What's The Punisher's alignment, /tg/?
>>47710528
alignment is for gaylords, i decide my alignment by writing options on several dreidels and spinning them all at once while shouting and stomping my foot and it means more than the alignment chart
>>47710546
>alignment is for gaylords
Edgy
>>47710565
just another one of the options i write on my several dreidels that i am currently spinning to decide what to write down for this character who is going to be more nuanced than two words could ever describe
>>47710528
Frankotic Frankful
>>47710528
Lawful evil.
>>47710528
True neutral?
I dont know, I never really understand alignments really well.
Lawful Good, fuck anyone that thinks otherwise
Paladium had arguably the worst alignments
>>47710528
It should be Neutral Evil since he only wants an excuse to kill for funsies, but as some in the past have suggested with his real super power likely making everybody retroactively a criminal after he murders them (like drugs magically appearing on them and the like) he'd be lawful neutral through cosmic shenanigans if that's true.
>>47710528
Lawful Neutral.
>Lawful
He doesn't care about the laws, he cares when a person does something that he thinks is bad
>>47710584
With a healthy dose of HATE
>>47710781
He'd still be neutral evil because because said cosmic shenanigans wouldn't change Frank himself.
>>47710528
>vigilante
>has no qualms about torture and murder
>sees world in terms of black and white
>obsessed with vengeance
>doesn't even care about the consequences or results of his actions
Chaotic Neutral
This character is not that deep or complex
>>47710528
shooty edgy
>>47710931
>literally powered by hate
>most people here are calling him neutral or good
>>47711039
A righteous hate is a good thing
the duck had to go
The Punisher is one character that show the flaws of the alignment system very clearly
There's arguments to be made for him being almost any alignment and he's little but a power fantasy
>>47710528
Chaotic Evil
>>47711065
>They had to go
Fuck, I actually remember that
>>47711110
I think there is an argument to be made for this. In some ways, he is profoundly selfish. However he's also a master tactician and shows careful planning and restraint. That's not something I would normally associate with chaotic evil alignment. I think you could make a good argument for it though.
>>47711164
Chaotic means outside of the law, not that you have ADHD.
>>47710528
Kinda a cunt but a good cunt.
Like, its well washed but man did they fuck up the shave and now it feels like thousand needles on yo dick/face.
That's the punisher.
>>47711192
Yeah, but they're also unpredictable. I'd say he's closer to neutral evil than chaotic evil.
>>47710931
Neutral Violent.
>>47711258
CE are sometimes unpredictable, sure, but he isn't evil per se. I would venture more towards CN, because he operates outside the law, in an attempt to bring justice upon the criminals. While bringing said justice, he has no qualms about doing some crazy shit, but at the end of the day everything he does is for the betterment of the innocents.
>>47710546
>>47711327
Look at the OP's image. The Punisher doesn't do it for innocent people, he does it for himself. Like I said, you can make a good argument that he's chaotic evil. I'm not sure that he's a character I would associate with that alignment, personally.
>>47710997
Has a code he follows. Can't be CN.
>>47711362
Well he sure as shit isn't lawful. His entire purpose is murdering people without a trial.
Frank Castle
>>47710736
This.
>>47711402
Frank Fort
>>47710528
Lawful Evil
>>47710781
He has been show to make some collateral victims on at least two occasions, which would impl that the rest of the people he killed were actually criminals.
>>47711362
Everyone has a code he follows.
>>47711473
Frank Bunker
>>47711357
>The Punisher doesn't do it for innocent people, he does it for himself. Like I said, you can make a good argument that he's chaotic evil.
He has a strict code that revolves around punishing criminals for their crimes, and his whole life is dedicated to that out of revenge for something that happened to him. That's not chaotic evil.
Frank is lawful, he follows a natural law and does so to an extreme.
He's not chaotic, what he does may seem like chaos, but the very idea of an innocent getting caught in a crossfire is enough for him to change plans, and if you were to argue that a sacrifice was worth the greater good, he'd kill you.
He's obviously not neutral, as he's actively engaged in fighting evil, and the act of fighting evil for no reward is inherently good.
He's possibly a neutral good, since his views cannot be swayed by any sort of pandering.
Frank is either the ultimate lawful good, or neutral good. Depends on what "law" we're talking about
>>47711529
>Everyone has a code he follows.
Not me, I just get high and improvise.
>>47711515
Lawful evil people would be organized criminals and corrupt politicians, the kinds of people he is dedicated to killing.
>>47711362
I'd say his code makes him neutral. He doesn't kill criminals for justice, he kills them for vengeance. He doesn't care about making the world a better place, or bringing people to justice or what is right or wrong, he just wants to murder people he hates. That makes him more chaotic, in my opinion.
>>47711613
>He doesn't kill criminals for justice, he kills them for vengeance
One in the same. When he kills a criminal instead of bringing him in, he's serving justice in his eyes, as the court system would likely give them a slap on the wrist (and at any length wouldn't slaughter them, which is what he sees as justice)
>>47711588
that's still a set of values.
