What Alignment is this Character?

[Jormengand]

I know that there are issues with the D&D alignment system, so feel free to use another alignment system if you like, but what alignment would you put this character in, given this description:

Repentant rapist, unrepentant thief - though never from anyone who would be noticeably harmed by it, or she'd have qualms about it. However, committed, and willing to sacrifice her comfort or even her life for the good of others. Liberal, open-minded, and devoted to freedom of every living being. Swore a vow of nonviolence, and keeps it. Also swore a vow to a friend that she would help them for as long as they both lived, without exception. Keeps many lovers, but each understands the terms and she loves them all dearly. Brimming with righteous indignation, she tries to keep her principles even in a world that seems determined to be against her. Wishing never to harm anyone again, she takes extreme psychological measures to control herself, but even they are not always enough.

Despising of any authority that is given without good cause and unafraid to challenge it, she fights for the rights of the downtrodden. Willing to forgive anything, she consorts with any from the greatest heroes to the most despicable villains, because she believes no-one deserves to be ill-treated, even if they have done terrible things as she has. Modest and reserved most of the time, she will stand to defend anyone in their time of need.

What alignment is she?

[Honest Tiefling]

Assuming that she really is repentant for the raping...I kinda assume Chaotic Neutral. She values certain values (her friends, freedom, well-treatment of everyone) over the ideas of good. That is assuming ideas of punishment and such are considered 'good', as well as restraining people from doing more bad stuff. She's got hints of Chaotic Good, but without more details I would say it's just inclinations.

[Jormengand]

That is assuming ideas of punishment and such are considered 'good',

Rather than diving into the silly D&D world of "Killing evil people is good, having sexual fetishes and doing drugs is evil, poisoning evil people is bad but using poison-equivalents that only work on evil people is good", I'd rather ask whether you consider it good.

[AMFV]

Rather than diving into the silly D&D world of "Killing evil people is good, having sexual fetishes and doing drugs is evil, poisoning evil people is bad but using poison-equivalents that only work on evil people is good", I'd rather ask whether you consider it good.

I think that without properly defining what Good is, that's going to careen into real world morality very quickly. What I consider Good is based exclusively on Real World morality. What I consider Good in game is based on textual proofing from the game, so I can separate that from reality. Without a similar basis any separation is impossible.

I would instead ask, "Why is the character's morality important in terms of alignment?" Once you know why you need to know the character's alignment that can affect a lot more. Obviously your character isn't a Paladin, and isn't a cleric, so if your acted alignment doesn't match what's written on the sheet, it won't have huge consequences.

[ExLibrisMortis]

This character is a 'repentant rapist', and rape is clearly Evil. However, in typical D&D (well, 3e anyway), there is absolute Evil, but also absolute Repentance. If, as Honest Tiefling says, the repentance is true (and also lasting), the past rape doesn't continue to negatively affect their alignment. This is what I would put in my universe as well - repentance is meant to be absolute, especially in a world where immortal beings have the ability to hold grudges.

I would personally not rate any not-really-causing-harm thief as Good, unless the following were true:
- The thieving is paired with immediate or well-known need - "these orphans are hungry now!" rather than "I might run into a hungry orphan someday...", when stealing from a baker's.
- Not being wealthy, or at least a lot poorer than whoever you're stealing from - having a periapt of wisdom +6 is well and good, but that's 36.000 gp, or 360.000 people fed for a day. Why are you still stealing from bakers, when you have that kind of money? Of course, since typical survival needs are measured in sp, D&D 3e characters can quickly afford to feed entire villages, so you'd soon be unable to justify stealing, just to feed orphans.
- If you do have money: inability to buy goods, or obtain them legally otherwise - slightly different from the above, in that some bakers may simply refuse to sell to you, like an orc to an elf or vice versa.
- (this may override the second and third point) Target is irredeemably Evil, particularly patrons of greed, like Mammon, or evil dragons.

Essentially, I'd accept a CG Vow of Poverty occasional-harmless-Robin Hood as true to their alignment, but not a rich CG steal-me-some-nice-clothes-he-won't-miss-it kind of thief, that'd be CN. For your character, depending on the quantity of the thieving, and the frivolity of the spending, CN or CG would be appropriate, but CN would be the most obvious choice.

