[Alignment Replacement] The Color Wheel - Now With More Green!

[ErrantX]

Heh, could always use the Pain of Healing rules from Iron Kingdoms...

-X

[vicente408]

Fey may often be part of the natural world in myth, but they are not Green at all really. Green hates deception, and if there's one thing that fey are known for it's deception. Green is the most honest color; a Green individual will tell you what they mean and nothing more, nothing less. Trickery, duplicitous dealings, and all that are not copasetic with green ideals; they are the purview of blue and black, green's enemies.

In MtG, green "outsiderish" things are pretty much always Elementals or Dryads, or sometimes Avatars. You're going to have to either make up something new to represent the color outside of the Prime Material or change the D&D fluff of one of those things to make them into suitable outsiders.

Like I said, trying to jam the two systems together is going to create a lot of friction, and most likely end up with too many compromises that don't feel right from one end or the other. Trying to force a system founded on a two-axis "grid" into a pentagon/pentagram mold is going to involve too much bending, twisting, and breaking. Best to make a new wholesale cosmology that incorporates the color wheel from the very beginning.

[Lord_Gareth]

Like I said, trying to jam the two systems together is going to create a lot of friction, and most likely end up with too many compromises that don't feel right from one end or the other. Trying to force a system founded on a two-axis "grid" into a pentagon/pentagram mold is going to involve too much bending, twisting, and breaking. Best to make a new wholesale cosmology that incorporates the color wheel from the very beginning.

I've been meaning to do that for some time, actually, but you can use the Wheel as-is, for now.

Other posts to be addressed later, when I am less sick.

[The Witch-King]

Fey may often be part of the natural world in myth, but they are not Green at all really. Green hates deception, and if there's one thing that fey are known for it's deception. Green is the most honest color; a Green individual will tell you what they mean and nothing more, nothing less. Trickery, duplicitous dealings, and all that are not copasetic with green ideals; they are the purview of blue and black, green's enemies.

"It's Not Easy Being Green" is one of the definitive articles on Green as a color in Magic: the Gathering. It can be found at: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazin...com/daily/mr43

What does it say about it's enemies blue and black?

"In blue, green sees an enemy that does not respect the value of nature. Blue wishes to tear down all that is natural to construct its own artificial world. Blue has no respect for the importance of instinct choosing to value knowledge over one's gut. Blue looks to its cold impersonal future always forsaking the warmth of its past. Green must preemptively destroy blue before it destroys green.

In black, green sees a selfish, selfish color. Green understands the importance of the cycle of life. As such it respects the role of death. Black, on the other hand, uses death unnaturally as a tool for its own means. If green is to protect nature, it must stop black before it kills all living things for its own twisted agenda."

I don't see anything about Green hating deception. Green hates artifice and it's not the same thing.

As for a hatred of deception, there's an awful lot of it in Nature if it hates it. Snakes, insects and amphibians that are brightly colored to appear like animals that are poisonous when they aren't. Insects that look like branches and twigs and leaves and all manner of parts of plants to hide their presence from predators that might eat them. Predators that hide in the tall grass and strike from upwind to take herbivores by surprise. Animals that inflate themselves with air or stand on their hind legs and lift their front paws to make themselves seem bigger to intimidate a foe. Chameleons that change color in order to blend in with their environments.

If anything, I would say Green is perfectly happy with deception--when its in the animal's nature to be deceptive. Creating something new that wasn't there and isn't natural is artifice not deception.

Fey are Nature spirits and Green is all about Nature and I think they're a perfect fit. Some fey are deceptive. Some aren't. Fairy Godmothers tend to be pretty honest with their charges. Satyrs and Dryads and Nymphs are all pretty straightforward. The "rank and file" Tinkerbell type fairies are all caretakers of flowers and other plants, humble maintainers of the natural status quo.

The fey that are deceptive are the ones people focus on because its such a commonly used story concept. Without them, most stories involving mortal interactions with fey wouldn't make interesting reading. And even then, many of the stories about fey being deceptive involve a mortal going into their domain without permission, a situation where anyone could be forgiven for being deceptive. Elves are as Green as Green gets and I wouldn't expect to walk into an elven forest unannounced and see even half of the elves pointing arrows at me.

