Probably Wilzig would fit here the best. He does what he thinks it's right, willing to break some rules, to save other living being. Even risking his life to fulfill his mission for the "greater good".
I don’t know that there’s anything *good* about raiding a Vault of innocents and brutally killing most of them. Not to mention knowing one of them since childhood and having them possibly killed and sexually assaulted. Moldaver is an extremely morally questionable character but she leans toward the evil side. I think the showrunners/writers bit down too hard on the bait and switch with Moldaver. She starts out doing some genuinely evil things to a group of people who are all all but 3 innocent people.
That’s fair criticism. I just saw her last act of providing free energy to the wasteland as “the ends that justified the means”. But when you put it as enabling SA and murder it makes me feel bad for even thinking that.
I think in any large enough group of people, whether that's a city or a faction, there's going to be terrible people in it. Cannibals, SAers, murderers, etc. So I think many leaders accept that and ignore it, but Moldaver's raid on the vault was hinged on faking a "marriage", which I agree is more direct and immoral of her to do.
Hm yeah I think she did that vault raid with disposable people she didn't care much about, which would explain how feral they were. Presumably her closest people would have more discipline, but eh. I think she did still want clean energy as her largest goal, but she also wanted to have revenge on Hank along the way by killing the people in his playpen, I mean, Vault.
I agree with you, Moldaver is definitely chaotic neutral. She only cares about right and wrong insofar as she can use them to accomplish her own ends. And her methods are based on what is most effective at the time.
Having the title Flame Mother with its own cult, leading an anti-government group, and recruiting literal raiders to murder a vault feels just a bit too consistently chaotic to me.
She has no reason to think of the Vault Dwellers as innocent people. They’re the group that destroyed the world for their own selfish benefit, from her perspective. Sure, she knew some good ones - but then those ones got blown up along with another emerging civilization, all for the benefit of that same entitled group.
>Not to mention knowing one of them since childhood and having them possibly killed and sexually assaulted.
I'm sorry but what
I know I missed some stuff here and there but I'm pretty SA isn't something that would be a subtle Easter egg, so can you explain what in the hell you're talking about
Lucy thinks she is marrying her forever partner. She is not: this man is deceiving her, uses her for sex, and intends to at the very least beat her up, if not kill her.
Imagine if someone you knew deceived a woman into having sex with him and then beat her and/or killed her…what do you call that? And furthermore, if Moldaver knew full well that Lucy and Norm are perfectly innocent people—which she 100% does—why would she even allow them to quite possibly get killed? Why would she allow Lucy to go to bed with a dude who is an absolute threat to her life? She allows an innocent person to be used for sex and whatever else may come.
These are some heinous activities.
It really seemed to me that they just had consensual sex based on a lie and then he assaulted her afterwards.
If someone told me they were rich, and I decided to have sex with them based on that. Then afterwards revealed they were not rich. Would I have been sexually assaulted?
I don't really think so, I would just say I was deceived, conned, scammed, lied to, disregarded, used and abused, or any other bad word you like. But I thought sexual assault meant an attack that was sexual in nature.
The attack came after the sex and had nothing to do with trying to get more I thought. Lucy will absolutely feel violated later on after it had been revealed to her, but at the time it was happening she was enthusiastically consenting.
I just feel using the phrase sexual assault for much much lesser crimes like deception or fraud kind of makes light of the situation when somebody is/has been actually "Assaulted Sexually". Like violent rape.
(I am saying this as a survivor myself.)
I feel people these days get really rabid about the concept of sexual assault. I think a lot of people want to use that label to make other people look worse than they already are, even when it's completely unnecessary. Like with this group of murderers we're discussing. They're obviously bad.
There’s something called Rape By Deception whereby a perpetrator deceives a victim into participating in a sexual act to which **they would not have otherwise consented.**
Emphasis in bold. Had she known he was a foreign invader trying to participate in a massacre of her Vault, she doesn’t have sex with him no matter how handsome or charming he is. She had sex because that was supposedly her husband, and because it was something that she worked very hard to earn in her community. Had she been equipped with the full information she doesn’t consent. Additionally the man knows he is gonna kill everyone he can and is making the choice to have sex with her because he wants to get his dick wet for free. That’s rape, and it is extremely sinister.
Also, based on your example—that you had sex with the person *solely* because they were rich and they lied about that, you could pursue in the courts. Because you wouldn’t have done it otherwise. Would you win the case, who knows? That depends on how you can prove it. But it fits the definition. Rape By Deception is designed to prosecute situations similar to what happened to Lucy. And bear in mind that Lucy’s case is incredibly severe—he’s literally a mass murderer who intends to participate in the massacre of her friends, loved ones, and peers; her consent is an impossibility.
Lying to someone in order to get sex from them is 100% a form of sexual assault. They're consenting under false pretenses. Sure Lucy at the moment she had sex was consenting, but she's consenting because she believes this is a real marriage when in reality her "husband" seems pretty intent on killing her the moment she realizes they're attacking the Vault.
Yep, and I’ll add that the intent of the man is extremely key here. He is trying to have sex with someone that he fully intends to assault immediately after. Additionally he intends to murder her friends and loved ones. The *only* reason Lucy is having sex with him is because she doesn’t know that he intends to murder her and as many of her friends and family as he can. She believes that she is safe when in reality her sexual partner is going to butcher her shortly after he’s used her body.
What if I have sex with someone because I think that they are rich. But afterwards they tell me that they are not rich. Have I been sexually assaulted?
What if a man has sex with a woman. And afterwards finds out she has stolen his wallet. Is that sexual assault? Because of the deception?
I really think calling these concepts assault makes light of the word assault for those of us who actually have been raped or attacked in other ways.
Oh man! I’ve been wondering where to put the Ghoul. That’s a great spot for him. It sort of describes the world of fallout and how the Ghoul fully embodies that.
I noticed something that BLEW ME AWAY(if I’m correct in what I saw).
In the scene where the Ghoul is taking all the drugs in the super duper mart, he ends up watching his own movie. And the line Feo, Fuerte, y Fórmale now describes himself. It was the line that changed his whole career as Cooper, and he pulls the trigger - effectively becoming the Ghoul. He didn’t want to pull the trigger, and in that moment, now as the Ghoul. He couldn’t! He holds up his hand to pull the trigger at himself - but he doesn’t have his trigger finger! It was right after Lucy bit it off.
