Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone,
Absolute Good and Evil as defined by a roleplaying game have no place in a discussion of real world people or organizations. As humans, we all have the capacity for good and evil within us at any moment. If we let the discussion fall into real world actions, then someone will be offended because both sides of the discussion are true and false at the same time.
Please let's just take a step back, and redirect the conversation to the game we are passionate about instead of personal attacks over interpretations of abstract philosophy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There was mention that the player would be warned if their intended action would impact their alignment negatively.
In the case of alignment change, perhaps when a player is entering a new alignment, or if alignment can be chosen at the start then when the player chooses that alignment, they are confronted with a visitation event, like a cut scene, where the presiding deity of that alignment lays out clearly that alignment's 'rules of engagement'.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There was mention that the player would be warned if their intended action would impact their alignment negatively.
In the case of alignment change, perhaps when a player is entering a new alignment, or if alignment can be chosen at the start then when the player chooses that alignment, they are confronted with a visitation event, like a cut scene, where the presiding deity of that alignment lays out clearly that alignment's 'rules of engagement'.
That is an excellent idea.
That is an excellent idea.There was mention that the player would be warned if their intended action would impact their alignment negatively.
In the case of alignment change, perhaps when a player is entering a new alignment, or if alignment can be chosen at the start then when the player chooses that alignment, they are confronted with a visitation event, like a cut scene, where the presiding deity of that alignment lays out clearly that alignment's 'rules of engagement'.
Yes, that would be very cool! It would help to cement the deity chosen by the character to the alignment they picked. I like the idea very much.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But it’s not baseless. It’s been quoted more than once, in this thread, that the flags do not last that long. Now, if we find out that flags for killing people last for at least several days, then I will retract that, but the longest I’ve heard for any flag so far is 24 hours.
So far, the only flags I've seen durations defined for are Attacker, which ends shortly after the fighting does, Heinous, which lasts the duration of the event, possibly up to 15 minutes after, Tresspasser, which lasts as long as they tresspass and a short while after. These are both intended to be "catch them in the act" flags. I have seen nothing indicating a duration on the Criminal flag, nor given the description of it, do I see any reason to believe it's intended to fill the same role (and would be redundant if it did so), but rather that it is intended specifically to allow others to pursue, locate, and punish the criminal after the fact. That suggests to me a longer duration. More comparable might be the Thief flag, no specifics given but "a decent length of time", and the Traitor/Betrayer flag, which lasts "for quite some time to allow the player to be punished for whatever actions were taken against the previous member group." If you can cite otherwise, please do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So far, the only flags I've seen durations defined for are Attacker, which ends shortly after the fighting does, Heinous, which lasts the duration of the event, possibly up to 15 minutes after, Tresspasser, which lasts as long as they tresspass and a short while after. These are both intended to be "catch them in the act" flags. I have seen nothing indicating a duration on the Criminal flag, nor given the description of it, do I see any reason to believe it's intended to fill the same role (and would be redundant if it did so), but rather that it is intended specifically to allow others to pursue, locate, and punish the criminal after the fact. That suggests to me a longer duration. More comparable might be the Thief flag, no specifics given but "a decent length of time", and the Traitor/Betrayer flag, which lasts "for quite some time to allow the player to be punished for whatever actions were taken against the previous member group." If you can cite otherwise, please do.
You could be right, but where there has been no exact number given for a criminal flag, on the flipside, there hasn’t been given any indication that it will be unlimited, either. I can only go by examples of time set by other flags and they have not been that long.
I am inclined to believe with the addition of the ‘Champion’ flag, described by Lee Hammock a couple of pages back, that there won’t an unlimited amount of time for criminal flags.
But then I guess we will see.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You could be right, but where there has been no exact number given for a criminal flag, on the flipside, there hasn’t been given any indication that it will be unlimited, either. I can only go by examples of time set by other flags and they have not been that long.I am inclined to believe with the addition of the ‘Champion’ flag, described by Lee Hammock a couple of pages back, that there won’t an unlimited amount of time for criminal flags.
But then I guess we will see.
Assuming they commit a crime and then sit on their hands until the flag goes away (however long that may be), then no, but it's been stated that if they keep getting it, the duration will get longer, and eventually could become permanent. Now, that may have changed since then, but that was the last word given on it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really want to know more about the self-flagging that Lee mentioned earlier. If the Champion flags allow you to engage against Evil characters freely while opening yourself as a valid target in return, then I think this will allow people who wish to be good to engage without fear of falling. I can't wait until Wednesday so we can get some clarification on this.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
You could be right, but where there has been no exact number given for a criminal flag, on the flipside, there hasn’t been given any indication that it will be unlimited, either. I can only go by examples of time set by other flags and they have not been that long.
There has been indication it could be unlimited though.
