A little about worldview. This is a very slippery topic, but it cannot be completely ignored, because. Alignment defines the basic framework for how your characters behave in the game. Following the chosen worldview is not strictly mandatory, but it is often a measure of high-quality wagering and the issuance of expo bonuses, and sometimes expo fines.
There are 9 world views in total.
Lawful Good(Lawful Good), “Crusader” – Choice of uncompromising paladins. Such a character always and everywhere opposes evil, protects the innocent, does good and causes justice. Unfortunately, as practice shows, this alimony is not tenacious, either boring and boring in wagering to the extreme, or makes its carrier frankly unviable, forcing him to get involved in all serious things. Therefore, it is most often perceived as a load on paladin buns.
Neutral Good(Neutral Good), “Benefactor” – Much more playable option. First of all, it is a subject gravitating towards goodness, but devoid of severe limitations in means and methods, characteristic of the previous version. He shows respect for his superiors, but is not at all obliged to obey them unconditionally. I'd say it's the best option for a non-evil party.
Chaotic Good(Chaotic Good), “Rebel” - A fairly popular version of the alaiment, which consists in combining good intentions and emphasized freethinking, bordering on selfishness. Robin Hood is often cited as an example, although options are possible here. The natural problem of all chaotic characters is the difficulty of getting along with the party. Their single-handedness and disregard for common values practically oblige them to conflicts on the basis of the severity of the quests.
Lawful Neutral(Lawful Neutral), "Judge" - A typical example of a pronounced legalist, without any inclinations for good or evil, but with a clear commitment to always and everywhere observing the letter of the rules. The rules do not necessarily mean the laws of society - the character's own internal code may well be applicable. Usually prone to dryness and formality, which is why he is not very popular in roleplaying - more suitable for NPCs, and from game Persians - for monks, for whom adherence to order is more important than other aspects.
True Neutral(True Neutral), "Unbiased". This is the path of a character who has no personal preferences, the path of going with the flow and doing things depending on which one seems to be the most promising at that particular moment in time. On the one hand, it is convenient, because it allows everything; on the other hand, by and large, the character does not care about the small squabbles taking place around him, and his entry into the adventure path is a rather unlikely event.
Let the melody rush like a bird, Let her bust tell, What I put on your capital. Here is such a taiga device. I put alleys at the stations, At the Moslift, Mosconcert and Mosgaz. On Luzhkov with his anniversary I put 850 times. On your miserable judgments, On the terrible metropolitan mess, And separately with great pleasure I put on the Moscow Spartak ...
So I would advise not to abuse the use of this alignment, or very carefully coordinate with the DM its motivation.
Chaotic Neutral(Chaotic Neutral), “Free Spirit” – I will not be mistaken in calling this the most demanded alaiment. On the one hand, he does not have to follow any rules; on the other hand, he does not reject any other people's values. In addition to paladins and monks, for whom a strict value system is required, an aliment is suitable for everyone. But, if we approach the issue with all severity, then such a character can hardly be considered a full-fledged member of a well-established company, because his behavior is far from corporate.
Lawful Evil(Lawful Evil), "Despot". A variant that is quite common in the world, but quite rare among adventurers. In his rules - the maintenance of traditions and the observance of certain rules of behavior, even if for this it is necessary to commit evil. In this context, evil is not an end in itself, but a method; the character simply believes that his game is worth even such candles. He's unlikely to kill just like that. By the way, he is not obliged to realize himself or recognize himself as evil. But, nevertheless, this is already a specific character who may not find a common language with a group of good characters.
Neutral Evil(Neutral Evil), “Criminal” - By analogy with , this is a fairly convenient character to play. The absence of a penchant for law or chaos, on the one hand, does not push him onto the extremely narrow paths of a servant of the law, and on the other hand, does not oblige him to show the miracles of impulsiveness inherent in chaotics. The only criterion is one's own desire for certain benefits, the receipt of which is usually carried out by openly evil methods. As a rule, NE characters are already unequivocally aware of their belonging to an unkind contingent.
