79 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

I find it hard to imagine that Anders is CE - running a free underground clinic just doesn't strike me as something CE would do.

That's the problem with D&D alignment.

Anders could be chaotic due to breaking the law as a runaway Mage AND Warden. Then again, his code of ethics to always help and protect Mages as an oppressed people could make it an argument for Lawful, since it applies to a personal code of conduct and not the laws of the land.

Anders could be said to be evil, due to killing civilians and provoking war. Then again, he could be said to be good due to fighting for freedom of prisoners and helping out via the clinic.

He could be said to be neutral, since he is "gray" in morality. Then again, he actively upsets the balance in the world with his attack and violates the natural order with his absorption of Justice/Vengeance, both big "no-no's" in Neutral alignment.


So it's a crock. A LG paladin could be both in and out of alignment character by murdering Orc babies. That's a crappy system.

[termokanden]

The ones I'm absolutely sure about:

 

Cassandra: LG

Varric: NG

Vivienne: LN

 

Not 100% sure:

 

Sera: CG (she does genuinely care what happens to people, she's got a bit of a wacky Robin Hood-thing going on)

Solas: NG (Solas generally approves of helping people and I think that puts him on the "good" end of the spectrum)

 

Pure speculation:

 

Dorian: LN

Iron Bull: LN (your choice in his personal quest influences his outlook, and one option gets you very close to LN)

Cole: NG

Blackwall: TN (I had problems with this one; I just don't feel comfortable putting him in the good category, and I don't think he's particularly lawful or chaotic)

 

PS: Yes it's a silly system, but somehow the speculation is still quite fun.

[Farangbaa]

If anything, we can't possibly lable Solas anything yet. There's just way too much unknowns.

[Lavaeolus]

The problem is Justice takes out innocents on purpose to start a conflict, which is the definition of chaotic.  Taking out the chantry is what throws the wrench into the works,that in itself is about as CE as you can get.

Blowing up innocents to start a conflict is Evil, not Chaotic. Whether it's Chaotic or not depends on the mindset. Chaotic would be something like, "I'm destroying this to tear down the established order" -- which, in fairness, is true enough.

However, part of the problem here is that Justice is so black-and-white, that's not necessarily his reasoning. The Chantry has committed "evil", no, it's committed injustice, ergo it must be punished. It is right that the mages should be free, as imprisoning through no fault of their own is injust. And that's a Lawful kind of reasoning. Lawful doesn't necessarily mean in favour of "current order", and Justice has an order: it's justice, justice defining his entire being.

Situations like this are hell for the D&D alignment system, because at his core Justice was Lawful to the extreme pre-merging, and he didn't change too much in basic personality apart from becoming too emotionally involved.

[termokanden]

If anything, we can't possibly lable Solas anything yet. There's just way too much unknowns.

I agree that you can never really know.

 

One thing CRPGs generally fail to capture in their morality system is being manipulate, pretending to be good but ultimately screwing people over. It's often a choice between "let me give you all my money and solve all your problems" and intimidation or outright violence.

 

Or how about just acting like the good guy to earn allies that you can use?

[Fast Jimmy]

I agree that you can never really know.

One thing CRPGs generally fail to capture in their morality system is being manipulate, pretending to be good but ultimately screwing people over. It's often a choice between "let me give you all my money and solve all your problems" and intimidation or outright violence.

Or how about just acting like the good guy to earn allies that you can use?

One could argue that's how the majority of RPGs work, given the hugely slanted benefits towards being nice and helping everyone you come across.

[termokanden]

Yes, that's exactly how a lot of players act, including myself. It's also a matter of companion approval. If you are truly quite obviously evil, there's no reason for most companions to stay with you, so it's an unrewarding and quite lonely way to play.

[stonerbishop]

The goal is to label them in the game, not what they might do in the future. What does Solas do in this game? He likes helping people, but only some people. He is volunteering with the inquisition but it is for largely selfish reasons

[Navasha]

Well, Solas is the "god" of rebellion.   Chaotic is almost a given.   I would probably go with Chaotic good.   Again alignments are based on intention not result.  

 

His intention is to free and help his people.  

[stonerbishop]

Well, Solas is the "god" of rebellion.   Chaotic is almost a given.   I would probably go with Chaotic good.   Again alignments are based on intention not result.  
 
His intention is to free and help his people.

My problem with this is he doesn't even know who his people are, or at least, he is hypocritical about it

[Lavaeolus]

Solas is an unknown. Is it for largely selfish reasons? Sure, he's after the orb, but that doesn't entail working with the apostate-hating Chantry (keep in mind, it doesn't become the Inquisition until later) in order to put things right and stop the Breach. He doesn't approve of literally helping everyone, but neither does Cassandra and she's solidly Good.

[stonerbishop]

He also murders those mages. Good?

[Lavaeolus]

One moment of anger, and he can be talked out of it by simply saying his name. In addition, they are not innocents -- they summoned his friend and not only erased her identity and distorted her nature, but ultimately "killed" her. An isolated incident, especially if justified by context, is not enough to lose a Good alignment if you're generally going around helping peasants (he approves the creation of Watchtowers, for instance).

Being "Good" doesn't mean "Paragon of Pure Goodness".

Cassandra, for instance, will also approve of just standing by and watching Celene get assassinated -- something which strikes a darker note in D&D's alignment system.

