How do you Judge a character if they are either good or evil...

yes

The end justified the means.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_society

"Guilt is a feeling that arises when we violate the absolute standards of morality within us, when we violate our conscience"

If you are biologically driven to feel guilty for wrongdoings then you are Good. If it requires the fear of reprisal then you are Evil.

Good people are biologically empathetic. Evil people enjoy subjugating others.

What is a person called when he does evil acts feel remorse and guilt but keeps on doing them?

>By their intent on what they are going to do
Yes.

>by their actions in which they employ
Also yes.

Insofar as you can "judge" an individual to be good or evil, you have to take both their motivations and methodology into account. How their actions contribute to the reality of a situation has a tendency to be a bit weightier than the ideal which inspires them to act, but you can't properly assess one without having a measure of the other.

Emotionally dishonest.

Emotionally mature

Yes.

Good people don't repeatedly commit evil acts. If they where somehow forced to by a third party they would be a victim of that evil third party.

Asshole

Youkai sympathizers leave!

Both, morality is complicated.

>Good people are biologically empathetic.

Not categorically true. Someone can be good due to high conscientiousness, even if they lack empathy for others. Someone can be evil due to high levels of empathy, such as in the case of pathological altruism.

>Evil people enjoy subjugating others.

Not categorically true. Good people can gain satisfaction from subjugating others, and evil people can be submissive.

Please go on

I mean its possible

Cognitive Dissonance. Two bits of their mind telling them polar opposites; one says "Wow I feel bad for robbing that person" and the other bit goes "lets do it again", despite the obvious clash.

Not that guy, but here's some examples I like.

>Someone can be good due to high conscientiousness
The "by the books" cop who doesn't really care about others.

>Someone can be evil due to high levels of empathy
The benevolent dictator, someone who takes away control of others to protect them.

>Good people can gain satisfaction from subjugating others
Actual benevolent dictator. Or "The Good King" trope. Knows and understands people need order to be able to survive.

>evil people can be submissive
The henchmen sterotype. Good minions are so hard to find these days...

I feel like most well written characters are often ones that fit these tropes. I much more prefer the well meaning villain than a mustache twirling saturday morning villain, and I much more prefer the hero who is in no way altruistic. As said in this thread before, evil people rarely know they are evil, and good people are rarely good for its own merits.

Racistb leave

A mixture of my culture, my upbringing, and my side of the conflict.

The good-evil axis was a mistake.

I cast detect evil.

>Not categorically true. Someone can be good due to high conscientiousness, even if they lack empathy for others. Someone can be evil due to high levels of empathy, such as in the case of pathological altruism.

Wrong. If you lack empathy you are not good. Pathological altruism does not make the person evil.

>Not categorically true. Good people can gain satisfaction from subjugating others, and evil people can be submissive.

Voluntary submission is not subjugation. Subjugation is always forceful. Enjoying subjugation is evil.

How many times must we tell you that the alignment system is literally representative of forces in the universe and a passive control over frequent inescapable behavioral quirks?

There's a fucking Reason that you never seem to find people who make complete sense, then have this bizzaro thing going on attached to the common sense that makes their first point if ever, so slightly off.

Well, empathy doesn't make you good either, being source of Schadenfreude and main contributor of just-world fallacy.

Enjoying subjugation isn't evil, subjugation is

I believe intent determines, whether they evil.
The action are what determines, whether they should be punished.

>T. Dark Lord

Schadenfreude happens in the context of seeing "bad people" suffer. They've done MRI studies that prove this.
The Just-World Hypothesis isn't a fallacy.

Enjoying subjugation is evil. Enjoying controlling someone without their consent or against their will is evil. It isn't the ends or the means; it's the intent.

Free will is an illusion.

"I have known many gods. He who denies them is as blind as he who trusts them too deeply. I seek not beyond death. It may be the blackness averred by the Nemedian skeptics, or Crom's realm of ice and cloud, or the snowy plains and vaulted halls of the Nordheimer's Valhalla. I know not, nor do I care. Let me live deep while I live; let me know the rich juices of red meat and stinging wine on my palate, the hot embrace of white arms, the mad exultation of battle when the blue blades flame and crimson, and I am content. Let teachers and priests and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content."

>Futhermore you all understand the same type of pain.

>Are you saying that it's okay for humans to be able to live in happiness?

What did she mean by this?

This is the most bullshit thing I've ever seen

t. Sociopath

Players can decide their own alignment. So far nobody has abused this.

NPCs just have an alignment and rarely change.

Moral Myopia

If they succeeded

How do you deal with Characters who are too alien to be given an alignment?

No such thing as good or evil. Everything is preordained.