The severity of your criminal act will affect the length of the time you will be flagged as a criminal. Repeat offenses while already flagged will have additive effects. It is entirely possible that one may become so notorious that they are permanently flagged as a criminal.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really want to know more about the self-flagging that Lee mentioned earlier. If the Champion flags allow you to engage against Evil characters freely while opening yourself as a valid target in return, then I think this will allow people who wish to be good to engage without fear of falling. I can't wait until Wednesday so we can get some clarification on this.
Indeed, me too!!!!!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's a good example of why people should drop the "real world" comparisons and stick to PFO.
I know my point with my example was actually to show people shouldn't mix their real life morality with this game. There are a lot of crazy views out there. I personally believe self defense is taking a life for selfish reasons UNLESS attached to the logic "If they kill me they are likely to kill again" or "I have too many people counting on me and too many good deeds left to do." But how can you say it's anything but selfish otherwise? You are taking their life to save yours just the same as if you killed them in cold blood because you need an organ transplant.
The point isn't to debate the morality, just to say that the Pathfinder rules accommodate for a lot of people with a diverse sense of ideology. It has gods of peace, redemption, healing, justice, vengeance and war all along the good axis.
Rather than people picking and choosing what parts of Pathfinder's ideology THEY agree with and thereby forcing their real world morals down the throats of people who entirely disagree with them that we should stick with the very wide and diverse Pathfinder standards on morality. Unless they think it would be appropriate for me to shove MY morality down THEIR throats. Who wants alignment hits for self defense or failing to defend or even sacrifice yourself for others? Anyone?
Having read this thread and the blog I am coming away with the impression that the anti griefing mechanism is going to be interfering to a large extent with legitimate rp reasons for player killing
Legitimate rp reasons to kill
1) My group is at war with his group
2) He is a criminal (flagged)
3) I recognise him as the person who attacked me last week
4) He is doing something in character I disagree with in character
5) He is attempting to gather the same resources as the ones I want
6) He is a member of an organisation I consider rp wise in a bad light (such as a mercenary band known for savagery) and I believe he is likely to call for help and then attack me if I don't kill him first
Out of all those only 1 and 2 seem not to be regarded as griefing under the mechanics and flagged as such even though I would regard them as legitimate in character reasons to attack
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ZenPagan
You can still PvP for all those reasons, just some will require self-flagging, other will push your alignment axis a little bit towards evil and/or chaotic, but you still have the chance to do stuff tho realining it back to the way you want it to be.
War will most likelly not affect alignment
criminal flag = target for all with no penalties at all.
the other fit in what I said above.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really want to know more about the self-flagging that Lee mentioned earlier. If the Champion flags allow you to engage against Evil characters freely while opening yourself as a valid target in return, then I think this will allow people who wish to be good to engage without fear of falling. I can't wait until Wednesday so we can get some clarification on this.
As long as it doesn't become a tool to grief and maintain an LG alignment.
@ Lord Daeron : While I am aware I can still do the PVP and the alignement shift that is not what worries me. It is the fact that I am being flagged via the anti griefing mechanism at all and therefore presumably could be judged a griefer by a gm and have my account shut down.
I currently play Eve and although I doubt anyone there would accuse me of being a griefer I find legitimate actions I would make as a player get trapped by there much more limited anti griefing mechanism to the point where I am not allowed to defend myself against someone I know is about to suicide gank me. My worry is that this game is going to end up even more restrictive of legitimate player actions in the name of anti griefing
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really want to know more about the self-flagging that Lee mentioned earlier. If the Champion flags allow you to engage against Evil characters freely while opening yourself as a valid target in return, then I think this will allow people who wish to be good to engage without fear of falling. I can't wait until Wednesday so we can get some clarification on this.As long as it doesn't become a tool to grief and maintain an LG alignment.
It shouldn't be an issue, because by setting it, you will open yourself to being attacked without penalty by the groups you would allow yourself attack. And while these flags will presumably allow you to attack character meeting x criteria without alignment penalties, there still may be reputation penalties.
There isn't enough info yet to know either way, but I don't think it will be a tool to just RPK evil characters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It sounded like those who want to PvP get a chance to flag themselves so they can PvP versus the kinds of people they are after.
So I GrumpyMel wants to romp on some evil baddies he just has to find those of them who fully intend to engage in PvP. That way the CE character who just happens to be out for a constitutional stroll in the woods can do so knowing that GrumpyMel will have to face the alighnment music if he elects to beat them to a bloody pulp anyway, plus they get the opportunity to defend themselves and can signal the other seven of his buddies also out for constitutional strolls in the same woods to pitch in.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Furthermore since Andius is a Head of State, by definition he IS a lawful authority and neither he nor anyone acting under his direction could be considered a vigilante while operating in ANY territory that other then that held by a power who's Soveriegnty has been recognized by him and where he was not invited to act.Following that logic, since arab muslims are one of the indigenous people of the middle east whom at one time the US government acknowledged the sovereignty of therefore all US forces, including those that killed UBL, were in fact Infidels not patriots.... but wait, don't all US forces have diplomatic immunity? Oh wait no, there is such a thing as status of forces agreements... SOFAs that dictate how we are handled when our actions conflict with host nation laws. We can be arrested and tried for what the host nation perceives as vigilantism.
