blueshoesandbluemountains: ohno-zombees: Because Forensics does, eventually, get boring. Here’s the definitions for those who are curious. I’ve had a bit of an epiphany here with this. All the characters I truly detest are Lawful Evil. I’ve never really put it together like that until now. I like Chaotic Evil because it is INTERESTING. Neutral Evil is useful, along with Lawful Neutral. Lawful Good exists to give us hope, even if they are not very interesting. Neutral Good exists to give us something to identify with, because the majority of the population pins themselves with this definition. Chaotic Good is generally the comedic relief, while also being someone to identify with (us tumblrites will fall into this category, generally). Neutral neutral is the pinion point by which we can measure all others, a solid round character. And chaotic neutral is always the wild card, which is never boring. Which leaves Lawful Evil as those that should know better and choose not to be, or bumble into a problem and make it worse. They can be manipulated as others cannot be, and that is where I have the most issue. I suppose feeling something towards a character is better than nothing, but a Lawful Evil is the quickest way for me to grow to dislike a character. Ironically enough, that was kind of my thought-process. I actually spent the longest amount of time trying to figure out Donovanderson’s placement. Their careers are certainly Lawful Good, and they are, as a rule, pretty good at their jobs. However, it is possible for the career and the character alignments to not match up, and I think that the two of them are…fairly selfish individuals. Which isn’t to say they’re bad people (as John would say, it’s all fine), it’s simply that, when push comes to shove, ethics take something of a back seat to personal satisfaction. Case in point: their affair, which could cost the both of them their jobs, get Lestrade in trouble for allowing fraternizing, and cost Anderson his marriage and potentially do harm to his wife. Hence: selfishness beats out over altruism, and a Lawful Good character would never allow that to happen. But I totally agree with you. Lawful Evil characters can be interesting (Darth Vader, for example? Bad Cabbie?), but they’re rarely allow to grow into that sort of strength, and often they’re relegated to being bumbling twits, which is a shame.

blueshoesandbluemountains:

ohno-zombees:

Because Forensics does, eventually, get boring.

Here’s the definitions for those who are curious.

I’ve had a bit of an epiphany here with this.

All the characters I truly detest are Lawful Evil. I’ve never really put it together like that until now. I like Chaotic Evil because it is INTERESTING. Neutral Evil is useful, along with Lawful Neutral. Lawful Good exists to give us hope, even if they are not very interesting. Neutral Good exists to give us something to identify with, because the majority of the population pins themselves with this definition. Chaotic Good is generally the comedic relief, while also being someone to identify with (us tumblrites will fall into this category, generally). Neutral neutral is the pinion point by which we can measure all others, a solid round character. And chaotic neutral is always the wild card, which is never boring.

Which leaves Lawful Evil as those that should know better and choose not to be, or bumble into a problem and make it worse. They can be manipulated as others cannot be, and that is where I have the most issue. I suppose feeling something towards a character is better than nothing, but a Lawful Evil is the quickest way for me to grow to dislike a character.

Ironically enough, that was kind of my thought-process. I actually spent the longest amount of time trying to figure out Donovanderson’s placement. Their careers are certainly Lawful Good, and they are, as a rule, pretty good at their jobs.
However, it is possible for the career and the character alignments to not match up, and I think that the two of them are…fairly selfish individuals. Which isn’t to say they’re bad people (as John would say, it’s all fine), it’s simply that, when push comes to shove, ethics take something of a back seat to personal satisfaction.
Case in point: their affair, which could cost the both of them their jobs, get Lestrade in trouble for allowing fraternizing, and cost Anderson his marriage and potentially do harm to his wife.

Hence: selfishness beats out over altruism, and a Lawful Good character would never allow that to happen.
But I totally agree with you. Lawful Evil characters can be interesting (Darth Vader, for example? Bad Cabbie?), but they’re rarely allow to grow into that sort of strength, and often they’re relegated to being bumbling twits, which is a shame.