code. His own self-imposed rules are central to his existence, to the point where I'd go so far as to call him textbook lawful. A paragon of what lawful means.

By D&D standards, he's also probably Good, since killing evil things in D&D is usually considered a good act. On the other hand, he does lie pretty constantly, so he could also be neutral on the good-evil axis.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

Honestly, Lawful Evil tinging towards Lawful Neutral. He's got his Code, that he lives by, is a creature of predictable habits, he's methodical and orderly, and he enjoys murdering people.

Killing evil creatures is often but not always a good deed in D&D, it depends on the circumstances. And "when they're tied up and helpless and only after torturing them for fun first" is not the proper circumstances.

[Ruslan]

Lawful Evil. He enjoys killing, and just happens to be working within the framework of a law that says "only kill bad guys".

[Naanomi]

I agree, Lawful Evil with Neutral tendencies (on both axis)

[Temperjoke]

Never watched it, but didn't he also take advantage of society's laws and procedures to hide his actions, while acting as a benefit to society by assisting them?

[Finback]

Totally LE. Isn't part of his motivation that he is subsuming his own urges to murder, by simply refocussing that onto other criminals? He's using his police background to simply make that easier.

[Angelmaker]

I am thinking Chaotic Good.

Dexter is motivated to act for the greater good of humanity even if that steps outside the lines.
CG? Dexter kills to satisfy his neeed for killing. He isn't the punisher, he is a homicidal maniac. He is also bending the law by interfering with investigations in many cases. NE at best, CE at worst.

I am pretty sure, he could simply. Cooperate with his sister if he was simply interested in catching the bad guys. No, he is self-serving by fulfilling his needs.

[CaptainSarathai]

Depends on how your axis works.
If "Lawful" means respecting to the written laws of the land, the he's probably not that. He's often going outside the law.

If "Lawful" means having a strong and predictable moral code that you adhere to internally, then yes, he's absolutely that.

If "Good" means just killing bad guys and ultately do a service for the greater benefit of everyone - then he's a good guy.

If "Good" means being ethical, merciful, fair, and so forth, then he's definitely not that.

[MrFahrenheit]

In this edition, RAW lawful neutral is the all-encompassing alignment. Personal code? I'd say LN.

[Coffee_Dragon]

One axis Batman, the other Snowflake.

[dejarnjc]

CG? Dexter kills to satisfy his neeed for killing. He isn't the punisher, he is a homicidal maniac. He is also bending the law by interfering with investigations in many cases. NE at best, CE at worst.

I am pretty sure, he could simply. Cooperate with his sister if he was simply interested in catching the bad guys. No, he is self-serving by fulfilling his needs.

He's pretty much a homicidal maniac if you watch the whole thing though I do agree with you that he's NE. I think he starts out LE and degenerates to NE throughout the course of the show. There are quite a few of his murders that fall outside the spectrum of Dexter's own rules and would definitely not be considered "good" or "lawful" or even "neutral" really..

Here's a short list of his innocent victims.

http://dexter.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Dexter's_innocent_victims

[Naanomi]

He's pretty much a homicidal maniac if you watch the whole thing though I do agree with you that he's NE. I think he starts out LE and degenerates to NE throughout the course of the show. There are quite a few of his murders that fall outside the spectrum of Dexter's own rules and would definitely not be considered "good" or "lawful" or even "neutral" really..

Here's a short list of his innocent victims.

http://dexter.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Dexter's_innocent_victims
Overall I say Lawful Evil, but I agree he crept towards Neutral Evil off and on throughout the series

[SethoMarkus]

This is fairly clearly LE/LN "For the Greater Good" mindset, even if that mondset is just a facade to cover up his true intentions. Probably right that he does shift towards Chaotic later on.

Really, I could unserstand the "Chaotic" bit if you put Lawful purely as "follows rules" rather than "prioritizes order", but Good?! Remind me to stay away from and Paladins/Clerics of Good gods/ideals in your settings...

