POLL: Saemon's alignment

Remove all ads!

I need help - I freely admit. I was just thinking on this, and I thought it worthy of a poll question. I've limited the options, because simply based on what you see of him, there's no possible way that Saemon Havarian can possibly be lawful or good, so any combination involving that is right out. I also have a problem with True Neutral or even Chaotic Neutral, as his actions seem so self-serving that it would indicate evil, but I'm not sure, so I left those options in. For me, I'd say Chaotic definitely, and probably evil, given that he definitely subscribes to the "every man for himself" philosophy, which is part of the description of Chaotic Evil.

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 31 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Saemon's alignment (31 votes.)

What's Saemon's Alignment? (Choose 1)
* True Neutral - 0% (0)
* Chaotic Neutral - 68% (21)
* Neutral Evil - 19% (6)
* Chaotic Evil - 13% (4)

 

A subsequent question could be: Would you like to carve him into little Saemon steaks or do you like this little scoundral?

 

@ takara: I'd definately want to chop him up and feed him to the Saughain.

 

In the book for SoA it says he's Neutral but I don't agree with that.

He should be Chaotic Neutral. He's not good nor is he evil. He fits the Chaotic Neutral description to a Tee though.

 

What exactly is the description for CN? I've been playing D&D since second edition and i STILL don't really know.
Going just off the two sides it is someone who has no real concern for good or evil but has no respect for law, order or stability at all. But then what does evil mean? if evil is taking pleasure from the pain of others then that could fit, but some people see evil as thinking of yourself before others. in this case ignoring the law is thinking of yourself before others, which is evil?
One description i read is that CN is the alignment of gamblers and madmen who do things on a whim and are never predictable, which fits with the chaotic part, but that seems like a pretty restrictive selection for an alignment choice.
anyone else have a better idea?

 

The description in the SOA manual does state that they are prone to whims, like gambling everything on a roll of a die. Whilst I would agree that seamon doesn't appear evil, I don't think he's that much of a gambler. Overall, neutral evil seems to fit better.

 

To me, evil always includes a somewhat destructive streak and a hunger for power or wealth. And whereas Saemon surely isn't unaffected by wealth I don't see him craving power at all. He is to me the epitome of CN. Unpredictable and self-serving, but in no way destructively evil. If he were evil he wouldn't set you up with the blade of the Giths. He'd keep it and use his pretty awesome powers of escaping sticky situations to get out of the jam he might get in.

I kinda like his style. I'm a born CN as well. (well, maybe with a faint 'good' streak. Just a faint one mind)

 

How can anyone claim that Saemon isn't evil? I thought for sure this poll was going to turn into a battle between Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil, but as it turns out, Chaotic Neutral has more than the other three options combined.

Is Saemon evil like Korgan or Montoron? Obviously not, but that doesn't mean he isn't evil. While Korgan will just outright kill you, Saemon's evil is more insidious, sneaky, and ultimately more dangerous. Someone that can betray you at a moment's notice is definitely evil. Even Korgan isn't that evil, as he eventually earns a small amount of respect for you for your skill in combat.

Is someone who sticks his battleaxe in your belly any more evil than someone who turns you over to almost certain death? Not really IMO. When you arrive at Spellhold, Saemon arranges for you to be ambushed as soon as you get off the ship, and he expects that you will die. He gives you the silver blade, with the full expectation that the Githyanki will kill you. He attempts to have a few hooligans kill you by accusing you of stealing your boots, and he turns you over to be killed by Balthazar (and a reward most likely). He is someone who sets up elaborate, deliberate and premeditated schemes (OK, the boots weren't elaborate but the others were) that he expects will end in the death of the person involved. If that isn't evil, WTF is?

 

Sure he does all that but he agrees to help you when he is freed from his service's to Bhodi. And it's not his fault that the ship crashes.

The desription for Chaotic Neutral is this:

Chaotic Neutral characters believe that there is no order to anything, including their own actions. With this as guiding principle, they tend to follow whatever whim strikes them at the moment. Good and evil are irrelevent when making a decision. Chaotic Neutral characters are extremely difficult to deal with. Such characters have been know to be cheerful and for no apparent reason gamble away everything on the role of a single die. They are extremely unreliable.

That last sentance is why I believe Saemon should be Chaotic Neutral.

 

I think deliberately trying to get you killed goes beyond "unreliable". In BG1, Garrick (also Chaotic Neutral) was unreliable because he ran away from battle when he got hurt. You couldn't count on him to stay to the end.

Saemon, on the other hand, is a scheming bastard.

Yes, he helps you get off the island, but you're as dumb as he thinks you are if you buy his excuse. Obviously, he knew his ship had been scuttled and needed some muscle to get off the island. You had an alternative of going to the Underdark - so you're helping him a whole lot more than he's helping you.

 

What about him helping the people in that desert city. I mean, I know he probably made some profit, but he continued to stay there, even when the monks were trying to kill him. I don't think that a totaly evil person would do that.

 

I'm not so sure about that. Don't forget, the first time you enter the smugglers cave he's left his men to take the rap for him. Only your intervention stops them all dying. Later on, I think he's just looking for a quick way to solve his problems. He clearly knows you're going to be coming back to amkethran and figures you'll take care of Balthazar for him.

 

He's true neutral. I just happen to be at that part of the game right now and I just cheated and added him to my group. He's true neutral.

 

We know that, it says that in the SoA book. Bt he should be Chaotic Neutral.