Discussion Main / LawfulGood

I actually view Batman as Lawful Good, I know he looks Chaotic Good but that's cause Gotham is a place where the Law doesn't behave Lawfully. The Joker is his Opposite, and he's obviously Chaotic Evil in the purest sense.

In Infinite Crisis No.1 Superman tells him II don't feel the need to control everything like you". When Batman crosses the line, it's not in the typical Vigilante Kill the Villain way, it's in ways that seem closer to Lawful Evil like the Sonar plot in The Dark Knight.

Batman Embodies Order while The Joker embodies Chaos.

Recently, the Good Is Not Nice and Good Is Not Soft examples were removed of the "Character archetypes particularly prone to this alignment" area and put in the "others" area. By the way, i am the troper that put this there originally, because the description of Lawful Good in the Hypertext d20 is:

"A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished."

The description of Neutral Good is:

"A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them.."

And the description of Chaotic Good is:

"A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he’s kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society."

Opinions?

LAWFUL Good??!?? This is the man who in Without Remorse murdered and tortured drug dealers. He faked his death and changed his name to avoid the law.

I don't care how much people think that drug dealers are acceptable targets, if you haven't noticed, murder and torture are against the law.

He didn't even have the excuse he uses when he later on works for the CIA, that he is working for the government so even if his actions are technically illegal, at least someone in authority has authorized it. Many of the killings in Without Remorse happen before he joins the CIA (including those of some low level drug dealers, not the evil bad guys).

I must quibble with the definition including a personal code of conduct.

My reading of the Alignment guidelines in D&D preclude a merely personal code of conduct as a defining characteristic of being Lawful; Lawfulness is specifically defined as adherence to a code seen as greater than the individual, a Higher Law so to speak.

A Chaotic character can very well have a very strict code of conduct, the point being that they will define his personal code as overriding all other externally imposed codes; this is what makes them Chaotic.

And do note that adherence to a Higher Law means that a Lawful character is not necessarily bound to the local laws. This last bit is a common misconception among D&D players, but a moment's thought will reveal it as a misconception indeed: would a Paladin obey the Evil laws of a Lawful Evil kingdom?

I am wanting to discuss this example:

• Phineas and Ferb count as this alignment, surprisingly — they break the rules constantly, but only because their mother never bothered to tell them that they weren't allowed to go into outer space/build giant robots/construct their own town/etc. They do, however, get building permits (written in crayon) and taking zoning laws into account, while also fudging the rules occasionally (if the family car is being controlled by a remote, does it really count as underage driving?) They take it Up To Eleven when they're stranded in space and need to jump start their rocket — but they can't start the car themselves, because they're not old enough to drive.

Well, the description to the lawful alignment in the Hypertext D20 is the following: "Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. "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."

The thing that called my attention is the "downside" list- because it sounds as the exact antithesis to the boys.

Soo... Superman. I won't dispute that he's LG, but I don't think that this picture shows him being especially lawful or good. Is this even picturable?

I removed Iroh from Avatar The Last Airbender from here since he's listed as both neutral and lawful good.

I could see him being a lawful good character back in his days as a general, but the reasons for him being listed here were mainly that he's polite and uses his firebending skills carefully. Yes, these certainly are a set of standards. But wouldn't the fact that he seems generally opposed to the policies of the Fire Nation to the point of being arrested prevent him from being completely lawful?

That's my opinion anyways, if anybody can argue for him belonging here feel free to put him back in.

Since we have 'differentiating between the law scale of Good', can we also have the 'differentiating between the morality scale of Lawful'? This can also extend to the other alignment articles.

Remove the example of Hero Antagonist, because a hero antagonist may be of any alignment(Not Evil).