You can argue that some fey have an association with illusion because of the fey use of glamors in mythology. But again, I would argue that fey glamors are perfectly natural for fey because its a natural inborn fey ability. Fish swim, birds fly, and chameleons change color--fey glamor. And I would say not because of an inbred desire to deceive but because of a great rapacious inbred need to be beautiful at all times. Just like a male peacock spreading its feathers and prancing around to attract a mate--it's in their nature.

Like I said, trying to jam the two systems together is going to create a lot of friction, and most likely end up with too many compromises that don't feel right from one end or the other. Trying to force a system founded on a two-axis "grid" into a pentagon/pentagram mold is going to involve too much bending, twisting, and breaking. Best to make a new wholesale cosmology that incorporates the color wheel from the very beginning.

I just don't see this at all. Deities, planes, outsiders, races and individuals are currently associated with alignments. We now sit down and associate them instead with colors or combinations of colors. An alignment was never the whole story about anyone or anywhere to begin with. There's a world of difference between the world views of a Chaotic Good Viking warrior and a modern day Chaotic Good pacifist protester. Alignment or color, there's always going to be more information you're going to have to give someone in order for them to know what's going on.

And as for cosmology--really, please tell me: what changes do we really need to make? The Fourteen Peaceful Gardens of Shamballah were Lawful Good--now, they're White. Where's the "bending, twisting and breaking?"

[Glimbur]

Red/Green: Savage is the term to describe Red/Green - raw emotion mixes with instinct to create a being that acts less on thought than it does intuition. Red/Green is brutally direct, preferring quick physical solutions over more lengthy intellectual social ones. Red/Green does not mix well with societies in general; Green's love of nature combines with Red's raw emotion (in this case, rage) with predictable results. Its greatest failing is an utter lack of thought; unless they fight to retain some form of self-control, Red/Green often barrels headfirst through life, unaware and unheeding of the consequences for their recklessly destructive actions.

Red - Freedom and Emotion: Red believes in acting on one's emotions, and in the freedom to do so; if you love, act upon it. If you rage, attack, if you feel sorrow, weep. Red believes in absolute freedom, and that people are happiest when they're honest with themselves. Trickery, spontaneity, and direct solutions are all hallmarks of Red's methodology; Red is far more likely to simply smash a wall or blow it up than it is to, say, build a door through it. At its best, Red is genuinely loyal, caring, and committed to the idea of personal freedom. At its worst, Red is random and pointlessly destructive, smashing through restricting obstacles, laws, and people simply because they're there. Allied Colors - Black and Green. Enemy Colors - Blue and White.

I don't see the difference between these two, at least not in a significant amount. A preference for using natural methods isn't the same as an alignment, and if you strip that out Red/Green is the same as Red.

Looking at the other descriptions, it seems like you could really simplify Green if you make it conservative/regressive. This instinctive thing, or there being an overall plan... they just muddy the water.

My other concern is that White is Lawful Neutral, Black is Neutral Evil, Red is Chaotic Neutral, and Blue is the only non-green color which is difficult to put in the original alignment system. It's True Neutral with an inquisitive bent... which is more personality than alignment anyway. Green doesn't fit the L-C G-E chart if you simplify it to simply conservative and let the preference for nature flow out of a preference for how things used to be done... but a preference for how things used to be done isn't fully action guiding: should we go back to slavery as it used to be done, should we return to a tribal society? Etc.

Final observation: none of these alignments really feel "good" to me. This isn't a big surprise coming from you.

[IcarusWings]

"It's Not Easy Being Green" is one of the definitive articles on Green as a color in Magic: the Gathering. It can be found at: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazin...com/daily/mr43

What does it say about it's enemies blue and black?

"In blue, green sees an enemy that does not respect the value of nature. Blue wishes to tear down all that is natural to construct its own artificial world. Blue has no respect for the importance of instinct choosing to value knowledge over one's gut. Blue looks to its cold impersonal future always forsaking the warmth of its past. Green must preemptively destroy blue before it destroys green.

In black, green sees a selfish, selfish color. Green understands the importance of the cycle of life. As such it respects the role of death. Black, on the other hand, uses death unnaturally as a tool for its own means. If green is to protect nature, it must stop black before it kills all living things for its own twisted agenda."

I don't see anything about Green hating deception. Green hates artifice and it's not the same thing.

