Nale what flavor of evil.

[martianmister]

I still think that Nale could be LE in the same way Roy is LG, by choosing to be lawful.

[hamishspence]

I still think that Nale could be LE in the same way Roy is LG, by choosing to be lawful.

He'd also need to "try to act" Lawful, and lack any disqualifying situation.

Like with Shojo:

. Shojo is not Chaotic Good because he took certain actions within the narrative. He was born Chaotic Good, and as a result of that worldview, took certain actions. Not all of those actions are required to be Chaotic, not all are required to be Good, but we can assume that they more often were than not. That's why I said temperament and self-image matter: that's how he viewed himself, that's how he tried to act, so barring some drastic disqualifying situation like murdering a bunch of people, that's what he is.

[Morty]

IMO it's interesting largely because it's disconnected from Nale's own self-identification.

Yes, I suppose that is an actually interesting aspect of it. Nale calling himself Lawful when he wasn't might have been along the same lines as considering himself a mastermind when he really wasn't. The difference, though, is that the vast gulf between Nale's self-image and the results of his actions are plain to see. The difference between Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil is something that we can see is hard for more than two people to agree on.

[Lacuna Caster]

Well I imagine it depends on what kind of laws we're talking about. Lawful good societies with lawful good laws will be followed happily by everyone because hey, this is a pretty good life they've got... ...A lawful evil society would be the kind to have the rules that everyone follows out of fear of being punished over really believing in their society's rules.

Yeah, but those are both motivated by a personal cost-benefit analysis- it's just the LG society prefers using the carrot and LE society prefers using the stick.

I'll admit I'm unclear on what a 'chaotic society' is supposed to look like under these conditions, really- it seems like that to the extent you have people with heterogeneous beliefs, agendas, ethics and values that don't acknowledge central authorities or institutions, you can't really speak of any cohesive society existing. You'd have a dozen tribal factions forming their own mini-societies instead. Matter of degree, I suppose?

[Ruck]

Yes, I suppose that is an actually interesting aspect of it. Nale calling himself Lawful when he wasn't might have been along the same lines as considering himself a mastermind when he really wasn't. The difference, though, is that the vast gulf between Nale's self-image and the results of his actions are plain to see. The difference between Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil is something that we can see is hard for more than two people to agree on.

Well, the way I'd put it is that that requires the starting assumption that he's Lawful Evil because he says so (which I guess is how his afterlife determination would start, but bear with me). I think if you just look at the sum totals of his actions without regard to any declared alignment, and try to come up with it independently, he looks a lot closer to Neutral or even Chaotic Evil than Lawful. (I don't think "single-minded obsession" is a specifically Lawful trait, anyway.)

In that sense, my questioning is for much the same reason I doubt Eugene is Lawful Good; he may have declared himself so, but the person we've seen depicted in the comic I would judge as True Neutral.

[skaddix]

Well both Nale and Elan are what the parent that raised them is which suggest Nurture.

I think Nale is interesting cause he says he is Lawful Evil but he is a guy who is not running the system and wants power to run the system and doesn't want to play the game slowly.

[hamishspence]

Well both Nale and Elan are what the parent that raised them is which suggest Nurture.

With some personality traits from the opposite parent:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0725.html

Perhaps a hint that they're not identical twins, but near-identical fraternal twins?

The Giant did say at the time that they were identical though:

If he can't Sneak Attack, it would be close. After all, he has the same Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution as Elan, because they are identical twins.

Perhaps a retcon? Or simply Rule of Funny when it comes to "things that can be inherited"?

[MReav]

With some personality traits from the opposite parent:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0725.html

Perhaps a hint that they're not identical twins, but near-identical fraternal twins?

The Giant did say at the time that they were identical though:



Perhaps a retcon? Or simply Rule of Funny when it comes to "things that can be inherited"?

I'm guessing only physical qualities count for the purposes of indenticality.

Otherwise Elan would be evil or Nale would be good.