[Kurald Galain]

If "Good" means just killing bad guys and ultately do a service for the greater benefit of everyone - then he's a good guy.

"Evil, but for a good cause" is nevertheless evil. Just because somebody can justify his own actions internally (basically like every person ever) doesn't make him good.

[Naanomi]

"Evil, but for a good cause" is nevertheless evil. Just because somebody can justify his own actions internally (basically like every person ever) doesn't make him good.
Heck Dexter doesn't even justify his own actions internally all the time, he recognizes and acknowledges he is a monster

[Tanarii]

I don't really know Dexter, but from what little I do know it seems like this would be the best 5e Alignment for someone wanting to play a Dexter-like character:

Lawful evil (LE) creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order.

(Edit: Or possibly:
Neutral evil (NE) is the alignment of those who do whatever they can get away with, without compassion or qualms.)

Of course, that'd be a small thing compared to the Personality, Ideal, Bond and Flaw traits. Because in this case, it seems like things like being a psychopath or sociopath (whichever he is) are far more important for making in-character decisions than social and moral attitudes.

[Knaight]

He's pretty much a homicidal maniac if you watch the whole thing though I do agree with you that he's NE. I think he starts out LE and degenerates to NE throughout the course of the show. There are quite a few of his murders that fall outside the spectrum of Dexter's own rules and would definitely not be considered "good" or "lawful" or even "neutral" really..

Here's a short list of his innocent victims.

http://dexter.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Dexter's_innocent_victims

I'd call him lawful evil as well, but that list is deceptive. According to that page Figg is an assisted suicide, Farrow was a murderer's accomplice with a long history of sub-murder violence, and while the others fit Donevic was a case of someone who managed to do something that made them look exceedingly guilty*.

*While also an object lesson in why one person doing minimal research acting as judge, jury, and executioner is a terrible idea. Even if Dexter's premise of how these people all deserve to be killed extrajudicially was held as true, the character is still shockingly cavalier about how much evidence is needed to murder somebody.

[DracoKnight]

the character is still shockingly cavalier about how much evidence is needed to murder somebody.

A habit that becomes even more disturbing when you remember he's basically a junkie jonesing for his next high.

[Dr.Samurai]

I'd say Neutral Evil.

I don't think the "code" is enough to make Dexter "lawful". He is above the law and operates outside the normal mores of society. He has no regard, in the end, for his fellows, as he continues fulfilling his need or want to kill despite the terrible impact it has on everyone around him. I think, if anything, the code prevents him from being straight up chaotic evil, but I can't say he's lawful when most of what he does is for his own good. His knowledge of the law and how to go undetected does not make him lawful.

And he's definitely evil. He kills people in cold blood. And he enjoys it. To the point where he does it ritualistically. I don't think it matters if he is particularly selective about it.

[EvilAnagram]

I don't think the "code" is enough to make Dexter "lawful". He is above the law and operates outside the normal mores of society.
Doesn't the lawful entry specifically state that operating according to a code rather than society's laws is lawful?


He has no regard, in the end, for his fellows, as he continues fulfilling his need or want to kill despite the terrible impact it has on everyone around him. I think, if anything, the code prevents him from being straight up chaotic evil, but I can't say he's lawful when most of what he does is for his own good.
None of that has anything to do with being lawful. In fact, the lawful evil alignment implies a selfishness and callousness. The Devils are the paragons of lawful evil in D&D, and they certainly don't care how their actions harm others.

[kladams707]

Dexter is Belkar after figuring out how to channel his socioopathic tendencies.

Dexter's "code" is "kill only other killers and be sure you have the evidence to justify it". A code that rationalizes murder to me is not enough to make you lawful. Typically those who are lawful evil are using the law to their own advantage. Dexter doesn't gain advantage from his code, simply a way to make his actions justifiable in his own mind. He also has no.real stand to gain, which is the motivation of neutral evil. His code is all about preserving himself and focusing his urges into.something somewhat acceptable.

