Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Shas'O 08-04-07, 10:40 PM	In a game I am playing in, I am playing a character who can be best described as a paladin (this isn't DnD, it is rather iron heroes, a d20 game by monte cooke.). He is strong, smart, charismatic, and good to the core. He would rather bluff or talk his out of a fight. He is also very loyal to his friends, and is usually the one to heal them and make sure they are alright after a fight. there is a certain character, however. A mage. She is abrasive, somewhat apathetic, and talks down to those around her. She does not like any of the characters, and insulted someone my character cares for (An assassin from his church that was going to kill him, but relented and joined 'sides' with him.). And later insulted him. He sort of flew off the handle at her, not because she insulted him (He could care less about that.) but moreso because she acts superior then the rest of the group, and insulted the previously mentioned assassin. The other characters in the group agree she's a... royal pain in the rear, more or less. Anyway, I was wondering HOW to deal with her, in character. He isn't going to fight her, or even lay a hand on her (Even if she attacks first, if it comes down to that.). But I do want her to know the rest of the group does NOT care for her shenanigans, and his tolerance, patience, and whatnot can only go so far. The rest of the group has told her as much, but her character has blown them off. Anyway, she is a GREAT player, and I don't hate her, neither to any of the other characters. Her character however is a total ice queen and does NOT get along with the group, no matter what. What should I do?
Lormador 08-04-07, 11:04 PM	Sigh. Someone always has to go and roleplay a horrible Charisma, and possibly a low Wisdom properly. Take a close look at that mage and decide whether or not she is a good person. What do her deeds say about her character? Does she act nobly and bravely, but has a difficult time relating to others? She talks down to those around her, as though they were of, ahem, lesser intelligence than she it. She may not understand or recognize the importance of the feelings of the others, or she may regret being so impulsive with her speech and saying things she doesn't really mean. As a paladin, I feel your duty is twofold. First, you must attempt to help this individual lead a more harmonious life with others. Do this by encouraging her to be nice and by being nice to her. You should be wise enough to know that only friendship is the end of enmity, not confrontation. Do not justify the exasperation, but promote peace. Second, you must help the others understand that some people just aren't going to please them personally but those individuals can still make important contributions. Apologize for the mage at every turn and try to keep others from antagonizing her. I'm sure she is well aware that the rest of the group is fed up with her. And I understand you're a human first, a paladin second, and human patience and tolerance only goes so far. You will falter on the path of righteousness, but you have taken an oath to continue to try to the best of your ability to live up to those ideals. If you decide that you no longer need to show compassion, tolerance, and humility, you will wind up with fighter levels.
Stormbrand 08-04-07, 11:14 PM	Apologize for the mage at every turn and try to keep others from antagonizing her. Do it in front of the mage as well. Eventually she will be equally sick of you apologising for her poor manners. IC, suggest, ditching the mage IC. Perhaps it would be nice to OOC warn the player beforehand, so there are no hard feelings when it arises. Literally say to the mage, "Your choices are either treat us with respect or be replaced." Go through with it.
