Is Belkar still Chaotic Evil?

[Wizard_Lizard]

I mean… …He certainly has done some evil stuff… …But… …Recently he is pushing more chaotic neutral even to chaotic good at times…

So let us discuss… the homicidal halfling…

[Rrmcklin]

Yes. Recent "good" behavior aside, there's no reason to think his actual alignment has changed, especially since we've seen that this very night his "Protection from Evil" charm still hurts him.

And yet people still keep bringing this up like it's unclear...

[factotum]

Plus he has spent his life doing evil. You don't get to counteract a lifetime of evil with the occasional good-ish act, especially if said good act is being done for largely selfish reasons.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Plus he has spent his life doing evil. You don't get to counteract a lifetime of evil with the occasional good-ish act, especially if said good act is being done for largely selfish reasons.

hiking ip a mountsin to warn Roy?
Tge vampires barelh even had to try to get him to protect V..
Sure "selfish"

[Peelee]

hiking ip a mountsin to warn Roy?
Tge vampires barelh even had to try to get him to protect V..
Sure "selfish"

The vampires barely had to try to get him to "protect V" in the sense that "protecting V" meant "hurting Roy." Not the best argument there.

Regardless, he spent a good deal of his life hurting people, killing people, and selling people into slavery. Dropping a dollar into the Red Cross cup ain't gonna get him out of the hole he's dug himself, ya know?

[understatement]

One of the things Belkar's been working on is loyalty to his team. That, while is a plus in most people's books, is not automatically a Good act -- heck, the Linear Guild are tight on loyalty and they're still Evil. Belkar is willing to fight alongside and nominally protect the Order because of "friendship" (or some diluted, twisted version of it), not because they're fighting Evil.

So yeah, he's still Chaotic Evil. Maybe he could end up Neutral at some point -- in a universe where second chances can be allowed, the effort of trying (as evidenced in the deva's speech) is a huge factor in redemption. Redemption's not necessarily about net positive as it is about correcting mistakes, knowing that you might not -- or will not -- be redeemed in others' eyes. That's what V is doing. Belkar's probing the pathway, but he hasn't gone on it yet. And in his time-ticking bomb I'm not sure he can make it.

Maybe that's why Belkar has to die? It'll be a little weird if the message was "I get to live happily because I happen to be with the right team at the right time."

[Morty]

If Belkar's alignment ever actually shifts from evil, I expect it'll be stated or portrayed directly in the comic.

[MultitudeMan]

One of the things Belkar's been working on is loyalty to his team. That, while is a plus in most people's books, is not automatically a Good act -- heck, the Linear Guild are tight on loyalty and they're still Evil. Belkar is willing to fight alongside and nominally protect the Order because of "friendship" (or some diluted, twisted version of it), not because they're fighting Evil.

So yeah, he's still Chaotic Evil. Maybe he could end up Neutral at some point -- in a universe where second chances can be allowed, the effort of trying (as evidenced in the deva's speech) is a huge factor in redemption. Redemption's not necessarily about net positive as it is about correcting mistakes, knowing that you might not -- or will not -- be redeemed in others' eyes. That's what V is doing. Belkar's probing the pathway, but he hasn't gone on it yet. And in his time-ticking bomb I'm not sure he can make it.

Maybe that's why Belkar has to die? It'll be a little weird if the message was "I get to live happily because I happen to be with the right team at the right time."

It just occurred to me that maybe Belkar's shift isn't so much on the Good-Evil axis as the Lawful-Chaotic axis. The point about loyalty is well made, but that could be seen as a shift away from Chaotic, towards Neutral Evil, or possibly even True Neutral, if both axes are in play. To me, loyalty feels like adherence to structure, more than a right/wrong thing.

[Conradine]

Belkar killed two innocent gnome civilians in cold blood and never showed an inch of remorse.
I would say that someone able to do that stays firmly in the Evil alignment unless he starts showing regrets.

[GideonWells]

I think when Belkar's alignment change happens we'll know. It may be something subtle that we miss until after a "That won't work because he's chaotic evi... what." or a "I had to do it because he's chaotic evil... why are non-chaotic evil psychocomps coming to claim him?" or a "Join team evil because, let's be honest, you are probably even evil than I" moment, but there will be an indication.

Belkar is on a trajectory, and building the acceleration, to leave his alignment. I just don't think he's crossed it yet. He's going to need a quite a bit of non-Chaotic Evil thrust to escape his evil gravity well. He's still in the "learning there are other ways" and "doubting his way is right" phase. He hasn't fully switched over yet.

[Psyren]

hiking ip a mountsin to warn Roy?
Tge vampires barelh even had to try to get him to protect V..
Sure "selfish"

It takes more than a handful of good deeds to change your alignment. Also he wanted to rub Roy's face in it and kill stuff moreso than warn him.

