![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thedeadlyhook![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
ludditerobot had this up, so I stole it. That probably reveals secret things about me. You scored as Neutral Good. A Neutral Good person tries to do the "goodest" thing possible. These people are willing to work with the law to accomplish their goal, but if the law is corrupt they are just as willing to tear it down. To these people, doing what's right is the most important thing, regardless of rules, customs, or laws.
What is your Alignment? created with QuizFarm.com |
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-10 05:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 02:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-10 06:17 pm (UTC)I guess its a good thing that the only character that I ever created for D&D was that alignment, huh?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 02:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-10 06:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 02:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-10 07:14 pm (UTC)Angelus was LE, I'll bet, and Spike CE (then later tending to CN). Buffy CG, maybe tending to CN? Well that says something, doesn't it? Giles was definitely on the lawful side - no wonder Slayers and Watchers have such trouble getting along sometimes.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 01:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 03:08 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 12:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 03:12 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 03:43 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 12:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 12:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 06:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 08:16 pm (UTC)Ah well, perhaps that's just another case where genre-fiction morality fails to map to the real world. I'd say the same thing about the tendency for fictional villains to proudly proclaim "Yay, I'm evil!" In the real world, even the worst scoundrels tend to have some kind of flimsy, self-serving rationale for their crimes, and one of the most annoying things about authentic bad guys - Milosevic, Hussein, and so forth - is that even when they get called to account, they insist on painting themselves as misunderstood saints. Thus you have to judge real people by their actions, not their P.R., and the fictional convention of self-identifying evildoers is frankly pretty useless for that...
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 03:51 am (UTC)I come out as Lawful Good, unsurprisingly. As for the ongoing effort to map Buffy character alignments, I'd be inclined to use a predisposition for anarchy as the primary indicator - Spike and Faith, for example, are pretty random and impulsive, with no particular rhyme or reason to their actions, so whether good or evil I'd say they fall somewhere in the Chaotic range.
Angel's a tougher one to classify. Sometimes he's doing his best to dynamite the status quo - that whole Acathla thing, for instance, was really more-Chaotic Evil-than-thou, and he manages to bring down the house pretty successfully in his series finale. But for the most part I'd say he's sliding back and forth along the Neutral scale, never certain whether he should be opposing the existing power structure or preserving it. Perhaps you could say the same for Buffy, making her a pretty solid Neutral Good.
As for gods like Jasmine and Illyria (but not crazy Glory), I'd put them all in the Lawful camp. Because isn't this whole business of ruling the world and being worshipped by the masses just so law-and-orderish? Jasmine could even be seen as a case of Lawful Good taken to its most wretched extreme, although her mania for peace and order regardless of any moral considerations is probably more like Lawful Neutral.
Adam's kind of stumping me, though. Robotic Neutral?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 04:48 am (UTC)However... it really seemed to me Angel had a big issue with rules, and would thus probably go "Lawful"... maybe I'm just figuring him as channeling the big Christian guilt, which would inherently imply law.
Thumbs up, though, to all the "god" figures as Lawful Evil - evil in this 'verse does seem to play by its own internal rules more often than good, come to think of it. Maybe anarchy IS the answer...
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 05:53 am (UTC)As we've discussed before, the heroes are really in an awkward position here. On the one hand they're trying to suppress the forces of chaos so that daily life can go on as usual - the prom still gets held, the sun doesn't go out, the world isn't sucked into the mouth of hell. But the heroes are also rebels who resent being pushed around by corrupt and foolish authority figures, and in the end they manage to bring down the forces of law and order as well. I guess that's why I'd tend to peg both Buffy and Angel as Neutral Good, since they view both extremes with suspicion.
I'll admit I'm applying something of a personal interpretation to these categories - this isn't the textbook D&D definition, which typically breaks down into guidelines about how likely various monsters and feudal lackeys are to obey their master or break their promises. (And frankly, for practical purposes "Chaotic Evil" often seems to translate as simply "more bad-ass than Lawful Evil," which betrays a certain lack of imagination.) But as long as the four compass points in question - Good/Evil, Law/Chaos - seem to have some relevance to the matter at hand, I figure there's no harm in pulling out the old gaming labels and see how they fit...
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 12:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-11 06:09 pm (UTC)