MM II Identity Parade

[gizmo33]

Are you saying Gold Dragons are dependent on another species for their evolution and survival.

I just do not see it.

Well you probably haven't seen a gold dragon around lately either.

There's any given number of justifications for the existence (or lack of) for any fantasy species in a fantasy world. Whether or not Bahamut ordered all non-good gold dragons to be hunted down and slain, and whether he was successful, is up to the DM.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well you probably haven't seen a gold dragon around lately either.

There's any given number of justifications for the existence (or lack of) for any fantasy species in a fantasy world. Whether or not Bahamut ordered all non-good gold dragons to be hunted down and slain, and whether he was successful, is up to the DM.

Funny. Once someone comes up with a counter argument based on science, you ignore it for a fantasy explanation. If so, why bring up science in the first place?

 

[Harlekin]

Funny. Once someone comes up with a counter argument based on science, you ignore it for a fantasy explanation. If so, why bring up science in the first place?

I think I started with the science, albeit as a joke.

 

[gizmo33]

You show me a domesticated animal that is altruistic (ie gives up resources without receiving more resources in return). Especially modern dogs are pretty close to a parasitic species by most standards. And I love them for it.

So if I tie a few diamonds to a stick and throw it, a dog won't bring it back because he'll be trying to calculate the net value of the transaction? Does he do so based on current diamond values? Or those from 10,000 years ago? (If your campaign world is that old). There's no real basis for measuring the altruism in the way that you've suggested. The fact is that evolutionary theory does NOT support anything about selfish behavior being more advantageous than non-selfish behavior irrespective of the environment.

I think the details of this are too many and our basis for discussing this almost doesn't exist. My point was to say that there's no reason that a gold dragon's environment has to reward selfish/evil behavior more than good. For example, the gold dragon's environment could have been one strictly controlled by very powerful divine beings.

The environment where grey wolves were almost driven to extinction while domestic dogs were not is an example of an environment that rewarded certain adaptive social behaviors between species. The analogy is to gold dragons, the gods, and so forth.

 

[gizmo33]

Funny. Once someone comes up with a counter argument based on science, you ignore it for a fantasy explanation. If so, why bring up science in the first place?

It wasn't based on science. The analogy was based on a mistatement of the theory. The application was to a fantasy environment.

 

[Harlekin]

I'm continuing this discussion only out of scientific curiosity, I totally agree that the alignment of Dragons in a game should follow the need of the game and not real-world science.

The fact is that evolutionary theory does NOT support anything about selfish behavior being more advantageous than non-selfish behavior irrespective of the environment.

I'ld love to see where you are getting this from as it seems to fly in the face of all mathematical models of evolution that I am aware of.

I think the details of this are too many and our basis for discussing this almost doesn't exist. My point was to say that there's no reason that a gold dragon's environment has to reward selfish/evil behavior more than good. For example, the gold dragon's environment could have been one strictly controlled by very powerful divine beings.

The environment where grey wolves were almost driven to extinction while domestic dogs were not is an example of an environment that rewarded certain adaptive social behaviors between species. The analogy is to gold dragons, the gods, and so forth.

However, under this model, you need ongoing intervention by the gods, otherwise an unaligned dragon will arise and outperform its brethren. And if you do have ongoing intervention, being "good" is not altruistic anymore, as there is clear net benefit to that behavior.

Edit: We may have different definitions of altruistic behavior. For me, altruistic behavior is an act that has more cost than benefit to an individual. In evolutionary terms, an act that reduces fitness, likely by reducing viability.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Harlekin, your entire model and theories are broken when you remember that gold dragons are not unintelligent animals who lack sentience.

Besides, my main gripe with dragons is that if some are unaligned, they ALL should be.

Which reminds me, your argument also breaks apart when you consider the existance of ALWAYS EVIL ALWAYS ALL THE TIME monsters.

Speaking of selfishness:

While I do not go that far, it is my basic playstyle, the good vs everyone who is not good. I do not run evil games, and I do not play in them. It is just not my preference. I am glad 4E does not support, and actively discourages evil characters.

So wait, you're stating that you're glad that D&D goes out of it's way to crap on playstyles that aren't yours? Look, I'm glad yours is supported, but that doesn't mean it's now magically unable to support other playstyles. It can be a game where you have good vs not good and have rules for people who want to do otherwise. Right now you're saying "HAH HAH I GOT MY GAME AND YOU DIDN'T. NYEAH NYEAH NEYAH!"

 

[Aeolius]

You show me a domesticated animal that is altruistic (ie gives up resources without receiving more resources in return).

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

 

[gizmo33]

I'ld love to see where you are getting this from as it seems to fly in the face of all mathematical models of evolution that I am aware of.

Which models of evolution don't define the successful behaviors for the environment? One that predicts that a wooly mammoth would thrive in the ocean I suppose. So far I don't recognize what you're talking about as being science.

However, under this model, you need ongoing intervention by the gods, otherwise an unaligned dragon will arise and outperform its brethren. And if you do have ongoing intervention, being "good" is not altruistic anymore, as there is clear net benefit to that behavior.

You have no basis to say that one type of gold dragon outperforms the other because you haven't even begin to suggest the relevant details of the environment in which these dragons exist. A single unaligned dragon won't outperform it's bretheren in the evolutionary sense because it will never breed (it's single, remember)

I'm asserting that there are environmental variables that are possible that will reward the set of behaviors that we define as "good" with no recourse to magical beings. This, obviously, is a controversial opinion outside of science.

 

[Harlekin]

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

Cute story. However, even by risking life, the dog gave up less than what he received by domestication. (also, to protect someone carrying his genes, so the argument doesn't apply in the first place - this is well described by the selfish gene theory).