|
Captain Oblivious posted:I'll ask again, if a Neutral Evil character can go his entire career acting Lawful Evil because it's convenient, what is the point of classification? The point of classification is classifying his internal philosophy, not the vagaries of circumstance. If I am bisexual but spend my whole life dating men because they are the only available option, that does not make me a homosexual.
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
I wonder if we could get alignment discussion to be a probatable offense?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:10
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure DnD morality only cares about actions. Besides, you can get all philosophical and ask if an internal philosophy that never matches up with external actions is ever really a philosophy in the first place, or just a lie to oneself. This makes me think of a new character to roleplay - a neutral evil character who lives his entire life convincing himself that he's chaotic good and being unjustly persecuted for his acts. He's not REALLY evil, he just ACTS evil. On the inside, though, he's good. Chaotic good. He's just tragically misunderstood is all. I think I'll make him a lich.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:18
|
|
|
Vorgen posted:I'm pretty sure DnD morality only cares about actions. You would be wrong. Certain Races (like demons and devils) are always certain alignments. You could be the kindest sweetest Succubus in the world and never harm a person and open a home for orphans etc.. And you would be Chaotic Evil. Alignment is phenomenally stupid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:23
|
|
|
I think trying to play a kind, sweet succubus would be more stupid than a 9 box alignment system. It's getting into sparkly vampire territory.
Vorgen fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Nov 22, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:26
|
|
|
Red_Mage posted:You would be wrong. Certain Races (like demons and devils) are always certain alignments. You could be the kindest sweetest Succubus in the world and never harm a person and open a home for orphans etc.. Wasn't Fall-From-Grace Lawful Neutral in "Planescape: Torment"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:37
|
|
|
prefect posted:Wasn't Fall-From-Grace Lawful Neutral in "Planescape: Torment"? Yes and it was made by Obsidian, who are not known for adhering to the source materials intentions when they find them to be lacking. See: KOTOR 2 True Evil Bob posted:Then he's Lawful Evil. If those Lawful Evil actions are still ultimately self serving and prove to be the best means of getting ahead, why? Isn't that what being Neutral Evil is all about? The point is that the means advocated by Lawful Evil are just as often the most convenient for Neutral Evil's goals as not. They partially encompass one another.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:39
|
|
|
FredMSloniker posted:I wonder if we could get alignment discussion to be a probatable offense? Ah, Lawful Evil poster spotted! You wish that so it would tempt the Chaotic Evil among us to discuss it even more, while the Neutral Evil posters would do so in other terms (eg. 'do you think that Tarquin is a morally corrupt bureaucrat, or is he more of a Laissez-Faire type?).
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:40
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:The point of classification is classifying his internal philosophy, not the vagaries of circumstance. If I am bisexual but spend my whole life dating men because they are the only available option, that does not make me a homosexual. Sexuality and personality/philosophy aren't comparable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:41
|
|
|
Remember that D&D is based on fantasy fiction where good creatures are shining paragons and evil creatures are unredeemable. "All succubi are evil" means they're universally horrible slavering lying no-good monsters that want to gently caress you and kill you, in whichever order suits them, and good characters can destroy them without any of that pesky "feeling bad about slaughtering intelligent beings" problem. There are no sweet kind succubi because that's not the cliche. If you want nuance that goes beyond Lord of the Rings style "Wizard kills ten thousand intelligent orcs and remains a hero," drop the alignment system completely. Make your orcs sensitive beings that just want to be loved, and the sorcerer up in the White Tower is the only father figure they've ever known, but he himself is suffering emotional trauma from back when Illuvatar forced him to take endless boring Choir classes when MAYBE WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO DO WAS PLAY TRUMPET, DID YOU EVER THINK OF THAT, gently caress YOU DAD.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:47
|
|
|