Shas'O 08-04-07, 11:20 PM	Sigh. Someone always has to go and roleplay a horrible Charisma, and possibly a low Wisdom properly. Take a close look at that mage and decide whether or not she is a good person. What do her deeds say about her character? Does she act nobly and bravely, but has a difficult time relating to others? She talks down to those around her, as though they were of, ahem, lesser intelligence than she it. She may not understand or recognize the importance of the feelings of the others, or she may regret being so impulsive with her speech and saying things she doesn't really mean. She is a good person, she does not want to kill unnecessary or harm innocent people (Though whenever someone suggests a plan for something, she almost always shuts it down, as it 'Kills wantonly' or the likes, even when the only people being killed are the really evil 'beastmen' who want to invade our homelands and sorta KILL everyone.). She'll also agitate things, insult people behind their backs, and will take the initiative in making enemies. I think she is pretty spiteful, and realizes it. As a paladin, I feel your duty is twofold. Paladinesque, not a true paladin. There are no paladins in the game, i'm just doing my best to act like one. First, you must attempt to help this individual lead a more harmonious life with others. Do this by encouraging her to be nice and by being nice to her. You should be wise enough to know that only friendship is the end of enmity, not confrontation. Do not justify the exasperation, but promote peace. I've tried that quite a bit. Most of the time it ends with my character wanting to hit her in the face, repeatedly. But he usually walks away, vents off, and tries to calm down. It is fairly hard to act 'nice' to her, because she will shoot someone down, act petty, and be a total ice queen to them. Second, you must help the others understand that some people just aren't going to please them personally but those individuals can still make important contributions. Apologize for the mage at every turn and try to keep others from antagonizing her. I'm currently trying that, as are the others... but it isn't helping much. I'm sure she is well aware that the rest of the group is fed up with her. And I understand you're a human first, a paladin second, and human patience and tolerance only goes so far. Yup, doing my best to keep my characters cool, but it is fairly hard. You will falter on the path of righteousness, but you have taken an oath to continue to try to the best of your ability to live up to those ideals. If you decide that you no longer need to show compassion, tolerance, and humility, you will wind up with fighter levels. He has taken an oath, but as I said before, he isn't actually a paladin. I'm just acting the part -really- strongly. He can kill people who don't need killing (Though he wouldn't under almost any condition, and the reprecussions would be -BAD- even without losing paladin abilities and all.). I'm just trying to figure out what to do without having my character lose it and knock her out with a fist to the face. Do it in front of the mage as well. Eventually she will be equally sick of you apologising for her poor manners. IC, suggest, ditching the mage IC. Perhaps it would be nice to OOC warn the player beforehand, so there are no hard feelings when it arises. Literally say to the mage, "Your choices are either treat us with respect or be replaced." Go through with it. All good ideas, I think i'll go through with them. He would definately go with 'If you don't treat us as equals, we are dumping you. Your Dress or not." (She really does like the dress she wears.)
Rerecros 08-04-07, 11:24 PM	The mage is just caustic (nothing to do with ability scores or alignment), is that a crime? If you are the paladin type your just going to have to take the abuse as long as he fights on your side. However you said you are also they silver tounged type, and the mage is the egocentric type, that leaves him open to be easily manipulated or made to look the fool.
Optimized_Commoner 08-04-07, 11:28 PM	"Excuse me mage. I'm sorry, but our group has decided that we no longer wish to travel with you based on our incompatible personalities. Thankyou for your assistance so far and we will make sure you get the appropriate share for your labours already performed on this quest." "Hello... New Cormyran times? I'd like to post an ad for a new adventurer to join a succesful outgoing group. Applicants can apply at the crown and thistle inn."
Lormador 08-04-07, 11:40 PM	Well, normally as a paladin or paladin-like character you're obligated to attempt to deal with the situation in as lawful and good a manner as possible, and that means tolerance, apologies, etc. If however you have determined that this is not productive anymore, and I assure you that it is, you have to ask the question of whether or not you can maintain this sort of behavior without too much risk to your own virtue! Believing that the bad behavior of this character, despite repeated warnings, has not improved and no attempt has been made to improve it, it may be in the best interest of the remaining members of the party to part ways. Or, pitch in and buy her a nice Cloak of Charisma. That should smooth her out a little.
calronmoonflower 08-04-07, 11:43 PM	I don't really believe that her character is good. More like neutral as in a duergar is neutral. 1. Talk to her out of character. 2. If that doesn't work dump her character in a polite manner.
Lormador 08-04-07, 11:56 PM	She could certainly be good. Think of a "bad cop" type of character, who doesn't get along with anyone, isn't cool, manages to insult his boss, his partners, and the citizenry. Yet this person has devoted his life to helping others in their time of great need, willingly becoming unpopular so as to accomplish his noble end. All people have flaws, and it sounds like the mage has a few as well. Her alignment must be judged on the basis of her deeds and her intentions, and not on the basis of how pleasant her interactions are or how nice her words are to hear. That's the problem. I tell you, don't kick her out of the party, just get her a Cloak of Charisma!
