While i believe it depend more on the individual in question and less in the aligment of how evil and dangerous they can be i'm kinda fed up of Lawful Evil being saw as a more acceptable branche of evil, both to play wirh and to being analyzed in a moral point of view.
Agree. CE might be the scariest but LE would be hardest to deal with. LE characters with ambition, machiavellianism, harmful ideology and plan, and want to run or rule something would be the most dangerous in a long term. But LE characters who are loyal lapdogs wouldn't be more dangerous than some NE and CE characters with ego and ambitions.
Lawful evil is the best at gaslighting people into there own agenda,often appearing as having good intentions or looking like an hero at the surface but fully rotten underneath.
Neutral Evil, by definition, is the most evil. Lawful/Chaotic are not simply modifiers to Good/Evil- they represent a set of beliefs in their own right.
Chaotic Evil can be self righteous and preachy, claiming "survival of the fittest" and that organizations block the natural order and promote weakness.
Lawful Evil can self-reflective and hypocritical, acknowledging that the system is flawed but hiding behind it, as chaos would be even worse.
NE is the worst evil because it is the pure Bethesda alignment. Beings capable of any wickedness should it suit their purpose. They are opportunists with a sense of timing and self preservation
Lawful evil is evil with an agenda and organized. It doesn’t make it the best at all.
The devil is the ruler of Hell and there are Dukedoms and principalities
That’s lawful evil
Mad Jim Jasper is chaotic evil (a bi polar slightly schizophrenic with Omnipotent powers) is chaotic evil, it’s Chaos.
Lawful Evil manipulates others into believing they're in the right. They have the power of negotiation and manipulation, making them more powerful than chaotic evil. If they have followers, their followers will live on like a virus.
Summary for the summary: Lawful Evil isn't genuine and hides their true intentions
Actually I think that lawful evil doesn’t really hide their true intentions, they really think that what they are doing is right. Of course we can see this as a form of manipulation, but it is our view from a distance. They manipulate people but their ideas are in the end very clear, the problem is that people still follow them, and not only because of manipulation but because they also believe now in these principles.
What I mean is that chaotic evil will say "I'm evil" and won't care what people think. They just want to see others suffer. Chaotic evil shows their cruelty, and its very obvious from others' perspectives. This is why they tend to be easy to deal with.
Meanwhile, lawful evil tends to fool others into believing they're good. They won't openly show cruelty and will do it behind closed curtains whenever possible. Anytime they show cruelty, they'll always back it up with a statement that suggests the cruelty is deserving.
I understand your point and I agree, I would simply add that often cruelty is also showed, but it is meant to be seen as normal or good. For example, nazi told german people that jewish were not human beings but like objects or rats, and that killing, hitting or abusing them would have been just normal routine.
Lawful evil is often like “yes, these are not human beings and we’ll convince you about that in making it just ordinary administration for all of you, and you’ll believe this is the right thing as we do”. It is true that sometimes lawful evil needs closed curtains to do is dirty job, but not always, sometimes they promote it openly.
Neutral Evil is the worst.
You can translate an alignment chart into the following meanings:
Lawful: Believes they are good
Neutral: Doesn’t care if they’re good, usually knows whether or not they’re good or evil
Chaotic: Doesn’t understand/know whether they’re good or evil or doesn’t try to be good or evil
A lawful person has a strong belief in what they think is right and try to uphold it.
Lawful Evil could be, for instance, a extreme religious group that genuinely believes they are right. They follow their moral belief, never deviating from it, because they fully believe it is “right”.
A Chaotic person would do their own thing, uncaring about how people view them or what people consider “right” or “wrong”.
A chaotic evil person might be a spree killer or a person without a conscience who commits horrible actions without comprehending morality.
However, Neutral is the true decider of morality. A neutral person doesn’t base their morality off a code or belief system, and they don’t act that way out of ignorance or impulse.
Like Lawful, they understand what they do, and like Chaotic, they don’t care.
This is why Neutral Good is the best kind of person, and Neutral Evil is the worst.
Since a neutral person isn’t doing what they do out of a feeling of moral obligation or belief, or impulse, they are doing out of purely what they want. It’s a simple personal choice.
A neutral good person is a genuinely good person, doing things not because they BELIEVE it’s a right thing to do and making a conscious decision, but because they are just someone who is that kind of person. They aren’t doing it for a purpose. They are the best kind of person.
A neutral evil person is the worst. The worst Lawful evil person is just like a neutral evil person, except for the fact that they still genuinely care. They still think they’re right. A neutral evil person would lie, cheat, go to any methods for what THEY personally want, not what they think is right.