Chaotic Evil(Chaotic Evil), “Destroyer” – The most extreme hypostasis of a bad Persian. Usually, mindless monsters are cited for analogy, but this is perhaps not true. He is entirely driven by greed, hatred and the desire for destruction. As a rule, he does not serve any pronounced dark forces - for this he is too impulsive and impulsive. In the game, such a character at first seems picturesque, but I, for example, cannot imagine a situation in which a “normal” game would not kill such a comrade.
At the DM's will, characters can not only gain and lose experience for playing an alignment well or badly, but also change it if the DM believes that the roleplaying explicitly points to a different alignment option. At first glance, there is nothing in this, but for example, a paladin who turned away from the path of good, a monk who turned to chaos, or a barbarian who became law-abiding, lose all their class buns. Therefore, I urge you to approach the issue of observing the chosen manner of behavior very carefully.
alignment ) reflects the ethical and moral inclinations of the character. When creating a character, the player specifies his alignment, and for non-player characters, the alignment is determined by the game master. Alignment affects both how roles are played and some of the player's abilities and limitations.Word Alignment some translate as "orientation", "character", or "commitment", although none of these options has become generally accepted. In gaming jargon, this concept is sometimes not translated, but transcribed: “ alignment».
The concept of alignment was first introduced to RPGs by D&D creator Harry Gygax in 1978. It took as its basis the philosophy of order and chaos from Michael Moorcock's Elric series of novels.
In early versions of D&D, players could choose between three alignments: good (principled), neutral, and chaotic. Subsequent editions of D&D introduced a second dimension to determine alignment, which could now be good, neutral, or evil. Thus, according to D&D rules, a character's alignment can be described by one of nine states, one of three on each dimension. The state when the worldview is neutral-neutral is usually called true neutral or simply neutral.
Alignment is not a fixed characteristic: a series of actions performed by a character that do not correspond to the current alignment will eventually change it towards the alignment of actions. For example, an unscrupulous thief (chaotic evil) who is seen giving away stolen goods to the poor eventually becomes chaotic good.
Alignment greatly influences the choice of character class. For example, a respectable (principled) character cannot be a bard or a barbarian, a druid must be neutral in at least one of the dimensions, and a paladin can only be fundamentally good. Also, a number of items and spells can selectively affect characters of different alignments.
In the 4th edition of D&D, the character's worldview system was changed; only 5 alignment types were left: lawful good, good, neutral, evil, chaotic evil.
Confrontation between good and evil Good-Evil listen)) is a common concept in both D&D and other fantasy games. While the player character may be driven by their own goals rather than the common good, it is still implied that the "good" character is primarily opposed to evil and often fights evil creatures.
Order and organization are of paramount importance for characters with a law-abiding neutral character (English Lawful Neutral, LN). They believe in strong and well-ordered government, be it tyranny or benevolent democracy. The benefits of organization and systematization outweigh any moral questions raised by their activities.
A law-abiding-evil character values tradition, loyalty, and order, but does not value freedom, dignity, or life. He follows the rules, but plays without mercy or compassion. He tends to operate within a hierarchy; he would rather rule, but is often willing to serve. He does not like to break laws and promises; this is partly due to his nature, partly because the laws can protect him from opponents who hold different beliefs. Some regular evil characters are actually committed to some evil idea, to an evil deity or evil master, just as paladins are committed to the idea of good. Such creatures gladly contribute to the spread of evil.
Chaotic evil characters (eng. Chaotic evil, CE) - the death of everything good and organized. They are driven only by the desire for personal gain and pleasure. They see absolutely nothing wrong with taking what they want by any means possible. Laws and governments are only the tools of the weak, unable to defend themselves. The strong have the right to take what they want, and the weak are needed to use them. When chaotic evil characters gather together, they are driven not by a desire to cooperate, but rather by a desire to confront powerful enemies. Such a group can only be held together by a strong leader who can force his subordinates to obey with an iron fist. Since leadership is based solely on brute force, it is likely that a leader will be swept away at the first sign of weakness by anyone who can in any way take away this position from him.
