What Alignment is Batman? (sorry, no room in poll for True Neutral)
Lawful Good
13.6% (27)
13.6% (27)
Neutral Good
20.6% (41)
20.6% (41)
Chaotic Good
40.7% (81)
40.7% (81)
Lawful Neutral
16.1% (32)
16.1% (32)
Chaotic Neutral
5.5% (11)
5.5% (11)
Lawful Evil
2.5% (5)
2.5% (5)
Chaotic Evil
0.5% (1)
0.5% (1)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: What Alignment is Batman?

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

That depends on the movie/show/game, doesn't it? But generally speaking he would be either Lawful Good or Chaotic Good. "You're truly incorruptible," says the Joker (hence the lawfulness). But he does use that illegal gimmick to trace the Joker's call at the end of Dark Knight (as pointed by Lucius). So... bleh, I dunno.

Batman is ridiculously lawful and arguably good. He never breaks his code under virtually any circumstances, and often opposes others not based around how they are harming innocents, but around how they are breaking his code. As far as his goodness is concerned, his intent is mostly to help better society and stop crime at an extreme cost to himself, which is quite obviously good. On the other hand, he is primarily motivated to do so out of revenge in many cases, which is not so good. He also is quite willing to utilize underhanded tactics as long as they don't break his code, which is also not very good. So he's definitely lawful, and either good or neutral depending on what aspects the writer or reader wishes to focus on. For me he's lawful good though.

Edit- and people really shouldn't equate the Paladin code with lawful good, or lawfulness in general. Otherwise, as others have pointed out, the idea of lawful evil makes very little sense.

Mr F.:
Well, I will put it like this. I am a DM, if I had current film era batman in my game and he was a paladin he could kiss goodbye to his power.

While true, I guess that'd be because he doesn't follow the paladin code more than anything. In Batman TAS he is mostly LG with some slip ups but clearly LG. Or maybe he's like...80% Good and 20% Neutral or so. He still won't be getting paladin powers, though.

Depends on which iteration of Jason Batman. (Someone on the internet needs to make a funny image of Jason Bateman dressed up as Batman)
Silver-Age Bateman is Lawful good due to the morality restrictions on old-timey comics.
Timmverse DCAU Bateman is Neutral Good. He cares more about helping people than the law itself, but still tries to support the law.
Nolanverse Bateman is Chaotic Good, regularly bucking the system but still trying to help people.

Bateman as written by Frank Miller is a chaotic evil psychopath.

DoPo:

Mr F.:
Well, I will put it like this. I am a DM, if I had current film era batman in my game and he was a paladin he could kiss goodbye to his power.

While true, I guess that'd be because he doesn't follow the paladin code more than anything. In Batman TAS he is mostly LG with some slip ups but clearly LG. Or maybe he's like...80% Good and 20% Neutral or so. He still won't be getting paladin powers, though.

Which, honestly, is why I try and nudge people away from paladins. Everyone plays them as Lawful Stupid http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Quotes/LawfulStupid

That said, in my current game there is a Lawful Good mage. Now, that guys is badass. It is his first game and he is trying to follow the wording of his alignment realistically. He thought up something which the others had ignored, after a battle if you want to show human dignity you bury the dead, regardless of who they are. He also took issue with the bodies being looted by the rogue and gunslinger (Pathfinder). He would have been able to make a good paladin. Its good fun, he is lawful good yet weak willed. He told them off for looting the bodies, told them to stop, they said no so he bailed on telling them off. Works within the alignment, makes a more interesting character.

OR: Uh, I love Batman. But he is not really a good guy in the current films. He is an asshole, its why I like him.

Chaotic Neutral for me.
I think that is why the story is interesting and makes the character more relate-able.

Souplex:
Bateman as written by Frank Miller is a chaotic evil psychopath.

Hmm...I guess the name fits but I think I prefer

Maybe he's Steve Bateman, though.

I was going to say Lawful Good, because he has a code he follows, but that's not enough, he needs an organisation following it, and the bat family is a bit small.

Otherwise a random orc who consistently goes round hitting people for no reason could be said to be lawful, because s/he's following the "hitting people for no reason" code.

Chaotic Good in most incarnations IMO.

Despite being an outlaw vigilante he adheres to a moral code, and his main reason for acting outside the law is to stop the criminals that the police can't, either due to corruption or because the villain has super powers or insane planning/technical skills. You could argue that his over-preparation (as seen in the war games arc where his attempt at a 'training simulation' backfired completely) and his paranoia and mistrust of other heroes, particularly Superman, drives him down to Chaotic Neutral, but everything is done out of concern.

tippy2k2:
clearly chaotic good (I would call Nolan's Batman this)

Nolan's Batman is Chaotic Neutral at best, and even then I don't buy it. Good implies a lot of things this Batman lacks.

The larger point that Batman can't be pinned to a single alignment because he's been done so many different ways, however, is one I agree with.

