What's Happening

Troperville

Tools

collapse/expand topics back to Main/TrueNeutral

angelthread1w9
topic
10:05:56 AM Jun 24th 2014
I don't know if it's important to state in the descriptions, but further cementing the Touhou fairies status as True Neutral is this statement from Perfect Memento in Strict Sense.

"Fairies are beings that can't harm nor benefit humans."

Naturally, benefit is good whole harm is evil, so since their neither they should be neutral. :p

Besides, True Neutral are represented by nature spirits in Shin Megami Tensei and is even a class. XD
romxxii
topic
09:46:20 PM Aug 26th 2012
Removed the following:

  • The Sandman fits the trope very well. So do a bunch of the other endless, such as Death, Destruction and Delight/Delirium. And how could I forget, Destiny. If he was any more neutral, he'd just sit there and do nothing... wait- He does.
    • The rest of the endless are arguably also neutral, but Desire and Despair, if judged by human standards, might tend to sadism.
      • Despair is neutral (if not very pleasant for others) as she only cares about her work and hoping the family will be nice (although she is easily swayed by Desire). The others tend to good (Death and Destruction) or evil (the actively malicious Desire).
        • Destruction actually abandons his role as Destruction largely because he can no longer carry it out in a neutral fashion - his feelings get in the way.

...because it's a duplicate (and far more natter-y) version of the line below:
  • The Sandman; Death, Desire and Despair are True Neutral.
VVK
topic
01:26:43 PM Apr 12th 2012
edited by VVK
Sephiroth in Dissidia and Kingdom Hearts: While I haven't played those games, I will say that ignoring the grand battle of Good vs. Evil doesn't automatically make you True Neutral, especially if you're doing so to torment your nemesis, which isn't very nice. It goes perfectly with Neutral Evil, which he is elsewhere (not counting before the Nibelheim incident; back then he might actually have been True Neutral, but I'm not sure about that). Any objections to removing that example?
Hughdo
topic
02:04:20 PM Mar 18th 2012
Isn't Wikipedia true neutral? That's a fair real life example, I think.
CrazyDawg
03:16:20 AM Apr 23rd 2012
We can't use real life examples. Ever. This just invites an Edit War. Sure you could argue that Wikipedia is True Neutral, but at the same time, someone else could just as easily argue that Wikipedia is Lawful Good or Neutral Good (dedicated to preserving and archiving knowledge; the search for knowledge is good) or Lawful Neutral (very formal in nature, often lapses into Sesquipedalian Loquaciousness, requires excessive citation to the point of Lawful Stupid etc...).
OldManHoOh
topic
07:21:22 AM Feb 20th 2012
Someone explain to me the Jack Harkness example better?
CrazyDawg
03:12:15 AM Apr 23rd 2012
edited by CrazyDawg
He's True Neutral not in the I-don't-give-a-damn sense, but True Neutral in the sense of his Good, Evil, Chaotic and Lawful traits all balancing out. Just like James Bond or Lelouch.
FoolsEditAccount
topic
08:14:20 AM Apr 10th 2011
How is this trope subjective? The other alignment tropes definitely are, but the way this is formatted seems pretty objective, especially since there are a number of types True Neutral characters can be narrowed down to.
SpellBlade
01:05:20 PM Apr 10th 2011
FoolsEditAccount
02:45:45 PM Apr 10th 2011
Ah, I see. I don't always keep up to date on the latest updates and decisions of the hivemind, my apologies.
DaibhidC
topic
07:09:50 AM Feb 12th 2011
Actually, I've been looking at the Types and it seems to me that there's too many. Aren't the following basically the same?

1. Cowards and compromisers; 6. Don't care about anything; 7. Fence-Riding Bastards; 9. Focused on own goals; 10. Trend-followers; and 12. Want to be left alone. All basically characters who think taking a side is more trouble than it's worth. (Possibly 13, although the description is a little confused: they "aren't dedicated to either side", but they "aren't neutral in the sense of not taking a side". In fact, 13 is probably Chaotic Neutral.)

2. Above Good and Evil; 5. Completely amoral force of nature.

3. Animals; 11. Robots. Characters who simply don't have the ability to make moral choices (possibly also 8. Characters with low intelligence, although I'm not sure it belongs here at all; a stupid character can want to do good [or evil] even if he doesn't know how.)

It seems to me that there's a different category for every reason to be True Neutral, rather than just every way True Neutral people might act.
StephanReiken
11:09:49 AM Mar 10th 2011
edited by StephanReiken
Adding onto this.

4. Is a Lawful Neutral opinion. They are trying to 'Balance' Good and Evil. Thats Lawful on a cosmic scale.
DaibhidC
topic
06:54:49 AM Feb 12th 2011
While I'm thinking about it, how is Discworld Death (who literally cannot disobey the rules, and when he bends them, does it for the side of Good) "sometimes" True Neutral? And especially how is he Type 3: Animals?
DaibhidC
topic
06:46:27 AM Feb 12th 2011
edited by DaibhidC
From the Futurama section:

Isn't that just a very long way of saying "Amy"? And I'd say she was more Neutral Good as well.
ytsejam214
topic
11:46:12 AM Dec 7th 2010
Yesterday I added Jules from Pulp Fiction to this page because I've always considered him to be THE textbook example of a True Neutral character, but it has since been removed. Any reason?
back to Main/TrueNeutral

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy