yeah @the_spyder I agree with all you said, but you are wrong about Elliseme. She didn't die, she's a huge character in the final SoA chapter. Prism, the somewhat mentally unstable artist, was making a sculpture of her becasue he saw her fleetingly and never saw her again, making him somehow fall madly in love with her. It had nothing to do with her dying.
yeah @the_spyder I agree with all you said, but you are wrong about Elliseme. She didn't die, she's a huge character in the final SoA chapter. Prism, the somewhat mentally unstable artist, was making a sculpture of her becasue he saw her fleetingly and never saw her again, making him somehow fall madly in love with her. It had nothing to do with her dying.
It's pretty common in myths, folklore, and tales of courtly love for a character to fall madly in love with a woman they see but a glimpse of, a love so powerful that it can cause physical pain or insanity. This is especially true if the woman in question happens to be an elf or faerie queen.
@RazaDelrom = it is sometimes very hard to follow your logic.
Who said that Ellesime "Had it coming"? Or was that something you read into what I posted? "Ellesime's room" is not actually where she lives (lived), it is a shrine "Built to her" much in the same way that some killers build shrines to the objects of their twisted obsessions. You find this out from the Dryads when you talk to them, before you enter the room.
Ellesime herself has been dead for quite some time, having died before the events of BG1. You may have noticed a rock face sculpture being carved into a cliff near Nashkal mines by some crazy guy who steals two emeralds to complete his masterpiece. That is in memorium to Ellesime. You may also remember several clones on the upper level of the dungeon. These are attempts by Irenicus to bring her back to life. 'Violating' her room, isn't doing anything at all 'To her'. And it isn't violating her resting place either, before you go there. It is searching through a room owned by a torturer and mad man for a way out.
It should also be noted that, among other things, Irenicus stole all of your stuff. Searching through his rooms to find it is legitimate. And anything that helps you escape is also legitimate.
The flaw in the logic train that I think you are tripping over is what some people call lawful stupid. Some people seem to think that playing lawful good means that you aren't allowed to be human, make mistakes or color outside the lines in even the smallest degree. Some will even take it to the extreme and think it means that you, as the player, have to work really hard to trip your own self up with ridiculously insane restrictions. Being Lawful good means setting a high standard, absolutely. It doesn't mean "I'm Dudley Do Right and can't cross the street against the light to save the world". It means intelligent, measured application of what is right and in accordance with your code. In playing lawful good, if I had to kill a fly in order to stop the death of an innocent, that fly would be DEAD quicker than you can blink. But I still keep an eye on the prize (that of the best and most good by the least possible evil manner possible).
Irenicus is a bad dude. Pure and simple. Even if he hadn't attacked Charname's party and killed some of his allies and tortured others, take a look at what he does to his own people. You may recall the pathetic creature in the glass jar in one of the first rooms. Irenicus did that to him, tortured him to such a degree that he begs for death. Irenicus did this in front of Imoen, to make her as sick as he is. He ultimately wants to commit a kind of genocide. He's Bad. Taking from him something that might help you escape and end his reign is only marginally evil (if it is even that).
Life is messy. You do your absolute best. But you don't ham string yourself needlessly to do it.
Yes, if you play an evil char, you would not care, yes if you play an LG char you would care. If you disagree, then ask yourself why was helm killed, and by whom? Because one LG deity decided that he could not trust helm as LG deity to not steal the tablet. There is all said: what you think you are doing and what you actually do might be two different things.
Now, I wonder, wasn't the title of this thread: "what's good about being evil"?
time to add some evilness right about now: Starts the real evil laugh.
In a tabletop campaign where your character hordes all of the loot he/she finds for him/herself and sells all the stuff he/she will not use to get better items. Having a Cleric at level 4 with a +3 mace of Flames, a +3 shield of reflecting, and a +3 elven chainmail that was forged in the fire of a red dragon... is quite awesome when the party finds out about his/her evilness. Especially since the rest of the party was still running around with only a few magical weapons and no magical armor items.
I know, but I'm applying real world logic, ie Prism is a loony toon
Real world logic doesn't really apply when we're talking about a world where some beings can be so supernaturally beautiful as to cause instant death to those who see them.
