Discussion Main / ChaoticNeutral

You might want take any suggestions to the Image Pickin' forum but you have to be sure that the image illustrates the concept to those who are not familiar with the work

Not anymore, as evidenced in season 4.

Out of note, the official description of Chaotic Neutral, in the Hypertext D20, is "Chaotic Neutral, "Free Spirit"

A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn’t strive to protect others’ freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those different from himself suffer). A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but his behavior is not totally random. He is not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it.

Chaotic neutral is the best alignment you can be because it represents true freedom from both society’s restrictions and a do-gooder’s zeal. "

Here is the description of the law vs chaos conflict in the Hypertext D20: " Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.

Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

"Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them."

Well, based in this description(the "judge" bits, to be more exact), the lawful alignments really are more similar to the mindset of a Knight Templar punishing persons than the chaotic alignments.

The only thing I wonder about regarding Raine is the "respect authority" part. He clearly disobeys orders in mutilating Landa, and implies he's done something similar in the past (he also bootlegged, but seriously, did anyone' ever follow Prohibition?). That said, the key word is "respect", not "obey".

Other than that one bit, the "lawful" description seems to sum up Raine's character pretty well, specifically the close-minded and judgemental parts (he's also a pretty honest guy from what we see, but that's more debatable). Another factor could be that Those Wacky Nazis are considered lawful, and Raine, in his own way, is Not So Different from a Nazi.

So, Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral it is, then? Or is he still Chaotic Neutral?

Actually, is it acceptable to say he balances out to True Neutral?

Han could be defined as either True or Chaotic Neutral. How you can define Lando as Lawful Neutral I don't know. He clearly is in it for Number 1 at the beginning. I would call him True Neutral though, not Chaotic.

^Are you kidding me? He was working with the Empire to save his city! He was in it for the good of the people.

• Well, at least in Jet case i have two replys 1-He only qualifies as evil in his first episode. Starting of the second, he is definitively non-evil.2-Be one Well-Intentioned Extremist not means that you is automatically evil in one Dn D context. Give one look in Queen Aurala(canonicaly Neutral Good) in the Eberron setting.
• About the others: i not like of see my own alignment examples being deleted at the first alignment disagreement. By this, i not want see the examples of the others being deleted of this mode. Please, not delete more.

Okay fine i will not delete Jet though Well-Intentioned Extremist means a villain who has a good goal but uses evil means, so how is Queen Aurala Neutral Good? That doesn't make any sense though.

I disagree with your judgement on Conan, looking through the page history, it seems whoever wrote his entry didn't read much of the stories and probably could've phrased it a lot better. Conan is all of those things by dint of necessity, considering his opponents are usually Complete Monster Gods or Wizards with a side order of cannibalism & rape, or well intentioned Knight Templar Tyrants that have a Vlad Tepes approach to Law and Order policies.

Conan is Chaotic Neutral because while he fights omnicidal cosmic horrors on a regular basis, he despises the "Civilised" kingdoms that aren't ruled by wizards, even though they are the most likely groups to be considered Good, if they were given time to evolve from restricting the freedom of their people and enslaving the various tribes.

V is definitely not Chaotic Evil- he's violent to serve a noble goal; Chaotic Evil people are violent because they love violence in itself. I'm not saying he's definitely Chaotic Neutral (he might not just fit any of the D and D alignments), but he's not Chaotic Evil.

Using Evil means to achieve a good end makes you in Dn D Evil aligned not Neutral. Rary from Greyhawk(an official Dn D setting) is officially Neutral Evil and wants to bring peace to Oerth... by crushing it under his heel. so I'm not saying that by my definition he is evil, but by Dn D rules based on the information given in his entry yes he would be something Evil but only if he operated within a Dn D context.

Well technically V only killed an innocent person (and she was a Death Seeker) and were apparently uninhabited building.

So YMMV

According to Dn D rules, anarchists and lunatics are generally chaotic neutral. V is both.

Well he's listed in the Chaotic Evil page.

They aren't. Riddick doesn't give a damn about anyone and only kills when he has too, or if the victim deserves it.

Kokonoe is a bitch, yes, but she is neither wantonly destructive nor is she actively malicious. Being a bitch and being obsessed with revenge does not make you evil.

Really? because this

• Riddick is a guy who does good things in a horrendously evil manner, and all because he wants to fulfill a deal so that people will just leave him the fuck alone.

