89 réponses à ce sujet

[ladyofpayne]

Anders - Chaotic Good
Isabela- Chaoitic Neutral
Varric- Neutral Good
Aveline- Lawful good.
Bethany - Neutral Good
Carver - Lawful Good
Fenris - Chaotic Neutral
Merrill - Stupid B*tch. Chaotic Good
Sebastian - Lawful Good

Ser Alric, Quentin- Chaotic Evil.
Meredith, Orsino- Lawful Neutral
Karl- Brainless neutral.



 

Modifié par ladyofpayne, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:32 .

[whykikyouwhy]

The last time I checked, "stupid b*tch" was NOT an alignment from D&D. Perhaps you meant something in the chaotic vein?

[ladyofpayne]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

The last time I checked, "stupid b*tch" was NOT an alignment from D&D. Perhaps you meant something in the chaotic vein?

Them need to put Stupid B*Tch as Alignment.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

 

On top of this, where do you get information about the templars torturing mages? It's from Anders,
who is hardly the shining example of impartiality (and who has never
been in the circle in Kirkwall, and is projecting his feelings from his
own circle experience). There are literally hundreds of mages, and
(assumed to be) hundreds of templars. There are bound to be some bad
eggs (Karras, Alrik, etc.), but there are also good eggs (Thrask,
Keran). The only things we know is that they tranquilized Karl (who was
guilty of helping mages become apostates). Bethany's letter doesn't mention any torture, or say anything about how it is unbearable.

Snip

Also consider the fact that Bethany is the sister of a very popular nobleman and folk hero in the city. They probably eased up on her, especially considering Hawke has a professional, if not cordial relationship with the Templars. Cullen and Thrask probably saw to it, and she probably gave them no reason to abuse her because she always avoided trouble.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 15 juillet 2011 - 02:41 .

[berelinde]

If Bethany becomes a Circle mage, she tells you in the Gallows courtyard that she has never been more fired up to fight for mages' rights than she has been since joinng Kirkwall's Circle. She says that she never knew how good she had it, and that mage freedom is something worth fighting for. For her to say something like that, she must have her reasons. Also, Ella, the young mage Anders... interacts with... is Bethany's protege. Whether she lives or dies, Bethany will be affected by it, and she will not be blaming Anders.

[jamesp81]

My opinions:

Fenris: Chaotic Neutral. Cares nothing about law, and likes exacting some epic vengeance now and again.

Merrill: Chaotic Good. Good intentions, no concern for the rules. Good heart, good soul. Her personality doesn't fit the rogue / scoundrel chaotic good we're used to, which makes her interesting. On a more flippant note, a more accurate description might be Chaotic Naive, or Chaotic Adorable.

Aveline: Lawful Good. Pretty obvious, IMO.

Varric: Chaotic Good. Also pretty obvious.

Bethany: Neutral Good. Good woman, loyal to her family. Doesn't go out of her way to stick it to The Man, but has no problem doing so if needed.

Sebastian: Lawful Good.

Anders: Chaotic Good, with a huge emphasis on the chaotic part.

Isabela: I think this is the least obvious one. A lot of people are going to call her Chaotic Neutral, and not without reason. But I contend she's chaotic good. It's in there, just not on the surface, and doesn't come out until a bit later. She's not as uncaring and hard as she appears.

[blaidfiste]

Chaotic Good
Bethany, Varric, Sebastian, Aveline. All basically good and will go against the law if they believe it's the right thing to do

Chaotic Neutral
Isabella, Fenris, Merrill, Anders - all put their agendas first above good or evil.

[sphinxess]

blaidfiste wrote...

Chaotic Good
Bethany, Varric, Sebastian, Aveline. All basically good and will go against the law if they believe it's the right thing to do

Chaotic Neutral
Isabella, Fenris, Merrill, Anders - all put their agendas first above good or evil.

Reading this makes me a sad kitty How come we don't get any evil aligned characters in our party anymore? 
I loved Edwin/Edwina, Virconia, Montaron and Xzar

[jamesp81]

Evil characters probably wouldn't last long around my Hawke. He has a tendency to....run a sword through their chests.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Here's one of the problems with D&D alignments as they're commonly understood: evil is usually unrealistic.

Are there things that are objectively evil? Sure, but even those fuzz out in the realm of D&D. Is it evil to kill bandits who attack you? No, though it's good to avoid it if you can. Is it evil to destroy the village that is cutting down local dryad trees for lumber? Also no. It is downright good to kill worshipers of an "evil" god, in many cases, and to kill sentient 'evil' creatures like liches.

To get a morality system where having evil characters in your party makes sense, some things have to be objectively evil. Like slavery, or racism, or apartheid. The big problem is that "killing" is always a thing that's going to sit out there with a big question mark. Many RPGs are based on the idea of killing things, and the real world involves a significant amount of killing people, especially a rough-and-tumble, slightly lawless civilization. It's still grossly exaggerated for games, though: do you know how many people Billy the Kid actually killed? It's generally accepted to be between four and nine. Imagine an RPG in which you kill only nine sentient humanoids the entire game. Ok, I would totally play that, but would most people? (Note: I think you CAN play some of the Thief games this way, if I recall, but most people don't.)

The average soldier in a "good" war may kill a lot more than nine people. But if that guy's still good, is the guy on the other side evil? I mean, we're allowed to kill Germans in WWII games pretty indiscriminately. And why is a guy killing soldiers in a war more morally acceptable than someone who is a part of an oppressed minority that can't actually create an army killing members of the race that's oppressing them? There's that one game where you play as the Irish guy in France fighting the Germans using guerilla tactics (or: terrorism), and  he's portrayed as being good. 

Most people don't say "Well, I'm going to be evil. Mwhahaha." They just pick a thing to fight for, and sometimes that thing is poorly reasoned, or based on bad cultural assumptions.

To put it another way:
"I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides."
-Havelock Vetinari

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 22 juillet 2011 - 09:22 .

[DRTJR]

Evil games in DnD could be setting up the Evil Empire that a good aligned party topples again.

[berelinde]

^^ I read that as "that a good aligned party topless again." I need coffee.

[randomcheeses]

DRTJR wrote...

Evil games in DnD could be setting up the Evil Empire that a good aligned party topples again.

How very Order Of The Stick

[Morroian]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

To put it another way:
"I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides."
-Havelock Vetinari

To quote John Rogers, the showrunner for the TV series Leverage: "You don't really understand an antagonist until you understand why he's a protagonist in his own version of the world."

[pamkhat]

We did this on Tumblr a while back.

Dragon Age
Dragon Age 2