Wait a minute... are we really arguing with someone who says it isn't lawful good to defend yourself against imps (you know... demonic creatures) who attack you on sight while you are trying to escape a dungeon? Or to take items you need to escape from said dungeon from the room of a madman/torturer/murderer of two of your dearest friend's girlfriend?
I suspect we are getting majorly trolled. We need a flail of ages or a melf's acid arrow here ASAP.
Thanks for the interesting thread guys. I always for some reason play as Chaotic Good because I find Lawful and Evil to be a little boring, but thanks for the alternative perspectives. It does seem like the dialog choices are too often a choice between heroic (not necessarily lawful) good and psychotic (rarely lawful) evil.
Someone made the excellent point earlier in the thread that good and evil are descriptive, not prescriptive labels, to be applied to consequences rather than actions. I think that's a really good way of looking at it. As an anarchist, and someone who believes in the facility of good and the banality of evil, I have a somewhat different interpretation of the alignment chart. I believe everyone wants to do what's right by them; conflict arises because people disagree about what good is.
The people I know whose actions I might if pushed describe as evil are all people who believed in their own good above the good of the group or the community - individualists. The people I know who I describe as good all believe in the primary of the group or community ahead of their own interests. Meanwhile, the people who I think of as lawful are people who believe that the good can best be achieved by following historic rules, laws, prescriptions, customs or moors. The chaotics are, like me, people who believe that the greatest good is best achieved by flouting those conventions, and that it is the creation of social institutions that allows for the greatest evil to occur.
With that in mind, I believe the D&D Alignment Chart in full should read as a spectrum between Anarchics and the Lawful on the one axis and Individualists vs. Communalists on the other. I think that captures more fully what I know about the world I live in.
Now, what's really interesting for me is that I can RP a character using that alignment chart very easily in a game like Planescape. Just look for the option that benefits me first and others second while allowing me to not upset others by going against the laws they live by, if playing Lawful Evil. Likewise Chaotic Good: the action that benefits my companions first, or expresses solidarity with them for actions previously committed, while accepting it is the laws of others which also has caused suffering.
But if you follow that alignment chart, I found it was very difficult to RP BG and BGII. As a Lawful Evil character, I was hardly going to go around randomly killing people, unless those people were marked in some way or it was not against the law to do so. As a Chaotic Good character, I found myself siding with the Law of the land far too often for my character's internal moral compass.
BG and BGII cater well for Chaotic Evil and Lawful Good characters but not so well for characters RPing other alignments.
Pillaging and burning villages, killing fools because they didn't kiss your feet to your satisfaction and stealing from the rich and poor, what's not to like about being evil?
I posted this link on the Lawful Good thread, but I think you will enjoy it. easydamus wrote a thorough discussion of "real" alignment making very similar arguments to you. "Evil" is more about personal achievement and personal fulfillment while "good" is more about doing right by others, as you said.
I find this to be very helpful with role-playing. The primary thing to consider, as you also stated, no one really considers themselves to be "evil", and very few people are truly without morals of any kind. When you take "good" and "evil" out of the equation and look at a more realistic spectrum of benevolence and universalism vs. achievement and hedonism, it's easier to see yourself making consistent choices. I'm not "evil", I'm "ambitious", for example.
Try these on for size:
Righteous (Lawful Good) - Conformity/Tradition and Benevolence
Humane (Neutral Good) - Benevolence and Universalism
Transcendent (Chaotic Good) - Universalism and Self-Direction
Autonomous (Chaotic Neutral) - Self-Direction and Stimulation
Sybaritic (Chaotic Evil) - Hedonism
Ambitious (Neutral Evil) - Achievement and Power
Ascendent (Lawful Evil) - Power and Security
Orthodox (Lawful Neutral) - Security and Conformity/Tradition
I usually play good characters. But even when trying other ways, I can never play as a psychotic or serial killer ---for me, the game gets boring pretty quickly. An evil run through can be a lot of fun, though.
I RP it as neutral evil, a charname who cares about him or herself above all else. I can still do "good" quests and be nice to NPCs. Or I can be a jerk if I feel like it. I'm never shy about asking for a reward. I'll swap out NPCs without much agonizing over their feelings. I'm the boss, it's my party, and we're doing it my way.
In other words I don't play evil as "mean" or "cruel", I'm mostly just a sociopath.
