|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm fine with the idea that certain outsiders (demons/devils) are moral abstractions and therefore totally, irredeemably evil. But for the vast majority of monsters, well... it seems that the concept of Manifest Destiny is built into the alignment system.
Which is why alignment is awesome. Because it's fun to go down the metaphysical rabbit hole, both in-character and out. :)
Morality is subjective, no matter how much we wish that somethings were objectively 'always evil.' My own faith teaches that materialism and greed are Very Bad Things, and yet there are gilded churches and jewelry-wearing leaders and millionaire evangelists and 'prosperity gospels' all about gaining wealth as a reward for faith, which, to the adherents of those particular branches is 'good.' Laws in many countries (including sections of America where it is legal to kill someone who 'appears threatening' or is trespassing) are predicated around the notions that possessions, property, territory and even *comfort* is more 'valuable' than human life, freedom or dignity.
Heck, we live in a country that touts democracy, and you can spend a lifetime never once working in a company that practices any sort of democracy (since workers don't get to vote for their boss), serving in a military that practices democracy (troops don't get to vote for officers) or attending a democratic church (where worshippers get to vote for who is priest). As Americans, we consider democracy, as a system, to be naive and unworkable in the home, in church, in school, at work or at war, since we absolutely fall back on un-democratic heirarchical systems in all aspects of our life, and then sit back on our couches and criticize our elected officials for making such hash of a system of governance that we would never apply to any facet of our own lives, 'cause, like living by the teachings of the long-haired homeless dude in the Bible, it's not terribly convenient or easy...
And that's a halfway decent description of lawful or good behavior. Choosing the path that's neither convenient, nor easy, nor 'practical.' The path that people say is naive or unrealistic, and leave the serious people shaking their heads and telling you to grow up, because 'grow up' to them means 'become disheartened by the unfairness of the world and abandon your principles.'
Is Mengkare choosing an easy route? If he's just incinerating anyone who doesn't immediately meet his standards, instead of finding roles for those who aren't *awesome* (which any moral society should, since there will always be people who aren't born 'perfect'), then he's avoiding the harder choice of designing an enlightened society that makes room for even those who aren't hand-picked elite. If he's not responsible for the purges, and some overzealous underlings are all about the racial purification of the less-perfect, then he's got the right idea, but there are some rotten apples in his paradise...
Ah, but the virtuous man knows that torture is a terrible way of extracting information. People will say anything, often completely false, to make the pain stop.
In a Pathfinder game, a competent torturer works in a zone of truth, which obviates that problem (assuming the person being tortured fails his save).
|
Ah, but the virtuous man knows that torture is a terrible way of extracting information. People will say anything, often completely false, to make the pain stop.In a Pathfinder game, a competent torturer works in a zone of truth, which obviates that problem (assuming the person being tortured fails his save).
That 3rd level party can combine Zone of Truth, Detect Thoughts and CHarm Person to create a pretty foolproof way to find what they know.
As long as our torturers can set the save DC high enough they don't actually need to do any torturing. If they're doing it then they're probably enjoying it or using it as a means of intimidating the populace.
Ah, but the virtuous man knows that torture is a terrible way of extracting information. People will say anything, often completely false, to make the pain stop.In a Pathfinder game, a competent torturer works in a zone of truth, which obviates that problem (assuming the person being tortured fails his save).
Which combines torture with mind-rape, and makes it worse IMO.
But my general ruling is that torture, for any reason, is metaphysically evil, and my games tend to run on the paradigm that whether or not you accomplish your task isn't ultimately half so important to the Big Goods of the universe as whether or not you did things The Right and True Way
(and generally, I try to ensure that things CAN be done The Right Way, because I'm not interested in playing in a world that forces one to morally compromise ones principles in order to save the day. Doing so seems a cheap way of implying that being That Good really is naive, and that Getting The Job Done must require dirtying your soul, which seems to fly in the face of certain character concepts that run on the idea of this not being the case. My 2 Cents. )
But fair point. Those abilities would mitigate the unreliability of torture.
But then one must ask, if one is using those powers, why torture at all to begin with?
And furthermore, since anyone effected by a Zone of Truth knows it, I'd think they'd be twice as likely to clam up and just scream rather then answer.