There is a stereotype that a chaotic evil character is necessarily a madman, a murderer, and his path is filled with those killed for no reason. Undoubtedly, these characters too will have a chaotic evil alignment, but in fact, in order for a character to fall under it, only two criteria are enough: selfishness and unpredictability, and they do not always give too bloody results.
Word Alignment some translate as "orientation", "character", or "commitment", although none of these options has become generally accepted. In gaming jargon, this concept is sometimes not translated, but transcribed: “ alignment».
History and role in D&D
The concept of alignment was first introduced to RPGs by D&D creator Harry Gygax in 1978. It took as its basis the philosophy of order and chaos from Michael Moorcock's Elric series of novels.
In early versions of D&D, players could choose between three alignments: good (principled), neutral, and chaotic. Subsequent editions of D&D introduced a second dimension to determine alignment, which could now be good, neutral, or evil. Thus, according to D&D rules, a character's alignment can be described by one of nine states, one of three on each dimension. The state when the worldview is neutral-neutral is usually called true neutral or simply neutral.
Alignment is not a fixed characteristic: a series of actions performed by a character that do not correspond to the current alignment will eventually change it towards the alignment of actions. For example, an unscrupulous thief (chaotic evil) who is seen giving away stolen goods to the poor eventually becomes chaotic good.
Alignment greatly influences the choice of character class. For example, a respectable (principled) character cannot be a bard or a barbarian, a druid must be neutral in at least one of the dimensions, and a paladin can only be fundamentally good. Also, a number of items and spells can selectively affect characters of different alignments.
In the 4th edition of D&D, the character's worldview system was changed; only 5 alignment types were left: lawful good, good, neutral, evil, chaotic evil.
Worldview axes in D&D
(Translation from English)
Good evil
Confrontation between good and evil Good-Evil listen)) is a common concept in both D&D and other fantasy games. While the player character may be driven by their own goals rather than the common good, it is still implied that the "good" character is primarily opposed to evil and often fights evil creatures.
The third edition of the D&D rules defines good and evil as follows:
Lawful Neutral
Order and organization are of paramount importance for characters with a law-abiding neutral character (English Lawful Neutral, LN). They believe in strong and well-ordered government, be it tyranny or benevolent democracy. The benefits of organization and systematization outweigh any moral questions raised by their activities.
Lawful Evil
A law-abiding-evil character values tradition, loyalty, and order, but does not value freedom, dignity, or life. He follows the rules, but plays without mercy or compassion. He tends to operate within a hierarchy; he would rather rule, but is often willing to serve. He does not like to break laws and promises; this is partly due to his nature, partly because the laws can protect him from opponents who hold different beliefs. Some regular evil characters are actually committed to some evil idea, to an evil deity or evil master, just as paladins are committed to the idea of good. Such creatures gladly contribute to the spread of evil.
Neutral Evil
Chaotic Evil
Chaotic evil characters (eng. Chaotic evil, CE) - the death of everything good and organized. They are driven only by the desire for personal gain and pleasure. They see absolutely nothing wrong with taking what they want by any means possible. Laws and governments are only the tools of the weak, unable to defend themselves. The strong have the right to take what they want, and the weak are needed to use them. When chaotic evil characters gather together, they are driven not by a desire to cooperate, but rather by a desire to confront powerful enemies. Such a group can only be held together by a strong leader who can force his subordinates to obey with an iron fist. Since leadership is based solely on brute force, it is likely that a leader will be swept away at the first sign of weakness by anyone who can in any way take away this position from him.
History and role in D&D
The concept of alignment was first introduced to RPGs by D&D creator Harry Gygax in 1978. It took as its basis the philosophy of order and chaos from Michael Moorcock's Elric series of novels.
In early versions of D&D, players could choose between three alignments: good (principled), neutral, and chaotic. Subsequent editions of D&D introduced a second dimension to determine alignment, which could now be good, neutral, or evil. Thus, according to D&D rules, a character's alignment can be described by one of nine states, one of three on each dimension. The state when the worldview is neutral-neutral is usually called true neutral or simply neutral.
