Elan isn't Chaotic Good.

[Silverlocke980]

Hello, everyone!

Reviewing recent events, I've decided to surface again. It's been interesting, hasn't it?

But what I'm interested in most right now is an idea that hit me. Elan's Chaotic Good, supposedly. He's a ditz, a bit of a loon, probably borderline crazy (though not in the way Belkar is), and is generally just a fun, goofy guy who does stuff for the weirdest, randomest reasons. He worships a clown-puppet named Banjo, for goodness' sakes.

So shouldn't he have killed Kubota?

For those arguing that Elan is Good-aligned, I see the point, but I would also like to state that Elan is Chaotic. That's really what gets me in these last few comics: Elan is acting more like a Lawful character than a Chaotic one. He accepted surrender, bound himself to those rules, and has even begun worrying about what their going to tell the paladin in the latest strip, mocking V for the random, Chaotic action of simply frying whoever Elan had tied up.

The gist of my question is whether Elan is Chaotic, or has changed his alignment, presumably from months of being Hinjo's bodyguard plus trauma from the loss of Haley, Belkar, and Roy's companionship, which you know must be hurting.

As further examples, let us consider the Kubota situation. Even when Kubota surrenders, Elan could, reasonably, have decided to ignore it and act on his emotions at the time, which consisted of hate and rage. That would be the textbook Chaotic example. Lawful characters are bound by codes and rules- surrendering to a Lawful character would be a valid tactic. I'm willing to bet Kubota developed the idea for this from living in a society of Lawful paladins.

Chaotic characters are not bound by these rules, however. Surrendering to a Chaotic character, particularly one who has the opposite morality alignment from you, might be ignored or acted upon entirely at whim. A Chaotic character could, perceivably, simply run Kubota through, wink, and say, " Sorry, not lawful." Or they could just as easily take them up on the offer, depending on how they felt at the time.

Chaotic characters tend to do things on whims or feelings, and Elan was pretty mad at Kubota at that point, so it doesn't quite make sense for me that a Chaotic character would accept his surrender without even some pretense of twisting it around- like tying him to his sinking boat, for example.

Likewise, once he has him, and V nukes the guy, Elan is distressed- at what he's going to tell Hinjo, specifically stating that the Order can't go around murdering guys, despite the fact that Kubota was obviously evil through and through- he tried to murder a whole family, and that was only among a list of things the guy had done!

Of course, Elan's not acting textbook lawful either. He concedes that it might be a good thing that Kubota is dead, and he's not exactly sorry to see the guy go- it just bothers him, somehow. Moreover, Elan's a Bard and a Dashing Swordsman, so I doubt he can be Lawful without losing his skills- at least the Bard abilities, though Dashing Swordsman might not have the same requirement.

So, I'm gonna argue that the time spent with Hinjo as a personal companion, the general rigors of sea-travel and being separated from his companions, and the fact that Elan has seemed a little more "with it" lately, that he's become Neutral Good, or at least is verging on entering that alignment.

And thus, I hopefully do not start a flame war.... :smalleek:

[Marsala]

I disagree. Note that Elan managed to rationalize V's disintegration of Kubota and had accepted it in the top row of the strip. He had no problem with the Chaotic nature of the act. It was only when V revealed that his motivation was not remotely Good at all that Elan got truly upset.

[chiasaur11]

Yeah.

Caring if someone murders someone in front of you in cold blood is basic good, not law or chaos.

[bladesyz]

I've seen quite a few of these alignment threads lately, and it's come to the point that I have to say something.

A lot of people are getting too stuck up on D&D alignment and putting the cart before the horses.

Let's get something straight: everyone has different interpretations of what constitutes good/evil, lawful/chaotic actions. Is it good to kill a defenseless evil person? Is it lawful to rebel against an (perceived) unjust law? We can argue over that for eons and not come to agreement. In fact, that's exactly what the philosophers over the ages have been doing!

Forget trying to determine some characters alignment by arguing about the "alignment" of some particular action. Better yet, forget about alignment altogether, and just realize that people do things based on their unique world view. Just because two fighters are both Lawful Good doesn't mean they will make the same decision on a particular dilemma. It all depends on their past experiences and how those experiences shaped their moral principles. An LG character raised in a culture that believes in "an eye for an eye" justice will have no qualms about summarily executing a self-confessed villain. An LG character raised in a culture of "innocent-until-proven-guilty" justice will demand that the villain be taken to trial.

To take the OP's example, why did Elan accept Kubota's surrender? It's very simple really. Elan's never had to shoulder any responsibility, but with the death of Roy and the loss of Hailey, he's suddenly thrust into the leadership role. He's never been a leader before, so how is he going to know what to do, and how to make the right decisions? He looks to see how other leaders operate, and coincidentally, he just happens to be spending a lot of time with Hinjo. Is it so surprising then, that Elan tries to emulate Hinjo in his decisions?

[Charles Phipps]

I mentioned that earlier, the Alignments mean different things at different tables.

Elan may be hedging towards Neutral Good, however.

[Silverlocke980]

To take the OP's example, why did Elan accept Kubota's surrender? It's very simple really. Elan's never had to shoulder any responsibility, but with the death of Roy and the loss of Hailey, he's suddenly thrust into the leadership role. He's never been a leader before, so how is he going to know what to do, and how to make the right decisions? He looks to see how other leaders operate, and coincidentally, he just happens to be spending a lot of time with Hinjo. Is it so surprising then, that Elan tries to emulate Hinjo in his decisions?

Actually, to me, this is a fascinating argument in its own right. I guess I'm getting it wrapped around my head that Elan is changing... of all the characters to shift in the course of OotS, the Spoony Bard would be the very last one I'd ever expect to change. Personally, I rather like this idea!

Still, Alignment is a huge part of D&D, and while I agree with you on that same alignments can be quite different- look at how different Miko and Roy, both LG, were!- I do think the alignment system gives us a quick, shorthand way to discuss character morality.

Interesting post!

[Charles Phipps]

I've known for a very long time that :elan: was changing as a character. I often got into very heated arguments with other characters because they dismissed Elan as useless. Unfortunately, AT TIMES, he is useless but people seemed to fail to realize he was a deeper character than people gave him credit for.

In the case of Elan, he's developing into a much more seasoned and intelligent adventurer. In the case of Kubota, he was trying to do the RIGHT THING. While you may argue that killing Kubota was the right thing to do....

It's also not very heroic. Elan is bound by story conventions.

[Dr. Cthulwho]

So shouldn't he have killed Kubota?

As further examples, let us consider the Kubota situation. Even when Kubota surrenders, Elan could, reasonably, have decided to ignore it and act on his emotions at the time, which consisted of hate and rage. That would be the textbook Chaotic example. Lawful characters are bound by codes and rules- surrendering to a Lawful character would be a valid tactic. I'm willing to bet Kubota developed the idea for this from living in a society of Lawful paladins.

I think the important word there is "could" - a chaotic good character could ignore established laws if they thought their way of doing things was a better avenue of "good". There is nothing to say they have to to.

I've said before, but there should be as many variations of "chaotic good" as people who inhabit it. There will be chaotic good characters who will feel fine with killing Kabuto, and others who wouldn't be. There will be Batman like CGs and Punisher like CGs (not that I'm actually saying that is what those two characters are, just characters with similar outlooks/ways of acting). Or Miko like LG vs. Hinjo like LG - what with Lawful good being much more stringent then Chaotic Good.

I mean, doesn't it kind of detract from the whole "chaotic" label if they become so predictable as when faced with a surrendering enemy they have to say "well, I am chaotic, so I have to kill this guy no matter what, because being chaotic I can hardly accept his surrender and hand him over to the local authorities - that would be lawful". Or "I'm chaotic, faced with a surrendering prisoner calling upon the law - I should flip a coin to decide whether I accept or not. What with being chaotic and all".


mocking V for the random, Chaotic action of simply frying whoever Elan had tied up.

Well, mocking V for saying he decided to kill someone for no reason other then convenience, and with no idea who they were or what they had done, other then they were likely a villain becuase Elan only ties up bad guys of some important. Which might be "chaotic", but not exactly "good".


