• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That sure seems like chaotic neutral or maybe neutral evil. Chaotic evil always came across to me as being evil for the lulz

    • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The way I’ve always looked at the alignments is that the evil - good axis is self-interest vs selflessness, and chaotic - lawful is lawless vs law-abiding.

      Consequently:

      • Chaotic evil is pure lawless self-interest

      • Chaotic neutral is lawless with a balance of selfish and selfless behavior depending on situation

      • Neutral evil is a balance between lawless and law-abiding behavior depending on situation but always selfishly.

      At least that’s the way I’ve used it.

      • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve always viewed the Lawful-Chaotic spectra as “following the rules vs. following your heart”.

        A lawful good character follows the rules because they believe rules serve a greater good

        A chaotic good character follows their heart because they believe rules aren’t always just. They’ll obey the rules only when they agree with them.

        Lawful evil follows the rules because it’s the least troublesome way of getting/doing what they want, in some cases even the most satisfying - because it’s harder to fight back when the law is on your side.

        Chaotic evil efficiently follows their impulse. They take and do whatever they want to do, whether they’re allowed to or not, because they don’t believe in the rules. If the rules allow them to do what they want, that’s just a convenient coincidence.

        Neutrals are a huge spectra in between. They could a character with their own moral code, I.e. an evil character who refuses to kill kids, or a good character who will always bends the rules to screw over ruch people.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The problem is both chaotic and neutral characters follow their hearts.

          Which is why I view chaotic characters as being willing to do blatantly self-destructive or uncomfortable things just for the sake of thumbing their nose at authority. The chaotic evil character doesn’t kill people because she wants to, she does it because you don’t want her to.

          • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Your interpretation is your own, but I as I eluded to before, I view neutrals as a half and half of lawful and chaotic.

            In my mind, neutrals don’t follow the law to the tee, but they aren’t entirely swayed by the impulse of their heart either.

            They could be the type with informal rules they won’t break, like an evil character that refuses to kill children, but doesn’t care what happens otherwise.

            They could be a rule bender, like a good character who generally see rules as a good thing, but turn a blind eye to the rules they deem against the people, or bend them to breaking point to help others.

            Could even be a true neutral character who goes with the flow. They do what is needed to complete the mission - they will use the rules to their advantage, but aren’t above breaking them when that fails.

            Sure you could say these sway towards lawful and chaotic, but that’s the point. Neutral is a mix of the two, not necessarily its own thing. That’s why I don’t see neutrals as a problem here.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s all up to personal interpretation, of course!

              I think neutrals only listen to their heart, whereas chaotic characters actually specifically hate the law. Demons are chaotic, not because they’re passionate, but because they oppose order and morals and rules.

              A neutral character only considers the law when thinking about consequences. A chaotic character always considers the law because fuck the police I won’t do what you tell me!

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The difficult question is if a chaotic evil character would follow a law that is in their self interest.

        I don’t think they would. I think they’d break the law anyway, even if it went against their own interests, because their nature is pure lawlessness.

        Chaos, to me, implies an inherent lawlessness that is itself the character’s goal. They break the law for its own sake, because they want laws to be broken (i.e. for the lulz)

        • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s an interesting point of view. I’ve never really seen it that way, but I can appreciate that. I see it more as a complete disregard for the law, rather than actively trying to break laws. It’d be pretty silly if a chaotic evil character, on hearing that feeding the homeless is illegal, would go around sharing his rations with homeless people “for the lulz”.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Neutral, to me, is a complete disregard for the law. Chaos is actually being anti-law

            A chaotic evil character would feed the homeless, but also it would be poisoned or something. For the lulz