Enlightened1 08-05-07, 12:00 AM	Subdual damage comes to mind...jk!
Stormbrand 08-05-07, 12:27 AM	The mage is just caustic (nothing to do with ability scores or alignment), is that a crime? If you are the paladin type your just going to have to take the abuse as long as he fights on your side. However you said you are also they silver tounged type, and the mage is the egocentric type, that leaves him open to be easily manipulated or made to look the fool. I see no reason why the character is obligated to take abuse from anyone, or to tolerate abuse being given to others. She does not have to commit an outright crime for a paladin to prefer working with someone else.
calronmoonflower 08-05-07, 02:31 AM	She could certainly be good. All people have flaws, and it sounds like the mage has a few as well. Her alignment must be judged on the basis of her deeds and her intentions, and not on the basis of how pleasant her interactions are or how nice her words are to hear. She'll also agitate things, insult people behind their backs, and will take the initiative in making enemies. I think she is pretty spiteful, and realizes it. If i wasn't for this I would agree. Making things worse and making enemies for what sounds like no good reason isn't really good. However, her other actions would also play a part. I guess she could be good, but that description sounds like a duergar to me.
Kuroimaken 08-05-07, 04:26 AM	From what you described, it seems like she might need a bit of a lesson. But given your character's paladinesque ways, you are definitely not the most suited person to give it to her. I find that many characters who talk down to others can be taken down a few pegs by being effectively bested. So, the mage is insulting your intelligence? Propose an intelligence contest. She's saying you're ugly? Ask the local wizard to cast Polymorph on her and make her a swamp hag. But again, like I said, your character is a VERY unlikely choice to be the one who corrects her, because he can't do anything outside the realm of niceness and will not attack her. Conversely, there could be a reason why she acts in this particular way. If you could discover this reason, by whatever methods, it's likely she might tone things down a tad. It makes for great roleplaying moments if, for instance, you discover she keeps everyone at arm's length with her attitude because she was betrayed in the past. I suspect it's more likely the latter than the former, given your vouch for the player. Give it a try.
Optimized_Commoner 08-05-07, 09:21 AM	Well, normally as a paladin or paladin-like character you're obligated to attempt to deal with the situation in as lawful and good a manner as possible, and that means tolerance, apologies, etc. Lawful Good isn't spelled Welcome Mat.
SirTodd 08-05-07, 09:31 AM	I have a friend who used to play just like that. Wonderful guy in real life, but always liked to play the most arrogant and rude person imaginable. In my case I simply commented on the abrasive behavior in game. And I left it at that. No punishments just ignore it and refuse to be baited by the behavior. As soon as he realized his behavior was largely being ignored, he decided to change the way he played his characters. This didn't happen over night but he eventually got the point. Remember sometimes taking punitive action on something as harmless as words does more harm than good. Usually people use roles like this to bait a reaction from people. When it stops upsetting people they get bored and try something new. Now that I am older I have learned a new method to encourage people not to play like this. I call it a teamwork XP bonus. If your rude or uncooperative you simply lose the bonus XP. My use of RP awards and reduction of combat awards, has encouraged some interesting personalities. None of which are a problem in any way to their fellow team mates.
Bloodbat 08-05-07, 09:46 AM	The best plan is to talk to her out of game and ask her to explain her motivation for playing an abrasive character. If you understand, in real life, why her character is a jerk, then it will not grate on you so much. Of course, that statement assumes she is playing one for a reason other than to get the rest of you to react. Once you know, then the two of you can role play some interactions that either play up the differences or bring her character into being more polite.
PeteRR 08-05-07, 01:17 PM	Go Ned Flanders on her and be insanely nice to her all the time. Compliments, small gifts, hugs. It's way more fun than trying to force her to change or force her to leave the group. She'll either go postal or treat the party better.
