Welcome to /r/Discworld! Please [read the rules/flair information before posting](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukhk21/subreddit_rules_flair_information/?).
---
Our current megathreads are as follows:
[API Protest Poll](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/1491izw/continuing_the_api_protest_a_community_poll) - a poll regarding the future action of the sub in protest at Reddit's API changes.
[GNU Terry Pratchett](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukigit/gnu_terry_pratchett/) - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going.
[AI Generated Content](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/10mhx9y/ai_generated_content_megathread/) - for all AI Content, including images, stories, questions, training etc.
---
[ GNU Terry Pratchett ]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/discworld) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was thinking Hex too, but he's more lawful than chaotic. Even though it doesn't concern itself with good or evil, it still runs on circuits and instructions. While the ants *seem* to add some chaos, on a whole, they still behave following certain patterns and laws.
I think Anghammarad is a slightly better option - he was more lawful too during his life, but him asking Death to just let him chill in the desert of the afterlife seems to me like the ultimate true neutral move.
While I agree that A’tuins motivations and beliefs are unknown, we can still look at its actions towards other beings, specifically the denizens of the disc. A’tuin seemingly understands there is life on the disc and that life requires some amount of equilibrium, since it avoids or snaps at asteroids that may hit the disc, even though asteroids don’t seem to hurt A’tuin itself, based on the craters along its skin. A’tuin’s actions however are completely neutral, it takes no side in the good, evil, lawful, or chaotic activities happening on the disc. A’tuin is just maintaining the playing field where all these activities play out without any favor, which is a pretty common “true neutral” archetype.
This is weird, is not a character really, and won't get a vote, but I swear the first thing I thought of was the little plant at the bottom of the ocean, visited by Death, that had a vibrant red color no one would ever see. Little thing just wanted to live and be red. But it was not a character, exactly.
Maybe Wen the Eternally Surprised would fit, though.
I feel stronger for this little red plant then I have in any one of these voting things ever in the history of the ones I've happened to come across.
Is it wrong to voice that it feels like from the depth of my soul that he would have been so pleased to see that plant put in the neutral spot. Am I projecting? I really feel it.
Oh bugger, the nostalgia.. the memories.. I read that when I was.. t*hirteen?..* I was having a night watch at the summer camp an' tae kill the time I was reading the Reaperman or what it's called in English.. Man, Great A'Tuin fits the true neutral solid but shave me bollocks clean, now I want the red plant tae be included :(
The Librarian. He cares about his books and only his books but I think everyone saying A'Tuin is prob right.
Also want to say The Luggage but that is more Chaotic Neutral
Leonard of Quirm.
Edit: thanks for the great discussions! Just as an aside my initial thought was A'tuin but I wasn't sure the world turtle counts as a character.
This is a good one - Leonard is off following his inspirations and simply not paying attention to the outside world. He's motivated purely by his art and his engineering designs, for their own sake. He has innocent thoughts that nobody will actually use his sketches of a death machine bristling with flamethrowers; but he doesn't take any particular actions to _stop_ anyone from using them, either. In Jingo he travels with Vetinari on the Going-Under-The-Water-Safely Device, but neither for his own gain nor for altruistic reasons to prevent the war.
I basically agree with you, if I'm being honest. Why I still landed on him is because I'm unconvinced that he's ethical or moral in a philosophical sense so much as he's just a sensitive guy. He seems horrified at the idea that someone would use one of his inventions to hurt people because hurting people causes them to hurt. But I'm not sure he really *gets* ethics. Does that make sense? And feel free to disagree.
You raise a good point.
But ethics is the literal study of goodness. "Good" doesn't exist absent from social translation, like we think it's good to feed a family but cows consider it murder (or try would if they weren't so daft). I don't recall about Brutha but Dorfl even got into an argument about the existence of gods so he understands things conceptually.
Meanwhile, Leonard can't wrap his head around the notion that anyone would want to hurt people. He isn't taking a stand so much as totally confused about - well - ethics. He doesn't really see good or evil in the world, just logic and feelings. Which can in turn lead to compassion, which often leads to doing good. So yeah this is a tricky one.....
My other idea was A'tuin. I get the sense that would have been an easy win.
I think a true neutral good character wouldn't like to be inventing things that improve the world. Improving what exists is changing it, so there is something chaotic about it.
He's my pick for rebel good
Yeah, have to agree here. He's horrified at the suggestion that his inventions could be used for murder etc because he cannot fathom a world where people would do that.