[FujinAkari]

I think you are reading way too much into it. There is an article on this website written by some guy named Rich Burlew about the dangers of assuming that evil characters cannot be loyal totheir friends.

http://www.giantitp.com/articles/Xbs...9g3HZBAGE.html

[Sir_Norbert]

He hiked up a mountain in the middle of nowhere to rejoin the team that had a means of transport.

[Wizard_Lizard]

I think he willl redeem himself and then die.
BUT will get annoyed tht he doesnt make it into hell..

[martianmister]

He's Neutral Good with lawful tendencies.

[Rrmcklin]

It just occurred to me that maybe Belkar's shift isn't so much on the Good-Evil axis as the Lawful-Chaotic axis. The point about loyalty is well made, but that could be seen as a shift away from Chaotic, towards Neutral Evil, or possibly even True Neutral, if both axes are in play. To me, loyalty feels like adherence to structure, more than a right/wrong thing.

It really isn't. Nothing about Belkar's changes have been about him valuing order or stability more. They have been about him growing deeper attachments and being willing/able to feel remorse/empathy for other beings, even if he does have to be fairly close to them for it.

Loyalty can have many reasons, "adherence to structure" being just one of them (and definitely not being Belkar's). Unless you want to say that Elan and Sabine (the latter literally being a creature of Chaos) aren't Chaotic.

[hroþila]

While I do think that having some capacity for empathy, regret and self-reflection puts Belkar closer to Neutral in absolute terms than he was when he had none of those things, I don't think he's particularly close. Those things aren't rare in Evil people, only complete caricatures lack them altogether. Redcloak has them too, to varying degrees, and yet, look at him.

[Peelee]

I think he willl redeem himself and then die.
BUT will get annoyed tht he doesnt make it into hell..

I really don't think that would annoy him.

[understatement]

Xykon
IFCC (too abstract)
Qarr
Greg
Bozzok
Kubota
Crystal
Thog
Vector Legion
Zz'drti
Sabine
Nale
Redcloak
ABD
Hilgya


a list of villains sorted by their amount of friendship/love

It's a crappy algorithm but apart from the first four or five, all of them are capable of empathy, dedication, friendship, and love. Crystal is loyal to Bozzok. Thog is loyal and attached to Nale. Tarquin loves his sons (for simplification). Laurin loves her daughter. Miron is friends with Laurin. Malack loved his family and was friends with Durkon. Z is friends with Nale. Sabine loves Nale. Nale loves her and is friends with Z. Redcloak loved his family and does care for the goblins. ABD loved her son. Hilgya loves her son.

All are still very much Evil.

[GrayGriffin]

I'd put Laurin way higher on the love scale than Tarquin. She actively tries to keep her daughter out of danger and is also happy to let her take her own path, while Tarquin's love for his sons is more like fondness for a pet that you put down once it's no longer willing to do tricks for you.

[understatement]

I'd put Laurin way higher on the love scale than Tarquin. She actively tries to keep her daughter out of danger and is also happy to let her take her own path, while Tarquin's love for his sons is more like fondness for a pet that you put down once it's no longer willing to do tricks for you.

Yeah, I just lumped the Legion together.

Tarquin
Miron
Malack
Laurin

[Wizard_Lizard]

I really don't think that would annoy him.

He got annoyed that he only got charged with manslaughter....
I think he would be annoyed if he got lumped with the neutral evil morons

[D.One]

He got annoyed that he only got charged with manslaughter....
I think he would be annoyed if he got lumped with the neutral evil morons

Yes, those weak posers can't handle intense hardcore introspection.

[snowblizz]

It really isn't. Nothing about Belkar's changes have been about him valuing order or stability more. They have been about him growing deeper attachments and being willing/able to feel remorse/empathy for other beings, even if he does have to be fairly close to them for it.

Loyalty can have many reasons, "adherence to structure" being just one of them (and definitely not being Belkar's). Unless you want to say that Elan and Sabine (the latter literally being a creature of Chaos) aren't Chaotic.

There is a kernel of truth to it.

Remember Shojo's Advice to Belkar. It wasn't to be good. It was, in essence how a Chaotic character can navigate a mostly Lawful society. AKA Get what you want without them getting you.

None of Belkar's changes have been hugely alignment shifting, but he pays more lipservice to both Law and Good than he used to, mostly because it lets him get away with Chaotic Evilness.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

a list of villains sorted by their amount of friendship/love

Xykon
IFCC (too abstract)
Qarr
<snip>

Huh.

I'd put the IFCC way, way, way lower in that list. Their whole shtick is that their friendship allows them to overcome their differences in approach, and indeed create a whole greater than the sum of its parts. I don't see their collaboration being "too abstract".

Grey Wolf

[Fyraltari]

Huh.

I'd put the IFCC way, way, way lower in that list. Their whole shtick is that their friendship allows them to overcome their differences in approach, and indeed create a whole greater than the sum of its parts. I don't see their collaboration being "too abstract".

Grey Wolf

I don’t know if they are friends or just clever enough to realize that they can fight the Greater Good together and only then get rid of the Lesser Evil.