Again... take whatever real world comparison you want to make and throw it out the window... it does not apply. If you open up consequence-less killing on the mere premise that I'm a "good" guy and he's a "bad" guy then dammit I'm playing a lawful good dark elf assassin!
There is no longer any principle behind lawful good. The idea of a "champion" who can in essence be a paladin without having to abide by any code except the one they want to is simply absurd. Way to circumvent alignment and character concept all so some people get to wear the "lawful good" hat just because they want to do the same thing as chaotic evil but not have to wear black. If this is seriously considered, then all alignments should be available to all classes and everyone should be able to do whatever they want...
I'm sorry but if you attack anyone without provocation, it's an evil act. And no, heresay from a newb isn't provocation. That is what the whole flag system is about... it seriously perplexes me that the things they announce that make NO sense what so ever, the majority see the light on... but yet something as common sense and...
1) You are not making any sense. In an absolute monarchy, the head of states word is law, period. Check your history books, if you don't understand how that system of government works. You may not like or agree with that system of government, that's great you can be part of a different one in game...but that IS the way it works.
When operating within his own territory the Head of State (E.G. Andius) is the absolute authority for what the law is there.
In uncontroled territory there IS no government who's authority applies there. So by definition, no laws to break. However individuals who are in service to a Soveriegn Authority (e.g. Andius's soldiers) are still bound to follow that authorties directives. That's being lawful for them. If you want an example think the High Seas before the Modern Age of Treaties and International Orginizations. Ships of no nation were bound by no law, though they could be subject to brute force. Ships sailing under the flag of a nation (e.g. the British Navy) were bound by thier OWN nations laws in thier behavior. That's how it worked.
It's only once you get to soveriegn territory of SOMEBODY ELSE that laws other then those of your OWN Head of State start to apply to you. However your state has to recognize the existance of that government before it's laws officialy apply to you. So US Forces operating in Britain are subject to British Law through exactly the sort of agreement you mention. However US Forces Operating in North Korea wouldn't be subject to North Korean law because the US doesn't recognize the legitamcy of that Government (officialy it doesn't exist).
In game, that would mean If Andius recognized the legitimacy of the Duchy of McCoolville then his forces would be acting unlawfuly when breaking thier laws in thier territory..short of a declared state of War. However, his forces wouldn't be acting unlawfuly when violating the laws of the Barony of Goonistan if Andius didn't recognize that government as legitimate...though Andius, himself MIGHT be acting Chaoticly for refusing to do so.
I think the problem you are running into is seperating things that are IN GAME/IN UNIVERSE from things that are OUT OF GAME/ OUT OF UNIVERSE.
IN GAME GoblinWorks doesn't exist, thier rules don't exist, flags don't exist. Our characters don't know anything about that because it's not part of the Universe...it's part of some construct that's OUTSIDE of the Universe. In fact, when we go after some-one whether flagged or bountied or not ALL we are operating on is some-ones heresay...unless we happaned to witness the event with our own eyes.
Now of course, OUT of GAME, GW IS the ULTIMATE Authority and thier rules are paramount and Andius is just some guy I'm playing a game with. However that's all OUT OF GAME stuff...our characters don't know anything about that. Alignment is really an IN GAME function of where our characters fit within the cosmology of the Universe and thier values and outlooks....NOT ours as players, playing a game together.
I think you are approaching this as a game of Chess or Football...while I'm actually approaching it as a Role-Playing Game and trying to see things through the eyes of characters who would exist in that world. Understand?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really want to know more about the self-flagging that Lee mentioned earlier. If the Champion flags allow you to engage against Evil characters freely while opening yourself as a valid target in return, then I think this will allow people who wish to be good to engage without fear of falling. I can't wait until Wednesday so we can get some clarification on this.As long as it doesn't become a tool to grief and maintain an LG alignment.
Neutral Good thank you very much. Sometimes I wave aside my head of state and therefore lawful authority status to dish out some vigilante justice just because that's the way I roll! I also make a point to wipe my butt with a contract written by the Hell Knights for every one I sign into law. For some reason they weren't amused when I asked them to start writing their contracts on softer paper. Ah well...
Anyway we aren't griefing or even RPKing. If you get evil status it's because you partook on actions that benefitted yourself and harmed others. As a consequence you are opened up to attack from champions.
Champions open themselves up to attack from you in order to protect others from your misdeeds. Sticking our necks on the line to protect the innocent. We aren't randomly targeting anyone. We are targeting a very specific group for a very specific reason.
