126 réponses à ce sujet

[sdfgdsfsdfsfs]

I don't think Garrus is chaotic, but that's just me.

[The Angry One]

Marixus99.9 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Samara: Lawful Evil
Jack: Chaotic Neutral (ME2) > Chaotic Good (ME3)
Hackett: Lawful Stupid (built the Crucible)
Catalyst: Chaotic Stupid
Harbinger: Chaotic Evil
Javik: True Neutral

Lol .. you don't forgive him? I agree with the starbrat's position though 

Edit: I mean where you put him not his logic ..

I like Hackett, but the Crucible is such a franchise killing joke, and I find Hackett's reasoning for not knowing what the Crucible does (that the a-bomb scientists didn't fully know the consequences behind it) idiotic.
Those scientists knew what that bomb would do. They knew the science behind it. They were just speculating on the consequences of detonating it.
The Crucible scientists on the other hand blindly built a device without know what it was for or what it did.. which is stupid. Stupid stupid stupid! 

[The Angry One]

byne wrote...

LeTtotheC wrote...

Kanon777 wrote...

Chaotic Evil = Morinth, the reapers are Lawfull Evil

Yep, that pretty much fits it.  The Repears are Evil, but they follow their own internal logic and rules.   Morinth just does it for the thrill, thus is chaotic...and evil. 

Yeah, I agree the Reapers are Lawful Evil.

I think using Sovereign's quote from ME1 would probably fit better if you put them as Lawful Evil:

"We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it"

They are Chaotic Evil. The only "law" they subsribe to is the one they made up in their heads, which doesn't actually exist.
They have deluded themselves into thinking they bring order, but they actually only bring chaos. Taking both this cycle and the Prothean's as our only example, they burst into a fairly orderly galaxy and brought nothing but chaos.

[OutlawInk]

I still think Samara needs to be on there, either as Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral.
Mordin seeks to do good and to help people, and laws wouldn't stop him, only his personal logic. He's not Lawful Neutral.

[Zix13]

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. Nor do you have any chaotic neutral characters(Awkward alignment anyways, maybe Katsumi?)

Edit-- Lot's of people saying Samara = lawful good? She's lawful neutral or true neutral. 

Modifié par Zix13, 13 avril 2012 - 10:32 .

[Zardoc]

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

[SuperVulcan]

Cool list

[Zix13]

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

Jacks character development is like Shep turning into a serial killer in ME3. Some things just don't happen. Morinth isn't "explosive" enough to be chaotic evil. 

[MaaZeus]

sdfgdsfsdfsfs wrote...

I don't think Garrus is chaotic, but that's just me.

Garrus hates rules and regulations. He follows his own heart and moral compass. This means he is "chaotic", nobody is directly controlling him other than he himself. This doesnt mean chaos in literal sense.

[Karrie788]

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

Jacks character development is like Shep turning into a serial killer in ME3. Some things just don't happen. Morinth isn't "explosive" enough to be chaotic evil. 

Why, exactly? What bothered you about her character development?
And being chaotic is not solely about being "explosive". A chaotic evil character loves murder and usually does it for no apparent reason. A neutral evil character is the epitome of selfishness and self-gain. Morinth seems more CE to me.

Modifié par Karrie788, 13 avril 2012 - 10:37 .

[MaaZeus]

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

Jacks character development is like Shep turning into a serial killer in ME3. Some things just don't happen. Morinth isn't "explosive" enough to be chaotic evil. 

Morinth enjoys murder and mayhem without remorse and only cares about getting her high rush and making sure she lives for another day. I dont remember Neutral Evil's definition but Morinth to me sounds as chaotic evil as it can be, she does it all for s***s and giggles.

[MaaZeus]

Mr_Blue wrote...

 Third try



Obviously we can't all agree on exactly who fits what alignment, but I'm just trying to fit them based on their general demeanor.

This is probably a testament to the fantastic character development BioWare created for us. Nobody is solely one thing, even with their archetype. But I think this last one probably nails it the most. Hope you guys enjoy.

I'm going to make a joke version now to ridicule some of the weirder or nonsensical plot points, and just funnier stuff in general. I'll post it in a sec.

Dont even bother getting it 100% right because its impossible. D&D character alignment descriptions are definetly very wide but do not cover everything, and almost all characters evolve through the serie aswell.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Hackett ain't really Lawful Good. He intentinally sends Shepard on off-the-radar missions to bypass Alliance regs (a few in ME1, Arrival). Neutral Good is a perfect fit for him. So would Captain Anderson be. In fact, I don,t think anybody in the ME universe could truly be qualified as Lawful Good. Maybe Paragon Shepard, but s/he has to break his/her morals so much by ME3 it s/he probably doesn't count anymore.

