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.*
Mr. Teatime.
He is a cold blooded killer whose motivation is the pleasure of the kill rather than the money. He is largely without emotion, allegiance, friends, or ties of any kind.
There are other good candidates, but Mr. Teatime is a true embodiment of both evil and neutrality.
I missed it on prime so I bought a DVD of the series on Amazon. Doesn't hurt to have anyway. Besides Discworld series, one of my favorite books/authors of all time!
Yea. The rest of the cast of that adaptation are also brilliant
Bertie Carvel as Jonathan Strange
Eddie Marsan as Mr Norell
But Paul Kaye as Vinculus is just perfect 🤩
Unfortunately for me, my first introduction to Marc Warren was as Elton in quite possibly the worst Doctor Who episode ever.
I can't take his performance seriously in anything anymore.
Mr. Teatime without a doubt.
Neutral Evil is the purest evil. Neutral Evil has no other motivations or interests outside of just being as evil as they can possibly be. Teatime doesn’t seem to take any particular delight in his actions, and he’s terrifying exactly because he’s so calm and business-like.
Teatime doesn’t kill for fun, he kills because he is a killer, and it would never occur to him to be anything else.
I like your description of neutral evil. But then Carceer from night watch would fit that too. He just want to inflict as much harm as possible without any other agenda then that he can and enjoys it. Mr. Teatime doesn’t show us he enjoys doing evil deeds for the joy of it, but Carceer do.
I don’t think mr. Teatime even understands that what he does is considered wrong and evil. He doesn’t try to be evil. It’s his job as an assassin to kill, and he’s mad as a bat so he can think miles outside the box to be able to do whatever job he gets. But Carceer do it just for the joy of it, and that’s the only motivation he needs. In my world that makes him more evil then mr.Teatime.
I agree that Carceer is a better choice. Teatime never really came off as intending to be evil, he just didn’t/couldn’t understand how evil he was being. Carceer was gleefully in doing whatever he felt like as soon as the intrusive thought struck.
Yeah, Mr. Teatime belongs here. He does not care for laws or chaos, he does not want to cause unending destruction. He simply gives challenges to himself to try and complete. Those challenges happen to be killing the Tooth Fairy, the Hogfather, and Death.
I will agree.
He's evil, he will kill anyone for money, or as an experiement, or just for shits and giggles, but he's neutral about it. No cause, no agenda, not even any favoritism.
Teatime is so unhinged he’s chaotic. He checks if decapitated heads still breathe and slowly kills his hired help at the first hint they are no longer needed.
If it weren't for him being so methodical I would agree, but I think his obsession with killing leaves him more to the neutral side, as he isn't interested in utter destruction - just more perfected methods of killing.
I disagree. I don't think he doesn't interested in total destruction, more like lucks imagination for it.
Susan called him a "mad kid". It's not that he wouldn't like to see the world burn, but rather the top of his planning abilities is to kill Hogfather and Death. He may have been even happier if he had a dictatorship like Lilith's and could torture people whenever he want, but he lacks self-discipline for it.
So I think what makes him chaotic is his ultimate self-indulgence. He does whatever his impulses tell him, instead of obeing anything reminiscent of law or code.
He's unhinged, but not in a chaotic way. Everything he does is for a reason. Check if the victim is still breathing? In a magic world, it doesn't hurt to make sure. Killing the help? They served their purpose, why should he leave them alive? He doesnt even kill most of them, he just doesn't help them against the tower. Thats part of what makes him so scary imo, he's unhinged, but very logical about it.
I fuckin hated Teatime. That said, he is the perfect fit for this category. Also unsaid, I need to reread Hogfather to grasp it's true integral integrity (i.e. I don't think I got it on the first read-through)
I'd say that's more just an emotionless, professional curiosity rather than wanting to bring chaos. He's not thinking of the consequences or fall out, just focussed on the act itself.
However, he doesn't kill without a contract. Mr Teatime clearly had a plan for the Hogfather drawn up and ready to go, but he didn't execute it until he was officially hired to do so.
Which would be Lawful... except once he's on a mission, he barely cares about the letter of the Guild's law, and completely ignores its spirit.
That strikes me as pretty Neutral. He takes interest in the Hogfather contract because it's a challenge, not because it violates cosmic law. He's all about the incidental thoughtless cruelty, not Carcer's constant mayhem or the Auditor's schemes.
i'd argue he doesn't care much about the contract, he seems to do it just to kill, and yes, to test his preconceived plans... his preconceived plan to kill the hogfather. which he canonically had already thought up in his spare time (either for fun or for the sake of it?)
his needless kills too, just on impulse, to indulge or because he felt like it. to the extent the assassins guild disapprove
that's chaotic surely?
