Forums / Fun! / Just For Fun

Would you be the heroic protagonist who saves everyone from chaos or would you be the villain who caused the turmoil? Maybe, you're the antihero who roams the streets, taking down thugs and other criminals to found out the information you're looking for. Are you the guy who does it for the fame or does it because you think it's right?

Mind you, this is not a super hero thread. This is alignment thread. I don't care what type of super hero you are, I just want to know if you'll become a tyrannical super villain or a man/woman who upholds the law.

I, personally, would be the antihero. I rather bring justice to the enemy than capture and let law enforcement deal with them. I would be the person to judge if they deserve to live or die. To break or to spare.

I'd be the friggin' dinosaur who eats people for no reason and leaves piles of feces on the superhero's doorstep.

I would be chaotically neutral, of course.

I would help save the world!

Or destroy it. Whatever I felt like at the moment.

Do whatever I want.
Help or kill
Depends on the mood.

Lawful Evil

I'm Chaotic Neutral to Neutral Evil.

I either want Anarchial Balance or just do what I please.

I would become a tyrannical super villain who upholds the law.

Most likely the seemingly 'hero' with no real sense of moral.
The kind of dude that would purge the guilty with extreme violence/murder.
And attempt to be pretty darn cool while he/she does it.

I'd be Lawful Good because Paladins kick ass.

I would be like Cole McGrath from Infamous. I would be a person with super powers, but would I use them for good and help out civilians, or would I use them for evil and only help myself?

You are evil for not using Oxford commas.

Karma moment:

Hmm, this guy makes a point. I could accept his constructive criticism and try to fix my mistake next time, or I can fry him with some lightning and shut him up for good.

I'd be neutral because my needs are far more important than others. However, that's not to say I won't help people. If I have no immediate goals and someone needs my help, I'll weigh my options and go with the better choice (whichever benefits me more).

y tho

Lawful good. I shall always help those who need it!

Is this based on what our personality is, or what we would like to be in a certain context? If the former, I'm just neutral good. If the latter, I'd be true neutral, so that I could be the wise old man who provides the protagonist with the big epiphany.

Lawful good. I want my people to be happy, damn it! …I also don't want any sort of chaos or rule-breaking.

Chaotic Evil all the way! I just want to watch the world burn.

Hahahahahahaha!

Lawful Neutral

PRAISE THE SUN!

Chaotic Neutral.
I would help the world,but if it doesn't apply to my commands
I would probably burn it

I don't think you understand what "chaotic" means in this context if that's your reasoning.

True Neutral, possibly Chaotic Neutral.

Can't really decide for myself.

Neutral Good. Possible slight Chaotic bent.

I would always help those in need, but I would rather help those who truly need it than those that already have the means to take care of themselves.

Not to say that I wouldn't put down revolutions or take down those that threaten the peace. But more often than not, I would come down on the side of the average person off the street, rather than the corporate board of directors.

Still, the people come first. That will always be what matters most to me.

All that said, though, I wouldn't hesitate to kill. As long as the threat they pose is great enough or the damage they've already caused is great enough.After all, if you just keep sending the villain to the same prison that he keeps busting out of, have you really solved the problem?

Some villains genuinely deserve death. Hell, for some, death is almost a reward compared to what they did. But I guess my point here is that I would never leave a job half done. Either do it right or don't do it at all.

I am curious where others would place me on the alignment scale, per this description of who I would strive to be.

(God damn it, why is everyone is picking chaotic neutral now).
I might be either chaotic good or chaotic neutral just based on ork concepts.
The said concepts are as followed.

• Making a lot of unnecessary weapon attachments.
• When in a vehicle my best provisional tactic when fighting a enemy vehicle is by ramming them relentlessly.
• Possibly destroy anything around me including my own stuff for fun and so I can just rebuild/fix it again, just so I can do that again some more. (Normally my own things though).
• If you put up a good fight, whether good or bad, I'll fight ya. (But my guilt says to do this to just bad).
• If you put up a good enough fight, I'll let ya live so we can fight another time.
  I am now leaning towards chaotic good it seems.
  But I would love to be chaotic neutral.
  "I just like to have some destructive fun once in a while."

I am the Lawful Neutral.

Note to self: If KYM users get superpowers, then run. Run really far away. Hide. Pray. Burrow underground. Let death by any other means be your way out of life than being killed by them.
 
But seriously, if I must be categorized, then I'd be a lawful good in any sense. Perhaps I would deviate from the law depending upon the law, but I don't trust myself to make decisions that affect so many others.