Dexter is what Chaotic Evil was meant to be.

[Dalebert]

LE or LN. He has a strong code. Definitely not even remotely chaotic. A key defining feature of good is a respect for life. They should at least be reluctant to kill. A CG character is more inclined to kill evil but even that is because they believe more death will result from letting an evil creature live. They would still prefer an option that prevents death like life in prison. He's just too lawful to fall into that type of CG. Chaotic creatures have justifications for whatever they really want to do. Good, neutral, or evil describes the ends they seek. C or L describes the means they're willing to use to reach those ends and a chaotic creature is all about "the end justifies the means".

[Dr.Samurai]

Doesn't the lawful entry specifically state that operating according to a code rather than society's laws is lawful?
Yes, it gives operating within a code as an example of lawful neutral, if that's what you're referring to as the lawful entry.

None of that has anything to do with being lawful. In fact, the lawful evil alignment implies a selfishness and callousness. The Devils are the paragons of lawful evil in D&D, and they certainly don't care how their actions harm others.
I think it would have to have something to do with being lawful, even if not mentioned in the alignment section. Otherwise, you can go around murdering whoever you want willy nilly and just because it's according to some code of yours, you can call yourself "lawful". I don't think a code is enough.

Under chaotic evil, it mentions arbitrary violence spurred by bloodlust. Is this not exactly what Dexter does? But he has a code that he operates by to do it. But in the end, he is completely about his own liberties. At the end of the day, it's all about him. Everyone else around him suffers so that he can kill people and get away with it. I don't see how someone like this can be considered "lawful" as a lawbreaker that puts himself so above everyone else that people die for it, and I don't mean his actual direct victims.

All that said, I fully admit that according to the sparse alignment section in 5E, he can be argued to be Lawful Evil. There doesn't seem to be a distinction between "individualism" and "group" in "chaotic" and "lawful" anymore.

[Tanarii]

Doesn't the lawful entry specifically state that operating according to a code rather than society's laws is lawful?that is correct.
Lawful good is: do the right thing as expected by society.
Lawful neutral is: in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes.
Lawful evil is: within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order.



None of that has anything to do with being lawful. In fact, the lawful evil alignment implies a selfishness and callousness. The Devils are the paragons of lawful evil in D&D, and they certainly don't care how their actions harm others.Yeah it's amazing the alignment baggage bring, typically from old edition thinking, or their own interpretations of the words.

In fact, "Lawful" doesn't really exist as a separate thing, insofar as 5e Alignment 'definitions' (which are actually suggested typical, but not required, behaviors). Each alignment has it's own specific typical, but not required, associate behavior that is defined. In other words, thinking about how something behaves 'Lawfully' is meaningless, what is meaningful is how something typically, but not always, behaves that is 'Lawful good', "Lawful Neutral" or "Lawful Evil". And those are one sentence each, and right there to look at in the PHB.

Anything beyond that is personal interpretation not backed up by what the game says Alignment is.

[Naanomi]

One way to conceptualize it (doesn't always works but helps sometimes)... would Dexter make a better Devil, Demon, Yugoloth, Modron... what?

I'd guess that he would be a great Devil: punishing those he sees as 'evil' of byzantine reasons, justifying his place in the world, but still doing horrible things without guilt or remorse.

[Dr.Samurai]

@Tanarii: Agreed. As I mentioned in my post, I fully admit that according to 5E's alignment section, he can be considered Lawful Evil. And that the alignments no longer carried other qualifiers from previous editions.

The problem, as I see it, is that these sentences are so sparse you can tag any of the evils onto Dexter.

(LAWFUL EVIL) Does Dexter methodically takes what he wants, within the limits of a code of... order? Yes. He takes lives and does so according to a code his father helped him construct.

(NEUTRAL EVIL) Does Dexter do whatever he can get away with without compassion or qualms? Yes, absolutely, he's a serial killer. And to get away with that, he'll do what he has to. The main plot behind the series is that being caught is *never* an option for Dexter. He also frames people, he's killed innocent people, he's let other people take the fall for him, etc.

