Classic DnD Alignments chart for WH Fantasy

[Ben Argo]

I’m sure you’re all familiar with the dnd alignment chart meme. If not, google it.

In your opinions, which LL would you say fit those nine categories and why? You can use in-game or lore reasoning.

Lawful Good: My Boi Franz. Uses the system against the wicked, does his best to protect the weak and innocent, truly serves the Empire of Man.

Neutral Good: Teclis. Wants to help as many people as possible so he has allies versus Chaos. Sure it isn’t entirely altruistic but he at least goes about his business in a friendly way.

Chaotic Good: this one is hard. I would have to say none of the WH leaders strike me as “chaotic good.” If Felix was a playable character, I would go for him. Maybe a Kislev leader or a TEB LL. Or, obviously, halflings.

Lawful Neutral: obviously all the Dwarf leaders, even the Slayer King. Their obsession with grudges means they’re willing to go to any length to “right a wrong.”

True Neutral: Settra. Yes, he’s lawful leaning but one of the only cool bits in End Times was his hilarious double middle finger to Chaos as he solo’d a Daemon army. He cares about himself and his country. He would do great evil or good, whatever is necessary.

Chaotic neutral: I would say Orion and crew. They don’t care about much outside the woods and they may invite you for a party or hunt you down.

Lawful Evil? Hard to say. Malekith or maybe Vlad. Both are cunning adversaries who use existing systems to manipulate political foes. They ruthlessly exploit those below them and manipulate things to go their way.

Neutral Evil: in Lore, Nagash. If we stick to LLs in the game, I guess I would choose Arkhan, history’s greatest wingman.

Chaotic Evil: Manny. Poor lad has some serious daddy issues. Idiot also tries to come off as a strategic genius but regularly lets his appetites get the best of him. Serious impulse control and MVP for Chaos in the End Times.

[TehOuchies]

I would put the lizards as Chaotic good.

[RED /(Weber)\]

You kinda mixed Mannfred and Nagash, Mannfred is more neutral as he works for himself only. Nagash, just straight up evil, and Settra won't let you forget.

Or hell, Archaon as chaotic evil, and that's not just a play-on joke about the chaotic bit.

[Ben Argo]

I placed Manny at Chaotic evil because I consider CE as the "stupid" evil category.

In several of the books, Mannfred has serious issues controlling his baser vampiric urges. Also, he manages to screw over the whole universe, killing himself and others in the process. That's pretty stupid and evil.

Nagash is arrogant and you could argue he is Lawful Evil (he should have been given the throne over his brother, he wants to make everything undead which would effectively destroy chaos and bring a twisted sort of order in the world, etc, etc). But I don't think he is stupid evil.

Lizards are willing to commit genocide at the drop of a hat and would be willing to rearrange the continents regardless of how many people it screwed over. Depends on what version of the Great Plan they're reading this week. Sound chaotic but their culture is very structured and they aren't really 'whimsical' they're more like "blindly obedient." Lawful Neutral, maybe?

[Mactalon]

Felix wouldn't really be Chaotic Good, he's more neutral good. He's a vagabond and not really lawful good since he's not overly fond of the establishment, but he's not erratic and always does 'the right thing' in more or less every situation.

At a stretch you could maybe make Vlad be Chaotic good when he's in "keep the sheep alive" mode? He's still a vampire and violently murders priests and the odd snacky-cake human but he also prevents bandits and other vampires picking on the peasants and before he went into full 'take over the world' mode it was probably the best century or two the people of Sylvania ever had, before or since. Even when he's conquesting he does the Genghis Khan thing of being happy to let everyone live as long as they submit to him.
He also seems to have genuine feelings of love and care for Isabella which is just about more depth and humanity than any other 'villainous' character in the setting ever displays at any point. Even when Malekith is back to being 'good' he's still a one-note bitter jerk to everyone.

It's sort of a thin line between here and Lawful Evil really, but he's the closest single character to it. Although I think the best contender for Lawful Evil would be a hero class in the Witch Hunter. They're a necessary part of the Empire's survival and even though good characters like Franz finds them awful he still employs them because they don't have a better alternative.

Otherwise as above, the Lizards as a whole kinda count as Chaotic Good since they'd cause extinction level events for some of the other 'good' races if they thought it meant the greater good of the plan would be served.

