Oh, LE, hands down.
"Yes? Why, yes, I do serve Asmodeus. But only in his aspect as an enforcer of contracts and punisher of the guilty, you see. And, why, YES, of course, I would be happy to do a favor for you. You're one of my BEST FRIENDS. And, since you're one of my best friends, I'd like to invite you to meet some other friends of mine ... we help each other once in a while.
"Oh, yes, Iomedae is a fine warrior. Perfect patron, if you ask me. Great person, devoted to Aroden. But, alas, I cannot aspire to emulate her martial prowess. Wouldn't dream of it!! My feeble motions would insult here. But honor ... keeping your word. I do respect that. Very much. And I will always keep my word to you, my friend."
He'll "my friend" you into damnation if you're not careful.
Could be worse. He could Facebook Friend you into damnation . . . .
Alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive. V was very probably CG, and certainly on the Good side of CN, before kidnapping Evey. Then he did that, and was certainly not Good, and IMO on the shady side of CN after that...but saying 'A neutral character wouldn't do that' isn't how Alignment works. I'm pretty sure a Good character did that...and in doing so, was no longer Good.
V is essentially a once-good person who's been driven insane by the torture inflicted upon him, and the events of his liberation. His actions are evil even if his ends are good. Which until the end... they aren't. His ends are personal revenge and he is an evil person until the moment he has his personal epiphany while dying in Evey's arms.
Although one might say that he started his process of redemption when he put the decision of bombing Parliament in Evey's hands instead of his own.
|
V is essentially a once-good person who's been driven insane by the torture inflicted upon him, and the events of his liberation. His actions are evil even if his ends are good. Which until the end... they aren't. His ends are personal revenge and he is an evil person until the moment he has his personal epiphany while dying in Evey's arms.
Although one might say that he started his process of redemption when he put the decision of bombing Parliament in Evey's hands instead of his own.
Barring the torture what does he do that's evil? Stop a rape? Try and start a revolution? Kill people guilty of unthinkable atrocities? Blow up empty buildings?
None of those are Evil acts.
Which would a Lawful Good (doesn't have to be paladin) character have a better time getting along with in their party?
Could the LG and LE strike up a deal based on their word and keep peace between themselves, or could the LG and CG see their attempts to do better and work with each other from that point?
Yeah.... Either COULD get along with each on 'some' level. It all depends on where they find their common ground.
However, when the orphanage starts to burn down, and the CG guy wants to do things HIS way and save the kids... and LE guy is more interested in something else...
LG is going to be more agreeable with the CG any time.
In that same situation though, the LE is liable to follow instructions lock step if he recognises the LG as his superior. The answer to the OP's question is extremely context dependent.
...
Barring the torture what does he do that's evil? Stop a rape? Try and start a revolution? Kill people guilty of unthinkable atrocities? Blow up empty buildings?None of those are Evil acts.
What about sticking masks on innocent hostages in order to make them impersonate him - I haven't seen that movie in a while, but IIRC he gets at least one hostage shot, and it could have easily been more.
V seems to be a "very bad things for the (very questionably) greater good" kind of guy. He probably doesn't enjoy hurting innocents, but if the pay off is enough then it is acceptable.
|
|
What about sticking masks on innocent hostages in order to make them impersonate him - I haven't seen that movie in a while, but IIRC he gets at least one hostage shot, and it could have easily been more.
Their innocence is a bit debatable given that they actively work for the propaganda organ of a totalitarian regime, but yeah, that one's kinda shady, I admit. Not enough to make someone even close to Evil on their own, though, which was my point.
V seems to be a "very bad things for the (very questionably) greater good" kind of guy. He probably doesn't enjoy hurting innocents, but if the pay off is enough then it is acceptable.
I dunno, he seems to sincerely regret hurting innocents, so I dunno about 'acceptable'. I don't argue that he's not willing to do it under extreme enough circumstances, but I would argue that's true of most CG revolutionaries.
...
Barring the torture what does he do that's evil? Stop a rape? Try and start a revolution? Kill people guilty of unthinkable atrocities? Blow up empty buildings?None of those are Evil acts.
What about sticking masks on innocent hostages in order to make them impersonate him - I haven't seen that movie in a while, but IIRC he gets at least one hostage shot, and it could have easily been more.
V seems to be a "very bad things for the (very questionably) greater good" kind of guy. He probably doesn't enjoy hurting innocents, but if the pay off is enough then it is acceptable.
You can't judge V on the conventional alignment graph because he is throughly insane. He really doesn't start to redeem himself until after he faces the consequences of torturing Evey, when he begins to realize that he has become what he hates. His process of redemption begins when he turns over control of the boom train to her, and completes when he dies in her arms.
The question becomes moot once the LE character crosses the line.
The Paladin is obliged to stand against evil actions. As long as the CG character remains GOOD, than the fact that Good DOES have a higher priority than Law in the Paladin code kicks in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we stop calling people insane just because they're bad or complicated or deluded people? Most bad people are complicated and deluded. We shouldn't always fall back on "oh, they were mentally ill" whenever someone does something horrible.
The question becomes moot once the LE character crosses the line.
The Paladin is obliged to stand against evil actions. As long as the CG character remains GOOD, than the fact that Good DOES have a higher priority than Law in the Paladin code kicks in.
Who said anything about paladins? Except for this:
Which would a Lawful Good (doesn't have to be paladin) character
Can we stop calling people insane just because they're bad or complicated or deluded people? Most bad people are complicated and deluded. We shouldn't always fall back on "oh, they were mentally ill" whenever someone does something horrible.
Fact is V was insane, brilliant, but clearly fixated beyond logic. Insane people can be complicated as well. Batman is mad as a hatter, but he knows it.
