Comments on: Pop Culture Alignment

By: aggh!tea

aggh!tea — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 09:59:39 +0000

Vote for “Lawful Evil”:
William ‘Bill’ Munny (Clint Eastwood in the Unforgiven) – remember, Evil is just a state of mind when vengence takes over…

Also I’d shift Vader over to “Neutral Evil” – dude doesn’t quite make it at the end of the ‘Jedi.

By: The nerd

The nerd — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:30:44 +0000

Okay time to show my nerdinss. The list is mostly good but there is two problems, Indian and Rorschach need to be switched.
First Rorschach:
He is not good. He murders freely and feels no empathy.He has no mercy and cares little for other people. He will use what ever means necessary weather they be good or evil. He is lawful not because he follows the law but he has his own rigid code that he follows dogmatically. In the player’s hand book 3.5 Lawful neutral can either be a judge of other laws or your own as long as you stick to it rigidly.
Second Indie:
Jones is chaotic good. He lives his life as a free spirit outside of normal laws yet he still does good. This is the definition of Chaotic good in the PHB 3.5. He helps people and tries to do right but he does not listen to what to the normal legal system.

But other than that it was great list and a difference of opinion is expected.

By: shagbark

shagbark — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:33:35 +0000

Rorschach is Lawful. He’s a caricature of the dangers of lawful good; he has his own rules and will follow them no matter what the consequences. The laws that he follows just doesn’t happen to be the ones voted in by legislatures.

By: Landon

Landon — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:09:38 +0000

Rorschach should stay where he is. He says “Evil MUST be punished”. He spent his whole life fighting crime and even killing criminals. Hell man, he calls his mask his real face because he doesn’t want to be associated with other “humans”.
(SPOILERS)
He was killed because he wouldn’t stand that the worlds peace be built on a lie.

By: Chairman

Chairman — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:27:52 +0000

Anton Chigurh is to me a True Neutral. Laws and morality do not matter to him, which strip him of both lawful and good. He’s not irrational, illogical, nor born of passion, which strips him of chaotic. As far as evil is concerned he never did anything blatantly evil that was without purpose. He killed only those who he was paid to kill or those who threatened his mission. As he said when he whacked the wife at the end, the husband made the choice to gamble with her life and lost, and he gave her the opportunity to gamble and win it back, so the motive wasn’t born of malice or hatred. She refused to take her chance to change her outcome and so the previous outcome stood.

By: secret

secret — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 05:22:15 +0000

this type of thing is popular on the 4chan.

By: Gail Pink

Gail Pink — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:12:32 +0000

I don’t know anything about DD, but this is really awesome and thought provoking, obviously.

By: Cluck

Cluck — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:04:09 +0000

Think the person cheated with using a video game for True Neutral and a TV show for Lawful Good.

I agree that Superman is the most obvious Lawful Good but True Neutral in movies is much harder to find. I keep thinking that the two movie characters that make the most sense for True Neutral are the Predator and the Aliens.

Think the others are for the most part a good fit.

By: TDiam

TDiam — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:13:40 +0000

What a weird coincidence! I just had this discussion with my friends last week; debating the placement of various figures on the d&d alignment chart. The Punisher is an interesting one to place…

By: Geoduck

Geoduck — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 08:47:32 +0000

Over on tvtropes.com, the Lawful Good picture-example is Superman, while Chaotic Good is Robin Hood. Both better fits. I’ve always thought The Doctor from Doctor Who would also a (ahem) good example of the latter.

By: Cola

Cola — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:10:56 +0000

Also his unpredictability, I guess.

I should have added that I have little to say about the other guys. I think Indy was miscategorised but I don’t really know where I’d place him.

By: Cola

Cola — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:09:59 +0000

I don’t think you people understand Rorschach. Neutral implies that the character is in it for their own benefit, and is relatively indifferent to the benefit or cost to others as a result of their actions. Lawful neutral, for instance, is someone who plays by a set of rules, but doesn’t have a huge investment in the outcome. Rorschach is a vigilante. His motivations are directly related to the well being of other people (children, the innocent, the people he cares for) but he operates outside of the rules of his society to achieve those ends, which is what makes him chaotic.

His concern is justice/punishing the unjust. He wants to cleanse the city of perverts and murderers, but not just to please himself (which would make him neutral).

Maybe you are all forgetting the girl’s underpants in the stove?

By: Hoople

Hoople — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:25:49 +0000

Hmm. Back in my D&D days, I always thought that alignments were plain dumb anyways, but seemed a part of the game that just couldn’t be excised. My original thought though, was that Rorschach would be Lawful Good, if anything, because of his never compromising. I admit he didn’t turn in villains for legal processing, but he would see the “LAW”-ful authorities as being weak and corrupt.

By: Toolbit

Toolbit — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:02:20 +0000

I would probably argue that Indiana Jones is Lawful Good. He believes priceless artifacts should be in a museum and will risk his life to do so. It seems like a good thing and it falls under the notion of law being the prime virtue.

Vader seems like Neutral Evil: he kills younglings and gives into his feelings (e.g., he kills Count Dooku instead of arresting him), which is diametrically opposed to the Jedi code. A better choice, in my opinion, would be Javert in Les Miserables or the cop (played by David Morse) who pursued House in season 3.

I agree with David Ali: Anton Chigur is too hard to classify. I too think there should be a better example. On the other hand, I disagree on Rorschach; he is the quintessence of Chaotic Good. He is good because his ideals are impeccable, even if his methods are psychotic.

dlauthor may be onto something with Aragorn being Lawful Good.

Haven’t seen Lost or played GTA IV; everyone else seems like a good pick.

Toolbit out.

By: susiejock

susiejock — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:40:53 +0000

Is it really? I never heard of that. Are you looking for wealthy men? I know a hot and interesting place named Billionairepal.com where I have met my boyfriend. You may take a look.

By: pwscott

pwscott — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:17:56 +0000

Good concept. It could use a little more research and tweaking.

By: poppedculture

poppedculture — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:49:29 +0000

Thanks for the link, John, and let me know if anyone lays claim to its creation. I hate posting things uncredited.

By: Hola

Hola — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:25:59 +0000

Nifty. That’s cool.

By: dlauthor

dlauthor — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:55:26 +0000

No way is Indiana Jones lawful. Dude’s a tomb robber, for the love of Pete. You want Lawful Neutral, call Judge Dredd. If anything, Indy’s Chaotic Good.

And Lawful Good is harder to peg. Aragorn? Will Kane in High Noon?

By: David Ali

David Ali — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:24:26 +0000

Okay, I can understand why all the characters are where they are, but I agree with you John, that Rorschach should be under Chaotic Neutral. Also, I don’t understand why he put Anton Chigurh under Neutral Evil. He/she could’ve chosen someone else… Posted this to my blog:

http://dailyrampager.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/pop-culture-alignment/