How can this not be evil?

I recently got Seven Civilizations from Atlas and 6 of them are pretty cool. But the last one I find very wrong. The civilization is long dead and the souls of the champions of it were placed into spheres to continue their work in advising the nation. They were driven into sleep and the nation fell. Recently the reawoke and now take over the bodies of people near them and use their knowledge to rebuild the nation.

Here is the kicker- the soul of the person who is possessed will be OBLITERATED when the sphere takes total control. How can so called good beings do this? It is one thing to release the souls into the afterlife, but to destroy them, even in the name of the greater good seems very evil to me.

DMH said:

but to destroy them, even in the name of the greater good seems very evil to me.

Click to expand...

"Destroying things for the greater good" sounds like textbook LG

You know, "needs of the many..." and all that.

I would agree - the act is evil.

I haven't read the book itself, but the press on their website I've seen doesn't seem to insinuate that all the civilizations are 'good.' I think this is a great hook, actually - a civilization, once a bastion of good, that fell into decline. Now, as its scions awaken, they discover the world as it is, and decide that the only way to return the world to 'good' is to reform their empire... no matter the costs. They would slowly morph from a good civilization into a more Lawful Evil civilization, probably without even noticing the changes until it was too late.

The write up has the "sphere people" as goody-two-shoe good (inc paladins and good clerics). I hope the author see this thread and responds.

Do they know that the destroy souls?

And I agree with TB, you have break eggs to make omelets. THe greater good they do is worth the cost.

Crothian said:

Do they know that the destroy souls?

And I agree with TB, you have break eggs to make omelets. THe greater good they do is worth the cost.

Click to expand...

If they knew about it, EEEEEEEEEEEVVVIIIILLLL.

This is one reason(amongst many) that we should all pray that alignment is on the list of things to be expunged when 4.0 comes along. Characters have goals and motives. You really don't want to be on the receiving end of a zealot's goal.

It's the age-old ends and means debate all over again, isn't it?

I generally prefer to run and play in games where good ends are best or most completely achieved by good means, because I see the means to be just as important as the ends. In my campaigns, anyone attempting to achieve good ends with evil means is going to drift to Neutral or worse.

For those who think that Lawful Good characters would be willing to obliterate a soul "for the greater good", consider whether a Chaotic Good character would be willing to do the same thing to free a large number of slaves.

Good is good. Don't romanticize the Chaotic and demonize the Lawful.

fafhrd said:

This is one reason(amongst many) that we should all pray that alignment is on the list of things to be expunged when 4.0 comes along. Characters have goals and motives. You really don't want to be on the receiving end of a zealot's goal.

Click to expand...

Of all the reasons I've heard to get rid of alignment, the fact that it can make a great plot device (wrong on of a zealots goal is a plot device) is one of the reasons for it to stay.

If they know of the obliteration ... EVIL indeed. Since they're advisors to their people they will obviously know something UNLESS they're simply the equivalent of computer databases. With the memories and knowledge of their past selves without the ability to grow and learn.

If they're not the database equivalent then they must also be able to think/feel. It is entirely possible that after decades/centuries of "living in a sphere" they have gotten fed up with their situation and alignment shifts have occurred. But I'm guessing this isn't the case otherwise you wouldn't have posted something about it.

As for the argument that alignment should be removed, I disagree. Even our modern world is governed by morality in one form or another. How you see someone in real life is based on your upbringing, your likes/dislikes, your current mood, a lot of things, however you can boil most of your feelings/perceptions down to an underlying tendency of behaviour.

In D&D it was reflected with alignment ... in Vampire the Masquerade it is an Archetype combined with your HUmanity or a Path of Enlightenment - each level in a path having a "base-leveloffence" before you had to check for a shift in your rating ... Rifts it was codified into genernal behaviour with lists of dos/don't

Alignment is a mechanic ... every roleplaying game I have every played had alignment in it. Even superhero games had alignment. Heros were good, Villains were bad, and you belonged to a faction. d20 Modern has an alignment equivalent.

In fact now I think about it ... there is no game I've played without alignment ... oh wait maybe Shadowrun.

D