So Chaotic Good vs Lawful Neutral right?
>>47664577
Basically. Javert is unquestionably Lawful Neutral (perhaps leaning Good, but not quite getting there).
Valjean actually starts Chaotic Neutral (he's only doing what he does to help his family, and then himself, neither of which are Good innately traits). It's only after he both decides to adopt and protect Fantine's child as well as stepping up and admitting him being Prisoner 24601 rather than letting an innocent man go to jail that he really completes the shift to Chaotic Good.
>>47664577
The Friends of the ABC are all Chaotic Good, by the way, while Monsieur and Madame Thénardier are Neutral Evil, perhaps even Chaotic Evil.
Everyone else is some shade of Neutral since they are primarily motivated by personal goals (Éponine joining the Friends to try and get Marius' attention, for example) rather than any kind of greater goal.
The movie wasn't bad. My sole complaint is that I didn't see Javert on the barricade at the end; it's my understanding that he's traditionally supposed to be front and center right next to or at least near to Valjean.
>>47664932
I'd say Valjean shifted to good earlier. He did lift that cart and probably did all sorts of minor acts of goodness during the timeskip.
>>47665045
>He did lift that cart
He's right next to a guy trapped under a card and he has the ability to help. It would be Evil to not lift the cart, but it's hardly Good to help someone right there in front of you who needs it.
Good requires actively going out and seeking Good things to do, not simply doing Good as it happens along.
Mind, I don't necessarily disagree with your overall point, I'm simply going by observed instances of Valjean doing Good. He certainly started his shift to Good after the priest lied for him at the monastery and he had his moment of revelation, but it's completed with his actions that I described.
>alignments
>>47664932
Valjean, once he's in charge of Causette, isn't particularly Chaotic outside of the continued charade about his true identity.
>>47665126
>one line of greentext with no actual argument in it
>>47665126
>>47665126
>muffin
>>47664577
Anon what have we said about trying to apply dnd alignments outside of dnd?
>>47665152
So a demon bent on overthrowing the cosmic order and causing strife and discord for shit and giggles would be Lawful if his method happened to be rigid?
>>47665309
yes.
>>47665309
Yes. But a demon literally can't be rigid. For most creatures, actions dictate alignment, but for Celestials, Fiends, Modrons, and Slaadi, it's the other way around.
>>47665096
In fairness he knows by lifting the cart he is going to "give himself away" so him helping is a pretty big self sacrifice which I think qualifies as good.
![vs-match-judge-claude-frollo-vs-darth-sidious-02f0d006-e213-41c1-84ff-5591074281d9[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/TTnwY8b.jpg "vs-match-judge-claude-frollo-vs-darth-sidious-02f0d006-e213-41c1-84ff-5591074281d9[1].jpg")
What about The hunchback of Notre-Dame (the book)?
>Esmeralda: Chaotic Good
>Archdeacon Frollo: Lawful Neutral, then turning Lawful Evil
>Jehan Frollo: Lawful Good
>Quasimodo: Lawful Good
>Gringoire: True Neutral
>Clopin: Chaotic Neutral
>Phoebus: Chaotic Neutral
Sounds accurate?
>>47665309
>demon wanting to overthrow the cosmic order with a rigid method for the lulz
what would it even look like?
>>47665096
>It would be Evil to not lift the cart
then it HAS to be Good to lift it.
such are the perils of a dualistic ontology.
also, holy shit anon. hope i don't ever get trapped under a cart near you anytime soon. you'd probably hand me a fucking bill for services rendered.
>>47665688
I think Phoebus would go from Lawful at the start to Chaotic at the end.
>>47665152
>your methods
No. Wrong.
>>47665755
Actually no, there is good, evil AND neutral.
Anon is saying that not lifting the cart would be evil (I guess like not helping a person in danger), looking for people in need of cart lifting would be good, just lifting the cart that happen to be near you would be neutral to him.
I mean I disagree but that's not a reason to misrepresent his opinion. I would actually say he has higher standard for good, as he expects people to help people in need when they see them.
>>47665775
What kind of lawful stuff did he accomplish? I admit I don't remember him much from the beginning of the book aside from his liaison with Esmeralda.
>>47665755
No, it's neutral. D&D's Good/Neutral/Evil axis isn't dualistic, it's tripartite. You can tell because there's three parts to it.
>you'd probably hand me a fucking bill for services rendered.
No, however I am a noodle-armed nerd, so the hypothetical cart probably isn't coming off of you no matter how hard I try to lift it.
>>47665837
>I would actually say he has higher standard for good, as he expects people to help people in need when they see them.
Pretty much. To be classified as "Good" a person has to be proactive.
Like, the example I use is
A new disease breaks out in Africa! You're out grocery shopping when you hear the news. There's some people from the Red Cross out front of the grocery store asking for donations to help fight the disease.
>Evil
"A new disease you say? I should totally invest in some pharma companies once I get home, I bet their stock is about to shoot up once a cure is found! Also fuck no you're not getting donations, I need that money to invest in aforementioned pharmas."
OR
"Good - there'll be less niggers in the world this way!"
>Neutral
"Man, that sucks. Once I've bought my groceries I'll probably use my debit card to take out an extra $5 or so do donate. Maybe. If I remember."
OR
"This is what happens when Man plays God like we do every day. I bet the world is just getting back at us for something."
OR
"[animal noises]" (because you are an animal and so cannot form an opinion on the matter)
>Good
"Whelp, I'm going to Africa tomorrow. They could use the volunteers to fight the disease."
OR
"I'll give what I can, though I can't afford much right now. But I'm going to write a letter to my senator, and maybe organize some volunteer rallies or charities."
>>47666202
He was a crusader brought along to help clear out gypsies, the trist with Esmeralda began when he was looking for a way to get gypsies out of a church if I remember properly.
>>47664577
I both love and hate the new insights 4chan gives me on the classics.
Valjean had alignment shift from TN (or possibly CN) towards NG. Saving the man framed for his crimes was less about complying with the law and more about his personal views of being morally right, so not Lawful.
Javert was shining bright epitome LG, he was the paladin falling in face of moral ambiguity.
>>47665688
>>Esmeralda: Chaotic Good
CN, one moment of sympathy doesn't make for alignment shift. Most of her actions are neutral on Good-Evil axis.
>>Quasimodo: Lawful Good
NG, he's a fool (idiot) with heart of gold, but he's not particularly lawful.
agreed with the rest
>>47664577
Valjean is neutral good.
Javert is lawful good.
What about the starship troopers cast?
>rico
>girlfriend
>friend
>asshole
>aliens
>>47668047
>heinlein protagonist
>heinlein love interest
>dead
>doesn't exist
>exterminatus target
That's all you need to know.
To me aligments are more about how you feel about your actions and why you do them.
How you feel about doing good (or evil)?
Good = you are good (you are evil)
Bad = you are bad (you are evil)
Neutral = you are neutral
Why you do it?
Because I have to = you are legal
Because I want to = you are chaotic
Because I need it = you are neutral
So a neutral good character might do something terrible because he needs to and feel like shit (kill the last specimen of its kind because he is starving). Or a legal evil character does something really good and feel like shit for it (donating money to build the walls in his village).
>>47668559
You are completely retarded. Educate yourself.
>>47668559
also to make a distinction:
have to: consequences of inaction result in lose of wealth, status or freedom
need to: consequences of inaction result in lose of health or life
>>47668580
how so? please explain
I try to take advantage of every situation but all within the law. I'm still loyal and friendly to my friends and those that do me good.
What am I?
>>47668674
legal neutral
>>47667223
I disagree helping to move the cart is good, doing nothing is neutral, and actively hindering any help or adding further injury to the man would be evil.
>>47664577
Javert is Lawful Good, it's why he kills himself at the end. He can't reconcile with the fact that his belief in the morality of the law is false, not can he tolerate persecuting an innocent man, so he does away with himself in an act of contrition.
>>47668710
imo it depends on the person
if you are good, not doing anything is evil
if you are neutral, not doing anything is neutral
if you are evil, not doing anything is evil
>>47668707
>legal
You mean lawful?
>>47668674
>but all within the law
letter of law or spirit of law?
>>47668828
You must be 18+ to post on this board.That makes you legal, right?
