Author Topic: What it means to be good, evil, or neutral  (Read 6691 times)

Xalthar

  • Forum Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 2121
  • Tisfjæsing.
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #15 on: March 16, 2004, 08:29:18 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Draklar
*looks at Annah\'s sig*
how can you be neutral or good if yer true evil?



rofl :D

this seems utterly pointless to be discussing....

seperot

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1782
  • :G
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2004, 11:50:56 pm »
Definition of good - Moogie
Definition of Evil - Me
Definition of Neutral - Monketh


anyone else is shades of grey :P
« Last Edit: March 16, 2004, 11:51:32 pm by seperot »

Axsyrus

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1119
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #17 on: March 17, 2004, 12:17:21 am »
argh.. is this thread still here  :baby:

ok then.. if it won\'t die..

Quote
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20001222b
What Alignment Means

Alignment is central to a D&D character\'s personality. D&D uses two measures to determine a specific character\'s ethical and moral attitudes and behavior.

The moral axis has three positions: good, neutral and evil. Good characters generally care about the welfare of others. Neutral people generally care about their own welfare. Evil people generally seek to harm the others\' welfare.

The ethical axis has three positions as well: lawful, neutral, and chaotic. Lawful people generally follow the social rules as they understand them. Neutral people follow those rules find convenient or obviously necessary. And chaotic people seek to upset the social order and either institute change, or simply create anarchy.


there you have it, the DnD description of all allignments.. is there anything wrong with this?

Axsyrus the Azure - Ruler of the Winds
Member of The Arcane Order\'s Council

Phinehas

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #18 on: March 17, 2004, 11:26:50 am »
Nope, sounds good.

Draklar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4422
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #19 on: March 17, 2004, 03:40:49 pm »
not that there\'s something wrong with it... but that\'s not all d&d alignments description (there are 9 alignments there). What you posted is descriptions of the moral axis and the ethical axis...
Sep: 3 questions:
would you harm anyone, including Mogs?
wouldn\'t Mogs bash annoying n00b?
didn\'t Monketh say that he\'s neutral, but slightly good?
:P
AKA Skald

Moogie

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4551
  • Artist/Flash Animator
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2004, 04:15:01 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Draklar

would you harm anyone, including Mogs?



He wouldn\'t, he\'s a big softy really... ;) *giggle*


Quote
Originally posted by Draklar
wouldn\'t Mogs bash annoying n00b?


I sometimes do, but I still consider me purely good, and if Sep does too, then what does it matter? :]



Axsyrus: The difference with this thread (as I discovered above) is this one is what we individually think of our alignments, not what any \'official\' description forces upon us. I think official descriptions suck anyway, alignment is just a way of generally categorising yourself, not trying to struggle and fit yourself into some exact conformity. :) How boring is that.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2004, 04:16:29 pm by Moogie »

Draklar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4422
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2004, 04:26:14 pm »
official descriptions help you to find yourself between all those alignments. Give some personality and help you to roleplay. Nothing else. You may say they suck, but the official descriptions are very helpfull when you want to roleplay specific character.

like when you want to roleplay pure good, it would be good to check what do you have to do in that direction. You can make your own definitions, but what\'s the point in making them at all then?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2004, 04:27:22 pm by Draklar »
AKA Skald

Auran

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 645
  • Quite pants really...
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #22 on: March 17, 2004, 05:59:15 pm »
This discussion is one of those issues that never die and never grow old. People who discuss it grow old and wise enough to realise for themselves, but what they abandon is taken up by a new generation of seekers of knowledge. There was once a very wise quote:

\"There is nothing new you can learn. All you can do is remember what you always knew\"

I guess what is means is that you can never learn anything until you discover it yourself. Take Calculus. Teachers can tell you unendingly what d/dt means but you never really understand until you realise it on your own.

So it is with good and evil. You cannot say good is such and expect others to agree. Some might and others might not. You can give endless logical explanations and hold philosophical discourses and yet not force conviction for conviction is not to be forced.  The individual will only be satisfied with what he or she finally discovers by searching his own intellect. So all this is pointless.

But on the other hand such philosophical arguments are good mental exercise and as such I view the journey as more important than the destination. Hence I will offer my opinion to that end.

Good:
What is white. That which is like the fire. Which illuminates. Which burns all till only the purest remains. Which is great strength and great responsibility at once


Evil:
What is black. That which is like the night. Which obscures and blinds. Which is blackest of black till our eyes cannot see our own selves. Which maddens the weak with fear till they treat each sound as heralding the approach of a mortal enemy. Which emboldens the wicked with the assurance that the deed will go unseen. Which prompts the honest to light the fire of good. Which allows the clever to work invisible to all eyes.


Neutral:
What is transparent. That which is like the river. Ruled by its own purpose. Heading to its own destination by breaching or bending around obstacles. That which flows steadily through Realms Bright and Realms Dark alike not pausing to look at either.


