History Main / CharacterAlignment

** The summoned champions each have their own [[TabletopGame/DungeonsandDragons D&D]]-esque alignment, though the Berserker class is outside it due to lacking rationality[[note]]It has been explained that the Berserker-class Servants who are fully affected by Mad Enhancement still have an alignment. ''VisualNovel/FateStayNight''[='=]s Berserker would be Chaotic Good, and ''Literature/FateZero''[='=]s Berserker would be Lawful Good[[/note]]. For example, Saber is LawfulGood, Archer is TrueNeutral, Caster is NeutralEvil, while Gilgamesh and Rider are ChaoticGood. However, how accurately each Servant matches their alignment tends to vary wildly: Saber and Caster match their alignments well, while Rider and especially Gilgamesh have baffled fans since their release, leading to many competing theories that try to give a consistent explanation. Most suggestions will only explain one character, though the theory that alignments are carryovers from a prototype that had vastly different characters using the same identities has gained some support after more information about it was revealed.

** Gilgamesh's alignment also falls into how he's characterized in [[Literature/TheEpicOfGilgamesh his original legend]], so the alignments of Servants might also take the Heroic Spirit's legend into account as well. And Rider's history (which is very different from how Myth/ClassicalMythology describes her in real life) could also support a ChaoticGood alignment. Assessment of her during the actual game has to be weighed against the fact that she has a rather vile Master ordering her around, and one of the routes involves her joining the heroes' side.
** ''Literature/FateZero'' continues this. Saber is still LawfulGood (obviously), Rider is NeutralGood, Archer (Gilgamesh) is still ChaoticGood, Lancer is LawfulNeutral, Caster is ChaoticEvil, Berserker is Lawful Mad[[note]]LawfulGood in actuality[[/note]], and Assassin is LawfulEvil.

'''As a general rule, do not add Character Alignment to any work where it is not featured in {{canon}}, as it will just lead to an EditWar. Administrivia/TheGreatCharacterAlignmentDebate explains this in more detail. In particular, [[Administrivia/NoRealLifeExamplesPlease there will be no real-life examples under these circumstances]], except for descriptions of proposed systems like the [[FourTemperamentEnsemble four humours]] theory.'''

** 5E returned to its roots and features the original nine-point axis, but retains Unaligned from 4E. However, Unaligned's scope was narrowed to only include entities that lack the intelligence or sapience to have a concept of morality, such as animals and constructs. Overall, 5e diminishes the importance of alignment by removing most of its mechanical effects' for example, Paladins don't have to be lawful good but follow Oaths that range across the alignment chart from the noble oath of Protection to the sinister oath of Conquest. Additionally, while most creatures "tend" towards certain alignment, individual members can be of any alignment. That being said, the various Oaths and pacts tend to have alignments at their base, so you cannot be a ChaoticEvil Paladin of Protection with an Oath to someone like [[ThePaladin Tyr]] as they won't want to give their blessing to someone actively working against their tenants or goals.