Alignment is not a fixed characteristic: a series of actions performed by a character that do not correspond to the current alignment will eventually change it towards the alignment of actions. For example, an unscrupulous thief (chaotic evil) who is seen giving away stolen goods to the poor eventually becomes chaotic good.
Alignment greatly influences the choice of character class. For example, a respectable (principled) character cannot be a bard or a barbarian, a druid must be neutral in at least one of the dimensions, and a paladin can only be fundamentally good. Also, a number of items and spells can selectively affect characters of different alignments.
In the 4th edition of D&D, the character's worldview system was changed; only 5 types of worldview were left: fundamentally good, kind, neutral, evil, chaotic evil.
Worldview axes in D&D
(Translation from English)
Good evil
Confrontation between good and evil Good-Evil listen)) is a common concept in both D&D and other fantasy games. While the player character may be driven by their own goals rather than the common good, it is still implied that the "good" character is primarily opposed to evil and often fights evil creatures.
The third edition of the D&D rules defines good and evil as follows:
Lawful Neutral
Order and organization are of the utmost importance for characters with a Lawful Neutral personality. Lawful Neutral, LN). They believe in strong and well-ordered government, be it tyranny or benevolent democracy. The benefits of organization and systematization outweigh any moral questions raised by their activities.
Lawful Evil
neutral good
True Neutral
Neutral Evil
Chaotic good
Chaotic Evil
Chaotic evil characters Chaotic Evil, CE) - the death of everything good and organized. They are driven only by the desire for personal gain and pleasure. They see absolutely nothing wrong with taking what they want by any means possible. Laws and governments are only the tools of the weak, unable to defend themselves. The strong have the right to take what they want, and the weak are needed to use them. When chaotic evil characters gather together, they are driven not by a desire to cooperate, but rather by a desire to confront powerful enemies. Such a group can only be held together by a strong leader who can force his subordinates to obey with an iron fist. Since leadership is based solely on brute force, it is likely that a leader will be swept away at the first sign of weakness by anyone who can in any way take away this position from him.
Bloodthirsty pirates, monsters with low Intelligence, vicious and ferocious goblinoids are good examples of chaotic evil characters.
Links
- Worldview Test
- Articles
A brief note for those who don't know: the DnD (Dungeons & Dragons) worldview system is interesting because in addition to the usual "evil-good" axis, there is also the "chaotic-principled" axis. It determines how much the character obeys generally established (or internal) ethical and moral standards. And the final outlook of the subject comes from the addition of these two axes. What I like about this worldview system is that it is perfectly applicable in real life, since the "evil-good" scheme cannot always give an accurate picture of a person. And knowing the difference between, for example, lauful-good and chaotic-good, it becomes easier for me personally to understand the motives of certain human actions.
I'm all for what. I want to talk about my favorite characters of each type of worldview. For simplicity, I took characters from films and cartoons. Three for each type of worldview, to better reveal the essence of the issue. Since the DnD system has already 9 types, then there are 27 characters.
So let's go:
Fundamentally Good/Lawful Good
Simba
Lion King
Ideal kings, in fact, have always been represented as lauful hoods. Honest, noble, upholding and defending the law - and at the same time generous and kindhearted. Simba's father, Mufasa, was just that. And although Simba, being a lion cub, did not obey the rules and laws of the pride too much, and in many situations behaved chaotically, but with such a father, he simply could not help but grow up the same.
But Mufasa is killed, Simba flees, and ends up in the company of two chaotic neutrals, Timon and Pumbaa. Hakuna-matata, a no-hassle philosophy, almost rid Simba of nightmare memories and remorse, but also almost turned him into a neutral hood at the same time.
This is where the whole point of this story lies - you can stay and live for yourself, eat bugs and swim in the river, or return to where the danger is, where the past is, where the evil uncle, lauful-ivel Scar, usurped the throne. This, of course, is Disney, and Simba, "remembering who he is", returns and takes the rightful throne, returns to the "circle of life". Many years later, I still like this story because it's about an equal choice, a choice where you're right in any case, and that makes it harder to stay lauful good.
