Evil--What's your take?

[Redjack]

My Black Guard uses detect good all the time. I do not perceive him as understanding that he is detecting "good". That would lead to ethical issues for him to deal with that don't concern him. He senses a "taint" in good persons that agitate him and he can't tolerate.

[DM_Acorn]

All in all people play to have fun, and how can you have fun if everyone is getting along, sitting in a tavern drinking? Well, maybe some people do but the point is to go out and kick ass, so differing ideals is necessary on this server.

I take issue with this statement on it's own. I will tell you why.

Conflict will drive story, this is true.

Sundren encourages conflict.

Players should not equal Characters.

Therefore I think it important to point out that PLAYERS on this server SHOULD get along. We have rules in place to encourage this.

Civility and fair play SHOULD be common place.

What sometimes happens, and what I think Gamling hints at, is that a CHARACTER gets stomped and the PLAYER takes it personally.

Then we have to deal with the tantrum and fallout that ensues.

There are rules for PVP you MUST read them, and follow them.

That said, there are also rules, that we all learned or should have learned in the sandbox. Put your self in the other player's shoes when you act. Your actions may make perfect sense to you and you may feel justified, but...

Ask yourself this: Does you opponent see it the same way you do?

The story is at stake.

You can't have a story with out authors and audience. We have the privilege of being both. We also have the responsibility to recognize that our peers write and read along with us.

I might sound like a broken record because I think I say this a lot.

Communicate. As much as you can (or as much as you have to) so that everyone involved feels part of the story.

[DM_Acorn]

For example?

Barbarian rage could easily fall here. Letting ones passions inform ones killing...

Oh yeah KILLING. CG could take the lesser of two evils path which a paladin should not.

[roguethree]

Barbarian rage could easily fall here. Letting ones passions inform ones killing...

Oh yeah KILLING. CG could take the lesser of two evils path which a paladin should not.

The rage is a response to a dangerous situation, not a "I feel like going on a killing spree so I guess I'll enter angry mode" button, so that doesn't work.

And killing, itself, isn't evil. Several good gods actively promote the killing of the wicked. It's guided by context, but the lawful and chaotic aspects of a paladin v. a CG individual don't define whether the killing of whatever is good or evil.

[Thief Of Navarre]

The rage is a response to a dangerous situation, not a "I feel like going on a killing spree so I guess I'll enter angry mode" button, so that doesn't work.

And killing, itself, isn't evil. Several good gods actively promote the killing of the wicked. It's guided by context, but the lawful and chaotic aspects of a paladin v. a CG individual don't define whether the killing of whatever is good or evil.

Which is essence means you have said and contributed nothing?

[GodBeastX]

Shitting on this whole thread with two things:

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wik...pions_of_Valor

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Lords_of_Darkness

Read those two books, at least the first chapters, then you'll get a better sense of this discussion and probably won't have to ask again. Lords of Darkness I especially recommend because it has a lovely section of "Why am I evil?" and explains much of what creates evil, why it exists, and why people stick to it.

THE ANSWERS ARE SHOCKING! ^^

[Kaybrie]

Taken from the second paragraph of the Lords of Darkness;

Good villains are no less right and justified then the heroes - from their point of view. Treat each villain as an protagonist of his or her own story, and not just the antagonist that confronts the heroes at dramatically appropriate points.

Infofags gotta infofag.

Edit; inb4 "That's referring to good aligned villains"

[roguethree]

Good villains are no less right and justified then the heroes - from their point of view.

That they think they're in the right doesn't make right and wrong subjective.

[Kaybrie]

That's the entire topic that's been discussed so far as I'm aware, in that from any characters perspective good and evil can be subjective. That a character is perfectly entitled to feel they're doing the good and just thing, even if it's evil.

[greypawn]

My main problem with evil is that they are just evil. And good people are always so ... well, good. Its just annoying that people do that. Why can't everything be the way I want it and see it as it should be? That would be best.

Is this thread closed yet? I swear I've heard this argument near five times a year on these forums. Always the same.

[Thief Of Navarre]

That they think they're in the right doesn't make right and wrong subjective.

Not in FR/D&D. Your right, since it has a clearly defined view of right and wrong.

[Doubtful]

Good =\= nice, tolerant, lenient.
Evil =\= baby eating sociopath, unpleasant, murderer.

[Azareil]

Is this thread closed yet? I swear I've heard this argument near five times a year on these forums. Always the same.

Man, I am the answer to your prayers. I can get a thread closed faster than any woman's legs when I walk in the room.


So here's my theory on evil.

First, let's take a look at what we get when we spell evil backwards. "live". That says a lot in and of itself. To be "evil" is to "live". Think about it.

Now good spelled backwards is "doog". That's not a word, it could be a typo and it's supposed to be dog. Actually, that makes sense. Darius Blackwell told Trevor that evil is like the wolves and the innocent are the sheep and the good people are the dogs who protect the sheep. So yes, it is a typo and is supposed to be 'dog'. How do you praise a dog? 'Good Dog'. Think about it.

Now, back to evil. The problem with trying to play as an evil character is the perception that they are bad people. When in fact, they are just trying to live their lives. Come on good people, aren't we all doing the exact same?! So while they try to live their lives, they come upon some hardships like we ALL have to face. When an evil person says "I have no money and need to feed myself" what does he do? He steals it. This is not bad! He is trying to survive! Yet the Legion is more than happy to cut his hands off for it! HOW IS THAT FAIR?! When an evil person says, "There's not enough people following my God." He goes out and forces people to convert! How come good people can get people to convert but it's frowned upon for evil people to do so? THIS IS A DOUBLE STANDARD.

Evil is supposed to be about having fun and doing what you want, without 'the man' keeping you down. Yet there is only one place for evil people to go and hang out and chill without having the 'good dogs' stamping on their feet. The Hippies in the 60's wanted to do just the same thing and we consider them modern day heroes because of their free love. Why can't we bring that back? I have to pay 50 bucks to get any love yet I am considered the monster here?! LOVE SHOULD BE FREE AGAIN BECAUSE IT IS EXPENSIVE RIGHT NOW AND WITH THE ECONOMY THE WAY IT IS AND THE DISEASES IT IS NOT SAFE GOD DAMN MEDICAL BILLS ARE IN THE THOUSANDS AND MY INSURANCE COMPANY DUMPED ME.

So that is my analysis.

[Kitsunestume]

Not to rag too much of FoogooFish's perfectly legitimate analogy, but if:

"Evil is like the wolves and the innocent are the sheep and the good people are the dogs who protect the sheep. "

; where does Team Greyscale come in? Would Greys like Myself and Peridan be humans, who herd the sheep, manipulate the dogs, and either hunt or train the wolves? That sounds about like what we do, and is a perfectly viable other form of evil, in it's own way.

edit: And people pay us to do that stuff, too, instead of usually locking us in the brig or trying to kill us.

[[DM] Grinning Death]

Well folks, I think that a very....long, discussion like this has run its course.


DM THREAD LOCK, GO!