As for a hatred of deception, there's an awful lot of it in Nature if it hates it. Snakes, insects and amphibians that are brightly colored to appear like animals that are poisonous when they aren't. Insects that look like branches and twigs and leaves and all manner of parts of plants to hide their presence from predators that might eat them. Predators that hide in the tall grass and strike from upwind to take herbivores by surprise. Animals that inflate themselves with air or stand on their hind legs and lift their front paws to make themselves seem bigger to intimidate a foe. Chameleons that change color in order to blend in with their environments.

If anything, I would say Green is perfectly happy with deception--when its in the animal's nature to be deceptive. Creating something new that wasn't there and isn't natural is artifice not deception.

Fey are Nature spirits and Green is all about Nature and I think they're a perfect fit. Some fey are deceptive. Some aren't. Fairy Godmothers tend to be pretty honest with their charges. Satyrs and Dryads and Nymphs are all pretty straightforward. The "rank and file" Tinkerbell type fairies are all caretakers of flowers and other plants, humble maintainers of the natural status quo.

The fey that are deceptive are the ones people focus on because its such a commonly used story concept. Without them, most stories involving mortal interactions with fey wouldn't make interesting reading. And even then, many of the stories about fey being deceptive involve a mortal going into their domain without permission, a situation where anyone could be forgiven for being deceptive. Elves are as Green as Green gets and I wouldn't expect to walk into an elven forest unannounced and see even half of the elves pointing arrows at me.

You can argue that some fey have an association with illusion because of the fey use of glamors in mythology. But again, I would argue that fey glamors are perfectly natural for fey because its a natural inborn fey ability. Fish swim, birds fly, and chameleons change color--fey glamor. And I would say not because of an inbred desire to deceive but because of a great rapacious inbred need to be beautiful at all times. Just like a male peacock spreading its feathers and prancing around to attract a mate--it's in their nature.

Green isn't all about nature anymore, just like black isn't about death and isn't portrayed as evil. They've been changed from MtG had them as.

[Lord_Gareth]

Looking at the other descriptions, it seems like you could really simplify Green if you make it conservative/regressive. This instinctive thing, or there being an overall plan... they just muddy the water.

Hrmm. An interesting concept. I'll toy with it awhile.

My other concern is that White is Lawful Neutral, Black is Neutral Evil, Red is Chaotic Neutral, and Blue is the only non-green color which is difficult to put in the original alignment system. It's True Neutral with an inquisitive bent... which is more personality than alignment anyway. Green doesn't fit the L-C G-E chart if you simplify it to simply conservative and let the preference for nature flow out of a preference for how things used to be done... but a preference for how things used to be done isn't fully action guiding: should we go back to slavery as it used to be done, should we return to a tribal society? Etc.

This isn't supposed to fit the L-C G-E chart. That's why it's a replacement system. These ideals are neither good nor evil in and of themselves, and every color has the potential to spawn both heroes and villains. Most characters are probably going to be morally gray, really, which is how it should be (in my opinion, anyway).

Final observation: none of these alignments really feel "good" to me. This isn't a big surprise coming from you.

Anything taken to an extreme is harmful, is it not? But each color has the potential for good as well; even a Black character might do good (say, out of a vainglorious desire for praise) and thus be heroic.

Green isn't all about nature anymore, just like black isn't about death and isn't portrayed as evil. They've been changed from MtG had them as.

A-hem. Black wasn't evil to begin with. Black is just willing to play dirty.

[hamishspence]

A-hem. Black wasn't evil to begin with. Black is just willing to play dirty.

Might the nicest Black types refuse to "play dirty" in the sense of "violate individual rights"?

At its best, Black creates societies of enlightened self-interest, where individual rights and opportunities take precedence over communal rules.

[Lord_Gareth]

Might the nicest Black types refuse to "play dirty" in the sense of "violate individual rights"?

An eminent possibility; the main traits of Black are (A) selfishness and (B) amorality. Everything else is entirely up for grabs, and the idea of an actively democratic Black (common ground with Red) is not unreasonable at all.

[hamishspence]

Some variants might even elevate "selfishness" in certain senses, into a form of morality, and build a moral code around it, rather than being strictly amoral.

Objectivism might qualify as a very Black philosophy.

[Lord_Gareth]

Objectivism might qualify as a very Black philosophy.

Common ground with Blue for the win, my friend ^_^

[hamishspence]

Good point.

Indeed, since Blue is allied with Black and White (normally opposed to each other) that might be a good way of constructing a philosophy capable of uniting them both.

