Community

Hey,

I've been experiencing some 'definition' problems concerning my character's alignment. The problem is not that I do not know his alignment, but rather that I cannot put a D&D standard name on it.

My char can best be summarised as the following:
A strong believer of the philosophy: "The end justifies the means".
However, not only does he adhere to this proverb, he is also convinced that Evil itself is the best mean one can ever use, as any means of Good is per definition unfit for battle; that is: Good seeks peace, not war, therefore it doesn't have either the motivation nor sufficient knowledge to wage war.
His goal is usually Good though, but it is mostly what he might deem to be Good himself; it is definitely never inherently Evil or pointlessly destructive.
There is of course also the slight urge of any tiefling to be just that tad Evil and to overdo a little bit when it comes down to 'creative' problem solving.

So now I'm torn between three specific alignments:
- Lawful Evil: His actions plainly radiate Evil. He's an infernal warlock who praises the pact of his ancestors with the Devils of Asmodeus and uses it fully. Yet lawfully he adheres a very specific set of rules (which he deems to be Good though).
- Lawful Neutral: His intentions are lawful to a set of rules, but his means tend do go any way he pleases. If Good were more fit for battle he would most likely use it more than Evil, so he doesn't really care much for what alignment his actions indicate, but more for the goals they acomplish.
- Chaotic Good: His intentions are primarily Good (but that's a big point of dispute since he himself likes to define Good...) and he'd use any means to accomplish them, even downright Evil.

Actually, a lot of other alignments fit too, but I never find the description wholly pleasing to my character's persona.

Any input, or alternative alignment names that do not fall in the standard 3x3 alignment grid?

Your character is patently evil.  I wouldn’t say that he necessarily radiates evil like some fiendish space heater, but, yeah, he’s evil.  Evil characters don’t necessarily have the blood of devils flowing through their veins or make pacts with the Powers Below, although this guy did.  What makes this guy evil is his uncompromising stance that the ends justify the means and that the most efficacious means must be employed regardless of how vile those measures may be.  The fact that he might be working for what he perceives as the general welfare does not absolve his black, black heart.

 Whether he is lawful, chaotic, or neutral is probably best determined by his relationship with authority or his general temperament.  If he works well with others and wants to build a society, then he’s more lawful, whereas if he is more anti-establishment then he would be more chaotic. 

 

Thanks for the replies

Well, I've noticed that you've based your opinion on the fact that you think that "The End Justifies The Means" is evil. However, I might be a loner in this specific opinion, but I do quite follow the above proverb myself and think of it rather as the greater good.

Consider the movie "V for Vendetta" that stars a lead that is so clearly in touch with "The End Justifies The Means", yet in common appreciation everyone considers him a hero... and he's labelled Chaotic Good.

I understand the common conception to label anyone who considers any means whatsoever as a cold and ruthless bastard, but really, if I were to save a hundred lives by shooting some serial killer, I'd do it in a heartbeat... and almost nobody would object.
And it's no different than saving hundred lives by shooting a beautiful princess, because the line we need to cross is not in 'how pure is the blood that I spill' (the means) but 'how much good did it do' (the end).

That's just my personal opinion, but you see, following your above logic in my own logic is as if saying that my character is actually Good.

I'm with the Salla and BvBPL on this one.  The main thing that makes the "Ends justify the means" stance so morally repugnant is the way it trivializes any evil that is done.  A character trying to be Good will generally let his actions be inefficient if it stops more evil from coming about.