Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sundragon2012" data-source="post: 3747465" data-attributes="member: 7624">It supports moral relativism insofar as there is an intrinsic moral and ethical equivalency in all points of the philosophical compass so to speak. One doesn't need an objective force calling them equal when they are just BECAUSE there is no higher force calling them unequal. On the Great Wheel there is no objective moral power calling demons "wrong" except the forces of good who can equally be called "wrong" by devils and they can all be called wrong by the ambivalent forces of the Outlands.Having no objective force or standard even if that standard is the "natural order" or "natural law" or something equally nebulous to call evil wrong or bad is tactily calling it the moral equivalent of good. I agree that this is a valid interpretation, but it actually bolsters my point. You see if good is that which seeks to enlighten and evil which seeks to oppress, dominate, destroy, etc. then instead of moral positions we have positions of the natural order. This is similar to the idea of the patterns of healthy growth that bring life and health and the forces of natural disaster that bring suffering and death. Neither is really good or evil but instead simply part of the greater cycle.I see the Great Wheel as supporting the idea that evil is part of the natural cycle in that is belongs where it is, as does an earthquake, a typhoon, or a plague in our world. One may rail against the coming of the tornado but its just doing what tornadoes do and is as much a valid part of the natural order as the gentle violet or the warming sun of a sping afternoon. I would argue that the Great Wheel presupposes a natural validity to all points of view.Again I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying. There is herosim in the Great Wheel. Heroes of good are always smiting evil in the hells and the abyss. However, I never said that heroics are not part of adventure on the Great Wheel. I am saying that the Great Wheel dimishes the utimate reality of the sacrifices of heroes when both heroes and villians are morally and ethically equivalent in a system that makes good and evil both cosmologically valid, natural and, if one is using the Great Wheel, I would say necessary.If evil is necessary then heroes IMO dimished by the fact that according to the Great Wheel there is no particular higher ground, there is only different ground. How exactly does one espouse a position of moral highground when one is standing next to a genocidal maniac who rightly claims that he is morally correct because an entire set of infinite universes and gods/demons within (the abyss) says he is?Whose perception is more morally valid, that of Asmodeus or that of Pelor? I would argue that according to the Great Wheel they are positions of equal validity though from different perspectives. This may work fine for some, but I see it as the antithesis of High Fantasy.Sundragon</blockquote>

Verification