59 réponses à ce sujet

[BelgarathMTH]

I usually enjoy hypothetical philosophical discussions like this using the D&D alignment system. The old system is classic, and quaint.

It's interesting how trying to place specific characters, be they DAO characters, fictional characters from books, movies, or tv, or historical figures and present day celebrities and politicians, into a D&D alignment category, gets people into passionate and heated discussions about how to categorize specific characters and people according to the system.

So after years of participating in discussions like this, I am beginning to conclude that human personality is way too complex to fit into Gygax's theory. Theories of personality that are based on categories, including the real life theories you might study in a psychology class, usually fail by reason of human complexity. We all resist having our personalities pigeon-holed, we find it constraining, we rebel against it, and we resist having people or characters we care about constrained into a category.

So I think the developers of DAO were right to move away from Gygax's system on this issue. Morrigan, Alistair, et al, are themselves. We impoverish the writing of complex, believable characters when we use Gygax's system. Unrestrained creativity makes better writing.

Modifié par BelgarathMTH, 28 décembre 2009 - 05:42 .

[Bibdy]

I think she just dislikes seeing people coddle others and acknowledge their mewling patheticness. She had to grow up and discover the world on her own (pretty much), why should others have the luxury of help? She'd prefer to see people fight for themselves, not helped along by the PC every step of the way.

[Gecon]

And here I thought the stupid D&D alignment discussions would have found an end.

[Demyx_IX]

I think Zevran was and is leaning more towards the evil side than the good side at least.... Theres some reasons that I wont mention due to spoilers. However An assassin don't just kill a certain group of people. It don't matter for a assassin if their good or evil (their target). For those reasons he seems a mix of evil and neutral.

Modifié par Demyx_IX, 28 décembre 2009 - 06:25 .

[Ulrik the Slayer]

Demyx_IX wrote...

I think Zevran was and is leaning more towards the evil side than the good side at least.... Theres some reasons that I wont mention due to spoilers. However An assassin don't just kill a certain group of people. It don't matter for a assassin if their good or evil (their target). For those reasons he seems a mix of evil and neutral.

Indeed. Like it or not, Zevran is an Assassin who have assassinated people which is evul. Most evul.

Though, its nothing he really enjoyed so the more time he spends with the Warden the more he leans towards Chaotic Neutral.

Also - Templar=Paladin? Bah! If the Paladins from DnD arrived in Ferelden they would try and free the Mages from the cruel and holier-than-thou Templars/Chantry. The Templars are fools, tools used by the Chantry and the noble Paladins in DnD are nothing like them. Alistair might be NG (He is hardly Lawful) but that's because of his character, not his Templar past.

Modifié par Ulrik the Slayer, 28 décembre 2009 - 06:44 .

[Bibdy]

I'm noticing a trend here. Pretty much every character you could consider evil, one way or another, can be nudged into 'Chaotic Neutral', because of a few personality quirks or decisions they've made.



That's why the alignment system fails. It doesn't consider motivations or give any real grasp on the character's personality. Its a very simple outline and tends to be more restrictive than anything.



Play through as a Lawful Good Paladin in DA:O and you're basically ****ed. That alignment is going to get broken before you get halfway into the game.

[EJ42]

Baalzie wrote...

EJ42 wrote...

Chaotic Neutral

Chaotic Neutral is called the "Anarchist" or "Free Spirit" alignment. A character of this alignment is an individualist who follows his or her own heart, and generally shirks rules and traditions. Good and Evil come a distant second to their need for personal freedom, and the only reliable thing about them is how totally unreliable they are. They typically act out of self-interest, but do not specifically enjoy seeing others suffer. Many free-spirited adventurers are of this alignment. Alternatively there are madmen whose actions are chaotic, but are not themselves inclined towards evil.


Consider Morrigan's reaction to Sten.  If she had an evil alignment, she would have been thrilled at the idea of watching the darkspawn devour him alive.  She also didn't seem too happy about what happened to the soldiers at Ostagar.

People who claim Morrigan is "evil" are most likely adolescents who have unresolved issues with an older sister.

