Poll: What Alignment is Batman?

[Thunderous Cacophony]

This is an old nerdy question, but it's one of my favourites; what D&D alignment is Batman?

Spoiler: What Is Alignment?

Alignment is basically the moral stance of a character, divided along two axes: Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic and Good/Neutral/Evil, creating 9 possible combinations. There's a lot of debate about what exactly each alignment is (even official definitions vary between editions), but in general:

Lawful: The belief that everything should follow an order, and that people should create, uphold and follow natural and mortal law. One judges the quality of an action by the 'goodness' of the action itself, or the ends DON'T justify the means. (AKA Deontology) EDIT As BabySinclair points out, 'Lawful' doesn't necessarily mean 'follows the law'; if a person has a hard-and-fast moral code they stick to no matter what, that's Lawful, even if the code doesn't match society's legal code (otherwise you could never have a Lawful Evil character).

Chaotic: The belief in personal flexibility and freedom, even (and perhaps especially) when that conflicts with society. One judges the quality of an action by the consequences of the action, so sometimes the ends DO justify the means (AKA Consequentialism)

Good: A willingness to act altruistically, to sacrifice the self for others (typically a large group, like a inhabitants of a country).

Evil: A willingness to act in your your own self-interest (or the interests of a small group, like your close friends and family) while disregarding others. One may still help others as a result of their actions, but it's not their primary motivation.

Neutral: The character has no strong inclinations towards one side of the axis or the other. Usually seen in Lawful/Chaotic, when they have no overwhelming desire either to follow or break the law, but it exists in Good/Evil too. This doesn't mean that the character has no morals; for example, a Lawful Neutral character usually has a personal code that they follow, regardless of whether or not that leads to good or evil outcomes.

Wikipedia has a pretty good page on alignment; scroll down to where it breaks down each category individually and gives examples if you're still unsure.

It's one of those things which can be argued almost any way. Pick a favourite Batman, or a synthesis that is the perfect Batman. I'm just curious about how the Caped Crusader (or, if you prefer, the Dark Knight) is understood by Escapists.

Just remember, you're probably wrong:

P.S. The Escapist wrote some good articles about alignment back in the day, you should read them.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/checkfortraps/8386-All-About-Alignment
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/checkfortraps/8436-All-About-Alignment-Part-II

 

[tippy2k2]

I'm not sure you could give him an alignment because there are so many different versions of batman.

Some are clearly lawful good (like the Adam West batman) and some are clearly chaotic good (I would call Nolan's Batman this) but there really is no way to give him an alignment without specifying which version you are speaking of.

 

[DoPo]

I'm not sure you could give him an alignment because there are so many different versions of batman.

This, also - never mix D&D alignments with something that's not D&D. It doesn't work by definition.

 

[Scarim Coral]

While that image pretty much fitted for each incarnation of Batman (he's is not one person) to me I say he is Netural Good due to being an upholder of justice but also he operate differently from a lawful person (does it in the shadow, a vigilante and interrogate ciminals).

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

i don't think he is lawful, because batman doesn't always uphold the law.

however he always tries to do good while balancing out everything, and he never kills, therefore i wouldn't put him at chaotic either, so neutral good is my guess.

 

[BabySinclair]

Something that you missed in your definition of Lawful is that Lawful will follow an order of their choosing, even one created by themselves. Lawful, is misleading, as it does not mean one must follow the laws (see lawful evil in a good society), it means they must follow a code of conduct and prefer orderly and measured actions. Batman as Lawful is pretty much clear cut. He has an order, as you put it, that he will not kill, he will not use guns, and he will not compromise in his pursuit of justice. On the G-E axis, this gets muddied and varies between writers. He's probably closer to Neutral with writers skewing him sometimes between good and evil (the debate is on his sanity and motivation.)

So in short, Batman's LN which allows him to venture into both good and evil. Officially, Wizards of the Coast put him as Lawful Good in Complete Scoundrel.

While that image pretty much fitted for each incarnation of Batman (he's is not one person) to me I say he is Netural Good due to being an upholder of justice but also he operate differently from a lawful person (does it in the shadow, a vigilante and interrogate ciminals).

