Post/Author/DateTime	Post
nhs_boy 01-26-06, 08:03 PM	I must confess to being amused by the descriptor 'Mature supplements line' for the BoVD / BoED. I know that it's used to designate who should be _reading_ them, but it amuses me that the word 'mature' is even associated with them in any way. I mean, your evil person as depicted in BoVD (nipple-clamp magic item slot and all) is hilariously immature, capering around trying to get people to look at how evil they are... 'LOOK at me! I'm being EEEEEVIL! I'm breaking your taboos! That'll teach you for not giving me a bigger allowance!' :-) Only the iciest of lawful-evil there approaches maturity... As for the BoED, well... Some Exalted character who shies away from using torture or poison to save hundreds of people from suffering and death is acting in a very childlike manner - 'I'm not facing this dilemma which challenges my outlook or its consequences either, so nyah!' Want a 'mature' supplement? Try a 'neutrality' alignment-book. Black&White is as simplistic (and immature) as it gets...
Callae 01-27-06, 04:20 AM	As has been discussed on these boards numerous times, "Mature" does not refer to intellectual maturity, or emotional maturity, in any way. It merely states that people over the age of majority (18) should be purchasing these books. Basically a warning for parents, and not a commentary on the mentality of the reader. ~C
Kyuketsukiouji 01-27-06, 07:00 PM	You know, the more of these "the Books are juvenile" posts I read, the more I wonder if I didn't accidentally buy a different version of them than everyone else, because for the life of me, I can't see where you get that kind of nonsense statement. Sure, there's Nipple Clamps of Exquisite Pain, all ten lines of half-column text, but all I really saw when I read that was an amusing way to make an item slotless. As for saying black and while morality is immature, it's always seemed to me to be a lot more mature than the relative morality we have in our world, where we have people killing buildingfulls and trainfulls of people for the so-called "good of the many". If I had to point at who was the more mature, I'd say the D&D demon who's evil and proud of it is a lot more mature than the Spanish inquisitor who merrily tortures people in the name of God. But I guess the Books reflect the character of their reader more than anything else...
nhs_boy 01-27-06, 07:48 PM	"I guess the Books reflect the character of their reader more than anything else..." In that, I see absolute morality as immature and so see the books as immature whilst you don't and don't, respectively, you'd be right! That's why debates about them can be entertaining, 'cause everyone knows that they're also debating with the outlook of the other person rather than just about marks of ink on paper :-). Ah, I just mistrust any moral system which tells me that I'm not responsible for considering all the aspects and implications of a situation I'm in, that I can just apply some absolute rules and so abdicate personal responsibility for my actions. ...But, I'm sure all this has been said before. Hence the thread title :-).
Kyuketsukiouji 01-27-06, 09:10 PM	"I guess the Books reflect the character of their reader more than anything else..." In that, I see absolute morality as immature and so see the books as immature whilst you don't and don't, respectively, you'd be right! That's why debates about them can be entertaining, 'cause everyone knows that they're also debating with the outlook of the other person rather than just about marks of ink on paper :-). Ah, I just mistrust any moral system which tells me that I'm not responsible for considering all the aspects and implications of a situation I'm in, that I can just apply some absolute rules and so abdicate personal responsibility for my actions. ...But, I'm sure all this has been said before. Hence the thread title :-). Definitely. The Books have been debated, argued, villified and praised ad nauseam. As far as I'm concerned, they're pretty good tools that address issues that should have been addressed two editions of D&D ago.
Cantankerous 01-28-06, 01:48 AM	As far as I'm concerned, they're pretty good tools that address issues that should have been addressed two editions of D&D ago. Seconded, with some reservations personally about the BoED, but all in all, sure. Let's keep one thing in mind though before villifying the "matruity" of a black and white morality... this is a game. Alignment in this game has a "crunchy" rules connotation. Therefore the rules concerning have to be as clear as possible given the subject matter (which is why I have my reservations about the BoED, to me it muddies the subject matter). Too, you have to keep in mind that the "morality" discussed in the game Alignment section is seperate from the morality of the participants, even seperate from "most of" the characters that operate in the system, in the game worlds. This is not the WotC take on morality... this is simply a game mechanic, nothing more, and does not have much of anything to do with the perceived moralities involved...nor is it meant to. The writers are VERY CLEAR on that point. Isshia
nick012000 01-29-06, 12:54 AM	I disagree that moral relativism is any more mature than moral absolutism. Nothing about moral absolutism removes responsability from your actions; it just gives you an absolute framework to measure up against. If anything, it demands responsability.