Batman in the popular consciousness, though, tends to be one that rules by terror. While he has a moral code, so do many evil people. His motives are often portrayed as selfish (based on HIS desire to punish people for what happened to HIM, rather than to protect), and he often shows no signs of altruism, respect for humanity or human dignity.

As he is commonly portrayed, he is more Evil than Good in alignment terms.

I know this will annoy a lot of people, but they tend to be the same people who judge "Good" and "Evil" based on whether or not I like the person."

Chaotic Good tends to be the dumping ground for "guys I like who do bad things." It's also where Gregory House gets dumped a lot, though he is selfish and dangerous to just about everyone around him because of it. House is practically the ultimate example of Evil doing good deeds for the wrong reasons. Batman usually isn't that far off, though.

DoPo:

Mr F.:
Well, I will put it like this. I am a DM, if I had current film era batman in my game and he was a paladin he could kiss goodbye to his power.

While true, I guess that'd be because he doesn't follow the paladin code more than anything. In Batman TAS he is mostly LG with some slip ups but clearly LG. Or maybe he's like...80% Good and 20% Neutral or so. He still won't be getting paladin powers, though.

TAS isn't the current film version, though. Current film version Batman is a terrorist with slightly better PR.

Angie7F:
Chaotic Neutral for me.
I think that is why the story is interesting and makes the character more relate-able.

It's relatable (The Hell does Firefox not recognise this as a word? It's a perfectly cromulent one) because it's one step away from the violent revenge fantasy so commonly identified with the nerd/geek/outcast.

Which I suppose could be the same thing....

WhiteFangofWar:

Despite being an outlaw vigilante he adheres to a moral code

A moral code doesn't make you capital G Good. Or Lawful, but since we're not arguing Law at this moment....

and his main reason for acting outside the law is to stop the criminals that the police can't[....] but everything is done out of concern.

Good intentions (though I find it arguable that most modern incarnations have that) do not make for Good acts.

Monsters often have bad reasons for good acts (or "good" reasons for bad ones.

You let one of them go but that's nothing new. Every now and then a little victim's spared because she smiled, 'cause he's got freckles. 'Cause they begged. And that's how you live with yourself. That's how you slaughter millions. Because once in awhile-on a whim, if the wind's in the right direction-you happen to be kind.

Batman tends to hide behind a moral code to excuse otherwise Evil acts.

Additionally, preparation and contingencies don't bump someone down the Good/Evil scale by themselves. Preparation implies order and is a sign of a Lawful mind (though perhaps Batman's ONLY sign in most versions). This is why Wizards in Third Edition (where this version of the alignment scale comes from) are repeatedly listed as having lawful tendencies. But back to GvE...

To repeat myself:

Chaotic Good tends to be the dumping ground for "guys I like who do bad things." It's also where Gregory House gets dumped a lot, though he is selfish and dangerous to just about everyone around him because of it. House is practically the ultimate example of Evil doing good deeds for the wrong reasons. Batman usually isn't that far off, though.

Alignment threads tend to be exercises in excusing the people or characters someone likes for their trespasses. That's nice, but it doesn't fit within the D&D alignment system where Good and Evil, Law and Chaos are very real forces in the world(s).

Zachary Amaranth:

DoPo:

Mr F.:
Well, I will put it like this. I am a DM, if I had current film era batman in my game and he was a paladin he could kiss goodbye to his power.

While true, I guess that'd be because he doesn't follow the paladin code more than anything. In Batman TAS he is mostly LG with some slip ups but clearly LG. Or maybe he's like...80% Good and 20% Neutral or so. He still won't be getting paladin powers, though.

TAS isn't the current film version, though. Current film version Batman is a terrorist with slightly better PR.

I know - I just rewatched a bit of TAS to remind myself of how it went. I've seen a current of one movie from the current trilogy - the second one (erm, The Dark Knight Returns? Whatever it was called). And if I really had to judge by that movie, I'd say Lawful. Lawful something, not sure. He was taking up serving Gotham quite seriously. Then again, I didn't pay much attention - the film bored me a bit and I think I started to doze off at some point, so maybe he was just trying to justify his actions. Also, can't remember if he was Neutral or Evil. The more I consider it, the more I think he was somewhere between Lawful Neutral and Lawful Stupid.

As I said, I'm judging this only from what scraps I can remember from the second movie.

I still think applying D&D alignment to non-D&D is not going to go well, though. Especially when you have everything being gritty and dark and edgy and stuff. I don't think there are even enough shades of morality in the movie to justify bringing in the D&D alignments. At most, I'd go with the 4e system where you have more or less a single axis - LG being "goodie two shoes", G less than that but OK, Unaligned speaks for itself, E also, and CE is just being a dick for the sake of being a dick at all times. Umm, I'm not sure you need all of the labels either.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked