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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6695932" data-attributes="member: 6681948">Is it possible that you have seen few if any characters that weren't played as evil at least to some extent?  I have seen many games where the primary, much less only, objective of the characters was not to kill things and take their stuff.  If gaining power for its own sake, and not caring how it is done, is the objective of the character, I submit that the character is evil.  In the games I played, the players accepted defeat of enemies and acquisition of gold = xp as a proxy for the other actions characters took, on screen and off screen, to grow and advance.  The characters were not seeking opportunities to gain xp.  Some sought opportunities to gain wealth, an objective generally acknowledged as neither good nor evil unto itself.  The purpose of gaining that wealth, and the means the characters were prepared to utilize to gain it, better defined their morality.  Gaining xp and levels was a byproduct of play, even in my 1e days, not the focus of play.  The focus was on objectives the characters, not the players, would perceive.  That might be gaining wealth (commonly a campaign involving neutrality, mercenaries, etc.).  It might be protection of the innocent and defeat of the guilty (a long-running campaign of largely LG characters).  It might even be seeking power, but here the characters would largely be focused on ancient magicks, not "kill them and take their stuff because that's how we get xp - see the xpmeter on my forehead?".Let's assume that killing newborns gains character power.  It certainly could.  Lots of evil creatures in 1e were capable of granting Wishes, and wishes could grant power in many forms.  So, every newborn you kill, the mysterious robed figure will grant you a Wish.  Does that somehow make it "not evil" to kill newborn babies?  Similarly, if the PC's use their abilities to loot, steal, pillage and slaughter the locals, because "gold and dead bodies = xp and that's the goal of the game", I submit they are evil.A nice summary.  My counterpoint:  if the character is prepared to compromise his own morals for self-interest, then the character begins the slide to Evil.  Unrestrained self-interest (backstab my buddy so I get a bigger share of the loot; kill the villagers for their treasure/xp) is evil.  Slay the orcs to protect the townsfolk?  That also gains xp, and treasure, but the xp and treasure are not the objective.You suggested good and evil are defined by what you kill.  I suggest they are actually defined, in game, by what drives you to kill.If the story hook was "hey, guys, there's a whole bunch of sentient beings living a hundred miles out of town - we don't like them, so it's OK to slaughter them and steal their treasure", then the characters taking that story hook are neutral at best, and I'd say evil.  That wasn't the typical story hook in any games I recall playing, though.  Exploration of the ancient ruins, perhaps.  Defend the town against the depredations of the evil Orcs, pretty common.  But "hey, they are just minding their own business, but since they look different/have a different philosophy/follow a different religion, it's OK to pillage their homes and slaughter them" was not the games I recall playing.Not really wanting to get into the whole "fornication" issue, but I'll just comment that this seems more like Law vs Chaos than Good vs Evil.  Stable bonds, family units, etc.</blockquote>

Verification