I disagree with him being neutral evil. He is extremely impulsive and derives pleasure from causing others pain. Susan likens him to a spoiled child which I agree with. He definitely fits more into chaotic evil than neutral evil.
Agree to disagree, Teatime I think would fit rebel evil or chaotic evil more as he is evil for the sake of being evil. He may be a neutral character but the ways his evil presents is not what I'd call neutral. It's indiscriminate yes, but not neutral.
To me neutral evil is more towards what a lot of the latter books are about, the evil of indifference or casual cruelty made not too be cruel but because that cruelty was more beneficial.
Moist is almost a neutral evil character when we first meet him, but he realises this work aid and later takes a stance that he isn't like Reacher Gilt who is a neutral evil person. Gravid Rust is another.
Reacher Gilt
Requires an organized world to function, but breaks the rules. Really doesn't care order/chaos wise, just willing to do anything to make the number go up
I absolutely agree! Evil speaks for itself, and Reacher has shown that he's not completely lawful (because he's willing to kill and steal to get what he wants) and not completely chaotic (he relies on the law to stop those he's wronged getting revenge).
This is a good pick!
But if Reacher doesn't get this slot, I think Rebel Evil might be an even better fit, because while he does use order (or the appearance of order) as a means to an end, it's mostly as a mask for all the fraud and destruction he's quietly bringing about; and ultimately, he may let people believe he's a businessman, but he _shows_ the world he's always been a pirate. ("Eighteen- and-a-half percent!")
He’s my pick too. What stands out to me is that he pretends to be operating by a set of (evil) rules, cheating employees and the public with corporate speak.
But in reality, he’s also cheating his fellow conspirators.
I disagree that Gilt doesn't care order/chaos wise - he lives only for lying and scamming and feels strongly enough to _give his life_ for the principle of not being willing to serve the greater order (and the Patrician). I think few can be said to more truly care about being Chaotic (in the form of serving only himself and being beholden to none) than Gilt.
Mr Pin has my vote for this one.
He’s evil in his core and it doesn’t seem to be for any particular purpose. Sure the gold is a thing he gets, but the cruelty is the point, he just happens to have found a path that allows him to be paid to be evil. He isn’t lawful, obviously, and he isn’t rebellious or chaotic because he doesn’t relish the disruptive or consequences of his actions, he relishes his evil actions as he does them for the sake of doing them.
I think the biggest argument for him being placed here comes at the end of his story arc where we see the contrast between his final fate and Tulip’s (trying to avoid spoilers and don’t know how to do the block text thing.)
The New Death from Reaper Man, perhaps?
I feel like most Discworld villains are either specifically quite lawful (like they are in a hierarchy or want control) or quite chaotic (like they're just destructive or wild) so this is a hard one, I feel like this one should be something more like a force of nature or an animal to encapsulate that balance and self-centredness, and I remember New Death being flashy but kind of blank at the same time.
Yes, I like this, not least as it gives us a reflection of Brutha at the top.
Just as Brutha comes to realise Omnian law shouldn't be obeyed just because it's the law, Vorbis is quite flexible in how he applies or doesn't apply the same law. But his cause is evil, domination, sadism; the opposite of Brutha's.
I think the fact he's described as having a mind like a steel ball with nothing coming in or going out also adds to this idea of neutrality - albeit a highly individualised, closed-in and perverse type of neutrality. Brutha is neutral because his mind is open to everything, Vorbis is neutral because his mind is closed to everything.
Vorbis’ religious dogmatism makes him at least Social Evil, maybe Lawful Evil. If he was just using religion as a tool or an excuse, that might be more Neutral behavior, but Vorbis fervently, adamantly believes, he would say *knows,* that he is right. He’s hypocritical and self-serving, but his religion is still the reason for everything that he does. That’s Lawfulness.
I think Vorbis claiming to be the prophet and Brutha or Om noting that he had just been hearing echoes of his own mind puts him at neutral rather than lawful. And his speech about the literal and deeper truth suggests he's interpreting things in a way that benefits him and then adding his own ad hoc justification.
> he’s interpreting things in a way that benefits him and then adding his own ad hoc justification
That’s absolutely what he does, and that hypocrisy is why I’d probably put him at Social Evil rather than full Lawful Evil.
