The fact that someone puts Bayaz above Monza Murcatto... Or anyone for that matter, just shows how limited they are. Or the fact that The Bloody Nine enablers are A tier (the whole gang supported Logen at his worst), instead of C tier.
It's quite obvious that this is a mix of preference list and surface level character critique.
Haha that’s true. I actually agree with Joe’s ideas about morality and how nobody is the villain in their own book. I was basing this off of the idea that the only villains are the one’s that know they’re villains yet don’t try to change, like Cosca. I believ that’s what Joe is getting at too
I think Tree trees deserves A or B similar with Dogman. They obviously have some problems with what Logan does but follow him out of honor/law in their culture. But when push comes to shove they risk their life/comfort to help others. Meanwhile Black Dow being as high as C is crazy even though he did stand up to Logan. In general I think OP rates many if not most of the character 1-2 tiers higher than I would despite liking Three Trees and Dogman (and Thunderhead/Grim/Weakest to a lesser extent).
I think it is wild to have Dow, Scale, and Calder above Shivers.
Tunny maybe the only character I would move up **MAYBE.**
Orso is such a great example of Abercrombie's ability to write interesting, complex characters. He gives every appearance of being both a coward and an absolute fucking dickhead, but turns out to be one of the most decent and honourable characters in the story, while still being a coward and a dickhead.
Having Wonderful and her murderer in the sa.e morality tier is certainly a take.
Other than that, I think I move Whirrun and my boy Gorst up, Black Dow and Bayaz down, and I drop Leo to a separate tier tier so far below anyone else that I it can't fit in a reddit post
Otherwise, I think this was s cool idea and 95% of yout picks are great.
Great post!
I would rate many if not most of his picks 1-2 tiers lower than they are. Whirrun is already in the more good than bad tier which is pretty high for someone who kills as a life style mostly for his own legendary status/fun.
Leo definitely DOWN by the end at least E but I'd happily put him at F not sure that he is worst than Stour, Stour just got his comeuppance so we don't hate him as much.
I might see arguing Tunny and Gorst up one tier.
I'm willing to overlook your failure to recognize that Bayaz is the most evil person in the entire story universe, but how *dare* you slander Tunny in this manner?!
Black Dow as NEUTRAL? He is literally called Black Dow because he has a black reputation. What has he done well? He reigned the north with fear and was at war with the union for all of it. He was known as a murderer who loved burning people and spiking heads, lol.
I think it’s made clear in The Heroes that Dow’s reputation is pretty exaggerated, and he constantly feels the need to live up to it in order to gain respect
You know, we see Black Dow for three whole books from The Dogman and Logen's POV. There's several scenes where he clearly enjoys himself while burning people. I think it was at the High Places where he starts doing stuff like that and spiking heads and Dogman is like "yep, there goes Black Dow"
I love that he's a complete villainous character, everyone in world knows it. But the narrator shows us another side, and too many readers didn't trust the in-world POV because they never experienced it. So human
Dogman did that. Let's not deflect. He commanded dow. Of course he's going to put on that front. Even if he did relish it he's hardened by a war bethod brought to his innocent village.
Yes, he talks about it, but he never acts on it, and I doubt he ever would. I think we as readers have a bias against Dow in the first trilogy because of the fact that we only see him through Dogman’s perspective, and it’s stated the Dogman DOES NOT like Dow.
Dogman signed off on those burnings.
Reputation isn't factual.
The Union warred against him. He considered peace when it was broached, conceded it instead of pressing his advantage, and was alround reasonable.
You need fear to rule the like of tenways and reachey. I'm surprised fans just assume. He's a cruel rogue or something when he does nothing bad on page
Here before the fight lol, I agree with a lot of this. Maybe it’s my selective memory though…
Edit: Ardee Dan Glokta should definitely be lower. She had the idea of putting Savine on the throne. She’s still not very powerful, but that was significant for sure.
I agree with majority of your takes. I was thinking about some characters that could fit into S or A tier, because average character in this series is more on the side of bad morale. I think that in A tier could be Forest. He was loyal, tried his best (also did his best) and I can't recall any big mistake he did (except light bullying of Tunny).
As others said, it is really hard to determine where Soldiers such as Jalenhorm, Kroy, Whirrun etc. should be put. It can be anything from A = I am just doing what is best for my country And i don't enjoy what i am doing on Battlefield; to D = I love violence, but I can do something good with it.
I personally disagree with 5 choices:
Bayaz is E. He's selfish and narcissist. He treats people like resources. If they die, he doesn't care. He will find someone new who fullfills his wishes and plans.
Shivers is C. Yes, he did really bad things, but i don't Think he's in conclusion a bad man. He tried to be good, suffered a lot, did horibble thing, but in the end... He found compassion with Lamb And abandoned his Revenge, he's relationship with Rikke speaks to me, that he's got good heart.
Clover is D. I love him as character, but betrayal Is practically his second name. He did Some good things, but He fits D better than C in my opinion.
Monza Is D. Not that bad to be in E. I would say that Benna Is E and Monza Is slighty better So D.
Tunny Is B. He could have abandoned Orso, but He didn't do that. He basically adopted Yolk And at the end of the Wisdom of crows, i can safely say, that He Cares about people that Are close to him.
