FREE! Click here to Join FunTrivia. Thousands of games, quizzes, and lots more!
Quiz about Wanna Change Alignment
Quiz about Wanna Change Alignment

Wanna Change Alignment? Trivia Quiz


A quiz on the ethical mores of playing characters consistently in the Dungeons and Dragons system.

A multiple-choice quiz by stuthehistoryguy. Estimated time: 6 mins.
  1. Home
  2. »
  3. Quizzes
  4. »
  5. Hobbies Trivia
  6. »
  7. Role Playing Games
  8. »
  9. Dungeons and Dragons

Time
6 mins
Type
Multiple Choice
Quiz #
256,257
Updated
Apr 29 23
# Qns
10
Difficulty
Average
Avg Score
7 / 10
Plays
3458
Awards
Editor's Choice
Last 3 plays: buncha1956 (5/10), Shiary (7/10), NumanKiwi (8/10).
- -
Question 1 of 10
1. Prominent leaders, especially those of extreme ideals, often make fine studies in the meaning of alignment. For example, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were both believers in order and discipline, but had little if any regard for human life or happiness contrary to their plans. Which of these alignments would a character based on Hitler or Stalin most likely espouse? Hint


Question 2 of 10
2. On the other hand, fictional characters, with their inherent two dimensional aspects, are also great studies in alignment. Such is the case with Aragorn, the romantic, wandering ranger from Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" cycle, who is often cited as a prime exemplar of what alignment? Hint


Question 3 of 10
3. Nuances in the portrayals of most fictional characters make it difficult to concretely classify them as one alignment. Like most real people, they act differently in different circumstances, and as such do not attend to the beck and call of a cosmic rulebook. One major exception is Superman, the first superhero of twentieth-century comic books. Though his character has developed over time, it would be pushing credulity to say he has ever really deviated from what alignment (at least since 1950 or so, when the character became relatively stable)? Hint


Question 4 of 10
4. In their Wizards of the Coast-published Dungeons and Dragons supplement, "The Complete Scoundrel", Mike McArtor and Wesley Schneider make an interesting case for scoundrels (i.e, characters that live by their wits, "sneaks, cheats, bluffers and opportunists") of an unlikely alignment. As examples, they cite James Bond, Odysseus, and Sanjuro, the title character from the Kurosawa film "Yojimbo". What counterintuitive (but logically defensible) alignment do McArtor and Schneider claim for these figures, bucking the common perception of this alignment as that of a souless martinet? Hint


Question 5 of 10
5. As cited earlier, it may be inappropriate to classify real people as one consistent alignment. Such would not be the case with Henry Lee Lucas, a purported serial killer. By some estimates, the nomadic Lucas killed over 100 people, but estimates of this sort are impossible to verify because of the murderer's penchant for pathological lying. His confessions eventually grew so contradictory that his was pardoned for one of his murders by none other than George W. Bush because it had been proven that Lucas was in another state when the killing he had confessed to occurred. Henry Lee Lucas is a prime example of what alignment? Hint


Question 6 of 10
6. As of this writing, the canonical resource on Dungeons and Dragons player alignment, "Players Handbook: Core Rulebook I v. 3.5" (published by Wizards of the Coast), defines one alignment as utterly individualistic - a character with this alignment is "out for herself, pure and simple". As such, it is generally discouraged, if not outright banned, from player character use. What name is given this notorious alignment? Hint


Question 7 of 10
7. "When someone needs help, I don't ask about their politics." This line, uttered by undiscriminating caregiver Nurse Meg Cratty on the television show "M*A*S*H", is most typical of what alignment, as defined by "Players Handbook 3.5"? Hint


Question 8 of 10
8. "The Simpsons" character Moe Szyslak briefly embraced the doctrine of postmodernism, which he defined as "weird for the sake of weird". Though many postmodern thinkers might dispute this formulation, what freewheeling Dungeons & Dragons alignment might most closely fulfill Moe's proclaimed ethos? Hint


Question 9 of 10
9. In Dungeons & Dragons terms, what alignment is my dog? (You really don't need to know anything about my dog to answer this question.)