EDIT:

Come to think of it, what other well-known philosophies could be characterized in Color Wheel terms?

[Lord_Gareth]

Alright folks, I'm running into a problem here; "Regressive" green is a helluva lot like White. "Nature" Green is more of a modern morality ("My carbon footprint is microscopic!") and, well, "savage" Green is more accurately Green/Red (until I change it, anyway). Ideas?

[hamishspence]

Maybe the darker aspect of Green could be "uncontrolled growth"

A more sinister Green character might insist on "growth" to the point where it becomes threatening- and not understand why sometimes, things need pruning.

[NineThePuma]

Not just wild growth, but perhaps something similar to naivete where they don't recognize that sometimes the bad things have to go?

[hamishspence]

At it's darkest, tumour-type spells, might be green-based.

[vicente408]

It's okay if you're finding overlap between colors. That's sort of the point of the color wheel; each color has its individual identity, but they still have common values with other colors. Not just with allies, even enemies can have common causes, though this happens more rarely.

What is uniquely green, though? The part of its philosophy that no other color has is that it desires a complete surrender to fate. Every other color will, in some way or another, want to change the path of fate to suit its ideals; red will instigate change according to how it feels, regardless of any overarching plan or destiny. Black will only settle for a fate that results in itself coming out on top. Blue knows what is best for the future and will try to shape the world to make it happen according to its vision. Even white will rebel against destiny if it feels that there is injustice that needs to be righted. Green, though, prioritizes the status quo above all else. The natural world is the epitome of this, a network of living things all acting in accordance with the roles they were born with, but it extends outside of the forests as well. A green individual will not aspire to anything greater than what they see as their destined position in the world; they are happy with what they were born into. If that life contains hardship, then they will endure. It is not one's place to change the world to make your own life more comfortable, or the life of another. Injustice and cruelty in the world is a shame, but even it has its place in the web of fate.

All that will be, will be, and those who try to change the world to suit their own wishes and plans are naive at best, and endangering the world's balance at worst.

[vasharanpaladin]

This concept has been yoinked. Carry on.

[Havvy]

What color would this philosophy be: Aggressive coercion in the free dealings between people causes less satisfaction combined with people have property rights.

[DragonOfUndeath]

maybe White with Red and Black Secondaries?

[Lord_Gareth]

maybe White with Red secondary and Black Tertiary?

A-hem. This is another point of confusion; a character can have up to two Secondary colors. There is no tertiary.

[The Witch-King]

A green individual will not aspire to anything greater than what they see as their destined position in the world; they are happy with what they were born into. If that life contains hardship, then they will endure. It is not one's place to change the world to make your own life more comfortable, or the life of another. Injustice and cruelty in the world is a shame, but even it has its place in the web of fate.

All that will be, will be, and those who try to change the world to suit their own wishes and plans are naive at best, and endangering the world's balance at worst.

I think that you are taking Green at its worst as being representative of Green at all times. Let's take another look at the given definition of Green:

Green - Growth and Harmony: Green believes in the concept of predestination; in Green's view, there's a Plan to create a perfect world, and a being can be happiest simply by discovering their role in the Plan and fulfilling it. Green trusts its instincts and harmonizes with the world around it, using intuition and observation to "grow" their way around problems either physically, mentally, magically or spiritually. Green dislikes using new ideas and inventions when more naturalistic or traditional solutions will work, and distrusts influences such as artifice, logic, and selfishness that hinder a being's personal growth and potentially endanger the Plan. Green characters often associate heavily with the natural world in their quest to grow personally and seek their role in the multiverse. At its best, Green is wise, understanding, and insightful. At its worst, Green is savage, short-sighted and hidebound. Allied Colors - Red and White. Enemy Colors - Black and Blue.

Green - Growth and Harmony

Philosophies don't exist for their own sake. Philosophies exist as a road towards happiness. I think you're missing both the potential and the beauty in the Green philosophy.

Green believes in the concept of predestination; in Green's view, there's a Plan to create a perfect world, and a being can be happiest simply by discovering their role in the Plan and fulfilling it.

Green is allied to White but Green isn't White. The Plan isn't being followed because laws or governments or tyrants or churches or priests or anybody tells you to follow the Plan. You follow the Plan because the idea is that's what's going to make you happy. If you aren't happy, then something is wrong. If you aren't happy, maybe you haven't discovered your proper role in the Plan or maybe you have discovered it but you haven't fulfilled it.