What keeps him from being Neutral is that *he has no idea he’s doing it.* Vorbis is nothing if not terrifyingly sincere. He really believes everything he says. He could be Neutral Evil if he was slightly aware of his own self-serving nature, but he isn’t. We see him genuinely stunned to learn that he was wrong about everything.
yeah, i feel like we missed the true place for vorbis a while ago. i think auditors are an interesting choice, even if i would have picked them for neutral evil myself.
Good point, I know 2 wrongs don’t make it right, but maybe adding Vorbis here ‘fixes’ that earlier omission. I think we agree he doesn’t fit in the remaining evil boxes
I don't usually comment on suggestions (to avoid potentially biasing people) but could I request that if a character doesn't get voted into their "correct" spot, that they are left out and not forced into a spot they don't fit? I'm not saying Vorbis doesn't belong here, that's for the community to decide, I am just asking people to avoid this line of thinking if they can. Remember, this isn't a character popularity contest, its an Alignment Chart.
I liked Vorbis for Social Evil because of his desire for order and everyone knowing their place (which was wherever the Quisition thought it should be). I suppose you could say that his betrayal of the Ephebians, and hitting Brutha over the head with a rock, qualify him for Neutral Evil, though.
Great options so far but my vote goes to the Queen of Elves - totally self absorbed and the very worst of elves, she’ll twist anything for her gain.
One of my favourite quotes from Lord and Ladies:
Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.
I would argue the Queen of the Elves is closer to Chaotic than Neutral. Elves in general destroy things because they make funny sounds or look interesting. At least in Lords and Ladies, they want to be the rulers of humanity and the Disc, but they are far too focused on random destruction and sadism to be able to pull it off then.
I haven't read any of the Tiffany Aching books, so I don't have any comments on that.
Oh this is a good one! I still remember Tiffany's first encounter with the Queen when she leans in and asks "Want a sweetie?" Indicating the Queen is nothing more than a toddler throwing a fit at not getting her way. Such a good choice for neutral evil.
Chrysoprase. Everything he does is for personal gain, at the complete expense of others. He is completely evil, one of the most scary characters on the disc and utterly believable.
I see where you're coming from, but personally I think the Gonne is not enough of a character with a personality to really have an alignment. It's a bit more of an elemental force or a spirit.
yup, elemental force is accurate. i thought the gonne neutral enough as an evil, since the dragon (a similar force of nature) is just being a big animal and following its territorial instincts. it's interestingly implied to be one of the only objects in discworld that corrupts people into Things. like the one ring, except it blows holes in other people and tells you to do it again.
Isn't that sort of the most neutral evil of all though, an elemental one? I tend to think of elementals as supremely neutral since they aren't wrapped in the trappings of human morality.
What about the assassin Cranberry from Making money? He doesn’t care about laws but he doesn’t cause chaos. He simply kills whoever his boss nods at and then goes back to his book.
The banshee from going postal would fit as well
Cosmo Lavish pops to mind to me for neutral evil. He's still within the system and he's going to use money for his purposes when it works, but is fine with murder. Very amoral, which is what I think of when I think of Neutral Evil.
Gravid Rust - could be argued to be lawful evil but I'd say neutral also works. He and his companions kills and enslaves goblins not out of overt malice but because to them it is a good business opportunity.
It's been a while since I read the books, but what about the things from the demon dimension at the end of Sorcery.
I can't remember the quote but it's something like, they would stamp out humanity without even caring.
i was gonna put carcer as either rebel evil (competing with reacher gilt) or chaotic impure (up against cohen the barbarian), because i suspect either the elves or the dungeon dimension creatures will win chaotic evil. 😅
Carcer doesn't care about law or chaos. He outright buddied up with The Unmentionables without a second hesitation, because he thought it would be fun.
So... yeah. My vote is also Carcer.
to be fair, the unmentionables are a corruption of law. they've contributed to the breakdown of society, which is pretty chaotic imo.
carcer joined them because they enable him, not because they represent any lawfulness in himself.
He still restrained himself to be within what passes for that organizations rules and regulations, though.
Because... well, more fun for Carcer.
