Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Synthia]

I like how people are unsure about Synthia.

[Andreus Ixiris]

That's really easy, Synthia is totally mono-Black.

[Gesakaarin]

Veikitamo Gesakaarin - Lawful Evil: As a former Caldari State corporate lawyer she is a philosophical adherent of Legalism, in addition to being staunchly nationalist and militarist. As such she is a strong believer that the law is the only true path to achieve a functional meritocracy in civil society. She is willing to use whatever means necessary to achieve the ends of a strong and stable society, and her acts of evil that she commits are fully justified and rationalized as noble deeds in service to the State and Kaalakiota.

Using Saede's system I would say her core values are: Power, Security, Conformity and Tradition.

[Halete]

I have no idea about Haelete;

At her core she strives to be benevolent but has a strong sadistic streak.

She attempts to be a universalist but is a staunch racist and fundamentally this is mutually exclusive to her Amarrian beliefs.

She largely lives by self-direction and independence but desires to be nurtured and guided.

She at times vilifies excess yet has a strong penchant for hedonistic pleasures.

She can show fierce loyalty but also lie ruthlessly to those closest to her.

I'd be loathe to pin her as a True Neutral because very few characters can accurately call themselves True Neutral. Chaotic Neutral may be more apt but she can express Lawful qualities. I'm not so sure due to the extreme amount of dissonance she acts with.

[Lyn Farel]

Use Schwartz-based system, it's easier for that kind of case, though flawed characters (at the contrary of hypocritical ones) are hard to pin down since they have ideals they eventually always fail to apply to themselves.

I would say especially at her core, Sybaritic, Autonomous, Ascendent, and at her ideals Righteous (recently acquired), Orthodox. The True Neutral transforms into Pragmatic, and she is probably not that.

[Saede Riordan]

Use Schwartz-based system, it's easier for that kind of case, though flawed characters (at the contrary of hypocritical ones) are hard to pin down since they have ideals they eventually always fail to apply to themselves.

I would say especially at her core, Sybaritic, Autonomous, Ascendent, and at her ideals Righteous (recently acquired), Orthodox. The True Neutral transforms into Pragmatic, and she is probably not that.

Yeah that sums her up decently I think.

Using Saede's system I would say her core values are: Power, Security, Conformity and Tradition.

That would put her in Ascendant and Orthodox.

[Saede Riordan]

[Jace]

Necro skills, Saede, necro skills.

Also, I have no idea what alignment system to use to make a post. So, yeah, I guess I'll do it from a five year old perspective. Jace can be a meanieface. Brock is Mr. Funtime Sad Clown.

Edit: I don't really mind alignment stuff, I just find D&D's very lacking and WoD's does not translate out of gameplay. So, yeah. I'll let others decide my characters' alignments.

[Vic Van Meter]

Necro skills, Saede, necro skills.

Also, I have no idea what alignment system to use to make a post. So, yeah, I guess I'll do it from a five year old perspective. Jace can be a meanieface. Brock is Mr. Funtime Sad Clown.

Edit: I don't really mind alignment stuff, I just find D&D's very lacking and WoD's does not translate out of gameplay. So, yeah. I'll let others decide my characters' alignments.

I always thought alignments, and by extension gameplay morality mechanics, were sort of RP training wheels.  Once you can run a character on straight up background and personality, they become pretty severe limitations.

[Samira Kernher]

Alignments are only limitations when you try to force your character into strictly upholding one. They're fine when treated as a loose definition that can and will change based on a character's actions.

Or in other words: alignments are fine when they are changing to fit the character. They are not fine when the character is changing to fit the alignment.

[Gaven Lok ri]

I actually agree with the result of the test that showed up on the other thread.

Gaven is pretty much exactly lawful neutral. In part because Good/neutral/Evil doesn't really work very well in EVE, whereas Chaotic/Neutral/Lawful does.

But Gaven is a proponent of both the "good" parts of Amarr, and the more moderate "Evil" parts. He certainly *Thinks* he is Lawful Good, but as the player I think that's a bit absurd.

[Alain Colcer]

i was a bit suprised that upon reviewing this thread, i did not add the results of my test...

Got True Neutral......which was kinda surprising, i always thought of Alain Colcer as neutral good, but he is effectively more interested in freedom on many aspects than just the "good moral" ones.

bookmarked the page explaining true neutral philosophy to review later.

[Shiki]

Shiki got LG, which surprised me since my responses to questions about altruistic acts were generally ambivalent. Was expecting LN.

Guess it goes back to the point made about intent versus action.

[Vic Van Meter]

Fun part is, I ran this for my WoW main because he screws with these tests so bad.  He got Neutral-Good, which is a first for him.  He generally ends up lawful to some end or another, and it's the good and evil thing he batters back and forth on.

Apparently, this test doesn't care that you give someone a Chelsea's smile, then tighten a gag into the wounds to make them vomit, and extol his father for information.  It just cares whether you're willing to say you did it and that it wasn't the "wrong" person.

[Jace]

I didn't even realize there was a test pages back until these recent comments. Jace got Lawful Neutral.