@Time4Tiddy, that's a great chart. It pretty closely matches my own views of the alignment system.
@Time4Tiddy thanks for the article, it was a brilliant read! I once tried to expand on those ideas but got a bit stuck so I'm really pleased to hear that someone else has had nearly the same idea and expanded it on it fully! I've bookmarked the page and will be coming back to it many times in the future! Thanks again!
Also, [quote]"Evil" is more about personal achievement and personal fulfillment while "good" is more about doing right by others, as you said. [/quote] .. is a much more succinct way of putting it!
@time4tiddy yeah my character isn't vary hidonistic more "did you hear that rat in the corner hmmm... I'm watching you rodent you'll not attack my ancles ahh it scweeked kill it kill it die die die". Or "hmmm... Fireballs are fun I think ill cast one right now ooh I didn't see that man but what an explosion it burned him alive AHH... he's still twitching dorn stab him staby stab stab stab."
@gawdzilla I plan on making my next play through a neutral evil womanizing cut throat mercenary but I haven't decided on what class or race and I haven't decided if I want him to romance viconia or just get whores at the copper cornet anytime he's in the city.
@dragonspear my first ee play through was with a good blade so thats out and what kind of evil mercinary owns a playhouse I mean really lol. But swashy never played on of those. ok its ether swashy or a fighter cuz then i could be an evil lord
Hey that playhouse gives me a front as a legit businessman.
Personally I like the idea of an evil assassin, but with Hexxat that's kinda moot. The issue with a evil lord (while I like it and any of the fighter kits make a lot of sense here), is that you already have Korgan, Dorn and Spoiler for evil fighters.
@dragonspear my first ee play through was with a good blade so thats out and what kind of evil mercinary owns a playhouse I mean really lol. But swashy never played on of those. ok its ether swashy or a fighter cuz then i could be an evil lord
Hey that playhouse gives me a front as a legit businessman.
Personally I like the idea of an evil assassin, but with Hexxat that's kinda moot. The issue with a evil lord (while I like it and any of the fighter kits make a lot of sense here), is that you already have Korgan, Dorn and Spoiler for evil fighters.
With Hexxat, assassin charname is even better because you can fully focus on stealth and she can take care of traps/locks.
@dragonspear yes yes but I don't really like hexxat and you can still bring dorn around with you I tend to have two good fighters on hand at all times except with my blade play through late game I was pritty much immune to all damage with my magic items and I one hit like everything before minsc and boo could show up. Boots of speed + haste + strangth + plus offensive spin killed a Lich without my parties help but to be fair they were fighting a demon
I'm considering dropping Kagain atm in BGEE for Baeloth. Just not sure =/ I know he'd help a lot with the fights I'd have left. Honestly I'd rather get rid of shar-teel but then I have no way of getting rid of traps.
I'm considering dropping Kagain atm in BGEE for Baeloth. Just not sure =/ I know he'd help a lot with the fights I'd have left. Honestly I'd rather get rid of shar-teel but then I have no way of getting rid of traps.
Isn't that what Garrick's for? I mean... you are playing evil
@dragonspear get rid of kagain traps must be disarmed unless your immune to damage of course used to put the thief up front all the time now if my blade runs over something then I look for traps
Comments
I agree with all you said, but you are wrong about Elliseme. She didn't die, she's a huge character in the final SoA chapter. Prism, the somewhat mentally unstable artist, was making a sculpture of her becasue he saw her fleetingly and never saw her again, making him somehow fall madly in love with her. It had nothing to do with her dying.
Now, I wonder, wasn't the title of this thread: "what's good about being evil"?
time to add some evilness right about now: Starts the real evil laugh.
and Cyric tricked them
In a tabletop campaign where your character hordes all of the loot he/she finds for him/herself and sells all the stuff he/she will not use to get better items. Having a Cleric at level 4 with a +3 mace of Flames, a +3 shield of reflecting, and a +3 elven chainmail that was forged in the fire of a red dragon... is quite awesome when the party finds out about his/her evilness.
Especially since the rest of the party was still running around with only a few magical weapons and no magical armor items.
I suspect we are getting majorly trolled. We need a flail of ages or a melf's acid arrow here ASAP.