[hamishspence]

The implication is that some mental traits can be inherited (like a love of overly elaborate plans) - and that it's not upbringing (Nale has it despite not being raised by his mother, Elan does not have it despite being raised by her).

[Resileaf]

The implication is that some mental traits can be inherited (like a love of overly elaborate plans) - and that it's not upbringing (Nale has it despite not being raised by his mother, Elan does not have it despite being raised by her).

Does he not?

[hamishspence]

Fair enough. Nale might even qualify as having the same "love of the dramatic" even if he displays it in a different way from his father and Elan.

"Outlook" (alignment) being upbringing, and everything else V mentions being inherited?

[Kish]

With some personality traits from the opposite parent:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0725.html

Perhaps a hint that they're not identical twins, but near-identical fraternal twins?

The Giant did say at the time that they were identical though:



Perhaps a retcon? Or simply Rule of Funny when it comes to "things that can be inherited"?

He specifically said that them being identical twins meant they had the same three physical ability scores and nothing about any of their mental scores. I'm not seeing how that relates at all to them being different in personality traits--beyond that it establishes that Rich is not writing the kind of genetic determinism Lacuna thinks he should be, but surely it was established a very long time ago that Rich is not writing the comic Lacuna wants.

[Aquillion]

Yes, I suppose that is an actually interesting aspect of it. Nale calling himself Lawful when he wasn't might have been along the same lines as considering himself a mastermind when he really wasn't. The difference, though, is that the vast gulf between Nale's self-image and the results of his actions are plain to see. The difference between Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil is something that we can see is hard for more than two people to agree on.

I still like my theory that Nale was turned Chaotic (or at least Neutral) by Sabine's CE influence and didn't realize it.

[Emanick]

I still like my theory that Nale was turned Chaotic (or at least Neutral) by Sabine's CE influence and didn't realize it.

I like it too. I'm still not positive that Nale has left the LE building, but it's a convincing argument and I essentially buy it.

[Lacuna Caster]

I still like my theory that Nale was turned Chaotic (or at least Neutral) by Sabine's CE influence and didn't realize it.

I also like this idea.

[masamune1]

My two cents- it occurred to me a while back that Chaotic characters of any moral alignment, perhaps especially Chaotic Evil, might be disproportionately home to characters to claim to belong to a different alignment including a Lawful one, simply by virtue of them being Chaotic.

Whether this is due to Chaotic characters tending to be less-than-self-aware (since they tend to follow their feelings rather than scrutinise them), or because they take a "screw the rules- I can be whatever alignment I want!", or because they've talked themselves into it through convoluted logic...it all makes sense.

I'll also add that canonically in D & D, there are plenty of Chaotic Evil demon lords and deities who are established as having orderly realms, societies and cults- Lolth (CE) vs her cult (LE) for example- so having LE aspirations alone does not a LE make. In fact it's probably a subset of CE characters who want LE worlds to compensate for the deficiencies of their Chaotic nature- e.g. if they can't control their murderous temper-tantrums (or don't really want to), they can at least make others follow strict rules about how to tip-toe around them. Kind of like a compulsive arsonist who thinks that the REAL problem is that everything isn't fireproof.

Chaotic Evil characters feel like they should get whatever the hell they want, so if they want a Lawful Evil empire or organization then those who follow them better start acting Lawful Evil and who cares if they themselves don't?

For the other side, a common example of Lawful Evil that the guides give is a crime boss who follows a strict code about "not hurting children" or "not telling lies" etc., so if a crime boss can be Lawful Evil despite by definition breaking the law, then breaking ro not breaking the law shouldn't be that big of a deal.

[Synesthesy]

I still think that your aligment is more about what you are then what you do.

This is why Vaarsuvius counts as True Neutral despite genocide or Roy counts as lawfull despite breaking the laws (for example, trying to evade from LG prisons in Azure City) or thinking about letting Elan in the bandits' camp.

So Nale is Lawfull Evil even if sometimes he failed to be lawful.