Chaotic characters are not bound by these rules, however. Surrendering to a Chaotic character, particularly one who has the opposite morality alignment from you, might be ignored or acted upon entirely at whim. A Chaotic character could, perceivably, simply run Kubota through, wink, and say, " Sorry, not lawful." Or they could just as easily take them up on the offer, depending on how they felt at the time.

Kind of making them sound completely unbalanced.


Chaotic characters tend to do things on whims or feelings, and Elan was pretty mad at Kubota at that point, so it doesn't quite make sense for me that a Chaotic character would accept his surrender without even some pretense of twisting it around- like tying him to his sinking boat, for example.

What about the actual, well, character of the character - there personal codes, values, personality etc? A PC is more then the sum of their alignments.

[Charles Phipps]

Yes, Chaotic Good does not mean VICIOUS or Anti-Hero. Elan was feeling merciful. So he acted on that impulse rather than the impulse to murder. Saying that Chaotic Goods are the practical ones is a bit silly.

But yes, that was a Lawful Action.

One lawful action does not a Good character make or Roy would be Chaotic Evil for not killing Belkar.

[Paragon Badger]

Elan's very lawful in that he adheres to storytelling conventions almost religiously...

[Zeful]

Hello, everyone!

Reviewing recent events, I've decided to surface again. It's been interesting, hasn't it?

But what I'm interested in most right now is an idea that hit me. Elan's Chaotic Good, supposedly. He's a ditz, a bit of a loon, probably borderline crazy (though not in the way Belkar is), and is generally just a fun, goofy guy who does stuff for the weirdest, randomest reasons. He worships a clown-puppet named Banjo, for goodness' sakes.

So shouldn't he have killed Kubota?

For those arguing that Elan is Good-aligned, I see the point, but I would also like to state that Elan is Chaotic. That's really what gets me in these last few comics: Elan is acting more like a Lawful character than a Chaotic one. He accepted surrender, bound himself to those rules, and has even begun worrying about what their going to tell the paladin in the latest strip, mocking V for the random, Chaotic action of simply frying whoever Elan had tied up.
No. This is because there is no "One True Interpretation" within the whole of D&D rules (except the math really). Everything means different things to different people. And as many people state in these threads, Elan is Chaotic Good, rather than Chaotic Good. He follows his own rules, and will do the wackiest things simply because he can. A good character, generally will accept an honest surrender, which Kabuto's was. Some CG characters would have pitched him over the side once he started going on about the impossibility of him getting a guilty verdict despite the overwhelming evidence against him. But Elan wouldn't because that'd be wrong and evil (evil done to evil is at best a neutral act) to him.


The gist of my question is whether Elan is Chaotic, or has changed his alignment, presumably from months of being Hinjo's bodyguard plus trauma from the loss of Haley, Belkar, and Roy's companionship, which you know must be hurting.

As further examples, let us consider the Kubota situation. Even when Kubota surrenders, Elan could, reasonably, have decided to ignore it and act on his emotions at the time, which consisted of hate and rage. That would be the textbook Chaotic example. Lawful characters are bound by codes and rules- surrendering to a Lawful character would be a valid tactic. I'm willing to bet Kubota developed the idea for this from living in a society of Lawful paladins.
A chaotic character can have morals and still be chaotic, they don't have to act like a spaz either. Yes Elan could have ignored the surrender and killed him, but that would be a non-good act. Good is apparently more important to him than Chaos. This emphasis on good doesn't make him neutral by default.


Chaotic characters are not bound by these rules, however. Surrendering to a Chaotic character, particularly one who has the opposite morality alignment from you, might be ignored or acted upon entirely at whim. A Chaotic character could, perceivably, simply run Kubota through, wink, and say, " Sorry, not lawful." Or they could just as easily take them up on the offer, depending on how they felt at the time. True in some aspects, Chaos is more open though. A chaotic character can choose to be bound by certain laws, and in fact doing so can make them more chaotic. If you obey a law about curfews, for instance, but ignore the indecency laws, you are more chaotic than one who ignore both laws.


Chaotic characters tend to do things on whims or feelings, and Elan was pretty mad at Kubota at that point, so it doesn't quite make sense for me that a Chaotic character would accept his surrender without even some pretense of twisting it around- like tying him to his sinking boat, for example.
Yes but some Chaotic characters like to see their enemies squirm in the spotlight. Haven't you ever wanted the satisfaction of seeing the villain's crimes displayed before them as you pick apart their plans one by one, watching them squirm as you point out that they've been playing into your hand (even if your lieing)?


Likewise, once he has him, and V nukes the guy, Elan is distressed- at what he's going to tell Hinjo, specifically stating that the Order can't go around murdering guys, despite the fact that Kubota was obviously evil through and through- he tried to murder a whole family, and that was only among a list of things the guy had done!

Of course, Elan's not acting textbook lawful either. He concedes that it might be a good thing that Kubota is dead, and he's not exactly sorry to see the guy go- it just bothers him, somehow. Moreover, Elan's a Bard and a Dashing Swordsman, so I doubt he can be Lawful without losing his skills- at least the Bard abilities, though Dashing Swordsman might not have the same requirement.
As you yourself state, Elan is admitting it's a good thing he's dead, he's distressed because the good action of letting him pay back his debt to the society he wronged wasn't upheld but agrees that this may have been better.


So, I'm gonna argue that the time spent with Hinjo as a personal companion, the general rigors of sea-travel and being separated from his companions, and the fact that Elan has seemed a little more "with it" lately, that he's become Neutral Good, or at least is verging on entering that alignment.

And thus, I hopefully do not start a flame war.... :smalleek:

It's entirely possible that Elan's Alignment was shifting toward Neutral Good on it's way to Lawful Good but he is still fairly chaotic. He's willing to lie about it(he didn't out right refuse to lie), but points out that lieing to a paladin isn't necessarily a good thing.

[JaxGaret]

In the case of Kubota, he was trying to do the RIGHT THING. While you may argue that killing Kubota was the right thing to do....

It's also not very heroic. Elan is bound by story conventions.

I think this hits the nail on the head. To Elan, killing Kubota was simply not something that he thought the hero would do, and he is thinking of himself as the hero.

He doesn't really have any problem with Kubota being killed, as we can see.

[Dervag]

Well, it seems like Elan has some objections. But they get swamped by V, who talks a lot more and is very eloquent.

I mean, he does break out the extremely good "Belkar would approve" argument. Belkar is an excellent moral compass, because his actions will nearly always point exactly away from whatever you should be doing. In a moral dilemma, you have only to ask yourself "what would Belkar do?" and then do the opposite. You'll probably be doing the right thing.
____________

Personally, I think that Elan was Chaotic Good until the battle of Azure City. Since then, he's spent a lot of time in close proximity to Lawful role models like Hinjo. He's spent no time close to his main Chaotic role model (Haley).

Elan is about as impressionable as Play-Doh (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0025.html). Is it any wonder he's starting to act a bit more lawful, more towards Neutral Good?

This is a natural way for his alignment to shift, and I see no reason why it's a problem or a surprise.

[Dr. Cthulwho]

Well, it seems like Elan has some objections. But they get swamped by V, who talks a lot more and is very eloquent.

I mean, he does break out the extremely good "Belkar would approve" argument. Belkar is an excellent moral compass, because his actions will nearly always point exactly away from whatever you should be doing. In a moral dilemma, you have only to ask yourself "what would Belkar do?" and then do the opposite. You'll probably be doing the right thing.

One day I'd really like to see an image of Jesus wondering "What would Belkar do?"

[Lord Seth]

Elan seems more Neutral Good than Chaotic Good to me lately.

[JaxGaret]

Elan seems more Neutral Good than Chaotic Good to me lately.

Ever since he became a Dashing Swordsman, really.

I think he's still firmly Chaotic, but with more Neutral tendencies.

[Gamiress]

One day I'd really like to see an image of Jesus wondering "What would Belkar do?"

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v662/Akelda/jesus.jpg

[JaxGaret]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v662/Akelda/jesus.jpg

Fantastic. Saved.