>step 1: get high
>step 2: improvise
It's more complex than Fronk's code, that can be reduced to "step 1: kill baddies".
>>47710528
Neutral Frank.
>>47710528
Lawful good.
You can say whatever you want, fighting evil is good. In the great pictures he saved countless innocent lives.
>>47710546
>gaylords
Are you 11?
>>47711669
That's the thing though, it's not about justice. He knows that killing them doesn't solve societies problems, but he doesn't care. He doesn't care about making the world a safer or better place. It's about revenge for what happened to his family. Everything is just about murdering lawbreakers to him.
Unironically, he's Chaotic Good.
Seeking the vehement and total destruction of those who are evil, by whatever means necessary, is perfectly within the domains of Chaotic Good.
Though, if he utilizes torture, he may fall to Chaotic Neutral (as is appropriate for someone who uses Evil means for Good ends). Murder is ultimately a Neutral act, but torment for the sake of torment is unequivocally Evil.
Frank's code and goals are very similar to the Mercykillers faction in Planescape, and Mercykillers are always Lawful Neutral. Thus it stands to reason that Frank is Lawful Neutral as well.
>>47711362
Personal codes of conduct don't make somebody Lawful or Chaotic. The reason someone follows a personal code of conduct makes somebody Lawful or Chaotic.
If they follow that code because it is just and correct, then they are lawful. If they follow that code only because they fear the consequences of breaking it (like Batman), then they are chaotic.
>>47711745
The Punisher employs murder, kidnapping, extortion, coercion, threats of violence, and torture in his war on crime.
>>47711700
Yes, but he doesn't fight evil within the confines of the law. Using a machine gun to mow down a drug cartel in the middle of a city isn't legal, unless you have a shit ton of paperwork, and can somehow claim self-defense, and even then he's more than likely looking at jail for using the machine gun in the middle of a city. Also, is torture a good act? No, it is not.
>>47711791
>murder,
Neutral
>kidnapping
Chaotic
>extortion
Vaguely Evil
>coercion, threats of violence
Chaotic in the extreme, vaguely Evil
>torture
Exceedingly Evil
>war on crime
Exceedingly Good
>>47711812
But do the ends justify the means to a good character?
>>47711744
Sounds like the ultimate good. It's a never ending fight against evil, that he'll fight until he dies, and even then he'll never get anything out of it.
>>47711745
>>47711791
Yet Frank would never allow harm to befall an innocent. He'd never torture someone innocent in order to get at the evil, even if it would work.
As for his methods, they may be unorthodox, but they're hardly evil, and it's debatable whether or not he gets some kind of thrill out of it. Usually he's only torturing hardass evildoers in order to get info so he can kill more hardass evildoers. I'm not a huge fan, but I've never seen him torture someone when a bullet could have sufficed.
>>47711812
>murder
Evil
>kidnapping
Evil
>extortion
Evil
>coercion, threats of violence
Evil
>torture
Evil
>war on crime
Well-intentioned evil
>>47711863
Ends and means must be in balance for someone to be truly Good or Evil. There's a reason most mortals end up Neutral.
Performing Good ends with Evil means causes your soul to be neither.
>>47711806
"Lawful" does NOT mean following the local laws, and never has. He does, however, follow a moderately strict code of conduct - only kill evil people, make sure no innocents get hurt, that sort of thing. Also I have no idea where you're pulling this torture thing, 99% of the time he just kills people dead.
>>47711898
Actually murdering people who are evil and actively engaging in acts harmful to other people such as violent/organized crime is a Good act. "Murder" just means it's illegal, it doesn't change whether it's Good or Evil.
>>47711898
No.
To explain it with far more depth:
>Murder
Depends entirely on who or what you are murdering and why. May be in tune with or in defiance of the laws of gods and men.
>kidnapping
Depends entirely on who or what you are kidnapping and why, but usually in defiance of the laws of gods and men.
>extortion
Typically an excess of force, and therefore tinges on Evil. But ultimately threats to manipulate another are not extremely Evil.
>coercion, threats of violence
Flagrantly defy all conventions of society and the structure by which people are expected to interact with each other. Supremely Chaotic, and often in excess of justifiable force, leaning towards Evil.
>Torture
Torment for torment's sake results in no gain but suffering, and its performance drags the world towards Hell. Even torturing people who "deserve it" is, at its utmost pinnacle, Lawful Evil.
>War on Crime
Transiently Lawful, but ultimately Good, as it is for the protection and benefit of all.
>>47711898
Doesnt evil inflicted upon evil equate good? Sort of like multiplying negatives
>>47711906
The Punisher is a remorseless, one man killing machine obsessed with murdering people he deems evil. He doesn't care about fairness, justice or whats right or wrong.