Lormador 08-05-07, 11:26 PM	Lawful Good isn't spelled Welcome Mat. That is exactly my point. Now apply it the other way and you will understand.
Majick 08-06-07, 12:35 AM	Go Ned Flanders on her and be insanely nice to her all the time. Compliments, small gifts, hugs. It's way more fun than trying to force her to change or force her to leave the group. She'll either go postal or treat the party better. Best. idea. ever. :D
Lormador 08-06-07, 11:35 AM	And what gift could be more perfect than a Cloak of Charisma? She's just roleplaying a Charisma of 6. Get it up a little and your problems will melt away.
High Octane 08-06-07, 06:26 PM	Go Ned Flanders on her and be insanely nice to her all the time. Compliments, small gifts, hugs. It's way more fun than trying to force her to change or force her to leave the group. She'll either go postal or treat the party better. "Hidilly-ho there magearino!" "DISINTEGRATE!" *shoots a green beam at paladin* "Well-ell, good thing the good Lord Heironeous blessed me with a great fortitude save and one ding dong diddly of a hit point pool! Now lets all join hands and thank him with a good *winks* aaaaand lawful hymn!" "DISINTEGRATE!" *shoots a green beat at own head and willingly fails fortitude save*
Optimized_Commoner 08-06-07, 09:01 PM	That is exactly my point. Now apply it the other way and you will understand. Sorry, huh? You've lost me.
nightside_samurai 08-07-07, 01:04 AM	Sorry, huh? You've lost me. .taM emocleW delleps t'nsi dooG lufwaL Duh :tongue:
High Octane 08-07-07, 09:32 AM	.taM emocleW delleps t'nsi dooG lufwaL A magic spell?
Lormador 08-07-07, 09:49 AM	Must I explain everything? Sheesh. No, Lawful Good doesn't spell Welcome Mat. You don't have to be a welcome mat to play lawful good, in fact, intolerance is one of the famous traps in the alignment. As a lawful good character, you can be intolerant of the beliefs of others, as long as your deeds remain sterling. You can look down on others, be mean and rude, and still be both lawful and good in the highest degree, just without being friendly. People have made this argument to justify heavy-handed tactics against the mage, such as removing her from the group, or even 'teaching her a lesson' and attacking her in some way. My point was, the same thing applies to the mage. Her alignment doesn't spell Welcome Mat either. She doesn't need to be tolerant, can look down at others, insult their intelligence, and what have you, all the while remaining good. We'll leave out the lawful part for the moment as it's not relevant. But by giving in to your base urges to return her attitude in kind, you only lower yourself and do not make the situation better for anyone. In this case the danger for you is to give in to your pride, take the moral high ground, and lord it over the mage not seeing that you become a hypocrite in the process. The Ned Flanders approach would be more effective, and I've done nothing but encourage its use since it appeared on the scene. In fact I proposed it, in a more subtle and serious form.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 08-07-07, 10:01 AM	She should be allowed to play the PC she wants. A little conflict between PCs is a good thing IMO. My overriding rule is the PCs don't need to love each other, they don't even need to like each other, but they must find a way to work together. Every player should bear these words of wisdom in mind: "…however little we may like or trust each other, we're on the same crew. Got the same troubles, same enemies and more than enough of both. Now we could circle each other and growl, both sleep with one eye open but that thought wearies me. I don't care what you've done. I don't know what you're planning on doing, but I'm trusting you. I think you should do the same, cause I don't see this working any other way."