(CHAOTIC EVIL) Does Dexter do arbitrary violence spurred by bloodlust? Yes. That is the whole point of his code. He has a need to murder people, and, just like he did with animals as a kid, would simply kill a person once his bloodlust became overwhelming. We've seen him succumb to it in the later seasons as well.

If the code is the major sticking point here then sure, he's lawful evil.

[dejarnjc]

One way to conceptualize it (doesn't always works but helps sometimes)... would Dexter make a better Devil, Demon, Yugoloth, Modron... what?

I'd guess that he would be a great Devil: punishing those he sees as 'evil' of byzantine reasons, justifying his place in the world, but still doing horrible things without guilt or remorse.

Great way of looking at it!

I dunno, I see him being a good Yugoloth. I remember several episodes where Dexter goes out of his way to help his intended victim escape the bounds of the law in order to make sure that the victim ends up in Dexter's hands. That to me screams neutral evil and Yugoloth-esque. Just a note, Yugoloths are mostly known for manipulating the Blood War to their own advantage. For Dexter, he is constantly actively playing the system and bending his own rules in order to most benefit his own needs.

[Tanarii]

The problem, as I see it, is that these sentences are so sparse you can tag any of the evils onto Dexter.that's not a bug. It's a feature.

Because 5e Alignment isn't intended to be defined by actions. It's not intended to be a way to categorize a fictional character.

It's intended to be a broad general behavior that players can use, in conjuction with the entire rest of their personality (Personality, Ideal, Bond & Flaw) to help decide how to make in-character decision (aka Roleplaying).

If it wasn't "sparse", it would both become a straight jacket determining actions instead or helping assist with them. And it would become dominant and more important factor than the other personality traits, instead of an underlying and generally less important factor.

[Dr.Samurai]

that's not a bug. It's a feature.

Because 5e Alignment isn't intended to be defined by actions. It's not intended to be a way to categorize a fictional character.

It's intended to be a broad general behavior that players can use, in conjuction with the entire rest of their personality (Personality, Ideal, Bond & Flaw) to help decide how to make in-character decision (aka Roleplaying).

If it wasn't "sparse", it would both become a straight jacket determining actions instead or helping assist with them. And it would become dominant and more important factor than the other personality traits, instead of an underlying and generally less important factor.
Full disclosure, I hardly ever look to these traits when making a character. As you know (because we've touched on this before) I enjoy long backstories and that's sort of where I determine how my character will act in the world.

So what you're saying could very well be perfectly true, and I'll take your word on it.

It just seems then sort of pointless. If the alignments are vague enough that several apply, what exactly is the point? (Again, I don't typically use them, so I don't typically see a point anyway, but it seems to me that each line of text for each alignment can easily be put into a personality, ideal, bond, and/or flaw.)

[Naanomi]

There are a very small set of situations where there are mechanical repercussions for alignment even in 5th ed, so the sorting question can (very rarely) be an issue

[Tanarii]

It just seems then sort of pointless. If the alignments are vague enough that several apply, what exactly is the point? (Again, I don't typically use them, so I don't typically see a point anyway, but it seems to me that each line of text for each alignment can easily be put into a personality, ideal, bond, and/or flaw.)The point is each line of text for each alignment can easily work with the majority of personalities, bonds and/or flaws. Ideals tend to line up with an Alignment, so less so. And motivations are great things for players to use to help determine in-character actions, whether it comes from backstory (/ugh) or clearly stated motivations (yay!). :smallbiggrin:

If you mean "why Alignment at all" the answer is tradition, defining Teams, and moral & social attitudes typically being a fairly critical part of personality. More the first two than the last though. :smallwink:

[Dr.Samurai]

And motivations are great things for players to use to help determine in-character actions, whether it comes from backstory (/ugh) or clearly stated motivations (yay!). :smallbiggrin:
Couldn't help yourself huh? :smallbiggrin:

If you mean "why Alignment at all" the answer is tradition, defining Teams, and moral & social attitudes typically being a fairly critical part of personality. More the first two than the last though. :smallwink:
I agree.

