Give this guy an alignment

[Maryring]

Hi there. Some of you may remember my old Queen character who I had problems giving an alignment, and who ended up as everything from LE to CG (only alignment she wasn't put down for was CE).

Now I have another similar character.

The guy is a wererat warrior, with great emphasis on the wererat part (the players have yet to see his non-rat form, and probably never will).

On one hand, he is a very violent person. He enjoys fighting and combat. He loves to test his wits, even against "unfair odds", evened by the fact that, as a wererat, and a very high-leveled one at that, most things can't hurt him. He loves the challenge, but he'll fight even if the fight ends up one sided, eagerly killing and eating, sometimes even skipping the killing part, anyone he fights.

The reason for this is that so far, every human, elf, etc, has betrayed him in pretty much every way possible. He's survived more metaphorical and actual daggers to the back than what a level 2 rogue has delivered thus far. There are very few places he can go without (foolish) adventurers trying to kill him. Now this would not change his alignment from the CE described above. Just give an explanation for why, and a hope for redemption. The trouble comes in his... quirks.

He will not harm ill, pregnant, elderly, youths etc. Especially children. He has risked his life during many different circumstances to save the lives of children. Though he ain't counting, he has saved about as many lives as he's gleefully ended. And while he isn't above using tricks, traps and poison, he does not lie. If he gives a promise, he will keep it. If someone begs for mercy, he will usually give it, the cause unrelated to how much he likes the person, and he will not strike someone who cannot fight back, nor someone whom detects as good. (He's got a magic item that allows him to cast "Detect Alignment" at will)

So.... I'm curious. What is the alignment of my poor, confused yet dangerously violent wererat?

[Dresil]

Sounds like a straight Chaotic Neutral to me.

[Urpriest]

The core lycanthropes have an Always alignment. I've forgotten what that of wererats is, but he's that. No matter how he acts or what his motivations.

[Kallisti]

I'd say LE or NE--he's not CE because he has too strict a code of honor, in my view, to be chaotic, but despite the fact that he does have some standards, he sounds evil. I suppose it'd be up to you whether he's Lawful or Neutral.

Just how much of a psychopath is he? A love of combat is one thing--even purposefully starting fights for the pleasure of it would be Neutral, or so I think--but murdering people for the joy of killing is evil.

EDIT: Urpriest is right, though. RAW he's whatever Wererats are.

[mootoall]

I'd say Chaotic Neutral: Screw the rules, I have power + Look out for number one + Selective murder seems fairly CN to me.

[Maryring]

The core lycanthropes have an Always alignment. I've forgotten what that of wererats is, but he's that. No matter how he acts or what his motivations.

Only inflicted. Natural lycans are free to choose their own alignment.

And even if it wasn't, I, as DM, did away with it.

[WarKitty]

The core lycanthropes have an Always alignment. I've forgotten what that of wererats is, but he's that. No matter how he acts or what his motivations.

Ok that really makes absolutely no sense.

Anyways, I'd say you could justify any of CN, LE, LN, TN

[Dr.Epic]

Sounds like a straight Chaotic Neutral to me.

Yeah, gotta agree with the CN alignment (although maybe Lawful Evil).

[Maryring]

But he isn't "screwing the rules". He has some rules he just won't break. In many ways, he's much more reliable and trustworthy than even some LG types.

[Dormammu]

Sounds LE to me. Keeps his word, sticks to a code but likes to kill for killing's sake.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Ok that really makes absolutely no sense.

I think the point is that lycanthropy forces avoidance of certain actions and outlooks. It's a curse, after all.

reliable and trustworthy than even some LG types.

Reliability and trust don't make up for murder. Nor do they make an otherwise free spirit Lawful.

[mootoall]

But he isn't "screwing the rules". He has some rules he just won't break. In many ways, he's much more reliable and trustworthy than even some LG types.

Ah, sorry. I meant Screw other peoples' rules. Which he does, according to your description.

[Urpriest]

Likes killing but has some rules feels Neutral Evil to me. For one, Neutral Evil is a pretty good Unseelie alignment, and reading his code this guy feels like a classic Unseelie.

[SmartAlec]

I'd agree with Neutral Evil. He's mostly out to fulfil his own wants. And though he has his quirks about not killing certain people, it feels as if he hasn't really thought about why. He's not refraining out of any noble impulse or because he holds some things sacred; he's just doing it because it's part of whatever game he's playing with himself.