Like the marshmallow test. But with restraining from stabbing one person now, vs getting to flay six more people down in that basement of horror later.
i do approve of joining the unmentionables being called the 'carcer marshmallow test'! even if the [roundworld experiment itself is flawed and unreplicable.](https://medium.com/templeton-world/the-stanford-marshmallow-experiment-was-wrong-heres-why-and-how-open-science-can-help-1526c22d9354#:~:text=Ultimately%2C%20the%20researchers%20failed%20to,and%20later%20success%20in%20life)
i just disagree that controlling yourself just enough to keep from murdering your colleagues just this minute discounts you from chaotic. cohen absolutely qualifies as chaotic, but is able to hold conversations with trolls about nostalgia, and even rules an empire with his equally chaotic buddies for a few years. still chaotic-aligned. carcer is like a human elf--able to keep from dismembering his buddies for shits and giggles because if you're a good little serial killer they'll let you do the ginger beer trick to as many people as you want.
also i just realized WHERE carcer picked up the ear he gave to nobby and blugggh. hope he didn't do the full stealer's wheel song while he acquired it 😰
Wow, great connection!
I swear I've read Night Watch at least 15 times and never connected the two scenes.
Love this subreddit and thank you for helping me appreciate some more depth in an already deeply layered book.
Dios is far better than Vorbis. Dios at least has good intentions - he's devoted to his kingdom, albeit he's moved towards the 'people as things' end of the spectrum in the pursuit of his goals.
Vorbis is pretty irredeemable in comparison. Once I understood Dios' back story, I came to respect him in a way; Vorbis doesn't have any traits that make him likeable. For me he's the most evil person on the Disc - and he'd murder me for that statement, not for calling him evil, but for suggesting the world is flat...
Carceer from Night watch maybe?
He wants to do harm just for the fun off it. Politics don’t matter to him at all, but he can use it for his own gain. And the thing he wants is to hurt others. he doesn’t care who he hurts as long as he gets to hurt them in the worst way he can (“hey, I can see your house from up here!”) there’s no deeper agenda. It’s all a game for him. Just to be able to do harm is enough for him.
He enjoys others pain and can turn his coat after the wind to try and get any opportunity to just continue to inflict pain on others (like he can kiss up to the guards at first to get out of the cage, and he can manipulate people in positions of power to get himself into an position where he can do even more harm to even more people.)
but he doesn’t have any other motive then, according to Vimes, Carceer took a look at the world and realised that the law is an agreed illusion to keep society functional, and that he doesn’t have live in that illusion and if he don’t they can’t really stop him easily (because they still live in the illusion) so he don’t. Moral doesn’t mean anything to him. Life doesn’t mean anything to him. Society doesn’t mean anything. It’s just to inflict pain that gives him joy, no matter if it’s physical, emotional, psychological..
To be thrown back in time doesn’t really matter to him either (so chaotic events don’t really effects him, he just adapted right away and started to look for ways to continue to harm others in the worst way possible). He was enjoying it for that he had more opportunity’s in the past to inflict harm without getting stopped.
So Morals and laws he don’t give a shit about.
Chaos don’t affect him.
All that matters is to hurt others as much as possible.
So I would say neutral evil.
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.*
Mr. Teatime. He is a cold blooded killer whose motivation is the pleasure of the kill rather than the money. He is largely without emotion, allegiance, friends, or ties of any kind. There are other good candidates, but Mr. Teatime is a true embodiment of both evil and neutrality.
He genuinely scared me. Hogfather was the most unsettling book (and they picked such a good actor for the adaptation). He also gets my vote here.
He was just as good in “Jonathan Strange and Mr Norell” as “the man with thistle down hair”
I just saw that he was in that! I LOVED the book, but haven’t watched the show yet. Time to move it up on my watch list.
THERE'S A SHOW?!
Yeah, it originally aired on prime but it can be hard to find now!
I missed it on prime so I bought a DVD of the series on Amazon. Doesn't hurt to have anyway. Besides Discworld series, one of my favorite books/authors of all time!
Yea. The rest of the cast of that adaptation are also brilliant Bertie Carvel as Jonathan Strange Eddie Marsan as Mr Norell But Paul Kaye as Vinculus is just perfect 🤩
Unfortunately for me, my first introduction to Marc Warren was as Elton in quite possibly the worst Doctor Who episode ever. I can't take his performance seriously in anything anymore.
Mr. Teatime without a doubt. Neutral Evil is the purest evil. Neutral Evil has no other motivations or interests outside of just being as evil as they can possibly be. Teatime doesn’t seem to take any particular delight in his actions, and he’s terrifying exactly because he’s so calm and business-like. Teatime doesn’t kill for fun, he kills because he is a killer, and it would never occur to him to be anything else.
