Munday: Align the characters
Snake
1) Where does your character fall?
Chaotic neutral with good tendancies. (I agree with where they list him but he definitely has good tendencies)
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Can I go with Carlin’s revised 10 commandments?
The 2 commandments
- Thou shall always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie
- Thou shall try really hard not to kill
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Snake is unshakeable in his beliefs. Honor and such will always, always come before law. He doesn’t believe in good and evil, everything is gray but he himself has the best intentions when it doesn’t interfere with his survival.
Snake’s upbring paired with his government has made him what he is. Snake was born Lawful Good. He was that paladin who’d ride into hell to save the innocents. Being deceived by what was his law; the military or government or both, has pushed him out of being lawful.
Snake has a very strong sense of what is right or wrong for himself. When it comes to crime he tries not to go after the individual unless it is a personal, one on one thing. Snake also tries not to commit human crimes. By that I mean rape and similar crimes that go against personal choice or abuse those who can’t defend themselves. Snake will not attack someone who has not affronted him. He gives a warning and if the line is crossed again there are no third strikes. His lines are very strong and he becomes aggressive toward anyone who crosses them. For example…an adult who has sex with a consensual 16 year old is not a problem….someone raping is instant death. Snake believes in immediate execution for people who cross the line. Turncoats, rapists, people who betray their words…. All go high on his kill list. Liars can too depending on what the lie was.
Snake honestly holds himself to a higher standard than he does others. Would he like to see people think the way he does… yes but he realizes not everyone is strong enough or willing enough to go out where he has. That being said he does WANT everyone to live his standards.
Peninnah/sacredeyes
1) Where does your character fall?
True Neutral with good intentions.
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Does Naively Neutral exist? It should for her.
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Peninnah will not stray provided she realizes she’s straying from it. She has lapses but they do not go far at all. Peninnah was created understanding right and wrong as she does. So I suppose God.. If anything Peninnah’s views have becomes stronger as she gets older. She holds herself to what could be considered impossible standards. She believes that no one has the right to judge others except God himself. She does not believe in denying sanctuary, comfort or aid to any. She is true neutral in that one minute she could be working with lepers and the next telling Lucifer it will be alright and he can fulfill his dreams.
To Peninnah there is no other way to be. She couldn’t dream of being other than what she is. She does have lines. They deal with being inhumane for the most part. However she does understand war and that killing is involved. She has even killed to fulfill her duties. The lines for her are always on a case by case basis. Intention means more than outcome.
Ian Malcolm/malcolmeffect
1) Where does your character fall?
Chaotic Good
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Egotistical Good? Or perhaps Rockstar Good? XD
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Ian has a very strong sense of truth. He believes the truth should be spoke regardless of the outcome. If speaking the truth would bring upon us the end of civilization he might just say it. He risks his career to speak the truth. Ian is also very capable of heroics. He’s not really afraid of jumping off the cliff… he’ll worry about hitting the bottom while he’s in the air.
I have yet to decide where Ian’s views came from. A good portion of his truth seeking is being in the science field. He excels there because he has an OCD like need to find the truth. Ian has definitely become more cynical over time but not overly so. He still believes people have the potential to do the right thing.. however he’s convinced they will always choose money and self benefit over any sort of sense of honor or good.
Ian holds everyone to his standards and of course believes he’s the best at upholding them. He’s egotistical, arrogant, wolfish, a know-it-all but he knows what he’s talking about and when the shit hits the fan he’s not afraid to take the reins and face it. He really has the best intentions and goals despite the rather annoying and excessive ways of going about them.
Rosie Marshall/wholelotofrosie
1) Where does your character fall?
Lawful Good
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Whole Lotta Good?
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Rosie is the law-abiding citizen type. She won’t break the law for the most part aside from little infractions; a run red light or a little DUI. She believes a person has to be good to others in order to receive the same. She really tries not to hate or treat others poorly though she is human and has a temper. She believes in hard work and dedication. She’s pretty strong in her views though she can be temporarily swayed from them she would never do something to the extreme.
Rosie got most of her standards from her mom. She was a hardworking single mom that taught her to be good to people and dream. Rosie has come a long a little. She doesn’t quite believe everyone deserves to be treated as well as she once thought. Though she isn’t mean she does on occasion give out a cold front.