Optimized_Commoner 08-07-07, 11:09 AM	Must I explain everything? Sheesh. Apparently. No, Lawful Good doesn't spell Welcome Mat. Ah, the warm glow of being right. Almost makes up for the sheesh. Almost. Moving along. My point was, the same thing applies to the mage. Her alignment doesn't spell Welcome Mat either. So far as I'm aware none of the nine do. She doesn't need to be tolerant, can look down at others, insult their intelligence, and what have you, all the while remaining good. We'll leave out the lawful part for the moment as it's not relevant. But by giving in to your base urges to return her attitude in kind, you only lower yourself and do not make the situation better for anyone. In this case the danger for you is to give in to your pride, take the moral high ground, and lord it over the mage not seeing that you become a hypocrite in the process. So insulting people is good and insulting people is bad... wow, I thought I was confused before. I also fail to see how anything I said was insulting and reciprocal. Merely a demand for correct due process in the groups working. Both lawful and good. The Ned Flanders approach would be more effective, and I've done nothing but encourage its use since it appeared on the scene. In fact I proposed it, in a more subtle and serious form. Effective... effective... no, so far as I'm aware direct honesty, open communication and a demand for good group dynamics is the most effective policy. Certainly more effective than some cowardly passive-agressive attempt at emotional blackmail. Remember, a happy paladin is an effective paladin. Edit: Hmmm, amusingly enough (since it's so on topic) I think that sheesh got to me.
Lormador 08-07-07, 12:07 PM	Jeez! Let's look at what you call a "cowardly passive-aggressive attempt at emotional blackmail" and your proposition, several posts above, which was for the mage to either leave the party or change her behavior. What I've encouraged is an effort to improve the attitude of the mage, by helping her notice the effect her words have on others. An important part of this is stopping others from angry confrontations with her, which would lead to a spiral of angry confrontations. This would teach both parties a little self-control even if it would require that the paladin character forget about his pride. Now, your solution would be to simply and politely ask the mage to improve her behavior, and if she did not, to remove her from the party. This would be a fine answer to the problem in some circumstances, namely if there was a readily available pool of trustworthy adventurers whose basic goodness could be assured. There is also the out of character possibility of losing a player. Also there is the possibility that the mage would try to improve her behavior, but would be unable to. Habits, after all, are hard to change, and you'd be left with the same problem as before a few games down the road. Eventually you'd be forced to eject the mage. This answer has a lot of conditions and basically constitutes running away from the problem. My answer has few conditions and basically constitutes dealing with the problem. You're free to prefer yours, it has a lot going for it.
PeteRR 08-07-07, 10:06 PM	Certainly more effective than some cowardly passive-agressive attempt at emotional blackmail. Cowardly? Being kind and generous and happy to a fault is what a Paladin is supposed to project to everyone except to his enemies. What's more likely to change behavior, a stern lecture by someone who isn't your Dad or friendly interaction by a fellow party member? Remember Pal, when you're pointing a finger at someone, you're also pointing 4 fingers back at yourself.* *I know, I know it's cliche, but in this case it's also true.
navar100 08-08-07, 12:03 AM	You can't "deal" with her. She's one of "those" players, those who think only of themselves without caring about anyone else. She'll make excuses "but that's how my character would behave". That is not an acceptable answer. The player is just an a**hole. Shun her. Don't talk to her. Don't respond to her. Do nothing. When it comes down to it in life or death situations I suppose it would be in character to aid her so she's not killed, but outside of combat, ignore her. If the character/player asks why you are behaving as such, tell her why and to change her ways. More than likely, she will instead try to kill your character. Then you can strike and kill her. The problem is she will try to strike when you are most vulnerable, such as being asleep. If you feel this agitation is going to reach this point, tell the DM to have her cut it out. I've had enough of these type of players. I can be playing a a Vow Of Povery Vow Of Peace character, and I will behave the same. (Though I wouldn't kill her. :P ) I've long since learned there's no dealing with these people.
SirTodd 08-08-07, 12:51 AM	Yes, as I said earlier: Ignore her. If she gets along with everyone outside the game as seems to be the case, then it's likely she is just fishing for a reaction. This is especially powerful if you can get the whole group to ignore her. She will feel like a complete a** as the rest of the players just stare at her and go back to doing what they were doing every time she insults someone.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 08-09-07, 12:52 PM	Being kind and generous and happy to a fault is what a Paladin is supposed to project to everyone except to his enemies. Rubbish. One does not have to be happy, or even nice, to be either Good or a Paladin.
