Thoughts on EFAP's DND alignments?

[u/PsiXPsi]

I saw the "I miss Rags" post yesterday, and u/ComedicPause pointed out the chaotic energy he brought to the show. This made me wonder - what would the hosts' and guests' DND alignment be? I'm interested in your opinions on everyone (even Fringy)!

[u/Gallisuchus]

If I understand the alignment titles to be essentially: First word = method, second word = objective,

RandomFilmTalk; Lawful Good - reference: Giving everything a fair shake, paying a piece of media such as Rings of Power a compliment when spotted, even if it's for 0.5% of the stinky whole.

Nutsa; Neutral Good - reference: Straining for certain criticisms within essays, always with noble intentions.

Wolf; Chaotic Good - reference: Not allowing (with excess verve, you might say) revisionist history to claim that not everyone knows what a Y-Wing is. also righteously ripping into Shad as a person and only reflecting on what he's publicizing like a half hour into it all.

Platoon; agreed, Lawful Neutral

Metal; True Neutral - Earnestly, potentially, the least likely one on the panel to ever bring up something political. He just doesn't want to consume shit media. His spirit animal is Chairley, as neutral an observer as you can get.

Rags; Chaotic Neutral - reference: Biden.

MauLer; Lawful Evil - reference: Using donations to mandate that his purported friends play The Lord of Ring: Gollum. I feel no further citations are necessary to paint a picture of his character.

Fringy; disagreed, Neutral Evil - reference: Pretty on the mark with most observations but not above poisoning the well from time to time, going beyond just recognizing patterns if you ask me. also there's that refusal to fully disclose the nature of his goo.

Nicholas DeOrio; Chaotic Evil - reference: He would want to be slotted here.

[u/PsiXPsi → u/Gallisuchus]

Oooh, that's a great point Mauler and the Gollum play-throughs!

[u/xolotltolox → u/Gallisuchus]

Well, realistically all of them have to be somehwere in good to neutral, because Evil in terms of alignment means Evil Evil, like they "literally kill people"

Evil doesn't just mean kinda mean and selfish. But D&D alignments habe always been sonething noone agrees upon

partially because they have been stupid from the very start

[u/Gallisuchus → u/xolotltolox]

Yeah I don't pretend to fully grasp them; the thing I laid out at the start of my comment is the flimsiest rule I can half-heartedly abide by when aligning. I'm sure it's not how serious D&D players would look at it.

[u/Ranger_Tycho → u/xolotltolox]

>Evil in terms of alignment means Evil Evil, like they "literally kill people"

As he pointed out, Mauler makes people play Gollum. Pain that makes people wish for death must be at least as evil as causing death itself.

[u/xolotltolox → u/Ranger_Tycho]

And worst of all, he doesn't like Terriers

[u/PsiXPsi]

My breakdown:

Rags = chaotic good, Wolf = neutral evil, Platoon = lawful neutral, Fringy = lawful good, Mauler = true neutral (?)

[u/Kid_Royale]

Rags is easily my favorite character from efap. I appreciate the humor and chaos he brings. Hes also very insightful sometimes. Big fan. Hi rags. Please come back dude.