DS9 character alignment

[jonds91]

As someone who played a bit of DnD back in the day I enjoy doing character alignments for TV series, books etc, I watch or read.

I think the image below is a fairly accurate summation of the alignments of 9 of the major characters in DS9. Although I am not sure Sisko is Chaotic Good as much as Neutral Good. I'd have someone like Nog perhaps more Chaotic Good
http://imgur.com/Jp9NF
Would others be interested in doing this for the other characters? I'll kick this off with just the "good" alignment.

Lawful Good
Worf
Vic Fontaine
Rom
Ezri Dax
Jake Sisko

Neutral Good
Kira
O'Brien
Benjamin Sisko
Bashir

Chaotic Good
Nog
Jadzia
Martok

Lawful Neutral
Odo - though I feel he was True Neutral to start with
Wormhole Aliens/Bajoran Prophets - They seemed to be follow some strict code but had their own motives
Jem'hadar solider - there to follow orders
Breen?
Damar - only following orders

True Neutral
Your average Ferengi - Quark, Brunt etc
Morn - given we know very little about him, I'm sticking him in TN
Tosk - only interest is to stay ahead of the chasers

Chaotic Neutral
Garak - a more CN character you will not find
Q

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Sisko gradually migrated from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good over the course of the series.

Nog moved from True Neutral to Lawful Good. I'd place Rom more Neutral Good than Lawful Good, he did a whole lot of stuff secretly behind people's backs in the series.

 

[Qonundrum]

What JirinPanthosa said, though I'd add that Garak was a near-consistent chaotic good throughout. He was a spy but even from the earliest days he seemed to have an inkling. Or, if nothing else, he hated how he was treated by his "peers" (for lack of better word) so he helped the Federation?

And that's what makes DS9 so cool - so many factions and groups, with more complex nuances and facets therein. Even early on and despite claims of "rough around the edges", the characters had impeccable core traits that remained throughout the series' run. Garak wasn't even a "main" character and overtook them in terms of being interesting at times!

 

[cultcross]

And that's what makes DS9 so cool - so many factions and groups, with more complex nuances and facets therein. Even early on and despite claims of "rough around the edges", the characters had impeccable core traits that remained throughout the series' run. Garak wasn't even a "main" character and overtook

I entirely agree, many 'minor' characters on DS9 are fleshed out and more interesting than regulars on the series that followed.
Although I would say they occasionally drifted into parody (Rom and Leeta especially), episodes like Empok Nor rely heavily on these developed recurring characters (there's only really Miles from the main cast there and it's not actually about him really).

 

[jonds91]

What JirinPanthosa said, though I'd add that Garak was a near-consistent chaotic good throughout.

No way! Garak is definitely Chaotic Neutral. He's as close to an outright nutjob as you can find on the show and I love him for that!

 

[jonds91]

Sisko gradually migrated from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good over the course of the series.

Nog moved from True Neutral to Lawful Good. I'd place Rom more Neutral Good than Lawful Good, he did a whole lot of stuff secretly behind people's backs in the series.

I agree Sisko moved but not sure if he made it all the way to CG. I've left him at NG. Agreed that Nog started out being TN, like any other profit oriented Ferengi, but became good. However my reasoning for his CG rating is based upon Nog in Treachery, Faith and the Great River, where Nog used rather chaotic methods to achieve his goals. His intentions were good but his methods were dodgy.

 

[jonds91]

Updated for Neutral class

 

[JirinPanthosa]

It's hard to place Garak on the D&D alignment spectrum. He believes in absolute duty to the state and rule of law but is willing to go far outside the law to protect it. In one context he'll have compassion and spare condemned people and in another context he'll coldly murder to achieve his goals. No alignment really fits all his behavior.

Garak's morality is way more complex than the D&D alignment system expresses.

 

[jonds91]

Garak's first and foremost priority is himself. He will do anything for self preservation putting him firmly in the neutral category. Then when you look at the way he went about his business, and even that half crazy look he possessed, suggests he is chaotic in nature.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Garak's first and foremost priority is himself. He will do anything for self preservation putting him firmly in the neutral category. Then when you look at the way he went about his business, and even that half crazy look he possessed, suggests he is chaotic in nature.

That's the exact opposite of the way I see Garak. Garak places the best interest of Cardassia, in his opinion, higher than anything else.