And yeah Manny just doesn't quite cut it for Chaotic Evil, what Ben said makes me think he actually fits into stupid evil. The Chaos and Beastmen characters fit the bill just too much over it. Archaon's the obvious choice but I think Morghur might actually slot into it just a little better as being truly Chaotic Evil.

If we were to count the stupids though -

Stupid Good: Marius Leitdorf. He's not a proper LL yet but is still in the game (and could possibly be Chaotic Good instead) but the point is he's mad as a meataxe but does the right thing when he's lucid.

Stupid Neutral: Greenskins. Orcs are kinda-sorta evil but are also something like slightly-more sentient animals, they don't really have 'evil' agendas and will sometimes avoid murdering/eating peasants and children etc since they can't fight and they want a proper rumble somewhere else. They're basically a race of whimsy and instinct.

Stupid Evil: The Skaven. Not dissimilar from the orcs in many ways but if you had to balance things out you have to put them as definitely being evil even with their natural instincts etc, and also incredibly stupid.

That's right Manny, you're always second fiddle. XD

[Dr. Uncredible]

Ahh yes, poor daft Manny, used to love the guy back in the original Warhammer Undead-times, when he was presented as the one Carstein who had ambitions beyond obsessively flinging armies at Altdorf.
But the more I read about him the more he stands out as a saturday morning cartoon villain, so unstable and illogically evil that you don´t actually -need- to send anyone after him, he´ll eventually defeat himself through sheer moustache-twirlingly evil incompetence.
Stupid Evil is about right.

But as for Chaotic Evil I´m thinking the Beastmen leaders, self-serving and utterly unreasonable, only in power because their lessers fear them.

And for Chaotic Neutral there´s always the orcs, one could argue evil for them as well, but mainly they´re a force of disorder, eschewing any rules other than "He who carries the biggest choppa calls the shots".

And lawful neutral for lizardmen seems spot on. They don´t always understand the rules, but by the old ones they will be followed and blast the consequences.

[Mactalon]

Originally posted by Dr. Uncredible:

Ahh yes, poor daft Manny, used to love the guy back in the original Warhammer Undead-times, when he was presented as the one Carstein who had ambitions beyond obsessively flinging armies at Altdorf.
But the more I read about him the more he stands out as a saturday morning cartoon villain, so unstable and illogically evil that you don´t actually -need- to send anyone after him, he´ll eventually defeat himself through sheer moustache-twirlingly evil incompetence.
Stupid Evil is about right.

But as for Chaotic Evil I´m thinking the Beastmen leaders, self-serving and utterly unreasonable, only in power because their lessers fear them.

And for Chaotic Neutral there´s always the orcs, one could argue evil for them as well, but mainly they´re a force of disorder, eschewing any rules other than "He who carries the biggest choppa calls the shots".

And lawful neutral for lizardmen seems spot on. They don´t always understand the rules, but by the old ones they will be followed and blast the consequences.

I still think the Lizards are in Chaotic Good because they're categorically not neutral by dint of being literally evolved to be the 'anti-evil'. I can't think of any others off the top of my head but I think they're the only ones who can't be corrupted by Chaos to turn 'evil', only killed or maybe driven crazy by it. The Elves are often considered Lawful Good in this setting but they're still more vulnerable to the classic "fall" even at their greatest, e.g. Tyrion.
As the Lizards exist to be against the embodiment of the world's evil I don't think you can call them neutral, that really fits in with the Tomb Kings more.

They're good, but they're not lawful by the standards of what the trope is going for. Despite being anti-evil though, like the Dwarfs their methods can sometimes be incredibly extreme, and will shatter entire nations because of the greater good. A Lawful character would avoid those means, lawful characters don't "blast the consequences" that's what makes them lawful! XD
They're either chaotic good or chaotic neutral to me, but I slot them into good because of the above stuff.

[Dr. Uncredible]

Originally posted by Mactalon:

Originally posted by Dr. Uncredible:

Ahh yes, poor daft Manny, used to love the guy back in the original Warhammer Undead-times, when he was presented as the one Carstein who had ambitions beyond obsessively flinging armies at Altdorf.
But the more I read about him the more he stands out as a saturday morning cartoon villain, so unstable and illogically evil that you don´t actually -need- to send anyone after him, he´ll eventually defeat himself through sheer moustache-twirlingly evil incompetence.
Stupid Evil is about right.