The reason alignment debates get out of control is that people try to apply DnD alignment to real life and say that its an inaccurate map of all possible moralities. Which is true. There are more wonders in heaven and earth than are present in Dungeons and Dragons. However, within the context of the DnD world the alignment system is very well-defined and should be pretty easy to understand and use. In DnD, the Planes, the Gods, and the afterlife do not care about your secret, true, inner alignment. Your alignment is a property attached to you, like your mass or specific heat, and it is measurable and definable. Gods will look at your soul, check your tags, and treat you accordingly. So will tons of other people. Also your actions will be constrained by your morality as well. That's why you can't be a nice, sweet, chaotic evil demoness. Because demonesses are chaotic evil, and that fact informs their actions. There are no secret desires or alternative career paths open for succubi, they're just chaotic evil demons. That's it. And because its a game of cooperative pretend, ultimately these rules are only enforced by the desires of the other people you're playing with. But you are also slightly influenced by the opinions of other people who care, because you want to be able to talk to them about it online. And also the company who made the games themselves are also able to chime in, because they make the material that you draw it from. So the DnD alignment system is basically, at its very strongest, a polite convention. Which means that playing tragically misunderstood, secretly-good succubi is rude! Vorgen fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Nov 22, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 03:52
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:If the actions and methods pursued by one alignment can and often are identical to one another regardless of what they internally tell themselves, what exactly is gained by classification? Tarquin's plot (Create several puppet states among his allies and manipulate them with the intention of unification for a higher purpose) could just as easily be the goal of a Chaotic Good ruler. Their objective (Brutal, Stalinist Empire vs Peace in our Time) and their methods (Chaotic good Tarquin would be a little more concerned about collateral damage) would differ but their objective would be the same. Likewise, a NE Tarquin could have the same goals, but he wouldn't bother with a lot of the trappings. Why would a NE Tarquin create a state full of red tape and regulations? Why go through all the trouble of a Bureaucratic smoke screen when you can just tell your guards to off fools? You're paying them the same either way. Why spend so much time worrying about the actual crimes of the belligerent smelly old man? The fighter's usefulness extends to when he tells you to shove your contract, probably before sundown. If he's irritating just tell your mooks to whack the codger tomorrow. It's good to be King. Eifert Posting fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Nov 22, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 04:09
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Sexuality and personality/philosophy aren't comparable. It's a metaphor, man. It is not meant to be a perfect 1 to 1 comparison.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 04:47
|
|
|
The only important difference between Neutral Evil and Law Evil is that one makes for a more interesting character. Also: Dictum 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 05:27
|
|
|
Cuchulain posted:Also: Dictum
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 08:47
|
|
|
Vorgen posted:However, within the context of the DnD world the alignment system is very well-defined and should be pretty easy to understand and use. In DnD, the Planes, the Gods, and the afterlife do not care about your secret, true, inner alignment. Your alignment is a property attached to you, like your mass or specific heat, and it is measurable and definable. Gods will look at your soul, check your tags, and treat you accordingly. So will tons of other people. I haven't played in ages; do they no longer allow alignment changes?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 10:48
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Yes and it was made by Obsidian, who are not known for adhering to the source materials intentions when they find them to be lacking. I would credit Planescape for that more than Black Isle. It certainly had no shortage of pressing the bounds of the alignment system it had, and there are any number of examples of an outsider transcending its inborn alignment in that way in that setting. And speaking of Planescape: in my own games, "good" and "evil" exist as qualities of a person and can be measured, but the things being measured were only named such as propaganda from the celestials eons ago back when they were first discovered. After all, if there's a spell for detecting good, someone had to have decided "good" is the thing being detected. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
FredMSloniker posted:I wonder if we could get alignment discussion to be a probatable offense? It's not going to be probatable (yet) but it's a tired subject so everyone move on from it please.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 14:28
|
|
|
Mirage posted:Remember that D&D is based on fantasy fiction where good creatures are shining paragons and evil creatures are unredeemable. "All succubi are evil" means they're universally horrible slavering lying no-good monsters that want to gently caress you and kill you, in whichever order suits them, and good characters can destroy them without any of that pesky "feeling bad about slaughtering intelligent beings" problem. There are no sweet kind succubi because that's not the cliche.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 14:43