[Prowl]

Funny, Elan seems to think he's Chaotic Good, he even explicitly says so in strip #445 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html).

What's next, another "Belkar isn't evil" thread?

[Dr. Cthulwho]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v662/Akelda/jesus.jpg

Wonderful, wonderful *applauds*

[Trixie]

Um, Chaotic Good people ARE bound by laws.

The thing is, they are bound by their own laws, and for someone good that means not killing when it is possible to not kill, which is exactly what Elan did.

To simply kill him would be no chaotic, but chaotic evil.

Thus, while Belkar would gladly stab him, I really don't see someone good, or someone seeing himself as a hero, like Elan (who is bound by the bardic charter, btw, and I don't really see killing people as allowed in it), doing it. It's that simple.

How could anyone see killing unarmed prisoners as good!?

[Charles Phipps]

How could anyone see killing unarmed prisoners as good!?

To be honest, how is it evil?

What makes putting a sword in Kubota's hands something that makes him less of Therkala's murder? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill a pregnant woman? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill the ruler of a country? Who abandoned a city in the times of distress? Who CONSORTS WITH DEMONS?

Equilibrium gave a pretty good explanation of my opinions on killing people.

Preston has mowed down countless troops at this point and when faced with the final bad guy. He then finally has the bad guy at his mercy. A man who participated in a monstrous system that burned Preston's wife to death and a woman he felt something for. Worse, he was a hypocrite who didn't even believe in the system.

The bad guy appeals to Preston's sense of mercy as a way to save his life and their mutual humanity. Preston kills him anyway, because the man is an enemy to humanity NOT because he's armed but the man will continue to threaten loved ones and could rally the bad guys to cause countless more lives.

Unarmed? Yes? Not dangerous? *HELL NO*

Listen, if you're going to kill somebody, then your determining factor should not be whether they are armed. It should be whether they are a threat to the public good. If someone had stabbed Darth Sidious in his bed, they should take it rather than trying to wake him up so he can get his lightsaber.

Would some Tolkien-esque pity have been nice? Certainly. However, if you're going to fight in a war then you shouldn't let stupid chivalric notions interfere with resolving it with the least misery for everyone.

[Delgarde]

I don't think Elan has ever been particularly disregarding of law and authority - this is afterall the guy who stole some clothes in Cliffport, and left an apologetic note (then had to steal some more, and updated the note appropriately). But I think that kind of behaviour is quite in keeping with a CG alignment - he has no problem breaking laws when needed, but feels guilty about the harm it does.

I think this thing with V and Kubota comes under the same category. He's only a little conflicted over actually killing Kubota - being Chaotic, he doesn't care too much for a long and potentially dodgy trial. But V's motivation is a problem for a Good character to stomach - while killing a defenseless man might be somewhat balanced by the man being a villain, V killed him not for crimes committed, but simply for being an inconvenience.

So no, I don't really see any sign of an alignment change...


I will admit though, that the rules of theatrics and plot is one lawbook which Elan will follow absolutely to the letter. :)

[Starbuck_II]

Of course, Elan's not acting textbook lawful either. He concedes that it might be a good thing that Kubota is dead, and he's not exactly sorry to see the guy go- it just bothers him, somehow. Moreover, Elan's a Bard and a Dashing Swordsman, so I doubt he can be Lawful without losing his skills- at least the Bard abilities, though Dashing Swordsman might not have the same requirement.


Look, you may have not read your PHB in a long time or maybe you just don't remember your Bard Entry very well. Either way, Only Barbarian (rage) lose abilities when they change alingment.

Bards are exactly liker Monks in alignmernt change: they lose nothing but can't advance while in a wrong alignment.
So as long as Elan is still leveling as a Dashing swordmen he can be whatever alignment he likes.


Personally, a Lawful Elan is fine with me.

"What would Belkar do?" I totally want a bumper sticker with that on it.

[pjackson]

To be honest, how is it evil?


What? Killing someone you do not need to kill and denying them the chance to repent of their evil deeds is evil.



What makes putting a sword in Kubota's hands something that makes him less of Therkala's murder? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill a pregnant woman? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill the ruler of a country? Who abandoned a city in the times of distress? Who CONSORTS WITH DEMONS?


Whether Kubota is evil or not does not affect whether killing him is evil.



Listen, if you're going to kill somebody, then your determining factor should not be whether they are armed. It should be whether they are a threat to the public good. If someone had stabbed Darth Sidious in his bed, they should take it rather than trying to wake him up so he can get his lightsaber.


Kubota was not a threat whilst he was a prisoner.
Sure he was boasting about being able to get off, but that does not mean he would have succeeded.
There were characters powerful enough to restrain Kubota around - such as Elan.
Kubota had a high charisma and good social skills to try to persuade a jury with, but Elan has them too.

[Trixie]

To be honest, how is it evil?

What makes putting a sword in Kubota's hands something that makes him less of Therkala's murder? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill a pregnant woman? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill the ruler of a country? Who abandoned a city in the times of distress? Who CONSORTS WITH DEMONS?

Equilibrium gave a pretty good explanation of my opinions on killing people.

Preston has mowed down countless troops at this point and when faced with the final bad guy. He then finally has the bad guy at his mercy. A man who participated in a monstrous system that burned Preston's wife to death and a woman he felt something for. Worse, he was a hypocrite who didn't even believe in the system.

The bad guy appeals to Preston's sense of mercy as a way to save his life and their mutual humanity. Preston kills him anyway, because the man is an enemy to humanity NOT because he's armed but the man will continue to threaten loved ones and could rally the bad guys to cause countless more lives.

Unarmed? Yes? Not dangerous? *HELL NO*

Listen, if you're going to kill somebody, then your determining factor should not be whether they are armed. It should be whether they are a threat to the public good. If someone had stabbed Darth Sidious in his bed, they should take it rather than trying to wake him up so he can get his lightsaber.

Would some Tolkien-esque pity have been nice? Certainly. However, if you're going to fight in a war then you shouldn't let stupid chivalric notions interfere with resolving it with the least misery for everyone.



Um, it so happens I actually watched that film. Whoever had written that summary is half-blind.

Preston was about to let him go, as if convinced... but, as the movie made clear, he remembered the face of that girl he was forced to kill - and then, breaking the influence of emotion-killing drugs, he shoot the bad guy - and a second later admitted it was bad thing to do, but he will pay the price, anyway.


And I don't see the relevance anyway. Killing a world dictator is one thing, although he should have been tried, in that case finishing the job of dismantling the government was more important and Preston was alone, so he had no choice but to dispose of the weight. Also, he wasn't good, LN at best.

On the other hand, we have a noble who just surrendered to far stronger character (a good one at that), powerful government sympathetic to said character, with the king being avatar of good and all, trials guided by divine, good beings, means to keep him isolated until the trial - just everything they need to give him fair trial and judge him. There is no common thing between these two cases.

And anyway, once you step into a petty vigilantism and decide who has to be killed for greater good, public safety and all, and who has the right, to, I don't know, a fair trial and other basic human rights - then you're one step away from smoking chimneys, gulags and concentration camps - or just petty murders, depending on your resources, of course.

[T.Titan]

Whether Kubota is evil or not does not affect whether killing him is evil.




In OOTS it does... or haven't you been reading the same strip?! (paladins slaughtered many a goblin just because they had their village/s close to a place they guarded without falling).



And anyway, once you step into a petty vigilantism and decide who has to be killed for greater good, public safety and all, and who has the right, to, I don't know, a fair trial and other basic human rights

You know, i never quite got how having 12 people (+1 executioner) decide someone should die is all that different from having 1 person do it... weighting the evidence on the other hand does seem prudent thou... (trials are there to try to prevent wrongful executions, not because of any morality issue about a guilty persons fate).

[Zolem]

A lot of people are saying that Elan accepting his surender was Lawful....I don't see that at all. A person surenders themselves to your mercy. Mercy is a trait of Good. Only an Evil charecter would still kill them wihtout remorse (see V's action for example) and a neutral charecter might be driven too much by his pasions for a bit, but would probably accept in the end. Now then, punching the guy who surendered because he was being a smug jerk who believed that the law protected him 100% is a Chaotic act. Elan is Chaotic Good, it's just that he's a Trasque sized load of Good and a german sheperd sized load of Chaotic.

