A Far Out Rant

[Kestrel]

A plotline that struck me was a lower ranking devil/demon that finds out about the Far Realm and summons one of them, thinking it could use a Far Realmian to destroy his rivals.

Unfortunately, for the fiend, his plan works too well, the Far Realms entity is much too powerful to control, and leads to the fall of a plane of hell or the Abyss to the Far Realmians.

 

[pawsplay]

The Far Realms aren't ULTRA-EVIL. They're simply inimical, bizarre, and probably uncaring. They exist as an alternative to Evil or roiling Chaos, not to outdo or supplant them. They are there when you need something, not menacing and vile, but simply wrong, incomprehensible, unknowable... something compelling, yet an invitation to madness.

If you don't have a use for such a thing, make it a nightmarish level of Hell, or make it the place where the obryliths live.

 

[Shemeska]

Fair enough. The plane itself may not be evil, but, the inhabitants certainly are.

Some of them are. The Dharculi aren't evil, they're just hungry (and neutral). It might be that only evil ones have a desire to leave and expand into other realities. It might be that the process of leaving the Far Realm and entering the Great Wheel or any other reality might drive them insane and bloodthirsty. Who knows. I just think it's a bit broad to try to define the natives as evil; seems like imprinting HPL's work a bit too directly, especially when we've had so small a sampling of the plane's inhabitants.

I'm not sure where the "exposure to our reality seems to be harmful" comes from

It comes from the Kaortis' flavor text. Exposure to the planes of the Great Wheel causes them debilitating pain, and due to their having become native to the Far Realm, they're incapable of surviving in the Great Wheel outside of their cysts without wearing resin-like suits.

 

[Mercule]

They're not evil in the "We want to take over the world and eat your soul" kind of demonic or devilish evil. No, they're evil in the sense of "We are here to completely obliterate all life and twist and pervert it for our own purposes".

Odd. The latter is how my demons opperate. They've been cast into the abyss and are being drug into oblivion. And they're going to take as much with them as they can.

 

[Victim]

Because Far Realms = Lovecraftian. The the Mythos is basically is a cosmological Mary Sue.

 

[Hammerhead]

the Mythos is basically is a cosmological Mary Sue.

Undeniably brilliant.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

# UTranslator Error Notification: Unknown concepts/memes encountered in body text. Accuracy of translation is highly suspect. Sender may exist in a universe that has dramatically different physical laws and/or experience time in a completely different manner than the reader does.

Temporal repeat approach/contact acknowledgment.

Negotiation for appropriation of #camper# #headgear# will be completed thirty-four days from this time. As per terms of our agreement, we are beginning the retrieval of #headgear# at this time.

*screaming begins*

Temporal repeat disengage/contact acknowledgment.

Star Control 2, right?

 

[rounser]

A lion eats you because it is hungry - under D&D this is neutral behaviour. The lion doesn't know or care about human society, it just sees two-legged meat-bags.

A devil flays you alive and takes your soul - under D&D this is evil behaviour. Devils are painted as being aware of and purposely malignant towards human society. They mean specific ill, and know what they're up to, and lack any form of conscience. They personify the moustache-twirler - there's nothing incidental or accidental about the way they act towards "people".

Cthulhu falls into both categories. It sees no more than meat-bags and seems unaware of human society except on some alien level, yet it's purposely created by the author as a force malignant to humanity. It seems to me that the incidental "they got in the way" element is downplayed, or Cthulhu would be a lot more indifferent to humans in the same way a lion often is, and that's not the case - every interaction humans have with Cthulhu is likely to be fatal or lead to manipulation or institutionalisation.

In this case, the author's intention trumps the "don't care, they're just meat-bags" factor, IMO, because any interactions Cthulhu has with "people" are going to have predictably bad outcomes. Therefore, IMO, far realm denizens = evil purely because of the author's intent for them.

 

[PallidPatience]

I'd categorise interaction with Cthulhu on the same level that I'd categorise sticking your hand in a bonfire. Is the fire evil because your interaction with it leads to your harm? I don't think so. Cthulhu isn't trying to mess with people. He's sleeping. It just so happens that what he is and how he thinks is inimical to mankind, just as the heat of fire is inimical to your hand.

 

[rounser]

I'd categorise interaction with Cthulhu on the same level that I'd categorise sticking your hand in a bonfire.

Only:
1) Cthulhu's a creature, and therefore subject to classification by alignment in D&D.
2) It's no accident that Cthulhu's designed specifically to hurt people.

I think point (2) takes away Cthulhu's right to immunity of intention towards evil in the same way, say, the smallpox virus has. Evolution might have designed the smallpox virus as being uncaring and predictably malignant towards humans, whereas an author who does the same sets out specifically to create a monster - the uncaringness is just flavour.

I'll admit that this is inconsistent - isn't a rot grub neutral, and predictably malignant? Yes, but perhaps it falls under the animal clause because it's of animal intelligence, and resembles an animal. Cthulhu, on the other hand, schemes towards his malignant effect, and I think we associate malignancy + intelligence with wickedness.

This is subjective, but then, morality itself is inconsistent. One example I've seen repeated recently is the following scenarios:

1) "You and an obese guy are on a train speeding towards 5 people on the track who cannot get off. You have the option to flick a switch and divert the train to another track where only 1 person is trapped, killing them rather than the 5. Do you flick the switch?"

2) "You and an obese guy are on a train speeding towards 5 people on the track who cannot get off. There is no switch and alternate track this time. You could push the obese guy off the front of the train, which would slow it enough to save the 5 people but kill him. Do you push him off?"

Given that most people don't hesitate to flick the switch in the first instance, but cannot bring themselves to push the obese guy off in the second suggests that morality cannot be approached in terms of logic, only in terms of human idiosyncracy. Mine tells me that Cthulhu is evil because I know what the true story purpose of his creation was, and he resembles a devil more than an animal. The tipping point for me is that he schemes against humanity, and thus cannot fall back on low intelligence as an excuse for his actions.