Seems like a fair trade to me. If you just want to be left alone stay neutral or good and don't go champion. Evil should have consequences.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A point I haven't seen touched in all this is the meta gaming aspect.
How does good know that swarthy guy over there is evil? Reputation is reputation and that is the mechanic for knowing him by his looks. Otherwise there should be a CURRENT bounty/warrant for that person's arrest or you really shouldn't know, and therefore have no justifiable reason to engage them. You are not supposed to know if that person is evil just by tab target.
As a matter of fact if alignments were hidden, (a pretty good idea if you ask me), all of this is kinda moot.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A point I haven't seen touched in all this is the meta gaming aspect.
How does good know that swarthy guy over there is evil? Reputation is reputation and that is the mechanic for knowing him by his looks. Otherwise there should be a CURRENT bounty/warrant for that person's arrest or you really shouldn't know, and therefore have no justifiable reason to engage them. You are not supposed to know if that person is evil just by tab target.
As a matter of fact if alignments were hidden, (a pretty good idea if you ask me), all of this is kinda moot.
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.
The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A point I haven't seen touched in all this is the meta gaming aspect.
How does good know that swarthy guy over there is evil? Reputation is reputation and that is the mechanic for knowing him by his looks. Otherwise there should be a CURRENT bounty/warrant for that person's arrest or you really shouldn't know, and therefore have no justifiable reason to engage them. You are not supposed to know if that person is evil just by tab target.
As a matter of fact if alignments were hidden, (a pretty good idea if you ask me), all of this is kinda moot.
Yes and that may involve some risks, as for example: A player kill someone you know and, after that, he changes his RPing to actions that will move his alignment to neutral or even good. When you encounter him in the road some months latter he can be just a CG char now, and if you kill him there is no champion flag that will prevent you of getting an alignment penalty.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A point I haven't seen touched in all this is the meta gaming aspect.
How does good know that swarthy guy over there is evil? Reputation is reputation and that is the mechanic for knowing him by his looks. Otherwise there should be a CURRENT bounty/warrant for that person's arrest or you really shouldn't know, and therefore have no justifiable reason to engage them. You are not supposed to know if that person is evil just by tab target.
As a matter of fact if alignments were hidden, (a pretty good idea if you ask me), all of this is kinda moot.
Personally I think alignments should be hidden but they should still apply. So we can use our own methods for determining alignment. If our method is effective and we only end up killing evil players then no alignment loss for us. If it is ineffective and we are slaughtering a bunch of good and neutral players thinking they are evil then we take the same hit anyone else would.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes and that may involve some risks, as for example: A player kill someone you know and, after that, he changes his RPing to actions that will move his alignment to neutral or even good. When you encounter him in the road some months latter he can be just a CG char now, and if you kill him there is no champion flag that will prevent you of getting an alignment penalty.A point I haven't seen touched in all this is the meta gaming aspect.
How does good know that swarthy guy over there is evil? Reputation is reputation and that is the mechanic for knowing him by his looks. Otherwise there should be a CURRENT bounty/warrant for that person's arrest or you really shouldn't know, and therefore have no justifiable reason to engage them. You are not supposed to know if that person is evil just by tab target.
As a matter of fact if alignments were hidden, (a pretty good idea if you ask me), all of this is kinda moot.
Well... If you wanted revenge you should have acted sooner in that situation. There should never be a flag lasting for a period of months if the person with the flag isn't taking actions to keep it in place.
In this case the character changed to CG, and he presumably doesn't have any flags. In that case you lost your chance for revenge months ago. If you take it now, you will get the attacker flag and you *should* get an alignment hit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally I think alignments should be hidden but they should still apply. So we can use our own methods for determining alignment. If our method is effective and we only end up killing evil players then no alignment loss for us. If it is ineffective and we are slaughtering a bunch of good and neutral players thinking they are evil then we take the same hit anyone else would.
Sorry dude, but no DM worth a grain of salt would allow Pallys to randomly detect evil on everything they see and then proceed to hack their heads off wherever and whenever. That is not a Dungeons and Dragons Paladin. Never was, never will be.
Paladin is Superman or Sir Percival. That's Judge Dredd, at best.
If your ideal is Archangel Michael, well yes, but only when facing the truly demonic or fiendish. Bull in a china shop fiery vengeance is not how a paladin works within the confines of civilization.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally I think alignments should be hidden but they should still apply. So we can use our own methods for determining alignment. If our method is effective and we only end up killing evil players then no alignment loss for us. If it is ineffective and we are slaughtering a bunch of good and neutral players thinking they are evil then we take the same hit anyone else would.
Sorry dude, but no DM worth a grain of salt would allow Pallys to randomly detect evil on everything they see and then proceed to hack their heads off wherever and whenever. That is not a Dungeons and Dragons Paladin. Never was, never will be.