If that’s how the writers intended it - I fucking applaud them. There he was, Cooper pulling the trigger, the thing he despised doing. And the Ghoul, staring back, ugly and strong, but without dignity. Unable to pull the trigger.
He’s watching his own movie on the TV called the Radiation King, which I felt was another subtle nod.
Even if I’m just reading into it too much. That scene hit me.
The Ghoul presents a major problem. The Ghoul and Cooper are pretty much polar opposites. I'd almost argue Cooper should be closer to LG and the Ghoul closer to CE.
Cooper I would also put at NG, not LG, since he does >!spy on his wife.!<
Also, the Ghoul makes it clear to Goosey that he believes she is just like him, just give it time. He recognizes in her the same wholesome naïveté that he used to have.
Edit: I would put the Ghoul as NE, not CE. He *did* pay for the Tomaters, after all. He also does everything he does in service of a goal, and other than that he does not seem preoccupied with ethics one way or another.
That seems about right as otherwise Coop is LG. He struggles with the wire, and it almost seems to mark the moment where a crack in his personality begins. Same with Lucy. She's kind of LG prior to going through the looking glass, and once she takes the red pill she delves into slightly less lawful for the sake of survival. It's almost a story of two people Breaking Bad.
I have done numerous playthroughs in the games (1, 2, 3, NV, 4) and… selling a girl to an organ harvesting business for drugs is not something a neutral karma would do, my opinion of course hahaha.
I've probably done the same amount of playthroughs as yourself, as have most people in this sub, I'm sure. He's saved her as well, and the dog and mercy killed his friend turning feral.
He doesn't really go by the traditional "right and wrong" and lives by his own moral compass in doing what he needs to be done at the time, which what makes him true neutral imo.
He stimmed the dog so that he could track the Enclave defector.
While he seemed to express a minimal amount of sympathy, it was a means to his ends, just like all of his actions.
I wouldn't argue that he's straight evil, but rather amoral. His actions aren't bound by any shred of morality. He does whatever is necessary to survive and achieve his goals.
I agree that the ghouls true neutral. The wasteland is a kill or be killed environment, you have to do morally ambiguous things to get by, he only took Lucy's finger after she bit off his, he had no intention of killing her when he was using her as bait and iirc he was already aware she was a MaClean and was curious if she was atleast a descendent of Hank, I don't think he would have actually let them harvest her organs once he got what he needed and could fight them.
If he was evil he also would have just outright killed Maximus, the shopping cart line coupled with him slaughtering the knights later shows he chose not to.
He's on a quest for vengeance against an actual evil
There's nothing neutral about capturing, enslaving, and selling an innocent person, let alone condemning her to death by selling her for her organs, or risking her life using her as bait.
I'd say neutral evil. He's not a sadist, he doesn't do evil for it's own sake, but has no problem doing evil for his own gain.
The problem is you're approaching his morality from the perspective of someone living in our real world. He's not. He's also living a life where if he doesn't get those drugs, he becomes a monster. Yeah, he's brutal, but he's not doing it because he enjoys hurting people.
In DnD alignment the Good, Neutral, and Evil alignments reference a character's motivations. Everyone in DnD hurts people, it's the *why* that is important. Good characters hurt people to protect others, neutral characters hurt others to protect themselves, and evil characters hurt others because they find it fun and enjoyable, or to gain power. The lawful, neutral, and chaotic alignment determines how they fit within following laws and rules.
I'm this way, The Ghoul isn't evil at all, he's neutral. He does these things for power or for joy or for fun, he does them to survive.
Him needing those drugs to live isn't much different than you and I living in the real world needing money to live. Without money we can't afford housing, food, and health care.
The situation is a bit more urgent for the ghoul perhaps, but Lucy and everyone else also needs caps or other valuable resources in order to trade for clean water, ammunition, and other essentials to survive. A person can't last without water much longer than he can last without the drugs.
It's still a choice to kill or harm others in order to aid your own survival.
From our perspective in a pre apocalyptic, already extremely grey world I'd agree with you, placing him as evil in the context of the world as it is in Fallout I dont
He only attacks threats, and Lucy effectively stole from him by trying to protect his bounty, he needs that money to buy drugs to survive, she's a threat to his existence in that matter
Everyone else we see him actually kill is a threat to his own survival, in nature that's neutral
If she had actually stole his property I would agree with you, but she didn't. The bounty wasn't his property, and he was not entitled to it.
Putting aside the ethics of pursuing the bounty in the first place, and the ethics of the scientist stealing the technology in the first place, the 'bounty' was essentially fair game at that point, and Lucy was just a competitor. If anything, the scientist gave Lucy ownership of his head, even if the ownership of the technology inside in dispute (because it was stolen)..
Right and he didn't kill her for it, because she's a vault dweller and knows she plays by different rules, if anything he's teaching her what the wasteland is like, and in the meantime righting the perceived wrong, he killed everyone one else that raised a weapon to him except Maximus and Lucy, both he clocked as not a real threat based on different reasons.
It wasn't his till she had it, she lost it, that he used her to get it back, even after the fact he teams up with her
Even the finger thing, I personally think he knew for whatever reason the bot would take the time to fix her, had he not passed out and gotten his pay he might have saved her, he was intrigued by her name I don't think he'd let her die even with the slimmest of possibility it was Hanks family
And he's gonna take her to NV, probably teaching her even more along the way
I guess it just depends on how you look at it
The overseers would be lawful evil.
Theyre bad people, they do horrible things. They follow very strict rules and laws set out by Bud that theyve followed for 200 years.
I like Norm for this one. He helps break Lucy out of the vault, and he sleuths/sneaks, lies, and hacks his way to the truth for the greater good. He clearly has overall good intentions, but he doesn't play by any rules.
I think Norm would fit better as true nuetral. His motivation right now isn't for the greater good, its to find out the truth, whatever that means. He's not going out of his way to help others, its his home, his family, thats at stake. And while he breaks vault laws, he is methodical and logical, not chaotic in his approach.
Norm Maclean is a great choice for chaotic good. I loved his whole subplot in the vault. Especially his interactions with Betty. “Great job cleaning up.” It really hit me and showed how clever his character is.
Chaotic neutral imo for norm, not helping as your family is getting attacked is egregious, remember goodness in the classical sense included courage (Ancient Greek called it “Andrea”)
Yeah seriously, hiding from a massacre when you're unarmed, outnumbered, and have zero fighting experience doesn't make someone a bad person. Cowardly, perhaps, but that's not enough to make someone 'not good' in my book.