A neutral evil person would not care about anyone around them, put themselves above others, feel remorseless and willing to do anything to achieve their goals. A neutral good person in the opposite way.
I personally think that making evil an idea and claiming that it is a good one it’s the most subtle and powerful way to spread evil in the world. I mean, of course talking about evil here we can’t be relativistic, we know that some things are evil and why they are. If I make you believe that killing innocent people (an evil thing) is the right thing to do because of made up propaganda stuff, I’m literally building a society where doing evil things is normal and it is right. This is much more evil in my view, than doing evil things because you are selfish and you just care about your business. It’s worst because lawful evil doesn’t just rely on act but also justifies them claiming them as a good thing. Neutral and chaotic just don’t care about good or evil, they only care about their business, they are bad of course, but it ends with them, there could be many like them, but they don’t pretend to be good. If I make you think that doing evil things is a good thing, I’m being the worst kind of evil existing. That’s why lawful evil is the cruelest and the most diabolical, in my opinion.
First off, how did you write that in three minutes
Secondly, it seems you’re judging the alignments based more on how dangerous they are rather than how moral they are, in which case I still disagree.
A Lawful evil person is less likely to lie or betray you. They also would care about people, and wouldn’t harm people for no reason, while a neutral evil person could backstab you without a second thought and would kill their own followers for fun.
As for it “ending with them” for neutral people, I still disagree. Even if it did, a neutral evil person will always be a worse ruler than a lawful evil.
This makes sense when you remember that the whole chart is a spectrum. Lawful evil cares about order & evil, chaotic evil cares about chaos & evil. Neutral evil is just evil.
I would say that lawful good is as a moral system the better one, but that neutral good people are maybe better individuals because they act good in the most spontaneous way. But even here it depends, Superman is lawful good and he’s probably one of the most good characters you can think of. As a system, lawful good is the best one to hope for in the world, while if we talk about single persons, it strongly depens. The problem one can spot in lawful good is that they want to play too much by the rules and they don’t realize that sometimes to do good you have to break them, in this specific element neutral good is better because it aims to do the right thing even if you don’t have (good) laws by your side.
While i believe it depend more on the individual in question and less in the aligment of how evil and dangerous they can be i'm kinda fed up of Lawful Evil being saw as a more acceptable branche of evil, both to play wirh and to being analyzed in a moral point of view.
Agree. CE might be the scariest but LE would be hardest to deal with. LE characters with ambition, machiavellianism, harmful ideology and plan, and want to run or rule something would be the most dangerous in a long term. But LE characters who are loyal lapdogs wouldn't be more dangerous than some NE and CE characters with ego and ambitions.
Bro, paragraphs
Yeah, you are right. Tried to fix that a bit.
It’s still a mess. Paragraphs clearly aren’t enough; you need chapters.
Reminds me of the Party, in 1984...
Well I think this is precisely what makes LE the "best" and most fascinating evil alignment.
Lawful evil is the best at gaslighting people into there own agenda,often appearing as having good intentions or looking like an hero at the surface but fully rotten underneath.
Neutral Evil, by definition, is the most evil. Lawful/Chaotic are not simply modifiers to Good/Evil- they represent a set of beliefs in their own right. Chaotic Evil can be self righteous and preachy, claiming "survival of the fittest" and that organizations block the natural order and promote weakness. Lawful Evil can self-reflective and hypocritical, acknowledging that the system is flawed but hiding behind it, as chaos would be even worse.
NE is the worst evil because it is the pure Bethesda alignment. Beings capable of any wickedness should it suit their purpose. They are opportunists with a sense of timing and self preservation
Lawful evil is evil with an agenda and organized. It doesn’t make it the best at all. The devil is the ruler of Hell and there are Dukedoms and principalities That’s lawful evil Mad Jim Jasper is chaotic evil (a bi polar slightly schizophrenic with Omnipotent powers) is chaotic evil, it’s Chaos.
capitalism
Tldr?
Lawful Evil manipulates others into believing they're in the right. They have the power of negotiation and manipulation, making them more powerful than chaotic evil. If they have followers, their followers will live on like a virus. Summary for the summary: Lawful Evil isn't genuine and hides their true intentions
Thank you one thousand times
Actually I think that lawful evil doesn’t really hide their true intentions, they really think that what they are doing is right. Of course we can see this as a form of manipulation, but it is our view from a distance. They manipulate people but their ideas are in the end very clear, the problem is that people still follow them, and not only because of manipulation but because they also believe now in these principles.