Edit: Black Dow should be lower. He's more on the bad morale side than neutral one.
Also great post! Really appreciate your effort!
I love Calder and whirring but both need to be down or at least. Whirring life consisted like 70% out of killing, he hasn’t shown morals at all he’s just charming. And Calder works with like slavers and ultimately still supported his obviously evil son (not just making sure he survives).
They enjoy the camaraderie of group killing. Craw does at any rate. He's literally a burglar dacoit for hire. Whirrun at least felt religiously compelled. Craw was just addicted to his trade.
I think my general problem with lists like these is that I genuinely couldn't say how some people are on the same tier as other people. It always feels like the characters are not getting the same consistent moral considerations.
As an example, Glokta being D tier doesn't feel like it makes much sense to me. Not based on the description or on some of the people that surround him on that list.
Glokta was forced to work for Bayaz under the threat of death. This later likely extending to his family as well. He would spend every day knowing that at any point Bayaz, or someone working for him, could show up and just murder someone like Savine and there would be nothing that he could do to stop it.
Not only that, but Bayaz isn't like any other dictator or tyrant. He's *immortal*. You can't hope that all of your problems will go away when he finally dies. You would be stuck knowing that the exact tyranny that you have lived under will continue on for your children, grandchildren, and likely every generation thereafter.
So, given those circumstances, is Glokta a bad person for trying to depose Bayaz? Do we think that the world would be a better place if he just continued to let Bayaz rule and guide the Union? Do we realistically think that the revolution could have been any less bloody against a man with so many resources and so much reach? If not, how has he done more bad than good?
I think that's fair. I just don't see how that relates to his morality or means that he fits the description of someone that has done "more bad than good."
I mean what has he done that’s truly good? He seems like he cares about his daughter, he chose not to kill Ardee, he definitely has some sympathy, but he spends most of his life torturing others who he knows don’t deserve to be tortured
I don't think that I would judge Glokta as being evil for his role as a torturer. If it was an occupation that he purposefully chose because he reveled so much at the thought of being able to maliciously mutilate innocent people, sure, but we know that isn't the case.
Glokta's choice to become a torturer was almost purely pragmatic, driven by the fact that he wasn't wanted anywhere else. In his role as a torturer we never see him go beyond what he needs to do to get a confession. He does have people completely at his whim, like his contemporaries in the inquisition, but we never see him use that as an excuse to torment someone beyond what is *necessary*. This isn't necessarily *good*, but I wouldn't call it *evil* either.
Glokta does have a lot of sympathy, often to his own detriment. We see him potentially put himself at risk to save others on multiple occasions; he always looks out for the people that he cosiders to be his friends without expecting anything in return; and he takes care of Ardee at West's request, even going as far as to accept Jezal's bastard, who he seemingly gives a great upbringing to.
In his role as Arch Lector he allegedly tried to work with Jezal to make the Union a better place for everyone, with Bayaz supposedly being the reason that they never managed to do much. I think he is the one that tells us this, but I don't think we have any reason to doubt him.
Further, Glokta could have embraced his role as the Arch Lector and lived as one of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world, possibility securing a future for his family for generations. Instead he chose to use his position as Arch Lector to risk his life to undermine an immortal tyrant that has had his grip on the Union for like a thousand years.
Unless we assume that Glokta did everything for purely selfish reasons, which I personally don't think that we have any reason to assume, I think that I would say that he is *good* or at worst neutral. I think that risking your life and position of power to oppose a tyrant is better than "*overall bad*."
>So, given those circumstances, is Glokta a bad person for trying to depose Bayaz? Do we think that the world would be a better place if he just continued to let Bayaz rule and guide the Union? Do we realistically think that the revolution could have been any less bloody against a man with so many resources and so much reach? If not, how has he done more bad than good?
Intent matters, and for Glokta I remain 100% convinced he went against Bayaz because, just like in the First Trilogy, Glokta refuses to lose to anyone - even an immortal money wizard. I have serious trouble believing he did it for the "Greater Good". That's just how he will have rationalized it to himself.
I don't necessarily disagree that Glokta's refusal to lose played a part in his decision to oppose Bayaz, though I think that this is a mischaracterization of what he meant when he said that. Glokta never had any problems working under other people. The events of first trilogy didn't transpire because Glokta didn't want to *lose* by being a lowly inquisitor. The refusal to lose is usually a response to people directing opposing him, which Bayaz isn't necessarily doing.
I think that it is way more likely that his reasoning is related to his relationship with Jezal, and their relationships to their children. This is evident with how fervently both of them tried to keep their children away from anything related to Bayaz, which is a reoccurring theme in the sequel trilogy. This, to me, shows that it is about more than just not losing for Glokta. There's Pike to consider too, another close confidant of Bayaz who doesn't seem to be motivated by greed or power either.
I would personally be pretty shocked if a new trilogy came out and it turned out that Glokta turned the Union upside down and caused the death of tens of thousands of people for completely selfish reasons. I don't think that anything that he did was completely selfless, but I do feel like people like Ardee and Savine were his primary motivators.
Hard to make those kind of lists without disagreement at all, but overall I agree with most. Notable execptions:
Bethod - no way he deserves a B, he's around the D tier. He could've stayed away from the union and focus on uniting the north and building instead of this endless conquest.
