View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
02-01-2012, 05:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelldar View Post
Without a doubt she has walked the line on occasion but in the same episodes you see the impact of her morals and how reluctant she is to make the decision. I think there's a clear difference between someone who is "Good" and follows the rules being "lawful" and only breaks them when it is an absolute necessity and those who would actively seek to circumvent the rules with the intent of doing "good."

You have to admit that for 7 years she held true to the Starfleet principles that eventually brought her crew home, had she broken the rules more than she had to Voyager would have been home a lot sooner, she knows this and you could see the conflict and guilt she felt over this in the show..

Talking out of the context of voyager now character alignment is always much more of a guide in roleplaying games rather than a strict rule the character follows flawlessly, take it from a frequent DM /nerd :p
Sometimes. Not every time. She also spent entire episodes just looking for flimsy justification for breaking the Prime Directive on purely internal matters of culture and government, and spent at least one episode threatening to throw people off the ship if they break the prime directive to save a peaceful civilization, backed only by "I said so" and the baby Hitler fallacy.

She's all over the board enough to almost qualify as true neutral on the schizophrenic archetype, but even disregarding the outliers, your own desscription is not lawful good. Breaking the rules when its the right thing to do is chaotic good. There's a reason the chaotic end of the scale, good or evil, is the end that generally gets things done. However, letting a planet die because its the rules is lawful evil.

The alignments may not be hard set boxes, but lawful good is still pretty restrictive. A paladin who broke alignment a fraction as often as Janeway would be pretty much irrecoverably fallen.