Paladin is Superman or Sir Percival. That's Judge Dredd, at best.
As DM I always consider the fact that most of time people will not be pleased by the fact that someone is probing them to know their alignments. And the fact to detect someone's alignment would involve some movement components such in othe spells not just looking at him . Most of time people will just be offended by a paladin trying to determine their alignment at will.
Also if soemone is good but is engaged in an evil act or bad toughts this person could be detected as evil as , in the same way, if a bad guy (not a CE supervilain but just a slightly selfish NE guy, for example) is engaged in doing something good and/or bears in his mind good toughts in the moment you probe him, it may also interfere in the detection.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The real life comparison is this. You are in a war torn country in Africa. There is an un-uniformed that goes around slaughtering people and doing all of the worst things that you hear about happening in these war torn countries. You've heard about it from the few survivors who managed to hide or escape at each village. You've been given their description. You have even seen them in the act before but they got away. A week later you catch up to them, demand they hand over their arms and give themselves up. They refuse. You kill them.
By YOUR morality I should take an alignment hit for killing them. By MY morality you should take an alignment hit for every innocent villager they ever kill from that point on if you DON'T kill them.
Lets not force our morality on each other. The game has well established criteria on what good and evil are. Lets follow those.
There... is... no... real... life... comparision... for... alignments.
Life has DYNAMIC... which means being able to be ever changing ethics based on a variety of factors.
The game has STATIC alignments which means your actions have the same effect on your character no matter where you are or what deity you follow.
It's not by MY morality. By my morality, if I assassinate a good character, I believe I should shift to evil. If I assassinate an evil character I should shift to good. This makes sense to me.... HOWEVER,
That is not how the game's alignment system works. It's the game's morality that you have a problem with. Not mine. Tell me why an assassin has to be evil, if his actions help stop the oppression of the innocents? Is that any less "good" than a Paladin!?
However, when Ryan said that assassination was an inherently EVIL act, there was no out cry. There was no "OMFG Devs are completely retarded!" from anyone. Everyone said oh... ok, I can see how that makes sense. But now, when Paladins can't run around smashing evil in the face to their heart's content because evil is evil and it must die... there is all this commontion about the SAME system.
If changes are made to the system as it was presented, it's because of character archetype prejudice.
I know prejudice is a harsh word, but that's really what it is. If a Paladin does not have to abide by his Lawful Good alignment because players don't concur with it's tenants then they shouldn't be playing Paladins.
The system should not be altered to accomodate ONE character archetype and not others. That is exactly what is happening here. So what mechanic will be emplaced for the Chaotic Good Rogue who wants to be an assassin?
Because if killing evil is good, then why can't that apply to rogue/assassin types? Hopefully this, "champion/assassin" specialist mechanic will accomodate for ALL PLAYERS not just the "I want to be lawful good, but not really have to abide by it" crowd.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.
Yes... and they are saying that doing so shouldn't be evil.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There... is... no... real... life... comparision... for... alignments.
Life has DYNAMIC... which means being able to be ever changing ethics based on a variety of factors.
The game has STATIC alignments which means your actions have the same effect on your character no matter where you are or what deity you follow.
Excellent point. Maybe it would make more sense if you considered alignments as faction ratings with the various gods. Killing people without clear divine justification (as indicated by in-game flags) *always* decreases your faction rating with certain ("Good") gods and increases it with other ("Evil") gods.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
Not that I know of, but there are folks that want to be able to go after specific players that are evil. So "the swarthy guy in the corner" isn't a relevant example. A relevant example would be "Dauthon, a black-hearted assassin who has assassinated three leaders in the League of Iomedae."
Maybe the alignment hit to go after them is so small it's manageable within the whole of the game for paladins. Maybe declaring war on the settlement affects alignment in a way that is manageable. Not sure, so I'm hoping for more info from GW on this.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@GrumpyMel
Just for your information: I have no itent to play an evil char. My main char is possibly going to be NG and the destiny twin is probably going to be some of the N alignment I'm just deciding the concept.
That said lets clarify some points:
Are you pointing the US Marines as an example of LG (or any good) organization????? They are at the best q LN one, some Iraqui civilians would argue they are LE or worse. Its a matter of point of view, but definitelly no Marine corps in the world can be pointed as good organizations. If the need to carry evil missions they will because they just follow orders. IMO they are just LN, commanders ask they obbey, period.
But lets go back to the subject of this thread.
Just because you don't agree with some points of view here it doesn't mean they are nonsense, people just think different, have different perspectives, different experiences and different concepts of good, evil and justice. We must all live with that, its life.
What is clear here is that some people believe revenge is part of good behavior, other, like me, disagree. IMO revenge is always evil. There is an ancient chinese quote that says: "Before starting a vendetta you must dig TWO graves". IMO Killing when you have other options is evil, period.