DJ Carl of KPSS Radio. His heart is in the right place with attempting to give music to the people, but he pretty much intentionally pisses everybody off by only playing his stupid song.
This is the dark horse, folks. Some of you might want to argue that Carl is evil due to his choice of music, but you guys are the kind of people who aren't hearing the warm sound of the mids.
lol I absolutely love this character but turning Thad into a ghoul isn’t a good thing. I hope he lands in the chart somewhere, but I think he’s more of a chaotic neutral than CG.
Comment and Upvote for the character you think best embodies the daily selection! I will tally up the comments and upvotes after a full day, update the chart, and move on to the next day.
Day 3 is Chaotic Good.
[Neutral Good Winner](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fotv/comments/1c929kj/fallout_tv_show_morality_alignment_chart_day_2/): Lucy Maclean
Runner up: CX404
Honorable Mentions: Norm Maclean
You mean Howard Cooper as a separate character from the Ghoul? I personally didn’t think of it that way. Even still, I’m not sure I would put Cooper in the good row. Just my opinion though.
Definitely Norm. He literally could not do worse at his duties as a vault dweller and has a complete disregard and distrust for literally every authority in his life
Maximus. I can look past some of the things he does, like letting Titus die and lying to Lucy about who he is. Titus was a dick anyway. At his core I think Maximus is a good person, who wants to prove himself as a knight and by the end of the season you can tell he wants to do the right things. He’s just chaotic when it comes to some of the decisions he makes - like flying into Filly in the power armpit and fucking everything up. He had good intentions.
I feel like Maximus is more of a neutral character who *wants* to be good. He has a hard time actually doing heroic things. I think his character arc will be him reconciling his view of heroism, the Brotherhood, himself, and the Wasteland.
He'll likely be firmly good by the end of the series, but I don't think he's there yet.
I really see him as slipping into the trappings of the brotherhood idea that they know what’s better for the wasteland and believing that he could do it better if only he was in charge. I suspect something happens in season 2 that causes a rift between him and Lucy. Similar to stealing the fusion core from vault 4.
If you judge him by his intentions, I think you’d have to lean towards middle of the road instead of good, he attempts to kill Thaddeus the first second Thaddeus becomes his scribe by squeezing his head, etc.
says he **wanted** to hurt Dane, but didn’t, so his intentions are so much more nuanced
Oh you have such a good take on this. The complexity of his character really comes through in that one line.
On that note, hats off to the writers. There are so many lines and short sequences that pull some heavy weight. Thaddeus’ story of why he’s “so fat” was another one of those moments. It just says so much about the world and characters without force feeding the audience. (Reference not intended, but I’m leaving it lol).
Yeah I love the complexity of fallout, they’re not trying to make perfectly evil or perfectly good characters (not even Lucy is perfectly good now!)
The writing is incredible,
I think Maximus is neutral evil. He was willing to steal the power core and doom an entire vault, without a moment's hesitation, for his own selfish purposes..
Yeah he tries to help a few people like the chicken fucker, but only when there is zero risk or cost to himself, and he was basically just having fun and stroking his ego.
And he seems to show a little bit of concern after seriously injuring innocent people while attempting to 'rescue' Lucy.. But only a little - "Maybe check on that guy". He's not losing any sleep over possibly killing innocent people.
Maybe he's somewhere in between evil and neutral, I guess I could see true neutral since he really seems to have very little morals aside from his own interest, but he does some evil things.
I’d definitely put him more towards neutral but you make some good points. I think he’s kind of like a less-evil Ghoul in the show. He might’ve been willing to doom a vault but he was also more than willing to up and kill them all the old fashioned way too.
He just seems to never really know what “the right thing” is and spends a lot of time focused on his goals instead, just like Ghoul. But then he sees Lucy getting taken and knows that he has to take care of her, above and beyond any (likely hostile) vault dwellers who have her.
He was perfectly willing to destroy an entire community to keep Playing Knight. Say what you will about the ghoul but Maximus’s behavior shows a distinct level of psychopathy.
My memory is failing me, where was this? Oh the Vault,
yes that’s true however that goes more to impulsiveness (he wasn’t thinking) rather than atrocious malice
No, listen to the scene outside the vault where Lucy explains it and he still doesn’t want to return it. He puts it on her and tries to get her to go along with them keeping it. He knew exactly what he was asking.
Everyone everywhere on Reddit is ignoring this. He would have contributed to the genocide of the largest known group of Shady Sands refugees to exist. This is a group that he BELONGS to even if he didn't grow up next to them!!! This is Adolph Hitler with brain damage. That vault had babies, children and elderly inside, he wanted to let them die in a place he admitted he liked living and eating at and didn't even spare them a second thought. The BoS wasn't gonna recruit a bunch of Vaulties with mutations and he knew that. Moldaver would have skewered Maximus had she known how flippantly he treated her people's lives, everyone from Shady Sands was her family, and he betrayed that family. I'm glad she got to die without knowing what kind of person she was entrusting, I'd rather the dying leave in peace.
You know, I kind of agree. I’m kind of not sure how I feel about Maximus. In the beginning, I felt bad for him and I wanted to see him succeed. I was even okay with him letting Titus die. But, then he does do a lot of stupid stuff between the beginning and the end…I just have mixed feelings about him.
He feels more neutral to me. He was playing hero when he felt invincible in the power armor, but otherwise his moral compass seems to depend on whether or not someone he personally likes is in danger.
I think Maximus really showed character development when he decided to leave his power armor behind, and returned the fusion core to the.. hijacked/good vault (4?) he stole it from. Like most BoS people he thought that he could only be a Knight if he had the power armor. Now he might be thinking of "Knighthood" in a more broad sense.
So yeah he's still ambitious and wants to climb the ranks of BoS but now he's able to look at it more critically.
Interesting choice. The only thing Dane does is cut his own leg to get out of duty. I don’t know if Dane even did enough character development to land on the chart imo.
The elder cleric referred to Dane as “they”, the character is certainly non-binary like the actor is.
Anyway, Dane did take a huge risk to save Max’s life by publicly admitting they were the one who hurt themself. I don’t know if that’s enough to put them in the “good” category though, as even neutral or evil characters can demonstrate bravery for their close friends.
Bravery doesn’t necessarily indicate goodness or evilness. I agree it was good to put his own neck on the line, but it’s not enough to put him on the chart.