Lawful characters in D&D can be lawbreakers. It all comes down to how and why the break laws in accordance with their own code of conduct. The problem stems from a Paladin's (who's viewed as the pinnacle of Lawful Good) code of conduct class feature that states they cannot intentionally break laws, skulk in shadows, and so forth. If being lawful came down solely on following the law, Lawful evil would be incredibly hard pressed to exist. Corrupt politicians, mob/gang lords, and Lex Luthor are lawful evil, they have their own code that supersedes laws.

 

[BrotherRool]

In the Chris Nolan films he's Neutral Good, because he aims to do the best for other people through selflessness (and as long as we don't stray into Frank Miller territory, I'd argue that most mainstream Batmans are pretty clearly good aligned. If he was out for revenge for his parents that could be neutral, but the more normal story is 'so that no-one else has to suffer that way', which is why it always sucks when some writer takes the cheap route and links the bad guy directly to his parents death)

And then he has a code which he upholds to avoid chaotic, as long as he avoids guns and killing I think chaotic would be a stretch, but in the film version it's recognised by himself as well as everyone else that vigilantism isn't the proper solution, it's just the only viable method right now and he knows scaring and beating the crud out of criminals isn't lawful but does it anyway out of need

 

[FalloutJack]

Batman's alignment is Batman. There is no other way to explain it.

 

[Lionsfan]

Definitely Chaotic Evil. I mean, seriously, the guys favorite Ice Cream was chocolate and Batman just kicked the shit out of him for no reason?

 

[Whatwhat]

No one has yet argued for the lawful neutral case and it has 31% percent of the votes so I am going to say it: He does whatever has to bedone to uphold his code be it evil or good in the eyes of society; thus he is the very definition of lawful neutral. He isn't chaotic because he opposes those with a simmilar goal but different ways (with which he disagrees) of reaching it. He isn't good or evil because he conducts a mixture of actions from both sides of the alignment spectrum.

 

[SD-Fiend]

Whatever the writer says he is.

 

[Abomination]

I'm a firm believer he is Lawful Good. The lawful nature is how he sticks to his principles of never killing, never using guns and assisting the judicial system. He does not determine the fate of his enemies when they are defeated, if they surrender he hands them over to the authorities.

While at times Batman doesn't follow what it perceived as a 'nice' way of doing things he always protects innocents and will not allow one to suffer in order to expedite his mission. He is good (often to a fault).

 

[DoPo]

No one has yet argued for the lawful neutral case

On the contrary.

So in short, Batman's LN

Also, it might help if people say which Batman they are talking about. As the image shows, a case can be made for each alignment, depending on which depiction you pick.

 

[Zeldias]

Generally speaking, probably lawful neutral. Strict adherence to a code no matter what, even to a fault (Joker, for example, is better dead than left alive). Neutral because I don't know if good characters plot underhanded ways to take out their friends.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Well, the problem is right on your allignment chart.

Different incarnations, and different writers have radically altered Batman over the few DECADES, changing with the times and what the market is interested in. You also have arguments where the boundaries on those alignments.

Is a character lawful if they follow a strict moral code of their own making, even if they break the law? Batman has bent the law across his knee to many times that it isn't even funny anymore.

Then you have the problem that Batman often is depicted as an inch above his Rouges. Does the struggle to keep on the side of the light push him towards a greater good than one who does not need to struggle, or does it make him neutral?

Morality isn't a simple metric you can stuff someone on only nine spaces and account for all human variations between good, evil, order, and chaos. Half of western thought has been the debate on morality, who it comes from, why we should follow it or why we shouldn't follow it.

 

[lunavixen]

There is a problem with the basis of your question. There have been that many different incarnations of Batman, he can't be nailed down to one alignment because every writer has made him something different, like the chart shows, a case can be made for every alignment for all of the different Batman incarnations, so it doesn't work, if you were being more specific and chose a singular Batman incarnation for debate, this might work, but for such a broad question, the point is moot.

I chose Neutral good by the way

 

[davidsoc]

you left it out...to me he is true neutral...but if there is no room there is no room....

part of the reasoning for that, has to be which version...which has already been brought up. The pic you put in he OP alone proves that there is all the "versions" of him contain different alignments. The general idea of batman to me is probably lawful neutral....but overall with all the different versions put the character itself as true neutral.

 

[mbarker]

Bat Man is lawfull good because he always lets people like the Joker live. Heros like Rorschach would be considered chaotic good.

 

[One of Many]

Where is Lawful Whoop-ass? Everyone knows that Batman is Lawful Whoop-ass.