>>47711966
>>47711969
Objectively wrong. Killing someone is murder. Murder is evil.
Take your murderhobo tendencies back to 3.5
>>47711906
Following a code of conduct doesn't make you Lawful in and of itself. The reasons why you follow a code of conduct can make you Lawful.
People forget that intention does have meaning in D&D's paradigm. That meaning is not always sufficient to justify one's alignment, but it sometimes is. The reasons why you do things shift some people from Evil to Neutral. (People often forget Neutral exists sometimes as well, it seems.)
>>47711970
Short answer? Depends. If you're killing people for selfish reasons, it's still Evil whatever their alignment. If you're killing Evil people because you're on a crusade against Evil, it's Good. On the other hand, some things like torture are always evil, no exceptions.
>>47710528
His alignment is Frank Castle
>>47711999
>Take your murderhobo tendencies back to 3.5
Actually you're equally wrong regardless of the edition we're talking about.
>>47711999
Just because you say so doesn't make it true.
Gary Gygax gave his full disclosure on this subject; the execution of wrongdoers is perfectly Lawful and Good. Good is not omnibenevolent. Good is willing to make sacrifices and give up on lost cases. Mercy is not always Good, nor is it the height of Good that all Good must aspire to. Some things cannot be forgiven.
>>47711906
>Also I have no idea where you're pulling this torture thing, 99% of the time he just kills people dead
Are you kidding? The Punisher holds some kind of world record for number of people tortured.
>>47712020
>some things like torture are always evil, no exceptions.
I'd say that depends on why you're torturing, who you're torturing, and to what end.
If you're torturing random people because it gets you off, that's evil.
If you're torturing a bad guy to get critical info, then cease torturing them afterwards (probably to kill them) then it's debatable.
>>47712021
>Where do you live
>On the edge
10/10
>>47710736
I bet you think Rorschach is Lawful Good as well you fucking edgelord.
>>47710528
Punisher is a good man.
>>47712043
>Mercy is not always Good, nor is it the height of Good that all Good must aspire to.
Showing mercy is MORE good than just executing people 9/10 times, but that doesn't mean killing evildoers is NOT good.
>>47712071
Nope.
D&D is ironclad in this. If you need to get critical information from a person, Charm them or Dominate them. Detect Thoughts or pin them in a Zone of Truth and Command them to answer. Cast Discern Lies and Intimidate them if you absolutely must, but torture is an act of evil.
>>47712071
Torture has never been a reliable way of getting good information out of people, and if you have magics to make it into one, you can also get the information out without emplying it.
>>47711039
frank castle and punisher 2099 are very different people
>>47711899
Actually, it means you'll end in Baator.
>>47712071
Torture will also get you in Baator, no matter how noble your ends, or how many orphans you saved in you other adventures.
>>47712215
You don't have to be Evil to end in Baator, you just have to be judged as worthy of punishment by the Pact Primeval.
>>47712227
>you just have to be judged as worthy of punishment by the Pact Primeval.
Sounds like a bunch of Frank Castles pulling a Frank on old Frank.
And where does this pact sit on the alignment chart?
Lawful neutral.
He kills people, which relates to his "goodness", however, every character in D&D regardless of alignment kills stuff so we can't take that as an overall indication of his lawfulness. He obeys his own set of laws in opposition to the established set of laws and does so for the purpose of being good, while incidentally doing bad things. I'd still say lawful neutral.
>>47712166
How so?
>>47712267
That sounds completely reasonable and logical. You've convinced me.
>>47712263
The Pact Primeval rests precariously between Lawful Neutral and Lawful Evil. It is the very essence of the laws of retribution and punishment.
However, nothing within the Pact proclaims the punishers must not encourage acts which must be punished, inviting gainless retribution by corrupting the innocent. It is through this loophole that Asmodeus' grand plan was enacted.
Does the end justify the means regarding aligment? (e.g. killing an innocent child to save the world) It must be, or else paladins would be able to be baited into failing very easily and that is absolutely retarded.
If so, intent matters more than actions.
If so, he must not be Good or Lawful, because he kills evil people because he hates them, not because he wants to uphold Law or Good.
I'm extremely confused now.
>>47712334
Intent and actions both matter in regards to alignment.
Ends can indeed justify the means, and also not sufficiently justify the means. It is a case-by-case situation.
Depends on the writer, the story and whether he's in his own book or in someone else's. In his own books, he tends to be LN or LG. If he's written in someone else's book, he tends to lean heavily towards evil.
>>47712334
If you're Good, ends absolutely do NOT justify the means. Killing an innocent child is an evil act no matter WHY you do it, and any paladin doing it absolutely should fall.
>>47712277
They're literally different people for one thing, Punisher 2099 is a man named Jake Gallows and lives in a timeline a hundred years ahead of present day marvel. Or did, God knows what's going on with that right now.
