Ok, so this is basically what we\'ve heard for the last several posts, and I also looked on one site. According to the site:

It does not depend on the act that is good or evil. Actually:

If it strengthens the neighbourhood, populace, world, etc., it should be considered good.

If it weakens the neighbourhood, populace, world, etc., it should be considered good.

And also, how Monketh said that taking things from others are never good.

What if a paladin stole a great artifact of evil from a dark mage? That would be considered good because he is preventing the mage from damaging whatever he has in mind. However, if the paladin stole the artifact to use it for himself, it can be considered evil. But maybe not, because maybe his intention is to do something good.

Even if the paladin was lawful good, stealing an artifact in order to save the world is probably not against his code, especially since its from an evil character.

Another thing, you have to look at evil and good from different perspectives. Lets say a King ordered a genocide on a bunch of lepers in order to save the rest of his people from leoprosy. To his people, he\'s a hero. To the lepers, he\'s a crazy, senile, cruel, etc. tyrant.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Besides that, I also have an opinion on true neutrality. Whoever is true netural doesn\'t nessacarily mean he acts to give gains to himself. Doesn\'t it mean he strives to balance good and evil so that one side doesn\'t become too exsistent? There aren\'t many characters like this, especially among humans(because of their natural chaotic/changing ways), and even among other races, it is extremely rare.

---------------------------------------------------------------

WHEW! That was my third and longest post ever lol. Thx for hearing me out.

Woot! This is my first post!

Anyway,

In fantasy type games(Dungeons&Dragons, etc.) can\'t magic theoretically make anything possible, provided that the mage is powerful enough?

And also, whoever created the Kran, why would he/she create organs, make it bleed, etc. etc...

If someone really created it, wouldn\'t he/she make every feature of it actually have a reason, or have some purpose?

As for the question if Krans can bleed or not, why don\'t you ask the mage who created the Kran? Usually bleeding is a weakness, so why would the mage provide that feature? (Unless it was a defense mechanism, that\'s a whole different story)

Also, about the resistant, immune magic thing...

Let\'s say a mage casts a damaging spell that uses magical energy. What would stop it from crumbling or damaging the Kran? Or even better, what if the mage casts a conjuration spell that summons a giant boulder which materializes onto this plane that smashes the Kran? Unless the mage imbued the Kran with some power or resistance, there is no reason it should be resistant against magic...

And another thing, when Mogura asked,

\"How the hell did he do that?\"

You would need a bit more information, like the language of magic in Planeshift, how mana works, how mages shape magic into what they want, blah blah. So before anyone can discuss on magic and the Kran, you would have to know about the system of magic, which the devs haven\'t even released yet...or even some kind of history...

If it were up to me, I would ask the devs about the Kran. We can sit here and post all day, but it has to be the devs that create the history, origin, properties, etc. of every SINGLE ASPECT IN THE WORLD OF PLANESHIFT.

Yes, yes, I know I\'m a newbie, I know I know nothing about science or Planeshift, but this is my opinion.