[Trixie]

In OOTS it does... or haven't you been reading the same strip?! (paladins slaughtered many a goblin just because they had their village/s close to a place they guarded without falling).

Except, well, one quarter of Azure City residents, who, despite being evil, were newer mass-slaughtered.

Yes, you were reading other comic. One in which Goblins weren't killed because they were created to be hunted, but because of them being evil, never mind most of them (like Redcloak's family) weren't.


You know, i never quite got how having 12 people (+1 executioner) decide someone should die is all that different from having 1 person do it... weighting the evidence on the other hand does seem prudent thou... (trials are there to try to prevent wrongful executions, not because of any morality issue about a guilty persons fate).

First, only one country uses botched system of twelve random guys giving the verdict - and yet, I would take even such botched system where I could present evidence, get a defender and receive a not-random punishment if I were actually guilty...

As opposed to your idea of justice which is actually anarchism - kill everyone we don't like, they are obviously guilty because we don't like them - otherwise, we would like them, right?

That sounds exactly like reasoning you might hear from certain guys in the thirties and forties - they were big in the business of killing anyone they felt like killing today. These were great times for vigilantes trying to up their "moral" bodycount, eh?

[Zolem]

First, only one country uses botched system of twelve random guys giving the verdict - and yet, I would take even such botched system where I could present evidence, get a defender and receive a not-random punishment if I were actually guilty...

As opposed to your idea of justice which is actually anarchism - kill everyone we don't like, they are obviously guilty because we don't like them - otherwise, we would like them, right?

That sounds exactly like reasoning you might hear from certain guys in the thirties and forties - they were big in the business of killing anyone they felt like killing today. These were great times for vigilantes trying to up their "moral" bodycount, eh?

For reference of wwhy it's good to have an objective an non-opinionated view of things, see the SG-1 episode Cor-Ai where one man gets to act as judge, jury, and executioner.

[T.Titan]

and a neutral character might be driven too much by his pasions for a bit, but would probably accept in the end.

How does that make that character neutral?! Man, it always annoyed me that Neutral on the G/E scale seems to just mean someone that's Good but isn't pro-active... that's hardly what one would call half way...


For reference of wwhy it's good to have an objective an non-opinionated view of things, see the SG-1 episode Cor-Ai where one man gets to act as judge, jury, and executioner.

As if 12 people can't be just as subjective or even worse then 1?!

The justice system in most countries is based on the premise that it's better to let 10 guilty people go free then to hang one innocent...

[AstralFire]

How does that make that character neutral?! Man, it always annoyed me that Neutral on the G/E scale seems to just mean someone that's Good but isn't pro-active... that's hardly what one would call half way...

Neutral is selfishly motivated to do good or evil things if it does them at all. That can be seen as not being proactive, since they only act if it'd affect a loved one.

[ObadiahtheSlim]

Oh for the love of Zarquon....

Elan is Chaotic Good to a T. He doesn't care about maintaining order or discipline. He only cares about doing the right thing (and looking cool while doing it). He is impulsive and will do that which his concise dictates about the situation, and not the norms of society. That is the hallmark of a chaotic good character. If he held an equal regard for order and freedom, then he would be neutral on that axis, but he doesn't.

[Wikkin]

Wow, long post.

Yep, Elan is still Chaotic Good.

Sorry.

[DrizztFan24]

If he had switched alignments wouldn't he have lost his spellcasting?

[factotum]

If he had switched alignments wouldn't he have lost his spellcasting?

Not unless he became Lawful. Bards can't be Lawful, but he could be Neutral Good just fine.

However, I don't believe that he IS NG--he's just as CG as the day he composed his song for dead Roy in which he confirmed that as his alignment.

[AKA_Bait]

If he had switched alignments wouldn't he have lost his spellcasting?

Nope. He couldn't advance as a bard anymore but he wouldn't lose any of his abilities.


Ex-Bards
A bard who becomes lawful in alignment cannot progress in levels as a bard, though he retains all his bard abilities.

That said, Elan isn't lawful. He didn't really have a big problem with V killing Kubota when he thought V had good reasons for it. It was only once V explained that he did it just for the sake of convience that Elan had a problem. That's chaotic or neutral, but not lawful.

[JT Jag]

Chaotic doesn't really mean that it's a requirement to flagrantly disregard the laws. To give yourself just one option and firmly adhere to it is just as lawful even if the action itself isn't.

Chaotic is all about having a choice. And this time Elan chose to accept that surrender.

[AKA_Bait]

Chaotic is all about having a choice. And this time Elan chose to accept that surrender.

Indeed. The fact that he still smacked Kubota afterwards indicates that he was still willing to disregard the law in this case.

[Manga Shoggoth]

Personally, I think that Elan was Chaotic Good until the battle of Azure City. Since then, he's spent a lot of time in close proximity to Lawful role models like Hinjo. He's spent no time close to his main Chaotic role model (Haley).

Elan is about as impressionable as Play-Doh (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0025.html). Is it any wonder he's starting to act a bit more lawful, more towards Neutral Good?

This is a natural way for his alignment to shift, and I see no reason why it's a problem or a surprise.

This is a good theory, but omits one thing: Elan's major role model is not Haley, but Roy (LG) Greenhilt - to the extent that Roy is idolised as the big brother he never had (I'd look the strip up - it is somewhere in the escape from Cliffport - but I am at work and pushed for time...).

So, Elan has had a major LG influence for much, if not most, of the strip, and any such shift should really have appeared some time ago.

[AstralFire]

Becoming a Dashing Swordsman was part of Elan learning to be competent and do things on his own, though. My sister's been a big influence in my life, but I didn't start adopting some of her biggest traits until I had to grow up and start taking care of others.

[AKA_Bait]

This So, Elan has had a major LG influence for much, if not most, of the strip, and any such shift should really have appeared some time ago.

Iffy, remember that Roy's influence was also counterbalanced by the infulence of Haley, V and Belkar, two of who are chaotic. Now, he's surrounded by pretty much entirely LG people. Also, it doesn't seem unlikley to me that he has started looking up to Hinjo in much the same way he used to look up to Roy. Only this time there aren't other folks around to influence him back the other way.

[TreesOfDeath]

Most chaotic good heros would probably be like "**** this" *stab*, but Elan just have different ethics about killing. Doesn't mean he isn't CG

[Querzis]

God how many people dont know what chaotic means? Look, any chaotic characteristic that was ever described can be resumed with one thing: Chaotic characters act on whims. And Lawfull characters act while following a code. A chaotic character is not more practical then a lawfull one. A neutral character is more practical then a good one. It aint that complicated to understand.

A Chaotic good character isnt likely to ever break a Lawfull good law. Why should he? That law already goes well with his morality! Its just that he isnt trying to follow that law, he just happen to be naturally good, without needing a moral code, and will naturally do the good thing.

Anyone who argued that V was acting chaotic good back in the last strip are just neutral people who wanna see themselves and those kind of act as good. Well no they arent, anyone whos ready to kill a tied up man on the premise of what they could do later cant be good, regardless of if its CG, NG or LG. Killing a defenseless villain is what neutral character do. Did Buffy kill Gloria in her human form? No shes a good guy, Gilles had to do it! Being neutral aint bad people. If there wasnt any Neutral character, Evil would have won a long time ago because good guys would let them go too often.

Well that being said, V killing Kubota would have been a neutral act if he really did it so that Kubota woudnt get away. But since he did it just because it was convenient...yeah evil. I cant wait for him to turn to the dark side, V is much more badass that way and he was already the most badass character in this comic as far as I'm concerned.

Now does Elan still act on whims? Yes, just as much as before so hes still as chaotic as before.

[AKA_Bait]

Now does Elan still act on whims? Yes, just as much as before so hes still as chaotic as before.

humm. I dunno. I haven't really gotten the feeling that he's as random and carefree as he was before Roy's death. Can you give me some examples of things he did on a whim since? I can't really think of any that stand out. Most of the ones that occur as possiblities are more Elan doing what he's expected to do in genre.