[Honest Tiefling]

Rather than diving into the silly D&D world of "Killing evil people is good, having sexual fetishes and doing drugs is evil, poisoning evil people is bad but using poison-equivalents that only work on evil people is good", I'd rather ask whether you consider it good.

I think it depends on the results of her actions. If she's just chumming it up with evil people when she is not in a position of authority or respect so such does no harm...Who cares? It's a bit shaky, sure, but it might not do anything. If she is in such a position which cause people to be more sympathetic to such evil people and possibly even accept them...Whoops.

I'm also curious, given her devotion to the ideals of being treated well and to their freedom, how DOES she react to criminals? How has she reacted to criminals who have slipped back into criminal habits?

Also, would she follow her friend and help them even if that meant betraying her ideals of helping the downtrodden or restricting freedom?

[Jormengand]

If she is in such a position which cause people to be more sympathetic to such evil people and possibly even accept them...Whoops.

She would rather people accept evil people (or people who do actions, especially herself - being a rapist probably makes it hard to make friends), even if they don't accept evil people's actions, though she'd rather people forgive each other if the transgressor is genuinely repentant.

I'm also curious, given her devotion to the ideals of being treated well and to their freedom, how DOES she react to criminals? How has she reacted to criminals who have slipped back into criminal habits?

She is a criminal. She is in criminal habits. And she realises that doesn't make her a bad person.

Also, would she follow her friend and help them even if that meant betraying her ideals of helping the downtrodden or restricting freedom?

Almost certainly no, although the decision would be a hard one.

[Honest Tiefling]

She would rather people accept evil people (or people who do actions, especially herself - being a rapist probably makes it hard to make friends), even if they don't accept evil people's actions, though she'd rather people forgive each other if the transgressor is genuinely repentant.

Is it that she accepts evil people, or people who have done evil? I mean, would she pal around with a person who took over another country and started murdering that country's people? I'm a little confused here.

She is a criminal. She is in criminal habits. And she realises that doesn't make her a bad person.

Has...She not stopped raping people? If the answer is no, I'm going to say Chaotic Evil with heavy denial. Theft is a more grey area, and I am not talking about that, unless she's stealing for her own benefit.

Almost certainly no, although the decision would be a hard one.

That does, in my mind, shift her to good/neutral territory.

[Jormengand]

Is it that she accepts evil people, or people who have done evil? I mean, would she pal around with a person who took over another country and started murdering that country's people? I'm a little confused here.

She accepts that they're still people and still don't deserve to be mistreated. If you try to torture someone because they're evil so it's okay, she's against that. She doesn't prefer to hang out with evil people by choice, but if people are nice to her, she doesn't condemn them for being evil, only try to make them better if she can, and accept that it's out of her power and a happy evil person is better than a sad evil person if she can't.

Has...She not stopped raping people? If the answer is no, I'm going to say Chaotic Evil with heavy denial. Theft is a more grey area, and I am not talking about that, unless she's stealing for her own benefit.

She has stopped raping people (she only did so once), and steals rarely, and mainly on impulse (but yes, mainly for her own benefit, though sometimes to make her friends happy).

[Honest Tiefling]

So...Her crimes are essentially petty theft from those who can afford it, and her ideas do seem to be centered around or not incompatible with redemption of evil.

I'm not going to say she's exalted, but I still peg her as Chaotic Neutral, with the likely possibility of Chaotic Good with additional information. That isn't meant as a insult, just characters and morality are both hard things to describe and explore, so I doubt a few paragraphs would be sufficient for more then a quick judgement.

The fact she's unwilling to condemn evil people is what gets me. And I don't mean people who were once evil, or questionably evil, but actively evil.

[Jormengand]

The fact she's unwilling to condemn evil people is what gets me. And I don't mean people who were once evil, or questionably evil, but actively evil.

It's mainly "I don't like what you've done, but that doesn't mean that you deserve to be hurt and I think you can become better". She may condemn what they've done, but condemning the person themself she sees as pointless and self-abnegating.