But as for Chaotic Evil I´m thinking the Beastmen leaders, self-serving and utterly unreasonable, only in power because their lessers fear them.

And for Chaotic Neutral there´s always the orcs, one could argue evil for them as well, but mainly they´re a force of disorder, eschewing any rules other than "He who carries the biggest choppa calls the shots".

And lawful neutral for lizardmen seems spot on. They don´t always understand the rules, but by the old ones they will be followed and blast the consequences.

I still think the Lizards are in Chaotic Good because they're categorically not neutral by dint of being literally evolved to be the 'anti-evil'. I can't think of any others off the top of my head but I think they're the only ones who can't be corrupted by Chaos to turn 'evil', only killed or maybe driven crazy by it. The Elves are often considered Lawful Good in this setting but they're still more vulnerable to the classic "fall" even at their greatest, e.g. Tyrion.
As the Lizards exist to be against the embodiment of the world's evil I don't think you can call them neutral, that really fits in with the Tomb Kings more.

They're good, but they're not lawful by the standards of what the trope is going for. Despite being anti-evil though, like the Dwarfs their methods can sometimes be incredibly extreme, and will shatter entire nations because of the greater good. A Lawful character would avoid those means, lawful characters don't "blast the consequences" that's what makes them lawful! XD
They're either chaotic good or chaotic neutral to me, but I slot them into good because of the above stuff.

I must disagree here! Though of course, this is my interpretation of it.
Granted, fighting chaos does give them a leaning towards good, but as the classic massive continent disruption ritual proved they -will- follow thorugh with an old instruction regardless of consequences.
This doesn´t make them not lawful in my eyes, this makes them not good. (alignment wise)

[Ser Pounce]

You can decompose the alignement chart in two parts : support to and integration into a system, whatever the given system, (Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic) and morality (Good, Neutral, Evil).

In that sense, Lizardmen are Lawful neutral. They don't care about doing good or bad, as long as it sticks to the "great plan".

Skavens are true Neutral Evil. They are, without question, the most vicious race in warhammer and their allegiance to any kind of political system only stand as long as it benefits them : when it doesn't anymore, they either left or backstab the others. They would sold anyone just to gain a bit of an edge.

Mannfred seems to be Chaotic Evil in that matter. Can't say much though. I'm not that much into Warhammer lore.

Nagash could sign for Neutral Evil from what I know.

True Neutral doesn't really exist in the warhammer world, neither do Chaotic Neutral. At least, not for a LL. The whole point of being a Lord mostly goes against both of those alignements. Orion is probably the closest possible to Neutral but that's all. He's still integrated into his own hierarchy. He's just not concerned with the rest of the world. Settra too.

[Cacomistle]

Lizards are not good. Dnd alignment id about motivations, not results, not that Lizardmen have great results.

Lizardmens whole thtis to the great plan. They don't really care about greater good. Thry don't care about harming others. Just the great plan.

I just googles around for a good definition of "good".
"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Not a single thing here describes lizards. They just follow a code, and it happens that chaos doesn't fit in. Sort of like how the Skaven oppose Nagash. Has nothing to do with them trying to help others, they just don't want Nagash to kill them.

[Cacomistle]

Originally posted by Ser Pounce:

You can decompose the alignement chart in two parts : support to and integration into a system, whatever the given system, (Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic) and morality (Good, Neutral, Evil).

In that sense, Lizardmen are Lawful neutral. They don't care about doing good or bad, as long as it sticks to the "great plan".

Skavens are true Neutral Evil. They are, without question, the most vicious race in warhammer and their allegiance to any kind of political system only stand as long as it benefits them : when it doesn't anymore, they either left or backstab the others. They would sold anyone just to gain a bit of an edge.

Mannfred seems to be Chaotic Evil in that matter. Can't say much though. I'm not that much into Warhammer lore.

Nagash could sign for Neutral Evil from what I know.

True Neutral doesn't really exist in the warhammer world, neither do Chaotic Neutral. At least, not for a LL. The whole point of being a Lord mostly goes against both of those alignements. Orion is probably the closest possible to Neutral but that's all. He's still integrated into his own hierarchy. He's just not concerned with the rest of the world. Settra too.

I think you could argue vlad as neutral neutral. Idk enough about Orion, and Settras whole thing is that he rules so I'd probably view him as lawful.

