Print

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

[Shanty Anzomi]

Was expecting LG, but got Lawful Good... was ok, this was my numbers

Code: [Select]

[b]Alignment:[/b]
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (39)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (26)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (20)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (31)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Chaotic Evil ---- XX (2)

[b]Law & Chaos:[/b]
Law ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (20)
Neutral - XXXXXXX (7)
Chaos --- X (1)

[b]Good & Evil:[/b]
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (19)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Evil ---- X (1)

[Aldrith Shutaq]

So I also finally took the actual test, and got exactly what I expected for Aldy: Neutral Good. Take that, ya nay-sayers!

Detailed Results:

Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (25)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (29)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXX (13)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXX (9)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXX (13)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXX (5)

Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXX (
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Chaos --- XXXX (4)

Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXX (9)
Evil ---- X (1)

Also, does anyone know any web-fu and can turn this image into an editable thing so we can put markers on it for characters we know? I think that would be really useful for showing where we think others are on the scale.

[Elmund Egivand]

Using D&D alignment system, Elmund is apparently Neutral Good.

The Magic one hurts my head.

[Samira Kernher]

Also decided to actually do the test.

Lawful Neutral

Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXX (8 )
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (25)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (23)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)

Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Neutral - XXXXXX (6)
Chaos --- XXXXXXXX (8 )

Good & Evil:
Good ---- XX (2)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (15)
Evil ---- XXXXXX (6)

So much not good.

[Korsavius]

I'll use the method Saede linked to describe Kor and others. I'll fill in everyone else when it isn't 2:30 am though. But for my perception of Kor...and note that I will put a spoiler so people putting their opinions on Kor will do so without being biased based on what I feel about my own character...
 
[spoiler]I would have to say he conducts himself in an overall pragmatic manner. He has traits associated with many of the alignments (i.e. benevolence, conformity, tradition, universalism, etc) to varying extents, and expresses the degree of these traits based on the context of a particular situation and with who he is interacting with.

For instance, he truly does care for his fellow countrymen. And he truly does wish for there to be a peace between the Federation and State. However, one can argue the reasons for his desire of peace between the two is so that the State can instead focus its military effort on eliminating the Guristas from the face of the cluster. As for his personal crusade against Guristas members, he often resorts to twisted, underhanded methods to eliminate them. These methods can be applied to anyone who harms or threatens the people he cares about and the nation he loves. This includes, in some cases, ex-Caldari who chose the wrong path (i.e. Provists). He has no trouble killing former fellow Caldari; after all, it is all in the name of a better State. [/spoiler]

[Ayallah]

Having tried many times to define Aya in the D&D alignment system I am just going to offer 100m ISK to anyone who can convince me she is one alignment over another.

I have also decided that
A: Aya is too well characterized and real to fit into a a metric or,
B: Aya is too poorly characterized/erratically played to fit into a metric

[Samira Kernher]

Chaotic Evil for Ayallah.

"A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable."

"Here are some possible adjectives describing chaotic evil characters: violent, cruel, capricious, malicious, untrustworthy, unreliable, heartless, volatile, inconsistent, uncaring, unfeeling, deceitful, discourteous, selfish."

Her big goal, as I have seen, is perfection of the self--namely, through battle. She cares nothing for killing other people, and only seems to care about allies so far as they are means for her to get more combat, and test herself against more people. Once they are no longer useful for that then she moves on to someone else who can.

Strength is what is important to Ayallah. She respects people who are skilled and capable, and dismisses people who are not.

At best, she might be Neutral Evil. But I haven't really seen anything to make me believe she really cares about authority beyond their ability to fulfill her need for destruction.

[V. Gesakaarin]

Veikitamo Gesakaarin:

Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (25)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (24)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (20)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXX (5)

Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXX (9)
Chaos --- XXX (3)

Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (15)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Evil ---- XX (2)

I have no idea why people think Veik is evil, she's the epitomy of law and goodness. Although most of the questions from a Caldari perspective were interesting -- she wouldn't betray her family, her corporation or her State as she sees it because she's deeply loyal to them all as well as believing in things like social justice and a form of charity in keeping with her concept of there being a greater good to work towards with fellow citizens.