Also, are we doing Punisher Max Frank, or mainstream continuity Frank? Because one of them is highly skilled but otherwise normal very,very dedicated murderer while the other was an angel at one point.
>>47712112
What about torturing people as punishment for a crime?
>>47711898
>police are well-intentioned evil
Ow
the edge
>>47712403
Lawful Evil. Even Saint Cuthbert will grit his teeth and permit it.
>>47712386
>If you're Good, ends absolutely do NOT justify the means. Killing an innocent child is an evil act no matter WHY you do it, and any paladin doing it absolutely should fall.
See, no.
Killing an innocent child because they've become the living portal through which Tharizdun, god of eternal darkness, will soon pour through and begin the destruction of all things positive in the great wheel, would be a perfectly justifiable reason for a paladin.
Only the most draconian DM would not allow a minor Evil aspect of the act to outweigh the corresponding tremendously Good aspect.
>>47712541 (me)
>most draconian DM would not allow
would allow*
fucking accidental self contradiction
(deleting posts takes too much time and somebody would just post a "gotcha!" anyway)
>>47712423
Most medieval punishments involved public displays of torture. Stocks, ordeal by fire, and in the case of treason things like being hung drawn and quartered.
Is any king or government that employs these punishments considered evil?
>>47712386
>"your end is nigh, Dabilch the Vile! I will slay you and put an end to your plans to destroy the world."
>"ha-ha, you truly are a fool, Sir Loin! The only way to stop my plan is to kill this child, who is also my phylactery!"
>"ah shit well nevermind just kill me now"
>everyone dies
>paladin goes to his god
>"nigga what the fuck"
>"hey you're the one who gave me my code, dont get mad when I don't break it"
>>47712586
You have to understand that one Evil act does not cause an alignment shift.
If you perform great acts of Evil in tune with great acts of Good then you are in the equilibrium of Neutral. Most mortals are Neutral, and in this case, most human societies throughout history are Lawful Neutral.
Hell, one flavor of True Neutral is explicitly "will act against anyone and perform all the Good/Law/Chaos/Evil in the world so as to bring balance".
>>47711539
Frank Redoubt
>>47712586
The Punisher doesn't live in the wild west, though. There is a system of justice in place that doesn't use torture, he just chooses to ignore it.
>>47712101
He's not?
>>47712541
I'd say putting a player in that position in the first place is shitty GMing
>>47712414
>still thinks police are good
Hush, child, grown-ups are talking.
>>47712725
Well, naturally. Paladins and their whole "one evil act = FALL" rule is shit game design in the first place, and I'm glad 4E and 5E did away with it.
>>47712267
>however, every character in D&D regardless of alignment kills stuff
Yes, but most D&D characters kill when attacked. They don't go out seeking people to kill. Say you have a quest to go retrieve a thing. Your whole mission is to get the thing, and bring it back. Now, if you can get the thing without fighting, that's the way you are going to do it. However, the thing is guarded, and the people guarding it attack you, so you defend yourself. That is WAY different than what Frank Castle does. You didn't set out to kill, he does. Every single time. Now, that's not to say him killing is evil, because he isn't killing innocents. However, I wouldn't say he is Lawful, more along the lines of Neutral. I would be willing to venture further and say he is True Neutral, because while he kills a shit ton of people in a premeditated way, they are all bad people. He is bringing criminals to justice, but how he is doing it is outside the scope of the justice systems and such.
>>47712748
Just because it's an anonymous message board doesn't mean you are required to act retarded for no other reason than that you can
>>47712112
>D&D is ironclad in this.
>If you need to get critical information from a person, Charm them or Dominate them
>he thinks Charm / Dominate is good
>iron-clad
>>47712847
Charm and Dominate are neutral.
Making them do something Evil is an Evil act for you, but likewise making them do something Good is a Good act for you.
>>47712847
>he thinks Charm / Dominate is good
While you might make an argument about them being Evil, nothing in the rules even suggests as much.
>>47710528
Murderhobo.
>>47712267
>every character in D&D regardless of alignment kills stuff
>>47710528
Chaotic good
>>47712868
>taking control of someone's mind and body
>good
>>47712913
So long as you don't make them do something Evil, it can be.
Dominating Skullcrusher, crusher of skulls, and making him build an orphanage is pretty Good.
>>47712871
This is like arguing swords are evil because they are made for the purpose of stabbing people
>>47711039
There's nothing wrong with hate, as long as you hate the right things.
>>47712913
According to D&D alignments? Yes. Fucking deal with deal.
>>47711039
hate doesn't mean you aren't good. lots of people hate their life for example but I'd call them neutral.
>>47712847
>>47712881
>>47712913
>filenames
>greentext as argument
Is it summer already
>>47712656
>There is a system of justice
Try a system of Law. Justice has never been a thing as far as Law is concerned.
