Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Evil Josef" data-source="post: 115688" data-attributes="member: 3002">Being good does not necessarily equal making a sacrifice.  The prince, in my opinion, is a good man - possible neutral good - but as someone pointed out, he's had to make some tough decisions to make the best of a situation for his people.  His intentions are good at heart, and riding out to confront the Conquerer might have been a foolish gamble; one he isn't willing to risk for the sake of his people, which is another good quality he possesses.  Outright confrontation is all well and good for a group of few, but the prince's office would make that infeasible and he apparently wants the best for his subjects.The conquerer, however, is chaotic neutral at best.  He's very selfish, and the good-will he showed his people seems more like an attempt to appease his own ego.  I would pin him as lawful evil, myself.  One need not be a finger-tenting, eyebrow-raising mastermind to achieve that position.  He doesn't realize he's a villain - the best villains never do - and probably sees himself as a righteous legend in the making, while his hunger for power and land has destroyed many of the lives of people of his part of the world.  His 'good' intentions really have paved the road to hell.The prince did what he could, given his position.  He had to adopt a stance that would protect his people, and confronting the conquerer with violence would have more than likely just led to strife and hardship for his own people, in the same vein that the conquerer's lust for battle leeched his resources.  He might be a little more isolationist than a more generous person might be, but the decision doesn't really make him a crueler person; he's using foresight to preserve the peace of his region, rather than striking out rashly.  He's hardly sold his soul.  Instead, he's saved the souls of his people rather than adding to the chaos beyond his borders by shaking up his royal hierarchy and launching a risky campaign.The Conquerer, however, isn't so good with his foresight (like many of the examples you named).  He seems mostly concerned with the here and now, which lends him towards chaotic, but he seems to have some capacity for manipulation, which pushes him back towards being lawful.  If he had patience and a good head for propaganda, he might have tried a little more subversion.  A popular tactic for would-be dictators - lay the blame on some other, more foreign force and offer to 'take care of it', then slowly worming their way into the military while earning the falsely generated gratitude of the common man.</blockquote>

Verification