I think, as I foist my own perspective on alignment, it's sort of a cop out to call someone "lawful" because they follow a code. If the code was one that many people followed, or was broad enough so as to easily slot into society or be compatible with other mores, I can see it.

But in the case of Dexter, this "lawful" character is not another seamless cog in the machine of society. His code is strictly personal, entirely selfish, and to the detriment of society. Dexter is not someone that maintains or increases order wherever he ends up. He creates disorder and confusion. He is a pathological liar, the people that trust him and care for him eventually learn he can't be trusted and typically befall tragedy directly because of him.

His impact on the people close to him, his workplace, the city he lives in, etc. is so disruptive and confusing and damaging that to call him "lawful" just seems bizarre to me. He routinely has people chasing shadows that don't exist. He routinely says one thing and does another. He has people second-guessing themselves all the time. No regard for the law. Breaks his own code. The list goes on.

But anyways... I know that this is all based on my own interpretation of alignment. I just thought I'd give a little more explanation because I find it an interesting discussion.

[Tanarii]

Couldn't help yourself huh? :smallbiggrin:Hahahaha yep.

As to the rest, that all sounds like a reasonable argument, just using the 5e 'definitions' of typical alignment behavior, why he'd be Neutral evil instead of Lawful evil. But as I said, I don't really know the character that well. Besides, like I said, it sounds like a huge part of his personality is insanity.

I mean, you certainly can emulate that kind of insanity by choosing a broad social/moral attitudes, and combining them with personality traits end up with something that is insanity. That's kind of the point of a 'method acting' way of playing a character that isn't yourself. I'm sure that's one of the techniques the writers and actors for the show use to come up with a consistent (in an insane way) character, although obviously they wouldn't use D&D's motivations or motivational categories.

[The Glyphstone]

Dexter seems most likely to be CN. He's not actively malicious, but he does tend to put his own short-term goals and interests ahead of anything or anyone else. Plus, despite his intelligence, he rarely stops to consider the consequences of his latest project beforehand and leaving it up to his CG sister to clean up the mess. Not my fault you didn't specify which Dexter...

[tkuremento]

I hope I wasn't the only one who thought of Dexter from Dextor's Laboratory first :| cause I was so confused about half of the answers until I realized it was NOT that Dexter.... :|

[Kurald Galain]

I hope I wasn't the only one who thought of Dexter from Dextor's Laboratory first :| cause I was so confused about half of the answers until I realized it was NOT that Dexter.... :|

Dexter from Dexter's Laboratory is pretty much CN, yes. The other Dexter really isn't.

[SethoMarkus]

I think, as I foist my own perspective on alignment, it's sort of a cop out to call someone "lawful" because they follow a code. If the code was one that many people followed, or was broad enough so as to easily slot into society or be compatible with other mores, I can see it.



I don't so much think "personal code" is what colored my opinion, rather than "methodical and orderly".

However, in light of other arguments, including your own on Dexter's regular bending of his own rules, I have to officially change my stance to Neutral Evil.

I still cannot see Dexter as Chaotic Evil; to me, he still works within a set of guidelines and cultivates a personal code too much, and is too obsessed with control over the situation. However, I now agree that these are more a show from an intelligent sociopath than from someone who needs order- he just understands that order is the best way to conceal his behaviors.

[kenposan]

I am thinking Chaotic Good.

Dexter is motivated to act for the greater good of humanity even if that steps outside the lines.

I'm going to disagree. Nothing about Dexter's motivation is with doing greater good. His motivation is to find a way to fulfill his need to kill in an 'appropriate' way. He killed a detective that found out his secret, which doesn't suggest good to me.