|
|
|
Hey everyone, let's shut up about the alignment system and talk about stuff thats actually relevent to the plot right now! Like this convoluted fan theory that I just pulled out of my rear end. Weather Tarquin is evil or not If the gate is there, then the order and/or Nale will clear out most of the danger and open a path for him. After that it's just a matter of shoving an army up their rear end and the gate now belongs to him. Nale dies, the order probably bites it, and assuming the "mr. Starshine is actually a draketooth" theory is correct, he's gone too. All of his enimies are dead while he gets a source of immense power and a possible bargining chip for when Xykon inevitibly shows up. And if the gate isn't there then everyone just runs around on a wild goose chase for awhile. Nobody can blame him because we wasn't telling any lies at the time; it was just an honest mistake, everyone moves on and Tarquin gets away scot free either way. TL;DR, Tarquin is kind of a dick.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 17:09
|
|
|
The problem with that theory is that the gate is useless on its own. It is not a source of inmense power without the spells of Redcloak and Xykon. The idea that he is helping the Order only so they kill Nale for him is likely though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 19:54
|
|
|
By the way, despite Elan's instinct for blaming Nale for everything, doesn't it seem more likely that Tarquin is the one who killed Penelope? We've already seen how ruthless he is in how he acquires his wives in the first place, added to it the fact that he's been married nine times suggests that maybe when he gets tired of his current wife he gets rid of her and goes looking for a new one. In this case, the fact that Penelope had suddenly gotten interested in finding her lost daughter (Haley? Hair color's right) again made Tarquin decide it was time to cut the cord. Or maybe she demanded more resources for the project than he was willing to give? Either way, Malack is right there. If Tarquin wanted Penelope back its not like he couldn't afford to have her raised from the dead. We should try to remember that despite his Magnificent Bastard status, Tarquin is still a bastard (in the pejorative rather than familial meaning, though maybe the latter too.) He's carved a path of blood and slavery across a whole continent, and we shouldn't forget that, even if he gets some of the best lines.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 20:22
|
|
|
I'll say it here and now: the baby is Haley, Penelope lied about her age to Tarquin (according to the story the kid should only be 15 years old), Tarquin killed her or had her killed or knew she'd bite it and did nothing to stop it because he was tired of it/it would best further his plans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
Wili posted:The problem with that theory is that the gate is useless on its own. It is not a source of inmense power without the spells of Redcloak and Xykon. This may be true, but as I mentioned he's a very manipulative bastard. Remember, this is the only time they've ever bothered to check if he's telling the truth, he's had plenty of opportunites to lie before so he may know more about the gate than he lets on (tying into the Starshine = Draketooth theory that would explain why Tarquin never let Ian excape; he was trying to grill him for more info.) Your right about the gate being useless though, but Tarquin has a lot of power at his disposal so it shouldn't be too hard to find someone who could make it work. And as I mentioned before Xykon's on his way and Tarquin knows it (I think he does at least, Im sure Elan or Haley mentioned once) so he may be planning to use the gate as a simple barginning chip. It certainly wouldn't be out of character for him, letting someone else take the glory while he keeps his power in the sidelines.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 21:25
|
|
|
You know, if Tarquin IS onto the Gates, he has everything he needs except the actual spells. Malack and the "female mage with the Ioun Stones" are certainly powerful enough to cast the spells required. Well, and a Gate. Which is what he'd be needing Elan to help him with. Now I'm half expecting a "Are they away? And you're sure the tracking amulet is hidden in Elan's gear? This had better work, Malack, I'm taking an awful risk here...." scene.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 21:52
|
|
|
Vorgen posted:I think trying to play a kind, sweet succubus would be more stupid than a 9 box alignment system. It's getting into sparkly vampire territory. Insane succubus who thinks she's everyone's mother?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:19
|
|
|
Yall can see the baby's hair, it's not the same color as Haley's
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2011 23:48
|
|
|
RentACop posted:Yall can see the baby's hair, it's not the same color as Haley's A baby's hair color can change by the time they reach adulthood. Granted it usually gets darker instead of lighter, but it's still within the realm of possibility. And it has to be considered possible that Sabine's right. Haley does lie a lot, after all. But having given the matter more thought, the more I've come to agree that the baby isn't Haley, but is some 15 year old girl we'll be meeting shortly. I think if we're looking at hair color, though, note that Orrin Draketooth and Haley have the exact same hair color. Given that Ian's possibly heading to Windy Cavern to hide out, my guess is that Haley's dead mom was a Draketooth, likely one of Girard's kids, making Orrin Haley's cousin, and Penelope's stolen daughter Haley's niece.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 00:49