Hermione Granger
Harry Potter
Law and goodness are far from the same thing,
and the lauful guds, who have both of these hypostases equally developed, have a hard time. This fully applies to Hermione Granger, who, despite her brilliant intellect, ended up not in Ravenclaw, where the most intelligent people of Hogwarts studied, but in Gryffindor, the abode of the brave at heart. It doesn’t immediately become clear why this happened - Hermione swears with friends because of the slightest violations of the rules and purses her lips in disgust when she hears about another trick, in general, she behaves like a typical lauful-neutral. But everything clears up in the middle of a terrible labyrinth, when, a few steps from the Philosopher's Stone, she desperately exclaims - "Me? What am I, I am the mind, rules and books! And there are much more important things in the world - friendship, honesty, loyalty!"
Neytiri
Avatar
And sometimes integrity and kindness are intertwined so closely that it becomes difficult to distinguish one from the other. Neytiri, who did not kill the invader because the seed of the Tree of Souls landed on the tip of her arrow, hinting that Jake's soul is pure, is a prime example of this. This is one of the most harmonious lauful hoods I know. Spare the alien invader, because he has a "strong and fearless heart", and inconsolably mourn the bloodthirsty wolves killed by her, because they are all children of her goddess: "Don't thank! They don't thank for killing!" In Neytiri there is that purity that is characteristic of small children and people living far from civilization - cry if you are hurt, laugh if you are happy, love friends and hate enemies. Neytiri is probably the closest thing to the ideal model of lauful hoods as it was originally conceived.
Fundamentally Neutral/Lawful Neutral
Dr. Lisa Cuddy
House M.D.
Cuddy, if you sign this, I'll tell you who spread the rumor around the hospital that you're a transgender.
- No such rumor, House.
- You will if you don't sign.
Lauful neutrals make excellent bosses, directors, deans, and ... head doctors. Lisa Cuddy is the only character in the series, with the possible exception of James Wilson's lauful hood, who is able to keep the unpredictable, like St. Petersburg weather, Dr. House in check. She refuses House a heart donation because his patient is old, but refuses a fabulous amount of money towards the hospital bill when it threatens House's resignation. Cuddy in the hospital is the personification of justice, but not blind, but conscious, ready to give up the letter of the law in those rare cases when circumstances require it.
Master Oogway
Kung Fu Panda
A wise teacher and an excellent schemer, Master Oogway is a different kind of lauful neutral than Cuddy. Oogway helps everyone find their own way, while not preventing them from making mistakes and getting bumps. "The past is forgotten, the future is closed, the present is granted!" - he says to the main character, when he has almost turned off the path. He leaves his student, Master Shifu, on the eve of a big battle, but invisibly helps during it. The only time he really affected an event was when his most ingenious intrigue with the Dragon Scroll was in jeopardy.
Oogway is a guiding compass for those who want to get somewhere - it will show the right direction, but will never take you to the right path if you yourself do not wish to set foot on it.
Dr. John Hamish Watson
Sherlock Holmes
The concentrated squint of cold eyes, the impeccable manners of a gentleman, biting English humor and a firearm in his bosom. James Bond, you ask? No Dr. Watson. Chaotic-neutral Holmes, in fact, is damn lucky with a friend - in the intervals between exposing criminals, Watson pulls out a brilliant detective from the tenacious fingers of a dozen different phobias and psychoses. Although the resemblance to James Bond is definitely present: if Cuddy is justice, and Oogway is intrigue, then Watson is an example of an active, active lauful neutrality, he pursues villains not only because they break the law and do evil, but because it is for him, damn it, interesting, and that is why he does not leave Holmes on the eve of his own marriage, although before that he was going to do it.