[Geddy2112]

Chaotic good, maybe a bit closer to chaotic neutral in practice.

[Mystral]

Maybe chaotic neutral, maybe chaotic good. Certainly not good enough to qualify for an exalted feat.

[Jormengand]

Maybe chaotic neutral, maybe chaotic good. Certainly not good enough to qualify for an exalted feat.

See, this is why I wanted to avoid the 3.5-style silliness of "Masochists who don't drink alcohol on principle or pacifist drug-users are both exalted good and vile evil at the same time".

[hamishspence]

BoED did have that Repentant Mind Flayer with the exalted feats. And the vow of nonviolence as well, as I recall.
Sufficiently repentant ex-villains can work their way up to exalted status.

[Kyberwulf]

She sounds like she is pretty Lawful Neutral. Like... HEAVY on the Law.. Almost Bordering Heavy on Evil side of things. It sounds like to her, everyone is accountable to Law, to some type of Rules. Enough so that EVERYONE should be weighed by their merits. It doesn't matter what laws other people are using to judge people. It's her laws that matter.

[Jormengand]

She sounds like she is pretty Lawful Neutral. Like... HEAVY on the Law.. Almost Bordering Heavy on Evil side of things. It sounds like to her, everyone is accountable to Law, to some type of Rules. Enough so that EVERYONE should be weighed by their merits. It doesn't matter what laws other people are using to judge people. It's her laws that matter.

Huh. Her laws? You've got about the diametrically opposite view to everyone else (You're saying LN(E) as opposed to CN(G)) so I'm wondering if you could elaborate.

EDIT: As in, I'm interested, not I'm criticising you.

[Kyberwulf]

She seems very paladin-y or monk-y... hey monkeys....

Rules exists to her. Good and evil doesn't matter to much. Everyone is accountable. She seems like she is very close to "Making" everyone follow the rules. Like a Paladin or a Monk, the rules of the land don't matter so much. Just what feels right inside. Also a strict code of what that right means.

Everyone thinks she is Chaotic. That isn't true. TO be Chaotic, no one is accountable to anything, or anyone. To be good, there has to be a certain level of respect for everyone. The people she hangs out with don't always subscribe to that.

[Jormengand]

She seems very paladin-y or monk-y... hey monkeys....

Rules exists to her. Good and evil doesn't matter to much. Everyone is accountable. She seems like she is very close to "Making" everyone follow the rules. Like a Paladin or a Monk, the rules of the land don't matter so much. Just what feels right inside. Also a strict code of what that right means.

Everyone thinks she is Chaotic. That isn't true. TO be Chaotic, no one is accountable to anything, or anyone. To be good, there has to be a certain level of respect for everyone. The people she hangs out with don't always subscribe to that.

She isn't forcing anyone to follow any rules, though. And she isn't accountable to anyone except herself. I'm not sure I get what you mean here.

[Kyberwulf]

Repentant rapist, unrepentant thief - though never from anyone who would be noticeably harmed by it, or she'd have qualms about it. However, committed, and willing to sacrifice her comfort or even her life for the good of others. Liberal, open-minded, and devoted to freedom of every living being. Swore a vow of nonviolence, and keeps it. Also swore a vow to a friend that she would help them for as long as they both lived, without exception. Keeps many lovers, but each understands the terms and she loves them all dearly. Brimming with righteous indignation, she tries to keep her principles even in a world that seems determined to be against her. Wishing never to harm anyone again, she takes extreme psychological measures to control herself, but even they are not always enough.

Despising of any authority that is given without good cause and unafraid to challenge it, she fights for the rights of the downtrodden. Willing to forgive anything, she consorts with any from the greatest heroes to the most despicable villains, because she believes no-one deserves to be ill-treated, even if they have done terrible things as she has. Modest and reserved most of the time, she will stand to defend anyone in their time of need.

She would rather people accept evil people (or people who do actions, especially herself - being a rapist probably makes it hard to make friends), even if they don't accept evil people's actions, though she'd rather people forgive each other if the transgressor is genuinely repentant.

She is a criminal. She is in criminal habits. And she realises that doesn't make her a bad person.

