Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Good/Evil vs. Law/Chaos
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4634192" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I would say that no human is fully evil, and very few may be considered to be even fully depraved. And, while I don't doubt the possibility of a character like you describe, I'm not sure I'd go with 'fully realistic' given the dichotomy you portray.</p><p></p><p>My suspicion is that most priviledged personages who truly were the soul of honor, courtesy, and compassion were at the least troubled by their own relationship to the ones that supported their priviledged existance. If they truly tried to live in an idealized manner toward their peers, they generally probably also tried to hold an idealized relationship with their inferiors. They probably at least tried to act justly, fairly, and properly as they understood the terms of the relation with their slaves. A manorial knight who truly tried to live up to the idealized ethical standard of his day might well profit from the misery of his serfs and think it right for him to do so, but by the same token he couldn't treat them as 'disposable' or cruelly (by the societies standads of cruelty) and also live up to the societies idealized vision of noble behavior. The same would be true of a colonial slave holder. People like Washington who tried to live up to the highest standards of honor as his society understood it, were privately very troubled by the fact that their station was due to the misery of slavery. They certainly wouldn't have treated a slave cruelly as they understood the term, if only for the same reasons that they wouldn't have mistreated a dog or a horse - because they would have considered it to reflect poorly on themselves, to be crass, and to show poor breeding.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, if in fact they did treat their inferiors as disposable and cared not a bit for how cruelly they were used, I think you'd typically find that their relationships with their peers were equally calculating and Machivellian. They probably privated mistreated their wives and children as well. They were probably loyal friends and allies only in so far as being a loyal friend and ally advanced their station, and they probably maintained the usual courtesies only in so far as doing so advanced and maintained their station. If they loved their family or anyone else, it was probably only an extension of their own self-love in that the success of their family was in some fashion proof of their own success.</p><p></p><p>Consider a character like John Rooney in 'Road to Perdition'. All of his apparant noble qualities are exposed as simple self-interest over the course of the narrative. He's not truly loyal to anyone but John Rooney, and will betray just about anyone to protect John Rooney and John Rooney's legacy. He's polite, and loyal, and compassionate only in as much as being percieved to have these characteristics and acting in that manner is good for business.</p><p></p><p>So I don't deny you the possibility you describe, I'm sure it sometimes happens, but neither do I think such disparate double lives are fully realistic. Cruelty and callousness tends to have a coarsening effect, and conversely compassion not born of simple self-interest towards anyone tends to make it harder to be cruel to anyone. </p><p></p><p>Which brings us back to the beginning. No human is fully evil. Even the worst of us don't usually desire evil ends, but rather desire good things and try to accomplish them with evil. It's difficult for us to imagine someone desiring evil, suffering, and destruction as an end unto itself.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4634192, member: 4937"] I would say that no human is fully evil, and very few may be considered to be even fully depraved. And, while I don't doubt the possibility of a character like you describe, I'm not sure I'd go with 'fully realistic' given the dichotomy you portray. My suspicion is that most priviledged personages who truly were the soul of honor, courtesy, and compassion were at the least troubled by their own relationship to the ones that supported their priviledged existance. If they truly tried to live in an idealized manner toward their peers, they generally probably also tried to hold an idealized relationship with their inferiors. They probably at least tried to act justly, fairly, and properly as they understood the terms of the relation with their slaves. A manorial knight who truly tried to live up to the idealized ethical standard of his day might well profit from the misery of his serfs and think it right for him to do so, but by the same token he couldn't treat them as 'disposable' or cruelly (by the societies standads of cruelty) and also live up to the societies idealized vision of noble behavior. The same would be true of a colonial slave holder. People like Washington who tried to live up to the highest standards of honor as his society understood it, were privately very troubled by the fact that their station was due to the misery of slavery. They certainly wouldn't have treated a slave cruelly as they understood the term, if only for the same reasons that they wouldn't have mistreated a dog or a horse - because they would have considered it to reflect poorly on themselves, to be crass, and to show poor breeding. On the other hand, if in fact they did treat their inferiors as disposable and cared not a bit for how cruelly they were used, I think you'd typically find that their relationships with their peers were equally calculating and Machivellian. They probably privated mistreated their wives and children as well. They were probably loyal friends and allies only in so far as being a loyal friend and ally advanced their station, and they probably maintained the usual courtesies only in so far as doing so advanced and maintained their station. If they loved their family or anyone else, it was probably only an extension of their own self-love in that the success of their family was in some fashion proof of their own success. Consider a character like John Rooney in 'Road to Perdition'. All of his apparant noble qualities are exposed as simple self-interest over the course of the narrative. He's not truly loyal to anyone but John Rooney, and will betray just about anyone to protect John Rooney and John Rooney's legacy. He's polite, and loyal, and compassionate only in as much as being percieved to have these characteristics and acting in that manner is good for business. So I don't deny you the possibility you describe, I'm sure it sometimes happens, but neither do I think such disparate double lives are fully realistic. Cruelty and callousness tends to have a coarsening effect, and conversely compassion not born of simple self-interest towards anyone tends to make it harder to be cruel to anyone. Which brings us back to the beginning. No human is fully evil. Even the worst of us don't usually desire evil ends, but rather desire good things and try to accomplish them with evil. It's difficult for us to imagine someone desiring evil, suffering, and destruction as an end unto itself. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Good/Evil vs. Law/Chaos
Top