Yeah, back in the 1970s with original D&D, when people did it like fansubs here and only one company then tried their hand at it. AD&D was fine and brought the creation of Lodoss War, which brought people full circle right back around to the AD&D stuff.Originally Posted by Kat
Localizationing stuff
Again, it's pretty obvious alignments don't make sense in Nasuverse no matter how you try to headcanon to have them make sense. Which either implies Nasu does not care or that he really does not have much clue.
See, not caring is fine, but assuming that he doesn't have a clue is real dumb when he's already proven to have a lot of pretty complex and obscure knowledge on shit.
Localizationing stuff
I always took Gilgamesh's alignment as a holdover from the earlier, more laid-back version of Gilgamesh that Nasu missed on an edit check.
Yet, he does not correct that holdover.
Gilgamesh is anyway an Overman beyond conventional morality.
There's no such thing as a "more laid-back" version of Gilgamesh in the sense of closer to a Good alignment. Prototype Gilgamesh (what I am assuming you're referring to) tries to drown an entire city because he's pissed at one guy.
F/SN Gilgamesh is actually closer to Good than that if only because he keeps to his actual targets.
Last edited by Siriel; February 4th, 2015 at 03:04 PM.
Ragnarok, come day of wrath
That fallen souls might bear our plea.
To hasten the Divine's return.
O piteous Wanderer.
Given that he summons the Surge of Utnapishtim, I'd wager its the entire world and not just an entire city.
In lack of evidence I'm willing to go for the lower estimate.
Ragnarok, come day of wrath
That fallen souls might bear our plea.
To hasten the Divine's return.
O piteous Wanderer.
There are ways to finesse this.
Gilgamesh is Chaotic Good. Chaotic fits if you think about how he originally made his biggest contribution by rebelling against the Gods with Enkidu.
For Good, it isn't what is defined as good by society. It's different in most RPGs, but in D&D it's related to an objective good that in real life resembles a kind of Christianity. (In fact, a lot of Cleric and Paladin spells are straight from the miracles performed in the Bible.) In other settings or different takes on alignment, it's just whatever a certain god that the character worships decides. In the Nasuverse's case, Gilgamesh IS the ultimate and objective decider of what is Good, so his own actions and judgements are what defines the Good in Chaotic Good, even if they are at odds with conventional society's morality.
Medusa on the other hand, is also Chaotic Good. But Chaotic can also refer to someone dishonorable, willing to get their hands dirty for a deed. She does that to save Sakura, so there's your Good.
She is also not a very pleasant person, and quite twisted, but nobody said "Good" means nice.
Last edited by mAc Chaos; February 4th, 2015 at 03:14 PM.
He never sleeps. He never dies.
Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around why Siegfried is Chaotic Good.
Or why Karna is Neutral Good in CCC but Lawful good in Apo.
Because his ideal is to only fight for himself/what he believes in?
Wouldn't that be neutral good like Alex?
You know, even with what I said there are some headscratchers. Like if Gilgamesh decides what is good, then for Medusa to be Good, it would have to mean that Gilgamesh would approve of what she's doing. But would he.
We would have to know what philosophy Nasu is bringing to his alignment system to make sense of it. Now that I am looking at Kojiro I think it's starting to come together: he does them using intention, not action. I always wondered why Kojiro is Neutral EVIL when all he does is chill and go easy on Saber while Medusa is Chaotic Good for trying to melt a school, but when we think of their intentions it makes sense. Medusa is doing it to achieve a greater good; to save somebody. Meanwhile Kojiro does not act especially maliciously but all of his actions are directed to merely his own self satisfaction and pleasure. He doesn't go out and murder everyone but that's because it just so happens that it doesn't please him to do so. And his goal is ultimately his own selfish desires.
But then going back to Gilgamesh, his own actions still require analysis. Does he do what he does, because he thinks it's right? Or maybe, he has a set idea of what is right, but doesn't care and just does what pleases him on a whim. But if he does that, then how is he good. Or is he just so innately good that by definition any act he takes on a random whim is still ultimately motivated by some greater good desire.
Him trying to mud the world isn't necessarily automatically evil; the god of the Old Testament did the same with the flood and people don't say that was wrong, even though they're coming at it from the same moral sensibilities that we use to judge Gilgamesh, since Western morality directly and indirectly is derived from its Christian history.
He never sleeps. He never dies.
Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight.
But Shakespeare is true neutral and all he cares about is his own pleasure.
welp
how much is he willing to hurt others for it though
He never sleeps. He never dies.
Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight.
vol 5
Edit: Remembered something
Last edited by You; February 4th, 2015 at 03:55 PM.
^Children are evil. I need to only look at my sister and other kids her age.
Do those alignments completely discard the heroes past life?
If yes, it can explain things for a few of them...but also render totally irrationnal the choice for others...
You never know when those things come in handy...
Spoiler:
I honestly took them to be the alignment related to that function of their legend they represent since when Saber gets goo'd she takes on the more warlord-like aspects of her legend and goes LE. Gil is easily CG in his legend, rebelling against the gods and going off from ruling his nation to finding immortality for himself, yet still finding value in people and all. In-universe, Medusa was actually someone that did good for her society, while it wouldn't exactly be surprising to find that her full monster form would be evil-aligned. Kojirou is the villain as painted by Musashi. ect ect ect.
I seriously always figured that you have to look at things a little sideways because Nasuverse ethics and morals are very much wrapped up in their own paradigm, and then each of the Servant's own cultures have some things that would have been regarded one way at that time but wouldn't be now in modern culture.
Localizationing stuff
That's all well and good, but there's no way Achilles is Lawful Neutral in the Iliad.
Posting Permissions
