I hope this is the right place for this. I am not sure. (just registered)

I have played f03 for years and I really like it.

Apparantly my allignment is lawful evil, according to some test.

What kind of actions would a lawful evil do in the capital wasteland? (note I have no expansions)

Would blowing up megaton be chaotic evil? Or neutral?

Would a lawful evil kill ghouls for the hell of it, or not at all.

I'm a little confused to how a lawful evil character should play.

I need some advice.

Was this test the G.O.A.T test which you take while still in Vault 101?

No some allignment test I did. I am currently in moriarties saloon. Divided to as wether to disarm the megaton bomb or to rig it to explode. I don't hate most megatonians (lolwut) But I loathe the sherrif and jericho. I cannot seem to figure out if simms is neutral good or lawful neutral o.o As for not blowing it yup. The house is rather shoddy. Hard decision this. x.x If only I were neutral evil, so much easier then.

I guess be lawful unless you can make money or benefit from of it or if you want to. Cool idea, man. Crooked cops and such in the higher ups are fascinating.

I like the idea of being employed by mr burke. shadowy evil business but I'd get a hotel room and tenpenny is like a big bad guy, but posh and collected. He does not strike me as chaotic evil or neutral evil. o.o

btw I don't know if it is relevant but my guy uses energy weapons (with sneak and repair)

'Lawful evil' uses the letter of law to further their own [selfish] ends, and to possibly foil retribution from those 'silly enough to abide by it' ~accepting that the law is the law...

Approach all opportunities with that point of view, and it's about as close to Lawful Evil as you can get.

**Some types of 'lawful Evil' use public adherence to the law to feign (or delusionally believe) upholding a [selective] sense of honor. You could approach conversations in that light; choosing the indignant response where appropriate.

I'd disagree, almost like two-adjectives aren't enough to describe a persons motivations. My last druid was, essentially, lawful-evil but he wasn't selfish.

However in the capital wasteland. Law is a thing of the past. Enclave doesn't do anything. Raiders and slavers about. The only way to have law it seems is to have the player emulate it by killing chaotic people/creatures. XD

Just try to think like Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden, those two would no doubt be considered Lawful Evil. You'd be the envy of some people in the D&D circles, that's the hardest alignment to achieve in the genre.

Describe how he [she?] was evil?

Usually Evil is only interested in what it wants.

A morally bankrupt, yet fanatical, druid who wanted to unite the Druid tribes into a totalitarian theocracy and overthrow the rest of civilisation to establish a kind of benevolent dictatorship; I was quite pleased with the concept actually, he viewed Druids as Chirst, bearing all of man's burden on nature whilst they over-consumed and despoiled nature.

Point is, I don't think that a "lawful evil" type is necessarily in contempt of the law, uses it as an excuse etc. The Enclave are lawful evil IMO because they have laws, that are typically evil, and obey them; whether or not the individual actually believes that they are doing right, or in the right, or not is really a detail and not a defining trait of being "lawful" or "evil".

Do you mean that they wanted "to unite the Druid tribes into a totalitarian theocracy", and would use the law to do it?

The Enclave are ~perhaps... somewhat akin to the Peace-Keepers in the Farscape setting. There were Peace-Keepers that were not outright evil, but what we saw of it showed a corrupt culture that would abuse the law to it's on ends rather often. They are the classic Lawful Evil IMO.

Indeed. Perhaps "Law" could be replaced by justice or as simms calls it wasteland justice. Also Law can also be seen as order. the absence of discord and chaos. Since I hate raiders (chaotic evil) three dog (chaotic good) etc I tend to like ordely characters that don't act like an idiot (chief gustavo is a good example that imo behaves oddly)

I almost always help doctor zimmer. harkness is an android, it was created by humans to serve humans, it could never be our equal (lolwut pokemon giovanni reference)

I tend to avoid killing general wastelanders. I do often kill brotherhood of steel guys. I do not hate them, i just want their gear. XD

I also loathe the regulators, and usually using bloody mess leave them behind in pieces as a warning to the rest. I kinda wanna kill their leader but she's essential and one cannot enter the building unless the perk is taken. no ty I'd take contract killer.

There was no inter-tribal Druid law, he would create those laws when establishing the nation; if I'm remembering 3.5e right lawful doesn't necessarily pertain to the "Law" rather a code, creed, belief system etc. He had his own laws, which he wanted to enforce upon all Druids and then men, and he had his religious code as a Druid, and would not break them; those laws however were evil; hence he was lawful evil IMO, because he had laws, a code, but would commit acts of evil. Like attacking trading routes and blacksmiths and lumber-jacks, or lying and scape-goating people to build support amongst other druids... or assassinate other druids whom he felt were corrupt and ineffectual.

Point is that alignments and such are really an OOC thing right? We all know that the Enclave are evil but they, personally, don't think that themselves are evil; in their own minds and amongst their own fellows they are lawful good.

A lawful evil character in Fallout would be a raider who doesn't kill children on principle or who buries his victims rather than impale them on spikes'a lawful evil character is an evil person with who obeys some kind of law, the opposite of an evil opportunist (neutral) or an evil person who does what they want (chaotic).