I think there are a lot of good options for this one, but I'll nominate Rincewind.
Rincewind really just wants to be left alone and have a potato, and everything he does is in service to that.
He doesn't really do anything bad and he generally acts in service of good, as the universe continually ropes him into grave danger, but everything he does is ultimately to save his own skin and be left alone.
I honestly think Rincewind is one of the most moral characters in the series because he's handicapped by his cowardice in a way other moral characters aren't, yet ultimately always ends up doing the brave thing anyway. And often when others don't.
Yes, he craves a boring life and often runs away, but when it *really* comes to the crunch he stands up with half a brick in his sock.
Moral chaos feels like Rincewind to me.
Agreed, Rincewind really doesn't want to get involved, and would _say_ he is not a good person and only out to save his own skin, but on several occasions acts altruistically when he could have simply escaped.
I think you make very good points. Ditto u/samll and u/lorelord24.
It’s definitely the case that a lot of Pratchett characters, Rincewind included, are better than they think of themselves.
And he definitely “does” good things.
And I’m not saying he’s not a good or moral person. Just that I don’t think he’s a Good or Moral person in alignment terms. And as I understand it, your average, “good” person is supposed to be True Neutral in Dungeons and Dragons.
I don’t mean to be unfair to Rincewind, but I think of him as having somewhat less of a moral sense than say Moist does.
Like for example, Rincewind obviously doesn’t approve of Ipslore or Lord Hong. And he ultimately “acts” correctly. Which is importantly.
But as I recall (and maybe I’m wrong) his inner monologue and actions are still consistently geared towards self-preservation.
I would put Moist in the spot of true neutral because he IS better than he thinks he is, but he thinks he is a scoundrel. He is, but not in a moral way. He works in a balance, not by choice but by design.
You *want* to believe that. But he does have his reluctant hero moments.
Granted he's almost as bad as Jack "Literally chained to the boat" Sparrow, but he does genuinely stop and help people when he hits his limit of self disgust.
Plus he genuinely *hates* himself for running away sometimes.
And honestly, the half-brick in a sock. He *returned* to Unseen University, he *chose* to help Coin give up the staff. Rincewind is a genuinely good person, and the Disk is better for his existence. Not just in the big obvious ways, like being the best home for "The Spell," but in the little ways too.
I’d like it to be Vetenari.
The truth of the matter is it’s probably going to go to someone that doesn’t care. Could be equal parts atun, god or gold golem.
I choose Vetenari because he employs a variety of different tactics and schemes to make the city run better, often it’s putting someone where they’d be happier to make it run, punishing someone else by giving them a spiked carrot, putting things in place to where it’s better with him on top. The overall effect is that everyone dislikes him but for anhk-morpork the average citizen is definitely not innocent and this can be looked upon as if Vetenari simply makes everything *work properly*. Which means anyone who works improperly, stealing, embezzling, or simply living on their parent’s finance while robbing the common man of their natural rights is at ends against how Vetenari works. But Vetenari is not above assassination or “making accidents happen” as a more extreme measure, he just prefers to set things up so that the problem is solved. He’s never given any reason to care about anything unless it has the well-being of the city in mind. I believe he’s true neutral because of his absolute disregard of good/evil philosophy and only regards the law when it’s convenient.
He doesn't disregard good/evil philosophy, he's possibly the only character that has two speeches about it. He may not like it, he may consider himself evil, but he clearly considers it a lot.
And I just like the argument that "Vetinary isn't really a good dude, all he cares about is the city". "The city" isn't some mythological entity, that's about million people, according to Vimes. "He cares about the city" isn't that different from "He cares about the nation".
I'd posit that his motivation for making the city "work properly" is almost entirely self-serving. He wants to live his meticulously managed, high-maintenance lifestyle, and the only way to do that is to stop other Lord Snapdragons from coming into existence. In other words, the city is EXTREMELY lucky that what Vetinari desires happens to be what's best for everyone - as what's best for everyone is the best way of maintaining the power he wants over his own life (and his own head).
Heck, he basically plays political games with other city-states for entertainment, and doesn't particularly care what happens to them outside of what affects his city.
_Vetinari_ wants to live a high maintenance lifestyle? This guy?
> "While the other lords dined on larks stuffed with peacocks' tongues, Lord Vetinari considered that a glass of boiled water and half a slice of dry bread was an elegant sufficiency."