That being said I leave most of it as a matter of interpretation. But I will say this that Good and Evil are like day and night. Each has an end and is sure to be succeeded by the other. Neutral is like the river that reflects the sun in the day and the black sky at night. Also, even during the day there will be caverns no light will ever reach, and during the night there will be lamps which will illuminate their surroundings even on the blackest of nights.


In the end i\'d like to suggest that you not let your alignment direct your actions. Instead allow your actions to decide your alignment. And if you really do choose an alignment don\'t just say: \"I am good/evil/neutral\" and sit pretty. Do something to forward your cause.

PS:
Many of the guilds say \"Bhuuu I am evil.\" or \"Woot I am good\" and do nothing:rolleyes:. That is partly because they are lazy bums and partly because the general gamer is moronic enough to mistake roleplaying charachter for the player. This ends up scaring potential charachters off since, unlike me and maybe Kiern, most of  you people here want to be the person remembered as popular, cool and all around nice. So I urge all gamers to learn to differentiate the player from the game and you will have a much better gaming experience.

Auran. No More.
Forget you ever knew me kid.

Draklar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4422
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #23 on: March 17, 2004, 06:22:33 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Auran
In the end i\'d like to suggest that you not let your alignment direct your actions. Instead allow your actions to decide your alignment.

someone here misses the point of alignments...
alignments help you to build character around some specific model.
If you already have a model then there\'s no point in picking alignments
and following your suggestion will result in people \"roleplaying\" themselfs most of the time...
AKA Skald

Auran

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 645
  • Quite pants really...
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #24 on: March 17, 2004, 06:34:06 pm »
Ah Draklar my friend it is not so. To perfectly roleplay you don\'t build a good ,evil or neutral charachter. You build a deep and interesting charachter unfettered by bounds of definitions and then judge from it what its alignment should be. The Charachter( i donot say \"is\" but \"should\" ) should not be built around the alignment. It is far better to judge the alignment once you have the charachter.

Charachters are never pure alignment except in very rare cases and these are generally stereotypical and boring. An interesting charachter is more often than not a cocktail. So its much better to build a charachter and then judge its aligment.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2004, 06:34:41 pm by Auran »

Auran. No More.
Forget you ever knew me kid.

Draklar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4422
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #25 on: March 17, 2004, 06:55:40 pm »
Auran, I\'m not going to discuss this with you. I would just advice you to play some p&p rpg and see how alignments work there.

I\'ll just say how did I make my new character (hey, this in the whole discussion might be actually useful):
So I was supposed to join the Dark Empire. Knowing that I should turn to evil (I was already lawful so that didn\'t make difference), I searched for many lawful-evil descriptions. Finally I found really good one, where I could see points showing how should lawful-evil character act like. I took ones I liked and dropped ones that I didn\'t. From this I made a custom character, that was still going under lawful-evil description.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2004, 07:04:56 pm by Draklar »
AKA Skald

seperot

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1782
  • :G
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #26 on: March 17, 2004, 07:36:54 pm »
Draklar anyone but Moogie. I\'d strap a c-4 bomb to there head anyday. And all evil people have a weakness mine is Moogie :P
« Last Edit: March 17, 2004, 07:37:20 pm by seperot »

Auran

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 645
  • Quite pants really...
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #27 on: March 17, 2004, 07:40:19 pm »
Lets just say that I don\'t call P&P RPG with its rules the final word. The ultimate RPG is Real Life. But nevermind. Thats the difference between you and me. I won\'t argue about this further since it would only end up making you look bad. I don\'t want that since i like your new charachter and wouldn\'t want it to go down the drain like the last one. When you get angry you tend to say silly things which ruin your image. So you should see I like you well enough to look out for you.;)

Auran. No More.
Forget you ever knew me kid.

Draklar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4422
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #28 on: March 17, 2004, 07:55:34 pm »
yup, some difference I\'d say... i don\'t see real life as a game, and I don\'t play any roles there... I\'m just myself...
but calling real life \"RolePlaying Game\"... well that\'s interesting idea :)

Sep: you are evil, but you aren\'t definition of it... and that\'s good for you in my opinion...
same for Mogs, I think it\'s much better and more interesting to be just highly good.
AKA Skald

Phinehas

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2004, 12:15:45 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Auran This discussion is one of those issues that never die and never grow old.People who discuss it grow old and wise enough to realise for themselves, but what they abandon is taken up by a new generation of seekers of knowledge.


Hear ye, hear ye. Members of the PS forums, bear witness to the fact that Auran has just officialy denied being wise. He states that the wise know that this discussion is futile, then he continues to post, discussing this topic. Therefore he cannot be wise.

Just wanted to make sure everyone noticed. It\'s not often that we get to see Auran insert his foot into his mouth. (although it couldn\'t be hard with that mouth! rofl)