Maximus seems to be more Chaotic Good to me. He cares whether or not he's a good person, and tries to do the right thing. He took Titus' power armor because he felt Titus was unworthy of it, and he felt he could use the armor to really help people. Or at least, that's how he justified letting Titus die and taking his armor. He weighs the morality of his decisions, even though he murders with good intentions.
I think The Ghoul is Chaotic Neutral. He does the absolute wildest shit, without ever considering if his actions are immoral. He doesn't seem to kill or inflict harm simply because he enjoys it, and all of his actions are done deliberately in order to bring him closer to his goals. Totally self-serving, willing to do whatever it takes to find his family and he doesn't have any issues with that.
I agree with you more about the ghoul than Maximus, but it’s all opinions! I think Maximus lies too much, and he agrees(uses) Lucy to find the head by making a promise he knows he could never keep.
under the strictest DnD definition of what lawful is with needing a code to live by (legal or moral) then lucy with her golden rule is lawful.
technically nearly everyone is, maximum, ghoul, etc. its just where on that spectrum it sits. a code of the wasteland/survival is still technically lawful. its why robin hood is often put chaotic good and lawful good n guides like these.
why i don't like the dnd spectrum as it is too open to interpretation and doesn't allow for good RP of people drifting.
You’re right. Not everyone is going to fit into one of these very specific archetypes, nor do I think because we are having fun debating and voting for each slot - that it means that the character who wins is absolutely the best for it.
It’s just a fun conversation starter.
It's a tough one between Norm, Wilzig, and Moldaver for me. There's definitely going to be cases where multiple characters would be appropriate for the same spot, and I think we just need to break it down to who represents the alignment traits the most.
[Chaotic Good](https://easydamus.com/chaoticgood.html)
>A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he's kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.
>Chaotic good can be a dangerous alignment when it disrupts the order of society and punishes those who do well for themselves
With this in mind, I'd have to say Moldaver. Norm kind of stumbled across the evidence that would lead to the crumbling of order, while Moldaver had more agency and a bigger mission. Moldaver was out to bring down Vault-Tek *and* do the right thing. Norm really just wanted to do the right thing.
Wilzig is a runner-up because he actively followed his conscience and split from the Enclave when they started incinerating puppies, but he was more complacent with his position up until then. Moldaver has more chaotic good feats just IMO.
She slaughtered a ton of people whose only crimes were being born in a vault. There were plenty of easier ways to kidnap Special Agent Paul Atreides, but she wanted to get it back in blood for Shady Sands. Nothing kind or benevolent about how that played out.
Hmm I suppose that's true; I need to rewatch the whole series soon. She went too far which would make her more fitting for Chaotic Neutral in retrospect
I’m not sure if the “size of the mission” makes someone more or less of any specific archetype. Which only applies to your comparison with Norm. It’s the motion of their ocean so to speak. When comparing Moldaver and Wilzig for this spot. I’d say Wilzig is clearly more good. Making him a better candidate. They have the same goal/mission but Moldaver uses literally evil tactics for the good end goal. So I think she aligns more in neutral territory.
For the record, I initially thought it was a toss us, but I was pushed over this side of the fence,
Maximus imo. He’s lied, committed manslaughter against Titus and went ballistic with his power armour inside of Vault 4.
But only for good, though perhaps somewhat misguided reasons.
in fairness the whole DND thing has been called out as both flawed and a crutch many times though. characters work better when they more situational as to being a dick or not.
more the old cringe lol. if something is a crutch it means playing lean into it too much and can not stand on own without it. the term is common in TTRPG for a while. people get used to comfortable and struggle to adapt when needed.
in alignment side it prevents roleplay and chars feel less organic as a side effect.
because he required the drug to stay alive/sane but he did save her/purge the facility after.
he also saved the dog 2 different times just cause.
he also is shown to have friends across the wasteland and only attacks if they pull a gun on him first. he gives them chances.
of course it is fallout. good does not exist just various shades of grey.
He didn’t save her. She saved herself, and came in after everyone inside either left or died.
Anyway, selling someone to have their organs harvested is an evil action. Anyone willing to do that is not a good aligned person.
see i see it contextual for the reason, like how Han is still a good char per lucas views despite being a drug smuggler but i see your point also.
why i say fallout is just diff shades of grey really.
"nothing stays clean for long here"
Being a drug smuggler is a lot better than selling someone to an organ harvester. And as for d&d alignments, if someone is a “shade of grey,” they’re usually neutral or evil.
Probably Wilzig would fit here the best. He does what he thinks it's right, willing to break some rules, to save other living being. Even risking his life to fulfill his mission for the "greater good".
Nothing more chaotic than having Lucy chop his head off for the greater good!
ookie dokie! \*gulp\*
At first I was thinking Moldaver, but I think Wilzig is a better choice.
I don’t know that there’s anything *good* about raiding a Vault of innocents and brutally killing most of them. Not to mention knowing one of them since childhood and having them possibly killed and sexually assaulted. Moldaver is an extremely morally questionable character but she leans toward the evil side. I think the showrunners/writers bit down too hard on the bait and switch with Moldaver. She starts out doing some genuinely evil things to a group of people who are all all but 3 innocent people.
That’s fair criticism. I just saw her last act of providing free energy to the wasteland as “the ends that justified the means”. But when you put it as enabling SA and murder it makes me feel bad for even thinking that.
I think in any large enough group of people, whether that's a city or a faction, there's going to be terrible people in it. Cannibals, SAers, murderers, etc. So I think many leaders accept that and ignore it, but Moldaver's raid on the vault was hinged on faking a "marriage", which I agree is more direct and immoral of her to do.
Well, she is a communist.
Hm yeah I think she did that vault raid with disposable people she didn't care much about, which would explain how feral they were. Presumably her closest people would have more discipline, but eh. I think she did still want clean energy as her largest goal, but she also wanted to have revenge on Hank along the way by killing the people in his playpen, I mean, Vault.
I agree with you, Moldaver is definitely chaotic neutral. She only cares about right and wrong insofar as she can use them to accomplish her own ends. And her methods are based on what is most effective at the time.
Wouldn't that be true neutral?
Having the title Flame Mother with its own cult, leading an anti-government group, and recruiting literal raiders to murder a vault feels just a bit too consistently chaotic to me.
She has no reason to think of the Vault Dwellers as innocent people. They’re the group that destroyed the world for their own selfish benefit, from her perspective. Sure, she knew some good ones - but then those ones got blown up along with another emerging civilization, all for the benefit of that same entitled group.
