Character Aliments

[Lana Kane]

Character Alignments

Lawful Good	Neutral Good	Chaotic Good
Lawful Neutral	True Neutral	Chaotic Neutral
Lawful Evil	Neutral Evil	Chaotic Evil

So one thing I really love reading it everyone's little ticks and tricks with their muses or favorite comic/movie person. Basically everyone is able to fit somewhere on the board above. Tell us where you fit and why! (Or where you think others belong!)


LANA for example is CHAOTIC NEUTRAL: meaning she does whatever she wants, whenever she wants. She is all about her own freedom and self-interest, and are thus completely unreliable [case point of abandoning her 'friends' in the middle of a battle]. She wont pursue anything for good or evil reasons, but only because it suits her to do it. While she wont kill, and she sometimes has a hard time walking away from someone hurting--she wont go out of her way to save just anyone as her first priority is making sure she is alright first.

If you need help understanding what each one means, then PM me and I will reply back with my chart that I have!!

[x]

So, I know most people would probably peg Charles as being Lawful Good, but I honestly see him more along the lines of Neutral Good. That's mainly because Lawful Good characters tend to have a strict moral code they adhere to; Charles's morality is actually rather fluid. It's much more obvious when he's younger, of course, but even as he gets older his morality is still inherently situational.

[Lana Kane]

Really? Now, you were right with me assuming that he was lawful good (I even used your color for it)! What do you mean he is neutral? Like give me an example! I do well with examples.

[x]

(Yeah, I caught that!  xD)

Well, from my understanding of Lawful Good, such a character needs to have a specific, and often strict, code of conduct.  Charles really doesn't; just about every bullet point in his personal code of conduct has an asterisk by it.  There are numerous exceptions to his rules and often times, especially when he's younger. Charles will be perfectly willing to go against his moral code in order to achieve "good." 

Example #1: Take Charles's behavior at the pub in Oxford during First Class.  He takes no issue whatsoever in cozying up to the minds of others - especially if it increases his chances of going home with a lovely lady.  At the same time, however, he stays out of Raven's mind entirely.  Yes, she asked him to, but she also knew about his mutation.  The women in the pubs didn't; how many do you think would have demanded he stay out if they'd known about his telepathy?  He rationalizes it by convincing himself that it's better to keep the telepathy hidden, that it would only cause undue chaos (which he isn't wrong, of course), but there's a sort of contradictory sense of reasoning going on there.  Charles is completely unperturbed by it, of course, because such a fluid line of logic allows for a "good" outcome: he can pick up girls with ease and no one has to know about his ability to read minds. 

Example #2: The whole confrontation with Emma, and the whole trip to Russia in general.  He effectively erases an entire task force from the eyes of everyone around them (even the damn dog's nose, for Christ's sake), takes over another man's mind in order to find out where Shaw was, puts another man to sleep and forces that man to forget he ever saw Charles (in perfect Russian, too), and then, to top it all off, aside from a sharp rebuke, he really doesn't try to make Erik stop choking the only other telepath he's ever met to death.  He does all of these things that blatantly contradict how the majority of the fanbase seems to see him, and he does it without ever once flinching.  Why?  Because it's all for the over-arching cause of "good". 

Example #3: Shaw.  The only moral Charles holds tight to is that he refuses to kill, or be an accessory to murder.  But even that changes when faced with a choice between holding tight to Shaw and letting Erik kill the man or letting his morality win out and rip himself away, almost certainly ensuring Erik's death.  Charles sacrifices his "Thou shalt not kill" morality and holds Shaw in place for Erik's homicidal intent and Nazi coin.  (Headcanon says Erik made the coin twirl like a mini blender just to make sure Shaw would actually die and not just be brain damaged.)

Though, really, Charles kind of toes the line between Lawful Good and Neutral Good; it's really hard for me to fully articulate, but I just cannot see Charles as fully Lawful Good.  He has a goal in mind, and his morality bends accordingly.  Like I've said before, Charles is an asshole.  He really is.  A well-meaning asshole, of course, but an asshole nonetheless. 

Does that help clarify why I tend to go more Neutral Good with Charles than Lawful Good?  (Sorry for the long-winded explanation!)

[Magda Eisenhardt]

Ah! I see! I understand! Good points there! I love reading where people get inside their muses heads, so your post wasn't long, it was fun! Never apologize for fun! I never thought of Xavier like that, so you have opened my mind!---ironic.

As for Magda--I can't figure out where she is, because she is so complex and changes rapidly. She starts off very sweet and happy. Then becomes withdrawn from the world, and frightened of it; she set down rules for herself and would never break them. To later become a violent activist; ignoring all the rules.

[reflectsgrowth]

Oh, wow I love your understanding of Charles! It's really neat to see how people interpet characters and have great understandings of them c: The examples were really good too! 


This seemed harder than I thought it would be to pick a certain category for a character. I think for the moment I'm torn between Lawful Good and Lawful Neutral. I don't see her as someone who would want to willingly break rules/laws and would probably be a bit hesitant. But at the same time she may if given a certain situation. I guess I'm still kinda trying to figure her out ab it? Of course, this could change over time since people do change it's all together possible. I don't see her being to selfish so I doubt she'd fit the evil/chaotic category very much. I think with just starting out she'd be more Lawful Good than anything and overtime may become some sort of neutral category or something completely different -- who knows! I guess I'll just figure that out as I figure out more of her story.