"Good" or "Bad?" Everything is perception.

Positive - Negative
Black - White
Light - Darkness
Virtuous - Despicable
Believer - Non-Believer

No matter what titles, colors, or words are given to one side or the other; they only describe parts of a whole. Components that compose a balance. And balance is a rising and falling wave between two states. Positive or negative, up or down, left or right.

With this in mind, when you strip away the titles and teachings you've been told your whole life; there is no 'right' and 'wrong.' There is only 'now.' The titles that describe your actions are but a means to record and track your choices no matter the motivation. The motivation is only for retrospect, such that others may understand why things happen as they do.

But consider this: We are all the Protagonist in our own stories, but since Protagonist has their own Goals to reach and exist in the same reality as millions of other Protagonists... we become the Antagonist of others as our paths cross in this experience we call 'life.'

In Shroud of the Avatar we are taught the Virtues. But the virtues are only virtues to those who accept, believe and promote them. The virtues are 'rules' to guide, teach, or... control those who embrace them.

But what of the non-believers? Of those who refuse the commune with the ones who believe themselves righteous? What happens when all of their paths begin to cross? When one wants what the other has? When another blocks you from the path you wish to proceed?

That's a simple answer...

.

.

.

.

Chaos.

 

I make my own fate. No God or path influences me but the one I create.

 

Free will is our greatest virtue.

 

So.. you guys are saying Chaos has no values? Or are you saying Chaos can't tell the difference between good and bad?

Free will is everyone's choice whether it's chaos or virtue. I will freely choose a different path thank you very much.

Incidentally... your perception of something does not change its nature. Regardless of whether you choose to label it or not. If all Chaos has to offer is a weak philosophy to justify bad behavior than Chaos is doomed to fail.

Just saying.

 

Let me rephrase it. Chaos, Virtue....neither guides me, neither rules me. I make my own fate.

 

Well that's fair enough I suppose.

 

I don't accept moral relativism. Chaos (by its definition) is incompatible with free will and there has no more relationship to virtue (or lack there of) than does a random number generator.

 

@Karrolanth

That was really funny! I have no idea what it has to do with this conversation but it's hilarious.

 

Agreed. I think Chaos is a poor substitute for Evil. The devs seem that they are consciously trying not to say "Evil" when that's precisely what they mean (or I hear). Although it's foggy. I don't see Darkstarr as Evil, nor Amberraine.

I think Tracy Hickman had it correct (in Dragonlance). Evil turns in upon itself. Evil does not believe in sacrifice or being in the service of others. While good is the opposite of that.

I don't have a problem with there being a Chaos path. I wouldn't mind seeing a Neutral. But in the absence of Evil, it leaves a lot to be desired.

 

Amber and I have had hours upon hours of discussion on this topic. Chaos is not a term I think fits well into a game, because Chaos just means a non-deterministic system which people cannot be (nor can any biologic thing).
I generally think it's good to not view things as good and evil (something I'm trying to teach my child), since people are complicated. But to imply that there isn't evil is hard to support in pretty much any philosophical structure.

 

I haven't read Hickman's books, but that definition would also include a solitary life, ie hermits, which I definitely don't define as evil.

 

I like fish.





Just kidding, I like chicken.

 

You like me! You really like me!

 

It's an important theme in all the Dragonlance books. RG's virtues are more robust and can be applied to the complex nature of people better than Tracy's definition in Dragonlance. But I find that it's still generally true that being Evil is usually a byproduct of being selfish and being good is often the reverse of that.

I don't think it means that if you don't share everything you own with strangers you're evil. I think it means that if all your thought is self serving and you can't see that we're all connected, that's a path to the darkside of the force.

So yeah, a hermit isn't evil because he doesn't sacrifice...but a warlord that makes the world a horrible place for everyone else just to satisfy his own want for power is. On balance, I think the theme works well, but I like the nuance of RG's virtues.

 

Karrolanth, I understand why you shared that video.

