Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kengar" data-source="post: 347105" data-attributes="member: 3230">I disagree; but there you have it in a nutshell. I could actually just stop there but I'm not that clever <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I don't think enjoying things like killing is a necessary part of evil. Just as a Good-aligned character might want to kill something, an Evil person might want someone to live. Remember, the opposite of love is NOT hate; it is indifference. Any person who enjoys suffering and carnage is very likely evil; but what about someone who doesn't necessarily enjoy torturing people (it deosn't thrill them, etc.) but will do it without any real reluctance beause it's seen as an efficient way to get information? That's Neutral??As far as power goes, alignment has more to do with the means than the ends. A Lawful Good Paladin might slay the dragon, win the hand of the princess and eventually become king. A Chaotic Evil Barbarian might slaughter everyone that stood in his way, become chieftain of all the tribes and sweep through "civilization" like a plague, becoming the ruler of a continent. Both achieved similiar ends, but look at how they did it.By my definitions, the LG Pal might very well see himself as the most qualified to rule; but he would judge his fitness for rulership on how well it would serve the group and his values as a whole. The CE Barb saw himself as the best ruler too; perhaps because he wasn't going to let anyone else tell him what to do.To re-quote just one part of your post:"only evil characters have a desire to dominate others specifically because he enjoys treating other beings as inferior and unworthy"I would agree with you in that, anyone who thought this way would very likely be of evil alignment. However, I would not say that in order to be evil, one must think that way.Again, IMHO, etc.</blockquote>

Verification