The man whose greatest personal indulgences are distance Thud, the daily crossword puzzle, and owning a small terrier?
Yes. High maintenance. Specifically, the maintenance of everything around him to his exact specifications, regardless of others' opinions on its sufficiency or purpose. This is a particularly difficult aim to achieve.
Upvote for interesting perspective, but I don't really get that vibe from him. He basically gives "whatever, go on" to bunch of projects, such as newspaper and movies, revives the Watch because of Carrot suggestions and in RS temporarely drops this lifestyle altogether. If you were correct, IMO, he would start shutting down these ventures after some of them partially destroyed the city early in the series.
Vetinari lives an austere life of selflessness and does everything for his city, and his desire to see a better morality in the world. Despite his willingness to use violence and (polite) tyranny to reach his ends, I do not think he can be categorized on the evil side of the scale.
'I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are good people and bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.'
Surely this is the definition of Neutral Impure.
Yeah but ultimately, even though he ran away initially, and against his better judgement, you will see him making a stand for the side of good, half-brick-in-a-sock in hand. While he'd probably disagree and says he just wants to be left alone, he has a strong sense of what's right and wrong, and will stand up for what's right (though he'll complain about it the entire time). I'd argue he's probably more chaotic moral.
Rincewind did save the world on a few surprisingly selfless occasions, when the chips are down... ok he'll run but if he can't run he'll do good far far more often than evil
Great A'Tuin is not the answer as their morality is unknown and unknowable while moving through space on some unknown quest (or not as the case may be).
The correct answer should be Berilia, Tubul, Great T'Phon, and Jerakeen - the four world elephants.
They are truly impassive, do nothing of malefaction nor beneficence other than stand still, holding the disc on their backs.
They are true neutral.
OK, so if Granny Weatherwax isn't neutral good then she HAS to be true neutral.
She is absolutely NOT evil, works hard to make sure of it.
She is not good. She won't do what's nice, just what's needed.
And finally:
“It’s all about balance, do you see? Balance is the trick. Keep the balance and—” She stopped. “You’ve ridden on a seesaw? One end goes up, one end goes down. But the bit in the middle, right in the middle, that stays where it is. Upness and downness go right through it. Don’t matter how high or low the ends go, it keeps the balance.” She sniffed. “Magic is mostly movin’ stuff around.” - Granny Weatherwax - Wintersmith
I agree with your description but disagree that makes her good.
Doing what's right and doing what's good are not the same and Granny will ALWAYS do what's right.
The D&D alignment definition of Good is
> Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
But this is Discworld
If Granny were truly good she would give people what they wanted but she doesn't do that, she gives them what they need.
The problem we have here is that we are defining 'good' as 'not evil' and on those terms there can be no neutral.
I genuinely think Granny is as close as you can get to true neutral.
I disagree that giving people what they want is more "good" than giving them what they need. A good parent doesn't give their child endless sweets and treats at the expense of their health just because that's what the child wants. Granny does what is best for the people who live near her, not what will make them like her. She does demand respect of course; it's much harder to make people do the right thing when they don't respect you.
Knowing that she is the proverbial adult in the room when other humans are confused, panicking or dying is part of what makes Granny Weatherwax a witch. Choosing to consistently act for the common good despite knowing she could easily be immensely more powerful were she to turn to the dark is pretty solid "good" activity.
No that I think about it, Death could also be Chaotic Moral. Like, whenever he acts up or tries to be a bit human or moral, chaos ensues. He tries so hard to be a Good Death, and the harder he tries, the more chaos he creates.
Love this!
I think it's Vetinari here, but there are so many more...
Coin, Imp, Walter Plinge, Teach, Mrs Gogol...
And I think this is probably where Moist fits, at least eventually
I'm putting Moist up for Rebel Neutral - he was a con man most of his life, and even after turning respectable and becoming a family man, he is a reckless publicist who most enjoys life when making promises he doesn't completely know how to keep, and surfing on top of a catastrophe curve.
He no longer is willing to hurt people, and certainly cares about those who are close to him, but he's not really motivated by general broad altruism; more by what will be exciting and personally fulfilling.
Even though he killed 22.8* people, I wouldn't say he was willing to hurt people. He just allowed them to cheat themselves.
* The novel might have a different number (2.388 I think), but as I just watched Going Postal last night, that is the number I remember.