On the whole, I believe that most laws and governments help to create an organized and civil society among people who are very normal in terms of "powers." If a person with a lot of power begins to act upon his own opinion as opposed to the consensus of the people, then the world becomes his to rule.

I have a bit of a utilitarian sense on whose opinion and values to consider. I value freedom as long as it doesn't harm others. So there's no way I'd let my personal opinions of what is right for people determine how I'd act with superpowers, and I'd certainly never act on those opinions. That's just unfair.

Some people may say that the world is unfair or that if other people had the opportunity that they wouldn't care about being fair, but what other people do doesn't dictate what I choose to do or believe. So, on the whole, I'd default to siding with the law.
 
Now there may be some instances where many believe the law is wrong and that it does not serve to help society or its people. But even In those instances, I would likely try to go through the system to change those laws before I tried to overthrow it. If you're trying to disrupt a system, you're still going to have to deal with the system until it is changed. A lot of people die when order is disrupted, and I'd like to prevent as much death and pain as possible on the way to a better system of governance.

And no matter what, I'd be "good." I don't want to get into a trite conversation of "What is good, really? But as I define it, I'd act for the good of the most people (like Captain Serious) with the state of the people in mind. I'd be more likely to be passive when a person has the means to take care of his or herself or when a person has brought ruin upon his or herself. But even in many instances, I wouldn't let a careless mistake cause the death of a person if I could help it. If there's a drunk driver, he crashes head-on into a sober driver and kills that driver on impact, then I would still try to save the drunken driver.

I would let the system deal out punishment than to deliver it myself or allow the circumstances to play as they will.

So yeah. Very lawful, even when I disagree with the law. Always good.

Neutral Good. Because I don't always agree with the law and Chaotic Good is usually stupid.

AS lawful evil
I am a Tyrant who rules with his own brand of justice. Slaying anyone who opposes me!
best example:
Doctor Doom

Anyways I think I might be Lawful Neutral. I would help others though I might work for the bad guy to pursue some of my interests. I guess wouldn't be on anybodies side, just the choose one that benefits me and the people around me.

Busing out my Dungeons and dragons Core rulebook version 3.5, as 4 does not go as in depth about alignment, as version four only has Lawful good, good, evil, Chaotic evil.

A lawful evil villian methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code and conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises. This reluctance comes partly from his nature and partly because he depends on order to protect himself from those who oppose him on moral grounds. some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood ( but have underlings do it ) or not letting children come to harm ( if it can be helped ) .
They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains. The scheming baron who expands his power and exploits his people is lawful evil.
Lawful evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents methodical, intentional, and frequently Successful evil

Im evil…
This also adds to my character Mex..

I'm neutral good. I fight to protect the world and try to redeem the bad guys whenever possible.

Actually, looking back, I'm more of a Neutral Good.

I don't think people understand "Lawful" and "Chaotic".

Lawful refers to the respect of order and rules, and the moral integrity to follow them as much as possible.

Chaotic is the opposite. The inherent dissatisfaction with rules and law.

Chaotic evil.

Thug life, yo.

The last Alignment test I took said I was Neutral Good. I guess it fits…

Seems like a lot would be some type of neutral. Surprised no one ever wants to be the villain with unlimited wealth and power or the hero who wants to protect everyone, even if it costs their own life.

Neutral Good with slighty Chaotic Good traits.

I don't usually follow order from other people.But I don't break all the rules either.I just try to do what I think is right (even if I act like an hearthless sometime).

Also,I don't normally take a side in a conflict unless it's very necessary (stand up for my friend, or for what I believe to be right, etc).I could be able to take some risk if someone was in real danger of being hurt or death but those circumstances does not happen often.

I do not really believe that someone must be in charge of anything to ensure the good of everyone.I just find this ideology to be pointless.

Lawful good. Though I can't help but think it would be an impossible ideal I'd always strive for, but never reach. Sort of a gradual improvement, hopefully.

Good is dumb, and law is for sissies.

I think I'm Chaotic Good, I do what I please, but I'm a good guy. I hate tyrants and fight for the every man, but at the end of the day it's only because I chose to do it.

Lawful Evil definitely.

Sacrifice.

Damnit, I was gonna say that.

True Neutral.

Chaotic Neutral.
I would destroy what i felt needs destroying and spread chaos but stick to some morals.

YEAH, TRUE NEUTRAL FIVE.

Chaotic Neutral because my mental stability level is below Hell.

neutral good, because im held to it by an otherworldly spirit…..

I've always been a chaotic good or chaotic neutral person. Wanted by the law, looking to help myself, but sometimes reaching out for other less fortunate people.