Fundamentally Evil/Lawful Evil
Jaffar
Alladin
The image of the evil-vizier-at-court is present in many works, but Jaffar is perhaps the most famous and successful interpretation. A devilish mind mixed with cunning and poisonous irony gave the world one of the most charismatic lauful-ivels. Jaffar does not want to destroy the world or all people - he just wants to slightly redraw it to his liking and make a couple of nice rearrangements in the Sultan's palace - for example, sit on the throne himself. But he wants everything to be legal, so that people recognize him as the true ruler - which is why he becomes nervous when Prince Ali appears in the palace. Jaffar is a classic lauful-ivel - a tyrant who hides behind the laws and is afraid of exposure until he realizes that the law is not able to keep him.
Madam Sallyman
Howl's Moving Castle
Unlike her counterpart Jaffar, Madame Sulliman does not want to usurp the throne. Everything suits her - she is an adviser to the king, an emotional and close-minded person, and twirls them as she wants. The sorceress is worried about completely different things - her beloved student, Howl, does not want to return to her, and with a smile on her face, she unleashes a terrible bloody war to prove to the student that he cannot be without her. Sulliman is a lauful-ivel who likes to cover himself with a mask of goodness - what a spell is worth to prevent enemy bombs from entering the palace - and falling on the surrounding houses. But what you can’t refuse her is endurance. What is worth only her phrase at the end - "Happy ending, right? Well, tell the king to end this useless war."
Hades
Hercules
Hades! How are things in the afterlife?
- Well, how can I tell you. Dirty. Gloomy. At rush hour ... MOUNTAINS OF CORPSES AS ALWAYS!
Disney, of course, strongly departed in the cartoon image from the mythological true-neutral Hades. Here, the god of the dead is the most chic lauful-ivel, with incredible charisma and divine ambitions. Interestingly, Hades has one of the classic traits of Lauful-ivels - a love of deals, which become the main tool on the way to dominance on Olympus. In this regard, the lauful-ivels are very interesting - having given their word, they can try to distort it as much as possible and distort the meaning of the entire agreement, and evade fulfillment - but formally they will always be obliged to fulfill it. So all deals and contracts with blood are from lauful-ivels, gentlemen.
Neutral Good
Dzeniba
spirited away
The twin sister of Yubaba's lauful-ivela, Dzeniba is her complete opposite. Despite the presence of non-figuring magical abilities, she lives in solitude, does not seek either power or money. Dzeniba, who at first glance seems formidable and almost killed the dragon Haku (because "He is a thief!"), turns out to be the keeper of good and bright wisdom. She forgives Haku, acknowledging that anyone can make amends, and helps Chihiro. "Hold this elastic - it will never break, because we wove it all together." She is the only one who will agree to shelter Faceless, whom everyone else was afraid of like fire, because "any help in the household will always come in handy."
Rafiki
Lion King
I think you're just a crazy monkey.
- And in my opinion, it's YOU crazy monkey!
If Dzeniba is more neutral than good, then Rafiki is definitely more good than neutral. Rafiki is a guide who helps Simba remember who he is. This monkey is damn good at getting out of depression and apathy: "Hey, why did you hit me with a stick?" "-It doesn't matter, it's already in the past!" "Yeah, but it still hurts!" "Oh, the past always hurts, but you can either stay where you are or...learn from it!" Behind Rafiki's madness lies an unobtrusive neutral-good wisdom - in the middle of joking, giggling and bullying, suddenly say to the main character those necessary words that will change his life.
Neil Oliver
Interstate 60
Excuse me, I won't sleep with you. I don't want to be your six hundred...what is it? At night you will think - maybe I'm the one? I will answer you - yes, I am the one. Which you will never have.
- You fucked me... morally! It was terrible!
-And I liked it.
Oh, that's a different story. About how sometimes even a neutral gud needs to interfere in the usual course of things. Neil, accustomed to letting everything take its course, makes a wish and meets a chaotic neutral, the wizard O.J. Grant, who twists his life so that the familiar world goes out from under his feet. Neal was put in situations where you couldn't stand aside and let someone decide something for you. To take or not to take money for the fact that you accidentally came with a woman who wanted to save her drug addict son by becoming the same? Should I be afraid of a person who hates lies, or should I accept the rules of the game and continue to play by them calmly? Go in search of the girl of your dreams, or obediently complete the task of a creepy wizard? Open the mysterious box so that you are not accused of murder, or believe that there is always a third way out and look for it? ... The film is about taking control of your own destiny, and Neil, who acts like a real chaotic at the end, is excellent example: "I'm sorry, dad. I don't need your car, and your lawyer fraternity. By the way, the picture you have is bad taste. You were scammed. Oh, by the way. It's hung upside down."