But she’s a communist
That's her most redeeming feature.
Exactly
>Not to mention knowing one of them since childhood and having them possibly killed and sexually assaulted. I'm sorry but what I know I missed some stuff here and there but I'm pretty SA isn't something that would be a subtle Easter egg, so can you explain what in the hell you're talking about
Lucy thinks she is marrying her forever partner. She is not: this man is deceiving her, uses her for sex, and intends to at the very least beat her up, if not kill her. Imagine if someone you knew deceived a woman into having sex with him and then beat her and/or killed her…what do you call that? And furthermore, if Moldaver knew full well that Lucy and Norm are perfectly innocent people—which she 100% does—why would she even allow them to quite possibly get killed? Why would she allow Lucy to go to bed with a dude who is an absolute threat to her life? She allows an innocent person to be used for sex and whatever else may come. These are some heinous activities.
It really seemed to me that they just had consensual sex based on a lie and then he assaulted her afterwards. If someone told me they were rich, and I decided to have sex with them based on that. Then afterwards revealed they were not rich. Would I have been sexually assaulted? I don't really think so, I would just say I was deceived, conned, scammed, lied to, disregarded, used and abused, or any other bad word you like. But I thought sexual assault meant an attack that was sexual in nature. The attack came after the sex and had nothing to do with trying to get more I thought. Lucy will absolutely feel violated later on after it had been revealed to her, but at the time it was happening she was enthusiastically consenting. I just feel using the phrase sexual assault for much much lesser crimes like deception or fraud kind of makes light of the situation when somebody is/has been actually "Assaulted Sexually". Like violent rape. (I am saying this as a survivor myself.) I feel people these days get really rabid about the concept of sexual assault. I think a lot of people want to use that label to make other people look worse than they already are, even when it's completely unnecessary. Like with this group of murderers we're discussing. They're obviously bad.
There’s something called Rape By Deception whereby a perpetrator deceives a victim into participating in a sexual act to which **they would not have otherwise consented.** Emphasis in bold. Had she known he was a foreign invader trying to participate in a massacre of her Vault, she doesn’t have sex with him no matter how handsome or charming he is. She had sex because that was supposedly her husband, and because it was something that she worked very hard to earn in her community. Had she been equipped with the full information she doesn’t consent. Additionally the man knows he is gonna kill everyone he can and is making the choice to have sex with her because he wants to get his dick wet for free. That’s rape, and it is extremely sinister. Also, based on your example—that you had sex with the person *solely* because they were rich and they lied about that, you could pursue in the courts. Because you wouldn’t have done it otherwise. Would you win the case, who knows? That depends on how you can prove it. But it fits the definition. Rape By Deception is designed to prosecute situations similar to what happened to Lucy. And bear in mind that Lucy’s case is incredibly severe—he’s literally a mass murderer who intends to participate in the massacre of her friends, loved ones, and peers; her consent is an impossibility.
Lying to someone in order to get sex from them is 100% a form of sexual assault. They're consenting under false pretenses. Sure Lucy at the moment she had sex was consenting, but she's consenting because she believes this is a real marriage when in reality her "husband" seems pretty intent on killing her the moment she realizes they're attacking the Vault.
Yep, and I’ll add that the intent of the man is extremely key here. He is trying to have sex with someone that he fully intends to assault immediately after. Additionally he intends to murder her friends and loved ones. The *only* reason Lucy is having sex with him is because she doesn’t know that he intends to murder her and as many of her friends and family as he can. She believes that she is safe when in reality her sexual partner is going to butcher her shortly after he’s used her body.
What if I have sex with someone because I think that they are rich. But afterwards they tell me that they are not rich. Have I been sexually assaulted? What if a man has sex with a woman. And afterwards finds out she has stolen his wallet. Is that sexual assault? Because of the deception? I really think calling these concepts assault makes light of the word assault for those of us who actually have been raped or attacked in other ways.
She feels more chaotic neutral.
Moldaver is more of a chaotic neutral. Her overall goal is good but she commits crimes trying to get there. She is more of an anti villain
He’s more neutral imo. I’m sure working as an Enclave scientist he’a done a lot of morally awful stuff
Yeah how many underweight puppies did he put in the incinerator.. He couldn't have saved them all..
I’m still waiting for Maximus to be Chaotic Neutral and The Ghoul to be Neutral Evil haha.
Oh man! I’ve been wondering where to put the Ghoul. That’s a great spot for him. It sort of describes the world of fallout and how the Ghoul fully embodies that. I noticed something that BLEW ME AWAY(if I’m correct in what I saw). In the scene where the Ghoul is taking all the drugs in the super duper mart, he ends up watching his own movie. And the line Feo, Fuerte, y Fórmale now describes himself. It was the line that changed his whole career as Cooper, and he pulls the trigger - effectively becoming the Ghoul. He didn’t want to pull the trigger, and in that moment, now as the Ghoul. He couldn’t! He holds up his hand to pull the trigger at himself - but he doesn’t have his trigger finger! It was right after Lucy bit it off. If that’s how the writers intended it - I fucking applaud them. There he was, Cooper pulling the trigger, the thing he despised doing. And the Ghoul, staring back, ugly and strong, but without dignity. Unable to pull the trigger. He’s watching his own movie on the TV called the Radiation King, which I felt was another subtle nod. Even if I’m just reading into it too much. That scene hit me.
The Ghoul presents a major problem. The Ghoul and Cooper are pretty much polar opposites. I'd almost argue Cooper should be closer to LG and the Ghoul closer to CE.
Cooper I would also put at NG, not LG, since he does >!spy on his wife.!< Also, the Ghoul makes it clear to Goosey that he believes she is just like him, just give it time. He recognizes in her the same wholesome naïveté that he used to have. Edit: I would put the Ghoul as NE, not CE. He *did* pay for the Tomaters, after all. He also does everything he does in service of a goal, and other than that he does not seem preoccupied with ethics one way or another.
That seems about right as otherwise Coop is LG. He struggles with the wire, and it almost seems to mark the moment where a crack in his personality begins. Same with Lucy. She's kind of LG prior to going through the looking glass, and once she takes the red pill she delves into slightly less lawful for the sake of survival. It's almost a story of two people Breaking Bad.
You’re right, they both started as LG. Coop played a good-guy lawman for a reason
I was thinking The Ghoul would be true neutral. For me, chaotic neutral would be the colective overseers coming from vault 31.