nhs_boy 01-29-06, 05:36 AM	(Disclaimer: OK, my troll-y issue with the game has been settled. Now, on to the philosophy! :-) ) "Nothing about moral absolutism removes responsability from your actions; it just gives you an absolute framework to measure up against. If anything, it demands responsability." My reason for looking down on absolute morality IRL is that, in relative morality, you still have to make decisions according to what you think is best, but you have to *build* your own framework to measure up against. It's perfectly possible to violate one's own relative morality by one's actions - only people who were pretty amoral to begin with constantly shift their relative morality to encompass whatever they want to do at that moment... Heh, if people believed in an absolute morality, they'd probably end up violating that as well! People who are both moral and relativists have dilemmas about how to best live up to their own standards, but the difference is, those standards are truly their own, and are usually more appropriate to their own life that some absolute set scrawled down somewhere distant.
Lady Maedhros 02-05-06, 02:34 AM	I am a moral absolutist. I firmly believe that there is a GOOD way to behave, that in most situations, there is a RIGHT solution, and that no matter what you may "believe", it is still EVIL with a capital EVIL to go around doing evil things. I believe that for any given abortion, it was either the wrong thing to do or not the wrong thing to do to have had it. I believe that for any given bullet wound, it was either murder or justifiable. I don't believe we neccissarily have any way of knowing, for any given abortion or gunshot, whether it was an evil act or not. That doesn't change whether or not it was, and all we can do as a society and as individuals is to strive for a better way to judge these things, to approach proper attunment with the universe's concrete moral absolutes. I am a moral absolutist. I still believe the BoED and the BoVD are fabulously, hilariously, blatantly immature. And no, not even because of the nipple clamps.
nhs_boy 02-05-06, 07:14 AM	(Mature take on absolutism noted) I'm curious as to how you can you live your life like that, though... Knowing that any your actions may be absolutely right or absolutely wrong but without knowing how to tell, wouldn't that just paralyse you into doing nothing? Ay! Unless that was wrong as well! What does one do?
Neodymium 02-06-06, 04:22 PM	i just figure that label is put on there because there are bare breasts shown.
Kyuketsukiouji 02-06-06, 06:57 PM	I still believe the BoED and the BoVD are fabulously, hilariously, blatantly immature. And no, not even because of the nipple clamps. So, care to actually substantiate that comment? Knowing that any your actions may be absolutely right or absolutely wrong but without knowing how to tell, wouldn't that just paralyse you into doing nothing? Well, that's the difference between our world and D&D reality. Here, you don't know. In D&D, the answer is available one spell away. Call up an outsider, commune with gods...you can get the answers you want to philosophical questions, in D&D.
Joush Mark 02-06-06, 09:35 PM	The books aren't really immautre. Yes, they fail to show why people do evil things, and evil is still shown as a demonized, utterly polerized choice from good. Absolute mortalty is something that often confused people because they assume that all actions must be good or evil in such a context. In truth, most actions have little bareing on good or evil. As for your example of a paladin that refuses to posion or use torture being immature.. That's an assanine statment. Torture is evil and, saveing reduclous fantises, allmost never works in the real world. Poison is not nessarly evil, but rather is a distaistful tool, and refuseing to use it is less immature then holding yourself to a high standard. Most evil people are such because there cermstances made it seem like they had no choice, or becasue it was the easyest path. Devorceing yourself from normal taboos and intentionaly acting in ways counter to soicital expecations makes it easyer for a person to act in ways they know are wrong. By makeing yourself into a monster you fit better into your "I'm evil" head space. The orther common type of evil is when your actions are reenforced by your peer group, createing cermstances where actions that are evil are personaly justfyable because your peer group allows it. This in the real world is the most disturctive, terrble type of evil, as allmost any act can be commited under these cermstances. This is the sort of "evil" that most evil races in dungons and dragons commit, as well. To be good sometimes means to do the right thing and fail rather then doing the wrong thing and suceed. The old "A madman tells you to choose between the bus full of orphans and the bus full of nuns" is resolved by a best effort, no attempt to keep yourself alive attempt to stop him or save bolth. Would it be evil to pick one or the orther? No, you diden't create the siutation, and tryed to minimize the damage.
Cantankerous 02-13-06, 05:21 AM	Kyuketsukiouji, No one ever needs to substaniate a belief. Opinions are opinions. She's fully entitled to find them as balatantly immature as she likes. I don't agree with her either and think that seeing immaturity in a "let's play pretend" game suppliment is like seeing immorality in a prostitute, and then complaining about it while you're with her, but how does anyone substantiate an opinion? Isshia