However the questions never did ask how she'd treat those whom she doesn't consider citizens and thus having no obligation towards.

[Jace]

Veikitamo Gesakaarin:

Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (25)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (24)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (20)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXX (5)

Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXX (9)
Chaos --- XXX (3)

Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (15)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Evil ---- XX (2)

I have no idea why people think Veik is evil, she's the epitomy of law and goodness. Although most of the questions from a Caldari perspective were interesting -- she wouldn't betray her family, her corporation or her State as she sees it because she's deeply loyal to them all as well as believing in things like social justice and a form of charity in keeping with her concept of there being a greater good to work towards with fellow citizens.

However the questions never did ask how she'd treat those whom she doesn't consider citizens and thus having no obligation towards.

This would be why the D&D alignment system is terribly flawed. It only functions within the setting of a non-world dungeon crawl. It can't handle any political dimensions.

[V. Gesakaarin]

This would be why the D&D alignment system is terribly flawed. It only functions within the setting of a non-world dungeon crawl. It can't handle any political dimensions.

Well yes. I just assumed this was a bit of fun. The great thing about Eve is that there's no objective good or evil -- only rationalizations and justifications.

[Vic Van Meter]

This would be why the D&D alignment system is terribly flawed. It only functions within the setting of a non-world dungeon crawl. It can't handle any political dimensions.

Well yes. I just assumed this was a bit of fun. The great thing about Eve is that there's no objective good or evil -- only rationalizations and justifications.

Well, there's always objective good and evil, you can just rationalize and justify it.

[Jace]

This would be why the D&D alignment system is terribly flawed. It only functions within the setting of a non-world dungeon crawl. It can't handle any political dimensions.

Well yes. I just assumed this was a bit of fun. The great thing about Eve is that there's no objective good or evil -- only rationalizations and justifications.

Agreed, both points.

[V. Gesakaarin]

Well, there's always objective good and evil, you can just rationalize and justify it.

I might rephrase and say that most people rationalize and justify what they do as being good, even if others might find it abhorrent. That said, I've always left the pursuit of objective morals to those with a desire to believe in them.

[Saede Riordan]

This is why I like the modified alignment system I used. I would say in that system that Veik is probably very Orthodox.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Morals in its descriptive sense, refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores. It does not connote objective claims of right or wrong, but only refers to that which is considered right or wrong. But it's necessarily true that what is considered right or wrong is objectively considered right or wrong. One can't really argue that people exist that consider certain things to be right and others to be wrong, if one doesn't want loose touch with reality.

In its normative sense, "morals" refer to whatever (if anything) is actually right or wrong, which may be independent of the values or mores held by any particular peoples or cultures. The idea that there is objective right and wrong is supported by a lot of arguments, to start with the point that there are deep logical problems with relativism/nihilism in general (and those also hold for moral relativism/nihilism. Cf. Boghossian "Fear of Knowledge") and end with the fact that a non-normative view of morals has the problem of not being able to justify why one should adopt it, while a normative foundation of morals can do so very well.

It's a bit like String-Theory(s). While there are theoretical reasons to assume that some form of String theory is true, we can't experimentally discern which one is. Similarly, we have a lot of reasons to assumethat objective morals exist, even though it is hard what exactly is objectively right or wrong on the level of morality. This though is an epistemic problem ofdiscerning the form something takes, not the question whether something does exist or not.

All that said, I'd agree that in EVE, to a certain degree and in a certain sense, we have no normative, objective morals, as it is a sand-box game that could be framed as "what if everyone had to make up his/her own..." with "..." being "morals" in this specific case. In a way, EVE is a game revolving around the descriptive morals that come up, which 'methodically' excludes normative morals.