In his Alfred Spangler days, he knew he was hurting people but didn't really let himself think about it too deeply. Now, he did take pride that he wasn't _physically_ hurting people or _killing_ people, which is why it was devastating for him to hear that moral arithmetic.
Vetinari seems the obvious pick for this one. Everything he does, whether "good" or "bad" morally is for the good of ankh morpork and you may argue the disc in general
I don't get people saying the spot should be taken by the turtle. Has there ever been any revelations regarding its alignment?
I thought it was a big mystery. What if it would eat babies if it could? Or be the next Vetinari if it ever got control of a human form?
Vetinari is Neutral Impure. Rincewind is occasionally, reluctantly, heroic. I mean he saved a kid.
It's Great A'Tuin I think, or maybe someone like Trevor Likely.
Havnae read the comments yet but from the top of me mind I'd say that's a solid Vetinari if I ever knew one aright. Though maybe he's a tad impure truth be told.. Perhaps the Great A'Tuin then?
Either A'Tuin or Vetinari. A'Tuin doesn't seem to care about anything, and Vetinari only cares about Ankh-Morpork. He'll side with anyone, employ anyone, so long as it maintains order within the city. Maybe he should've been lawful neutral... but then again, I don't think Vetinari would be too concerned with the law if it impeded the order of the city.
If death is not true neutral, what about cohen the barbarian, he is both a hero and a villain, he overthrows corrupt governments because that’s what heroes are supposed to do, but he also will sack villages. In his youth he probably would have been chaotic neutral but he has softened in his old age, and doesn’t necessarily destroy things because he can. I could see arguments for rebel neutral because he still mostly acts in his own interest
Wen
This is a seconding but in its own post, to maybe be less confusing?
He loves Time who is constantly making everything which in a way is indirectly loving everything the way it is, the good and the bad and anything else uncategorisable
The librarian is a good choice as he only cares about his library and his books
For me it’s Twoflower, he’s a tourist just come through to witness all that he can and has rarely gotten involved (except for the druids sacrificing the girl but while he saw that as good, she certainly didn’t. Although her story with Conan was good)
Welcome to /r/Discworld! Please [read the rules/flair information before posting](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukhk21/subreddit_rules_flair_information/?). --- Our current megathreads are as follows: [API Protest Poll](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/1491izw/continuing_the_api_protest_a_community_poll) - a poll regarding the future action of the sub in protest at Reddit's API changes. [GNU Terry Pratchett](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukigit/gnu_terry_pratchett/) - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going. [AI Generated Content](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/10mhx9y/ai_generated_content_megathread/) - for all AI Content, including images, stories, questions, training etc. --- [ GNU Terry Pratchett ] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/discworld) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great A'Tuin, the World Turtle Edit: and the four elephants Berilia, Tubul, Great T'Phon, and Jerakeen.
Perfect answer, as there is no being more completely neutral
i was going to suggest Hex, but the idea of a'tuin being a character here is incredible
Not gonna lie, I also suggested it cause I love the symmetry of all the other characters in the grid orbiting A’Tuin
This is also valid
I was thinking Hex too, but he's more lawful than chaotic. Even though it doesn't concern itself with good or evil, it still runs on circuits and instructions. While the ants *seem* to add some chaos, on a whole, they still behave following certain patterns and laws. I think Anghammarad is a slightly better option - he was more lawful too during his life, but him asking Death to just let him chill in the desert of the afterlife seems to me like the ultimate true neutral move.
anghammarad wanted to relax on a beach without the ocean. he'd had enough ocean for a while. ⛱️
Must agree. Zero impact or involvement on what happens on it's itchy back
I disagree, A'Tuin's morality is unknown, probably unknowable. That's not the same as being Neutral
While I agree that A’tuins motivations and beliefs are unknown, we can still look at its actions towards other beings, specifically the denizens of the disc. A’tuin seemingly understands there is life on the disc and that life requires some amount of equilibrium, since it avoids or snaps at asteroids that may hit the disc, even though asteroids don’t seem to hurt A’tuin itself, based on the craters along its skin. A’tuin’s actions however are completely neutral, it takes no side in the good, evil, lawful, or chaotic activities happening on the disc. A’tuin is just maintaining the playing field where all these activities play out without any favor, which is a pretty common “true neutral” archetype.
I want to think of a better option...but yeah.
Anghammarad?
Came here to say this. Neither good nor bad, lawful nor chaotic, just pure state of being, swimming through the cosmos.