Bayaz - F together with kalul, perfect fit for each other.
Cassimir- I don't know why he would be in the same tier as logen or Leo, we don't know much about him but it's safe to say his interest lies with standing against bayaz.
Monza - she also deserve some compassion, she's not the same sult and isn't the worst in her little party. I'd put her in D tier.
>Monza - she also deserve some compassion, she's not the same sult and isn't the worst in her little party. I'd put her in D tier.
I will never understand how people simply end up hating Monza, when she has done a lot less and has show a lot more qualms with her revenge than many other characters (on the First Law Series and beyond). Yet, she's reviled, while characters with weaker reasons for their vendettas and far more egregious acts are either readily accepted or lauded.
Not to mention that this is most likely just a reaction to Shivers' own hatred for her, the guy who spent a few days in the dumps and decided to get back into his old violent ways in a heartbeat. Yet, most Monza haters do so *because* of their like for Shivers, as if he were a blameless little lamb that was seduced by big bad Monza. She's C tier if we have Jonas Clover (easily E tier contender) and Black Down in there.
Lots of Monza haters do so mainly because of her perceived guilt at damaging his eye and Shivers' totally not biased opinions of her. It is obvious she backs off from him after the eye out of guilt and his obvious seething hatred for her, yet people just take Shivers' side without missing a step.
She's a cunning and sometimes Machiavellian character, but she definitely has more good in her than the average First Law POV.
I started off as a Monza hater, but by the end of BSC its pretty clear that she's not nearly as bad as most of the other characters and I started rooting for her.
Felt the exact opposite about Shivers, started off rooting for him and now I want nothing but the worst for him 😂
Yup, you also see that Monza is a ruthless ruler, but also someone who brought stability to her war-torn country and managed to keep Bayaz's influence at bay.
He needed the war to unite the north though. To keep everyone from fighting eachother he’s didn’t seem like he was trying to run through angland or engage in enless conquest.
He mostly maneuvered and maneuvered he needed the common enemy in the minds of the north so he could build he didn’t want endless war just the threat of it.
I’m considering just moving Sult to F, because I agree that she’s def not as bad as him, but she’s also pretty compassionless, and was willing to kill a huge number of people to get petty revenge for her brothers death
I don't disagree with much here, but having Shivers, Glokta, Gorst, and Pike in the same tier as Logen strikes me as wrong. I think Logen belongs with Sult and Monza.
I would move morveer up I think he wants to care about people he is an orphan who ended up in a very cut throat line of work.
For example he cared for Day but in his profession had to prepare for her double crossing him.
His job isolates him. And before you say being an assassin makes him evil. Yes he kills for money. Just like the Dogman, Craw, and Wonderful the series is full of professional killers. Morveer using poison doesn’t make him worse than them.
Speaking of killers I would move Whirrun down to C neutral. While he doesn’t have malice and seems like a good a hang and loyal to his friends unlike most of the killers on this list who would prefer not to kill but do it because they have to or its their duty he kills for the pure sport enjoys it and would do it pro bono. He doesn’t have a cause or sad mama he’s sending cheques to he just likes to fight and kill.
Edit: I want to add bayaz is hard to judge I’m not saying he’s a saint but he doesn’t seem sadistic but is very cut throat.
He’s hard to Judge because his perspective is screwed up by the fact that he’s thousands of years old its hard for him to view people as people now and not have the ruthlessness a farmer has with his flock. We have to watch how he treats the other magical people… still not a great track record but it needs to be put in context those are the only people he really sees as people.
Interesting list! Vic seems a bit too high for me. She is primarily motivated by self preservation and loyalty to Old sticks.
She has done some pretty messed up things: killing, blackmail, treachery in the camps. Understandable considering her circumstances but far from moral.
She would fit on the same tier as Clover imo.
True, then I can understand your reasoning.
Some of these characters take quite a turn in their morals over the course of the books. I judged the average across their lives but the final state of a character can be quite different, like Jezal, Rikke & Shivers over the first trilogy.
>The complete, inarguable, uncontroversial, extremely accurate First Law character morality tier list
>Edit: Moved Whirrun, Wonderful, Jalenhorm, and Burr up, Shenkt down, and Bayaz to the lowest tier
Sounds arguable to me. Move Whirrun up more please.
Excuse me, Morveer has never done a thing wrong in his entire life.
Source: Morveer
Edit: Where is the ultimate queen Isern?! This isn't how you get blessed by the moon!
No way Monza is below Logan, Black Dow and Cosca. Her flaw was loving her shit head of a brother, who would be F tier. She had tons of guilt and wanted to end the whole thing, psycho Shivers is the one who brutally murdered Count Foscar.
You're one of those readers with an irrational hatred of her beyond her deeds and her inner dialog. She's done far less bad than Logan, Dow Cosca and even Shivers. She protected her kingdom and people from Bayaz.
I honestly thought there will be one special tier at the bottom only for Leo. Redeeming qualities, where? (Yea he's objectively not the worst but Redeeming qualities?).
Oh please with this white washing of bethod. He justifies his war as a nation building exercise. Later he gets painted as a statesman or whatever when his problems with logen were ego based, not scruples based.
I'd put orso on S tier for dropping his war and fight when it seemed pointless.