Answer: (one word, seven letters, no quote marks)
Question 10 of 10
10. Finally, in practical gameplay, one application of alignment is the strictures it places on the behavior of certain character classes. Which of these classes does NOT have any restrictions on alignment? Hint



(Optional) Create a Free FunTrivia ID to save the points you are about to earn:

arrow Select a User ID:
arrow Choose a Password:
arrow Your Email:




Most Recent Scores
Dec 17 2024 : buncha1956: 5/10
Dec 03 2024 : Shiary: 7/10
Nov 27 2024 : NumanKiwi: 8/10
Nov 24 2024 : Purple2000: 7/10
Nov 15 2024 : Baldfroggie: 7/10
Nov 12 2024 : DCW2: 10/10
Oct 29 2024 : Guest 199: 5/10
Oct 28 2024 : Guest 50: 7/10

Score Distribution

quiz
Quiz Answer Key and Fun Facts
1. Prominent leaders, especially those of extreme ideals, often make fine studies in the meaning of alignment. For example, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were both believers in order and discipline, but had little if any regard for human life or happiness contrary to their plans. Which of these alignments would a character based on Hitler or Stalin most likely espouse?

Answer: Lawful evil

In the Dungeons and Dragons world, the underworld creatures that most folks would call "demons" or "devils" are distinguished largely by alignment. Chaotic evil demons exist essentially to wreak havoc and destruction for their own twisted pleasures, while the more methodical devils have, to use the cliché, a method to their madness.

They have no regard for the common good, but their malevolence is guided by a single, overarching plan.
2. On the other hand, fictional characters, with their inherent two dimensional aspects, are also great studies in alignment. Such is the case with Aragorn, the romantic, wandering ranger from Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" cycle, who is often cited as a prime exemplar of what alignment?

Answer: Chaotic good

One might say that, by taking on the responsibilities of a general and a sovereign, Aragorn shifts alignment to lawful good by the end of Tolkien's saga. Changing alignment can have some consequences for certain character classes in Dungeons & Dragons (as discussed in Question 10 below); this probably would not have been a problem for a character like Aragorn.

On a side note, the British science fiction character Dr. Who, with his distaste for the confinement of convention coupled with his overarching desire for universal well-being, may be classified as chaotic good as well, though I am not sure if any official Dungeons & Dragons publications have broached this subject.
3. Nuances in the portrayals of most fictional characters make it difficult to concretely classify them as one alignment. Like most real people, they act differently in different circumstances, and as such do not attend to the beck and call of a cosmic rulebook. One major exception is Superman, the first superhero of twentieth-century comic books. Though his character has developed over time, it would be pushing credulity to say he has ever really deviated from what alignment (at least since 1950 or so, when the character became relatively stable)?

Answer: Lawful good

Superman's good nature can be seen in his absolute refusal to kill (even when the fate of the world may hang in the balance - the "Sacrifice" storyline of 2005 may be the best example thereof). Likewise, Superman's allegiance to the lawful ethos is evidenced by his often aggravating reluctance to deviate from the prevailing societal order, perhaps best evidenced by his refusal to allow Batman a crack at the Joker (because the infamous villain had diplomatic immunity at the time) in the oft-referenced "Death in the Family" storyline. Plainly speaking, if Superman is not lawful good, no one is.
4. In their Wizards of the Coast-published Dungeons and Dragons supplement, "The Complete Scoundrel", Mike McArtor and Wesley Schneider make an interesting case for scoundrels (i.e, characters that live by their wits, "sneaks, cheats, bluffers and opportunists") of an unlikely alignment. As examples, they cite James Bond, Odysseus, and Sanjuro, the title character from the Kurosawa film "Yojimbo". What counterintuitive (but logically defensible) alignment do McArtor and Schneider claim for these figures, bucking the common perception of this alignment as that of a souless martinet?

Answer: Lawful neutral

As "Complete Scoundrel" puts it, these characters use "their cunning to uphold the strictures of law or tradition while at the same time manipulating these codes to benefit themselves". Though certainly arguable, this represents an intriguing take on an oft-neglected and pigeonholed alignment.
5. As cited earlier, it may be inappropriate to classify real people as one consistent alignment. Such would not be the case with Henry Lee Lucas, a purported serial killer. By some estimates, the nomadic Lucas killed over 100 people, but estimates of this sort are impossible to verify because of the murderer's penchant for pathological lying. His confessions eventually grew so contradictory that his was pardoned for one of his murders by none other than George W. Bush because it had been proven that Lucas was in another state when the killing he had confessed to occurred. Henry Lee Lucas is a prime example of what alignment?