Sounds more like Evil than Neutral, doing evil towards a good end for a selfish reason.

Also Kokonoe's entry specifically says she is not evil only because Terumi is a Complete Monster. I'm sorry, but if the entry states that the only thing that keeps a character from being evil is not any actual legitimate reason, but because of the fact someone they face is a Complete Monster, then that doesn't really suggest that you are Chaotic Neutral really. So I'm removing their entries

K Sonik, you might want to consider that (a) you aren't the sole arbiter of alignment; (b) it's inherently a subjective trope and therefore people are allowed to disagree.

Re: Riddick, there's Word of God, or at least Word Of Vin Diesel, about his alignment, so go with that and not any particular fan interpretation.

Yes i know but a) I am not making my claims based on assumptions but based on the fact that using evil means makes you evil not neutral in Dn D even if you are doing it for a good goal. In fact, it is other people who are making assumptions not based on any proofs but based on their own opinions without any evidence to back it up.Rary from Greyhawk(official Dn D setting)is an official proof of my claim. He is Neutral Evil and and is an Well-intentioned extremist.

This is in contrast to other people, who are making their assumptions based on their beliefs, not based on any official evidence to support their claims. So it is very hypocritical to assume that I am just making claims based on my opinions when actually I am not.

I'm not going to contest this example anymore, but please don't add Jet to Chaotic Evil, because he just isn't that alignment if you compare him to any other Chaotic Evil character.

That being said, I know you read Order Of The Stick, and so I would cite something like Haley's murder of Crystal/Roy's use of Belkar to the contrary- these are both kind of evil methods for good reasons that don't disqualify either of them from being Good.

Looking at a lot of your entries, it seems like you have a problem with the idea that a character who does morally questionable things can be good/likable in the slightest.

Hey I am not going to, okay. and I don't have problem with the concept that those that uses evil means can't be antiheroes or antivillains. I will cite that in Dn D using evil means to achieve a good end makes you Neutral, which, although isn't necessarily something I agree with, i can logically se the reasoning.

Outside of a Dn D context however, you can call yourself an morally ambiguous villain if you use evil means to achieve a good end, but if you operate within a Dn D context, you will be an Evil alignment.

I hope you see where I am going with this. Basically, if you are going to apply a Dn D alignment to a Well-intentioned extremist,don't expect that person to end up with a Laful Neutral,True Neutral or Chaotic Neutral under the Dn D rules, but an evil alignment.

I did delete him from Chaotic Evil, but I think I had some confusion and didn't realize you weren't always the one readding him.

Actually, that makes a fair amount of sense, although that would seem to raise the issue that no non Dn D character should be given a Character Alignment, because as your example suggests, that system uses standards that don't really match up with reality.

Exactly... Man, I don't get why there could be anyone who thinks Jet would qualify for anything Neutral by Dn D terms. In Dn D using Evil means to achieve a Good end makes you Evil. Heck the example that I cited above is an official proof. It just bugs my mind really

I don't know whether to put this reply here or elsewhere, but I think that maybe Deadpool should be added back in. Reading a bit about him, it sounds like it would be fair to say that he's at least sometimes this alignment, although at other times (such as in that Hulk Vs movie), he's Chaotic Evil- it seems to be Depending on the Writer.

Deadpool seems to fall clearly in the Chaotic Stupid department.

I guess that you is right(SPECIALLY in Raziel case), by this, i am putting his edits of today in Chaotic Evil.

if they are not evil then they are just magnificent

Yup.

"Also, the Magnificent Bastard is likely to appear as a Villain Protagonist or dark Anti Hero"

jack sparrow, john constantine, lelouch, tyler durden, are dark antiheroes.

Though in case of lelouch, generally it is debated if it is Chaotic Good, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral or Wild Card.

A dark anti-hero usually is evil, simply generally presented as on your side. According to what I've heard Lelouch and Constantive have both consciously, sanely, methodically, and sadistically (the basic requirements for genuine evil) done far too horrible things to be considered either good or neutral. I have no information about Durden, but Jack Sparrow seemed comparatively "harmless" from what little I remember of him.