>>47710528
He's CN, mostly because you can tell he doesn't really care about right and wrong, he's just looking for an excuse to kill people. In most depictions. Obviously it's been like 40 years since the character came out, he's varied a bit over time.
If a Klansman realized that the best way to kill blacks was to get a CC permit and walk around Detroit at night in a suit, and then just shoot anyone who mugged him, he wouldn't be a good guy, even though he's technically doing nothing illegal. Hell, he'd probably rack up dozens of dead muggers, potentially making the city safer, but he'd still be an asshole because of WHY he's doing it. Similarly the Punisher is looking for an excuse to kill people because he's bitter over his family's death, and "they're criminals" is as good of an excuse as he can find.
For a CG version of The Punisher, check Charles Bronson's character in Death Wish. There's a guy who is actually trying to fix his community, but the only way he knows how is to shoot criminals.
>>47713157
Fine, whatever. The point is he doesn't have to torture criminals, but he does.
you guys know that good and evil are literal cosmic forces in dnd right? like, in real life you might argue about whether it's good or not to kill one person against their will to save five other people... in dnd, when you have that same argument, in-universe there is a single, objective answer to the question, either always or depending on circumstances. i assume a cleric or a paladin would be able to tell instinctively if it's a good action.
so anyway when you monkeys try to argue about random characters' alignments, it doesn't really make sense because they don't live in the universe where good and evil are literal, fundamental forces that make up the cosmology. is the punisher good or evil? that's really just your opinion on what good and evil are. seems obvious to me he's good - you can't hate evil with all your heart without caring about making the world safe for good people. i mean, i'm sure it's possible, but unlikely. it doesn't matter if the punisher admits it or not, that's just a psychological fact that is probably true of his character. he's good. unless you're some kind of kantian cuck.
as for lawful vs chaotic, that side of the spectrum is retarded anyway. if lawful is having respect for either the law of the land, or for your own personal code of ethics, then what is the difference between neutral and chaotic? if we are considering the first one (law of the land, instead of personal code of ethics) neutral clearly does not care about the law of the land, so is the implication that chaotic is "lol i break laws just for lulz haha xd"? similarly, if we're talking about personal codes, if lawful people have one, then neutrals do not. so, chaotic people are ___????
>people trying to argue that killing is inherently evil
In that case literally every being in existence is evil
>>47713207
>chaotic is for 12 years olds being lol so random?
Yes.
>>47712868
Not the way I see it. I'd put mind control a step above murder on the evilness scale. At least when you kill someone, they go out with their thoughts still belonging to themselves.
The fact that someone would consider otherwise though is interesting to me however, which just goes to show how wildly the morality of actions can be perceived.
>>47713268
>Not the way I see it
The way you see it is "evil", not "Evil". Evil is not some subjective, nebulous thing in D&D, it is a strict quantifiable measurement of an action and its consequences.
>>47713268
If a spell doesn't have evil in its descriptor then it isn't evil by itself that's how D&D works your personal opinion doesn't enter into it.
>>47713343
>fireballing an innocent child isn't evil because fireball doesn't have evil in its descriptor
are you... are you retarded?
i'm so sorry.
>>47713300
From my point of view the Punisher is evil!
>anakinskywalker.img
>>47711999
no no no, murder is the designation we give to breaking the law, the law being killing is not allowed.
So A. you'd have to say "killing is wrong"
which is B. highly debateable in itself but killing evil people has been seen as good by a lot of people for a long time.
C. evil is based upon personal morals or social morals. Depending on if you ask "are they good or evil?" or "Are they considered good or evil by the public?" which are two different questions.
D. if you want to bring up dnd, angels, lawful good creatures, kill all the time.
>>47713371
What, exactly, do you think "by itself" means? Yes, you can do evil with spells like fireball or dominate person. You can also do good with them. But, presuming no particular target or goal, the spells by themselves are not evil.
>>47713372
The gods and devils don't give a shit about your point of view. Celestials and Fiends are literally crafted from the essence of Good and Evil.
Hell, someone with insanely refined empathy (i.e. epic-level Sense Motive) can literally perceive goodness and evilness.
>>47713417
>casting dominate person on a rock is not evil
no shit, retard
>this is somehow relevant to the discussion at hand!
???
jesus christ where were you when they were passing out the brains
>>47713371
In that situation the SPELL ITSELF isn't evil, but the action done with it is.
Compared to spells that have the [evil] descriptor which function using elemental evil in some vauge "up to the DM to flesh out" kinda way.
>>47713444
Casting dominate person on a valid target for the spell(in other words, a living, thinking humanoid) is not evil unless you use it for evil purposes. Are you genuinely retarded?
>>47713444
Yes, the discussion at hand is >>47712847's post which insinuates charm/dominate cannot be Good. Now fuck off.
