But her intentionally snapping the neck of Maxwell Lord, even though it was apparently her only option, was such a shock specifically *because* it was against her alignment.

As I remember the D&D alignments, a character could do something outside of their alignment (free will) but only with a significant impact (psychic/emotional, and maybe changing alignment).

I would propose that act shifted her toward True Neutral (somehow, I feel like Superman would have found another option)… but I don’t feel like traditional Wonder Woman could stay at True Neutral at all. She cares. She has a strict credo, even though she broke it in that extreme situation. So either she needs to atone for her action (e.g. by finding a way to limit superpowers – accepting Lord’s case! – or by finding a way to ensure they can’t be subverted as Maxwell Lord did), or she needs to fundamentally change her character, becoming more anarchic and less Good.

@Fluffy: Deathstroke is a meticulous contract assassin. I would call him NE.

John Constantine is a perfect CN. He bows to no one, flits in and out of people’s lives on a whim, and has battled against both Heaven and Hell (even at the same time, on more than one occasion).

@CJ: No to both Two Face & Batman. Chaotics often have quirky codes of conduct that they follow religiously. Lawfulness generally means respect for SOCIETY’s laws, not just your own.

I agree with (and applaud) all 9 of MGK’s choices.

excellently put together…Spider-Man is and always has been my favorite super hero and I quite enjoy the quote going along with the NG…

I do have something to say on the whole Batman’s not lawful thing…I’m not sure if D&D would agree with me on this but I and the people I game with have always believed lawful characters to follow a creed or set of morals that they absolutely under no circumstances will not break…this easily translates to following the laws but is broader than that…Batman is lawful because he has his rule that he won’t…under any circumstances…break…he is dedicated to following his own set of guidelines…whether he works inside or outside the actual laws is inconsequential because he acts upon his own laws but they are unfaltering and will never change or be undermined…

that’s my dose of nerdiness for the day…

Deathstroke the Terminator.

He has a code, which is not terribly good, nor evil, certainly isn’t legal, but he follows it anyway. I find it to be a good contrast to the “Chaotic Neutrals are insane” memes that float around.

I’m not that familiar with Constatntine, alas.

Pretty much for all the characters I know anything about (everyone ‘cept Red Skull, Cerberus, and Constantine) I totally agree with.
Lawful Neutral, Lawful Evil, Chaotic Good, and Chaotic Evil are 100% perfect.
Superman and Spiderman are great choices…though perhaps not the best…

vonDread says Batman is the epitome of LG?
No. No way in hell.
First and foremost, Batman is a vigilante…means he breaks the law to do good.
It’s super nerdy, but I’ve had hours long discussions on trying to place Batman…
Our decision? Batman is his OWN alignment.

Also, whoever says Neutral and Chaotic are hard to distinguish from are plain wrong. Neutral characters, played properly, tend to follow the law…but it doesn’t bother them to break it if it serves their needs (based upon Good/Neutral/Evil). Chaotic players, however, tend to go out of their way to bother the established law and order…they derive pleasure from it.
Had that argument with a new player a while back…joined with a Neutral Good character, but then started going out of his way to play tricks on a rich businessman he didn’t like…so he got an alignment shift to Chaotic, much to his displeasure.