And while, yes, anyone in reality ultimately breaks under torture (or dies first), this is a fantasy game where people's capabilities are far beyond those of folk in our mortal world. Zone of Truth doesn't prevent people from twisting the truth, it only blocks technical lies. These spells are far less effective, I imagine, then they're often held up as.
All of which is a long way of saying that alignment is a matter of personal interpretation
Wait, does that mean Smite Evil works on anyone the paladin thinks is evil?
(Quoting out of context is probably evil, isn't it? ;) )
That reminds me: if Paizo ever does their own version of Unearthed Arcana, or any other book o' rule variants, I really want to see an alignment-removal variant. If I ever get a level in ranger, I'm taking alignment as my favored enemy.
I keep toying with the idea of making alignment truly that: what side you are aligned with, but having no real bearing on your actual personality or behavior. Alignment Lawful Good? Then you are on the side of the celestials and the inevitables; you are probably a orderly, fairly nice guy, just because you'd get along with your side better if you were. But you might be a callous, conniving, manipulative bastard, who's thinks of himself as just being out for the greater good by any means necessary.
Then I could have angels like those from Supernatural season 5, intrigue in churches of good gods, and the like, without needing heavy application of industrial strength Suspension of Disbelief. (Alchemists charge a lot for that stuff.)
Morality is subjective, no matter how much we wish that somethings were objectively 'always evil.'I'm fine with the idea that certain outsiders (demons/devils) are moral abstractions and therefore totally, irredeemably evil. But for the vast majority of monsters, well... it seems that the concept of Manifest Destiny is built into the alignment system.
Which is why alignment is awesome. Because it's fun to go down the metaphysical rabbit hole, both in-character and out. :)
Except ‘In Game’ Good and Evil are actual measurable forces in the universe. Sure , regular folk can sit around and argue about morality and what the definitions of Good and Evil are, but once you have access to Detect Good and Detect Evil any argument goes out the window.
Of course, Good and Evil have little to do with right and wrong and I can see that argument going on quite often.
If I ever have cause to run a game involving Hermea, my Mengkare will indeed be Lawful Good. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be stopped, necessarily, but he will be the very avatar of the term 'benevolent dictatorship, with plenty of references to Plato's Repulic thrown in for good measure.
As others have said, it's simply more interesting to me for Mengkare to be completely and totally sincere, and running his eugenics program as humanely and ethically as such a thing is possible. He is dispassionate, but that is the nature of a project which is large and long-range even by draconic standards. Those who attempt to enter Hermea uninvited will be executed--what else does one do with trespassers, spies, and invaders?--but my Mengkare doesn't barbecue exiles unless they attempt to defy that sentence. Every aspect of life in Hermea is strictly regulated, and breaking the rules can see you torn from friends and family and cast out into a strange and untrusting world--but if you play by the rules, you are sheltered, well-fed, safe, and happy.
To be sure, it is a chilling place; a Caileanite would certainly be justified in seeing it as a sort Cheliax with fancy gilt, and even a Paladin of Abadar might have reason to pause in considering the civilization Mengkare has created. But the dragon's intentions are honest, benevolent, and forthright, and though he walks a line day in and day out, I find it most compelling if he hasn't crossed it...yet, at least.
Every aspect of life in Hermea is strictly regulated, and breaking the rules can see you torn from friends and family and cast out into a strange and untrusting world--but if you play by the rules, you are sheltered, well-fed, safe, and happy.
To be sure, it is a chilling place; a Caileanite would certainly be justified in seeing it as a sort Cheliax with fancy gilt, and even a Paladin of Abadar might have reason to pause in considering the civilization Mengkare has created. But the dragon's intentions are honest, benevolent, and forthright, and though he walks a line day in and day out, I find it most compelling if he hasn't crossed it...yet, at least.
This thread makes me wish that we could get Joss Whedon to drop in and tell us what alignment he thinks the Agent from Serenity was... He is working for a better world- but there will be no place in it for someone who has done what he has done.
LN, in my opinion, possibly LE. Likely LE, TBH.
Zone of Truth doesn't prevent people from twisting the truth, it only blocks technical lies.