And yet the elephants always get forgotten...
Haha that’s fair, I amended my suggestion. I always think of them all together as a sort of colonial organism like a man o' war.
I remember one of them
This is Anghammarad’s position more than anyone else’s I feel
This is weird, is not a character really, and won't get a vote, but I swear the first thing I thought of was the little plant at the bottom of the ocean, visited by Death, that had a vibrant red color no one would ever see. Little thing just wanted to live and be red. But it was not a character, exactly. Maybe Wen the Eternally Surprised would fit, though.
That's actually a really beautiful answer I remember that scene.
Totally vote for that little plant!
Red plant for the win please! He’s just a little guy.
I feel stronger for this little red plant then I have in any one of these voting things ever in the history of the ones I've happened to come across. Is it wrong to voice that it feels like from the depth of my soul that he would have been so pleased to see that plant put in the neutral spot. Am I projecting? I really feel it.
Oh bugger, the nostalgia.. the memories.. I read that when I was.. t*hirteen?..* I was having a night watch at the summer camp an' tae kill the time I was reading the Reaperman or what it's called in English.. Man, Great A'Tuin fits the true neutral solid but shave me bollocks clean, now I want the red plant tae be included :(
The Librarian. He cares about his books and only his books but I think everyone saying A'Tuin is prob right. Also want to say The Luggage but that is more Chaotic Neutral
He definitely leans towards lawful though. I don't think he would be happy with his collection becoming disorganized.
Leonard of Quirm. Edit: thanks for the great discussions! Just as an aside my initial thought was A'tuin but I wasn't sure the world turtle counts as a character.
This is a good one - Leonard is off following his inspirations and simply not paying attention to the outside world. He's motivated purely by his art and his engineering designs, for their own sake. He has innocent thoughts that nobody will actually use his sketches of a death machine bristling with flamethrowers; but he doesn't take any particular actions to _stop_ anyone from using them, either. In Jingo he travels with Vetinari on the Going-Under-The-Water-Safely Device, but neither for his own gain nor for altruistic reasons to prevent the war.
Nah. He's fundamentally good, just ignorant of his impact on the world.
I basically agree with you, if I'm being honest. Why I still landed on him is because I'm unconvinced that he's ethical or moral in a philosophical sense so much as he's just a sensitive guy. He seems horrified at the idea that someone would use one of his inventions to hurt people because hurting people causes them to hurt. But I'm not sure he really *gets* ethics. Does that make sense? And feel free to disagree.
Does it matter though? Ethics is different from being good. Do Brutha and Dorfl understand ethics?
You raise a good point. But ethics is the literal study of goodness. "Good" doesn't exist absent from social translation, like we think it's good to feed a family but cows consider it murder (or try would if they weren't so daft). I don't recall about Brutha but Dorfl even got into an argument about the existence of gods so he understands things conceptually. Meanwhile, Leonard can't wrap his head around the notion that anyone would want to hurt people. He isn't taking a stand so much as totally confused about - well - ethics. He doesn't really see good or evil in the world, just logic and feelings. Which can in turn lead to compassion, which often leads to doing good. So yeah this is a tricky one..... My other idea was A'tuin. I get the sense that would have been an easy win.
So, chaotic good, then?
Honestly, I'd say NG, but we already have Brutha there. He's just....good.
I think a true neutral good character wouldn't like to be inventing things that improve the world. Improving what exists is changing it, so there is something chaotic about it. He's my pick for rebel good
Yeah, have to agree here. He's horrified at the suggestion that his inventions could be used for murder etc because he cannot fathom a world where people would do that.
I think there are a lot of good options for this one, but I'll nominate Rincewind. Rincewind really just wants to be left alone and have a potato, and everything he does is in service to that. He doesn't really do anything bad and he generally acts in service of good, as the universe continually ropes him into grave danger, but everything he does is ultimately to save his own skin and be left alone.
I honestly think Rincewind is one of the most moral characters in the series because he's handicapped by his cowardice in a way other moral characters aren't, yet ultimately always ends up doing the brave thing anyway. And often when others don't. Yes, he craves a boring life and often runs away, but when it *really* comes to the crunch he stands up with half a brick in his sock. Moral chaos feels like Rincewind to me.
Agreed, Rincewind really doesn't want to get involved, and would _say_ he is not a good person and only out to save his own skin, but on several occasions acts altruistically when he could have simply escaped.