Samara is a far better Lawful Neutral. There is only the Code. No Judgement, no bad or good.

Reapers are Lawful Evil. ''We impose order on the chaos of galactic evolution''

Legion and the Geth (same thing really) are of course True Neutral. Albeit what personality they develop post Reaper upgrades remains to be seen.

TIm is a better Neutral Evil. He cares not for laws, but will still use them if it serves his purpose. He justs wants to see his vision fulfilled by any means deemed neccessary.

Gool old Garrus is Chaotic Good of course.

Chaotic Neutral, yeah Jack is good here. Maybe a bit Chaotic Evil in ME2, but fits far better come ME3.

Chaotic Evil, I don't know really. Morinth, I imagine. Not Saren, he is also Neutral Evil as I see it. Or Balak. The Thorian. No major villain is Chatic Evil, really. Mass Effect avoids the extremes here.

[Zardoc]

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

Jacks character development is like Shep turning into a serial killer in ME3. Some things just don't happen. Morinth isn't "explosive" enough to be chaotic evil. 

No it's not?

[OutlawInk]

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character). 

Jack isn't Evil. Evil characters enjoy making other people suffer. Jack might kill people, but only if they try to control her or wrong her. She acts tough, but it's mostly just that, an act.

[Subguy614]

Gianna Parissini = LG?

[garf]

The AD&D alignment system is a game mechanic that utterly fails to take the complexities of human (sentient, if you will, but currently in RL they are synonymous) psychology and morality (two separate fields of study. ) and pigeon hole them into a nine position matrix. And this because the good evil neutral factions of basic D&D just didn't work.

It's no wonder you can't shoehorn ME characters into it.

Good effort though. I see the logic of your choices and it's an amusing excercise. for myself, my nerd hobby up until the endings was working on a rules supplement for Traveller™ that would create the mass effect universe for table top.

haven't bothered with it the last two months. Not sure I will return to it. I can't see Bioware caring enough to actually buy it. And honestly I'm not interested in figuring out how to make something for the brave new world they've created.

Modifié par garf, 13 avril 2012 - 11:00 .

[Team Value]

garf wrote...

The AD&D alignment system is a game mechanic that utterly fails to take the complexities of human (sentient, if you will, but currently in RL they are synonymous) psychology and morality (two separate fields of study. ) and pigeon hole them into a nine position matrix. And this because the good evil neutral factions of basic D&D just didn't work.

It's no wonder you can't shoehorn ME characters into it.

I agree.

I've never really like the D&D alignment system. It's a fairly clever way of representing ethics in a game, but it's always seemed to me as if they came up with the idea of making it a 3x3 matrix and had to pad it with alignments that really don't make sense. Lawful evil, for instance, just does not exist. Darth Vader is the poster child for LE, but even he doesn't fit it.

Taking it for what it is, though, I think the poster is pretty good, but--again--TIM is not lawful in any sense. He will do literally anything to achieve his goals--even betraying his own principles.

[Zix13]

Karrie788 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

Jacks character development is like Shep turning into a serial killer in ME3. Some things just don't happen. Morinth isn't "explosive" enough to be chaotic evil. 

Why, exactly? What bothered you about her character development?
And being chaotic is not solely about being "explosive". A chaotic evil character loves murder and usually does it for no apparent reason. A neutral evil character is the epitome of selfishness and self-gain. Morinth seems more CE to me.

Jack's character development. She's the biggest scumbag on a ship full of serial killers and she's hired by the alliance teaching teenagers 6 months later. That's what bothers me about it. 

Alright, I see your point with Morinth. However, she's not quite the "Someone tells Chaotic Evil John to **** off, John kills them, their family, and burns down their hometown" Chaotic evil that comes to mind when you think of Chaotic Evil characters..... Kinda like Jack. Guess I just have too specific an interpretation of chaotic evil. 

OutlawInk wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character). 

Jack isn't Evil. Evil characters enjoy making other people suffer. Jack might kill people, but only if they try to control her or wrong her. She acts tough, but it's mostly just that, an act.

 

I loled.
"I will smear the walls with you ****". 

"What about him?"
"That's easy" ---death

"I used to kill kids here, I loved it" 

"I still get tingles when I kill"

etc. etc. etc.

Modifié par Zix13, 13 avril 2012 - 11:04 .

[Karrie788]

garf wrote...

The AD&D alignment system is a game mechanic that utterly fails to take the complexities of human (sentient, if you will, but currently in RL they are synonymous) psychology and morality (two separate fields of study. ) and pigeon hole them into a nine position matrix. And this because the good evil neutral factions of basic D&D just didn't work.