Torture solves that problem! If you're getting answers that are evasive or less than perfectly direct, you just keep on keeping on.
The suite of interrogation spells doesn't solve every problem, but it certainly solves an awful lot of problems. Charm Person probably being the best/lowest level/simplest of them.
Except ‘In Game’ Good and Evil are actual measurable forces in the universe. Sure , regular folk can sit around and argue about morality and what the definitions of Good and Evil are, but once you have access to Detect Good and Detect Evil any argument goes out the window.
+1 on this.
Whatever you think about the subjectiveness of RL morality, it seems clear to me that, as written, it's objective in a Pathfinder game. The Detect Alignment spells color code people for your convienience, so to speak.
Zone of Truth doesn't prevent people from twisting the truth, it only blocks technical lies.Torture solves that problem! If you're getting answers that are evasive or less than perfectly direct, you just keep on keeping on.
The suite of interrogation spells doesn't solve every problem, but it certainly solves an awful lot of problems. Charm Person probably being the best/lowest level/simplest of them.
Note I'm not arguing that torture is completely ineffective, merely that one cannot engage in it and maintain a Good alignment. ^_^
|
|
Whatever you think about the subjectiveness of RL morality, it seems clear to me that, as written, it's objective in a Pathfinder game. The Detect Alignment spells color code people for your convienience, so to speak.
That said, detect alignment doesn't initially distinguish between the LE petty tyrant at work (who'd happily screw you over for a promotion, donates to charity (but only for the tax write-off), and wouldn't hurt a fly), and Asmodeus. And with less hyperbolic comparisons, it doesn't EVER distinguish between petty selfish evil and murdering madman evil.
Whatever you think about the subjectiveness of RL morality, it seems clear to me that, as written, it's objective in a Pathfinder game. The Detect Alignment spells color code people for your convienience, so to speak.That said, detect alignment doesn't initially distinguish between the LE petty tyrant at work (who'd happily screw you over for a promotion, donates to charity (but only for the tax write-off), and wouldn't hurt a fly), and Asmodeus. And with less hyperbolic comparisons, it doesn't EVER distinguish between petty selfish evil and murdering madman evil.
One solution to this is to take the stance that 90% of people in the world are some shade of Neutral, and that people with a G or E in their alignments truly represent people of exceptionally virtuous or dastardly character.
It also allows you to have a world where most people behave in a shades of gray manner, because, well, Neutral covers that quite nicely.
Whatever you think about the subjectiveness of RL morality, it seems clear to me that, as written, it's objective in a Pathfinder game. The Detect Alignment spells color code people for your convienience, so to speak.That said, detect alignment doesn't initially distinguish between the LE petty tyrant at work (who'd happily screw you over for a promotion, donates to charity (but only for the tax write-off), and wouldn't hurt a fly), and Asmodeus. And with less hyperbolic comparisons, it doesn't EVER distinguish between petty selfish evil and murdering madman evil.
Except that more evil things have stronger auras.
That said, detect alignment doesn't initially distinguish between the LE petty tyrant at work (who'd happily screw you over for a promotion, donates to charity (but only for the tax write-off), and wouldn't hurt a fly), and Asmodeus. And with less hyperbolic comparisons, it doesn't EVER distinguish between petty selfish evil and murdering madman evil.Except that more evil things have stronger auras.
Isn't that based on HD? So it doesn't distinguish between above petty tyrant and the LE budding serial killer, so long as they're both first level.
Isn't that based on HD? So it doesn't distinguish between above petty tyrant and the LE budding serial killer, so long as they're both first level.
That's true, but the budding serial killer is going to rapidly have more levels than the beaureaucrat, once the 'budding' part stops. (Killing things and taking their stuff is the number 1 source of XP.)
Isn't that based on HD? So it doesn't distinguish between above petty tyrant and the LE budding serial killer, so long as they're both first level.That's true, but the budding serial killer is going to rapidly have more levels than the beaureaucrat, once the 'budding' part stops. (Killing things and taking their stuff is the number 1 source of XP.)
I don't like where my mind goes to argue against this thought. So I will refrain from rebuttal, other than to say there is logical path to refute this.