[stonerbishop]

So eye for an eye is ok in good alignment? I'm not arguing. I'm asking. Oh and he lies to every one the entire game even if you are romancing. Even blackwall admits his identity.

I'm unsure about intentions being the deciding factor here. Road to hell and all that...

[Lavaeolus]

D&D is an alignment meter, not a karma meter. Watching a character slowly descend and descend until you slowly realize... "Wait, you've switched alignments now!" is part of the fun, and you've said yourself we're judging Solas "in the game".

Lying is really Chaotic, not Evil. Good/Evil can be a bit of a mess when it comes to such things as trust and so on, however. The system gets a bit... wobbly.

[stonerbishop]

I guess my issue is comparing solas to Aveline who believes in protecting everyone in the city, regardless of race

[stonerbishop]

D&D is an alignment meter, not a karma meter. Watching a character slowly descend and descend until you slowly realize... "Wait, you've switched alignments now!" is part of the fun, and you've said yourself we're judging Solas "in the game".Lying is really Chaotic, not Evil. Good/Evil can be a bit of a mess when it comes to such things as trust and so on, however. The system gets a bit... wobbly.

Wimbly wobbly timey wimey. Ugh

[Lavaeolus]

Solas believes in helping people regardless of race. He's deeply prejudiced, yes, but that's not the same thing as not wanting to help people. If Bull outright quits the Qun, for instance, he gladly comforts and consoles him, distracting him with a game of Chess. He doesn't go "Oh you're a Qunari so you're still a slave really".

[ThreeF]

Dog is TN. Animals are. Mostly because Chaotic Friendly is not an actual alignment.

 

Not if you ask the cook. CE through and through.

[Navasha]

Truthfulness has nothing to do with alignment, unless you were a 'lawful' alignment following a code of "never lies", maybe.

 

And intentions is the whole point.   Someone can still be a bumbling idiot of 'lawful good' and have everything they do with the best intent lead to very bad things happening to all kinds of people.  

 

Your nitpicking at a system design for an 'overall' worldview with details and specific actions.    That isn't what the alignment system was designed for. 

 

A lawful good person might come home to see his family murdered and the killer standing over them with a bloody knife.   If in a fit of rage he kills that person, that doesn't change his overall world outlook.   He still thinks killing is wrong.   He might come to regret his actions or attempt to atone for it, but he is still 'lawful good'. 

[stonerbishop]

Truthfulness has nothing to do with alignment, unless you were a 'lawful' alignment following a code of "never lies", maybe.
 
And intentions is the whole point.   Someone can still be a bumbling idiot of 'lawful good' and have everything they do with the best intent lead to very bad things happening to all kinds of people.  
 
Your nitpicking at a system design for an 'overall' worldview with details and specific actions.    That isn't what the alignment system was designed for. 
 
A lawful good person might come home to see his family murdered and the killer standing over them with a bloody knife.   If in a fit of rage he kills that person, that doesn't change his overall world outlook.   He still thinks killing is wrong.   He might come to regret his actions or attempt to atone for it, but he is still 'lawful good'.

I understand what you are saying. I have trouble separating my intense dislike of Solas from this to be objective

[Lavaeolus]

A lawful good person might come home to see his family murdered and the killer standing over them with a bloody knife.   If in a fit of rage he kills that person, that doesn't change his overall world outlook.   He still thinks killing is wrong.   He might come to regret his actions or attempt to atone for it, but he is still 'lawful good'.

Along this line, I have to object to Blackwall being True or Lawful Neutral. He deeply believes his previous actions were wrong, and if he could, according to the semi-psychic spirit we let just roam around, he "would stand between Rainier and the carriage". Hell, the Good "redeemed" former murderer/thief/whathaveyou is something of cliché. Ultimately, while he can arguably be simply trying to cover his tracks for his own sake, when he sacrifices his life to turn himself in and save his man it basically cements him as (now, at least) Good. It also points towards Lawful, but there are some other problems.

Lawful might be a lot more problematic. Regret over an action only goes so far if you continually repeat it, and Blackwall lies about his very identity. Still, that lie is not the only part of his character (part of the problem will dealing with complex people), and he generally tries to aspire to the stereotypical Lawful Good hero in all else.

[termokanden]

I could not find a suitable alignment for Blackwall. If you've done the things he has done, does a single act of self-sacrifice for a former comrade make up for it?

 

I honestly don't know, but I certainly gave him a second chance in my game.

[ThreeF]

Along this line, I have to object to Blackwall being True or Lawful Neutral. He deeply believes his previous actions were wrong, and if he could, according to the semi-psychic spirit we let just roam around, he "would stand between Rainier and the carriage". Hell, the Good "redeemed" former murderer/thief/whathaveyou is something of cliché. Ultimately, while he can arguably be simply trying to cover his tracks for his own sake, when he sacrifices his life to turn himself in and save his man it basically cements him as (now, at least) Good. It also points towards Lawful, but there are some other problems.

Lawful might be a lot more problematic. Regret over an action only goes so far if you continually repeat it, and Blackwall lies about his very identity. Still, that lie is not the only part of his character (part of the problem will dealing with complex people), and he generally tries to aspire to the stereotypical Lawful Good hero in all else.

 

Imo Blackwall subverts the LG DnD trope, that's the basis of his character.