"Also, would she follow her friend and help them even if that meant betraying her ideals of helping the downtrodden or restricting freedom?"
Almost certainly no, although the decision would be a hard one.

She accepts that they're still people and still don't deserve to be mistreated. If you try to torture someone because they're evil so it's okay, she's against that. She doesn't prefer to hang out with evil people by choice, but if people are nice to her, she doesn't condemn them for being evil, only try to make them better if she can, and accept that it's out of her power and a happy evil person is better than a sad evil person if she can't.



This almost sounds like The Punisher, or Rorschach. Without the HARDnose point on punishing without mercy. Witch would be decidedly Lawful Evil.
Evil and goodness doesn't matter so much as following rules. As long as people follow the rules, she seems okay with them.

[Jormengand]

This almost sounds like The Punisher, or Rorschach. Without the HARDnose point on punishing without mercy. Witch would be decidedly Lawful Evil.
Evil and goodness doesn't matter so much as following rules. As long as people follow the rules, she seems okay with them.

Again, what rules? What rules does she expect any creature other than herself to follow?

[Kyberwulf]

Again. What rules do a Paladin or a Monk have to follow. They just have them.

[Jormengand]

Again. What rules do a Paladin or a Monk have to follow. They just have them.

Yeah, but chaotic exalted characters, paladins of freedom, hell, even paladins of slaughter have to follow codes. Barbarians, bards, and druids have to follow alignment codes just like a monk. Does having a code you follow make you lawful?

[Kyberwulf]

Nope. doesn't make you lawful. Just means you have rules you have to follow. It seems like you already have an alignment picked out for the character. So why bother asking?

[Saintsqc]

Law/chaos :

Sworing vows
Lawful

Liberal, open-minded, and devoted to freedom of every living being.
Chaotic

Keeps many lovers, but each understands the terms and she loves them all dearly.
Chaotic

Brimming with righteous indignation, she tries to keep her principles even in a world that seems determined to be against her.
Having principles dont make you lawful or chaotic...who doesnt have some kind of principles ?

Wishing never to harm anyone again, she takes extreme psychological measures to control herself, but even they are not always enough.
Sounds kinda lawful

What alignment is she?

Neutral or a bit on the chaotic axis

Good/evil :

unrepentant thief
not Good

However, committed, and willing to sacrifice her comfort or even her life for the good of others.
Good

Swore a vow of nonviolence, and keeps it.
Good

Also swore a vow to a friend that she would help them for as long as they both lived, without exception.
Good

Wishing never to harm anyone again, she takes extreme psychological measures to control herself
Good

she fights for the rights of the downtrodden.
Good

Willing to forgive anything, she consorts with any from the greatest heroes to the most despicable villains, because she believes no-one deserves to be ill-treated
Good

Modest and reserved most of the time, she will stand to defend anyone in their time of need.
Good

Quite obvious IMO

Overall, I would say this character is chaotic good or neutral good...

She sounds like she is pretty Lawful Neutral. Like... HEAVY on the Law..

Uh ?

[Kriton]

Angstful-Edgy

[Kyberwulf]

Repentant rapist- Still kind of evil.
unrepentant thief- though never from anyone who would be noticeably harmed by it, or she'd have qualms about it.- Sounds neutral
However, committed, and willing to sacrifice her comfort or even her life for the good of others- meh good
Liberal, open-minded, and devoted to freedom of every living being.- Sounds more neutral then good.
Swore a vow of nonviolence, and keeps it.- Lawful, and good.
Also swore a vow to a friend that she would help them for as long as they both lived, without exception. Lawful and neutral.. because the friend could do evil.
Keeps many lovers, but each understands the terms and she loves them all dearly.- this sounds more neutral. Not really chaotic.
Brimming with righteous indignation- This sounds more neutral then good.
she tries to keep her principles even in a world that seems determined to be against her. -Again.. lawful. neither good nor evil.
Wishing never to harm anyone again, she takes extreme psychological measures to control herself, but even they are not always enough. Again, Sounds more lawful then good or evil.