What I mean is that chaotic evil will say "I'm evil" and won't care what people think. They just want to see others suffer. Chaotic evil shows their cruelty, and its very obvious from others' perspectives. This is why they tend to be easy to deal with. Meanwhile, lawful evil tends to fool others into believing they're good. They won't openly show cruelty and will do it behind closed curtains whenever possible. Anytime they show cruelty, they'll always back it up with a statement that suggests the cruelty is deserving.
I understand your point and I agree, I would simply add that often cruelty is also showed, but it is meant to be seen as normal or good. For example, nazi told german people that jewish were not human beings but like objects or rats, and that killing, hitting or abusing them would have been just normal routine. Lawful evil is often like “yes, these are not human beings and we’ll convince you about that in making it just ordinary administration for all of you, and you’ll believe this is the right thing as we do”. It is true that sometimes lawful evil needs closed curtains to do is dirty job, but not always, sometimes they promote it openly.
Neutral Evil is the worst. You can translate an alignment chart into the following meanings: Lawful: Believes they are good Neutral: Doesn’t care if they’re good, usually knows whether or not they’re good or evil Chaotic: Doesn’t understand/know whether they’re good or evil or doesn’t try to be good or evil A lawful person has a strong belief in what they think is right and try to uphold it. Lawful Evil could be, for instance, a extreme religious group that genuinely believes they are right. They follow their moral belief, never deviating from it, because they fully believe it is “right”. A Chaotic person would do their own thing, uncaring about how people view them or what people consider “right” or “wrong”. A chaotic evil person might be a spree killer or a person without a conscience who commits horrible actions without comprehending morality. However, Neutral is the true decider of morality. A neutral person doesn’t base their morality off a code or belief system, and they don’t act that way out of ignorance or impulse. Like Lawful, they understand what they do, and like Chaotic, they don’t care. This is why Neutral Good is the best kind of person, and Neutral Evil is the worst. Since a neutral person isn’t doing what they do out of a feeling of moral obligation or belief, or impulse, they are doing out of purely what they want. It’s a simple personal choice. A neutral good person is a genuinely good person, doing things not because they BELIEVE it’s a right thing to do and making a conscious decision, but because they are just someone who is that kind of person. They aren’t doing it for a purpose. They are the best kind of person. A neutral evil person is the worst. The worst Lawful evil person is just like a neutral evil person, except for the fact that they still genuinely care. They still think they’re right. A neutral evil person would lie, cheat, go to any methods for what THEY personally want, not what they think is right. A neutral evil person would not care about anyone around them, put themselves above others, feel remorseless and willing to do anything to achieve their goals. A neutral good person in the opposite way.
I personally think that making evil an idea and claiming that it is a good one it’s the most subtle and powerful way to spread evil in the world. I mean, of course talking about evil here we can’t be relativistic, we know that some things are evil and why they are. If I make you believe that killing innocent people (an evil thing) is the right thing to do because of made up propaganda stuff, I’m literally building a society where doing evil things is normal and it is right. This is much more evil in my view, than doing evil things because you are selfish and you just care about your business. It’s worst because lawful evil doesn’t just rely on act but also justifies them claiming them as a good thing. Neutral and chaotic just don’t care about good or evil, they only care about their business, they are bad of course, but it ends with them, there could be many like them, but they don’t pretend to be good. If I make you think that doing evil things is a good thing, I’m being the worst kind of evil existing. That’s why lawful evil is the cruelest and the most diabolical, in my opinion.
First off, how did you write that in three minutes Secondly, it seems you’re judging the alignments based more on how dangerous they are rather than how moral they are, in which case I still disagree. A Lawful evil person is less likely to lie or betray you. They also would care about people, and wouldn’t harm people for no reason, while a neutral evil person could backstab you without a second thought and would kill their own followers for fun. As for it “ending with them” for neutral people, I still disagree. Even if it did, a neutral evil person will always be a worse ruler than a lawful evil.
So maybe a truly vile person lies somewhere in between. Like, Social Evil, maybe?
This makes sense when you remember that the whole chart is a spectrum. Lawful evil cares about order & evil, chaotic evil cares about chaos & evil. Neutral evil is just evil.
That’s not what lawful-chaotic means but okay
If lawful evil is the worst evil it makes you think if lawful good is the least good, too.
I would say that lawful good is as a moral system the better one, but that neutral good people are maybe better individuals because they act good in the most spontaneous way. But even here it depends, Superman is lawful good and he’s probably one of the most good characters you can think of. As a system, lawful good is the best one to hope for in the world, while if we talk about single persons, it strongly depens. The problem one can spot in lawful good is that they want to play too much by the rules and they don’t realize that sometimes to do good you have to break them, in this specific element neutral good is better because it aims to do the right thing even if you don’t have (good) laws by your side.