But vlad doesn't really care about being evil. I don't think he gets joy out of harming others or anything like that. I think he'd prefer Empire to Chaos, even if just because good factions are less murdery. Basically I don't think he cares enough to do evil.

Tgen as for lawful vs chaotic, I dont know specifically about vlad but most vampires do not seem to be honest, or care for authority. So I'd guess Vlad is probably Neutral since lying isn't a huge part of his char like Mannfred.

Other than him and the 2 you mentioned, off the top of my head I can't think of anyone else. Most remotely good characters are lawful, probably because they got that order vs chaos thing.

[Ser Pounce]

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

I think you could argue vlad as neutral neutral. Idk enough about Orion, and Settras whole thing is that he rules so I'd probably view him as lawful.

But vlad doesn't really care about being evil. I don't think he gets joy out of harming others or anything like that. I think he'd prefer Empire to Chaos, even if just because good factions are less murdery. Basically I don't think he cares enough to do evil.

Tgen as for lawful vs chaotic, I dont know specifically about vlad but most vampires do not seem to be honest, or care for authority. So I'd guess Vlad is probably Neutral since lying isn't a huge part of his char like Mannfred.

Vlad is politically integrated and care about the world. Just by that, it automatically set him as Lawful. Probably Lawful Neutral but still, that's not True Neutral.
Ofc he would prefer the Empire to Chaos. Isn't that the reason he started to invade the Empire ? So he could reinforce it against the coming Chaos invasions, because humans were too petty to consider being united against it ?

Being a lord set you as someone who cares to rules. No one wants to rule over dead bodies, not even the Vampire Counts.
Surely, not all the vampires are lawful but those who wnats to rule are to some extent. Being Neutral or Evil though is something else entirely.

Mannfred wanted to rule but at the end, it didn't even care about it anymore. He went full Chaotic Evil.

[Cacomistle]

Originally posted by Ser Pounce:

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

I think you could argue vlad as neutral neutral. Idk enough about Orion, and Settras whole thing is that he rules so I'd probably view him as lawful.

But vlad doesn't really care about being evil. I don't think he gets joy out of harming others or anything like that. I think he'd prefer Empire to Chaos, even if just because good factions are less murdery. Basically I don't think he cares enough to do evil.

Tgen as for lawful vs chaotic, I dont know specifically about vlad but most vampires do not seem to be honest, or care for authority. So I'd guess Vlad is probably Neutral since lying isn't a huge part of his char like Mannfred.

Vlad is politically integrated and care about the world. Just by that, it automatically set him as Lawful. Probably Lawful Neutral but still, that's not True Neutral.
Ofc he would prefer the Empire to Chaos. Isn't that the reason he started to invade the Empire ? So he could reinforce it against the coming Chaos invasions, because humans were too petty to consider being united against it ?

Being a lord set you as someone who cares to rules. No one wants to rule over dead bodies, not even the Vampire Counts.
Surely, not all the vampires are lawful but those who wnats to rule are to some extent. Being Neutral or Evil though is something else entirely.

Mannfred wanted to rule but at the end, it didn't even care about it anymore. He went full Chaotic Evil.

I don't know enough about vlad specifically, but a lot of the vamps seemed not to care about law. They want to rule, but it's a means to an end. Sort of like how a farmer rules over chickens and cows. Its not because of any respect for law or honesty or other lawful principles, its just because they need cattle.

I think Skaven are a good example of playing politics not necessarily meaning lawfulness. They're extremely dishonest and don't care at all about authority beyond fear of what authority might do to them. They absolutely are not lawful, but any Skaven will jump at the opportunity to rule over others.

Vlad seems a lot more lawful than most vamps, but most of them seem chaotic so more lawful would be neutral.

I suppose he might be too politically integrated to not be lawful though. You're probably right, because he gets involved in politics beyond what is necessary just to have cattle.

[Dr. Uncredible]

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

Originally posted by Ser Pounce:

Vlad is politically integrated and care about the world. Just by that, it automatically set him as Lawful. Probably Lawful Neutral but still, that's not True Neutral.
Ofc he would prefer the Empire to Chaos. Isn't that the reason he started to invade the Empire ? So he could reinforce it against the coming Chaos invasions, because humans were too petty to consider being united against it ?