[KorvinStarmast]

So Nale is Lawfull Evil even if sometimes he failed to be lawful.

If there is ever a cut scene with a view on Nale in the afterlife, it will be interesting to see where he is now. I get the idea that if she wants to, Sabine can travel in the infernal realms and visit him.

Right?

[Ruck]

I still think that your aligment is more about what you are then what you do.

This is why Vaarsuvius counts as True Neutral despite genocide or Roy counts as lawfull despite breaking the laws (for example, trying to evade from LG prisons in Azure City) or thinking about letting Elan in the bandits' camp.

So Nale is Lawfull Evil even if sometimes he failed to be lawful.

I think it's a fallacy to separate what we are from what we do. That said, as I've said before, in a story like this alignment can function as both descriptive and prescriptive, and we need to be clear which one we mean. Vaarsuvius is True Neutral from a prescriptive standpoint, i.e. The Giant tries to write V as someone with that perspective, which is why V is horrified to learn the true extent of the damage caused by Familicide (a character with a more Evil perspective simply wouldn't care). But that doesn't mean when V is judged, they'll go to the TN afterlife; it may be impossible to make up for the scope of evil and destruction of Familicide in a way that balances the scales.

(And as far as Roy goes, being Lawful Good doesn't mean following all of the laws, all of the time. It means he tries to uphold both Law and Good, and he fits better into that category than any other. Elan and the bandits is a particularly odd example to cite given that it was a strongly enough Chaotic Evil action that, by word of the deva, if he hadn't rectified it, he would have gotten the boot from both Lawful and Good afterlives.)

[Emanick]

If there is ever a cut scene with a view on Nale in the afterlife, it will be interesting to see where he is now. I get the idea that if she wants to, Sabine can travel in the infernal realms and visit him.

Right?

Maybe, maybe not. We know inter-fiend rivalry exists, so demons and devils don't exactly trust one another - one IFCC member even mentions the Blood War, so I guess they fight each other at least some of the time. As such, there may be defenses up which prevent fiends from just Plane Shifting into planes that they are opposed to. Wouldn't surprise me, anyway.

[KorvinStarmast]

Maybe, maybe not. We know inter-fiend rivalry exists, so demons and devils don't exactly trust one another - one IFCC member even mentions the Blood War, so I guess they fight each other at least some of the time. As such, there may be defenses up which prevent fiends from just Plane Shifting into planes that they are opposed to. Wouldn't surprise me, anyway.

Yeah, the three: Cedric, Nero, and Lee are innovators rather than typical cases for fiends of the usual three alignment partners to Evil.

I think Sabine was originally working for Lee, which suggests to me that she would easily access the LE planes, so if Nale ended up there it would be an easy visit.

[Synesthesy]

I think it's a fallacy to separate what we are from what we do. That said, as I've said before, in a story like this alignment can function as both descriptive and prescriptive, and we need to be clear which one we mean. Vaarsuvius is True Neutral from a prescriptive standpoint, i.e. The Giant tries to write V as someone with that perspective, which is why V is horrified to learn the true extent of the damage caused by Familicide (a character with a more Evil perspective simply wouldn't care). But that doesn't mean when V is judged, they'll go to the TN afterlife; it may be impossible to make up for the scope of evil and destruction of Familicide in a way that balances the scales.

Aligments and afterlives are different things, and they shouldn't be confused. They both are absolute things: the first can be easily discovered with the right spell, while the other must wait until you die.

V is true neutral. Period. Author said that, and the Author himself cannot be wrong. There is no needing to argue. We argue about Nale only because there is no word of Author saying his aligment nor anyone has never casted something to detect it on strips.

You can argue that V is damned, that if V dies now, she will go to Neutral Evil afterlife. The same you can argue that Nale will go to NE or CE afterlife, who knows.

However, you must explain someway why V is true neutral despite having killed more people than every other character in the story. Then the only reasonable answer is that aligment are not about what you did, but they are about what you are and what you want to do.

