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

I do not think Darkstarr and Lord British are opposites in game. I think they just play that angle outside of the game because it's fun.

 

This is in the Harvard link above. Again highly recommended as a brain teaser.
Only someone that we would consider a psychopath would be able to make rational "right" decisions consistently. However people that have a psychopath disorder are less likely to make that "right" decision.
Human wetware is fascinating.

 

They have always been positioned as opposites in game (even when Lord DarkStarr was Lord Blackthorn in the original Ultima series ). I do find it rather ironic that, based on my personal observations, their real-life personalities (Starr is the orderly one, while Richard is the chaotic one) seem to be the exact opposite of their in-game personas

 

I guess in single player you will not be judged by morals or be labeled as good vs evil, but in multi-player, we will all be judged for our actions by the community and the morals that develop with it.

 

Well, if it is anything at all like past Ultimas, you will be judged by your actions, and this would be reflected in NPC reactions to you (i.e., Vendor: I'm not selling any of my wares to you, thief! or Sure, I'll sell you want you want, but at a 200% markup...Female NPC: Get away from me, you letch! I'm not giving you any directions!) Your actions always have consequences...

 

that is very true, but its not because they label you as good or evil, its because of the choices you make.

 

Well, we are all labeled as being "good" or "evil" based on the choices we make (i.e.,the NPC you encounter thinks you are "evil" because you choose to dine on the flesh of your fellow human beings ).

 

One of my motivations for this post, was to shed light on the opinion that actions of each Avatar who are their own Protagonist, may make them Antagonists to each other. At least in theory.

Understanding that by living in the world of Ultima, we by default accept to abide by the set of laws, beliefs that have been established.

My question is; What game mechanics will allow for Evil/Bad/Non-Virtuous Avatars to be... non-virtuous? (outside of lying in conversation?)

 

We've been told there will be a dark path for players to follow if they wish. We don't know anything beyond that.

 

*enters dark path*
*stubs toe on unseen object*

OUCH!

This is not what I had in mind for a 'dark path'.....

 

From a non-evil/good perspective I interpret
virtue to be rules, order, community, spirituality and life-affirming
and
chaos to be relativistic, disorganized, disruptive, self-affirmative and nihilistic.

 

Good = football, beer, fried food and sex.
Evil = death, taxes, mosquitos and people who stop their cart in the exact middle of the grocery aisle.

 

Evil = football-franchise driven by advertisement profits, beer-franchise driven by glorifying consuming poisonous substance, fried food-cholesterol and sex-STDs.
Good = death-Is the only way to ascend, taxes-provides law enforcement, mosquitos-feed spiders and people who stop their cart in the exact middle of the grocery aisle-super markets with fresh food!

 

Loved this topic so far! I'd like to give my opinion about lots of things that have been said, but instead of giving individual responses, i'll express my vision of the topic trying to address what piqued my interest (@Spoon, Thank you very much for the link to Harvard lecture! I'd hear it when i have time. For now, this is going to be just my vision). If you're busy or lazy to face this wall of text, just skip to the conclussion!

Order VS Chaos
It seems to be consensum about Order and Chaos as opposing forces, and i also agree with it. I find interesting how Order is quite straightforward to define, but Chaos poses some difficulty. To me, It seems unavoidable to think humans are beings of Order since our intelligence enslaves us to causality through observation (I saw X happens after Y many times, so if i see Y happen, i tend to think X is going to follow), and knowing our needs are fullfiled for a period of time make us feel safe and comfortable. That's why Order is often linked to good things.

I searched a definition for Chaos online, i found one suitable with my perception in the Chaos theory article in Wikipedia - Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future. This fits perfectly well as opposite to Order (something Chaotic is when you observe it for a while, and even observing X after Y some times, you can't be sure next time Y will happen, X will follow). To me that explains why Chaos is linked somehow to something not good (let's not say evil) since not being able to predict if your basic needs are going to be fullfiled tomorrow could make you feel uneasy.

Both concepts as a whole
Thinking about Chaos and Order as something separate is unreal; nobody could be a being of absolute Order nor of absolute Chaos. Trying to translate it to human behavior and thinking about the extremes from a realistic point of view, I'd say an archetype of Order is who develops ways (formulas) for facing problems, keeping some sort of mental record about the way things turns out, and refining (changing, hereby Chaos) its "formula" to face problems.