|
|
|
jng2058 posted:You know, if Tarquin IS onto the Gates, he has everything he needs except the actual spells. Malack and the "female mage with the Ioun Stones" are certainly powerful enough to cast the spells required. Well, and a Gate. Which is what he'd be needing Elan to help him with. Tarquin isn't really that ambitious, though. He already has pretty much everything he wants - a pretty big empire to lord over, thousands of loyal followers, a succession of wives. All he needs now is people to talk about his legend long after his death. The Gates are much too dangerous for their reward. Tarquin wants the world to exist to tremble and fear him, not to just have vast personal powers over a blasted and featureless wasteland.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:10
|
|
|
Then maybe he wants to destroy the gate? That would leave only the one gate left, setting up the final part of the story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
I think we can take Tarquin's motivations and ambitions at face value. Anybody who's maniacal enough to want to mess with the gates wouldn't be able to stomach his "be the top dog underling enterprise solution" plan and suffer through serving idiots like the Empress of Blood. He's a badass warlord living the good life and crushing his enemies until his climactic downfall. It doesn't get any better than that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 05:39
|
|
|
Yeah, Tarquin benefits more than anyone by just keeping the status quo.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 06:15
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Tarquin isn't really that ambitious, though. He already has pretty much everything he wants ... Not true. He wants to be a legend.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 14:59
|
|
|
terminal mehmet posted:Not true. He wants to be a legend. Which he achieves by having his son kill him and tell the thing as an epic story. Tarquin's got a perfect win-win set up barring outside interference. He doesn't seem dumb enough to get blown up by Xykon or mess with world destroying gates or anything. He'll just be ruthless warlord king who has it all until the showdown between him and his son.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 15:28
|
|
|
Cuchulain posted:Which he achieves by having his son kill him and tell the thing as an epic story. There's more than one way to become a legend. I'm sure he is capable of formulating multiple plans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 16:19
|
|
|
I think you all are missing something vital in his character here - he hasn't actually told anyone a lie since we met him, as far as I can understand. Bent the truth, sure, let people infer things that weren't true from his statements, absolutely, but outright lie? I don't think he's done that. So when he outright says that he's cool with helping Elan and co save the world, chances are he really means it and isn't just going to backstab them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:I think you all are missing something vital in his character here - he hasn't actually told anyone a lie since we met him, as far as I can understand. Bent the truth, sure, let people infer things that weren't true from his statements, absolutely, but outright lie? I don't think he's done that. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 20:09
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:I think you all are missing something vital in his character here - he hasn't actually told anyone a lie since we met him, as far as I can understand. Bent the truth, sure, let people infer things that weren't true from his statements, absolutely, but outright lie? I don't think he's done that. So when he outright says that he's cool with helping Elan and co save the world, chances are he really means it and isn't just going to backstab them. Following your train of logic, he's cool with it up until they accomplish that and then all bets are off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:I think you all are missing something vital in his character here - he hasn't actually told anyone a lie since we met him, as far as I can understand. Bent the truth, sure, let people infer things that weren't true from his statements, absolutely, but outright lie? I don't think he's done that. So when he outright says that he's cool with helping Elan and co save the world, chances are he really means it and isn't just going to backstab them. Of course he's fine with letting them save the world he has to live in it until he lets Elan finally finish him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
The Werle posted:He's a badass warlord living the good life and crushing his enemies until his climactic downfall. It doesn't get any better than that. "Without a doubt, many called him a tyrant, but in the end, when it counted, he and his son saved the world."
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 23:04
|
|