No.... YOU just don't understand ADD alignments...
They are NOT how You VIEW them it's a set thing!
An alignment solely IS, its forces of nature... EVIL is a force of nature, just as CHAOS and GOOD and LAW....
Don't post if You do not understand what is being discussed... They're not saying she is evil , they say that her character would in a ADD game have the ALIGNMENT Evil.....
She reacts badly to YOUR character helping others even when said actions help the party!
She likes the ideas of letting innocents suffer to boost YOUR powers, chosing NOT to makes her upset!
That is NOT how an non-evil aligned *NOTE ALIGNMENT AGAIN* character in ADD would behave... Her ACTIONS and REACTIONS put her totally in Evil alignment...
She might not be considered evil by us players but that has NOTHING to do with it...

Learn about alignments first if You want to discuss them!

And There IS no "pure Chaos". Chaotic only represents one of two axis of the alignments... You'd say that Slaadi represent Chaotic Neutral in that case, only chaotic without care about evil and good...
As said, do not just read a page on a website and then think You know how things work...
Do the work Yourself, play the games, read the rules, understand the whole gamsystem, THEN use that knowledge in debates and discussions, unless You LIKE loooking like a nab ofc...

You are 100% wrong.

You couldn't be more wrong if you got a PhD in being wrong.  Actually, you could submit some of your posts as your thesis.

The parts of your post, where I've made bold and red, are parts where your opinion differs GREATLY from reality.

Morrigan takes no special pleasure in watching others suffer.  You may just feel that way because you don't understand how other people work.  Morrigan values self-reliance.  Weakness disgusts her.  She takes no pleasure in watching the weak suffer, but feels no special obligation to help them.  If they manage to overcome their own obstacles, then she would look upon them favorably.

I can't really help the fact that you seem to have been raised on the idea that coddling the weak is the epitomy of "goodness" in the world.  It's that sort of attitude that is making for fine print on our products' warning labels which will soon require a microscope to read.

Your perception of her actions is what leads you to believe she is evil, but it is simply you being prejudiced and wrong that has lead you to your incorrect assumption.

[Basher of Glory]

EJ42 wrote...
...
You couldn't be more wrong if you got a PhD in being wrong.  Actually, you could submit some of your posts as your thesis.

The parts of your post, where I've made bold and red, are parts where your opinion differs GREATLY from reality.

Morrigan takes no special pleasure in watching others suffer.  You may just feel that way because you don't understand how other people work.  Morrigan values self-reliance.  Weakness disgusts her.  She takes no pleasure in watching the weak suffer, but feels no special obligation to help them.  If they manage to overcome their own obstacles, then she would look upon them favorably.

I can't really help the fact that you seem to have been raised on the idea that coddling the weak is the epitomy of "goodness" in the world.  It's that sort of attitude that is making for fine print on our products' warning labels which will soon require a microscope to read.

Your perception of her actions is what leads you to believe she is evil, but it is simply you being prejudiced and wrong that has lead you to your incorrect assumption.

If I understand correctly, then we share more or less the same opinion?
(check http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/9/index/505724/2#509407 )

Modifié par Baher of Glory, 29 décembre 2009 - 12:57 .

[Basher of Glory]

Gecon wrote...

And here I thought the stupid D&D alignment discussions would have found an end.

I just wonder, how you would feel, when you talk about stuff of your interest and someone else comes by and says
"and here I thought the stupid ....-discussion would have found an end"

Perhaps you should take a look at this:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Social_skills

Modifié par Baher of Glory, 29 décembre 2009 - 01:04 .

[AsheraII]

Stupid discussions like this are basically why my AD&D group once threw EVERY single rule regarding alignment out of the window, and instead started using "reactions as the GM sees fit".

As a result, the paladin didn't have to fear losing all his powers because the GM held back some information, the priest could safely accept a drink from the rogue without having to wonder where the rogue got his money, etcetera. Players were basically allowed to have their mundane flaws, which would have their drawbacks, but also their personal advantages. A Paladin slaughtering innocent children would cost him his status, but not turning a wanted man in to the authorities because the paladin doesn't trust the authorities, or believes the man innocent or falsely accused based on the knowledge he has (NOT the knowledge that the GM has) wouldn't cost him his status. His faith in his deity comes first, his faith in the government or religious organisation that he should serve comes second.

I had a lot of fun playing AD&D, but it really became a great game once we noticed that those big books were called "guides", not "rules". They gave us a nice framework to start out with, but also were very clear that the GM is always right and overrules anything you might find in the books. Gladly, our GM also got tired of some things, so we basically put parts of the framework on our ignorelist.