True Neutral/True Neutral
Crush
Finding Nemo
Yes, another turtle. Crash is the personification of the canonical true-neutral indifference, which is expressed in one of his "Chuwaaaaaak". One of the cutest and most harmless types of true neutrals is a kind of Jamaican rastaman with bliss in his eyes, going with the flow of life with maximum comfort.
Ryuk
death note
Ryuk is an example of what happens when a true neutral gets bored. Or rather, true-neutral-God-Death will get bored. Only such a character can make a mess that will kill more than one hundred people, laugh and devour apples in unlimited quantities - and not because he likes to contemplate death, but simply because it is _fun_. And at the same time, in fact, he will absolutely not care how it all ends.
Dr. Emmett Brown
Back to the Future
Do not forget that true-neutral is not necessarily a bully. True-neutral may well be a person who is immersed in his business with his head. Doc has stolen plutonium, died, been resurrected, gone to the Wild West, been struck by lightning, nearly fallen off City Hall, fallen in love - all the while passionately wanting to push science forward. Doc did not want to know what was in the envelope that could save his life - simply because it says about the future, and that it could upset the balance of the world, but at the same time managed to break a bunch of physical and criminal laws when he knew that it could help him to save the world.
- Did you open the envelope? But what about the imbalance of the universe, irreversible consequences?...
- And I thought ... what the hell!
Neutral Evil
Witch of the Waste
Howl's Moving Castle
In the past, a brilliant sorceress of the royal court, the Witch of the Waste loved youth and strength too much. This love made her cruel and cynical, but did not deprive her of a peculiar charm. The witch is more neutral than evil - she puts a curse on the main character, but then calmly admits that she can and would take it off, but she doesn’t know how to do it. She is, after all, from Miyazaki's work, so when her illusion of youth is taken away from her, she becomes a harmless and rather wise old woman, in her own way sweet and worthy of compassion.
- Grandma, give me your heart, please!
-Do you really need it? Hold on. Just take care, take care!
Cruella De Ville
101 Dalmatians
The head of the House of De Vil fashion house, an icon of style, an example of charm and elegance (especially when the role of Cruella is played by the incomparable Glenn Close), by compatibility the devil in the flesh. Along with intelligence and wealth, Cruella got an obsession with a Dalmatian fur coat, which ruined her. This is a classic example of a neutral ivel - most likely, such a person will not touch you, just passing by, but if you stand in his way or interfere with the achievement of the goal, they will try to deal with you by all known methods.
Antoine Ego
Ratatouille
A great example of a neutral-ivel who puts his business first and does not recognize everything else. In principle, a gloomy and cruel denial of everything that does not fit the criteria set by the neutral-ivel, and distinguish it from the true-neutral. Antoine Ego is a famous Parisian critic. His devastating article ruined and brought to a heart attack one of the best chefs in the city. Antoine is thin and pale, because when he tastes food, he immediately spits it out, because it does not correspond to his painfully refined taste. But when he came across a cook who could surprise him - even if it turned out to be a rat! - The ego sacrifices his job and reputation to elevate him in the public eye.
Chaotic Good
Genie
Alladin
Quite a difficult case. Two opposites are fighting in the Genie - the eternal curse of the genies, forcing him to do everything according to the rules and orders, and his own chaotic nature of a merry fellow and a joker. Actually, his internal conflict for me from childhood was more interesting than the actual story of Aladdin himself. After being released from the shackles, the Genie is a very expressive chaotic buzzard, furious, ardent, loyal in friendship, unpredictable, doing good in his own ways and at the same time soft, trusting, quickly forgetting any offense and able to be happy for others.