I see lawful evil. He murders people to fill his own needs but follows a code.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Most folks are tending towards one of the evil alignments.
Myself I might have been swayed by the evil done in the name of various religions.....then again saying a pope during the era of the inquisitions just might be Lawful Evil is not a stretch.
My first thought for Dexter and said Pope was Chaotic Good because Dexter believes killing serial killers is good (as does the state of Texas and several others) and an Inquisition era Pope believed ridding the world of "heritics" was good.
I can see the points against though. Good conversation.

[SethoMarkus]

Most folks are tending towards one of the evil alignments.
Myself I might have been swayed by the evil done in the name of various religions.....then again saying a pope during the era of the inquisitions just might be Lawful Evil is not a stretch.
My first thought for Dexter and said Pope was Chaotic Good because Dexter believes killing serial killers is good (as does the state of Texas and several others) and an Inquisition era Pope believed ridding the world of "heritics" was good.
I can see the points against though. Good conversation.

But Dexter doesn't kill serial killers to stop them, he kills them because he wants to kill and it is "acceptable" to kill (other) serial killers.

[RumoCrytuf]

By no means is Dex a good guy. His actions are his own for one reason and one reason only. To satisfy the "Dark Passenger" as he calls it. His actions, and a code made by his father and that other lady I can't recall the name of to try to keep him in check, are not good. Now, I've argued before and will argue again that selfish is not inherently evil.Good and Evil are subjective, but that's an argument for another time. Let's say that only when an action is detrimental to others, no matter who's to gain, is evil. Now, in Dexters case, let's examine his person.

Do His actions harm other people? Yes. Aside from the blatant killing of other human beings (Though that bastard who killed Rita had it coming), He leads people in circles. Constantly trying to lead them away from the real killer, and blame someone else. Not to mention the time that he planned to kill Maria (No, He didn't kill Doakes. Lila did by setting the place on fire ) He has sacrificed the lives of possibly hundreds of people. This, by our agreed upon definition, makes Dexter evil.

Now, we have to define what is Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral. We will try not to defer to extremes.

Chaotic: General disregard for laws. Follow your own path.

Lawful: Obeys the laws of the land, whatever they may be.

Neutral (Neither Lawful nor Chaotic): Follow laws when required, but not out of any true duty. Willing to break laws under circumstances.

By these defined definitions, Dexter most closely follows Neutral. He follows laws when he has too, but will break them to satisfy his needs.

Verdict: Dexter is Neutral Evil. His actions are evil, though he has a good streak in him (Most of his relationships and love interests show this). He doesn't care about laws, but he doesn't make it glaringly obvious. He follows laws when he has to, but he breaks them when no one's looking... for the most part. (Looking at you, season 6).

[Angelmaker]

My first thought for Dexter and said Pope was Chaotic Good because Dexter believes killing serial killers is good (as does the state of Texas and several others) and an Inquisition era Pope believed ridding the world of "heritics" was good.
I can see the points against though. Good conversation.

Killing people by sentencing them to death is not good. It's lawful. A crime has perpetrated and a punishment is dealt in order to deter further criminal behaviour. They may delude themself into thinking "its good for everyone", whereas the means to achieve it can be evil and in tis case are.

In the case of religious nutbags, you are referring to divine command theory. And if a divine command would be true, ( or as a amatter of fact ) the cental claims of a religion then yes, absolute morality would be on the side of the divine and it could define good as whatever it wants it to be. I am very glad that so far no religion on this world that makes outrageous claims about otherworldy truths can prove it's truthness.

The central point in your argument "belives it to be true" makes me think you think along the same lines, so I wonder if you based your estimation of dexter's morality rather on his beliefsystem rather than your own?

[Tanarii]

Now, we have to define what is Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral. We will try not to defer to extremes.

Chaotic: General disregard for laws. Follow your own path.

Lawful: Obeys the laws of the land, whatever they may be.

Neutral (Neither Lawful nor Chaotic): Follow laws when required, but not out of any true duty. Willing to break laws under circumstances.

As has already been pointed out, those definitions aren't the ones used for Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, and Chaotic Evil in 5e.