Greg
Re: Mengkare
** spoiler omitted **
In alignment conversations, I always think it's fascinating when people bring up the fact that even "good" PCs spend most of their time going around killing the hell out of "monsters"... with "monster" being interpreted as "anything that might be dangerous to me."
Seriously--if you go into the dungeon where a monster (either intelligent or not) lives and try to take its stuff, and it attacks you, does it justify your killing it? Seems to me most American home-defense laws would say that the monster has the right to attack you, guilt-free.
I'm fine with the idea that certain outsiders (demons/devils) are moral abstractions and therefore totally, irredeemably evil. But for the vast majority of monsters, well... it seems that the concept of Manifest Destiny is built into the alignment system.
Which is why alignment is awesome. Because it's fun to go down the metaphysical rabbit hole, both in-character and out. :)
I don't feel that manifest destiny is built into alignment, because most D&D monsters are actually pretty horrible and pose a danger to non-evil beings. If I'm a Varisian ranger, I don't mind killing some local goblins and taking their stuff. Because if I don't, they're probably going to kill my family and take THEIR stuff (or at least try to). Even if I don't have any nearby family and am just doing it for the loot, I'm still doing those local farmers a huge favor. Goblins don't want peace.
Exceptions to this rule are often, as you say, very interesting. The 3e description for the Belker says that it's totally evil but mostly just wants to be left alone to brood and grumble; as a DM, I never really knew what to make of that morally.
And then you have neutral antagonists like lizardfolk, who CAN coexist peacefully with other creatures as long as they respect each others borders (just like any nation). Killing lizardfolk to take their stuff makes you no hero in my book; but what if you have to pass through their lands to prevent some greater evil? That's a pretty sticky situation. And we're not even touching on the sorts of legitimate border disputes, mutual claims to land, and generation-spanning patterns of revenge which so tragically muddle up our own reality.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like Mengkare as Lawful Good. We need to have some good-aligned archvillains in the setting, after all.
Does anyone else find this nation remarkably chilling? They say that Mengkare is uncorrupted by his power, but it seems to me that the very act of effectively requiring his citizens to legaly sign over their free will to him is an act that is inherently non-good (I read him as being LN rather than LG). Personally, I have plans to cast this wyrm as one of the arch-villains in a camppaign.You're supposed to be creeped out by Stepford Island.
By the way when the movie is made, the dragon HAS to be voiced by Christopher Wauken. Megkore sounds very much like Wauken's version of Gabriel.
Oh my goodness... Christopher Wauken....YES!!!! Great observation!
Greg
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
By the way when the movie is made, the dragon HAS to be voiced by Christopher Wauken. Megkore sounds very much like Wauken's version of Gabriel.
Walk without rhythm, you won't attract the wyrm.
0_0
Millefune, your necromancy shone the light on this thread for me.
The misdirection, the confusion. Mengkare is an Aboleth... He is using the breeding program to recreate the Azlanti. I mean they are on an island in the Steaming Sea which is part of the Arcadian Ocean. Heck they even ban the gods and we all know how the Aboleth love them.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's quite a lot of light between;
the Dragon will be LN
and;
and will in fact be responsible for roasting and toasting violators and unworthy citizens.
will that make it so that our characters with the Island Blood feat be illegal, since the exiles never actually make it to the mainland (since they or their parents are getting eaten or roasted by the dragon)?
There's no guarantee that a LN or even a balls-out crazy CE Mengkare is the one 'roasting dissidents.' Indeed, it's almost *impossible* for Mengkare to be doing that sort of thing, since his breath weapon of 24d10 ish damage wouldn't be likely to leave any sort of corpse behind anyway (and he's got fiddy bajillion ways of taking care of dissidents that *don't* have half the ships captains on the Inner Sea gossiping about how evil he is, assuming he isn't *staggering* levels of incompetent, insane and / or stupid).
I haven't gotten my hands on Chronicles of the Righteous, but, in light of some of the very different kinds of good Empyreal philosophy presented (building on older, and, controversial, philosophies of good such as those of Erastil or Findeladlara), that we are trending towards a situation where one can be 'good' in game, without 100% agreeing with everything that I do (or the Pope does, or James Jacob does), on every single point.