[JonahFalcon]

Um, Good IS a moral code, by definition.

And V isn't evil. Just insane.

Oh, and PS. Lawful Good Paladins are more likely to kill an evil character on sight, not Chaotic Good. And even Hinjo didn't kill Kobuto on sight.

[JonahFalcon]

humm. I dunno. I haven't really gotten the feeling that he's as random and carefree as he was before Roy's death. Can you give me some examples of things he did on a whim since? I can't really think of any that stand out. Most of the ones that occur as possiblities are more Elan doing what he's expected to do in genre.

Um, Elan's random and carefree behavior had nothing to do with good/evil. It had to do with being naked and free, and loving it.

[Querzis]

humm. I dunno. I haven't really gotten the feeling that he's as random and carefree as he was before Roy's death. Can you give me some examples of things he did on a whim since? I can't really think of any that stand out. Most of the ones that occur as possiblities are more Elan doing what he's expected to do in genre.

Punching Kubota. The pie contest between puppets and pretty much everything that happened on the orc island. Wearing an eyepatch. Thinking Therkla is a superhero. Stuff like that.

Now I agree hes definitly not as carefree as before. But that just mean hes growing up really. Its not because you follow your whims that you have to be immature.


Um, Good IS a moral code, by definition.

How so? I saw an hobo the other day and gave him 50$ because I felt like it even if I dont have much money (its an example, I didnt really do that). I see the good part but not the code part. I know I'm chaotic, everything I ever did I did it on a whim and I've done a few good things and a few evil things. I dont see why it would have to be a code. Or maybe you're just surprised some people can naturally do good things without having been raised and teached to do them? Because personally, I actually believe its the opposite.


And V isn't evil. Just insane.

Yeah sure, go check out all the form of insanity and tell me if V match any. V is sane, hes actually sane to a creepy level. By the way, I dont think hes evil right now, but I sure hope he will be, hes really badass when doing evil stuff.


Oh, and PS. Lawful Good Paladins are more likely to kill an evil character on sight, not Chaotic Good. And even Hinjo didn't kill Kobuto on sight.

Kinda agree with that really. Lawfull good actually have a code about fighting and destroying evil. But they also believe in fair trial and redeeming evil so good paladins would never kill them if they can avoid it which is what we are talking about here.

[Inhuman Bot]

Except, well, one quarter of Azure City residents, who, despite being evil, were newer mass-slaughtered.

Where'd you see that statistic?

Also, I belive Elan is still CG, but getting closer and closer to NG.

[dps]

Except, well, one quarter of Azure City residents, who, despite being evil, were newer mass-slaughtered.

Yes, you were reading other comic. One in which Goblins weren't killed because they were created to be hunted, but because of them being evil, never mind most of them (like Redcloak's family) weren't.



First, only one country uses botched system of twelve random guys giving the verdict - and yet, I would take even such botched system where I could present evidence, get a defender and receive a not-random punishment if I were actually guilty...

As opposed to your idea of justice which is actually anarchism - kill everyone we don't like, they are obviously guilty because we don't like them - otherwise, we would like them, right?

That sounds exactly like reasoning you might hear from certain guys in the thirties and forties - they were big in the business of killing anyone they felt like killing today. These were great times for vigilantes trying to up their "moral" bodycount, eh?

English isn't your native language, is it? 'Cause I don't have a clue what the first sentence in this post means.

[Holammer]

I think that Elan remains Chaotic Good still. I'd say it's near enough a prerequisite for being a dashing swordsman much like Lawful good for a Paladin. We're talking about a character similar to Robin Hood, gleefully foiling the plans of unlawful government and honouring good in all its forms while still remaining a free spirited rebel.

Elan's reaction and actions reflect how I think a Chaotic Good person should behave and act. There is lots of people interpreting it in other ways of course.
The fact that Elan cannot fully swallow his anger and gives Kobuta a shiner expresses his angry chaotic side, but the good in Elan makes him bring the bad guy to justice because it's the right thing to do for a good person.

Chaotic Good by my interpretation doesn't mean you can skewer evil people as they beg for mercy or surrender, that's a job for the Neutral.
I add "my interpretation" because there is a lot of people that would argue that a character like The Punisher (a.k.a Frank Castle) is Chaotic Good.

[only1doug]

I would of been happy to see Elan leaving Kubota on the sinking rowboat and watch him ty to swim in his armour. that would still be chaotic good to my mind, yes Kubota offered his surrender but thats no guarantee that a CG character would go out of his way to save him.

"you want to surrender? Very well, i'll accept your surrender once you have swum back to the ship."

[Texas Jedi]

I would of been happy to see Elan leaving Kubota on the sinking rowboat and watch him ty to swim in his armour. that would still be chaotic good to my mind, yes Kubota offered his surrender but thats no guarantee that a CG character would go out of his way to save him.

"you want to surrender? Very well, i'll accept your surrender once you have swum back to the ship."


That was a neutral thing to do in that situation. He didn't have to kill him but he didn't have to save him either. I just see that as a neutral act because you didn't go out of your way to harm him (evil) but didn't go out of your way to save him either (good) so when that adds up you get neutral.

Now the title of the thread is just wrong. Elan, along with Durkon, Belkar and Roy are easy to pick their alignments. Elan has always been in my mind Chaotic Good, Durkon and Roy are both Lawful Good (Durkon being more law than good, and Roy being the opposite). Belkar is Chaotic Evil, he is only kept in check because the other would kill him if he steps out of line. V is harder to follow so I am going to call him True Neutral. Haley is I think Chaotic Neutral. She does good things but usually only to impress Elan but is not above doing evil in the name of good.

[chiasaur11]

That was a neutral thing to do in that situation. He didn't have to kill him but he didn't have to save him either. I just see that as a neutral act because you didn't go out of your way to harm him (evil) but didn't go out of your way to save him either (good) so when that adds up you get neutral.

Now the title of the thread is just wrong. Elan, along with Durkon, Belkar and Roy are easy to pick their alignments. Elan has always been in my mind Chaotic Good, Durkon and Roy are both Lawful Good (Durkon being more law than good, and Roy being the opposite). Belkar is Chaotic Evil, he is only kept in check because the other would kill him if he steps out of line. V is harder to follow so I am going to call him True Neutral. Haley is I think Chaotic Neutral. She does good things but usually only to impress Elan but is not above doing evil in the name of good.

Officially Haley's Chaotic Good. Ish.

Especially recently what with giving up most of her money to help innocent people in Azure City.

[Texas Jedi]

Officially Haley's Chaotic Good. Ish.

Especially recently what with giving up most of her money to help innocent people in Azure City.

True, I didn't remember that. I was thinking older Haley. I think she is more leaning to chaotic good now.

[Dr. Cthulwho]

True, I didn't remember that. I was thinking older Haley. I think she is more leaning to chaotic good now.

I always thought of her as CG, although I was under the impression that her reaction to the Belkar gnome slaying made some question whether she was neutral or good.

[MasterDinadan]

The two dimensional approach to alignment is pretty bad anyway. Not to mention that you can't define a character's alignment by a single situation. Maybe Elan HAS been acting more lawful than usual lately. So what? In real life, people's attitudes change on a day to day basis. At best, one's alignment can only indicate how that character acts for the most part. It is not a force that you can never work against.
Chaotic beings can do Lawful things. Evil beings can do Good things. Etc etc...

More to the point, people may have varying traits that represent completely different alignments. How about a character that always follows the law (suggesting lawful) but has no problem at all with telling lies (suggesting chaotic).. Furthermore, he is helpful to other people in need (a Good trait) but perhaps he is cruel to dwarves for some reason (an Evil trait). The thing is that characters can have lawful traits without necessary being lawful (or even neutral). A chaotic character is not completely opposed to doing anything lawful, just most of the time.

[Texas Jedi]

I always thought of her as CG, although I was under the impression that her reaction to the Belkar gnome slaying made some question whether she was neutral or good.