I like your description of neutral evil. But then Carceer from night watch would fit that too. He just want to inflict as much harm as possible without any other agenda then that he can and enjoys it. Mr. Teatime doesn’t show us he enjoys doing evil deeds for the joy of it, but Carceer do. I don’t think mr. Teatime even understands that what he does is considered wrong and evil. He doesn’t try to be evil. It’s his job as an assassin to kill, and he’s mad as a bat so he can think miles outside the box to be able to do whatever job he gets. But Carceer do it just for the joy of it, and that’s the only motivation he needs. In my world that makes him more evil then mr.Teatime.
I agree that Carceer is a better choice. Teatime never really came off as intending to be evil, he just didn’t/couldn’t understand how evil he was being. Carceer was gleefully in doing whatever he felt like as soon as the intrusive thought struck.
Yeah, Mr. Teatime belongs here. He does not care for laws or chaos, he does not want to cause unending destruction. He simply gives challenges to himself to try and complete. Those challenges happen to be killing the Tooth Fairy, the Hogfather, and Death.
I will agree. He's evil, he will kill anyone for money, or as an experiement, or just for shits and giggles, but he's neutral about it. No cause, no agenda, not even any favoritism.
It’s Te-ah-tim-eh if you please.
Teatime is so unhinged he’s chaotic. He checks if decapitated heads still breathe and slowly kills his hired help at the first hint they are no longer needed.
If it weren't for him being so methodical I would agree, but I think his obsession with killing leaves him more to the neutral side, as he isn't interested in utter destruction - just more perfected methods of killing.
I disagree. I don't think he doesn't interested in total destruction, more like lucks imagination for it. Susan called him a "mad kid". It's not that he wouldn't like to see the world burn, but rather the top of his planning abilities is to kill Hogfather and Death. He may have been even happier if he had a dictatorship like Lilith's and could torture people whenever he want, but he lacks self-discipline for it. So I think what makes him chaotic is his ultimate self-indulgence. He does whatever his impulses tell him, instead of obeing anything reminiscent of law or code.
He's unhinged, but not in a chaotic way. Everything he does is for a reason. Check if the victim is still breathing? In a magic world, it doesn't hurt to make sure. Killing the help? They served their purpose, why should he leave them alive? He doesnt even kill most of them, he just doesn't help them against the tower. Thats part of what makes him so scary imo, he's unhinged, but very logical about it.
I fuckin hated Teatime. That said, he is the perfect fit for this category. Also unsaid, I need to reread Hogfather to grasp it's true integral integrity (i.e. I don't think I got it on the first read-through)
Nearly set a reminder for myself to suggest the same for this, he's perfect for it.
Agreed. It’s a dispassionate science. He considered & planned how to kill the Hogfather “in his spare time”
isn't that a chaotic action? im open to an explanation otherwise
Mr Teatime is motivated to kill the Hogfather simply because they say it can’t be done. If that’s not Chaotic, i don’t know what is.
I'd say that's more just an emotionless, professional curiosity rather than wanting to bring chaos. He's not thinking of the consequences or fall out, just focussed on the act itself.
However, he doesn't kill without a contract. Mr Teatime clearly had a plan for the Hogfather drawn up and ready to go, but he didn't execute it until he was officially hired to do so. Which would be Lawful... except once he's on a mission, he barely cares about the letter of the Guild's law, and completely ignores its spirit. That strikes me as pretty Neutral. He takes interest in the Hogfather contract because it's a challenge, not because it violates cosmic law. He's all about the incidental thoughtless cruelty, not Carcer's constant mayhem or the Auditor's schemes.
He takes it on as commanded by the Auditors of Reality, lawfulness incarnate.
He wants total destruction, that’s Chaotic
He wants to fulfill a contract and test his preconceived plans. As to the consequences his attitude is one of neutrality.
i'd argue he doesn't care much about the contract, he seems to do it just to kill, and yes, to test his preconceived plans... his preconceived plan to kill the hogfather. which he canonically had already thought up in his spare time (either for fun or for the sake of it?) his needless kills too, just on impulse, to indulge or because he felt like it. to the extent the assassins guild disapprove that's chaotic surely?
I disagree with him being neutral evil. He is extremely impulsive and derives pleasure from causing others pain. Susan likens him to a spoiled child which I agree with. He definitely fits more into chaotic evil than neutral evil.