The problem here is that the game, to the date, offers no other options to good chars "punish" or "justice" the evil ones but kill. So people are arguing that good should be able to kill evil even when they are not flagged. But that poses a mechanics problem as grieffers could just create "good" chars to keep killing the evil ones with minimal consequences. So the DEVs are going to present some flags, especially the champion flag that (probably) is going to let the good players to fight evil proactivelly, and get no alignment penalty.
So what is the problem now? Because now you have a way to deal with the evil, but just need make clear to everybody that you are doing it for justice (presenting a champion flag) and not for fun or other...
@LordDaeron
1) I don't happen to believe "revenge" is part of good behavior it's probably part of evil behavior...at best neutral but certainly not good.
However you are missing the point that I am not talking about killing for "revenge". I'm talking about killing/destroying Evil as neccesary to prevent it from doing FUTURE HARM to innocents. That's NOT revenge, it's an altruistic activity..and therefore good. If some other method short of killing could be effective in stopping Evil (e.g. talking to it) then that would be a greater good. However in 99 percent of Classical Fantasy it's NOT, Evil is too strong and too pernicious that any other method short of using violence to destroy it will be effective in stopping it. It's certainly possible for you as a GM to construct a scenario where that is NOT the case and Evil can be stopped by reasoning with it or merely subduing it....but that's NOT typical for classic fantasy and not generaly what people familiar with the genre will expect...it's certainly not how things go down in most of Pathfinders modules and adventure paths.
I am, however, saying that the Alignment system as described makes no sense from a cosmological standpoint and how it handles alignment shifts. It may well make some sense in trying to control OOG PLAYER behavior but certainly not in representing IG CHARACTER behavior. Lets look...
death curse and bounty = "I'm going to pay you back for what you did to me." THAT is revenge and from a logical standpoint probably deserving of an evil shit on the person placing the curse or bounty...yet it gets none.
bounty hunting = "Cold blooded murder for proffit". Definately deserving of an evil shift on the bounty hunter.... yet it gets none.
Attacking and Killing unflagged Evil = Altruistic action where the Good character is risking thier own life and sacrificing of themselves (subject to death curse and bounty) in order to prevent future harm to others at no gain (no bounty) to themselves. That is about as textbook a definition of a Good action that one can find in Classical Fantasy...yet it gets a shift toward "Evil" here.
I can understand why GW would want to penalize the player behavior that they are penalizing and under the conditions that they do. That makes perfect sense from a standpoint rules for engagement for PvP. It makes absolutely no sense from the standpoint of cosmology. What I see GW doing is trying to pretend it does in order to get the PvP result that they want, even though it doesn't really fit that way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also if soemone is good but is engaged in an evil act or bad toughts this person could be detected as evil as , in the same way, if a bad guy (not a CE supervilain but just a slightly selfish NE guy, for example) is engaged in doing something good and/or bears in his mind good toughts in the moment you probe him, it may also interfere in the detection.
Hopefully, there is a significant (not majority) chance for the spell to read false positive, so those cleave happy paladins DO take alignment hits.
This would be a good compromise from both sides of the arguement IMO.
I have no problem with Paladins uphold justice within the confines of the game mechanics. I know I come off as anti-"paladin", but that is not my intent... I just believe that paladins are held to a much higher moral code than other characters... that is what makes them different from a LG fighter/cleric. I understand that Paladins have been handicapped in the past, and I don't want to see that happen either. In combat, Paladins should kick ass... they are the champions of good. But we should not compromise of the archetype's code of ethics.
PCs can shift their alignment and therefore have the ability of redemption. NPCs have a set alignment that does not allow for their redemption, thus making KOSing them a non-issue...
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Yes... and they are saying that doing so shouldn't be evil.The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.
Yup this is the only problem I've had in this whole discussion. Just like animate dead being evil (it has the evil descriptor) killing is evil (it specifically says evil = killing in the alignment section.
If you are killing a bad guy yeah it is less evil than killing an innocent but you are still committing an evil act even if for the greater good. If all you ever do is run around killing *evil* people (again even for the greater good) how is that not going to slowly over time start shifting you toward being evil yourself?
The perfect fictional example, that others have mentioned is Dexter, he is a serial killer. He only kills bad people that he has gotten irrefutable proof are bad, that doesn't make him any less evil. Even if his motives are selfish (he enjoys killing) he is serving the greater good by killing bad people. Again he is still evil.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes... and they are saying that doing so shouldn't be evil.The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.
I understand the confusion from Andius and the like. They come from PvP centric games where this guild theme really was the most good guys on the server. I've played some of those games.
This is a readjustment to sane PvP and we will all have growing pains. However with that established, I have read the guild charters for these players and there is absolutely no doubt that they are planning to engage in Vigilante behavior as an established play style.
