40 replies to this topic

[DeusEx]

Do you guys remember that Xvart village in BG1? As I recall they ran from you but because they had the red circles under them you could attack them. I felt so bad about killing them, I've avoided them ever since. I mean what's the point of killing them? How do we know that there weren't little xvarts there? Just because someone is of an evil race does that make everyone evil?

Sure I remember. I always make certain to pass that area and butcher every single one of those ugly little smurfs. Why you ask, well it's fun thats why and once when I was done I placed their rotten bodies in nice big heart shape in which said Viconia (written with blood of those little xvarts), she liked it you know .

[Cal Jones]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt conflicted about the Xvart village. Not that it stops me from killing them...

As for good and evil, don't get me started - I have a degree in Philosophy and we'd be here all night.
I believe there is a distinction between doing evil and doing wrong. Breaking into a house and stealing someone's belongings is wrong (I can say that honestly because someone broke into my house on Monday, so I know what it's like). Breaking into someone's house, finding them there and then torturing them to death for their PIN numbers is evil. Taking a performance enhancing drug before a contest is wrong. Stamping a puppy to death for the fun of it is evil. And so forth.

The Shadow Thieves, as far as I'm concerned, are the lesser of two evils, for the reasons folks have laid out above. They are guilty of a few evil things, but most of what they do is just wrong. The vampires, on the other hand, are evil, and do evil. I have played the vampire way twice and I just felt uncomfortable with it (though a lot of that has to do with the fact I despise Bodhi...she's just so annoying and won't shut up...whereas Aran seems like a jolly nice sort of chap). This is even though I generally don't play a goody goody game - I usually play a neutral character and have a party of mixed alignments, and though I generally take the good path, I don't always limit myself to that.

[Scipio]

As for good and evil, don't get me started - I have a degree in Philosophy and we'd be here all night.

Of course we would. If philosophers haven't been able to answer any important questions in 3,000 years, how could they expect to define good and evil in a few hours?

Oops - maybe the wrong thing to say to a girl who can bench-press her own bodyweight.

The Shadow Thieves, as far as I'm concerned, are the lesser of two evils, for the reasons folks have laid out above. They are guilty of a few evil things, but most of what they do is just wrong. The vampires, on the other hand, are evil, and do evil.

I'd rather find a vampire at the bottom of the garden than a thief. I'm protected against vampires because I don't believe in them. I'm not protected against a drug-addled criminal with a stolen 38 Special.

[Discordia]

vampires could live off cattle, but they prefer to feed on humans...they do have a choice.

the cowled wizards might be lawful, but they are still evil (or neutral at best). evil does not necessarily translate to moral behaviour, evil is selfish (thusly making characters like eldoth, edwin, kagain and the likes definitly evil) and good is self sacrificing behaviour while moral would be lawful and immoral chaotic...at least thats the way i see it.

thieves should should be able to be good -maybe only chaotic good (like robin hood) but never lawful (except for lawful evil maybe), if you ask me.

other than that...what is good and what is evil...
short answer, there is no such thing or respectively...relatively to what goal or to whom? sth good in the short term, might be bad in the long term and sth bad in the short term, might be good in the long term...

theres this funny chinese story about a farmer and his son...they had a horse and one day it ran away and the neighbours came and all said what happened was bad and the farmer said time will tell. and the horse returned and brought along more horses and again the neighbours came and said what ocurred was good and the farmer responded time will tell. as the farmers son was breaking in the horses he fell off and broke a leg and again the neighbours came and said that this was bad and the farmer repsoned time will tell. a war broke out and all the families had to send their sons...but this farmers son couldnt go so he could stay at home...

you could spin this tale endlessely...

anyway...i usually dont play good characters but neutral ones (true or chaotic)


and think of vampires in our world as deranged lunatics that break into your house, steal your firstborn child to sacrifice it to satan...

now weigh that against the possibility of someone stealing your television...or even your car.

Edited by Discordia, 01 August 2008 - 12:08 PM.

[Scipio]

and think of vampires in our world as deranged lunatics that break into your house, steal your firstborn child to sacrifice it to satan...

now weigh that against the possibility of someone stealing your television...or even your car.

Yes, but what if my TV isn't insured?

[Icendoan]

and think of vampires in our world as deranged lunatics that break into your house, steal your firstborn child to sacrifice it to satan...

Why is always the firstborn? (I am a firstborn)

Icen

[Jarno Mikkola]

Yes, but what if my TV isn't insured?

And your firstborn child is? ...Hey, I want to borrow that time machine!

Why is always the firstborn? (I am a firstborn)

You taste the most different... best is another word for it.

Edited by Jarno Mikkola, 01 August 2008 - 12:56 PM.

[WizWom]

Evil is as evil does.