Evil has long had more freedom in this vein, and it's James' own point that Lissala, as proponent of the seven *virtues* of rule, whose own tenets were corrupted into the seven *sins* of ancient Thassilon, was LE *the entire time,* despite her followers having corrupted her original non-evil teachings into evil ones. If Lissala can change radically, from praising virtues to rewarding sins, and remain Lawful Evil, then perhaps, by this same logic, Mengkare can remain non-Evil (or even *good!*) while not agreeing with every other LG person in the world.
And, bear in mind, much of the stuff he's accused of is *complete* fantasy. Nobody gets kidnapped, per the actual write up. Nobody gets forcibly bred to anybody else. Anybody can leave, and there are recruiters wandering the inner sea looking for people to *invite* to come and live in this place. There are *rumors* of burned bodies (spread by people who *haven't* been invited to live in paradise, mind you, not the most objective of reporters), but no actual evidence of such.
A lot of Golarion rumor is just that, rumor. It *might* be true, if you, the GM, want it to be. It might be *far, far worse,* and 'Mengkare' could be some sort of ascended Veiled Master Aboleth, breeding for a tastier and more subservient sort of human being, or possessed by a nascent demon lord or archdevil, breeding for a healthier and pretty sort of mortal, so that his fiendish court can possess them and engage in all sorts of mortal shenanigans, with the entire island nation being nothing more than a brothel for bored fiends, with the human bodies of its inhabitants being worn like masks, to be used and discarded like blow-up dolls.
Look at Rahadoum. 'Rumor' has it that the gods are punishing it with droughts, because it has turned away from them. Then look at the map, where it is *significantly* more green and fertile than gods-worshipping nations Thuvia and Osirion, on the same latitude. Sounds like the churches are blowing some serious smoke, trying to cover up how the nations they favor *are doing worse* than the nation they are 'punishing.'
Geb, run by life-hating antithetical-to-life nasty negative-energy undead, are producing so much surplus food that the non-negative-energy soaked nation to their north is *buying food from them.*
It's easy to see the word 'eugenics' and go straight to 'ZOMG! Hitler,' but, like many places in Golarion, not everything is as simplistic or caricatured as that. Hermea, among other places, seems to have been intentionally designed to provoke thought and discussion and exploration of what 'good' means. I see that as a good thing. If good, or evil, is just a two-dimensional cardboard cutout, it doesn't really add anything to the game, other than being a meaningless mechanical descriptor that tells you who is excluded by protection from evil, and who is damaged by holy smite.
Given a choice between a Hermea that provokes thought and discourse and exploration, and one that discourages it, I'll go with provocation any day.
If it ever comes down to it being published while James Jacobs is still the head of the campaign's direction (I don't see him going anywhere, as he's been doing a good job thus far), the Dragon will be LN and will in fact be responsible for roasting and toasting violators and unworthy citizens.
That's actually not how things work here. Golarion was created as a team effort, and continues to be so--all of us who created the world together have a say over what happens to it (and not just our "pet" nations). So while we might disagree--even publicly, as a little messageboard debate is fun for everyone--we're not about to go kicking each other's sandcastles over. :)
All of which is to say that you're not going to see Mengkare statted up any time soon, so play him however you want!
James do you have any hints or tidbits for us on Two Tree Island which cropped up on the ISWG map ?
James do you have any hints or tidbits for us on Two Tree Island which cropped up on the ISWG map ?
Not yet! It's definitely part of Hermea, and I imagine the fact that it's split off from the main island is rather significant, but as we haven't published anything about it yet, I dare not go speculating. I've got some ideas, though, and I suspect that when we detail Hermea further, Two Tree Island will have a role to play. :)
|
Contributor
|
James do you have any hints or tidbits for us on Two Tree Island which cropped up on the ISWG map ?Not yet! It's definitely part of Hermea, and I imagine the fact that it's split off from the main island is rather significant, but as we haven't published anything about it yet, I dare not go speculating. I've got some ideas, though, and I suspect that when we detail Hermea further, Two Tree Island will have a role to play. :)
Immediately I think of the talking (prophesying) trees of the Sun and the Moon of the island in the furthest East in the Alexander legend...
But maybe it just has two scrubby trees. Who knows?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two Tree's Island?...in the Western Seas?..someone was chanelling JRRT that day.