Unless it comes to heinous crimes such as murder, rape, treason, the big crimes Rosie can ignore it. She doesn’t hold others to quite the same standards and perhaps that comes from being in the limelight. She isn’t bothered by drugs and other crimes that are unlawful but not truly detrimental to the masses. She holds herself to a higher standard than she does others.
Walter Bishop/dr_fringe
1) Where does your character fall?
Chaotic Neutral leaning toward good.
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Insane? Is that an alignment. Insane with good tendencies?
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Walter has no direct commitment to his alignment. He definitely believes in do what needs to be done. This doesn’t mean he’s amoral or immoral. He still believes in doing things for the benefit of others. He’s just not caught up in the ethics of how to get it done.
Walter has changed a lot. He used to border on what I might consider neutral evil when it came to his experiments. Redemption and making up for his past drives Walter a lot of the time now. He definitely feels remorse for what he’s done and guilt.
Walter’s lines are very vague. Murder, wanton killing, crimes against humanity type stuff is beyond his scope. Even when he was experimenting on others he never did it with the intention of harming them but making them better. He wants to be good to others even if what he does appears to be the opposite.
Walter doesn’t hold anyone to his standards. I don’t think he wants anyone to follow his example. I think he would be mad at anyone who tried.
Stuntman Mike/autohomicide
1) Where does your character fall?
Neutral Evil
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Smashingly Evil. XD!!!
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Mike believes no one is as good as he is. He believes certain types of people deserve to die and does not turn away from doing it. I don’t think Mike has any lines. There are none. He’ll kill someone and rape them while they are dying. He’ll put on a façade of anything to get his way.
Mike has changed greatly over time. At one point he was probably lawful good or chaotic good but that has slipped away. I can’t even fathom whether Mike even cares what others moral codes are. His mind doesn’t work on comparing others to himself or to anyone else. It’s like there are two baskets labeled “Kill now” and “kill later” in his head as he meets people.
If you're curious about any character I didn't do here feel free to ask.
1) Where does your character fall?
Chaotic neutral with good tendancies. (I agree with where they list him but he definitely has good tendencies)
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Can I go with Carlin’s revised 10 commandments?
The 2 commandments
- Thou shall always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie
- Thou shall try really hard not to kill
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Snake is unshakeable in his beliefs. Honor and such will always, always come before law. He doesn’t believe in good and evil, everything is gray but he himself has the best intentions when it doesn’t interfere with his survival.
Snake’s upbring paired with his government has made him what he is. Snake was born Lawful Good. He was that paladin who’d ride into hell to save the innocents. Being deceived by what was his law; the military or government or both, has pushed him out of being lawful.
Snake has a very strong sense of what is right or wrong for himself. When it comes to crime he tries not to go after the individual unless it is a personal, one on one thing. Snake also tries not to commit human crimes. By that I mean rape and similar crimes that go against personal choice or abuse those who can’t defend themselves. Snake will not attack someone who has not affronted him. He gives a warning and if the line is crossed again there are no third strikes. His lines are very strong and he becomes aggressive toward anyone who crosses them. For example…an adult who has sex with a consensual 16 year old is not a problem….someone raping is instant death. Snake believes in immediate execution for people who cross the line. Turncoats, rapists, people who betray their words…. All go high on his kill list. Liars can too depending on what the lie was.
Snake honestly holds himself to a higher standard than he does others. Would he like to see people think the way he does… yes but he realizes not everyone is strong enough or willing enough to go out where he has. That being said he does WANT everyone to live his standards.
Peninnah/sacredeyes
1) Where does your character fall?
True Neutral with good intentions.
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Does Naively Neutral exist? It should for her.
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Peninnah will not stray provided she realizes she’s straying from it. She has lapses but they do not go far at all. Peninnah was created understanding right and wrong as she does. So I suppose God.. If anything Peninnah’s views have becomes stronger as she gets older. She holds herself to what could be considered impossible standards. She believes that no one has the right to judge others except God himself. She does not believe in denying sanctuary, comfort or aid to any. She is true neutral in that one minute she could be working with lepers and the next telling Lucifer it will be alright and he can fulfill his dreams.
To Peninnah there is no other way to be. She couldn’t dream of being other than what she is. She does have lines. They deal with being inhumane for the most part. However she does understand war and that killing is involved. She has even killed to fulfill her duties. The lines for her are always on a case by case basis. Intention means more than outcome.
Ian Malcolm/malcolmeffect
1) Where does your character fall?