[Tengu_temp]

Loves fighting and killing, has no qualms against murder for the sake of it as long as it doesn't go against his code, but at the same time his code is unflinching? Typical LE if you ask me.

[Blue Ghost]

Another vote for LE. No new reasoning to contribute.

[Zeofar]

Straight up Chaotic Evil. He might, just might, get Chaotic Neutral on a very good day, but it seems doubtful.

Edit: Okay, I reread the first post, and I'm pretty much evenly split between Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Evil.

[Ilmryn]

The core lycanthropes have an Always alignment. I've forgotten what that of wererats is, but he's that. No matter how he acts or what his motivations.

Well, according to Savage Species, even always alignments have exceptions. Whereupon follows a CN succubus PC, but that's another story...

Anyways, the character seems to have alignment factors in all kind of directions. According to the alignment section of the DMG, a character that is undecided, wishy-wasy, or changes alignments all the time is TN. From the description, the character does as much good as evil, and is as chaotic as he is lawful. TN is not just a character in the middle, it can also be a character with extreme tendencies in opposite directions.

[Zeofar]

Anyways, the character seems to have alignment factors in all kind of directions. According to the alignment section of the DMG, a character that is undecided, wishy-wasy, or changes alignments all the time is TN. From the description, the character does as much good as evil, and is as chaotic as he is lawful. TN is not just a character in the middle, it can also be a character with extreme tendencies in opposite directions.

From the description though, he obviously isn't wishy-washy. He acts in a specific manner. He doesn't change alignment all the time either; he acts a certain way consistently. He doesn't, for a month, act Chaotic Good, but then, when faced with despair after recognizing the depravity of mankind, switch to Lawful Evil, only to switch back later.

The best argument for True Neutral would be that he is undecided, but that is a little unclear, so clarification would probably be helpful.

[Grynning]

I think the character is probably TN or CN. Liking to fight and kill isn't really an evil trait in D&D, especially with the restrictions against killing the good and innocent. It's a game about kicking in the doors of the homes of monsters who are otherwise minding their own business, murdering them, and taking their stuff for cryin' out loud. And the party Paladin is usually in the front.

[Kiren]

This depends on whom he violently kills. The morality of how he kills his victims, as long as it isn't torture, doesn't matter. He will not kill weak, elderly, sick, pregnant, young Ecetera. Combined with he does still protects those who cannot fight back, and hes various codes, the character is neutral.

Lawful Neutral with Chaotic tendencies. Or Chaotic Neutral with lawful tendencies.

[Zeofar]

I think the character is probably TN or CN. Liking to fight and kill isn't really and evil trait in D&D, especially with the restrictions against killing the good and innocent. It's a game about kicking in the doors of the homes of monsters who are otherwise minding their own business, murdering them, and taking their stuff for cryin' out loud. And the party Paladin is usually in the front.

That really comes from bad meta influences on roleplay, though. Killing for the sake of killing is very different from killing with the intent of preventing evil or rendering justice. A paladin shouldn't be killing a monster who is doing no evil or could no be believed to ever do evil; demons and devils are often an exception to this, but that has more to do with religious affiliation than anything else.

[Grynning]

You didn't detect even the slightest hint of sarcasm there, huh?

Regardless, D&D does tend to exist in a world inherently more tolerant of violence than our own, and even good characters commit acts of violence, including killing their enemies, quite regularly. Several of the good gods (Kord, Bahamut, Heironeous) are warrior deities, and they don't just advocate some kind of passive, self-defense type philosophy, they're pretty fired up about seeking out and destroying evil.

D&D is a game about heroic combat as much as it is about heroic roleplaying. Saying that a character who likes to fight and kill in such a setting is evil is about like saying that every player who enjoys the combat is evil.

[CockroachTeaParty]

This wererat sounds kind of nutty. Reveling in slaughter is typically an evil trait... even if he spares certain kinds of people, he might kill those same folk's loved ones who fall into his 'fair game' category. He sounds like a spreader of misery and woe, and I don't get the sense that there's much thought behind his behavior, or much internal struggling. Sure, he's been betrayed, but he's not attempting to alter his behavior to avoid future betrayal; he's lashing out, and seems to be somewhat confused.