On the other hand, an archetype of Chaos is who lives day by day, looking for immediate solutions to immediate problems, and not worrying about what could happen next. Nonetheless, even this archetype will face the same problems on a daily basis, and unavoidably he'll apply the solution that suited him best in the past (keeping, hereby Order), even uncounciously.

As you can see, from my point of view both concepts are opposite, but not necessarily antagonic. A situations of global antagonism between the two could burst in a given status quo (Oh, you can't imagine how much i'm expecting to hear about all the social situation in game ). Local antagonism is easier; it can come up anytime someone who don't acknowledge the other way of being clashes against one who does.

Good VS Evil
This is where everything gets tricky. Taking out of the question the deterministic worlds where good and evil are a reality (Every single D&D setting and, by extension, most of the Medieval Fantasy), this is really matter of the point of view. To me, the most accurate definition of this abstract dichotomy is reflected in Wyrms, a book by Orson Scott Card. For those interested, I'll introduce a summary of the part i'm talking to (even if it's tagged as a Spoiler, it unveils nothing of the book plot).

Spoiler

... we can't do good or evil to most of the universe. Only to other living things. Mostly to each other. Because the systems of human beings are ours to control. They're every bit as real as the universe itself, and they are what gives us our existence-but we can manipulate them. We can change the systems that create the terms of our life. And we do change those systems, according to the single simple choice of our will.
...
The system lives on sacrifice. No order could exist in which every person in it received everything he desired all the time. The system that gives us our existence depends on people making sacrifices. I give up something I desire, so that others can receive some of what they desire. In turn, they give up something they want, so I can have some of what I want. Every human society depends on that simple principle.
...
I'm saying that good people sacrifice anything that is necessary in order to maintain the order that allows all others to exist, even if they have to sacrifice their own life. While evil people manipulate and force the sacrifice of any and every other person in order to wholly gratify their own hunger. Do you see the difference?

Long story short; trying to see the big picture of mankind as a whole, doing good is to "lose" (or invest, or dedicate to) so others could earn. Doing evil is to "win" (or earn, or obtain) without being concerned about how much others has to lose to achieve your success. But even this definition requires a point of view, is relative. But i'd like to keep this point for later, since when i'll talk about good or evil from now on, i'll do it according to this definition.

Where do the Virtues fit?
I'ts undeniable that the old Virtue system - BEWARE! Some spoilers of the Single Player Ultima games in there - defined by Mr. Garriot is a code, and that could guide us to understand that is bonded with Order. Even if it could be interpreted as such, to me being virtuous it's not matter of the way you face problems in your daily life. You could follow the code of virtues if you're an Orderly person, but you can spontaneoulsy act according to them, even if you don't know them (or simply don't care). What's Orderly is to adhere the virtues; a Chaotic person probably just consider them as he works out stuff, and pass if he don't suit the actual situation. As a summary, Virtues are unrelated to Chaos an Order; what's related to the dichotomy is the way you follow them. A side thought... shouldn't be the one who strictly refuses to follow any virtue a person of Order?

Regarding the kindness of virtues, at first glance they're deemed to be good by almost everyone, but it's because the signifier of the words chosen as Virtues; they've been carefully chosen so is not inclined by nefarious intepretations, and the fair explanations associated to each concept are not questioned. Nonetheless, everything could be manipulated, and used in good or evil ways; Lord Blackthorne did that already when he got the code of virtues twisted. From my point of view, even if Virtues are good at first glance, Virtues could go both ways depending on the one who interprets it.

Conclusions
I'm glad to hear what Baron Drocis quoted (there will be a dark path to follow). I expect Virtues to have two sides, one good and one evil. That will allow us to manufacture our own code without failing in the odd concept of being what's generally accepted by good and evil. Assuming we don't want to become absolutely Virtuous or absolutely Infamous, we shall be able to take whatever side of every virtue we deem to suit our character, and don't mind the ones we think not to be related to the character. Choosing to be an active member of the Order or Chaos faction could restrict some choices of some aspects, but not all of them; I want to see evil people in the Order and good people in the Chaos.

 

I really enjoyed your responses here and they mirror and word my own thoughts. And the quote from Wyrms was fantastic.

Thanks!

 

Smacking your thumb with a hammer is always bad, I don't care how its perceived.

 

If all you have is a hammer; everything looks like a nail.