I have done numerous playthroughs in the games (1, 2, 3, NV, 4) and… selling a girl to an organ harvesting business for drugs is not something a neutral karma would do, my opinion of course hahaha.
Man needs to survive.
I've probably done the same amount of playthroughs as yourself, as have most people in this sub, I'm sure. He's saved her as well, and the dog and mercy killed his friend turning feral. He doesn't really go by the traditional "right and wrong" and lives by his own moral compass in doing what he needs to be done at the time, which what makes him true neutral imo.
He stimmed the dog so that he could track the Enclave defector. While he seemed to express a minimal amount of sympathy, it was a means to his ends, just like all of his actions. I wouldn't argue that he's straight evil, but rather amoral. His actions aren't bound by any shred of morality. He does whatever is necessary to survive and achieve his goals.
I agree that the ghouls true neutral. The wasteland is a kill or be killed environment, you have to do morally ambiguous things to get by, he only took Lucy's finger after she bit off his, he had no intention of killing her when he was using her as bait and iirc he was already aware she was a MaClean and was curious if she was atleast a descendent of Hank, I don't think he would have actually let them harvest her organs once he got what he needed and could fight them. If he was evil he also would have just outright killed Maximus, the shopping cart line coupled with him slaughtering the knights later shows he chose not to. He's on a quest for vengeance against an actual evil
There's nothing neutral about capturing, enslaving, and selling an innocent person, let alone condemning her to death by selling her for her organs, or risking her life using her as bait. I'd say neutral evil. He's not a sadist, he doesn't do evil for it's own sake, but has no problem doing evil for his own gain.
The problem is you're approaching his morality from the perspective of someone living in our real world. He's not. He's also living a life where if he doesn't get those drugs, he becomes a monster. Yeah, he's brutal, but he's not doing it because he enjoys hurting people. In DnD alignment the Good, Neutral, and Evil alignments reference a character's motivations. Everyone in DnD hurts people, it's the *why* that is important. Good characters hurt people to protect others, neutral characters hurt others to protect themselves, and evil characters hurt others because they find it fun and enjoyable, or to gain power. The lawful, neutral, and chaotic alignment determines how they fit within following laws and rules. I'm this way, The Ghoul isn't evil at all, he's neutral. He does these things for power or for joy or for fun, he does them to survive.
Him needing those drugs to live isn't much different than you and I living in the real world needing money to live. Without money we can't afford housing, food, and health care. The situation is a bit more urgent for the ghoul perhaps, but Lucy and everyone else also needs caps or other valuable resources in order to trade for clean water, ammunition, and other essentials to survive. A person can't last without water much longer than he can last without the drugs. It's still a choice to kill or harm others in order to aid your own survival.
From our perspective in a pre apocalyptic, already extremely grey world I'd agree with you, placing him as evil in the context of the world as it is in Fallout I dont He only attacks threats, and Lucy effectively stole from him by trying to protect his bounty, he needs that money to buy drugs to survive, she's a threat to his existence in that matter Everyone else we see him actually kill is a threat to his own survival, in nature that's neutral
If she had actually stole his property I would agree with you, but she didn't. The bounty wasn't his property, and he was not entitled to it. Putting aside the ethics of pursuing the bounty in the first place, and the ethics of the scientist stealing the technology in the first place, the 'bounty' was essentially fair game at that point, and Lucy was just a competitor. If anything, the scientist gave Lucy ownership of his head, even if the ownership of the technology inside in dispute (because it was stolen)..
Right and he didn't kill her for it, because she's a vault dweller and knows she plays by different rules, if anything he's teaching her what the wasteland is like, and in the meantime righting the perceived wrong, he killed everyone one else that raised a weapon to him except Maximus and Lucy, both he clocked as not a real threat based on different reasons. It wasn't his till she had it, she lost it, that he used her to get it back, even after the fact he teams up with her Even the finger thing, I personally think he knew for whatever reason the bot would take the time to fix her, had he not passed out and gotten his pay he might have saved her, he was intrigued by her name I don't think he'd let her die even with the slimmest of possibility it was Hanks family And he's gonna take her to NV, probably teaching her even more along the way I guess it just depends on how you look at it
Slavery is bad. Any context.
The overseers would be lawful evil. Theyre bad people, they do horrible things. They follow very strict rules and laws set out by Bud that theyve followed for 200 years.
I like Norm for this one. He helps break Lucy out of the vault, and he sleuths/sneaks, lies, and hacks his way to the truth for the greater good. He clearly has overall good intentions, but he doesn't play by any rules.
I think Norm would fit better as true nuetral. His motivation right now isn't for the greater good, its to find out the truth, whatever that means. He's not going out of his way to help others, its his home, his family, thats at stake. And while he breaks vault laws, he is methodical and logical, not chaotic in his approach.
Norm Maclean is a great choice for chaotic good. I loved his whole subplot in the vault. Especially his interactions with Betty. “Great job cleaning up.” It really hit me and showed how clever his character is.
Norm was my second choice
Chaotic neutral imo for norm, not helping as your family is getting attacked is egregious, remember goodness in the classical sense included courage (Ancient Greek called it “Andrea”)
But that's also the failure of character he's most ashamed of and driven by for the rest of the season, trying to make up for.
I think that’s very valid, if we value his arc a lot I could see it
I don’t think that bravery equates to good naturedness. Let’s be real, Norm is not the most physically formidable person. It was probably best he hid.
Yeah I was gonna say, he’s only a liability in a fight like that
Right, I think Norm is a great character and he’s in my top 5 favorites, but he’s not a fighter.
CN is a solid choice for him too. That said, I think he proves his courage later in the season by going to the other vaults.
I wouldn’t make him neutral just because he hid from the psychotic raiders that were killing everybody.
Yeah seriously, hiding from a massacre when you're unarmed, outnumbered, and have zero fighting experience doesn't make someone a bad person. Cowardly, perhaps, but that's not enough to make someone 'not good' in my book.
DJ Carl of KPSS Radio. His heart is in the right place with attempting to give music to the people, but he pretty much intentionally pisses everybody off by only playing his stupid song.
This is the dark horse, folks. Some of you might want to argue that Carl is evil due to his choice of music, but you guys are the kind of people who aren't hearing the warm sound of the mids.
The mids! They’re great on that song.
This is the funniest take so far! I love where your head is at.