Wonder Woman on Batman's recruiting the original Robin.
"So you recruited a 10 year old boy looking for revenge for his parents. Why? So he could turn out like you?"
"No... So that he wouldn't."
-Young Justice
Marvel may make better movies, but DC wipes them on the floor when it comes to animation.
Fact is V was insane, brilliant, but clearly fixated beyond logic. Insane people can be complicated as well. Batman is mad as a hatter, but he knows it.
Again, stop using that word.
|
|
Can we stop calling people insane just because they're bad or complicated or deluded people? Most bad people are complicated and deluded. We shouldn't always fall back on "oh, they were mentally ill" whenever someone does something horrible.
This is probably fair as a general rule, but the only one being referred to here as 'insane' is V. And, frankly, speaking as a Psych Major, V is seriously mentally ill. I actually did a report on him in my Abnormal Psychology class detailing his various issues.
They aren't actually mostly why he does most of the things he does, but the fact is that the man is not well. At all.
Fact is V was insane, brilliant, but clearly fixated beyond logic. Insane people can be complicated as well. Batman is mad as a hatter, but he knows it.Again, stop using that word.
So go back to simplistic nine-label war game designations instead?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the only one being referred to here as 'insane' is V
You got ninjaed by being wrong.
Batman and V have both been referred to as "insane" or "mad" in this thread. It's tasteless as well as lazy. Mental illness is not the only reason someone would do the horrible things V or Batman are willing to do. It's not a reason at all. That's just the narrative the media likes to spin these days for pretty much everything. "This guy went and shot a load of people! He must've been crazy!"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the only one being referred to here as 'insane' is VYou got ninjaed by being wrong.
Okay, V and Batman, apparently. Batman isn't exactly a picture of mental health either, so I think my point stands. This is not a generic statement about large numbers of mentally ill people, it's a statement about a specific character who shows all the hallmarks of mental illness (among many other traits).
Batman and V have both been referred to as "insane" or "mad" in this thread. It's tasteless as well as lazy. Mental illness is not the only reason someone would do the horrible things V or Batman are willing to do. It's not a reason at all. That's just the narrative the media likes to spin these days for pretty much everything. "This guy went and shot a load of people! He must've been crazy!"
Again, I don't necessarily disagree with you that this is a thing (though I do have a whole argument about how 'mad' and 'insane' have different definitions other than referring to mental illness, and that decoupling them from mental illness is probably the way to go to deal with the issues in terminology).
But complaining when it's applied to fictional characters who actually display all the symptoms of mental illness is...singularly odd. It's like complaining someone is stereotyping by saying all black people are criminals when they are only referring to a specific fictional character who happens to be both black and a criminal.
It doesn't actually follow logically at all.
personally I find the letter to be quite insane, also anyone running around in a bat costume probably is insane too.
to be clear insanity is defined as
in a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction; seriously mentally ill.
it is not a medical definition and is simply a way for a person who doesn't have accurate knowledge of mental illnesses to express themselves.
to not allow them to use the word, would make it impossible for them to ascribe themselves around mental illness. When people see unexplainable behavior, of course they're going to call them insane, it's probably the best word they have for the described the situation.
I want to pop in and say Batman isn't crazy. You can't judge his actions by what is sensible in our reality, you have to consider the world he lives in.
Magic is real. Aliens are real. One of his best friends is an alien from a dead planet raised in Kansas. He knows the Princess of the Amazons. He knows several space cops that have amazing power from alien space rings that run on Willpower. He knows a Demon bound by Merlin. He has been to Atlantis, and its King is part of his social club.
Dressing up like a bat and saving the world is a rational response to this reality. Especially given that it works, and he has both saved countless lives and resisted temptation to become something terrible many, many times.
I'm aware that he's done crazy stuff, is paranoid, doesn't trust himself to stop killing if he starts, and was obviously heavily affected by the death of his parents, but that doesn't equal crazy to me.
And he's Lawful Good. And would prefer to work with Chaotic Good over Lawful Evil.
And he's Lawful Good. And would prefer to work with Chaotic Good over Lawful Evil.
...And regularly throws down and hates working with other LG characters while having long talks and laughing with a CE character. He is a bit "odd" when it comes to interpersonal relationships.
I want to pop in and say Batman isn't crazy. You can't judge his actions by what is sensible in our reality, you have to consider the world he lives in.
Magic is real. Aliens are real. One of his best friends is an alien from a dead planet raised in Kansas. He knows the Princess of the Amazons. He knows several space cops that have amazing power from alien space rings that run on Willpower. He knows a Demon bound by Merlin. He has been to Atlantis, and its King is part of his social club.
Dressing up like a bat and saving the world is a rational response to this reality. Especially given that it works, and he has both saved countless lives and resisted temptation to become something terrible many, many times.
I'm aware that he's done crazy stuff, is paranoid, doesn't trust himself to stop killing if he starts, and was obviously heavily affected by the death of his parents, but that doesn't equal crazy to me.
And he's Lawful Good. And would prefer to work with Chaotic Good over Lawful Evil.
at no point did any of that elicit wearing a bat outfit. also he's not lawful good, he's batman.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Within his universe, Batman is absolutely not at all irrational for putting on a bat suit and beating up criminals. He's a little irrational (in an obsessive sense) for going up against the same villains as someone like Superman.
He's seriously irrational in several other ways (paranoia, identity issues, profound inability to deal with certain aspects of life...stuff like that) that have nothing to do with his milieu or the fact that he's a superhero.
Isn't the Lawful Good/ChaoticGood dynamic at the center of basically every buddy film ever? You go by the book, but I'm a loose cannon willing to do whatever it takes. We piss each other off, but in the end we not only save the day together, we each learn a valuable lesson.