It's less about actual sovereign government law and merely the diametric of being chaotic, one side does what-ever it wants and the other has some self-imposed restrictions due to belief, law, principle etc.

I'd say don't restrict yourself too much Weasel, the game really isn't intended for you to be a villain. A lawful evil character is still evil and may blow up Megaton just for the greed of reward provided it suits what-ever they believe or want.

ty enclave. I overanolyse things. (as usual)

btw @ druid thing. Did you use Oasis as your base? Just curious.

I can agree with this; but it's sad IMO, the series should maintain a strict indifference to the PC's ethics and moral compass ~if they even have one.


But I meant any laws ~wherever they happen to be. The character wouldn't force his rival to comply with his demands [to further the theocracy agenda] using some trumped up legal pretext that just might work? (A thing more to the letter than to the spirit of the law.)

** Or invite the rival over for talks, because it's legal to shoot them if they accost you in your home?

I dunno... The exchange operator seemed pretty evil; and thought nothing of sending an assault [death-squad] team to the traced location of a random stranger he spoke with in the Posido-Net LAN. Didn't even ask for permission.

... Except that I cannot recall any character [in books or film] that was both evil and truly principled.
'Lord Gro' is about the closest character that comes to mind, but he was more of a chaotic neutral; capable of switching sides in a war ~simply because the other side was losing.

No, this was in DnD and thought to myself that Druids would be able to make the most effective secret police force ever and it rolled from there.


No not really, the campaign had us all facing a corrupt faction of lycanthrope Druids; he was basically a radical preacher but united the Druids under him as a devout military commander - almost like a Crusader against heratics... of-course this was after I unsuccessfully tried to persuade the lycan Druids to join in the planned Druid Revolution.

I like how you put "Death Squad" in there as though his guy personally formed them to get you . This mainland scum hacked into top-level communications, it's doubtful that he himself authorised it but rather passed on the news to someone else and knew they would; I mean he never talks to anyone else does he? Probably just sent an email across Enclave.Net to whom-ever. Besides the Enclave view their hatred of mainlanders as a fight of good against evil, with themselves as the good guys.

That sounds like it was a fun session.

But would it matter? He still issued the call with causal abandon; expecting to read the after action report.

Well you're acting like it's no big thing. This mainlander accessed secure Enclave data, he could have been looking through classified information or anything as far as they were concerned; I'm not arguing that the fking Enclave aren't evil, probably the most open and shut case in some time, but the Enclave still consider themselves the heroes; which is my point about alignments that they are assigned by players by some arbitrary standards as opposed to what their characters perspective is. Hence, nobody would wake up one day and think "hmm... I'm pretty lawful evil", they'd just do as they do.

Eh... it's not impossible. In the intro to Fallout 2 the Enclave are seen to have called out the Vault 13 inhabitants with the 'All Clear [come out now]' signal... and the squad got bored and shot the ones who emerged.

My point is that even within an organization like the Enclave (or the Peace-Keepers), the personality can be the same kind; one who will use the letter of the law to their advantage, or to uphold their honor because the law says that their [questionable] actions were [at least technically] legal.

I pretty much joined the slavers. brought them the 4 they wanted and some other 12. got me the cash to upgrade my suite o.o and some exp. Can't wait to reach level 14 (contract killer) :3

Lawful Evil is all about self-interest, doing things that ultimately benefit only you, but doing so within certain limit. Its basically a selfish character, who will steal, double-cross, and possibly even kill, if those things sit within his (or her) moral boundary.

Blowing up Megaton could possibly fit, as the ultimate reward is monetary. I'm guessing a Chaotic Evil would do it just for the hell of it, but a lawful evil person does it because he gets something out of it.

The trouble with this game is that there is little inbetween Paragon Good, and Devilish Evil. Neutral doesn't really exist, unless you do nothing, and make no decisions whatsoever. And I don't think that Good actions + Evil actions = Neutral karma, despite what the game tells us.

Don't know if it's possible, but to play any type of evil. You should disable Broken Steel, because all the evil actions you do during the course of the main game, is negated by Broken Steel.

Well, indeed. Broken Steel was added to allow a 'play-after-the-ending' that Bethesda/TES fans love so much. Apparently, invalidating the entire story just to keep playing on as if nothing had happened is a good thing, it seems. Now, whether Bethesda planned this all along or just added it due to fan backlash to game actually ending when the story was complete (a crazy thought), I'm not sure. Maybe someone can enlighten us here?

If the latter, then I think that sets a dangerous precedent. Bethesda's story should be theirs to tell, not ours to demand how it should end. If they want the story to end with the final scene at the water purifier, then so be it. It's their decision. For video games to be taken seriously developers should be able to create the story that they want, without having to change it due to disgruntled fans. You wouldn't demand that a movie end differently, just because you didn't like it. The same thing happened with Mass Effect 3 - people didn't like the ending, and it caused a huge backlash. There were demands that Bioware 'fix' the ending to give the ending that fans wanted, which is something I strongly disagree with. It was Bioware's story, just as Fallout 3 was Bethesda's story, and they can tell it how they choose.