Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Muscular Neutrality (thought experiment)
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="Steampunkette" data-source="post: 9532096" data-attributes="member: 6796468"><p>If there's a minimum amount of Evil that must be maintained, and the neutrals are maintaining that evil, then they are protecting and encouraging evil to exist, and fighting Good to do it.</p><p></p><p>Which is, y'know. Evil. Killing good people who seek to stop murderers and other forces of evil is not a morally neutral act.</p><p></p><p>The key phrase is "According to this worldview".</p><p></p><p>The Neutrals think they're not doing evil. Or that greater evil will come from it. However, the neutrals in this thought experiment are a bunch of gibbering fools who are committing evil acts in defense of evil while thinking that will somehow keep things 'Balanced'.</p><p></p><p>Internally they may believe their actions are good (which tips the scales to good, I guess, and breaks the balance any way you slice it) but they're actually just allowing evil things to happen and stopping anyone who tries to stop those evil things from happening.</p><p></p><p>"Muscular Neutrals" are -absolutely- allowing evil to exist. Because Good seeks to destroy evil and Muscular Neutrals step in to stop them from landing the killing blow.</p><p></p><p>If Neutrals just didn't get involved and let good and evil fight it out, they'd -still- be allowing Evil to exist by not opposing it and helping to squish it. They also wouldn't be "Muscular Neutrals" because the whole thought experiment hinges on these neutral entities -acting- to preserve the balance.</p><p></p><p>I.E. Defending Evil when Good might win, and defending Good when Evil might win. To "Maintain a balance".</p><p></p><p>And this is the external "Something bad happens if evil is destroyed" outcome I was suggesting.</p><p></p><p>In which case they're performing Evil actions against Good people to prevent a great external Evil. Which is a "Good" thing for their internal worldview, which unbalances good and evil, soooo... Not striking a balance, which is the intent of "Muscular Neutrals"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Steampunkette, post: 9532096, member: 6796468"] If there's a minimum amount of Evil that must be maintained, and the neutrals are maintaining that evil, then they are protecting and encouraging evil to exist, and fighting Good to do it. Which is, y'know. Evil. Killing good people who seek to stop murderers and other forces of evil is not a morally neutral act. The key phrase is "According to this worldview". The Neutrals think they're not doing evil. Or that greater evil will come from it. However, the neutrals in this thought experiment are a bunch of gibbering fools who are committing evil acts in defense of evil while thinking that will somehow keep things 'Balanced'. Internally they may believe their actions are good (which tips the scales to good, I guess, and breaks the balance any way you slice it) but they're actually just allowing evil things to happen and stopping anyone who tries to stop those evil things from happening. "Muscular Neutrals" are -absolutely- allowing evil to exist. Because Good seeks to destroy evil and Muscular Neutrals step in to stop them from landing the killing blow. If Neutrals just didn't get involved and let good and evil fight it out, they'd -still- be allowing Evil to exist by not opposing it and helping to squish it. They also wouldn't be "Muscular Neutrals" because the whole thought experiment hinges on these neutral entities -acting- to preserve the balance. I.E. Defending Evil when Good might win, and defending Good when Evil might win. To "Maintain a balance". And this is the external "Something bad happens if evil is destroyed" outcome I was suggesting. In which case they're performing Evil actions against Good people to prevent a great external Evil. Which is a "Good" thing for their internal worldview, which unbalances good and evil, soooo... Not striking a balance, which is the intent of "Muscular Neutrals" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Muscular Neutrality (thought experiment)
Top