>>47710528
His alignment is Neutral Punisher
>>47713474
>casting fireball on a living, thinking humanoid is not evil unless you use it for evil purposes
k, retard
>>47713480
actually, his post insinuates that it is more evil than killing them. now, since you have the critical thought capacity of a vegetable, let me think the next step for you: it might not be evil at all to kill them, nor to dominate them. if they are an evil villain who is about to destroy all of humanity, is anyone really going to tell me that it is evil to kill or dominate them? of course not. hence why the fact that fireball or dominate person don't have "evil" in the descriptor is irrelevant
Chaotic 90's
>>47713176
Underrated series.
Though it kinda tapered off after 3.
>>47713525
>casting fireball on a living, thinking humanoid is not evil unless you use it for evil purposes
Killing a band of orcs or bandits with a fireball is a Good act. It's like you don't have the slightest clue on how alignments actually work.
>>47713525
>it might not be evil at all to kill them, nor to dominate them.
That's our side of the argument, you oblivious clod. You're arguing with the wrong poster.
And no, >>47712847 is insinuating that Charm/Dominate is intrinsically Evil. Lurk more until you learn to meme arrows.
>>47713590
I dont care what side of which argument you are on, just because i'm making fun of your retarded logic doesn't mean i'm agreeing with the other retard you were arguing with.
>>47713554
no shit? congrats on figuring out how to add 1 and 1 together i guess
>>47712937
>this entire thread
Why're we having this discussion again?
Did someone just finish watching DD?
>>47713635
Kill yourself retard.
>>47713635
Your inability to understand context doesn't mean the logic is flawed. You took issue with the statement "If a spell doesn't have evil in its descriptor then it isn't evil by itself", then brought up Fireball being used on an innocent child. This does not follow. That is not Fireball being used by itself.
There are spells that are Evil by themselves, no matter what. Casting Animate Dead to raise skeletons to clear aside burning wreckage to save some orphans? Your intentions and results may be Good, but the spell you have performed is Evil. Your end result is Neutral, end of record.
>>47710528
HE IS CHAOTIC LAWFUL
>>47712101
In D&D land, punisher is LG.
Since we're using D&D alignments, that's what matters here.
>>47712950
[citation needed]
What's weird about aligned spells is that Mindrape, a spell that allows you to bend a person's psyche and mind to your complete will even to the point of changing their own alignment is Evil aligned, but Programmed Amnesia, a spell that allows you to bend a person's psyche and mind to your complete will even to the point of changing their own alignment, is not.
(Seriously, these spells pretty much do the exact same thing.)
>>47713217
Killing isn't inherently evil. HOW you kill, or WHY, that is where the distinction comes into play.
>>47710528
Good Evil.
>>47713695
>>47713959
Awful Lawful
>>47710528
He's frankly frank
>>47712541
A true Paladin would find another way
>>47715308
Chaotic Stupid
>>47712267
i buy this
He's LG on the verge of LE, and has been walking that fine line for a long damn time.
>>47713207
>it doesn't matter if the punisher admits it or not, that's just a psychological fact that is probably true of his character.
Actually this is a really good point I think. In the scheme of things hes making the world a better place by killing evil doers, so in that sense he's cosmically good, i.e. doing a net gain for the good side of the cosmic struggle, even if the way he goes about it by OUR morality is "wrong" depending on who you ask. Like another anon said, everyone kills people in d&d, thats just how it goes.
>>47715706
Meant LG on the verge of LN.
The Punisher is Lawful Gygaxian.
LG in the 1200s or 1500s or 1700s looks a lot like LE to a ignorant modern urbanite.
>>47711674
>There is no edge
Then where does Frank live?
>>47716106
Don't ask questions with answers you don't want to know, anon.
Some things are worth not knowing.
>>47716106
>>47712021
Age: Thirty Six...CALIBER
>>47715546
Franktic Frank
>>47715767
Eeh just because Gygax thought you could kill evil creatures (shock! horror!) doesn't mean all the people the Punisher kills are evil. One of the films has him killing a guy for smoking weed and killing a woman because she's married to a mobster.
>>47716571
>One of the films has him killing a guy for smoking weed
Your point being?
>>47713905
Programmed Amnesia is permanent, Mindrape is temporary.
Programmed Amnesia also had uses that directly helped the target, at least in AD&D, beyond merely deleting harmful memories.
Also Mindrape is one of those Monte Cook concepts that is beyond abusive in terms of power level. Jesus Christ.
>>47710528
True Frank
>>47711336
There's a town called Gaylord in Michigan.
>>47716604
>>47713905
FUCK I meant Mindrape is instantaneous, Programmed Amnesia is permanent. Ergo you can remove Programmed Amnesia easier.
>>47716590
Well, he's not remotely close to Gygax's take on a LG type, is the point, and certainly not Lawful Good. Maybe LN (if you view a criminal who believes in arbitrarily killing criminals that are far less bad as lawful), or 3e's take on CE ("hot blooded and arbitrarily violent," kills people because he's randumb like that).