Green trusts its instincts and harmonizes with the world around it, using intuition and observation to "grow" their way around problems either physically, mentally, magically or spiritually.

You don't just accept problems and carry on. You don't just accept a life of pain and hardship and unhappiness. You sit down and do the hardest thing there is to do sometimes: you think. You look at your place in life and ask "why am I not happy?" You ask "what would it take to be happy?" Because that's the point of any philosophy.

Green characters often associate heavily with the natural world in their quest to grow personally and seek their role in the multiverse.

If you're the adopted son of a cruel step-father who's married your mother, you don't just put up with his abuse because it's your lot in life. You do what he says while you think about your situation. You watch the birds in the sky, you contemplate the animals in the forest, you commune with your ancestors. You search in Nature and in yourself for a place in the world, a place in the Plan where you can be happy. You might decide to leave home and seek work in a nearby village. After working hard just to survive in your new environment, you take up an apprenticeship or learn some job you think you'll be happy at. You work day and night if necessary to grow into the role that you believe you were meant to fulfill in the plan. You make it work, with hard work and honest re-appraisal of yourself and where you are in life.

Knowing there is a Plan and believing in the Plan are just the tip of the iceberg. The philosophy of Green as a guiding path isn't just "accept the Plan." It's look at the Plan, see yourself as a part of the Plan, a happy and harmonious part, and do what it takes to grow into that role so you can fulfill your part of the Plan.

At its best, Green is wise, understanding, and insightful. At its worst, Green is savage, short-sighted and hidebound.

Any philosophy can be reduced to one simple concept or directive. That's usually the point where that philosophy breaks down entirely. White venerates law, not for the sake of law, but because White perceives law as the best road to a life that's peaceful and ideal. It's that life that's peaceful and ideal that's the point. Green perceives Nature--the Plan--as the best road to a life that's happy, harmonious and that best develops the potential of each individual. You don't just accept. You're supposed to use observation and intuition to find your role, not let it be dictated to you, not by authority figures, not even by circumstance and then you're supposed to work hard to improve yourself and grow into that role so you can be happy and in harmony with those around you. And that's what so beautiful about Green as a philosophy.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

So, one the major issues here is that Magic: the Gathering's alignment system is less "alignment" than even the DND system and bothers throwing in personality into the factor.

To be terse:
White = LN, going to either good or evil, natch.
Blue = TN, with the personality of a curious monkey, trickster, information broker, or similar in the mix.
Black = NE or TN, leaning more to chaos than law, but both are sill secondary to the focus of self and thus neutrality
Red = CWhatever
Green = TN in the sense that animals are TN.
WU = Even more LN than White, being less good or evil than either base color.
WB = LE, bleeding into the adjacent squares maybe. It's about the business (and/or family), after all.
WR = Nearly anything, really. You'll probably get a bunch of internal conflict between Law and Chaos, which could eventually land the person in either solid White or Red, but it really just runs the gamut.
WG = Very shamanistic and old guard style. Slight preference for nature, so either near LG or TN.
UB = Non-good, easy, as it's about getting info and power and not letting others have the same.
UR = Mad Scientist, so bunch of Chaos, little sense. Not much else to say.
UG = More "Visionary" Scientist or Evilutionary Biologist. Probably a shade of apathetic neutral or neutral whatever, depending. May be hammed up as Evlulz.
BR = Very easily CE, but could bleed out into the nearby alignments. It's all about the moment, the revelry and the self!
BG = Ranges from crazy old hermetic wizard to Nature above Man style Druids. So, some shade of neutral, probably some evil.
RG = Basically, an animal. Heavy on either some shade of KAY-OHS or TN due to sheer stupidity.

tl;dr: The color wheel is a decent addition, but not a replacement for the default alignment system. One's like the Big Five, the other like the Myers-Briggs test. There is some strong, positive correlating overlap, but they ultimately test different things. In this case, DND does a better job at alignment while the Color Wheel covers personality.

[GnomeWorks]

In D&D terms, Green is roughly equatable to Neutral Good.

To get a useful philosophy out of green, you have to somewhat ignore its enemy status with Blue and instead focus on why it is an enemy of Black. You can work in the anti-Blue stuff later; anti-Black is where you start.

