|
This is a thread that is dedicated to discussing One Piece. Do not read this thread if you are not currently caught up as there are spoilers in here.
If an episode or a chapter has already been officially released, then it is not necessary to post using spoilers.
If you have knowledge on a chapter that has not been officially released yet, do NOT post it in this thread. Ignoring this public note will result in a mod action. |
On November 14 2014 07:07 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2014 20:43 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think honour means what you think it means lol, Forikorder of all people getting onto other people for improper language use...
I think he meant that i don't know the meaning not that i made grammar mistakes. I make tons of those but that's not really important if you can atleast understand what i'm trying to say.
He can't have honor when he constantly does dishonorable things but whatever!
For once i'm also fed up with the flashback
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On November 15 2014 01:59 shell wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 07:07 Sentenal wrote:On November 13 2014 20:43 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think honour means what you think it means lol, Forikorder of all people getting onto other people for improper language use... I think he meant that i don't know the meaning not that i made grammar mistakes. I make tons of those but that's not really important if you can atleast understand what i'm trying to say. He can't have honor when he constantly does dishonorable things but whatever! For once i'm also fed up with the flashback
Only one more chapter in it, two at most.
|
I know this is pretty obvious already but I suppose I just thought about it - - - this explains law's reckless behaviour in regards to DD. Not only is he not particularly afraid of death (he already almost died and is a 'D' after all) but he knows that if DD wants immortality then he can't let him die so he can get away with all sorts of shit.
|
On November 15 2014 01:59 shell wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 07:07 Sentenal wrote:On November 13 2014 20:43 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think honour means what you think it means lol, Forikorder of all people getting onto other people for improper language use... I think he meant that i don't know the meaning not that i made grammar mistakes. I make tons of those but that's not really important if you can atleast understand what i'm trying to say. He can't have honor when he constantly does dishonorable things but whatever! For once i'm also fed up with the flashback
i wouldnt say he does things that are by nature dishonourable jsut things that are evil
|
On November 15 2014 02:49 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 01:59 shell wrote:On November 14 2014 07:07 Sentenal wrote:On November 13 2014 20:43 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think honour means what you think it means lol, Forikorder of all people getting onto other people for improper language use... I think he meant that i don't know the meaning not that i made grammar mistakes. I make tons of those but that's not really important if you can atleast understand what i'm trying to say. He can't have honor when he constantly does dishonorable things but whatever! For once i'm also fed up with the flashback i wouldnt say he does things that are by nature dishonourable jsut things that are evil
Or to say it in another way:
There is Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.
And Forikorder thinks that DD is LawfulHonorable Evil.
Just wanted to make a D&D reference when talking about DD. Classic. Also maybe a bit silly.
edit:
I am not sure either way where DD falls.
He did put the real Mera-Mera fruit in the battle arena for example, and he blackmailed the Tenryuubito into making him a Shichibukai, purely by stealing money rather than finding more violent methods, and really cares about his family/crew.
On the other side he turned the CC hostage trade into a trap and fake retired from all his titles.
|
On November 15 2014 11:14 Mataza wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 02:49 Forikorder wrote:On November 15 2014 01:59 shell wrote:On November 14 2014 07:07 Sentenal wrote:On November 13 2014 20:43 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think honour means what you think it means lol, Forikorder of all people getting onto other people for improper language use... I think he meant that i don't know the meaning not that i made grammar mistakes. I make tons of those but that's not really important if you can atleast understand what i'm trying to say. He can't have honor when he constantly does dishonorable things but whatever! For once i'm also fed up with the flashback i wouldnt say he does things that are by nature dishonourable jsut things that are evil Or to say it in another way: There is Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil. And Forikorder thinks that DD is LawfulHonorable Evil. Just wanted to make a D&D reference when talking about DD. Classic. Also maybe a bit silly. edit: I am not sure either way where DD falls. He did put the real Mera-Mera fruit in the battle arena for example, and he blackmailed the Tenryuubito into making him a Shichibukai, purely by stealing money rather than finding more violent methods, and really cares about his family/crew. On the other side he turned the CC hostage trade into a trap and fake retired from all his titles.
id say neutral evil he cares about his name crew members which is lawful but he also kills nameless grunts which is chaotic
he set up the arena legit (the fire fire fruit was legit there) but also kidnapped losers
he had a fairly elaborate plan to take over Dressrossa (lawful trait) and is pretty much winging it now (chaotic)
so all in all hes not lawful and hes not chaotic either so neutral evil
|
FREEAGLELAND26782 Posts
i kinda agree with foriskriodr on neutral e
|
Doffy is lawful evil by definition. He creates institutions, order, elaborate plans to further his evil purposes. Chaotic evil is someone who destroys without regard and creates... well, chaos. Doflamingo wants to rule the world, not blow it up. If he was chaotic he would have burned dressrosa to the ground.