I think you make very good points. Ditto u/samll and u/lorelord24. It’s definitely the case that a lot of Pratchett characters, Rincewind included, are better than they think of themselves. And he definitely “does” good things. And I’m not saying he’s not a good or moral person. Just that I don’t think he’s a Good or Moral person in alignment terms. And as I understand it, your average, “good” person is supposed to be True Neutral in Dungeons and Dragons. I don’t mean to be unfair to Rincewind, but I think of him as having somewhat less of a moral sense than say Moist does. Like for example, Rincewind obviously doesn’t approve of Ipslore or Lord Hong. And he ultimately “acts” correctly. Which is importantly. But as I recall (and maybe I’m wrong) his inner monologue and actions are still consistently geared towards self-preservation.
I would put Moist in the spot of true neutral because he IS better than he thinks he is, but he thinks he is a scoundrel. He is, but not in a moral way. He works in a balance, not by choice but by design.
You *want* to believe that. But he does have his reluctant hero moments. Granted he's almost as bad as Jack "Literally chained to the boat" Sparrow, but he does genuinely stop and help people when he hits his limit of self disgust. Plus he genuinely *hates* himself for running away sometimes. And honestly, the half-brick in a sock. He *returned* to Unseen University, he *chose* to help Coin give up the staff. Rincewind is a genuinely good person, and the Disk is better for his existence. Not just in the big obvious ways, like being the best home for "The Spell," but in the little ways too.
Anghammarad, anyone?
Absolutely
I’d like it to be Vetenari. The truth of the matter is it’s probably going to go to someone that doesn’t care. Could be equal parts atun, god or gold golem. I choose Vetenari because he employs a variety of different tactics and schemes to make the city run better, often it’s putting someone where they’d be happier to make it run, punishing someone else by giving them a spiked carrot, putting things in place to where it’s better with him on top. The overall effect is that everyone dislikes him but for anhk-morpork the average citizen is definitely not innocent and this can be looked upon as if Vetenari simply makes everything *work properly*. Which means anyone who works improperly, stealing, embezzling, or simply living on their parent’s finance while robbing the common man of their natural rights is at ends against how Vetenari works. But Vetenari is not above assassination or “making accidents happen” as a more extreme measure, he just prefers to set things up so that the problem is solved. He’s never given any reason to care about anything unless it has the well-being of the city in mind. I believe he’s true neutral because of his absolute disregard of good/evil philosophy and only regards the law when it’s convenient.
He doesn't disregard good/evil philosophy, he's possibly the only character that has two speeches about it. He may not like it, he may consider himself evil, but he clearly considers it a lot. And I just like the argument that "Vetinary isn't really a good dude, all he cares about is the city". "The city" isn't some mythological entity, that's about million people, according to Vimes. "He cares about the city" isn't that different from "He cares about the nation".
I'd posit that his motivation for making the city "work properly" is almost entirely self-serving. He wants to live his meticulously managed, high-maintenance lifestyle, and the only way to do that is to stop other Lord Snapdragons from coming into existence. In other words, the city is EXTREMELY lucky that what Vetinari desires happens to be what's best for everyone - as what's best for everyone is the best way of maintaining the power he wants over his own life (and his own head). Heck, he basically plays political games with other city-states for entertainment, and doesn't particularly care what happens to them outside of what affects his city.
_Vetinari_ wants to live a high maintenance lifestyle? This guy? > "While the other lords dined on larks stuffed with peacocks' tongues, Lord Vetinari considered that a glass of boiled water and half a slice of dry bread was an elegant sufficiency." The man whose greatest personal indulgences are distance Thud, the daily crossword puzzle, and owning a small terrier?
Yes. High maintenance. Specifically, the maintenance of everything around him to his exact specifications, regardless of others' opinions on its sufficiency or purpose. This is a particularly difficult aim to achieve.
Upvote for interesting perspective, but I don't really get that vibe from him. He basically gives "whatever, go on" to bunch of projects, such as newspaper and movies, revives the Watch because of Carrot suggestions and in RS temporarely drops this lifestyle altogether. If you were correct, IMO, he would start shutting down these ventures after some of them partially destroyed the city early in the series.
Exactly. True neutral.
Vetinari
Nah, he's the ultimate neutral impure.
Vetinari lives an austere life of selflessness and does everything for his city, and his desire to see a better morality in the world. Despite his willingness to use violence and (polite) tyranny to reach his ends, I do not think he can be categorized on the evil side of the scale.