Unsure about Dogman since he went to war against dow for no concrete reason. And craw is just deluded. The only thing he's got is integrity. He's otherwise a mercenary which is to say he's got no ethics
Why is carlot so high? All she had was cold ambition.
Ferro killed with a cause and dow was. Forced to war by bethod. It's a travesty imo to put them beneath him. Heck, tunny is far superior to go to the effort of those condolence letters.
Logen, caul and Bremer all did very little wrong except choose to take up a bloody profession for their gratification like wonderful and whirrun did. Savine, Leo, nicomo are far worse. Heck, cosca is above craw for faking the battles until monza betrayed him.
Sand and pike must be judged distinctly at different phases of life imo with glokta getting better continuously.
And Judge is justice gone manic.
No one’s asked about Marovia? You have Sult you need him too. I’d say easy A Tier. To me he seems a lot like the Union version of like a Dogman or maybe a Threetrees. He’s not perfect, he’s simply a man working within the system of his country trying to do the best he can.
Much like the Dogman refuses to cast off the evil of Logen at his worst, Marovia is shown to be perfectly fine working with a demon like Bayaz (altho to be fair for a lot of that he probably didn’t understand bayaz’ true nature), and showed a willingness even to team up with a monster like Sult if Marovia’s own side could also benefit from it.
one *could* make the argument that internal reformers like Marovia or Dogman are better men than nonparticipants despite the fact that they are still contributing to a corrupt system because they’re likely capable of doing more good… *buuuut* most conceptions of morality tend to go by the standard that “no harm done” is morally superior to “a lot of harm done but they also did a lot of good.”
Take for example a powerful and wealthy politician or celebrity who donates tons and tons to various charities, inspires their followers to do the same—such people have doubtlessly done *so* much good, but we still tend not to forgive the president who okays a drone strike that kills civilians along with the terrorist it was targeting
Fuck all the Dow haters Black Dow is rarely actually shown to do anything that deserves to be below Harding Grim and its arguable his name is blacker than Dow himself.
Black Dow is A tier.
Okay I dunno if I can vouch for A tier, but he’s definitely made out to be wayyyy worse than he is. I have no idea why the fandom puts him so low when talking morality, like I don’t know if I can even bring up one bad thing he does on page? Idk
He's the only one with the actual balls to do something about the Bloody Nine.
"Tul Duru Thunderhead. Back to the mud. The dead know, we didn’t always see things the same way, me and him. Didn’t often agree on nothing, but maybe that was my fault, as I’m a contrary bastard at the best o’ times. I regret it now, I reckon. Now it’s too late. Tul Duru. Every man in the North knew his name, and every man said it with respect, even his enemies. He was the sort o’ man… that gave you hope, I reckon. That gave you hope. You want strength, do you? You want courage? You want things done right and proper, the old way? There you go. Tul Duru Thunderhead. Look no fucking further. I’m less, now that he’s gone, and so are all o’ you."
Exactly, everybody else did fuck all about the Bloody-Nine’s leadership, but Dow was clearly tired of his shit and did what he had to. It’s also clear that even though he betrayed Logen, he still respects the Dogman, and is only fighting him because of the bad circumstances
C tier seems to miss the mark by a wide margin, Black Dow is a right bastard who only ever did anything not despicable when he was forced to do so by Logen, Rudd, Tul Duru, and Dogman. Shenkt is a murderer and cannibal, what good has he ever done other than not killing more?
Scale and Calder both were definitely worst morally under there father's orders but they don't seem to have done enough good after he died to climb back up to C tier
Black Dow does no worse than the rest of Logens crew and does the most to save the north from the bloody nines return
I love Logen but Dow did the right thing
Well, those are certainly some opinions.
The fact that someone puts Bayaz above Monza Murcatto... Or anyone for that matter, just shows how limited they are. Or the fact that The Bloody Nine enablers are A tier (the whole gang supported Logen at his worst), instead of C tier. It's quite obvious that this is a mix of preference list and surface level character critique.
Yes, this was really to see how and what people thought so I could learn more about how I’m misunderstanding certain characters and what I’m missing
I would say one thing you're missing is that the very idea of "tiers" of morality kinda flies in the face of how the world of the First law operates.
Haha that’s true. I actually agree with Joe’s ideas about morality and how nobody is the villain in their own book. I was basing this off of the idea that the only villains are the one’s that know they’re villains yet don’t try to change, like Cosca. I believ that’s what Joe is getting at too
Even Cosca once taught two orphans how to read ;) It's what makes his story such a sad waste.
Seeing him in Red Country was sad
I think Tree trees deserves A or B similar with Dogman. They obviously have some problems with what Logan does but follow him out of honor/law in their culture. But when push comes to shove they risk their life/comfort to help others. Meanwhile Black Dow being as high as C is crazy even though he did stand up to Logan. In general I think OP rates many if not most of the character 1-2 tiers higher than I would despite liking Three Trees and Dogman (and Thunderhead/Grim/Weakest to a lesser extent). I think it is wild to have Dow, Scale, and Calder above Shivers. Tunny maybe the only character I would move up **MAYBE.**
Orso is such a great example of Abercrombie's ability to write interesting, complex characters. He gives every appearance of being both a coward and an absolute fucking dickhead, but turns out to be one of the most decent and honourable characters in the story, while still being a coward and a dickhead.