Neutral evil is someone who does whatever, whenever to fulfill their selfish desires. If doffy was neutral evil he would probably not have a crew, family, nor kingdom. A neutral evil doflamingo would have captured dressrosa, taken all the money and then left to do something else. Kind of like an evil rpg protagonist.
|
The 9 DnD alignments are way too restrictive, anyway. The idea that you could effectively classify every character into one of 9 different categories is crazy.
|
On November 16 2014 04:48 Sentenal wrote:
The 9 DnD alignments are way too restrictive, anyway. The idea that you could effectively classify every character into one of 9 different categories is crazy.
I only brought it up because the discussion was about DD's traits.
I just wanted to remind everyone that one can be evil and still have more character traits.(He's honorable. -> He can't be, because he's evil for multiple pages)
DD is not picky about what he's doing, but he has preferred methods that we could just call "lawful". DD is also very ambitious, mainly motivated by increasing his personal power to his goal of becoming the Pirate King.
However, he is very extreme in the sense that he really cares about his family, but is absolutely ruthless and cruel to everyone else, and he is not above being extra cruel to people who are in his way..
Maybe he even sees only black and white, those who are on his side and everyone else is an enemy.
He wouldn't even be evil if not for his ambition and disregard for everyone who is in his way.
|
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine.
|
Why talk about D&D traits? The D&D traits are just inherently silly since they only exist to pigeonhole poeple so you can feel happy about playing goodies vs baddies and as part of a black and white (and an exact shade of grey) world, none of which applies to just about any world but D&D.
A character can be good or evil, honourable or dishonourable. They are mutuallly exclusive. But Doflamingo is not honourable, has committed many dishonourable act which precludes the description of being honourable, and indeed forikorder cannot explain how he is honorable, other than that "any proof against this just makes my argument stronger".
|
It came down to DD is honorable because honor is subjective. DD cares about his family so therefore he is honorable. Instead of looking at things normally associated with being honorable like being honest or fair. Latest chapter shows he only cares about his family that is useful to him anyways.
|
On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine.
i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it
as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine
|
On November 16 2014 14:39 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine. i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine
You can treat your version as a spectrum, but the traditional DnD 9 character alignments does not work as spectrum. You think neutral is "in between lawful and chaotic", which may work for however you see it, but in the traditional sense, neutral is when the character simply doesn't give a fuck one way or another. You can have characters who have both lawful and chaotic aspects about their behavior, which is impossible with the traditional classifications, that aren't neutral either. Its stupid.
|
On November 16 2014 14:46 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2014 14:39 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine. i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine You can treat your version as a spectrum, but the traditional DnD 9 character alignments does not work as spectrum. You think neutral is "in between lawful and chaotic", which may work for however you see it, but in the traditional sense, neutral is when the character simply doesn't give a fuck one way or another. You can have characters who have both lawful and chaotic aspects about their behavior, which is impossible with the traditional classifications, that aren't neutral either. Its stupid.
thats wrong, you have Lawful Good paladins who literally cant lie or associate with evil dudes or do any evil at all and then you can have a lawful good character who can do all of the above and be fine
the DnD alignment system is not as black and white as you make it sound
|
On November 16 2014 14:49 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2014 14:46 Sentenal wrote:On November 16 2014 14:39 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine. i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine You can treat your version as a spectrum, but the traditional DnD 9 character alignments does not work as spectrum. You think neutral is "in between lawful and chaotic", which may work for however you see it, but in the traditional sense, neutral is when the character simply doesn't give a fuck one way or another. You can have characters who have both lawful and chaotic aspects about their behavior, which is impossible with the traditional classifications, that aren't neutral either. Its stupid. thats wrong, you have Lawful Good paladins who literally cant lie or associate with evil dudes or do any evil at all and then you can have a lawful good character who can do all of the above and be fine the DnD alignment system is not as black and white as you make it sound
If you have a lawful good paladin who is lying and being dishonest, that is breaking his alignment, and showing why the classification system is stupid. No GM will force a character into an alignment like a straight jacket to restrict their play because its generally accepted that doing is insane.