High Octane 08-09-07, 01:48 PM	Rubbish. One does not have to be happy, or even nice, to be either Good or a Paladin. Lawful Good. It doesn't mean "Lawful Nice."
Lormador 08-09-07, 10:01 PM	Actually, it kind of does mean that. Consider that violence is not always physical but can be emotional or verbal in nature. The point of being lawful good is trying to help others and having a firm belief that laws are the best and most judicious way to do so. I humbly submit that there isn't anything wrong with being nice. Follow my line of reasoning, and tell me what isn't lawful and good about it. 1. The suffering of sentient beings is an evil. 2. Violence increases the suffering of sentient beings. 3. Violence is therefore an evil. 4. Beings will suffer the least if they are good and lawful. 5. Being good and lawful therefore decreases suffering. 6. Being good and lawful is therefore incompatible with violence as such, however, the principle of the greater good applies. The suffering of one is to be preferred to the suffering of many. 7. Violence has physical, emotional, and verbal forms. 8. Verbal abuse is therefore incompatible with a lawful and good alignment. Paladins are thereby obligated to be as nice as possible, because being nice is the opposite of verbal abuse. Come on guys, this is easy stuff. If you can't handle being a paladin, there is always the fighter class.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 08-10-07, 12:51 PM	Actually, it kind of does mean that. Actually, it precisely does not mean that. Paladins are thereby obligated to be as nice as possible Nonsense. Politeness is not a digital state. There is a lot of space between "nice as possible" and "verbally abusive," and that space is called "normalcy."
Stormbrand 08-10-07, 01:10 PM	Actually, it kind of does mean that. Consider that violence is not always physical but can be emotional or verbal in nature. The point of being lawful good is trying to help others and having a firm belief that laws are the best and most judicious way to do so. I humbly submit that there isn't anything wrong with being nice. Follow my line of reasoning, and tell me what isn't lawful and good about it. 1. The suffering of sentient beings is an evil. 2. Violence increases the suffering of sentient beings. 3. Violence is therefore an evil. 4. Beings will suffer the least if they are good and lawful. 5. Being good and lawful therefore decreases suffering. 6. Being good and lawful is therefore incompatible with violence as such, however, the principle of the greater good applies. The suffering of one is to be preferred to the suffering of many. 7. Violence has physical, emotional, and verbal forms. 8. Verbal abuse is therefore incompatible with a lawful and good alignment. Paladins are thereby obligated to be as nice as possible, because being nice is the opposite of verbal abuse. Come on guys, this is easy stuff. If you can't handle being a paladin, there is always the fighter class. Verbal abuse is EXACTLY what the mage is doing. Thus you are contradicting yourself here. Must I explain everything? Sheesh. No, Lawful Good doesn't spell Welcome Mat. You don't have to be a welcome mat to play lawful good, in fact, intolerance is one of the famous traps in the alignment. As a lawful good character, you can be intolerant of the beliefs of others, as long as your deeds remain sterling. You can look down on others, be mean and rude, and still be both lawful and good in the highest degree, just without being friendly. ... My point was, the same thing applies to the mage. Her alignment doesn't spell Welcome Mat either. She doesn't need to be tolerant, can look down at others, insult their intelligence, and what have you, all the while remaining good. We'll leave out the lawful part for the moment as it's not relevant. So why is one character obligated to be friendly as part of Lawful Good, but the mage isn't?