Endless hordes of fun...
http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2012:Losing
Someone made the excellent point earlier in the thread that good and evil are descriptive, not prescriptive labels, to be applied to consequences rather than actions. I think that's a really good way of looking at it. As an anarchist, and someone who believes in the facility of good and the banality of evil, I have a somewhat different interpretation of the alignment chart. I believe everyone wants to do what's right by them; conflict arises because people disagree about what good is.
The people I know whose actions I might if pushed describe as evil are all people who believed in their own good above the good of the group or the community - individualists. The people I know who I describe as good all believe in the primary of the group or community ahead of their own interests. Meanwhile, the people who I think of as lawful are people who believe that the good can best be achieved by following historic rules, laws, prescriptions, customs or moors. The chaotics are, like me, people who believe that the greatest good is best achieved by flouting those conventions, and that it is the creation of social institutions that allows for the greatest evil to occur.
With that in mind, I believe the D&D Alignment Chart in full should read as a spectrum between Anarchics and the Lawful on the one axis and Individualists vs. Communalists on the other. I think that captures more fully what I know about the world I live in.
Now, what's really interesting for me is that I can RP a character using that alignment chart very easily in a game like Planescape. Just look for the option that benefits me first and others second while allowing me to not upset others by going against the laws they live by, if playing Lawful Evil. Likewise Chaotic Good: the action that benefits my companions first, or expresses solidarity with them for actions previously committed, while accepting it is the laws of others which also has caused suffering.
But if you follow that alignment chart, I found it was very difficult to RP BG and BGII. As a Lawful Evil character, I was hardly going to go around randomly killing people, unless those people were marked in some way or it was not against the law to do so. As a Chaotic Good character, I found myself siding with the Law of the land far too often for my character's internal moral compass.
BG and BGII cater well for Chaotic Evil and Lawful Good characters but not so well for characters RPing other alignments.
And I think BG and BGII are poorer games for it.
I posted this link on the Lawful Good thread, but I think you will enjoy it. easydamus wrote a thorough discussion of "real" alignment making very similar arguments to you. "Evil" is more about personal achievement and personal fulfillment while "good" is more about doing right by others, as you said.
http://www.easydamus.com/alignmentreal.html
I find this to be very helpful with role-playing. The primary thing to consider, as you also stated, no one really considers themselves to be "evil", and very few people are truly without morals of any kind.
When you take "good" and "evil" out of the equation and look at a more realistic spectrum of benevolence and universalism vs. achievement and hedonism, it's easier to see yourself making consistent choices. I'm not "evil", I'm "ambitious", for example.
Try these on for size:
Righteous (Lawful Good) - Conformity/Tradition and Benevolence
Humane (Neutral Good) - Benevolence and Universalism
Transcendent (Chaotic Good) - Universalism and Self-Direction
Autonomous (Chaotic Neutral) - Self-Direction and Stimulation
Sybaritic (Chaotic Evil) - Hedonism
Ambitious (Neutral Evil) - Achievement and Power
Ascendent (Lawful Evil) - Power and Security
Orthodox (Lawful Neutral) - Security and Conformity/Tradition
Pragmatic (True Neutral) - (any values)
I RP it as neutral evil, a charname who cares about him or herself above all else. I can still do "good" quests and be nice to NPCs. Or I can be a jerk if I feel like it. I'm never shy about asking for a reward. I'll swap out NPCs without much agonizing over their feelings. I'm the boss, it's my party, and we're doing it my way.
In other words I don't play evil as "mean" or "cruel", I'm mostly just a sociopath.
@Time4Tiddy, that's a great chart. It pretty closely matches my own views of the alignment system.
Also, [quote]"Evil" is more about personal achievement and personal fulfillment while "good" is more about doing right by others, as you said. [/quote]
.. is a much more succinct way of putting it!
I think a flashy blade would fit such a personality well. Or a swashbuckler.
Personally I like the idea of an evil assassin, but with Hexxat that's kinda moot. The issue with a evil lord (while I like it and any of the fighter kits make a lot of sense here), is that you already have Korgan, Dorn and Spoiler for evil fighters.
I'm considering dropping Kagain atm in BGEE for Baeloth. Just not sure =/ I know he'd help a lot with the fights I'd have left. Honestly I'd rather get rid of shar-teel but then I have no way of getting rid of traps.