Answer: Chaotic evil

Though Lucas did have a partner (Ottis Toole) for a time, both killers were anxious to implicate each other for scores of killings once in custody; this was clearly not a firm partnership on the order of the Mafia's "omerta".
6. As of this writing, the canonical resource on Dungeons and Dragons player alignment, "Players Handbook: Core Rulebook I v. 3.5" (published by Wizards of the Coast), defines one alignment as utterly individualistic - a character with this alignment is "out for herself, pure and simple". As such, it is generally discouraged, if not outright banned, from player character use. What name is given this notorious alignment?

Answer: Neutral evil

A major difference between recent D&D rules and the earlier, first edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons rules composed by Gary Gygax is their respective positions on evil. Wizards of the Coast rulebooks proscribe evil as a player alignment - evil is for "monsters" and "villains". Gygax's original rules fully anticipated players who wanted to stretch their creativity into playing an evil character, even sanctioning a character class (the Assassin) that had to have an evil alignment by definition.

This was not universally accepted by major role-playing figures; many authors of Gygax's day wrote pieces for the game's official organ, "Dragon" magazine, that called for evil characters to be non-playing only. Though I am sure there are still many campaigns with evil characters, this backlash against "playing evil" represents a major sea change in how today's copyright holders view the game.
7. "When someone needs help, I don't ask about their politics." This line, uttered by undiscriminating caregiver Nurse Meg Cratty on the television show "M*A*S*H", is most typical of what alignment, as defined by "Players Handbook 3.5"?

Answer: Neutral good

As the handbook states: "A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates, but does not feel beholden to them." In the instance above, Nurse Cratty had given humanitarian aid to injured Koreans, some of whom turned out to be communists fighting against Cratty's fellow Americans. Though not especially anxious to throw off the rules of American law, Nurse Cratty was more than willing to ignore these legal codes and political alliances in the cause of helping someone who was hurt, even if the person she was helping was her enemy.
8. "The Simpsons" character Moe Szyslak briefly embraced the doctrine of postmodernism, which he defined as "weird for the sake of weird". Though many postmodern thinkers might dispute this formulation, what freewheeling Dungeons & Dragons alignment might most closely fulfill Moe's proclaimed ethos?

Answer: Chaotic neutral

Freedom is the buzzword for the chaotic neutral character. He is not motivated to do harm, but is not especially interested in benevolence, either. Sheer freedom is the motivator - freedom from authority, freedom from the obligations of the missionary, freedom even from sadistic entanglements. "Complete Scoundrel" cites Johnny Depp's "Pirates of the Carribean" character, Captain Jack Sparrow, as an exemplar of chaotic neutral. With their emphasis on the deconstruction of established norms, the postmodernists might well be chaotic neutral as well.
9. In Dungeons & Dragons terms, what alignment is my dog? (You really don't need to know anything about my dog to answer this question.)

Answer: Neutral

D&D rules have consistently portrayed all natural animals - including dinosaurs! - as true neutral. When applied to humans, this seems quite apropos. A neutral character does have empathy for others (like my dog), but realizes that there is a time and a place to kill, either for food, territory, or survival, and he has no compunction about doing so. Likewise, he does show loyalty and social attachment, but constantly challenges authority, and probably should not be trusted to follow his proscribed rules, e.g., not run away, when left unsupervised. By these measures, cats, lacking a pack instinct, may well be chaotic neutral, though I am sure some feline enthusiasts would dispute this.

"Players Handbook 3.5" characterizes a neutral character as "undecided". This may be unfair; real neutrality may indeed be the most profound decision of all.
10. Finally, in practical gameplay, one application of alignment is the strictures it places on the behavior of certain character classes. Which of these classes does NOT have any restrictions on alignment?

Answer: Fighter

Paladins, disciplined holy warriors, must be lawful good; a model paladin would be Sir Galahad from the Arthurian legends. Monks, dedicated, innately driven martial artists, must be lawful, though their position on good and evil is negotiable. In Gary Gygax's original formulation of D&D rules, Druids were required to be true neutrals; in the more current Version 3.5, this stricture has eased somewhat, but druids still must be neutral on one of the two good/evil - law/chaos axes. Fighters, on the other hand, have never had any such strictures, and can be any alignment they choose.
Source: Author stuthehistoryguy

This quiz was reviewed by FunTrivia editor gtho4 before going online.
Any errors found in FunTrivia content are routinely corrected through our feedback system.
12/22/2024, Copyright 2024 FunTrivia, Inc. - Report an Error / Contact Us