>>47668828
oh yeah sorry, not used to the d&d terminology anymore, it's been years since I played D&D/PF
>>47665688
The book version of Quasimodo isn't Good, he's a raging misanthrope with a mean side who only shows a soft spot for Esmeralda and does Frollo's will without questions.
>>47665139
>HURRR
>NO ARGUMENT
>DURRR
When will spergs like you finally learn not everything must carry one?
>>47664577
I'd say after adopting Causette, and especially at the end of it, had transitioned straight from CG to NG all the way to LG. At the end of it, he was fully willing to sacrifice his own freedom to both help a man and to see his full sentence to the end as he promised.
In a way, Valjean represents everything Javert claimed to be but failed at fulfilling. Hence the reason he killed himself since he realized that he was wrong and that this one former convict was able to actually be genuinely good in spite of their crappy world
>>47667223
>Evil
>"Good - there'll be less niggers in the world this way!"
choose one
>>47667223
That's a pretty easy to acquire definition of evil.
I'd do the same, and I don't think I'm evil. Not like I spread the disease myself to raise the stocks or something.
>>47664932
Valjean goes from CN to NG.
>>47668830
With companions and NPCs that I like, spirit of law. I will steal, murder, torture, and burn, if I can get away with it, but I have to get something out of it for my personal gain(information for my character's goals, money, repaying a debt I have with someone, etc). I also respect contracts and make the NPC sign them when dealing with me. I distrust everyone and only offer charity work for those that grow on my character or do something that makes me feel I owe them.
Stuff like that.
>>47668710
>doing nothing is neutral
Not helping when you have the capacity to help RIGHT NOW is pretty much the textbook definition of Evil, particularly in the case to the cart since there is essentially zero chance of negative consequences for Valjean: the absolute worst thing that could happen to him (that he knows of) is simply failing to lift the cart despite his efforts (he had no reasonable way of knowing that Javert would connect his prodigious strength to who he used to be).
You don't have to be malignant or malevolent to be Evil, just selfish. "I just plain don't feel like putting in a modicum of effort at no risk to myself" is the fucking textbook definition of selfishness.
>>47668751
I think that Javert *sees* himself as Lawful Good, but his actual alignment definitely appears to be Lawful Neutral. Particularly in the musical, we never really get the sense of him doing Good, simply enforcing the Law.
>>47669040
Shitty bait, mate.
>>47669127
>That's a pretty easy to acquire definition of evil.
Evil is easy. In other news - water = wet.
>I'd do the same, and I don't think I'm evil.
Doesn't mean your not - there's no Detect Alignment in real life, but there isn't any Detect Alignment in Ravenloft, either, yet Alignment still exists. Just because you're not spreading plague yourself doesn't mean you're not evil since spreading plague yourself might not be within your means or abilities. You're still saying, however, that you will turn the suffering of others to your own personal advantage, rather than investing a modicum of your own funds into fighting the plague or, at the least, doing nothing for whatever reason.
Although it's also worth noting there that alignment is the SUM of your actions, not any one individual action. Not giving a dime to a charity becuase you want to spend your money on getting rich instead is pretty Evil (since Evil = Selfish in D&D), but your other actions may mean that you're overall Neutral or even Good.
>>47669127
The evil path is always the easier path
>there is a druid inside a forest
>E: No need to go in, just burn the forest he will come out
>you are trapped in a prison with 2 others, they lift you up to a place where you can easily escape
>"Lift me up bro! The guards are coming"
>E: "Good bye suckers"
>NPC ask you to inform him if you find his wallet
>E finds the wallet, but never returns it
Its always less work to be bad.
Thinking in dualities, fuck triplities. Neutral is the cancer killing D&D
>>47665688
To be honest Frollo is showed to be lawful evil from the start, at least in the movie.
>>47665688
>what would it even look like?
>>47665126
>>47670585
Did nothing wrong.
NOTHING WRONG
O
T
H
I
N
G
W
R
O
N
G
>>47664577
So we're doing musicals now? I guess there were some alignment shifts in Book of Mormon. Elder Price goes from lawful good/stupid to something else all though I'm not quite sure what.
>>47665688
>>Esmeralda: Chaotic Good
Evil in the end if we're going off of "selfish."