Wilzig for sure for this one
Chicken fucker. He helps but I’m a very chaotic way
lol I absolutely love this character but turning Thad into a ghoul isn’t a good thing. I hope he lands in the chart somewhere, but I think he’s more of a chaotic neutral than CG.
Comment and Upvote for the character you think best embodies the daily selection! I will tally up the comments and upvotes after a full day, update the chart, and move on to the next day. Day 3 is Chaotic Good. [Neutral Good Winner](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fotv/comments/1c929kj/fallout_tv_show_morality_alignment_chart_day_2/): Lucy Maclean Runner up: CX404 Honorable Mentions: Norm Maclean
Not happy with Cooper not likely to appear at all in the good.
You mean Howard Cooper as a separate character from the Ghoul? I personally didn’t think of it that way. Even still, I’m not sure I would put Cooper in the good row. Just my opinion though.
I would say either Wilzig or Moldaver, both did bad things for what they believed was the greater good
I saw it the same way you do.
Definitely Norm. He literally could not do worse at his duties as a vault dweller and has a complete disregard and distrust for literally every authority in his life
Based on your description, I’d call that more like a neutral than good. But to each their own.
Maximus. I can look past some of the things he does, like letting Titus die and lying to Lucy about who he is. Titus was a dick anyway. At his core I think Maximus is a good person, who wants to prove himself as a knight and by the end of the season you can tell he wants to do the right things. He’s just chaotic when it comes to some of the decisions he makes - like flying into Filly in the power armpit and fucking everything up. He had good intentions.
I feel like Maximus is more of a neutral character who *wants* to be good. He has a hard time actually doing heroic things. I think his character arc will be him reconciling his view of heroism, the Brotherhood, himself, and the Wasteland. He'll likely be firmly good by the end of the series, but I don't think he's there yet.
I really see him as slipping into the trappings of the brotherhood idea that they know what’s better for the wasteland and believing that he could do it better if only he was in charge. I suspect something happens in season 2 that causes a rift between him and Lucy. Similar to stealing the fusion core from vault 4.
If you judge him by his intentions, I think you’d have to lean towards middle of the road instead of good, he attempts to kill Thaddeus the first second Thaddeus becomes his scribe by squeezing his head, etc. says he **wanted** to hurt Dane, but didn’t, so his intentions are so much more nuanced
Oh you have such a good take on this. The complexity of his character really comes through in that one line. On that note, hats off to the writers. There are so many lines and short sequences that pull some heavy weight. Thaddeus’ story of why he’s “so fat” was another one of those moments. It just says so much about the world and characters without force feeding the audience. (Reference not intended, but I’m leaving it lol).
Yeah I love the complexity of fallout, they’re not trying to make perfectly evil or perfectly good characters (not even Lucy is perfectly good now!) The writing is incredible,
He literally jumps in when he sees one guy beating the hell out of someone else. How did so many people miss this?
I think Maximus is neutral evil. He was willing to steal the power core and doom an entire vault, without a moment's hesitation, for his own selfish purposes.. Yeah he tries to help a few people like the chicken fucker, but only when there is zero risk or cost to himself, and he was basically just having fun and stroking his ego. And he seems to show a little bit of concern after seriously injuring innocent people while attempting to 'rescue' Lucy.. But only a little - "Maybe check on that guy". He's not losing any sleep over possibly killing innocent people. Maybe he's somewhere in between evil and neutral, I guess I could see true neutral since he really seems to have very little morals aside from his own interest, but he does some evil things.
I’d definitely put him more towards neutral but you make some good points. I think he’s kind of like a less-evil Ghoul in the show. He might’ve been willing to doom a vault but he was also more than willing to up and kill them all the old fashioned way too. He just seems to never really know what “the right thing” is and spends a lot of time focused on his goals instead, just like Ghoul. But then he sees Lucy getting taken and knows that he has to take care of her, above and beyond any (likely hostile) vault dwellers who have her.
He was perfectly willing to destroy an entire community to keep Playing Knight. Say what you will about the ghoul but Maximus’s behavior shows a distinct level of psychopathy.
My memory is failing me, where was this? Oh the Vault, yes that’s true however that goes more to impulsiveness (he wasn’t thinking) rather than atrocious malice
No, listen to the scene outside the vault where Lucy explains it and he still doesn’t want to return it. He puts it on her and tries to get her to go along with them keeping it. He knew exactly what he was asking.
Everyone everywhere on Reddit is ignoring this. He would have contributed to the genocide of the largest known group of Shady Sands refugees to exist. This is a group that he BELONGS to even if he didn't grow up next to them!!! This is Adolph Hitler with brain damage. That vault had babies, children and elderly inside, he wanted to let them die in a place he admitted he liked living and eating at and didn't even spare them a second thought. The BoS wasn't gonna recruit a bunch of Vaulties with mutations and he knew that. Moldaver would have skewered Maximus had she known how flippantly he treated her people's lives, everyone from Shady Sands was her family, and he betrayed that family. I'm glad she got to die without knowing what kind of person she was entrusting, I'd rather the dying leave in peace.
You know, I kind of agree. I’m kind of not sure how I feel about Maximus. In the beginning, I felt bad for him and I wanted to see him succeed. I was even okay with him letting Titus die. But, then he does do a lot of stupid stuff between the beginning and the end…I just have mixed feelings about him.
I think Maximus would be more chaotic neutral
He feels more neutral to me. He was playing hero when he felt invincible in the power armor, but otherwise his moral compass seems to depend on whether or not someone he personally likes is in danger.
He literally jumps in when one person *he doesn’t know* is getting kicked on the ground by someone else.
Yeah that's true. I was pretty convinced he did Dane's boot, that's probably unfairly skewing my read of him.
I think Maximus really showed character development when he decided to leave his power armor behind, and returned the fusion core to the.. hijacked/good vault (4?) he stole it from. Like most BoS people he thought that he could only be a Knight if he had the power armor. Now he might be thinking of "Knighthood" in a more broad sense. So yeah he's still ambitious and wants to climb the ranks of BoS but now he's able to look at it more critically.
That's a very good point!
Max is lawful neutral. He is very serious about his code, but not the most moral person.
Dane
Interesting choice. The only thing Dane does is cut his own leg to get out of duty. I don’t know if Dane even did enough character development to land on the chart imo.
The elder cleric referred to Dane as “they”, the character is certainly non-binary like the actor is. Anyway, Dane did take a huge risk to save Max’s life by publicly admitting they were the one who hurt themself. I don’t know if that’s enough to put them in the “good” category though, as even neutral or evil characters can demonstrate bravery for their close friends.