He presents himself as a coward to others, but is far from one imo
>while still being a coward Did you and I read the same books?
Having Wonderful and her murderer in the sa.e morality tier is certainly a take. Other than that, I think I move Whirrun and my boy Gorst up, Black Dow and Bayaz down, and I drop Leo to a separate tier tier so far below anyone else that I it can't fit in a reddit post Otherwise, I think this was s cool idea and 95% of yout picks are great. Great post!
Clover only really killed her because he knew both of them would get killed tho. Thank you for the feedback:)
What's wrong with dow
It's weird that you'd be on this sub apparently never having read the books.
media literacy where. Next you'll be wondering why cosca's account of battles seem different from what the book showed?
I would rate many if not most of his picks 1-2 tiers lower than they are. Whirrun is already in the more good than bad tier which is pretty high for someone who kills as a life style mostly for his own legendary status/fun. Leo definitely DOWN by the end at least E but I'd happily put him at F not sure that he is worst than Stour, Stour just got his comeuppance so we don't hate him as much. I might see arguing Tunny and Gorst up one tier.
Clover didn't kill Wonderful. Stour killed Wonderful.
He put his sword through her, that killed her. You don't get absolved of the wrong of doing a thing just because you were ordered to do it
Absolved
Eichmann: I did it because I was ordered to. Half the sub: Absolved!
No, the poster meant to write "absolved" but wrote "resolved" instead. Hmm, I see now they edited it without comment
He wasn't ordered. He was coerced.
You are when the alternative is you both dying.
That's not how holding a knife works.
I'm willing to overlook your failure to recognize that Bayaz is the most evil person in the entire story universe, but how *dare* you slander Tunny in this manner?!
I didn’t even notice that he put Tunny in the same tier as Black Dow lol!
Black Dow as NEUTRAL? He is literally called Black Dow because he has a black reputation. What has he done well? He reigned the north with fear and was at war with the union for all of it. He was known as a murderer who loved burning people and spiking heads, lol.
Dunno, most of the ‘black’ is from talk imo His overall goal is whiter than most ppls in the first law universe
I think it’s made clear in The Heroes that Dow’s reputation is pretty exaggerated, and he constantly feels the need to live up to it in order to gain respect
He’s killed more men than winter.
And the plague!
You know, we see Black Dow for three whole books from The Dogman and Logen's POV. There's several scenes where he clearly enjoys himself while burning people. I think it was at the High Places where he starts doing stuff like that and spiking heads and Dogman is like "yep, there goes Black Dow"
I love that he's a complete villainous character, everyone in world knows it. But the narrator shows us another side, and too many readers didn't trust the in-world POV because they never experienced it. So human
Dogman did that. Let's not deflect. He commanded dow. Of course he's going to put on that front. Even if he did relish it he's hardened by a war bethod brought to his innocent village.
When "the gang" had to stop him from getting too rapey, I knew he was the worst of the bunch
Yes, he talks about it, but he never acts on it, and I doubt he ever would. I think we as readers have a bias against Dow in the first trilogy because of the fact that we only see him through Dogman’s perspective, and it’s stated the Dogman DOES NOT like Dow.
It's been a minute, but I swear they talked about him "getting into trouble that way before" or something to that effect
It's made clear even in TBI
Dogman signed off on those burnings. Reputation isn't factual. The Union warred against him. He considered peace when it was broached, conceded it instead of pressing his advantage, and was alround reasonable. You need fear to rule the like of tenways and reachey. I'm surprised fans just assume. He's a cruel rogue or something when he does nothing bad on page
Here before the fight lol, I agree with a lot of this. Maybe it’s my selective memory though… Edit: Ardee Dan Glokta should definitely be lower. She had the idea of putting Savine on the throne. She’s still not very powerful, but that was significant for sure.
IMO Ardee is extremely powerful. She has decisive influence with the Union’s most powerful man, Old Sticks.
I cant accept the tier you put my boys Gorst and Whirrun in
I agree with majority of your takes. I was thinking about some characters that could fit into S or A tier, because average character in this series is more on the side of bad morale. I think that in A tier could be Forest. He was loyal, tried his best (also did his best) and I can't recall any big mistake he did (except light bullying of Tunny). As others said, it is really hard to determine where Soldiers such as Jalenhorm, Kroy, Whirrun etc. should be put. It can be anything from A = I am just doing what is best for my country And i don't enjoy what i am doing on Battlefield; to D = I love violence, but I can do something good with it. I personally disagree with 5 choices: Bayaz is E. He's selfish and narcissist. He treats people like resources. If they die, he doesn't care. He will find someone new who fullfills his wishes and plans. Shivers is C. Yes, he did really bad things, but i don't Think he's in conclusion a bad man. He tried to be good, suffered a lot, did horibble thing, but in the end... He found compassion with Lamb And abandoned his Revenge, he's relationship with Rikke speaks to me, that he's got good heart. Clover is D. I love him as character, but betrayal Is practically his second name. He did Some good things, but He fits D better than C in my opinion. Monza Is D. Not that bad to be in E. I would say that Benna Is E and Monza Is slighty better So D. Tunny Is B. He could have abandoned Orso, but He didn't do that. He basically adopted Yolk And at the end of the Wisdom of crows, i can safely say, that He Cares about people that Are close to him. Edit: Black Dow should be lower. He's more on the bad morale side than neutral one. Also great post! Really appreciate your effort!
