You're a villain. How would you change the world? Contest with prizes. (Spoilers for ZEITGEIST)

[gideonpepys]

It's very interesting, knowing that the thread title is "you're a vilain", that the most popular choices are the benign/good ones: Miller Pyre, the Long now and the Moral Mind.

And so?

I rather like it

They act like vilains, but their goals are noble...that's something my players will have to ponder about.
I just have to make sure that as a DM i will have to hit them hard and personally during the campaign, so that it becomes more personal...
Does the end justify the means?
Will it end like in Watchmen?

They, or I, might even propose to join the Ob. (in which case something will go wrong, blood spilled again, terrible misunderstanding etc...)

My sentiments exactly.

I think the title of the thread is key here. First of all because I think that very few people think of themselves as villains (even the Nazis thought they were doing the right thing) and because a lot of us contributing to this debate have been ignoring that injunction!

Some members of the conspiracy are clearly villainous - Leone Quital, for example. He strikes me as the sort of person who would know that his 'tastes' are egocentric and cruel. But he's also not high up enough to take part in the discussion. Only those with less overtly selfish aims seem to qualify.

On the whole notion of just how deeply one's own motives can be hidden from oneself, it would be a nice touch if Roland Stanfield is horrified when he reincarnates as a rakshasa! (Perhaps blaming the PCs for forcing his hand!)

 

[Ajar]

FYI, Leone Quital is the leader of the Watchmaker faction.

But yeah, this is basically why I called the Ob "well-intentioned villainy." Convinced that the ends justify the means, they undertake horrific acts like the witchoil experiments, all in the service of what they see as a better world. It's fair to say that the most overtly villainous Ob members (Macbannin and Quital) are driving the most overtly villainous agendas (sever the Dreaming/Bleak Gate and take free will away), but even those are still ultimately aimed at making the world a better place. It's kind of a nice echo of Ethelyn's plans for the Coaltongue in Adventure #1.

The Ob's villainy really stems from having the arrogance to think that they (and only they) have the right to and are capable of determining the fate of the entire world.

 

[gideonpepys]

FYI, Leone Quital is the leader of the Watchmaker faction.

Oh yeah. Duh. I need to play him more Lawful Neutral from now on, I think, with flashes of insane rage. But up to now I'd portrayed him as a slightly cliched supervillain. Puts a whole new slant on his character (which is probably why my brain chose to ignore this new fact).

 

[Hitomi Camacho]

A question, what's the last day to cast the votes?

 

[Ajar]

I believe it's the end of the Kickstarter, which is in 5 days.

 

[Hitomi Camacho]

I'm going to throw a question to the supporters of the Colossus, why choose the direct path when you can take a more subtle one, like you know soul binding people... ?

 

[Isklexi]

The colossus and panarchist options seem kind of similar. I agree that the "good" goals are the best ones. I like the conspiracy to be "well intentioned extremists". It makes the villains death more poignant when his dying words are, "everything I've done has been for Lanjyr", and it be completely true.

 

[Hitomi Camacho]

Originally Posted by Hitomi Camacho
I now you are a supporter of the Miller Pyre and as a DM I would like to know what evil outcomings of that plan can you imagine. I have clear ideas of the potential for absolute evil in the Panarchist cause disguised as really good intentions but I can't see them on the Pyre.

Posted by gideonpepys

Neither can I. I didn't really consider that to be the role of this debate, or my part in it.

But I do think that the 'evil outcome' could derive from something above or beyond this debate: perhaps there are inevitable casualties as a result of the huge changes wrought by the Ob? Could it be that one use for the huge lighthouse-sized Wayfarer Lanterns is to protect key areas from the chaos that will rip through the rest of the world? (This may in fact be something RangerWickett already has in mind.)

So this new utopia will be built on deaths of hundreds of thousands if not millions, and the Ob think that it is worth it (or in some cases are unaware that this will be the outcome).

That's the main difference between our points of view. In your case is the typical case "would the end justify the means?" while I support to the idea of "Utopia gone really, really wrong" without having to kill half a country to achieve it.

One more point - I know that Nicodemus now holds a 'twisted' view of the ideals he once did. Again, I never saw this debate as an attempt to embody those views. It can't be can it, unless we're pretending that every fictional character who is taking part has also read the Campaign Guide! So we have to assume that Nicodemus has something up his sleeve, don't we? Or maybe his 'twisted' view is simply that realty itself needs changing - no matter what the cost - because humanity can't be altered, improved, or persuaded, by any other means.

You are right when you say that I went to far assuming everyone in fiction read the Campaing Guide but we can be sure that the founders of the Ob "read" it and have chosen people who shares their goals. Reason over faith, Science over superstition, self-enlightenment, Knowledge over races or nations. (At this point if Moral Mind wins is almost ok for me)
About Nicodemus holding something, well we can't be sure but the adventure is called Schism after all, we just don't now if it's going to be him or another faction inside the one who breaks the organization.

 

[Siberys]

Looks like, if we get one of each of the main, side, and secret options, we'll end up with Miller's Pyre/Moral Mind/Materialists. I could dig that.

The colossus and panarchist options seem kind of similar. I agree that the "good" goals are the best ones. I like the conspiracy to be "well intentioned extremists". It makes the villains death more poignant when his dying words are, "everything I've done has been for Lanjyr", and it be completely true.

They are in means, but not ends. Panarchist is basically "Colossus, but for EVERYONE!" Subtle change, very very large ramifications.

 

[Hitomi Camacho]

Looks like, if we get one of each of the main, side, and secret options, we'll end up with Miller's Pyre/Moral Mind/Materialists. I could dig that.



They are in means, but not ends. Panarchist is basically "Colossus, but for EVERYONE!" Subtle change, very very large ramifications.

I don't see it that way, the powers with the Panarchist wouldn't be so big. But its possession aspect is open for villany. Instead of becoming super powerful lets give power to everyone and the use or knowledge to bind the souls of those that defy us to our will.