Let's talk Homestuck and alignments!

Confession: I've only played D&D once, but I love applying the alignment system to fiction. And I just...I really want to sperg about Homestuck character alignments okay.

I made a chart. It's rough as fuck but still.


Seriously, ask me about my alignment headcanons please.

(I'll add explanations in a sec)

 

How are you defining good vs evil, too, if you dont mind? You've got some interesting judgements there--like terezi being so much more 'good' than latula, or gamzee being so much more 'evil' than eridan--and I'd be interested to hear your thought process.

 

To be fair, I mostly just judged the pre-scratch trolls in terms of chaotic vs. lawful, with a few exceptions. They're really scattered and I honestly thought of just leaving them out entirely since they're so minor for the most part, but Aranea and Meenah are major enough that I felt obligated to include all of them. :P So I probably won't do much analysis for them tbh?

Gamzee is more "evil" than Eridan primarily because Eridan seems to have acted largely on impulse when he killed Feferi and Kanaya (note that those are the two he explicitly stated he wouldn't kill) rather than due to any grand scheming, although I guess I forgot about the whole genocidal ambitions part, so they're probably closer to tied in practice. I still think Gamzee's a bit worse, since his long-term abuse of Terezi and worship of a figure he now knows is pure evil seem to point towards consistently evil intent, but yeah, Eridan is pretty damn rotten.

Lawful vs. chaotic...I guess the easiest way to phrase it, in my personal interp, is the value the person puts on things being done a certain way. Lawful good characters lean towards thinking rules and laws (whether institutional or personal) are the best way to get good things dumb, whereas chaotic good characters would view them as getting in the way of the greater good, if that makes sense. Or, perhaps more accurately, manmade rules (lawful) vs. natural rules (chaotic).

Fuck, I know exactly what I mean but I have no clue how to phrase it. D:

 

That's an interesting interpretation. I've always thought of Lawful "following set rules or traditions" and Chaotic as "doing whatever they feel like will benefit themselves/their cause the best." So Chaotic characters can do Lawful things, but Lawful characters can't do Chaotic things (or if they do, they feel badly about it afterwards).

 

I would almost argue that Eridan THINKS he's lawful evil, but is more neutral evil with leaning towards pure neutral (and would be happier neutral good and had the potential but that is what fanfic is for! exploring shit that didn't happen). Eridan does a lot of 'for the good of the state/law (ie Feferi but still she is in a sense the law)' evil before the game. He plots and plans a lot of evil, but rarely seems to go through with it both in and out of the game. He isn't good, but he's not actively evil (Karkat's interaction with him vs Karkat's interactions with Vriska - who is full up chaotic evil for all her 'plans' and chaotic evil is terrifying when you think about it). The fact Eridan thinks he's lawful evil is what gets him in trouble in the end, the fact that he IS neutral evil is why he killed Feferi and Kanaya.

Gamzee is pure neutral with swings into evil or good depending on what/who is influencing him at any given time.

Also I freely admit most of my DnD playing as been homebrew mash up of 2nd and 3rd, otherwise I've mostly played Shadowrun (which I keep wanting to type Shadowgate) and Eclipse Phase and homebrew LARPs.

(I was acutally just talking Alligments and Homestuck with my rp buddy last night since we are planning to do a homestuck/badulr's gate mash up).

 

In theory, but it the chaotic thing can be interpreted as for the good of the state/law/government/god you can swing it. A lot depends if you've got a Paladin on your hands or not.

 

I'd rank most of the Trolls (and some of the exiles) closer to evil than they are. Not necessarily in that area, but... that's a cultural thing. I feel like Alternia breeds some degree of Evil-esque selfish pragmatism, at least among the higher castes.

That said, that's because my introduction to D&D alignments came from here. It's not perfect, it's older now and kind of inelegant, but it's one of the few times I've seen a consistent case example used to explain the nine combinations. To excerpt the relevant bit (page 22-3 in the document and 12-3 in the pdf):

Alignment Alignment is the philosophy a character lives by and can affect how NPCs and some magic items react to a character. The possibilities range from believing strongly in society and altruism (Lawful Good) to being anarchistic and actively unpleasant (Chaotic Evil). Life-threatening situations put a character’s alignment to the test. Note: your party characters must be good or neutral; they cannot be of evil alignment. Alignment is presented here with examples of how differently-aligned members of a party might face a lifethreatening situation (in this case, a shortage of water).

Lawful Good A character of this alignment insists that everyone get an even share of what water there is, even those in the party who seem beyond hope. He or she readily conceives of and accepts plans that call for unequal distribution of water for the greater good of the group, but will never let the weak or dying go without water.

Lawful Neutral Such characters insist that everyone get an equal share of available water, but won’t care one way or the other about characters that may be beyond hope. They also accept plans that call for unequal distribution of water for the good of the group.

Lawful Evil A character of this alignment insists that available water be evenly distributed among the able-bodied of the group, but won’t offer any to those that seem too far gone. He or she accepts plans that call for unequal distribution of water if that means more water for him or her.

Neutral Good A neutral good character insists that everyone in the group get an even share of remaining water, even the seriously dehydrated. He or she considers plans calling for unequal water distribution, but has to be thoroughly convinced that the plan will ultimately benefit the party and not hurt him or her personally.

True Neutral A character of this alignment wants a fair share for him or herself, but won’t necessarily come to anyone’s aid. He or she considers plans that call for unequal water distribution if he or she and the party benefit in the short term.

Neutral Evil A character of this alignment insists on his or her fair share, and is against giving water to the very weak. He or she considers plans for unequal water distribution if he or she personally benefits.

Chaotic Good A chaotic good character insists that everyone get an even share of the available water, even the very weak. He or she considers plans calling for unequal water distribution if he or she and those he or she likes personally get more water as part of the plan.

Chaotic Neutral Such a character insists on his or her fair share, and won’t concern him or herself with the plight of those too weak to stand up for themselves. He or she considers plans calling for unequal water distribution if he or she personally gets more water as part of the plan.

Chaotic Evil A chaotic evil character freely lies, cheats, or even kills to get all the water he or she can. He or she constantly suggests plans for unequal water distribution that grant him or her additional water immediately.

So I'd peg Vriska as being slightly on the evil side, because she'd definitely accept a plan that made sure that she (and/or someone she cares about specifically (her again)) gets water. Same with Eridan. Meanwhile I'd put Gamzee much more in the neutral range previously -- but as he is currently in-comic he definitely falls at CE, yeah. I likewise think Kankri's kind Lawful Neutral, he'd insist everyone gets an equal share or follow the pre-determined plan. I'm not actually sure I'd peg all the Kids as Good, either, because I feel like some of them are more Neutral than not... though now that I say it I'm not as certain I can name an example, hrrm. (Neutral's funny, because they trend Good anyway because that's just easier for a well-functioning group, but it's still distinct.) And so on for some of the others -- though many of them are definitely Good, yeah.

Again, this was before they started trying to explore the alignments more fully (hence no one allowed to be evil in the game) so it's not perfect by any means. I just really like the use of a life-or-death group scenario for exploring this sort of thing, because that's where a character's convictions really show themselves.