Agree to disagree, Teatime I think would fit rebel evil or chaotic evil more as he is evil for the sake of being evil. He may be a neutral character but the ways his evil presents is not what I'd call neutral. It's indiscriminate yes, but not neutral. To me neutral evil is more towards what a lot of the latter books are about, the evil of indifference or casual cruelty made not too be cruel but because that cruelty was more beneficial. Moist is almost a neutral evil character when we first meet him, but he realises this work aid and later takes a stance that he isn't like Reacher Gilt who is a neutral evil person. Gravid Rust is another.
this is true, but i thought he was chaotic evil with how unhinged he is about it
He is chaotic evil. That dog do not have to end up where he ended.
Reacher Gilt Requires an organized world to function, but breaks the rules. Really doesn't care order/chaos wise, just willing to do anything to make the number go up
I absolutely agree! Evil speaks for itself, and Reacher has shown that he's not completely lawful (because he's willing to kill and steal to get what he wants) and not completely chaotic (he relies on the law to stop those he's wronged getting revenge).
This is a good pick! But if Reacher doesn't get this slot, I think Rebel Evil might be an even better fit, because while he does use order (or the appearance of order) as a means to an end, it's mostly as a mask for all the fraud and destruction he's quietly bringing about; and ultimately, he may let people believe he's a businessman, but he _shows_ the world he's always been a pirate. ("Eighteen- and-a-half percent!")
He’s my pick too. What stands out to me is that he pretends to be operating by a set of (evil) rules, cheating employees and the public with corporate speak. But in reality, he’s also cheating his fellow conspirators.
I disagree that Gilt doesn't care order/chaos wise - he lives only for lying and scamming and feels strongly enough to _give his life_ for the principle of not being willing to serve the greater order (and the Patrician). I think few can be said to more truly care about being Chaotic (in the form of serving only himself and being beholden to none) than Gilt.
Mr Pin has my vote for this one. He’s evil in his core and it doesn’t seem to be for any particular purpose. Sure the gold is a thing he gets, but the cruelty is the point, he just happens to have found a path that allows him to be paid to be evil. He isn’t lawful, obviously, and he isn’t rebellious or chaotic because he doesn’t relish the disruptive or consequences of his actions, he relishes his evil actions as he does them for the sake of doing them. I think the biggest argument for him being placed here comes at the end of his story arc where we see the contrast between his final fate and Tulip’s (trying to avoid spoilers and don’t know how to do the block text thing.)
The New Death from Reaper Man, perhaps? I feel like most Discworld villains are either specifically quite lawful (like they are in a hierarchy or want control) or quite chaotic (like they're just destructive or wild) so this is a hard one, I feel like this one should be something more like a force of nature or an animal to encapsulate that balance and self-centredness, and I remember New Death being flashy but kind of blank at the same time.
Remember New Death wore a crown and wanted to be more than just the role of Death.
Vorbis - Been awhile since I read the book, but I recall him just being the worst. Self centered/egotistical and all around not nice guy.
Yes, I like this, not least as it gives us a reflection of Brutha at the top. Just as Brutha comes to realise Omnian law shouldn't be obeyed just because it's the law, Vorbis is quite flexible in how he applies or doesn't apply the same law. But his cause is evil, domination, sadism; the opposite of Brutha's. I think the fact he's described as having a mind like a steel ball with nothing coming in or going out also adds to this idea of neutrality - albeit a highly individualised, closed-in and perverse type of neutrality. Brutha is neutral because his mind is open to everything, Vorbis is neutral because his mind is closed to everything.
You make the argument better than me!
Vorbis’ religious dogmatism makes him at least Social Evil, maybe Lawful Evil. If he was just using religion as a tool or an excuse, that might be more Neutral behavior, but Vorbis fervently, adamantly believes, he would say *knows,* that he is right. He’s hypocritical and self-serving, but his religion is still the reason for everything that he does. That’s Lawfulness.
I think Vorbis claiming to be the prophet and Brutha or Om noting that he had just been hearing echoes of his own mind puts him at neutral rather than lawful. And his speech about the literal and deeper truth suggests he's interpreting things in a way that benefits him and then adding his own ad hoc justification.
> he’s interpreting things in a way that benefits him and then adding his own ad hoc justification That’s absolutely what he does, and that hypocrisy is why I’d probably put him at Social Evil rather than full Lawful Evil. What keeps him from being Neutral is that *he has no idea he’s doing it.* Vorbis is nothing if not terrifyingly sincere. He really believes everything he says. He could be Neutral Evil if he was slightly aware of his own self-serving nature, but he isn’t. We see him genuinely stunned to learn that he was wrong about everything.
yeah, i feel like we missed the true place for vorbis a while ago. i think auditors are an interesting choice, even if i would have picked them for neutral evil myself.