Certainly nothing like Lawful Good, either by modern takes or Gygax's take on the alignment.
>>47713700
Forcing someone with magic (aka the spells you mentioned) when they're about to kill an innocent in order to save that innocent's is the same as forcing them with steel or your hands (aka being a fucking hero).
Tying someone up or stripping them of their weapons is likewise not necessarily evil.
>>47712101
Rorschach is LN leaning LG.
>>47713656
Mostly it's that real morality isn't two-dimenstion like stereotypical Sith OR Jedi philosophies.
>>47715381
No, a true Paladin would do what is needed, be hurt by it, mourn for it, and require an extra-special headpat from their god to convince them that whatever the past, the time for self-flagellation is over..
>>47711065
Hey, man. Ducks are universal rapists. They fucking cunts evolve to try and counter, and then the cocks evolve too. Ducks are fucking horrible.
>>47717542
THIS
True paladins are willing to be sacrificed or sacrifice what they personally care about (outside of the greater good) for the greater good.
To those faggots who say that they should have found another way you should know that there isn't always a perfectly clean good way, there will always be sacrifices to be made and mud your hero has to drag his pride and morels through. This does not, however, excuse being and edgy shit head.
"Acts of goodness are not always wise, and acts of evil are not always foolish, but regardless, we shall always strive to be good."
>>47717718
>mud your hero has to drag his pride and morels through
>morels
My poor fungi!
>>47717898
JUSTICE DOEZB'T NEED GRAMMAR!
>>47717958
No, justice rains from above.
>>47710528
True Neutral because crazy people lack the capacity to choose to be good/evil or lawful/chaotic
>>47717554
That's ascribing human traits to a non-sapient creature. It's not like ducks are criminals. Are you as disgusted by infant cannibalism or coprophagy in the animal kingdom?
>>47718209
All animals disgust me. They are soulless and it is humanity's duty to reign over them.
>>47710528
Lawful Lawful
>>47718240
See, that's an ethos I can appreciate. Not share, but appreciate.
But "animals are just cute fuzzy widdle people!" is a damn silly thing to believe.
>>47711999
Killing is not always wrong. What about killing in self defense, or killing under color of law (i.g. a police officer shooting someone who is committing a crime or a soldier killing in war)?
Anyone who says killing is always wrong is a fool.
Lawful Good paladin
>>47713207
Of course d&d alignments are imperfect, but looking at the chaos-order alignments i find it easier to think in terms of societal models.
Lawful thinks an orderly society is best (best for everyone is lawful good, best for himself if lawful evil)
Chaotic thinks order is bad (for chaotic good, bad because it causes oppression evil, for chaotic evil, bad because it tries to prevent him from doing whatever the fuck he wants)
Neutral is more complicated, but lawful neutral just thinks an orderly society is ideal and doesn't care if it helps people or if it benefits him, just order for its own sake.
Chaotic neutral just does whatever wants and hates people telling him what to do.
Lawful good prefers a society where law works and evil is systematically punished
Chaotic good prefers a society where people can and do justice with their own hands, think wild west
Lawful evil prefers a society where everyone is systematically explored for his benefit
Chaotic evil prefers a lawless society where he can take anything he wants by force.
![keekee-484px[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/STLm8ct.jpg "keekee-484px[1].jpg")
>>47718240
I partially agree but think mammals are ok.
>>47719096
Mammals are some of the worst offenders because of how close they are to the Human ideal.
They have failed and wallow in it. Not only that, they deceive us with how human they can look. Their features imitate us, and through that false imago we see what it is that is wrong with our own lesser man.
>>47710528
True Faggot
>>47718719
Still wrong, it's just less wrong than all plausible alternatives. It's like arguing over what's greener, a golden-brown apple pie or a deep orange pumpkin pie. Killing may be the best option, but that doesn't make it good.
Or perhaps you're of the mind that killing is good when it has good consequences, for instance if by killing you save many innocent lives. I still say that killing is wrong, but I'll agree that the actual action you took was right because it wasn't just killing. And, of course, if even more information is provided (perhaps that the folks you saved were carrying a disease that kills millions), then I'd swing back to the overall act being wrong. And there's nothing inconsistent here.
>>47719237
Right there you admit that you'd let millions suffer for the sake of thousands. You are stupid or playing the fool.
>>47711362
Is that how dnd alignments work? I mean everyone ever has a code they follow regardless of whether they can put it into words.
>>47719295
When did I do that?
>>47719305
I'm sorry, I read your statement wrong.
>>47711970
Haven't you ever heard that two wrongs don't make a right?
>>47710528
>Character who has appeared in multiple different incarnations with multiple different authors/directors/developers
>Having one alignment
>>47710528
Lawful Evil. He limits his actions to asshole victims but as the OPs image shows, he engages in vigilantism because he likes to hurt people and isn't actually interested in making the world a better place.
>>47710528
Lawful Neutral.