I was thinking of the Dirt Farmer episode (she agreed to do it because Elan would be proud of her). The Rock for Treasure thing (very evil but a funny thing to do). There is also the whole talk about Slavery issue with Belkar (she goes along with it until Roy steps in). I need to go back and read some of those areas and familarize myself with as much as the older comics.

She has done some good things like give the money to Azurite citizens, and a few other things that I can't remember at this time.

After coming up with this list I still say she is Chaotic Neutral with good tendancies around Elan.

[Dervag]

To be honest, how is it evil?

What makes putting a sword in Kubota's hands something that makes him less of Therkala's murder? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill a pregnant woman? What makes him less of a man who tried to kill the ruler of a country? Who abandoned a city in the times of distress? Who CONSORTS WITH DEMONS?

Equilibrium gave a pretty good explanation of my opinions on killing people.The problem comes when you have won the battle. Elan has defeated and captured Kubota. The idea of bringing him to trial is not somehow anathema. As I argued in another thread, you, personally, are never the best judge of whether the person in your power deserves to die for their crimes.

If you have a rational reason for thinking they should die, you should be able to convince reasonable people of it in a trial. And if (as is likely) the evidence in your mind is unreasonable, if you are biased or mentally unstable because of your experiences, then you are the last person who should be handing out death sentences.

Execution for crimes should always be a decision made in cold blood, by people in possession of all the available facts. The guy who arrests the presumed criminal does not count, nor does a random bystander like V.
_________________


Indeed. The fact that he still smacked Kubota afterwards indicates that he was still willing to disregard the law in this case.I think it shows he was so angry that he did something he knew he would regret doing later. Sometimes people do that.
_______________


This is a good theory, but omits one thing: Elan's major role model is not Haley, but Roy (LG) Greenhilt - to the extent that Roy is idolised as the big brother he never had (I'd look the strip up - it is somewhere in the escape from Cliffport - but I am at work and pushed for time...).

So, Elan has had a major LG influence for much, if not most, of the strip, and any such shift should really have appeared some time ago.I think I wasn't clear enough.

Haley, being Chaotic, influences Elan. Roy is his role model (I want to be like Roy!). But Haley presents a model of how to be chaotic. Haley is a strong, competent, chaotic-aligned figure. Her influence tends to offset Roy's influence and keep Elan's alignment where it is.

Imagine Elan's conscience being influenced on the lawful/chaotic scale by a shoulder-modron and a shoulder-slaad, as at the end of strip 68 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0068.html). Only without the zany incomprehensible binary-speak and surrealist-speak.

Roy speaks with the voice of the shoulder-modron, Haley with the voice of the shoulder-slaad. Remove Haley while replacing Roy with another Lawful figure, and you get a slightly more lawful Elan.

It's a matter of the balance of influences.

Also, remember that Elan spent months around Hinjo- it's been something like eight or nine months since the Battle of Azure City (Kaizo is pregnant enough to show quite clearly, and she was about eight weeks pregnant at the wedding, which was in turn four months after the battle). By this point, he's probably spent as much game time around Hinjo as he ever did around Roy.

[The DM]

Elan remains Chaotic Good, evidence given in his interaction with Therla and the orcs on the island, and the whole deal with Banjo and the other hand-puppet-god, Giggles. The guy helped a tribe of orcs create a new idol-worshipping religion either earlier that day or mere days before! He's cavorting with and flirting with someone he knows was employed by an evil noble, while he's in a committed relationship. The evidence is abundant.

Further, while your interpretation of what a Lawful or Neutral Good character would do is accurate, you fail to take into account that a Chaotic Good character might do the same, but for different reasons. Honor and decency is far from exclusive to Lawful actions. Take Batman or Drizzt Do'Urden, a pair who are considered by many to be -the- ideal archetypes of Chaotic Good heroes. Both routinely ask for and accept surrender, and both have a strong code of conduct and sense of honor. Both also accept that true villains cannot be redeemed, and have not balked from putting permanent ends to those who are a true threat to those they care about or the ideals they champion. Only later do they regret the necessity, Drizzt in his first-person soliloquies, Batman in his ever-present brooding and in taking every effort possible to redeem or capture villains. In many ways, a character's motives and actions dictate their moral alignment, while their philosophy and tendencies determine their ethical alignment. For Elan, his actions are always Good, fuelled by pure intentions. His philosophy on life is wanton, and his behavioral tendencies are erratic.

Bottom line: Elan's actions don't prove him non-Chaotic. They prove him Good, and a Hero.

[AstralFire]

Stay away from Bruce Wayne. He's got good arguments for him being all non-evils and I've seen some well constructed (as much as they can be, given the odd argument) stances for him as LE. Stick to Drizzt, there.

[JonahFalcon]

Stay away from Bruce Wayne. He's got good arguments for him being all non-evils and I've seen some well constructed (as much as they can be, given the odd argument) stances for him as LE. Stick to Drizzt, there.

Batman doesn't kill. In fact, it's his moral code.

[AstralFire]

Batman doesn't kill. In fact, it's his moral code.

I didn't say I necessarily agreed with it. However, mainstream print comic characters have very inconsistent personalities from one writer to the next, so combined with the normal alignment murkiness, pinning Mr. Wayne down is hard.

[Charles Phipps]

The problem comes when you have won the battle. Elan has defeated and captured Kubota. The idea of bringing him to trial is not somehow anathema. As I argued in another thread, you, personally, are never the best judge of whether the person in your power deserves to die for their crimes.

Winning the battle is arbitrary to winning the war. Tactics are less important than strategy. Again, Kubota's danger is the same as the guys in Equilibrium. They're physically non-threatening. Their danger is to the stability of society.


If you have a rational reason for thinking they should die, you should be able to convince reasonable people of it in a trial. And if (as is likely) the evidence in your mind is unreasonable, if you are biased or mentally unstable because of your experiences, then you are the last person who should be handing out death sentences.

Yet, you personally, are often better than a complete stranger. A person who knows what kind of snake Kubota is may be prejudiced but that's because HE KNOWS KUBOTA IS GUILTY. In a legal system based on fairness than arbitrary mercy then he certainly is a better judge.


Execution for crimes should always be a decision made in cold blood, by people in possession of all the available facts. The guy who arrests the presumed criminal does not count, nor does a random bystander like V.

A court of law is, inherently, a biased place on the idea of certain assumptions about justice. A legal court based on punishing the guilty is something that the United States doesn't have. Likewise, the Star Chamber was criticized primarily because it was educated individuals who had been stacked by politicians.

Battlestar Galactica did a good episode on the necessities of Trial Law. The essential point being that no one is inherently unbiased and if they were, then they wouldn't necessarilly be good because evil people might get away who are a threat to the world.

Ironically, Trial by jury may be less Lawful than Summary Execution. If Elan was lawful good, he'd probably go.

"Surrender denied!"

[TentsOnFire]

Another thing you need to remember is that Elan TRIED to kill Kubota, remember? But his hits were ineffective. Note: he DID punch Kubota in the face when he surrendered.

So I say he's still chaotic. Because Elan just isn't the type of guy to kill a prisoner anyways.

[akumadaimyo]

Batman doesn't kill. In fact, it's his moral code.

No, he'll just drop you off a friggin fire escape and break your ankels. Yeah what a nice guy. *sarcasm* Oh and your wrong about that killing part. Frank Millers batman kills. It depends who is doing the writing.

To get on topic though I feel that Elan IS Chaotic Good, he's just the stupid kind. On the other hand I don't believe Rich hamstrings himself with alingments all too often. I still don't buy that Belkar is CE at all. I'd still like to know why someone who is supposedly CE travels with a group of doo gooders when he could join like say the Linear Guild or the Lich whose name I forget and do what he wants? There really needs to be a storyline about why in the world Belkar is traveling with the Order of the Stick instead of running around on his own or being with an evil party.

[AstralFire]

That traitorous chick, Tsukiko I think it was? Belkar nearly sided with her.

I think it's mostly that no one but the OotS can stand him long enough to get use out of him, and it's notable that keeping him in line is a pretty team effort thing.