Roxlimn 08-10-07, 01:29 PM	Lormandor: 1. The suffering of sentient beings is an evil. 2. Violence increases the suffering of sentient beings. 3. Violence is therefore an evil. 4. Beings will suffer the least if they are good and lawful. 5. Being good and lawful therefore decreases suffering. 6. Being good and lawful is therefore incompatible with violence as such, however, the principle of the greater good applies. The suffering of one is to be preferred to the suffering of many. 7. Violence has physical, emotional, and verbal forms. 8. Verbal abuse is therefore incompatible with a lawful and good alignment. 1. Evil is D&D is defined as the debasement or destruction of others. We can be more precise, but generally speaking, that's it. The suffering of sentients can be cleansing, uplifting, or even heroic, clearly an exception. Therefore, it's only related to Evil in the instances that's mentioned - when one sentient does it to another. 2. Violence doesn't always increase the suffering of sentients. Athletes, in particular, experience pain from their activities, but you'll be hard pressed to find a one that would say that they're suffering. Rather, they'd suffer if they weren't able to pursue their passion. No pain, no gain, right? 4. I don't understand why Lawful and Good beings suffer the least. Is it because suffering is Evil? 6. "Greater good" refers to the philosophy of Utilitarianism, a philosophy that's been used to justify fatal human experimentation involving years upon years of excruciating pain and suffering. I would think about that before using it in a morality argument. Those are the main points that are problematic.
Lormador 08-11-07, 12:14 AM	To the first point, one might respond that although suffering might be accompanied by certain effects that one might deem positive, it is not qua suffering that they are positive. The actual suffering is not what is sought after but what is rightfully avoided, because suffering qua suffering is an evil. To the second, one must distinguish exercise, which is a pleasure, from suffering! Insofar as an athlete does experience suffering, that athlete seeks to avoid suffering because the sport is not suffering, it is soccer or golf. Suffering is incidental to the effect, just as with the first point. Lawful and good beings suffer the least not insofar as they are the subjects of less violence, although this will be the case among the like-minded, but because the lawful goodness that is in them causes them to behave in the right way toward others, which is a source of satisfaction. This satisfaction justifies their suffering and thereby lessens it. Finally every dogma except radical non-violence has been used to justify abhorrent actions on this planet. I brought forth the utilitarian argument because, after all, this is a fantasy roleplaying game we're talking about here and with measurable levels of goodness utilitarianism becomes far more viable. You ought to be careful when applying arguments from reality back and forth willy-nilly without taking this into account. If the goodness of a deed or a being can be measured then it is perfectly justifiable to sacrifice a lesser good to promote a greater one if the difference subtracted is still positive. Whereas in the real world the question of what constitutes 'greater' is always a matter of perspective and confusion.
Roxlimn 08-13-07, 07:23 AM	Lormador: 1. I don't see any indication in D&D that suffering in itself is Evil. In fact, it's a Good's creatures willingness to undergo necessary suffering for the good of others is part of what defines D&D's moral compass. 2. You must not be an athlete. Athletes meet suffering head on, as a necessary consequence of the things they like to do. For many sports, this is a constant companion. Mountaineers, survivalists, cyclists, and weightlifters alike often gain as much satisfaction from overcoming the related suffering as they do from the activity itself. 3. Huh? That makes no sense whatsoever. If anything, an equal dedication to an Evil cause will alleviate as much suffering as dedication to a Good cause. It is the satisfaction of meeting the dedication that does it, not the cause in itself. 4. Great. The next time my Lawful Good Priest needs to stop a war or alleviate a mass famine, he'll be well justified in ritually sacrificing a person or two to do it.
High Octane 08-13-07, 01:12 PM	The problem people seem to have with D&D is not being able to distinguish between evil and "Evil". The first is the real world debated concept that has been the target of philosophers and writers since we could first form written words. The second is only found in fiction. The second is found in He-Man and Transformers. I mean seriously, what makes He Man better than Skeletor? They are both violent psychos who beat the hell out of each other and wage war on "principle". But Skeletor is a skull faced guy who lives in a cave and He Man is a blond haired blue eyed guy who lives in a castle. That makes He Man "Good" and Skeletor "Evil"
Roxlimn 08-13-07, 01:15 PM	It depends on which He Man you're talking about. The first version of He Man was actually rather gentle, though you could level the same charge at Skeletor, strangely enough.