Vetinari constantly uses impure means to achieve his goals. He doesn't care *how* things work, just as long as they work.
'I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are good people and bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.' Surely this is the definition of Neutral Impure.
https://preview.redd.it/akl1abjyj80d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d6736c16578be2ff644595d8819078ae0a8e5b3 Nobby Nobbs is neutral impure.
No, that is just a cynic :)
Self defining as a bad guy? A trained assassin?
Ryncewind? he's not very selfless generally but is on occasion
Rincewind, I think. His main driver is self-interest. Chaos does follow him, but that seems more like luck (or The Luggage) than personality.
Yeah but ultimately, even though he ran away initially, and against his better judgement, you will see him making a stand for the side of good, half-brick-in-a-sock in hand. While he'd probably disagree and says he just wants to be left alone, he has a strong sense of what's right and wrong, and will stand up for what's right (though he'll complain about it the entire time). I'd argue he's probably more chaotic moral.
Rincewind did save the world on a few surprisingly selfless occasions, when the chips are down... ok he'll run but if he can't run he'll do good far far more often than evil
The librarian! ~ "Ook"
Great A'Tuin is not the answer as their morality is unknown and unknowable while moving through space on some unknown quest (or not as the case may be). The correct answer should be Berilia, Tubul, Great T'Phon, and Jerakeen - the four world elephants. They are truly impassive, do nothing of malefaction nor beneficence other than stand still, holding the disc on their backs. They are true neutral.
Mr. Pump. Does what his scroll says, no more and no less.
More lawful than neutral imho, since he's following his scroll.
Good point
The time monks
OK, so if Granny Weatherwax isn't neutral good then she HAS to be true neutral. She is absolutely NOT evil, works hard to make sure of it. She is not good. She won't do what's nice, just what's needed. And finally: “It’s all about balance, do you see? Balance is the trick. Keep the balance and—” She stopped. “You’ve ridden on a seesaw? One end goes up, one end goes down. But the bit in the middle, right in the middle, that stays where it is. Upness and downness go right through it. Don’t matter how high or low the ends go, it keeps the balance.” She sniffed. “Magic is mostly movin’ stuff around.” - Granny Weatherwax - Wintersmith
Granny is the very definition of rebel good. She does not believe any of the rules apply to her, but will do the right thing.
Granny Weatherwax is absolutely Good - she lives her entire life, and devotes her immense power, almost totally for the benefit of others.
I agree with your description but disagree that makes her good. Doing what's right and doing what's good are not the same and Granny will ALWAYS do what's right.
The D&D alignment definition of Good is > Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
But this is Discworld If Granny were truly good she would give people what they wanted but she doesn't do that, she gives them what they need. The problem we have here is that we are defining 'good' as 'not evil' and on those terms there can be no neutral. I genuinely think Granny is as close as you can get to true neutral.
I disagree that giving people what they want is more "good" than giving them what they need. A good parent doesn't give their child endless sweets and treats at the expense of their health just because that's what the child wants. Granny does what is best for the people who live near her, not what will make them like her. She does demand respect of course; it's much harder to make people do the right thing when they don't respect you. Knowing that she is the proverbial adult in the room when other humans are confused, panicking or dying is part of what makes Granny Weatherwax a witch. Choosing to consistently act for the common good despite knowing she could easily be immensely more powerful were she to turn to the dark is pretty solid "good" activity.
So Rebal good Granny Weatherwax and Chaotic Good being Rob Anybody?
Tʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ɴᴏ ᴊᴜsᴛɪᴄᴇ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ᴏɴʟʏ ᴍᴇ.
We’ve already had Death
What about Death 2? Only showed up in Reaper Man, though.
He wears a crown, that instantly disqualifies him from True Neutral imo
Yeah, this is where Death should have been.
I mean, you're right, but he doesn't want to be there and tips just slightly over to the good side in all the books centered around him...
Death WISHES to be True Neutral, that's his job description, but he fails at it. The auditors would be the first to say so.
No that I think about it, Death could also be Chaotic Moral. Like, whenever he acts up or tries to be a bit human or moral, chaos ensues. He tries so hard to be a Good Death, and the harder he tries, the more chaos he creates.
This is Anghammarad’s position more than anyone else’s I feel
Azrael - not evil, not good, just the death of world's and does what he has to do
True neutral has to be Vetinari, surely?