Edit: Basically, the IFFC aims to destroy the forces of Good, but to what end? A cosmos where evil of all stripes can live together in disharmony or a temporary alliance where their ennemity is put on hold for just a little while (cosmoligical time wise).

[wumpus]

I think you are reading way too much into it. There is an article on this website written by some guy named Rich Burlew about the dangers of assuming that evil characters cannot be loyal totheir friends.

http://www.giantitp.com/articles/Xbs...9g3HZBAGE.html

Rich also defines alignment (or the "real you") as "how you act on your worst day". Belkar happily kills for fun on even his good days, so I'd hate to think of him being put to the test.

Don't forget that the Deva dug a single item out of Roy's past: he may have acted completely lawful good after that, but if he hadn't immediately corrected his error he would be tossed in the neutral pile. You don't eliminate 9 kilonazis of evil by simply faking being less evil, which is pretty much where Belkar stands right now.

Rich has clearly showed that Belkar is on a redemption arc. He also has a strict time limit and it is by no means clear that he will meet his redemption before expiring. Belkar is still clearly well in the deep side of the alignment pool and his only chance is some sort of heroic self sacrifice (thanks to his deadline). Redemption is not for everyone, and probably not for Belkar.

[drazen]

There is a kernel of truth to it.

Remember Shojo's Advice to Belkar. It wasn't to be good. It was, in essence how a Chaotic character can navigate a mostly Lawful society. AKA Get what you want without them getting you.

None of Belkar's changes have been hugely alignment shifting, but he pays more lipservice to both Law and Good than he used to, mostly because it lets him get away with Chaotic Evilness.

Seems like there's a little more going on than that. I'm not saying he's not Evil, but Belkar is suddenly questioning/struggling with his evil, because he can't comprehend Durkon's sacrifice to save him, and deep down, maybe he doesn't feel like he really deserved it. That step isn't nothing. His evil isn't making him feel better anymore.

#1098 "He didn't blame me." (granted, Durkon said it was silly to count on Belkar to begin with, which is a little bit of backhanded forgiveness, but it obviously got through)

#1115 "Stupid hairy self-sacrificing co-worker." "I don't have to worry about... picking an unwinnable fight with a super-powered vampire cleric to distract him from killing my idiot teammate who's never been anything but a jackass to me." Belkar's expression when he says this last bit says it all, really. It's pretty clear he at least doesn't entirely believe what he's saying in that panel. I think he wants to still believe it, but it's not quite working for him anymore.

#1130 "How dare you make me think about things, Durkon! How could you not think about how your selflessness would affect ME!"

#1151 - Durkon explicitly tells Belkar that more people don't repent from evil because it feels bad to admit you've done bad, which is something #1115 and #1130 show that Belkar is clearly struggling with that. Of course he finds a very Belkar-ish solution in saying that it would take "intense hardcore introspection" to change which "weak posers" can't do. Sure, his apology for committing assault with a palm tree isn't much, but he has to start somewhere.

He still enjoys a good fight, but even that can get overdone for him now. #1068 - "I have stabbed so many faces today. I'm good."

I don't think he's changed alignment. I do think he's moved a blip toward Neutral. I do think if he changes alignments it would be to Chaotic Neutral, not TN or any Good.

Has Belkar even really even committed a single evil act since stabbing the Oracle? All I can think of is his palm-tree assault, and I guess he kind of half-assed it in the Buggy Lou fight until the bug-men suggested they'd dine on kitty soup. Beyond that, it's pretty much been limited to a bunch of snarky comments.

[littlebum2002]

The vampires barely had to try to get him to "protect V" in the sense that "protecting V" meant "hurting Roy." Not the best argument there.

Regardless, he spent a good deal of his life hurting people, killing people, and selling people into slavery. Dropping a dollar into the Red Cross cup ain't gonna get him out of the hole he's dug himself, ya know?

I may be wrong, but I don't think that's how alignment works in D&D. If you spend your entire life being evil, then start being good, I don't think you need to make up for all your previous misdeeds before your alignment changes. After all, think about the opposite: If you spend your entire life being a paladin and saving thousands of innocent lives, and then suddenly start murdering innocent people, do you really need to murder enough innocent people to make up for ll the lives you saved before your alignment changes? No, when you start murdering innocent people your alignment changes, either to Neutral or Evil. Your past good deeds aren't taken into account.

So the same should be true for Belkar. His past is irrelevant. What we need to ask ourselves is, right now, is he acting Evil or Neutral?

(Again, it is entirely possible that I am misunderstanding how D&D alignment works, because I am far from being the most knowledgeable person here, so anyone can feel free to correct me. Also, it is entirely possible that the OOTS alignment system works differently than the D&D alignment system, so that may change things as well)

[hamishspence]

I may be wrong, but I don't think that's how alignment works in D&D. If you spend your entire life being evil, then start being good, I don't think you need to make up for all your previous misdeeds before your alignment changes

IMO you do need to at least show signs of repenting or regretting all your previous misdeeds, and of seeking to make up for them.