Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nivenus" data-source="post: 5777998" data-attributes="member: 71756">If I can reply to that, perhaps I wasn't clear enough earlier, but I think there's a pretty big difference between &quot;society's needs come before individuals&quot; and &quot;one should put the good of others before oneself.&quot; For instance, a chaotic good character might put the needs of individuals before those of the majority or even society at a whole, but they still think of others before themselves.Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly is arguably chaotic good, but he still acts selflessly on many occasions. I don't think individualism is at odds with selflessness and compassion - it can just as easily be a different interpretation of it. Similarly, collectivism doesn't have to equate to selflessness - it can just as easily be about making everyone the way you think or want them to be, even if it harms them in the process.Conversely, Redcloak from Order of the Stick is Lawful Evil. This isn't just because he happens to serve an evil god - he believes firmly in order and the idea of putting the needs of the many before the few, but he defines the needs of the many specifically as other goblinoids and is willing to endanger all of reality in order to help them achieve parity with the other races. This is the goal of a Lawful character, but that hardly makes Redcloak anything but evil.Perhaps selfish and selflessness aren't the right terms - but I think by focusing on them (which I mentioned only in part of my descriptions) I think you're ignoring the items I actually listed as predominantly defining good and evil:Perhaps &quot;untempered greed&quot; should be replaced with pride but the point stands that I consider these to be the chief qualifiers of good and evil using the nine-alignment system. And I think, for the most part, the way they're usually defined supports that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nivenus, post: 5777998, member: 71756"] If I can reply to that, perhaps I wasn't clear enough earlier, but I think there's a pretty big difference between "society's needs come before individuals" and "one should put the good of others before oneself." For instance, a chaotic good character might put the needs of individuals before those of the majority or even society at a whole, but they still think of others before themselves. Malcolm Reynolds from [I]Firefly[/I] is arguably chaotic good, but he still acts selflessly on many occasions. I don't think individualism is at odds with selflessness and compassion - it can just as easily be a different interpretation of it. Similarly, collectivism doesn't have to equate to selflessness - it can just as easily be about making everyone the way you [I]think[/I] or [I]want[/I] them to be, even if it harms them in the process. Conversely, Redcloak from [I]Order of the Stick[/I] is Lawful Evil. This isn't just because he happens to serve an evil god - he believes firmly in order and the idea of putting the needs of the many before the few, but he defines the needs of the many [I]specifically[/I] as other goblinoids and is willing to endanger all of reality in order to help them achieve parity with the other races. This is the goal of a Lawful character, but that hardly makes Redcloak anything but evil. Perhaps selfish and selflessness aren't the right terms - but I think by focusing on them (which I mentioned only in part of my descriptions) I think you're ignoring the items I [I]actually[/I] listed as predominantly defining good and evil: Perhaps "untempered greed" should be replaced with pride but the point stands that I consider these to be the chief qualifiers of good and evil using the nine-alignment system. And I think, for the most part, the way they're usually defined supports that. [/QUOTE]

Verification