Chaotic Good
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Egotistical Good? Or perhaps Rockstar Good? XD
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Ian has a very strong sense of truth. He believes the truth should be spoke regardless of the outcome. If speaking the truth would bring upon us the end of civilization he might just say it. He risks his career to speak the truth. Ian is also very capable of heroics. He’s not really afraid of jumping off the cliff… he’ll worry about hitting the bottom while he’s in the air.
I have yet to decide where Ian’s views came from. A good portion of his truth seeking is being in the science field. He excels there because he has an OCD like need to find the truth. Ian has definitely become more cynical over time but not overly so. He still believes people have the potential to do the right thing.. however he’s convinced they will always choose money and self benefit over any sort of sense of honor or good.
Ian holds everyone to his standards and of course believes he’s the best at upholding them. He’s egotistical, arrogant, wolfish, a know-it-all but he knows what he’s talking about and when the shit hits the fan he’s not afraid to take the reins and face it. He really has the best intentions and goals despite the rather annoying and excessive ways of going about them.
Rosie Marshall/wholelotofrosie
1) Where does your character fall?
Lawful Good
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Whole Lotta Good?
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Rosie is the law-abiding citizen type. She won’t break the law for the most part aside from little infractions; a run red light or a little DUI. She believes a person has to be good to others in order to receive the same. She really tries not to hate or treat others poorly though she is human and has a temper. She believes in hard work and dedication. She’s pretty strong in her views though she can be temporarily swayed from them she would never do something to the extreme.
Rosie got most of her standards from her mom. She was a hardworking single mom that taught her to be good to people and dream. Rosie has come a long a little. She doesn’t quite believe everyone deserves to be treated as well as she once thought. Though she isn’t mean she does on occasion give out a cold front.
Unless it comes to heinous crimes such as murder, rape, treason, the big crimes Rosie can ignore it. She doesn’t hold others to quite the same standards and perhaps that comes from being in the limelight. She isn’t bothered by drugs and other crimes that are unlawful but not truly detrimental to the masses. She holds herself to a higher standard than she does others.
Walter Bishop/dr_fringe
1) Where does your character fall?
Chaotic Neutral leaning toward good.
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Insane? Is that an alignment. Insane with good tendencies?
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Walter has no direct commitment to his alignment. He definitely believes in do what needs to be done. This doesn’t mean he’s amoral or immoral. He still believes in doing things for the benefit of others. He’s just not caught up in the ethics of how to get it done.
Walter has changed a lot. He used to border on what I might consider neutral evil when it came to his experiments. Redemption and making up for his past drives Walter a lot of the time now. He definitely feels remorse for what he’s done and guilt.
Walter’s lines are very vague. Murder, wanton killing, crimes against humanity type stuff is beyond his scope. Even when he was experimenting on others he never did it with the intention of harming them but making them better. He wants to be good to others even if what he does appears to be the opposite.
Walter doesn’t hold anyone to his standards. I don’t think he wants anyone to follow his example. I think he would be mad at anyone who tried.
Stuntman Mike/autohomicide
1) Where does your character fall?
Neutral Evil
2) Or, because nine categories isn't enough to cover the broad spectrum of human and non-human moralities: come up with a two-word term to describe your character's moral compass, and explain it. Examples might be: 'Lawful Sleazy', 'Chaotic Self-Sufficient', or 'Comedically Evil'.
Smashingly Evil. XD!!!
3) That's the easy version. For bonus points? Expound at length on the character's moral and ethical views. How committed are they to whatever their ethical code (or lack thereof) might be? Who or what contributed to their views on what is right or wrong? Have their views changed as they've gotten older? Where do they draw the line on what is or isn't acceptable-- or do they? Do they hold themselves to a different moral standard than they do those around them, or do they expect everyone to share their own ethical code?
Mike believes no one is as good as he is. He believes certain types of people deserve to die and does not turn away from doing it. I don’t think Mike has any lines. There are none. He’ll kill someone and rape them while they are dying. He’ll put on a façade of anything to get his way.
Mike has changed greatly over time. At one point he was probably lawful good or chaotic good but that has slipped away. I can’t even fathom whether Mike even cares what others moral codes are. His mind doesn’t work on comparing others to himself or to anyone else. It’s like there are two baskets labeled “Kill now” and “kill later” in his head as he meets people.
If you're curious about any character I didn't do here feel free to ask.