Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="avigor" data-source="post: 3628821" data-attributes="member: 48877">The goal shouldn't be "save the kid from the flames; other dangers be damned." It should be "save the kid from danger." i.e., you wouldn't be throwing him from the flames to a three-story drop, as that would simply change his danger. You would want to remove all danger that you are aware of. Only a stupid hero (int and wis of less than 6) would throw a kid out of a window to save him.Most of the difference between law and chaos would be things like lifestyle rules and being honor-bound to avoid certain methods like torture, stealth, poison, or refusing to even tolerate the presence of a cleric of a different/evil god, etc. Chaotics would not be afraid to hit villains below the belt, and wouldn't feel honor-bound to kill every evil thing they meet, only the ones that are a threat, or to commit suicide by taking on a dragon to save a village if they wouldn't make a difference. In that dragon example, if fighting it would give the villagers a chance to escape, a chaotic good might just do it, but if he wouldn't even slow it down he wouldn't act "lawful stupid" and kill himself; he'd live to fight and gain vengeance against that dragon 5-10 or so levels later.The "the ends justify the means" approach would be a vigilante who doesn't mind torturing the bad guy to get the info that saves 10,000 lives or whatever. Yes, it could be utilized to drive someone to evil actions, but even chaotic goods would have some rules, like don't hurt others just because you want to (have a good reason), try to help as many as possible, etc. Think more Kantian vs. Utilitarian ethics; lawful likes a bunch of rules detailing what to do, while chaotic does whatever method gives the best result.Make it the reverse? Huh? That would mean that lawful good wants to help people and chaotic good wants to hurt people. That sounds like the opposite to me. Good wants to help people. That's there intent. Lawful people follow rules about how they stop evil, while chaotic doesn't follow such rules, just stopping evil by whatever means are necessary.Doing good when not antagonized by a villain wouldn't differ that much. One major difference would be their approach to legislation and beuracracy. Lawfuls would work with the existing system, trying to use established methods of changing it, prefereably without any violence at all. Chaotics would get fed up with it and try to get people to demand immediate change, without waiting for the paperwork. They'd be more likely to start a revolution, but even then they'd normally wait until absolutely neccessary.Evil, I think, falls under the following:Hurting Others: Unless you're hurting one for the good of many (torturing or killing a villain, for example), hurting others is always an evil act. In the case of torture and such, it's questionable, especially if it's avoidable. Reasons for this type of evil would be:   Willful Ignorance: This includes justifying hurting someone with BS explainations (justifying slavery with the bible, for instance), refusing to admit to yourself that you're hurting people and not helping them, etc. A lot of these actually think that they're good.   Apathy: Simply not caring that you're hurting others. You want to help yourself, and you don't care if you hurt others on the way.   Sadism: Hurting people just because you want to see them suffer.Entropy Acceleration: Demons or whatever that want nothing less than the complete annihilation of all that exists. Unless they succeed, they'll keep trying until they die. The demons in the Warcraft universe are completely this kind of evil.Greed would only be truely evil if combined with hurting others; taking something that belongs to noone, and that noone needs, itsn't evil. Taking something that, as far as you know, isn't owned by someone, and isn't needed by anyone else, wouldn't be evil as long as you apologized etc if you found out later that it was. Hurting someone to help yourself, and only yourself, would be evil, but hurting someone while helping a larger number of people, possibly including yourself, wouldn't necessarily be evil (although it might be chaotic, depending on circumstances). Taking an evil dragon's treasure hoard and giving at least some to others wouldn't be evil in an of itself, especially if you killed the dragon first so it couldn't retaliate against the local populace. Stealing a neutral artifact from an evil villain so he can't hurt people with it, and then choosing to keep it, wouldn't be evil as long as there were no original owners or they told you to keep it, and you didn't hurt people with it.</blockquote>

Verification