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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mlund" data-source="post: 4382650" data-attributes="member: 50304">I'd disagree. While it is certainly possible to take any generally benevolent activity and make it self-serving or even abusive, it doesn't imply that the temperate mean or the common use of these concepts is not virtuous.Freedom on its face communicates a concept of self-determination and personal liberty rather than the wanton disregard of any assumed obligations or moral imperatives.Trade on its face implies the relatively free exchange of goods and services between willing parties to their mutual benefit rather than the blackmail of property from one party to stay the hand of force from another.Adventure in the context of the D&D Player's Handbook implies heroic feats and characters meeting the call of fantastic destinies rather than the pillaging, subjugation, and destruction that might come from "Evil Adventures."Travel seems neutral to me on its face, though. It is probably still better than compulsive immobility, though.From the common man's perspective, however, Luck means "good fortune" and it means easing the burdens of everyday living for 99% of the population of such a world. Sure, the occasional Villain might pull a Yahtzee! and take over a kingdom, but that's not the general implication here either.The goddess may disagree with laws that confine people to social classes, caste systems, and the like. Most of the laws that limit people actually just limit their ability to impose on the freedoms of their neighbors - like depriving them of sleep by playing loud music or depriving them of their life, liberty, or property for your own gain or amusement.Liberty != AnarchyThat's simply not true. First of all, there are certainly ways to improve the lot of many people without harming the lot of others. Unless you define your "good" and "bad" relative to what your neighbor has rather than what you have your neighbor's good fortune is not automatically purchased by your misfortune. Life is not a zero-sum game. Moreover, "for the better" is probably referring to the macro-scale - the greater body of sapient mortal beings. I'm sure it cheeses off demons and devils when innocents benefit, but, again, a context that's out in left field.Again, while he may worship and believe I doubt his would be considered "change for the better" and his anarchy would likely lead to the violation of the liberties of his neighbors.- Marty Lund</blockquote>

Verification