 

[jonds91]

Interesting.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

If you think he's strictly selfish, cite examples.

In his chats with Bashir, he always prizes absolute loyalty and duty to the state over all else. From his preference in literature to his attitude toward law enforcement. In the last season, it pains him more than anything that when he's cracking Cardassian codes, no matter which side wins the war Cardassia loses. He tried to jump at every opportunity to return to his former life.

 

[Artoo Atari]

I agree Sisko moved but not sure if he made it all the way to CG. I've left him at NG. ...

Agreed. I see him as NG as well. He would not have gone after Eddington the way he did had he been CG. Speaking of whom, I would put Eddington as a good example of a Chaotic Good character. Worf is a good LG character.

Also agree with the choice of Garek as a chaotic neutral and Odo as lawful neutral. True neutrals are harder to classify. I would probably lump most of the "noncoporeal life form of-the-week" entities there.

Rounding out the evil categories, I would probably place the Female Changeling as Lawful Evil, Dukat as the NE, and maybe Joran Dax as the CE.

 

[TribbleFeeder]

Never played DD but this sounds like it would be interesting to dive into. If anyone wouldn’t mind explaining what each alignment means I’d be super appreciative.

 

[Artoo Atari]

I never really played D&D much either, but its alignment system has been applied to many different kinds of games and fiction as a way to create/write characters to explain their behaviors and motivations based on how they respond to laws and government and the desire to be benevolent or evil. I'll try to briefly summarize using some non-ST examples, here goes:

Lawful Good characters strive to do right and help others by the letter of the law or a code of honor (think: Superman). Neutral Good characters try to do the best they can inside or outside the laws of the land (think: Spider-Man). Chaotic Good characters do the right thing as they personally see it, often in opposition to authority (think: Robin Hood).

Lawful Neutrals go by the law regardless, like judges or soldiers following orders. True Neutral would be almost like purely natural or non-aligned characters or non-corporeal creatures with no motivation either way. Chaotic neutrals are characters that do what suits them and their purposes without regard to law or good (think: Deadpool).

Lawful Evil characters seek to impose their will through structure and their own imposed codes or laws (think: Darth Vader or Magneto). Neutral Evil villains are motivated to do evil to accomplish their will for personal gain, revenge, etc. (I think many villains and assassins fall into this category). Chaotic evil villains are usually psychopaths who do evil things because they like it (think: Joker).

Anyway, probably not the best analysis but hope it helps.

 

[TribbleFeeder]

Anyway, probably not the best analysis but hope it helps.

That was super helpful. Thanks for explaining. It seems like a pretty interesting way to look at the characters/motives. Especially for those like Garek or Quark, I could never really get a true grasp on either of their decision making.

Question: do you think characters always stay inside an alignment or can they move to another one through development?

 

[Artoo Atari]

Question: do you think characters always stay inside an alignment or can they move to another one through development?

Personally, I think it depends on the character. One the one hand, I would imagine that the majority of Starfleet officers that defected to the Maquis would start out as Lawful or Neutral Good characters just for the fact that they are academy-trained officers used to following orders, working within the chain of command, etc. Then they reach that moment where come to see Federation authority as corrupted and become Chaotic Good (depending on one's point of view I suppose).

One the other hand, speaking in terms of characterization and writing, I think certain characters don't (or at least shouldn't) change. For example, if a writer wrote an episode in which Quark began upholding the law for the greater good and Odo started breaking the law for kicks, then I would argue that they are not really Quark and Odo anymore.

 

[TribbleFeeder]

For example, if a writer wrote an episode in which Quark began upholding the law for the greater good and Odo started breaking the law for kicks, then I would argue that they are not really Quark and Odo anymore.

Hahahahaha a classic “StarFleet possessed by aliens” episode

 

[JirinPanthosa]

D&D alignment is too simplistic for anything but encouraging newcomer RPG players to be consistent about role playing.

Writing should make characters consistent, but morality can also be contextual. Like somebody might be lawful in general but chaotic when the law is unreasonable or tyrannical. Or good in most cases but evil when their life is in danger.

 

[kkt]

Hahahahaha a classic “StarFleet possessed by aliens” episode

Except neither Odo nor Quark is in Starfleet.