Despising of any authority that is given without good cause and unafraid to challenge it- Sounds lawful and kind of good
she fights for the rights of the downtrodden.- Sounds more neutral.
Willing to forgive anything- Sounds more neutral then either good or evil.
she consorts with any from the greatest heroes to the most despicable villains- Sounds more neutral
because she believes no-one deserves to be ill-treated, even if they have done terrible things as she has.- again sounds more Lawful then anything else.
Modest and reserved most of the time- again sounds lawful, neither good or evil.
she will stand to defend anyone in their time of need- sounds lawful. Not good, since it could be an evil person.

She would rather people accept evil people even if they don't accept evil people's actions,- Sounds evil.
though she'd rather people forgive each other if the transgressor is genuinely repentant. Sounds lawful.

She is a criminal. Not good.
She is in criminal habits. again not good.
And she realises that doesn't make her a bad person. Not good.

"Also, would she follow her friend and help them even if that meant betraying her ideals of helping the downtrodden or restricting freedom?"
Almost certainly no, although the decision would be a hard one.- Sounds lawful. and neutral.

She accepts that they're still people and still don't deserve to be mistreated.-Sounds lawful and good
If you try to torture someone because they're evil so it's okay, she's against that. Sounds Lawful, and neutral.. Just because she knows its bad doesn't make her good.
She doesn't prefer to hang out with evil people by choice- Neutral.
but if people are nice to her, she doesn't condemn them for being evil, only try to make them better if she can- Again sounds neutral
and accept that it's out of her power and a happy evil person is better than a sad evil person if she can't- again sounds neutral.

Again, she may live on the outside of societies laws.. but she does follow her own rules. Her good/evil, is pretty neutral. Most of what is describe is mostly Meh, some of it is evil. When she is good, again.. it's mostly.. meh. A lot of what she does do that is good, is kind of selfish in desire. The only time it doesn't seem so meh, is when it's a stance on law versus chaos.

[Thrudd]

"consorts with the most despicable villains"...how much "consorting" are we talking about? Brief alliances of necessity, or long term associations? Does this mean she tolerates villainous behavior in her presence, but simply doesn't take part in it? Or do you mean she gives everyone a chance to show who they are without judging them for past deeds, but if they show themselves to be unrepentant and villainous then she will try to stop them, reform them, or leave their company?

If she consorts with villains in long term relationships/alliances and does not try to prevent their actions, then she is neutral or chaotic neutral. If she refuses to tolerate villainous behavior and works to stop or reform the villains, then she could be chaotic good.
Good cannot consort with evil on a long term basis or turn a blind eye to villainous behavior. That is a main factor separating good from neutral.

[Malifice]

Chaotic Neutral.

A few shades of evil, and a few shades of good, but mostly sits in the middle there.

[Saintsqc]

Again, she may live on the outside of societies laws.. but she does follow her own rules. Her good/evil, is pretty neutral. Most of what is describe is mostly Meh, some of it is evil. When she is good, again.. it's mostly.. meh. A lot of what she does do that is good, is kind of selfish in desire. The only time it doesn't seem so meh, is when it's a stance on law versus chaos.

Are you sure you are not trying to prove your initial position (LN/LE) at all cost lol ?

Also, who doesnt live by following their own rules (IRL) ? Everyone has some kind of value/ethic/code/ideal that they live by. This is shouldnt be a defining trait between law/chaos.

Again, anyone who does good deeds does it because of selfish desire (IRL). True altruism doesnt exist. This shouldnt be a defining trait neither.

From wiki :

Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.

According to the early rulebook, lawful characters are driven to protect the interest of the group above the interest of the individual and would strive to be honest and to obey just and fair laws. Chaotic creatures and individuals embraced the individual above the group and viewed laws and honesty as unimportant.

Underlined : a description that fit the character. I dont see how lawful could fit this character given this description.

Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master.

OP clearly states that the character will get out of her way to helps other, she's ready to make sacrifices. Whether she might end up helping an evil person is irrelevant (unless it makes her kill other people). She's more interrested by helping other individual and she's not judgmental toward others (wich is a non-lawful trait).


I could see this character fitting some alignments (CN, CG, NG, N) but not lawful and evil alignments (LG, LN, CE, NE, LE).