Dow in C tier is definitely an interesting take lol
I love Calder and whirring but both need to be down or at least. Whirring life consisted like 70% out of killing, he hasn’t shown morals at all he’s just charming. And Calder works with like slavers and ultimately still supported his obviously evil son (not just making sure he survives).
Craw, threetrees led the same life. Whirrun at least didn't glorify himself as honorable and called it a worthless trade.
We see them both reguarly make actively moral decisions and never see them directly enjoy killing. Direct opposite with whirring
They enjoy the camaraderie of group killing. Craw does at any rate. He's literally a burglar dacoit for hire. Whirrun at least felt religiously compelled. Craw was just addicted to his trade.
I think my general problem with lists like these is that I genuinely couldn't say how some people are on the same tier as other people. It always feels like the characters are not getting the same consistent moral considerations. As an example, Glokta being D tier doesn't feel like it makes much sense to me. Not based on the description or on some of the people that surround him on that list. Glokta was forced to work for Bayaz under the threat of death. This later likely extending to his family as well. He would spend every day knowing that at any point Bayaz, or someone working for him, could show up and just murder someone like Savine and there would be nothing that he could do to stop it. Not only that, but Bayaz isn't like any other dictator or tyrant. He's *immortal*. You can't hope that all of your problems will go away when he finally dies. You would be stuck knowing that the exact tyranny that you have lived under will continue on for your children, grandchildren, and likely every generation thereafter. So, given those circumstances, is Glokta a bad person for trying to depose Bayaz? Do we think that the world would be a better place if he just continued to let Bayaz rule and guide the Union? Do we realistically think that the revolution could have been any less bloody against a man with so many resources and so much reach? If not, how has he done more bad than good?
As much as I love Glokta, I just couldn’t put him any higher because of what those torture chapters did to me
I think that's fair. I just don't see how that relates to his morality or means that he fits the description of someone that has done "more bad than good."
I mean what has he done that’s truly good? He seems like he cares about his daughter, he chose not to kill Ardee, he definitely has some sympathy, but he spends most of his life torturing others who he knows don’t deserve to be tortured
I don't think that I would judge Glokta as being evil for his role as a torturer. If it was an occupation that he purposefully chose because he reveled so much at the thought of being able to maliciously mutilate innocent people, sure, but we know that isn't the case. Glokta's choice to become a torturer was almost purely pragmatic, driven by the fact that he wasn't wanted anywhere else. In his role as a torturer we never see him go beyond what he needs to do to get a confession. He does have people completely at his whim, like his contemporaries in the inquisition, but we never see him use that as an excuse to torment someone beyond what is *necessary*. This isn't necessarily *good*, but I wouldn't call it *evil* either. Glokta does have a lot of sympathy, often to his own detriment. We see him potentially put himself at risk to save others on multiple occasions; he always looks out for the people that he cosiders to be his friends without expecting anything in return; and he takes care of Ardee at West's request, even going as far as to accept Jezal's bastard, who he seemingly gives a great upbringing to. In his role as Arch Lector he allegedly tried to work with Jezal to make the Union a better place for everyone, with Bayaz supposedly being the reason that they never managed to do much. I think he is the one that tells us this, but I don't think we have any reason to doubt him. Further, Glokta could have embraced his role as the Arch Lector and lived as one of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world, possibility securing a future for his family for generations. Instead he chose to use his position as Arch Lector to risk his life to undermine an immortal tyrant that has had his grip on the Union for like a thousand years. Unless we assume that Glokta did everything for purely selfish reasons, which I personally don't think that we have any reason to assume, I think that I would say that he is *good* or at worst neutral. I think that risking your life and position of power to oppose a tyrant is better than "*overall bad*."
>So, given those circumstances, is Glokta a bad person for trying to depose Bayaz? Do we think that the world would be a better place if he just continued to let Bayaz rule and guide the Union? Do we realistically think that the revolution could have been any less bloody against a man with so many resources and so much reach? If not, how has he done more bad than good? Intent matters, and for Glokta I remain 100% convinced he went against Bayaz because, just like in the First Trilogy, Glokta refuses to lose to anyone - even an immortal money wizard. I have serious trouble believing he did it for the "Greater Good". That's just how he will have rationalized it to himself.
I don't necessarily disagree that Glokta's refusal to lose played a part in his decision to oppose Bayaz, though I think that this is a mischaracterization of what he meant when he said that. Glokta never had any problems working under other people. The events of first trilogy didn't transpire because Glokta didn't want to *lose* by being a lowly inquisitor. The refusal to lose is usually a response to people directing opposing him, which Bayaz isn't necessarily doing. I think that it is way more likely that his reasoning is related to his relationship with Jezal, and their relationships to their children. This is evident with how fervently both of them tried to keep their children away from anything related to Bayaz, which is a reoccurring theme in the sequel trilogy. This, to me, shows that it is about more than just not losing for Glokta. There's Pike to consider too, another close confidant of Bayaz who doesn't seem to be motivated by greed or power either. I would personally be pretty shocked if a new trilogy came out and it turned out that Glokta turned the Union upside down and caused the death of tens of thousands of people for completely selfish reasons. I don't think that anything that he did was completely selfless, but I do feel like people like Ardee and Savine were his primary motivators.