Ugh... And they rarely ever hurt the perpetrator victim beyond easily healed wounds (in-universe, at any rate). The Screwy Squirrel is mainly Chaotic Neutral based on the fact that the acts are socially acceptable in-setting, meaning in a Looney Tunes cartoon, one can get run over by a steamroller, get an anvil on your head and get blown up with a dynamite, and yet they are still seen to be alive and well with only but a few scratches and maybe a broken leg. To qualify for an evil alignment in the end, one would have to actually break out of these limits and actually hurt somebody permanently or even kill somebody for their own amusement or gain (except if death is really, really cheap in the setting). That simply isn't part of the Screwy Squirrel routine, and neither is that what a would Chaotic Neutral do at least on a regular basis. That is why the Screwy Squirrel is (mostly) a Chaotic Neutral trope, with a few breaks into Chaotic Good if it has enough other redeeming qualities that pushes it into that territory.

Bear in mind, with your opinion, you're pushing about half of the Looney Tunes cast into evil territory due to your own opinion about a trope that was codified by them. They're tricksters, not outright villains, and while they easily seem pretty unsympathetic, you can always look at it the other way and say that they could easily be much, much worse.

I'm going to re-add it AGAIN. Quite a few people here believe it belongs here, and I am pretty sure it's more than those who share your opinion.

Yes but the whole point of Chaotic Neutral is that they are Chaotic and Neutral, as in not hurting innocent people just because you feel like it and actually leaving alone those that haven't done anything wrong.

And you are completely missing the point. Let's take an example. If I blow up a guy and he easily comes back from death and it is funny that wouldn't make a difference as at the end of the day it is my sadistic intentions that matter when deciding a DND alignment.

I'm not gonna go and say that they are outright evil by my definition of it (I tend to reserve those for actual villains) but by Dn D definitions, no, Screwy Squirrels would not qualify for this alignment due to the fact that they torment people for no just reason.

Heck as stated on the trope page these kind of character can venture into Dude, Not Funny!.

So i'm going to remove it ONCE AGAIN

PS as you said the Looney Tunes characters are tricksters not tormentors which is what the Screwy Squirrel is

No, I perfectly understood your point.

And it also says protagonist, and the trope is currently listed under tricksters. Also, do note that 90% of the examples on the page are Screwy Squirrels are, to some degree, heroes. In essence to what I said above, as long as other characters in the setting don't estrange themselves from the character or tell him that he went too far, it is treated as fine. If anvils rain from the sky on a daily basis and nobody actually dies from getting hit from one, it's not such a big deal if a character causes such a thing. Quite a few of them are rather nice once you get past their antics even, if you take a close look at the Western Animation section.

In layman's terms, you take the mercilessly torments part a bit too realistically than trhe trope itself means. I mean, you wouldn't say one is evil simply because one puts a trashcan full of water at the door of somebody's house and then rings the doorbell just to prank somebody. In essence it is the same thing, just in the acceptable range of the reality. True, it's not okay dropping an anvil on somebody's head in real life, but it is in the cartoon.

The describtion of the trope itself is a little bit fuzzy in itself however. Tormentor is perhaps a bit harsh word for the kind of trope, since it's more describing a prankster cartoon character, not actively striving for evil, but just to entertain themselves. In the frames of our describtions (note that it isn't just me who keeps editing it back to the Chaotic Neutral list) of the alignments, that immidiately disqualifies the Screwy Squirrel from any evil alignment unless it has other traits that makes the character seem less sympathetic.

Mugen, Marv (sin city),Grom hellscream, Deadpool, Rina inverse, kenpachi, Devilman ,Sam and max, Tyler durden,Beetlejuice, rico (The Penguins of madagascar), heloise etc.. are Heroic Sociopath and Chaotic Neutral.

Going by your description above he's not neutral/rather harmless, but rather conflicted somewhere in-between this and an evil alignment, with considerably stronger leaning to thw second, but mostly directing his attentions to people worse than he is, and wishing to truly become neutral.

Do you mean lawful-chaotic neutral or good-evil neutral?

BTW he normally minds his own business, but his empathy (yes, he does have that) usually causes him to intervine when some thugs are bullying some helpless people.

Could you also advise where on the Sliding Scale Of Anti Heroes he would be on?

To be fair the difference between a Neutral and an Evil character is that the latter is willing to harm a innocent so I totally agree with the alignment you gave your character, although he does perhaps have evil tendencies. If he was willing to harm an innocent, then yes he would be Chaotic Evil. By the way, where could I in the future find your story?

Go to Troper Works and look for "Chronicles Of Conflict".

Also, don't want to be a Grammer Nazi, but don't you mean that the latter (evil) is willing to harm an innocent?

yeah