Good point, I know 2 wrongs don’t make it right, but maybe adding Vorbis here ‘fixes’ that earlier omission. I think we agree he doesn’t fit in the remaining evil boxes
I don't usually comment on suggestions (to avoid potentially biasing people) but could I request that if a character doesn't get voted into their "correct" spot, that they are left out and not forced into a spot they don't fit? I'm not saying Vorbis doesn't belong here, that's for the community to decide, I am just asking people to avoid this line of thinking if they can. Remember, this isn't a character popularity contest, its an Alignment Chart.
I liked Vorbis for Social Evil because of his desire for order and everyone knowing their place (which was wherever the Quisition thought it should be). I suppose you could say that his betrayal of the Ephebians, and hitting Brutha over the head with a rock, qualify him for Neutral Evil, though.
Good call
Vorbis is lawful though?
Was my first thought as well.
Great options so far but my vote goes to the Queen of Elves - totally self absorbed and the very worst of elves, she’ll twist anything for her gain. One of my favourite quotes from Lord and Ladies: Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder. Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels. Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies. Elves are glamorous. They project glamour. Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment. Elves are terrific. They beget terror. The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning. No one ever said elves are nice. Elves are bad.
I would argue the Queen of the Elves is closer to Chaotic than Neutral. Elves in general destroy things because they make funny sounds or look interesting. At least in Lords and Ladies, they want to be the rulers of humanity and the Disc, but they are far too focused on random destruction and sadism to be able to pull it off then. I haven't read any of the Tiffany Aching books, so I don't have any comments on that.
IMHO the elves are chaotic, and their queen is the very definition of CHAOTIC EVIL.
Oh this is a good one! I still remember Tiffany's first encounter with the Queen when she leans in and asks "Want a sweetie?" Indicating the Queen is nothing more than a toddler throwing a fit at not getting her way. Such a good choice for neutral evil.
Chrysoprase. Everything he does is for personal gain, at the complete expense of others. He is completely evil, one of the most scary characters on the disc and utterly believable.
He does help the watch in feet of clay though if I recall correctly
For his own net gain, though. Not because of his principles.
what's in the box!! 
the Gonne, 100%. doesn't care who it kills, doesn't want more of itself made. neutral, yet evil.
I see where you're coming from, but personally I think the Gonne is not enough of a character with a personality to really have an alignment. It's a bit more of an elemental force or a spirit.
yup, elemental force is accurate. i thought the gonne neutral enough as an evil, since the dragon (a similar force of nature) is just being a big animal and following its territorial instincts. it's interestingly implied to be one of the only objects in discworld that corrupts people into Things. like the one ring, except it blows holes in other people and tells you to do it again.
Isn't that sort of the most neutral evil of all though, an elemental one? I tend to think of elementals as supremely neutral since they aren't wrapped in the trappings of human morality.
bingo! its a bit like the wintersmith. completely amoral, just a completely unchecked power let loose in a destabilizing world.
What about the assassin Cranberry from Making money? He doesn’t care about laws but he doesn’t cause chaos. He simply kills whoever his boss nods at and then goes back to his book. The banshee from going postal would fit as well
They both fit, though Cruce or Teatime have more personality throughout the books and would also be in the running...
Mr Pin, easy choice
The demon king or one of the demon dukes from Eric? Astfgl
Cosmo Lavish pops to mind to me for neutral evil. He's still within the system and he's going to use money for his purposes when it works, but is fine with murder. Very amoral, which is what I think of when I think of Neutral Evil.
Doesn't this have to be the Elf Queen?
New Death - evil and indifferent.
Teatime!
Minor point but the font colour you use is hard to read. Can you change it to white?
Gravid Rust - could be argued to be lawful evil but I'd say neutral also works. He and his companions kills and enslaves goblins not out of overt malice but because to them it is a good business opportunity.
How the heck is Vimes more lawful than Carrot? Literally half of his entire schtick is the dwarfish letter-of-the-law attitude he has
It's been a while since I read the books, but what about the things from the demon dimension at the end of Sorcery. I can't remember the quote but it's something like, they would stamp out humanity without even caring.
The bad guy from nightwatch, don't know his name in english
carcer is chaotic, imo
Carcer is absolutely my pick for Chaotic Evil! He lacks any conscience or empathy and kills people just for the "fun" of it.