Simply an example of how those preached as being 'baddies' may not see themselves as such.

One of my history professors initiated a great discussion in class one day about how 'propaganda machines' always paint the 'enemies' as opposites from their people.

They don't worship our god(s)
They don't speak our language
They don't dress like we do
They don't accept our culture
They don't want to share their resources
Etc.

They demonize the opposition of their cause to sway the public to support their actions and to not protest, riot and overthrow those in power.

 

Sure, but you could also not intellectually believe something about people all being connected and still not make the world a horrible place for everyone else. Or, you could believe everyone is connected and believe in "sacrifice" in a theoretical way but force the concept on others, like Blackthorn in U5. The idea of selfishness and the ego is an important aspect of a lot of real world religions, but I think this goes way beyond the self versus the society or the broader community. I think its really about valuing things in life that are meaningless beyond the grave, a kind of pettiness in character.

Still, I don't think merely being selfish is in itself either either. IT goes further than that.

 

Yes, of course it goes deeper. It's a very complex thing answering what the sum of the answer is for, "what is evil?" But if you point to a single act of evil, that's not so hard for me. Is it evil to let a stranger die in exchange for saving your friends life. Yes, welcome to the real world, kid.

 

Ah, but can you create a path that is totally free of any and all virtues?

 

Thank you - that was the idea, yes. 'Evil' depends on what side you're on.

The following is something I wrote last year on another forum, in response to a discussion on motivations for evil characters. I'm sure some of you won't agree with my thoughts, but some might. Although it was specifically related to roleplaying an evil PC, I believe it applies to real people as well.

(I also try not to think of events as 'good' or 'bad' (although that can be hard sometimes!), things just 'are'. It's the interpretation of the event, the circumstances, and who's doing the interpreting, that makes it seem one way or the other... and something that seemed bad at the time can turn out to have been a positive event, with hindsight.)


The main thing that comes to mind for me, is that evil people aren't evil just for the sake of it. They have purpose and motivation just like the rest of us, and I imagine most don't think of themselves as 'evil'. Their morals or actions may seem questionable at best to those of 'good' intent, but to their own way of thinking whatever they're doing is perfectly reasonable within their personal code of conduct. If they're pulling the wings off butterflies, they're not doing it without a reason.

Maybe the voices in their head are telling them to do certain things. Maybe they were brought up to believe that everyone with a particular characteristic is evil, inhuman, out to harm everyone else, or whatever. Maybe they are just a scientist of sorts, dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge, studying the actions and consequences of people placed in difficult situations without regard for the mental or physical suffering of their subjects. (I have RPed with this particular character, played by a very talented friend, as one of several experimental subjects. It was one of the most complex and difficult roleplaying experiences I've had, but was amazing stuff and helped me learn things about my own character that I may never have discovered otherwise.) Even if a villain's motivation is just to have a good time and do what they find enjoyable regardless of how that affects anyone else, it's still a logical and reasonable motivation to them.

'Good' people do 'evil' things all the time. Killing another person might generally be considered an evil act, but the soldier or police officer who does so to save someone else is considered a hero. In conflict, people are 'the bad guys' because they're not on the same side as you - to them, you are 'the bad guys'. In our MMO world, the characters who go around killing the monsters are heroes, even though the monsters are often only trying to obtain whatever they need to feed and protect themselves and their young, ensure another generation survives to continue into the future, and kill any 'hero' who threatens that. Evil is subjective and depends on the circumstances and point of view, it's rarely black and white.

Another thing you might want to consider is that even 'evil' people can have good qualities... they are not often completely black-hearted. One of the things I remember reading about writing villains a long time back was about Hitler. If I remember correctly, it mentioned that he apparently loved children and animals, yet this was a man whose policies were responsible for sending thousands of children to the gas chamber. As the article said, such things make him "more real, and ultimately more chilling." Give your villain 'human' qualities and emotions (regardless of race - you know what I mean!) and he or she will be more believable.