Being a lord set you as someone who cares to rules. No one wants to rule over dead bodies, not even the Vampire Counts.
Surely, not all the vampires are lawful but those who wnats to rule are to some extent. Being Neutral or Evil though is something else entirely.

Mannfred wanted to rule but at the end, it didn't even care about it anymore. He went full Chaotic Evil.

I don't know enough about vlad specifically, but a lot of the vamps seemed not to care about law. They want to rule, but it's a means to an end. Sort of like how a farmer rules over chickens and cows. Its not because of any respect for law or honesty or other lawful principles, its just because they need cattle.

I think Skaven are a good example of playing politics not necessarily meaning lawfulness. They're extremely dishonest and don't care at all about authority beyond fear of what authority might do to them. They absolutely are not lawful, but any Skaven will jump at the opportunity to rule over others.

Vlad seems a lot more lawful than most vamps, but most of them seem chaotic so more lawful would be neutral.

I suppose he might be too politically integrated to not be lawful though. You're probably right, because he gets involved in politics beyond what is necessary just to have cattle.

While it´s true that Warhammer vampires aren´t lawful creatures, they´re bound by rules by necessity, for whatever reason they form a schemy, plotting aristocracy that keeps it´s own members in check.
I personally believe they need a society and one another to keep themselves from going feral.

Sooo, I´d place Warhammer vampiric society, and by extension even Manny as neutral evil, with Vlad possibly true neutral.
Sociopathic creatures forming rule-bound societies out of need.

I re-read Mannfreds stuff, and a lot of his -really- bonkers behavior is from the End-Times bollox, and I personally take that with a pillar of salt.
That said, I´ve only read the rule-book lore, not the novels.

[Ser Pounce]

Originally posted by Dr. Uncredible:

While it´s true that Warhammer vampires aren´t lawful creatures, they´re bound by rules by necessity, for whatever reason they form a schemy, plotting aristocracy that keeps it´s own members in check.
I personally believe they need a society and one another to keep themselves from going feral.

Sooo, I´d place Warhammer vampiric society, and by extension even Manny as neutral evil, with Vlad possibly true neutral.
Sociopathic creatures forming rule-bound societies out of need.

I re-read Mannfreds stuff, and a lot of his -really- bonkers behavior is from the End-Times bollox, and I personally take that with a pillar of salt.
That said, I´ve only read the rule-book lore, not the novels.

The aristocracy thing that keeps their members in check is mostly needed. How long do you think Vampires would survive if they were just roaming around slaughtering people ? We can assume they would be extinct by now or hidden somewhere in the remote place. Their existence is already barely accepted within the Empire.

Mannfred definitly went full-evil at the end. Probably because of the frustration. :D

[Dr. Uncredible]

Originally posted by Ser Pounce:

Originally posted by Dr. Uncredible:

While it´s true that Warhammer vampires aren´t lawful creatures, they´re bound by rules by necessity, for whatever reason they form a schemy, plotting aristocracy that keeps it´s own members in check.
I personally believe they need a society and one another to keep themselves from going feral.

Sooo, I´d place Warhammer vampiric society, and by extension even Manny as neutral evil, with Vlad possibly true neutral.
Sociopathic creatures forming rule-bound societies out of need.

I re-read Mannfreds stuff, and a lot of his -really- bonkers behavior is from the End-Times bollox, and I personally take that with a pillar of salt.
That said, I´ve only read the rule-book lore, not the novels.

The aristocracy thing that keeps their members in check is mostly needed. How long do you think Vampires would survive if they were just roaming around slaughtering people ? We can assume they would be extinct by now or hidden somewhere in the remote place. Their existence is already barely accepted within the Empire.

Mannfred definitly went full-evil at the end. Probably because of the frustration. :D

Exactly! So if they were wholly chaotic they couldn´t function as a society, the race of Vampires would consist of isolated Vargheists and Varghulfs,
ergo, they´re to some degree creatures of order, they might not like it, but it´s part of who they are, the ones that haven´t gone feral.
And oh, Mannfred is evil allright, one of the more unabashedly evil characters in the game, supernaturally and sometimes cartoonishly so!
You recon part of his irrationallity and villain-level evil towards the end might stem from his millenia-long studies in dark magics?
He´s described in the old rulebooks as a savvy politician, but I think it´s safe to say that this goes right out the window towards the end.