[KorvinStarmast]

However, you must explain someway why V is true neutral despite having killed more people than every other character in the story. Then the only reasonable answer is that aligment are not about what you did, but they are about what you are and what you want to do.

At the end of Don't Split the Party, the Deva's tell Roy about V's descent into evil (or toward evil?) or try to, and he's not paying attention since he is so focused on getting back and has become so used to dealing with Belkar as his Evil party member.

[Synesthesy]

At the end of Don't Split the Party, the Deva's tell Roy about V's descent into evil (or toward evil?) or try to, and he's not paying attention since he is so focused on getting back and has become so used to dealing with Belkar as his Evil party member.

Again, there isn't any reason to discuss about aligments. The Giant, who is some kind of God for the Ootsverse, said that V is True Neutral.

For this to not contradict what the Deva said, what V feels, and the common reason saying that genocide is always very evil, we must admit that aligment AND the place you'll deserve after your death may be different things.
This is because in dnd aligment are metaphysical concept and not just some kind of internal rule you can follow or not. You must have an aligment out of 9 possibility, and changing your aligment is hard and slow (see Belkar).

Did I show my point? I don't want to persuade anyone, even if for me it's obvious this way... And I don't want that a thread about Nale become a thread about V :P

However I say that if V can cast a familicide being true neutral (and being damned in the lower planes), Nale can act chaotic sometime and still be damned in the Lawfull Evil afterlife.

[Ruck]

Aligments and afterlives are different things, and they shouldn't be confused. They both are absolute things: the first can be easily discovered with the right spell, while the other must wait until you die.

Afterlife is determined by alignment, though.

However, you must explain someway why V is true neutral despite having killed more people than every other character in the story. Then the only reasonable answer is that aligment are not about what you did, but they are about what you are and what you want to do.

"The only reasonable argument"? How about the one I literally said, that we can use the term "alignment" in both a descriptive and prescriptive sense? The Giant actually said that when he describes a character's alignment, he's talking about the latter:

So when I say, "This character has this alignment," just read it as, "This character was written with this point of view in mind, and if you could see their entire life rather than this small sliver, that would be more obvious."

Now, I suppose you could argue that's the only thing alignment means, but given that a character's actions in D&D can change their alignment, it seems like it can be used in both senses, as I described.

[Synesthesy]

Afterlife is determined by alignment, though.



"The only reasonable argument"? How about the one I literally said, that we can use the term "alignment" in both a descriptive and prescriptive sense? The Giant actually said that when he describes a character's alignment, he's talking about the latter:



Now, I suppose you could argue that's the only thing alignment means, but given that a character's actions in D&D can change their alignment, it seems like it can be used in both senses, as I described.

This is something I dislike about dnd aligment system. However, I agree with you, and with the Giant of course. And I think I agree with you too.
I just say that the descriptive and prescriptive sense of aligment may or may not be the same thing. For V is not the same. Maybe for Nale is not the same. For Elan, for example, it is the same.

For Belkar is the opposite of V and/or Nale. V did not change, but she did something that is not true neutral compatible. Belkar is chaning, but still has done too much not to be considered evil (at least, for now).

Those are big point in this story, IMHO.

[Ruck]

This is something I dislike about dnd aligment system. However, I agree with you, and with the Giant of course. And I think I agree with you too.
I just say that the descriptive and prescriptive sense of aligment may or may not be the same thing. For V is not the same. Maybe for Nale is not the same. For Elan, for example, it is the same.

For Belkar is the opposite of V and/or Nale. V did not change, but she did something that is not true neutral compatible. Belkar is chaning, but still has done too much not to be considered evil (at least, for now).

Those are big point in this story, IMHO.

Right, I'd agree with the bolded. One describes a character's viewpoint; the other describes the sum total of their actions. (Nale is an interesting case because I don't think Lawful Evil fits either-- it's a self-deception on his part.)