Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6414638" data-attributes="member: 48965">I think you're definitions are confused... Again you seem to be using a very narrow (arguably incorrect unless we are speaking to jargon within the field of philosophy as opposed to common meanings) definition for the word value.  The definition of value is... 1. the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.and... 2. a person's principles or standards of behavior; one's judgment of what is important in lifeIt seems like, for the purposes of your argument you keep trying to separate "behaviors" from morality/values but in the common definitions of these words they define morality and values and make no specific mention of "goodness"...So far you haven't shown me where they are specifically called out as non-values, in fact this seems to fit the definition of value I posted above...No it is not a moral "failing" it is a morality that is not concerned with good or evil...How are these moral failings?  Again you're choosing your own definition of moral here... in fact your whole argument seems to be based around the acceptance of your very narrow definition of morals/values and morality centered around "goodness" which the actual common definitions don't necessarily support as the only view.All you've shown here is that the morality and values of say a LN character vs. a NG character are different, what you haven't shown is that Law and Chaos aren't values in and of themselves... That's the point I think you are trying to make that only good is a value and only good can be defined as morality... but looking at the actual definitions of the words morality/value/moral shows that's not true.No it doesn't tell the player that a Conan-esque hero is not heroic, because heroic also means... exhibiting or marked by courage and daring, which definitely defines Conan.  all it says is that for the values that constitute "good" in D&D, Conan is not a fit... and I think most people who've read the stories would agree. Really because the SRD states that Neutral Evil follow evil as an ideal... how is that possible if it is a moral failing as opposed to a value or set of values in and of itself?Wrong, this is how you are defining morality and nothing you've actually shown me from the books supports your particular vies of values, morals or morality.Funny there was a point in time where many people believed good was constituted in an eye for an eye vengeance... And yet the concept of "good" has changed and been re-defined for many over time.Again I feel you are wrong it's clearly stated in the 3.5 SRD that evil can be followed as an ideal, and it has it's own set of defining values and morality when we aren't sticking to your very narrow definition of those words.I'm sorry but I remain unconvinced this is anything but your specific interpretation...It is in certain rpg's (Planescape, Mage, Unknown Armies, etc.)I am discussing a roleplaying game with dragons, elves and goblins... it has numerous things that have no correlation in the real world and I already stated I don't consider "Because the real world" in any way a valid argument.I used quotes because what is considered "good" by Elric changes throughout the stories... and is never actually codified.  No, you're assuming what is "good" in the Elric stories and also assuming that the elimination of Chaos and Law actually does bring about the most "good" in the world (this ignores the fact that he has to destroy the world in order for it to be re-made) but the stories never answer the question of what good is or whether it is or isn't achieved by his final act. It says for some it would be viewed as good for others it would be viewed as a bad thing... in play, remember we are speaking to roleplaying games not real life (though you keep bringing real life issues into the discussion), the individual players would decide if this was good or evil.  Just to get away from real world issue and use a more related example... can you objectively determine whether the creation of Droaam (a monster nation) in Eberron is a reform or not?</blockquote>

Verification