I'd peg him as a NE or CE. I typically associate Lawfulness with discipline and ethics that apply not just to the self, but something on the outside as well, whether that be a cause, organization, patron, etc. He's too self-centered sounding for that. If he only killed in self defense, when people try to kill him for being a wererat, I might lose the Evil and bump him to Neutral.

[Grynning]

Again, killing opponents in fair fights is NOT evil in D&D. Many examples are given throughout the game text of characters of good or neutral alignment who enjoy combat. Hell, the entire description of the Warmage class is about a large group of spellcasters who love making their enemies explode. Why is a were-rat who likes to scrap and take fools down in alley fights more "evil" than a wizard who likes to rain down fire on orcs? Because he eats them after? He's a gorram were-rat, it's in his nature to take a nibble on whatever is available.

Also, crazy =/= to evil, or even chaotic. Insanity can be role-played many ways that don't necessary involve being an axe-crazy, and from the OP's description that's not really what he's going for. He's violent, yes. He's a little anti-social. But he doesn't go around killing people at random; he just doesn't hold back when he fights and gets a thrill from the death of his enemies. He knows what is best in life. To crush his enemies. To see them driven before him, and hear the lamentations of their women.

That's not "evil" by the game's definition. It's not "good," either. It's neutral.

[Urpriest]

Hmm...I hadn't read the description as thoroughly as I thought...

Nothing in this guy's description says why he fights people. Yes, he enjoys fighting. He also apparently has rules about who he's allowed to fight. He fights when it's one-sided, he fights when it's two-sided. He kills and eats. Fine.

What are his motivations? These are the key thing here. If he fights random passers-by in alleys with the intent of killing them for fun and food, he's evil. If he fights people who are out to hunt him down (as described in the post) then he's neutral, maybe even good given his focus on protecting children. So what are the positive reasons that motivate him to pick one particular fight over another? Without that information all discussion here is idle speculation.

[Lhurgyof]

The core lycanthropes have an Always alignment. I've forgotten what that of wererats is, but he's that. No matter how he acts or what his motivations.

Edit: Always LE

[WarKitty]

They're always CE afaik.

So... CE. No backdoors about it. If he willingly turns into his were-for, then he is CE.

DM says he houseruled that away.

[SmartAlec]

Again, killing opponents in fair fights is NOT evil in D&D. Many examples are given throughout the game text of characters of good or neutral alignment who enjoy combat. Hell, the entire description of the Warmage class is about a large group of spellcasters who love making their enemies explode. Why is a were-rat who likes to scrap and take fools down in alley fights more "evil" than a wizard who likes to rain down fire on orcs? Because he eats them after? He's a gorram were-rat, it's in his nature to take a nibble on whatever is available.

This isn't about classes or races, but alignment. Let's look at the Warmage here. You've described the hypothetical Warmage as a spellcaster who loves to make foes explode and who rains down fire on Orcs, and you haven't given a reason why the Warmage is attacking those Orcs beyond 'likes making foes explode'. Presumably, this character has gone out, picked a fight with a bunch of Orcs and is now bombarding them with fire. He's not helping anyone by it; he's not making his life any easier by doing it; he's just doing it because he loves to kill.

Would a good Warmage act this way? No.
Would a neutral Warmage act this way? No.
Would an evil Warmage act this way? Yes.

So, you have described an evil character who is a Warmage. Yes, he's killed Orcs; but he's done it needlessly and without a shred of empathy. Evil characters that kill evil beings don't become good simply by doing so. There has to be some good intention behind it for that to be the case.

To applying that to this were-rat; he picks fights. Sometimes he'll fight people stronger than him; sometimes he'll fight people weaker than him. He wants a challenge, but he'll kill who he fights, unless they beg him for mercy. He has a list of targets he won't go after, but it's not explained why he won't go after them; without further explanation, it's hard to see if there's a genuine good intention behind those restrictions or if he's just acting that way because it makes him feel superior, or whatever.

As described, then, I would say this were-rat is evil. He's not serving some greater cause or acting in defence of anyone; he's not even enriching himself. He's just fighting because he likes to fight and kill, and outside of his guidelines, anyone is fair game to him. I don't think that fits good or neutral at all.

[Lhurgyof]

DM says he houseruled that away.

Oh... Well, I'd say he's True Neutral, with a splash of Evil.