KOTOR: HK-47's D&D alignment

Remove all ads!

I've just had an argument with a friend about HK-47.
Given that KOTOR seems to be partly based in the same D20 system of Wizards of the Coast that D&D 3.X is based in, it wouldn't be that difficult to bring someone (or is it something) like HK-47 into a D&D world.

The question is, as a droid, would HK-47's alignment be true neutral since like an animal he doesn't have the mental ability to have a moral compass, or since he's a droid bound to obey the commands given to him pretty much to the letter and all that, would he be lawful?

Given how amoral and bloodthirsty he is, would he be evil or again, as a more or less unfeeling droid would he be neutral?

I myself am leaning towards lawful neutral since I recall mechanis and the way the Lawful Neutral beings there could hunt down anyone.

 

Lawful evil, I would think. His programming would dictate that its "law" for him. Evil due to the actions that he does\has done. However, I do seem to recall reading, in the SW rpg books, that droids do not have alignments, since they are machines.

 

The follow orders things points at lawful, the actions and comments point toward evil. This droid is a machine and a weapon so we could argue that morality wouldn't apply but as a droid it has some sort of AI and it isn't programmed to value life or respect the Three Laws of Robotics (different setting I know).

So I'd say it depends whether or not you consider that the droid is sentient and whether or not it has an AI. If it does then evil would make sense since it would have to be evil to consciously harm someone.

It would have to be lawful unless capable of not following orders or its programs.

The whole badass attitude ("meatbags") and blatant disrespect for life hints at LE in my opinion.

 

I voted true neutral since he clearly is a robot with an AI that is only suited for rudimentary problem solving. It seems to me that the robots in KOTOR are quite simplistic, which is odd considering how technologically advanced the world is. HK-47 seems to lack morality, even though our current morality is based on reason and robots *are* quite capable of reasoning. I guess that it was programmed to be bloodthirsty.

Edit:
Jeez. How much nerd cred do I get for discussing the morality of fictive robots?

 

Here's the rub, though. HK-47 doesn't always follow orders. He only automatically and unquestioningly follows Revan's orders. I'd say it's a toss-up between lawful and neutral evil.

 

Revan was the Sith Lord Supreme in the Sith Army, so to speak. His word WAS the law. And seeing that HK-47 always obeyed Revan, he did in fact obey the law to the letter. And from his various bits of dialogue, it's pretty safe to assume that he enjoyed the killings he either orchestrated by himself or was commanded to (ergo evil to the memory core).

Because he did kill without compunction on numerous occations if he thought it would benefit his later masters, and even though he'd forgotten all about Revan, I guess you could say he still operated by the same (lack of) moral compass Revan programmed him with. I'd go for Lawful Evil. He's also blatantly loyal to Revan, even if Revan turns out to be a Boyscout Incarnate.

 

Yulaw, HK-47 betrayed most of his matters at one point or another. That he never betrayed Revan is hardly compelling evidence that he is purely lawful.

 

He didn't betray his masters. They were killed because of him, but that's not the same. One stabbed him at got electrocuted after learning that HK killed 104 freebies for him. Another got killed while he was away on a mission. A target caught him, reprogrammed him and sent him back to kill his master, but he wasn't fond of doing that. And so on.

 

And killing 104 freebies was lawful? He was under no orders to do so, and had nothing to gain by doing it. That falls pretty far on the chaotic end of the alignment pool, which isn't really a good thing if you're arguing for a lawful alignment. Now that you've reminded me of that little tidbit, I am in fact now rather firmly entrenched in the not-lawful interpretation of his alignment. I'd still accept the argument that he was just acting in accordance with his programing but it's really just semantics at that point, isn't it? Sure, he was acting in accordance to his programming, but he was programmed to behave in a manner not in keeping with lawful alignment. What we have here is a classic chicken/egg dilemma.

Is he lawful because he acted in accordance with his programming? If we accept that, we must also accept that he isn't evil, since that aspect of his behavior is also in keeping with his programming. I'm OK with that, but it makes more sense to me to judge his alignment by his actions.

 

Well, in that case, Revan and Malak weren't evil either. They were simply being driven by the Dark Side, even though they must have enjoyed it, same as HK being programmed and delighting in the mayhem because of it. We get more than one hint that the Force control Jedi and Sith just as much as they seem to control it. Seems to me that the align-o-meter is broken somehow.

 

Yulaw, turning to the dark side is something you do by choice in the star wars universe. An AI, regardless of its sophistication, does not choose how it is programmed. That aside, you ignore the main thrust of my point -- that it matters not whether HK-47 was programmed to behave unlawfully or whether he chose to do so. We all have "reasons" for our alignment, but those reasons don't change what the alignment is.

Hedonism Bot was programmed to be hedonistic -- whether or not he was programmed to be hedonistic has no effect on whether or not it is appropriate to state that Hedonism Bot is hedonistic. Alignment should work the same way, or the concept should be thrown out in its entirety, since we all have "reasons" that would explain it.

 

Then again, pretending it's just a game is just plain unrealisticly boring, right?

 

I voted Neutral Evil but I think i've changed my mind.

He's a machine, incapable of empathyof any kind. He has no emotions, no ambitions, etc. He is True Neutral.

Edit: To clarify - Being Good, Evil, Chaotic, or Lawful are choices made by an individual. He, essentially, does not have choice, he's a machine.

 

lawful evil

 

Can he have an alignment?