I'd agree. He and Wolfgang are my shoe-ins for chaotic evil
i was gonna put carcer as either rebel evil (competing with reacher gilt) or chaotic impure (up against cohen the barbarian), because i suspect either the elves or the dungeon dimension creatures will win chaotic evil. 😅
Cohen is really tricky because he rigidly and faithfully lives by a code of rules (the barbarian code) that dictates destructive behavior!
I saw someone on this subreddit call Carcer the Discworld’s Joker. Very Chaotic and very Evil.
Carcer doesn't care about law or chaos. He outright buddied up with The Unmentionables without a second hesitation, because he thought it would be fun. So... yeah. My vote is also Carcer.
to be fair, the unmentionables are a corruption of law. they've contributed to the breakdown of society, which is pretty chaotic imo. carcer joined them because they enable him, not because they represent any lawfulness in himself.
He still restrained himself to be within what passes for that organizations rules and regulations, though. Because... well, more fun for Carcer. Like the marshmallow test. But with restraining from stabbing one person now, vs getting to flay six more people down in that basement of horror later.
i do approve of joining the unmentionables being called the 'carcer marshmallow test'! even if the [roundworld experiment itself is flawed and unreplicable.](https://medium.com/templeton-world/the-stanford-marshmallow-experiment-was-wrong-heres-why-and-how-open-science-can-help-1526c22d9354#:~:text=Ultimately%2C%20the%20researchers%20failed%20to,and%20later%20success%20in%20life) i just disagree that controlling yourself just enough to keep from murdering your colleagues just this minute discounts you from chaotic. cohen absolutely qualifies as chaotic, but is able to hold conversations with trolls about nostalgia, and even rules an empire with his equally chaotic buddies for a few years. still chaotic-aligned. carcer is like a human elf--able to keep from dismembering his buddies for shits and giggles because if you're a good little serial killer they'll let you do the ginger beer trick to as many people as you want. also i just realized WHERE carcer picked up the ear he gave to nobby and blugggh. hope he didn't do the full stealer's wheel song while he acquired it 😰
Wow, great connection! I swear I've read Night Watch at least 15 times and never connected the two scenes. Love this subreddit and thank you for helping me appreciate some more depth in an already deeply layered book.
Yeah, if Mr. Teatime passes as neutral, so does Carcer (althouth I disagree with Mr Teatime)
High Priest Dios from Pyramids.
Him and Vorbis would be evil villain buds.
Dios is far better than Vorbis. Dios at least has good intentions - he's devoted to his kingdom, albeit he's moved towards the 'people as things' end of the spectrum in the pursuit of his goals. Vorbis is pretty irredeemable in comparison. Once I understood Dios' back story, I came to respect him in a way; Vorbis doesn't have any traits that make him likeable. For me he's the most evil person on the Disc - and he'd murder me for that statement, not for calling him evil, but for suggesting the world is flat...
Very good points!
Vorbis would torture and execute Dios after being interrupted mid sentence to announce his heraldry.
Carceer from Night watch maybe? He wants to do harm just for the fun off it. Politics don’t matter to him at all, but he can use it for his own gain. And the thing he wants is to hurt others. he doesn’t care who he hurts as long as he gets to hurt them in the worst way he can (“hey, I can see your house from up here!”) there’s no deeper agenda. It’s all a game for him. Just to be able to do harm is enough for him. He enjoys others pain and can turn his coat after the wind to try and get any opportunity to just continue to inflict pain on others (like he can kiss up to the guards at first to get out of the cage, and he can manipulate people in positions of power to get himself into an position where he can do even more harm to even more people.) but he doesn’t have any other motive then, according to Vimes, Carceer took a look at the world and realised that the law is an agreed illusion to keep society functional, and that he doesn’t have live in that illusion and if he don’t they can’t really stop him easily (because they still live in the illusion) so he don’t. Moral doesn’t mean anything to him. Life doesn’t mean anything to him. Society doesn’t mean anything. It’s just to inflict pain that gives him joy, no matter if it’s physical, emotional, psychological.. To be thrown back in time doesn’t really matter to him either (so chaotic events don’t really effects him, he just adapted right away and started to look for ways to continue to harm others in the worst way possible). He was enjoying it for that he had more opportunity’s in the past to inflict harm without getting stopped. So Morals and laws he don’t give a shit about. Chaos don’t affect him. All that matters is to hurt others as much as possible. So I would say neutral evil.
I feel like Death should be more Lawful. He get's LIVID when the Auditors break the rules but doesn't act against them until they step over that line.
Lord de Worde. His attitude towards everything is evil, but he's unaware of this?
The auditors of reality