Black is amoral, selfish, paranoid, parasitic, individualistic, and indifferent to the plights of others. Some of those - amoral, selfish, paranoid - are anti-White.

Which leaves parasitism, individualism, and indifference as anti-Green virtues.

If we try to find opposites to those, we arrive at beliefs like: interdependence, empathy, and concern for the community.

These virtues are reflected in Green cards in M:tG, as well. Green has a strong theme of symbiosis, of the greater good, of lending assistance to others. It doesn't look out for itself, it looks out for the whole.

You can then add in Green's anti-Blue virtues, of instinct, tradition, and a feel for nature (which oppose Blue's virtues of reason, progress, and education), which brings you to the idea that there is a grand plan, to trust your instincts rather than to think ahead too much, and a preference for nature over artifice.

[Hyooz]

An eminent possibility; the main traits of Black are (A) selfishness and (B) amorality. Everything else is entirely up for grabs, and the idea of an actively democratic Black (common ground with Red) is not unreasonable at all.

So how do you translate a selfish, amoral person into a Good guy? Seems fairly wedged into the Evil side of things with wanderings into neutrality.

[hamishspence]

Selfish can be converted into "willing to help others (for what they perceive as their own gain)".

Some might (if they find helping others to be pleasurable enough) actually take considerable risks to help them.

Amoral is harder to justify though- some kind of a morality needs to be used for the Good guy to justify not doing Evil acts, though "I personally find them emotionally painful and not pleasurable" might do as an "amoral reason for not behaving immorally".

So, the person who subscribes to a generally Black ethic, might still have some of the traits associated with a Good alignment in D&D.

Specifically "takes risks to help others (strangers)" or "concern for life" or "respect for dignity".

[Owrtho]

Similarly, a black character may be good if, despite being selfish, they feel that it is in their best interests to obey laws or other social conventions as it would cause too much trouble for them if they didn't do so. Thus they may act in the best interests of others as they consider such actions to be in their own best interests.

Also a black characters may view others as means to their own entertainment (like many fey and the like). They may work hard to help and protect those that they find entertaining the way someone would protect a favourite toy or other prized possession. The motivating outlook may seem bad, but the actions it motivates could easily be good depending on who they help.

It is also likely that such a character would not see themselves as evil in either case.

Owrtho

[hamishspence]

Similarly, a black character may be good if, despite being selfish, they feel that it is in their best interests to obey laws or other social conventions as it would cause too much trouble for them if they didn't do so. Thus they may act in the best interests of others as they consider such actions to be in their own best interests.

To qualify as Good (in the D&D sense) they'd probably have to actually help others, even strangers, when there's little to be directly gained by doing so.

Otherwise, they'd probably be closer to Neutral- the PHB does point out that Neutral characters might risk themselves for friends, family, or even country- because they feel a personal attachment to it- but wouldn't normally risk themselves for strangers.

A "hedonist" who finds the sight of other people's happiness and gratitude pleasurable- so they help others at cost to themselves (but from their view, the personal pleasure outweighs the physical cost) might qualify as Good in this sense.

(Conversely, they might fight the sight of others suffering to be emotionally painful- and act to relieve their own emotional pain and maximise own emotional pleasure).

I like the idea of a character who is "self-centred but Good".

[Maho-Tsukai]

Very interesting, and I have a proposition for you. I actually had the idea to organize all the Core Spells(and eventually the others) into the five MTG colors and making a sort of "D20 MTG." Seeing your color based alignment system and interest in having MTG related content translated into D&D I would love it if you could become a partner of sorts in this project. You would have imput and even help out with the actual changes to the game(There are some radical ones planed such as the elimination of certain classes and such.) if you wanted too and I would love your aid in this. I seek to either put it up on this forum when done or turn it into a 100% free PDF that will be released. You will get full credit for whatever you do once a finished product is created(Either a forum post or free pdf.)

However, I understand you may not have the time or wherewithal to do such a thing so whatever your answer is I will respect it. However, I would really like to plan some stuff out with you and have somebody else to work with.

[Glimbur]

I like the idea of a character who is "self-centred but Good".

Good in what sense? Clearly not as in "acts selflessly", a utilitarian approach which only considers your own good is actually egoism which is... questionable; a deontological approach which only considers your own good is either very complicated and far-seeing or also egoism.