They will have to come to grips that this game will better reflect the true fantasy archetypes and Vigilante behavior is CHAOTIC GOOD. And just like quintessential CG Batman, there will be dips into non-good if you take it too far.
My suggestion is accept who you really are and enjoy it to the fullest!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Excellent point. Maybe it would make more sense if you considered alignments as faction ratings with the various gods. Killing people without clear divine justification (as indicated by in-game flags) *always* decreases your faction rating with certain ("Good") gods and increases it with other ("Evil") gods.
See, THAT is a valid statement. If there is an "enemy of such-and-such diety" flag, that a player gains over significant time, then the target would be fair game.
But it would be an tyranical warlord not the shady guy in the corner of the tavern that would get tagged. Then game on for pallys.
But if shady guy in the corner is contemplating stealing something, a paladin shouldn't be able to decapate him on the spot for simply being evil... in essense "well you did something, although I don't know what, to become evil so you deserve to die".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
By the way guys, I suggest the movie "Django Unchained" There is an absoluetly FANTASTIC example of what a "Lawful Good Bounty Hunter" looks like in theory and you will see very clearly that just how hard it is for a Bounty hunetr to remain Lawful & Good.
P.S. There is a reason that the Paladin is bestowed with the very powerful ability to detect evil: Because only the true Paladin is just enough to use it wisely.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It is difficult to think of anyone more evil than a mass murderer, even if that mass murderer thinks he is justified. Perhaps especially where that mass murderer thinks he is justified.
Whether he is unemplyed, an industrial mogul, a priest, or a king. Whether he thinks he is lawful good and the people he is murdering en masse are also murderers.
Alignment shift for killing another player makes sense. Not shifting alignment for killing another player makes alignment meaningless.
The complaint is that it is unfair that the evil bolster their alignment from doing evil things but the good damage their alignment from doing evil things. Problem is that is the burden of being good: you don't get to do evil things and still be good.
Except that it is NOT "Evil" to destroy "Evil". Otherwise every adventurer that ever killed an Orc, Goblin, Drow, Ogre, would be thoroughly and unrepentantly Evil. Yet Pathfinder portrays paragons of Good doing these things and being Good for doing them. Q.E.D.
There is no such entity as a "player" in the Pathfinder Cosmology. From the standpoint of the Universe an (NPC) Evil Drow Sorceror is equivalent to a (PC) Evil Elf Sorceror in every regard.
You are taking a completely OOC construct designed to control OOC player behavior and trying to apply it to an IC measure of the character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Except that it is NOT "Evil" to destroy "Evil". Otherwise every adventurer that ever killed an Orc, Goblin, Drow, Ogre, would be thoroughly and unrepentantly Evil. Yet Pathfinder portrays paragons of Good doing these things and being Good for doing them. Q.E.D.
There is no such entity as a "player" in the Pathfinder Cosmology. From the standpoint of the Universe an (NPC) Evil Drow Sorceror is equivalent to a (PC) Evil Elf Sorceror in every regard.
You are taking a completely OOC construct designed to control OOC player behavior and trying to apply it to an IC measure of the character.
Wrong! For the purpose of this game, the 7 PC races are essentially "at war" with Orcs, Goblins, and the evil races. That is why we can kill them just like any other faction we are at war with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Wrong! For the purpose of this game, the 7 PC races are essentially "at war" with Orcs, Goblins, and the evil races. That is why we can kill them just like any other faction we are at war with.
Except that it is NOT "Evil" to destroy "Evil". Otherwise every adventurer that ever killed an Orc, Goblin, Drow, Ogre, would be thoroughly and unrepentantly Evil. Yet Pathfinder portrays paragons of Good doing these things and being Good for doing them. Q.E.D.
There is no such entity as a "player" in the Pathfinder Cosmology. From the standpoint of the Universe an (NPC) Evil Drow Sorceror is equivalent to a (PC) Evil Elf Sorceror in every regard.
You are taking a completely OOC construct designed to control OOC player behavior and trying to apply it to an IC measure of the character.
Good point
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is a readjustment to sane PvP and we will all have growing pains. However with that established, I have read the guild charters for these players and there is absolutely no doubt that they are planning to engage in Vigilante behavior as an established play style.
They will have to come to grips that this game will better reflect the true fantasy archetypes and Vigilante behavior is CHAOTIC GOOD. And just like quintessential CG Batman, there will be dips into non-good if you take it too far.
My suggestion is accept who you really are and enjoy it to the fullest!
See, vigilante behavior is upholding justice where you have no jurisdiction. If they want to make it legal to KOS evil in their own territory, that is FINE, no chaotic shift. But don't come to my neck of the woods and expect to do the same, thinking because you are good, that you have that right. You don't have jurisdiction.
Please see the Pathfinder Core Rulebook Additional Rules section on Alignment.
Killing is evil. Concern for all sentient life. Opposing evil relentlessly.