|
On November 16 2014 14:51 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2014 14:49 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 14:46 Sentenal wrote:On November 16 2014 14:39 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine. i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine You can treat your version as a spectrum, but the traditional DnD 9 character alignments does not work as spectrum. You think neutral is "in between lawful and chaotic", which may work for however you see it, but in the traditional sense, neutral is when the character simply doesn't give a fuck one way or another. You can have characters who have both lawful and chaotic aspects about their behavior, which is impossible with the traditional classifications, that aren't neutral either. Its stupid. thats wrong, you have Lawful Good paladins who literally cant lie or associate with evil dudes or do any evil at all and then you can have a lawful good character who can do all of the above and be fine the DnD alignment system is not as black and white as you make it sound If you have a lawful good paladin who is lying and being dishonest, that is breaking his alignment, and showing why the classification system is stupid. No GM will force a character into an alignment like a straight jacket to restrict their play because its generally accepted that doing is insane.
okay so now i dont understand, first you say the alignments are restrictive then you straight say noone actually treated them as restrictive
|
On November 16 2014 14:54 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2014 14:51 Sentenal wrote:On November 16 2014 14:49 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 14:46 Sentenal wrote:On November 16 2014 14:39 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine. i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine You can treat your version as a spectrum, but the traditional DnD 9 character alignments does not work as spectrum. You think neutral is "in between lawful and chaotic", which may work for however you see it, but in the traditional sense, neutral is when the character simply doesn't give a fuck one way or another. You can have characters who have both lawful and chaotic aspects about their behavior, which is impossible with the traditional classifications, that aren't neutral either. Its stupid. thats wrong, you have Lawful Good paladins who literally cant lie or associate with evil dudes or do any evil at all and then you can have a lawful good character who can do all of the above and be fine the DnD alignment system is not as black and white as you make it sound If you have a lawful good paladin who is lying and being dishonest, that is breaking his alignment, and showing why the classification system is stupid. No GM will force a character into an alignment like a straight jacket to restrict their play because its generally accepted that doing is insane. okay so now i dont understand, first you say the alignments are restrictive then you straight say noone actually treated them as restrictive
Alignments by their definition, are restrictive. And because they are restrictive, in actual practice/play, no one is actually going follow them to the letter, since they are shackles at best. Thats why you have your lawful good paladins behaving chaotically at times.
|
On November 16 2014 14:56 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2014 14:54 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 14:51 Sentenal wrote:On November 16 2014 14:49 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 14:46 Sentenal wrote:On November 16 2014 14:39 Forikorder wrote:On November 16 2014 05:42 Sentenal wrote:
He has traits that can be lawful, and traits that can be chaotic. And that doesn't make him neutral, either, since neutral starts a trend towards apathy. I dunno, I just really dislike those 9 character alignments, since a good dynamic character should be impossible to describe in one of the nine. i disagree, as long as you treat them as a spectrum everyone falls on it as long as you understand that people can be lawful while not being a paldin and chaotic without being the joker its fine You can treat your version as a spectrum, but the traditional DnD 9 character alignments does not work as spectrum. You think neutral is "in between lawful and chaotic", which may work for however you see it, but in the traditional sense, neutral is when the character simply doesn't give a fuck one way or another. You can have characters who have both lawful and chaotic aspects about their behavior, which is impossible with the traditional classifications, that aren't neutral either. Its stupid. thats wrong, you have Lawful Good paladins who literally cant lie or associate with evil dudes or do any evil at all and then you can have a lawful good character who can do all of the above and be fine the DnD alignment system is not as black and white as you make it sound If you have a lawful good paladin who is lying and being dishonest, that is breaking his alignment, and showing why the classification system is stupid. No GM will force a character into an alignment like a straight jacket to restrict their play because its generally accepted that doing is insane. okay so now i dont understand, first you say the alignments are restrictive then you straight say noone actually treated them as restrictive Alignments by their definition, are restrictive. And because they are restrictive, in actual practice/play, no one is actually going follow them to the letter, since they are shackles at best. Thats why you have your lawful good paladins behaving chaotically at times.
so what your saying is that if you turn off your brain and only go by the book, its a bad system (since the writers would know noone would do it like that) but if you treated it more like a spectrum then its a fine system
like exactly what i said earileir
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
