I’m curious about the community’s input: how would you classify the companions in this game based off their karma (like they were in Fallout 3). Who would you place under “good,” “neutral,” and “evil?” Some of these I suspect can be debatable (I normally run solo, but I want to start collecting more companion perks), so I’d like to see why you group some of them the way you do.
- Cait: chaotic neutral. She just does not care about human life.
- Codsworth lawful good. Reason he’s pre war kind set and still believed in the good of humanity and the sole survivor.
- Piper: chaotic good. Reason pipers heart is in the right place but she can’t stop causing trouble
- Curie: lawful good. What can I say her purpose was to help people.
- Danse: lawful neutral. Reason Danse wants to do right by people but the brotherhood has so much of a hand up his rear it prevents him from putting morals first.
- Deacon: chaotic good. Reason Good man but plays dirty to get his way
- Dogmeat: amoral. Doggies are loyal doggos.
- Hancock: lawful evil: Hancock is all about doing the wrong thing to send the right message.
- Macready: chaotic neutral. Macready isn’t a bad person but his background kind of forced him into this life.
- Nick: lawful good. He believes in helping those in need and goes the extra mile to do it
- Preston: lawful good: this man is literally trying to rebuild the commonwealth
- Strong: this guy is so mixed up idk what he is
- X6-88: evil: this thing has no regard for human life, has no morals and would genocide the common wealth if ordered too.
Original Link – Continuation of discussion