Prince Dastan
Prince of Persia
Quite a fun and well-done interpretation of the famous computer hero. The filmed Prince of Persia is strong and ruthless to his enemies, as befits his status - but only until a really dirty game starts around him. Knowing that he did not kill his adoptive father, the Prince does not surrender to the authorities and does not wait for proceedings, but runs away, completely spoiling his alibi in order to find the real killer.
Charles Baker
Planet 51
Playboy, astronaut, womanizer and narcissistic selfish turkey - all this is Chuck Baker. Even on a foreign planet, in the field, when the hunt is open for you, because everyone is sure that you are eating brains and zombie honest people - he remains the same. Unless, selfishness and narcissism turns out to be a mask. Seeing a failed student putting himself in danger to save him, Chuck deliberately sets himself up to divert suspicion from him. One of the most touching and unstable chaotic hoods I know.
Chaotic Neutral
Crash and Eddie
ice age
I have to admit - I'm pissing in my bed!
-Nothing, brother, I must also confess - I also pee in your bed!
Forgive me for trying to cram two characters into the same position, but I think it's silly to present them separately. Two possum brothers, absolutely insane, never sitting in one place. They tease each other every second, fight and quarrel, but they are always together, always stand up for each other like a mountain, run away and fight together. At first glance, absolutely frivolous characters, Crash and Eddie show one important trait of chaotic neutrals - they will always protect and appreciate what is truly dear to them.
Dr. Gregory House
House M.D.
Where do without him. House is a classic chaot neutral. He saves people who were abandoned by all doctors, and calmly has breakfast on a makeshift table from a patient lying in a coma. It is difficult to love with such a person, and it is difficult to be friends with him, but they make friends with him and fall in love with him, especially the lauful goodies Wilson and Cameron, with their eternally laufulgud complex "To lead someone to the true path." House is bilious and caustic, but hides pain behind his irony - both mental and physical. If Cuddy in the hospital personifies justice, then House is almost Fate itself, an element of chaos and unpredictability, which in the end will still try to do everything in the best possible way.
Tyler Gage
step up
Tyler is an example of what a chaotic neutral can do when he really wants to change (it's worth noting that chaotic neutrals change extremely rarely). A troubled dancer, car thief, and rowdy, Tyler sees the other side of life and realizes he can get out and be a better person. He helps Nora Clark in her dream come true, and gradually begins to understand that the world does not revolve around him, but he must help the world revolve. He quits crime and enters the School of the Arts in order to "rise up" and take a step forward.
Chaotic Evil
Stuart Griffin
Family Guy
Chaotic Ivels are often unfairly accused of low intelligence. Stewie Griffin dispels this outrageous myth. The epitome of evil genius, Stewie was born along with a map of the world where places to capture were marked. In addition to the constant goals (take over the white house / kill his mother), Stewie commits other atrocities that only come to his mind. Classic chaotic-evil - does what it pleases, where it is necessary and how it is necessary, using any means for this.
Yzma
The Emperor's New Groove
How do we kill the emperor, mistress?
-I'll create a spell that will cause snowfall. The valley will be covered, and we will... make snowballs and draw archangels in the snow!!
-Uh...
Yes, you're right, the plan is not without flaws.
One of the most charming chaotic evels. Yzma, like many court advisers, wants to get the throne. But unlike her counterparts lauful and neutral ivelov, she does it the way she sees fit. Poison. Transform into a llama. Roll into the snow. Fantasy is limited only by the abilities of the dreamer, as they say.
Bellatrix Leistringe
Harry Potter
Incredibly beautiful character performed by Helena Bonham Carter. Here, chaotic wealth has a very simple nature - Bellatrix is absolutely insane. Which, however, does not deprive her of a sharp mind and deceit. The atypicality of this chaotic ivel is its incredible devotion to the Dark Lord, but this small glimpse of neutrality is more than compensated by many chaotic actions.
So here it is) Damn interesting thing these worldviews. Practice on friends)