That is NOT a license to attack evil characters at will.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't put a badge of LG in a organization where if a bad commander issues bad orders they will follow (most of time unaware of the bad inteintions of the bad commander), They will follow the orders and the consequences may be bad. Are the soldiers bad? No, they were just following orders. So IMO any honorable military organization is just LN. Is that an offense? Why? So lets go back to the threads subject please I hope I have made myself clear.It's quite possible to disagree with the actions of the military yet support those soldiers who put on the uniform and carry out their orders day in and day out. This isn't the forum to debate that sort of thing though, but I had to at least comment as LordDaeron was just using an example brought up by someone else, isn't an American and honestly his view of the US military should be taken with the knowledge that some really bad things have been done in his country, and other countries nearby by members of the military acting under orders that were less then honorable.
Just FYI...and this is a tangent..but since you may be unaware.
Marines don't take an oath to follow thier commanders orders blindly or even the orders of the President. Thier oath is to uphold the Constitution and the Republic for which it stands. That embodies some very high principles.
Further more Marines ARE allowed and have in the past disobeyed the orders of commanders when they believed those orders violated thier oaths or the laws of thier nation. The Uniform Code of Millitary Justice provides for that. Those Marines will almost certainly face a Court Martial where they will have to explain thier actions and those actions will be judged. However it is both allowed for and expected, even though standard operating procedure is to follow the chain of command and such incidents tend to be rare.
Just thought you might like to know.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Except that it is NOT "Evil" to destroy "Evil". Otherwise every adventurer that ever killed an Orc, Goblin, Drow, Ogre, would be thoroughly and unrepentantly Evil. Yet Pathfinder portrays paragons of Good doing these things and being Good for doing them. Q.E.D.It is difficult to think of anyone more evil than a mass murderer, even if that mass murderer thinks he is justified. Perhaps especially where that mass murderer thinks he is justified.
Whether he is unemplyed, an industrial mogul, a priest, or a king. Whether he thinks he is lawful good and the people he is murdering en masse are also murderers.
Alignment shift for killing another player makes sense. Not shifting alignment for killing another player makes alignment meaningless.
The complaint is that it is unfair that the evil bolster their alignment from doing evil things but the good damage their alignment from doing evil things. Problem is that is the burden of being good: you don't get to do evil things and still be good.
False. You are not destroying evil killing a person, you are killing a person. Destroying evil is rahter more significant than that.
There is no such entity as a "player" in the Pathfinder Cosmology. From the standpoint of the Universe an (NPC) Evil Drow Sorceror is equivalent to a (PC) Evil Elf Sorceror in every regard.You are taking a completely OOC construct designed to control OOC player behavior and trying to apply it to an IC measure of the character.
It is OOC construct player behavior that is the matter at hand here, Mel, and the in-game universe is not fully created. We are offered a hand in its crafting and part of our mission is to ensure the quality of the game is everything it can be that it should be, and your desire to run around as a vigilante hothead killing everyone you deem is evil is out of line.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really want to know more about the self-flagging that Lee mentioned earlier. If the Champion flags allow you to engage against Evil characters freely while opening yourself as a valid target in return, then I think this will allow people who wish to be good to engage without fear of falling. I can't wait until Wednesday so we can get some clarification on this.
Yeah, it probably could work depending upon how it is implimented. The alignment shifts currently described really don't make sense as far as I'm concerned. I am seeing people go through some pretty tortured excersizes of logic to try to rationalize them into fitting though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Marines don't take an oath to follow thier commanders orders blindly or even the orders of the President. Thier oath is to uphold the Constitution and the Republic for which it stands. That embodies some very high principles.
Please don't reference the oath that I took and misquote it.
"I will obey the orders of the President and the officers appointed over me."
Again, real life has no bearing on this... referencing it, correctly or incorrectly, is inconsequential to the debate.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just FYI...and this is a tangent..but since you may be unaware.
Marines don't take an oath to follow thier commanders orders blindly or even the orders of the President. Thier oath is to uphold the Constitution and the Republic for which it stands. That embodies some very high principles.
Further more Marines ARE allowed and have in the past disobeyed the orders of commanders when they believed those orders violated thier oaths or the laws of thier nation. The Uniform Code of Millitary Justice provides for that. Those Marines will almost certainly face a Court Martial where they will have to explain thier actions and those actions will be judged. However it is both allowed for and expected, even though standard operating procedure is to follow the chain of command and such incidents tend to be rare.
Just thought you might like to know.
I'm trully aware of what you posted above (already know that), however that changes not my oppinion. I admire marines for their bravery, loyalty and commitment along other many qualities, but still think ANY military organization (with rare excptions), if alignments were aplyable in real life, would be considered lawful neutral. But as it was extensivelly said for many people here it does not apply.
So lets go back to the thread subject please?