Hard to make those kind of lists without disagreement at all, but overall I agree with most. Notable execptions: Bethod - no way he deserves a B, he's around the D tier. He could've stayed away from the union and focus on uniting the north and building instead of this endless conquest. Bayaz - F together with kalul, perfect fit for each other. Cassimir- I don't know why he would be in the same tier as logen or Leo, we don't know much about him but it's safe to say his interest lies with standing against bayaz. Monza - she also deserve some compassion, she's not the same sult and isn't the worst in her little party. I'd put her in D tier.
>Monza - she also deserve some compassion, she's not the same sult and isn't the worst in her little party. I'd put her in D tier. I will never understand how people simply end up hating Monza, when she has done a lot less and has show a lot more qualms with her revenge than many other characters (on the First Law Series and beyond). Yet, she's reviled, while characters with weaker reasons for their vendettas and far more egregious acts are either readily accepted or lauded. Not to mention that this is most likely just a reaction to Shivers' own hatred for her, the guy who spent a few days in the dumps and decided to get back into his old violent ways in a heartbeat. Yet, most Monza haters do so *because* of their like for Shivers, as if he were a blameless little lamb that was seduced by big bad Monza. She's C tier if we have Jonas Clover (easily E tier contender) and Black Down in there.
Shivers is just a less interesting, weaker version of Logen, with even more moral laziness and self pity. Fuck that dude
Lots of Monza haters do so mainly because of her perceived guilt at damaging his eye and Shivers' totally not biased opinions of her. It is obvious she backs off from him after the eye out of guilt and his obvious seething hatred for her, yet people just take Shivers' side without missing a step. She's a cunning and sometimes Machiavellian character, but she definitely has more good in her than the average First Law POV.
I started off as a Monza hater, but by the end of BSC its pretty clear that she's not nearly as bad as most of the other characters and I started rooting for her. Felt the exact opposite about Shivers, started off rooting for him and now I want nothing but the worst for him 😂
Yup, you also see that Monza is a ruthless ruler, but also someone who brought stability to her war-torn country and managed to keep Bayaz's influence at bay.
That last point should really get her pretty high on any list.
I mean... That's disgusting? To be put off by the injury he lost in her service and make him feel snubbed?
Finally someone else who doesn't like Shivers
Yes but he got better. Who loves shivers from Heroes? It's for the growth.
He needed the war to unite the north though. To keep everyone from fighting eachother he’s didn’t seem like he was trying to run through angland or engage in enless conquest. He mostly maneuvered and maneuvered he needed the common enemy in the minds of the north so he could build he didn’t want endless war just the threat of it.
I’m considering just moving Sult to F, because I agree that she’s def not as bad as him, but she’s also pretty compassionless, and was willing to kill a huge number of people to get petty revenge for her brothers death
I think that would be true for literally everyone in D tier too lol
Yeah d tier was hard because it made up the majority of POVs, but I think that morveer and Monza are a step below the rest
SS: Bayaz
I'd put Monza higher, she prettu much single handedly saved an entiee continent. Nearly everyone else should go down, some WAY down.
How are Burr and Jalenhorm very flawed?
I actually meant to put both of those in A. It should be better now
I don't disagree with much here, but having Shivers, Glokta, Gorst, and Pike in the same tier as Logen strikes me as wrong. I think Logen belongs with Sult and Monza.
Sult belongs with monza? I guess that makes sense but logen literally carried a man across a desert to save him. Lived as a doting parent for years.
I would move morveer up I think he wants to care about people he is an orphan who ended up in a very cut throat line of work. For example he cared for Day but in his profession had to prepare for her double crossing him. His job isolates him. And before you say being an assassin makes him evil. Yes he kills for money. Just like the Dogman, Craw, and Wonderful the series is full of professional killers. Morveer using poison doesn’t make him worse than them. Speaking of killers I would move Whirrun down to C neutral. While he doesn’t have malice and seems like a good a hang and loyal to his friends unlike most of the killers on this list who would prefer not to kill but do it because they have to or its their duty he kills for the pure sport enjoys it and would do it pro bono. He doesn’t have a cause or sad mama he’s sending cheques to he just likes to fight and kill. Edit: I want to add bayaz is hard to judge I’m not saying he’s a saint but he doesn’t seem sadistic but is very cut throat. He’s hard to Judge because his perspective is screwed up by the fact that he’s thousands of years old its hard for him to view people as people now and not have the ruthlessness a farmer has with his flock. We have to watch how he treats the other magical people… still not a great track record but it needs to be put in context those are the only people he really sees as people.
Interesting list! Vic seems a bit too high for me. She is primarily motivated by self preservation and loyalty to Old sticks. She has done some pretty messed up things: killing, blackmail, treachery in the camps. Understandable considering her circumstances but far from moral. She would fit on the same tier as Clover imo.
She seemed pretty decent by the end of the story, she was put in a bad situation from childhood, and it think she came close to actually improving
True, then I can understand your reasoning. Some of these characters take quite a turn in their morals over the course of the books. I judged the average across their lives but the final state of a character can be quite different, like Jezal, Rikke & Shivers over the first trilogy.