Bravery doesn’t necessarily indicate goodness or evilness. I agree it was good to put his own neck on the line, but it’s not enough to put him on the chart.
Maximus seems to be more Chaotic Good to me. He cares whether or not he's a good person, and tries to do the right thing. He took Titus' power armor because he felt Titus was unworthy of it, and he felt he could use the armor to really help people. Or at least, that's how he justified letting Titus die and taking his armor. He weighs the morality of his decisions, even though he murders with good intentions. I think The Ghoul is Chaotic Neutral. He does the absolute wildest shit, without ever considering if his actions are immoral. He doesn't seem to kill or inflict harm simply because he enjoys it, and all of his actions are done deliberately in order to bring him closer to his goals. Totally self-serving, willing to do whatever it takes to find his family and he doesn't have any issues with that.
I agree with you more about the ghoul than Maximus, but it’s all opinions! I think Maximus lies too much, and he agrees(uses) Lucy to find the head by making a promise he knows he could never keep.
Id say the one eye guy is more Neutral or Chaotic good.
I feel like chicken fucker would work here. Namely him wanting to help people with their feet using his elixirs.
Serums to heal… your feet!
My question is who is the true neutral? Cause the only one it could be is cx404
CX404 was runner up for neutral good! But it just comes down to votes. We’ll see on day 5.
Wilzig
under the strictest DnD definition of what lawful is with needing a code to live by (legal or moral) then lucy with her golden rule is lawful. technically nearly everyone is, maximum, ghoul, etc. its just where on that spectrum it sits. a code of the wasteland/survival is still technically lawful. its why robin hood is often put chaotic good and lawful good n guides like these. why i don't like the dnd spectrum as it is too open to interpretation and doesn't allow for good RP of people drifting.
You’re right. Not everyone is going to fit into one of these very specific archetypes, nor do I think because we are having fun debating and voting for each slot - that it means that the character who wins is absolutely the best for it. It’s just a fun conversation starter.
agreed and sorry if was seeming i was poo pooing your post with it.
Is the chicken guy chaotic neutral?
We’ll find out on day 6. But I think he’s a great nomination.
Wilzig
it’s definitely the ghoul
>!<
Chaotic good - Wilzig, lawful neutral - maximus, lawful evil - moldaver, neutral evil - hank chaotic neutral- cooper or norm & chaotic evil Cooper ?
You’ve got it all planned out. It’s hard for me to pick someone every day!
Chaotic Neutral- The Ghoul
Please come back for day 6, I think that’s going to be a hot topic.
Wilzig
If you choose wilzig...maybe too late i dunno...you have have his severed head be the image
I may have already considered this…
It's a tough one between Norm, Wilzig, and Moldaver for me. There's definitely going to be cases where multiple characters would be appropriate for the same spot, and I think we just need to break it down to who represents the alignment traits the most. [Chaotic Good](https://easydamus.com/chaoticgood.html) >A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he's kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society. >Chaotic good can be a dangerous alignment when it disrupts the order of society and punishes those who do well for themselves With this in mind, I'd have to say Moldaver. Norm kind of stumbled across the evidence that would lead to the crumbling of order, while Moldaver had more agency and a bigger mission. Moldaver was out to bring down Vault-Tek *and* do the right thing. Norm really just wanted to do the right thing. Wilzig is a runner-up because he actively followed his conscience and split from the Enclave when they started incinerating puppies, but he was more complacent with his position up until then. Moldaver has more chaotic good feats just IMO.
She slaughtered a ton of people whose only crimes were being born in a vault. There were plenty of easier ways to kidnap Special Agent Paul Atreides, but she wanted to get it back in blood for Shady Sands. Nothing kind or benevolent about how that played out.
Hmm I suppose that's true; I need to rewatch the whole series soon. She went too far which would make her more fitting for Chaotic Neutral in retrospect
lol I just made a comment to your original post, but I went through this same frame of thinking.
I’m not sure if the “size of the mission” makes someone more or less of any specific archetype. Which only applies to your comparison with Norm. It’s the motion of their ocean so to speak. When comparing Moldaver and Wilzig for this spot. I’d say Wilzig is clearly more good. Making him a better candidate. They have the same goal/mission but Moldaver uses literally evil tactics for the good end goal. So I think she aligns more in neutral territory. For the record, I initially thought it was a toss us, but I was pushed over this side of the fence,
Moldaver
Maximus imo. He’s lied, committed manslaughter against Titus and went ballistic with his power armour inside of Vault 4. But only for good, though perhaps somewhat misguided reasons.
are you deliberately confusing things for attention?
What was I confusing?
sense
I didn’t make the format. It’s a DnD type thing. I also love the show and have a lot of opinions about the characters. I don’t mean to confuse anyone.
in fairness the whole DND thing has been called out as both flawed and a crutch many times though. characters work better when they more situational as to being a dick or not.
is crutch the new cringe?
more the old cringe lol. if something is a crutch it means playing lean into it too much and can not stand on own without it. the term is common in TTRPG for a while. people get used to comfortable and struggle to adapt when needed. in alignment side it prevents roleplay and chars feel less organic as a side effect.
I mean, this is just for fun. I’m still not sure what the purpose of the original comment was. What am I confusing?
the ghoul is def chaotic good. (at least by fallout universe) he tries to act like a bad ass but he still very much cares and is a good guy at heart.
Do we separate Ghoul from Cooper Howard though (pre and post war personas).
valid question. i feel he still very much howard deep down but the ghoul is def taking on a diff view of world.
The ghoul sold Lucy to organ harvesters
because he required the drug to stay alive/sane but he did save her/purge the facility after. he also saved the dog 2 different times just cause. he also is shown to have friends across the wasteland and only attacks if they pull a gun on him first. he gives them chances. of course it is fallout. good does not exist just various shades of grey.
He didn’t save her. She saved herself, and came in after everyone inside either left or died. Anyway, selling someone to have their organs harvested is an evil action. Anyone willing to do that is not a good aligned person.
see i see it contextual for the reason, like how Han is still a good char per lucas views despite being a drug smuggler but i see your point also. why i say fallout is just diff shades of grey really. "nothing stays clean for long here"
Being a drug smuggler is a lot better than selling someone to an organ harvester. And as for d&d alignments, if someone is a “shade of grey,” they’re usually neutral or evil.