>>47719986
That's wrong thought. He didn't say he likes it, he said he hates those people. Ge hates them because they do bad things, not because they give them an excuse to hurt them. Otherwise that makes no sense, even for a crazy person.
>>47710528
Chaotic Evil
>>47711674
>Neutral Frank
>not Frank Frank
>>47720145
>He didn't say he likes it
Throughout Ennis's run it's fairly apparent that Frank kills people because he loves doing it, and the death of his family is used as an excuse for murdering people. Garth Ennis's run on the Punisher is great if you want to get to know Frank Castle.
I mean, the death of his family had a massive impact to him, so it isn't one or the other, but both. The people he kills need killing. They're loathsome and all deserve death. The trauma over the death of his family will never leave him. Frank blames himself and the criminals who caused the death of his family, and he can never receive catharsis over it, and the only time he feels any sense of relief is in the midst of when he's murdering people he hates who he believes deserve it.
His "personal code" is his moral legitimization for what he does, but he nonetheless rigidly adheres to it because without it he's no different then the people he punishes. His rigid adherence makes him Lawful. The fact that his code is a moral one means he isn't Evil, but because it's just a legitimization for murdering people, it isn't Good, so Neutral. Lawful Neutral.
>>47718088
From my zeppelin I reign from above.
>>47715308
I'm legitimately disappointed that it took this long for someone to post this. For shame /tg/
>>47712400
He also died, and was then brought back using a similar technique as Frankenstein's Monster.
>>47710528
Chaotic good.
Hey if a paladin can kill people and still be good then so can Frank.
>>47721053
>a chaotic person murdering (a crime) people for breaking the law, even if they have never hurt anyone
>good
>>47722055
A good alignment in DnD doesn't follow the laws.
Laws aren't morals. You can break laws and still be good in DnD logic. Hell, you can break laws and still be Lawful.
>>47717500
>not CG
>>47719339
Have you ever played D&D?
>>47718088
>justice rains from abAAAGH
FTFY
>>47710528
Chaotic good in D&D and aberrant evil in RIFTS.
>>47719339
Yeah and two rights make an airplane.
>>47710528
Probs Chaotic Good.
Once in a blue moon he'll even let people off if he sees they truly resent their actions.
>>47710528
As with most capeshit, depends onthe writer
>>47711773
Chaotic is more about not ascribing to a code of conduct.
>>47710582
sounds like riveting fanfiction
>>47718402
>>47718240
I sorta kinda agree. I wanna punch people who say's animals are "just like people!" They're animals, sure they can return you're affection and in some degree understand you, but they can also gnaw you'r fucking face off.
He's /tg/s idea of Lawful Stupid "RIDER KIIIIICK" paladin taken to its logical end.
How did so many idiots end up posting in this thread? It's a fucking alignment thread. There's nothing you can say about alignment that hasn't been said a million times already on /tg/ alone. there is nothing knew to say. Stop talking about alignment. What the hell is wrong with you people?
>>47722078
But... that's my point. He commits murder (a crime) to kill people for committing crimes often drastically less bad than what he's guilty of.
Chaotic evil is probably the best fit (hot tempered, unpredictable, and most of all, arbitrarily violent) as there's not even the case to be made for him being the lesser of two evils.
>>47710528
>ITT neckbeards discovering that good and evil are subjective
>>47722843
Good and evil aren't "subjective," that's not a thing. You're thinking of "relative."
>>47710528
NE
>but he kills bad guys, that must be Good!
Evil isn't all on the same team. The Mafia goes out of their way to crush petty thugs and deranged criminals that operate in their turf, and actually gives a good deal back to the community (at least, in Italy. The American branch sort of dropped that idea). Look at Syria and the dozens of different rebel groups. They're all fighting to depose a tyrant,Let's not have the argument over Assad's PR right nowbut they fight eachother as often as their stated enemy.
It doesn't make them good.
Frank is driven by hatred and revenge, both purely Neutral motivations, to commit unlawful murder, an Evil act. The fact that his chosen victims are themselves Evil neither justifies his actions nor excuses his motives. He is Evil because he kills for no greater reason than his own personal gratification. He is Neutral Evil because while he disregards the law in his actions, he has no particular philosophy regarding order versus disorder and does not go out of his way to align himself to one side or the other. He simply applies methods which he knows to bring results.
>>47723047
>Full Definition of subjective
>...
>3a : characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind : phenomenal — compare objective 1b
>b: relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristics or states
>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subjective
No, I am thinking of subjective and, yes, it's a thing.
I would vote LN, because he's literally one step removed from Bats (in most iterations).
His code is JUSTICE and JUSTICE especially when the JUSTICE system fails.
Frank Castle's version of justice just involves more holes in bodies.
>>47716677
The crazy one is the exalted mindrape. IIRC, it forces the target to face their sins, then become Good or die. It really is about what you use it for.