It's no wonder you can't shoehorn ME characters into it.

True, it's more of a safeguard for your player character development in D&D games than anything else. Trying to fit pre-established characters in the chart can never go completely right.
That being said, I like the latest version OP

[Karrie788]

Zix13 wrote...

Jack's character development. She's the biggest scumbag on a ship full of serial killers and she's hired by the alliance teaching teenagers 6 months later. That's what bothers me about it. 

Alright, I see your point with Morinth. However, she's not quite the "Someone tells Chaotic Evil John to **** off, John kills them, their family, and burns down their hometown" Chaotic evil that comes to mind when you think of Chaotic Evil characters..... Kinda like Jack. Guess I just have too specific an interpretation of chaotic evil. 

Maybe... I've always thought that Jack's tough attitude in ME2 was more of a face than an actual state of mind. She's all talk. Well, maybe not all, but I've always felt she was bragging to hide her self-consciousness.

That's the problem with the D&D system, it does not represent 9 personalities, it's 9 options that can fit a LOT of personalities. Personally I see both Ash and Samara as lawful neutral, but they are completely different characters personality-wise.

[Zix13]

Karrie788 wrote...

Maybe... I've always thought that Jack's tough attitude in ME2 was more of a face than an actual state of mind. She's all talk. Well, maybe not all, but I've always felt she was bragging to hide her self-consciousness.

 

Well, the fact that she's on a prison ship where everyone is a serial killer and disgusted by her actions suggests that she's not all talk, even though she acts like it when she's in your squad.

Karrie788 wrote...
That's the problem with the D&D system, it does not represent 9 personalities, it's 9 options that can fit a LOT of personalities. Personally I see both Ash and Samara as lawful neutral, but they are completely different characters personality-wise.

For sure, D&D alignment system is limited, but its inadequecy varies depending on the particular alignment.
Lawful good, chaotic good, true neutral, lawful evil, and kinda neutral good are pretty specific and easy to reference. The rest are far more awkward to place someone in. 

Modifié par Zix13, 13 avril 2012 - 11:16 .

[Zardoc]

Zix13 wrote...

Karrie788 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character), Morinth is neutral evil. Mordin is more neutral good. Saren was brainwashed, so you can't really count him. Hacket is lawful neutral, not lawful good methinks. You don't have any lawful good characters............ Liara would probably be the closest. 

Jack got character development, as in, grew up. And Morinth is really more chaotic than neutral evil.

Jacks character development is like Shep turning into a serial killer in ME3. Some things just don't happen. Morinth isn't "explosive" enough to be chaotic evil. 

Why, exactly? What bothered you about her character development?
And being chaotic is not solely about being "explosive". A chaotic evil character loves murder and usually does it for no apparent reason. A neutral evil character is the epitome of selfishness and self-gain. Morinth seems more CE to me.

Jack's character development. She's the biggest scumbag on a ship full of serial killers and she's hired by the alliance teaching teenagers 6 months later. That's what bothers me about it. 

Alright, I see your point with Morinth. However, she's not quite the "Someone tells Chaotic Evil John to **** off, John kills them, their family, and burns down their hometown" Chaotic evil that comes to mind when you think of Chaotic Evil characters..... Kinda like Jack. Guess I just have too specific an interpretation of chaotic evil. 

OutlawInk wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Fail. Jack is chaotic evil( in ME2 before they retconned her entire character). 

Jack isn't Evil. Evil characters enjoy making other people suffer. Jack might kill people, but only if they try to control her or wrong her. She acts tough, but it's mostly just that, an act.

 

I loled.
"I will smear the walls with you ****". 

"What about him?"
"That's easy" ---death

"I used to kill kids here, I loved it" 

"I still get tingles when I kill"

etc. etc. etc.

Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change that. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. In short, she grew up a little.

Modifié par Zardoc, 13 avril 2012 - 11:17 .

[humes spork]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Hackett ain't really Lawful Good. He intentinally sends Shepard on off-the-radar missions to bypass Alliance regs (a few in ME1, Arrival).

Honestly, I think Hackett's character was written ambiguously with the intent that his morals and ethics mimic Shepard's regardless of playthrough. Hackett approves of Shepard's actions, and supports him/her regardless what Shepard does. That, or Hackett is a hardass realist who knows the political game, compartmentalizes like crazy, and keeps his fingers in multiple different pies.

[Zix13]

Zardoc wrote...


Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change her. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. 

Go play ME2 and listen to the opinions of her from people on purgatory. 

Modifié par Zix13, 13 avril 2012 - 11:17 .