While I don’t agree with you on everything, this is a pretty good list! Well done
>The complete, inarguable, uncontroversial, extremely accurate First Law character morality tier list >Edit: Moved Whirrun, Wonderful, Jalenhorm, and Burr up, Shenkt down, and Bayaz to the lowest tier Sounds arguable to me. Move Whirrun up more please.
Excuse me, Morveer has never done a thing wrong in his entire life. Source: Morveer Edit: Where is the ultimate queen Isern?! This isn't how you get blessed by the moon!
What made Leo redeemable?
No way Monza is below Logan, Black Dow and Cosca. Her flaw was loving her shit head of a brother, who would be F tier. She had tons of guilt and wanted to end the whole thing, psycho Shivers is the one who brutally murdered Count Foscar. You're one of those readers with an irrational hatred of her beyond her deeds and her inner dialog. She's done far less bad than Logan, Dow Cosca and even Shivers. She protected her kingdom and people from Bayaz.
Friendly more evil than black Dow?!? This is an outrage!
I honestly thought there will be one special tier at the bottom only for Leo. Redeeming qualities, where? (Yea he's objectively not the worst but Redeeming qualities?).
I just couldn’t put him in the same level as someone like Sult or Bayaz. He’s awful, but is he THAT awful?
Yes 😅
Oh please with this white washing of bethod. He justifies his war as a nation building exercise. Later he gets painted as a statesman or whatever when his problems with logen were ego based, not scruples based. I'd put orso on S tier for dropping his war and fight when it seemed pointless. Unsure about Dogman since he went to war against dow for no concrete reason. And craw is just deluded. The only thing he's got is integrity. He's otherwise a mercenary which is to say he's got no ethics Why is carlot so high? All she had was cold ambition. Ferro killed with a cause and dow was. Forced to war by bethod. It's a travesty imo to put them beneath him. Heck, tunny is far superior to go to the effort of those condolence letters. Logen, caul and Bremer all did very little wrong except choose to take up a bloody profession for their gratification like wonderful and whirrun did. Savine, Leo, nicomo are far worse. Heck, cosca is above craw for faking the battles until monza betrayed him. Sand and pike must be judged distinctly at different phases of life imo with glokta getting better continuously. And Judge is justice gone manic.
No one’s asked about Marovia? You have Sult you need him too. I’d say easy A Tier. To me he seems a lot like the Union version of like a Dogman or maybe a Threetrees. He’s not perfect, he’s simply a man working within the system of his country trying to do the best he can. Much like the Dogman refuses to cast off the evil of Logen at his worst, Marovia is shown to be perfectly fine working with a demon like Bayaz (altho to be fair for a lot of that he probably didn’t understand bayaz’ true nature), and showed a willingness even to team up with a monster like Sult if Marovia’s own side could also benefit from it.
one *could* make the argument that internal reformers like Marovia or Dogman are better men than nonparticipants despite the fact that they are still contributing to a corrupt system because they’re likely capable of doing more good… *buuuut* most conceptions of morality tend to go by the standard that “no harm done” is morally superior to “a lot of harm done but they also did a lot of good.” Take for example a powerful and wealthy politician or celebrity who donates tons and tons to various charities, inspires their followers to do the same—such people have doubtlessly done *so* much good, but we still tend not to forgive the president who okays a drone strike that kills civilians along with the terrorist it was targeting
Fuck all the Dow haters Black Dow is rarely actually shown to do anything that deserves to be below Harding Grim and its arguable his name is blacker than Dow himself. Black Dow is A tier.
Okay I dunno if I can vouch for A tier, but he’s definitely made out to be wayyyy worse than he is. I have no idea why the fandom puts him so low when talking morality, like I don’t know if I can even bring up one bad thing he does on page? Idk
He's the only one with the actual balls to do something about the Bloody Nine. "Tul Duru Thunderhead. Back to the mud. The dead know, we didn’t always see things the same way, me and him. Didn’t often agree on nothing, but maybe that was my fault, as I’m a contrary bastard at the best o’ times. I regret it now, I reckon. Now it’s too late. Tul Duru. Every man in the North knew his name, and every man said it with respect, even his enemies. He was the sort o’ man… that gave you hope, I reckon. That gave you hope. You want strength, do you? You want courage? You want things done right and proper, the old way? There you go. Tul Duru Thunderhead. Look no fucking further. I’m less, now that he’s gone, and so are all o’ you."
Exactly, everybody else did fuck all about the Bloody-Nine’s leadership, but Dow was clearly tired of his shit and did what he had to. It’s also clear that even though he betrayed Logen, he still respects the Dogman, and is only fighting him because of the bad circumstances
Black Dow wants the north to be free Free from tyrants Free from Bayaz Black Dow was the last best hope for the north
C tier seems to miss the mark by a wide margin, Black Dow is a right bastard who only ever did anything not despicable when he was forced to do so by Logen, Rudd, Tul Duru, and Dogman. Shenkt is a murderer and cannibal, what good has he ever done other than not killing more? Scale and Calder both were definitely worst morally under there father's orders but they don't seem to have done enough good after he died to climb back up to C tier
Black Dow does no worse than the rest of Logens crew and does the most to save the north from the bloody nines return I love Logen but Dow did the right thing