[Lord Seth]

Batman's alignment depends so much on who the writer is that unless you're giving specific incarnations of Batman (for example, the TAS Batman or the Adam West Batman or the Dark Knight Batman or Batman under Writer X in the comics) it's useless to cite him.


Elan remains Chaotic Good, evidence given in his interaction with Therla and the orcs on the island, and the whole deal with Banjo and the other hand-puppet-god, Giggles. The guy helped a tribe of orcs create a new idol-worshipping religion either earlier that day or mere days before! He's cavorting with and flirting with someone he knows was employed by an evil noble, while he's in a committed relationship. The evidence is abundant....when was the flirting?

[Charles Phipps]

Short summary:

Bob Kane Batman: Lawful Neutral verging on Lawful Evil.

Adam West Batman: Cheerfully Lawful Good.

Tim Burton Batman (Keaton version only): Chaotic Neutral (taking at face value he's murdered hundreds of people to satisfy his own quest for vengeance and blew up a chemical plant)

Animated Batman: Neutral Good.

Nolan's Batman: Neutral Good verging on Lawful Good and Neutral at times.

Frank Miller's Batman: Neutral gone totally CN by All-Star.

[AceOfFools]

Bottom line: Elan's actions don't prove him non-Chaotic. They prove him Good, and a Hero.

*Applause*

Excellent summery there.

And kudos on the name, very clever.

[Ricky S]

Ok, so everybody is all strung up by whether he is actually chaotic or lawful. We have established that he is good at least.
Firstly does it really matter what his actual alignment is? The alignment system was considered one of the worst traits of 3.5 and has been changed for 4th edition.
Secondly Elan has always been considered chaotic good. He is a bard and that generally means he is chaotic good. Also he is extra crazy because of low intelligience and likely low wisdom. If you remember back to the past comics where he presses the self distruct rune it seems that, that was chaotic. In answer to why he saved his life (Kubota), it has already been answered. He did it because he is good and the lawful tendancy is because he is hinjos bodyguard and answers to him. Just because your chaotic good does not mean that you can disregard the laws placed by the authority in the area. Well you can, but Elan is friends with them and Elan is like an innocent kid so he would never do that anyway.

Plus he still punched Kubota whereas a lawful character would consider that unjust. I.e. A paladin would not punch him after he surrendered. It would not be honourable.

[Niknokitueu]

What? Killing someone you do not need to kill and denying them the chance to repent of their evil deeds is evil.
I'll take your 'evil' and raise you 'guilt'.

Not killing someone in Kubota's position, where he has knowingly been involved with many nefarious schemes, where literally thousands of innocents have died, is currently actively reducing the chances of the fleet to survive in a vain bid to be on top of the remains, has just tried to kill friends, has just succeeded in killing an ally (even if he did not think that he would succeed - he gambled Therakla's life without knowing she could be saved on the basis that attempts to do so would give him the time to escape), and even when caught and helpless is boasting about said deeds, and boasting about how he will beat the system in this class-bound and honour-ruled system, and also boasting about how he will continue to engineer whatever murders are required in order to become ruler of the remains - that would be an unforgivable act.

Killing Kubota was not an intrinsically evil act. It would have been dubious enough that a paladin could not do it without risk of falling, but a generally good person would do it to remove a dangerous evil foe.

I have said before how Roy would probably have killed him, as he follows the need for law and good, rather than blindly following the rules and trying to do good. Roy has committed several law-breaking and quasi-evil acts, but these are few and far between. Alignments are a guide, not a straight jacket (unless you are a paladin, of course, as it is your vows you are breaking...)

Elan did not kill him, because his world view of 'good' prevents him killing an unarmed and defeated opponent. Elan is however too simple a soul to realise that Kubota is never unarmed (in the broader sense), and did not consider himself defeated.

Do you think that Kubota being imprisoned (prior to a trial) would have in any way prevented assasination attempts on Hinjo, organised by him? Or would have in any way prevented his evil machinations from proceeding apace? He was even gloating about the increase to his power base as a result of Hinjo not being able to force a conviction.

Nah, Kubota was not unarmed, and he was far from defeated. Killing him would have (at worst) been a minor evil act. Letting him live would have been a far greater evil.

It is worth remembering though, V did not know any of this, and so did actually commit an evil act. He killed Kubota out of complete ignorance ("What is this Kubota you speak of?") and his sole justification was the delay that remaining with the fleet during a long trial would entail.

Now THAT was an evil act.

Elan is CG, and if he was just playing true to alignment form would happily have killed Kubota (Doing good with scant regards for the law...). Elan, however, does not think that way, and is CG more from 'being good his own way' rather then the flat CG description. Almost as if he is a fully-fleshed out character...

Have Fun!
Niknokitueu
ps. The alignment system was here long before 3.5 came out. Try 20 years before 3.5 came out. Alignments have changed very little from version to version and are there to help guide newbie players into playing their character appropriately. It stops Paladins from being backstabbing little gits as much as it forces assassins to be not-very-nice people. Without them you would have calls for "I am a paladin of hacking and slashing, and will kill anything I can rape XP from"...

[Manga Shoggoth]

I think I wasn't clear enough.

Haley, being Chaotic, influences Elan. Roy is his role model (I want to be like Roy!). But Haley presents a model of how to be chaotic. Haley is a strong, competent, chaotic-aligned figure. Her influence tends to offset Roy's influence and keep Elan's alignment where it is.

Imagine Elan's conscience being influenced on the lawful/chaotic scale by a shoulder-modron and a shoulder-slaad, as at the end of strip 68 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0068.html). Only without the zany incomprehensible binary-speak and surrealist-speak.

Roy speaks with the voice of the shoulder-modron, Haley with the voice of the shoulder-slaad. Remove Haley while replacing Roy with another Lawful figure, and you get a slightly more lawful Elan.


I love that description. Too bad it is too long to sig.

The other thing to note is that Elan has professed admiration of V, to the length of considering taking a level of wizard early on in the strip. However, there seems to be some confusion about V's alignment at the moment...

[Underground]

Why would a person that is chaotic good, i.e. that is good natured and is following his or her conscience not accept surrender - and instead murder a helpless victim in cold blood ?

[hamishspence]

there is a lot of argument on whether killing a helpless person is murder or not. Strictly, its not (anyone being executed is technically helpless)

However, thats a pretty narrow definition. Expanding on it: is killing a condemned criminal rather than letting them be executed murder?

Equivalent: a criminal killing another criminal on death row. Strictly, answer is yes, even if person is actually condemned to die, killing them can be murder.

Now we get to the issue closest to the actual case: is killing someone who is under arrest, restrained, but has not yet reached trial murder? Answer. Yes. Jack Ruby was convicted of the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. Even had he know for a fact Oswald was guilty because Oswald told him so, it would still have been murder.

Now look at Kubota. Which situation most closely fits him?

Of course, if you disallow Fiendish Codex 2, which specifically states that Murder is an Evil act, you could end up saying: even if it was murder, it wasn't evil.

I would not agree, but you could certainly say that.

[AKA_Bait]

Of course, if you disallow Fiendish Codex 2, which specifically states that Murder is an Evil act, you could end up saying: even if it was murder, it wasn't evil.


The question is more 'was it murder'. The FC2 doesn't provide a definition of muder, the BovD does, I quoted it on the other thread. It requires a 'nefarious purpose', such as personal gain or enjoyment.

Now, I agree that V's killing Kubota here was evil and a murder (after the most current strip anyways) but unless can you give me something defining 'executing a guilty prisoner' as murder rather than some other kind of unlawful killing I'm going object to a blanket use of the term in that case.

[Eric]

Why would a person that is chaotic good, i.e. that is good natured and is following his or her conscience not accept surrender - and instead murder a helpless victim in cold blood ?

When it's a helpless (currently) villain.

This isn't offing-a-little-girl-in-pigtails-with-a-puppy-in-her-arms sort of helpless.

This is "We've got the slimy little beggar cornered now" sort of helpless.

[Eric]

I still don't buy that Belkar is CE at all. I'd still like to know why someone who is supposedly CE travels with a group of doo gooders when he could join like say the Linear Guild or the Lich whose name I forget and do what he wants?

1) He needed to get out of town in a hurry
2) "Roy has boobies". Elan.
3) He still gets to do the things he likes and he's less likely to get killed by his teammates in OOtS.
4) Someone to show off to
5) Why not?

[Callista]

What we're seeing is probably Elan's slipping a little from his original extreme alignment; but it's nowhere near what it takes to get away from chaos or good. It's basically character development--Elan's not a caricature anymore, as he was when the comic first started; if he stayed that way, he'd seem flat and lifeless.

Elan's been settling down a bit lately. He started out extremely chaotic, though! Just because he's no longer so strongly chaotic as he once was doesn't mean he's neutral now. He's middle of the road Chaotic Good now, rather than extreme chaos, extreme Good.

I think Elan is still the most strongly Good aligned main character (Hinjo and O'chul do give him a good run for his money; they're extreme too, but not so main-character as he is; we don't know enough about the other characters to know about them)... he is starting to be a little more pragmatic lately, though.

Elan's started to take a bit of responsibility, even though he's a bit silly about it--guarding Hinjo, for example. He's become more useful in battle; and rather than just an intuitive knowledge of plot, he's starting to consciously use his feel for a good story to predict and control situations. And he's starting to think more deeply and realistically about things like hostages, prisoners, and his responsibility to Haley (compare to the earlier episode with Samantha).

Basically, Elan's growing up... I just hope he keeps his innocence.

[Greep]

Heh, Elan IS "good". Definately by Rich's standards, though I don't know about D and D standards.

To quote from Elan saving Nale in the very beginning (paraphrased):

"Yeah I know, but I didn't save you so we could interrogate you. I saved you because I'm the good twin, not the evil twin", "...I don't get it", "Yup"

This Kubota situation is EXACTLY the same "alignment dilemma" act. Note, the whole "killing bad guys cause they're bad" is, to my understanding, more like Miko, who sure ain't going anywhere good for an afterlife, tho at least her horse will be with her :)

[Blue Ghost]

I would agree that Elan's honoring Kubota's surrender, when taken by itself, is a Lawful act. Normally, though, I would argue that a single Lawful act does not warrant an alignment change, especially in Elan's case. Elan's moral ideals seem to be neutral good, maybe even leaning toward lawful. His alignment is chaotic because his personality is reckless and impulsive, not because he actively pursues chaos. So, honoring Kubota's surrender is what his moral code dictates, and perfectly consistent action.
However, there is reason to believe that Elan is becoming more lawful. Probably beginning when he took that level in Dashing Swordsman, Elan has become less happy-go-lucky and more serious in his worldview. He is losing much of the impulsiveness that defines him as a chaotic character, and he may be crossing the line to neutral good.

[akumadaimyo]

1) He needed to get out of town in a hurry
2) "Roy has boobies". Elan.
3) He still gets to do the things he likes and he's less likely to get killed by his teammates in OOtS.
4) Someone to show off to
5) Why not?

Those reasons are still pretty lame and don't cut it. I want real reasons why Belkar is with the OOtS instead of with an evil group. When I said I wanted real reasons I meant from Rich in a strip, not from someone trying to justify Belkar on the boards.

[Eric]

Those reasons are still pretty lame and don't cut it. I want real reasons why Belkar is with the OOtS instead of with an evil group. When I said I wanted real reasons I meant from Rich in a strip, not from someone trying to justify Belkar on the boards.

Those ARE The reasons.

Just because you're CE doesn't mean you can only be friends with CE critters.

See also comic #42.

Comic #435 has his association with the OOtS team gives him one of the best days of his life.

He gets to kill LOTS of things. And all without getting into trouble with the law (which is why he had to join the team in the first place).

He's CE. Does he NEED a better explanation?

No.

[dragongirl690]

No.....it makes perfect sense to say Elan is Chaotic Good he even tried to save some people and he has only killed Hobgoblins and a few of other things.He is not making a evil mastermind plan to destroy us all.Right?:smallconfused:

[NerfTW]

Those reasons are still pretty lame and don't cut it. I want real reasons why Belkar is with the OOtS instead of with an evil group. When I said I wanted real reasons I meant from Rich in a strip, not from someone trying to justify Belkar on the boards.

Rich has stated those reasons in the books commentaries. Belkar needed to get out of town fast. He liked hanging out with Elan. He likes killing things. Roy never let him be alone where he could kill everyone and take thier treasure initially.

For the first mission after the dungeon, he was tricked into coming along by the promise of killing things.

Then he agreed to help against the bandits because he wanted to be the one to earn XP off Elan. (His exact words in that strip)

After that they were captured by Miko, and by the time he got out of that bind, he had a mark of justice put on him so he had to help out. The reason for the mark of justice was explained by Rich in the commentary as being the only way to believably have Belkar follow the team at that point and not just hightail it out of there.

[NorseItalian]

Elan is chaotic good because Rich says so. Plain and simple.

[David Argall]

Now an additional reason Belkar is tagging along with the party is that he is stupid. It's Roy who points out to him he could have changed sides in some battles with evil and then looted the bodies of party members. It's Haley that points out that Xykon could have taken the Mark off Belkar. Belkar just doesn't think clearly enough or far enough in the future to realize leaving the party is a good idea.

For that matter, he may be wise in staying with the party. Belkar does not get along well with other bad guys. [For one thing, there is the vulture principle, "You know what they call someone who takes advantage of his teammates? A vulture! A !@#$ vulture! Now there's only room for one vulture on this team and that's me, not you!] He needs the tolerance the Good party can show him.



I would agree that Elan's honoring Kubota's surrender, when taken by itself, is a Lawful act.
However, it is also compatible with other alignments, all actually.
The basic point is that Elan knows he is not all that bright. So that means he needs to consult the opinion of others when he can. He is impulsive, and so often forgets, but he still knows it is best that he ask others what he should do.
Now with Kubota surrendering, there is no need to act right away. He can bring Kubota to the law so they can decide. He is sure he knows that Kubota deserves death, but he knows he can be wrong, and very easily. So since he can't be as sure as he needs to be and since he can consult others, he has a duty not to kill Kubota, whatever alignment we assign to Elan.
[We can contrast with V here, who has no such reason to think others will make a decision superior enough to justify the delay and bother. So he acts right away, but we can't select her alignment either based just on that. V acts in a somewhat chaotic way while Elan acts in a somewhat lawful, but neither are in danger of any alignment violations on that basis.]

Now we can also note that avoiding killing is a very basic Good trait. If there is not reason to kill Kubota, there is reason not to kill him. By surrendering, Kubota eliminates a quite large percentage of the reasons that might justify his killing. In particular, it eliminates any immediate need, and so allows delay, which of itself justifies delay. So accepting the surrender is in particular acceptable to any good alignment.

[TheNovak]

Further, while your interpretation of what a Lawful or Neutral Good character would do is accurate, you fail to take into account that a Chaotic Good character might do the same, but for different reasons. Honor and decency is far from exclusive to Lawful actions. Take Batman or Drizzt Do'Urden, a pair who are considered by many to be -the- ideal archetypes of Chaotic Good heroes.

Batman. Complete Scoundrel. Lawful Good.

Not that that seals the debate, but I think that when the official line is that he's LG, that should lend the argument some credence.


Both routinely ask for and accept surrender, and both have a strong code of conduct and sense of honor. Both also accept that true villains cannot be redeemed, and have not balked from putting permanent ends to those who are a true threat to those they care about or the ideals they champion.

Frank Miller and his serious, serious issues (especially concerning prostitutes) aside, Batman hasn't gone around killing people since he debuted in 1939 with a pistol.

Not to go off into total comic nerdism here, but the version of Bats that's been fairly consistently portrayed over the last few decades not only refuses to kill, he considers heroes who do kill to be complete scum, and they go right to the top of his "People to Punch in the Face" list. As Superman put it in a Justice League episode, when you boil Batman down to his barest essence, he's just a guy who doesn't want to see anybody die.

Anyway, Elan's totally Chaotic Good. Carry on.