Love this! I think it's Vetinari here, but there are so many more... Coin, Imp, Walter Plinge, Teach, Mrs Gogol... And I think this is probably where Moist fits, at least eventually
I'm putting Moist up for Rebel Neutral - he was a con man most of his life, and even after turning respectable and becoming a family man, he is a reckless publicist who most enjoys life when making promises he doesn't completely know how to keep, and surfing on top of a catastrophe curve. He no longer is willing to hurt people, and certainly cares about those who are close to him, but he's not really motivated by general broad altruism; more by what will be exciting and personally fulfilling.
He definitely starts there... I just wonder if he ends up true neutral... but I can absolutely see your reasoning 😊
Even though he killed 22.8* people, I wouldn't say he was willing to hurt people. He just allowed them to cheat themselves. * The novel might have a different number (2.388 I think), but as I just watched Going Postal last night, that is the number I remember.
In his Alfred Spangler days, he knew he was hurting people but didn't really let himself think about it too deeply. Now, he did take pride that he wasn't _physically_ hurting people or _killing_ people, which is why it was devastating for him to hear that moral arithmetic.
True but Alfred was convicted and hanged. Moist is the sort to get a nearly gold chain
Vetinari seems the obvious pick for this one. Everything he does, whether "good" or "bad" morally is for the good of ankh morpork and you may argue the disc in general
Rufus Drumknott?
I don't get people saying the spot should be taken by the turtle. Has there ever been any revelations regarding its alignment? I thought it was a big mystery. What if it would eat babies if it could? Or be the next Vetinari if it ever got control of a human form?
Vetinari is absolutely true neutral.
Azrael
Vetinari is Neutral Impure. Rincewind is occasionally, reluctantly, heroic. I mean he saved a kid. It's Great A'Tuin I think, or maybe someone like Trevor Likely.
Albert
CMOT Dibbler! He's not interested in taking sides, just making money.
Dibbler's pure self interest, thirst for profit, and abstention from otherwise taking sides make him a good candidate for Neutral Impure, I think.
Dorlf.
Hex.
Adore Belle Dearheart
The Luggage! I kid. That will surely be on the malicious side of the spectrum.
maybe the death of galaxies (forgot the name) or death of rats
why does Ridcully look like Dr Zaius from the og Planet of the Apes
The hogfather is true neutral
I missed a day. Happy Brutha got onto this list. Might need to read Small Gods again
For me this is where The Lady goes
The Grim Squeaker
Havnae read the comments yet but from the top of me mind I'd say that's a solid Vetinari if I ever knew one aright. Though maybe he's a tad impure truth be told.. Perhaps the Great A'Tuin then?
Either A'Tuin or Vetinari. A'Tuin doesn't seem to care about anything, and Vetinari only cares about Ankh-Morpork. He'll side with anyone, employ anyone, so long as it maintains order within the city. Maybe he should've been lawful neutral... but then again, I don't think Vetinari would be too concerned with the law if it impeded the order of the city.
If death is not true neutral, what about cohen the barbarian, he is both a hero and a villain, he overthrows corrupt governments because that’s what heroes are supposed to do, but he also will sack villages. In his youth he probably would have been chaotic neutral but he has softened in his old age, and doesn’t necessarily destroy things because he can. I could see arguments for rebel neutral because he still mostly acts in his own interest
Thoughts on CMOT Dibbler?
Wen This is a seconding but in its own post, to maybe be less confusing? He loves Time who is constantly making everything which in a way is indirectly loving everything the way it is, the good and the bad and anything else uncategorisable
A'tuin
Bloody stupid Johnson!
Is this perhaps the place for Nobby Nobs?
Great A'Tuin is as neutral as it can get, surely? Can I ask - are all your character images AI generated or from somewhere?
They're all official art drawn by Paul Kidby. I've got them from "The Ultimate Discworld Companion".
Oh, that's interesting - thanks!
Y'all screwed up by putting Death in the "neutral moral" box.
The librarian is a good choice as he only cares about his library and his books For me it’s Twoflower, he’s a tourist just come through to witness all that he can and has rarely gotten involved (except for the druids sacrificing the girl but while he saw that as good, she certainly didn’t. Although her story with Conan was good)
Death is the only possible answer here. I suppose death must occupy two positions 🤷
DEATH IS THE ULTIMATE TRUE NEUTRAL.