The game, of course, doesn't track that until the hell trials.

You Character Record might say "Lawful Good" - but chances are you're playing Chaotic Evil. Doing everything for yourself with no regard except the immortal rule: thou shalt not get caught.

Love? Clearly the romance you choose has more to do with game effects than anything else. Can I get XP from the romance? Maybe that's the one I want, then! (say "Viconia!")
Money? Collect every penny, you might need it someday. End the game with millions you cannot spend and a full bag of Holding.
Law? Only applies when guards come.
Good? What's in it for me? How much XP? How much Gold?

[Discordia]

Why is always the firstborn? (I am a firstborn)

Icen

dunno, figured it would sound more dramatic...but then again, its the first draw and probably fucked up anyway...so why bother, right? (but i guess it has to do with succession and other archaic heritary rulings)

[Cal Jones]

Evil is as evil does.

The game, of course, doesn't track that until the hell trials.

You Character Record might say "Lawful Good" - but chances are you're playing Chaotic Evil. Doing everything for yourself with no regard except the immortal rule: thou shalt not get caught.

Love? Clearly the romance you choose has more to do with game effects than anything else. Can I get XP from the romance? Maybe that's the one I want, then! (say "Viconia!")
Money? Collect every penny, you might need it someday. End the game with millions you cannot spend and a full bag of Holding.
Law? Only applies when guards come.
Good? What's in it for me? How much XP? How much Gold?

This is why I play neutral. (Plus good characters can't use Soul Reaver. )

[Scipio]

Yes, but what if my TV isn't insured?

And your firstborn child is? ...Hey, I want to borrow that time machine!

You're safe, Jarno. Aren't you the seventh son of a seventh son?

[darlarosa]

well at least you weren't sacraficed to the great god of thunder and plague in the first season of the "holy cycle" because you are the 1st born >.>

And I've decided the best thing to do is to stay neutral or at least chaotic good...

[Jarno Mikkola]

Ahh, being a truly neutral... So, any of you wondered after an quest, whether there is still gold to be gained, and willing to have it, even if you have to blow through the ashes of a 'happy accident', or an urn. (Ah, we don't need them anymore, let's kill them...)
I am.

[Sammi Somara]

I always try to follow the good path. I won't raid houses or open locked chests, and I try not to do anything bad in-game. If there's a righteous option, I'll pick it. I always give money to all the beggars I come across, just 'cause I can, and all that stuff. Even when evil is clearly the more lucrative option, or the evil option gets you better stuff, I'll still do what's right. I'd feel really mean if I didn't yanno.

Edited by Sammi Somara, 02 August 2008 - 07:24 PM.

[Sir_Carnifex]

My PC doesn't have any qualms about breaking into houses, grabbing a beggar's savings, or pickpocketing that valuable quest item right back after completing the quest. Usually, the evil stops there, but if necessary, he'll corner a helpless civilian for a reputation-lowering session. That is, he relieves the guy of his miserable life. That's only if PC is evil, though.

That said, the I will generally choose the 'good' path of most quests. For instance, never have I played on Bodhi's side (I keep intending to!) and I've never turned in Valygar (intend to do that, too!). It doesn't matter which side (vampires/thieves) is more evil, I just trust the one side much less. How would you like working for someone who views you as an entree?

See for yourself:

Edited by Sir_Carnifex, 02 August 2008 - 08:00 PM.

[Leonard DeVir]

A jolly good hi to everyone!

First of all, if my expression is faulty and/or otherwise weird, correct me pls -.-

I've read through the mod posts and accidentally stumbled across the more philosophical threads, and I enjoyed reading them. At least one could learn something about (more) proper RP that way. To this specific one I just have to reply ^^

I think we can't break the borders between the game and reality, because...its a game! Even with mods it has a certain way to function, and we can force it to be a little more realistic by creating mods. But its a game, and someone already said, because of that black and white are somewhat clear AND most of the people won't put much emotions in pixels.

In my opinion that's one of the main differences between BG and reality: ingame you can loot houses and nobody complains or loses his basics of life, so you don't have a bad feeling about it. I'm sure, some people would stop the looting if there were scripted events in which the NPCs would mourn and suffer over their lost belongings, or even kill themselves (!) in despair. That would add a "omg, I really did something wrong!" feeling. As it is now, doing wrong is overlooked, just as if it is normal. I believe everybody has already taken something which doesn't belong to him, and if its just a chewing gum from his sister. That's not evil, but wrong, and we wont care much either.

On the other hand, in dialogues you can choose your reaction, alignment, and even actions. If you give 5.- to a beggar, you feel good because you -did- something, and you receive a reaction for it. Similar the house of the noble in the Bridge District (name?), you'll be forced out or attacked.

And that's all about it! You can do things, which you can't do in real, like backstabbing someone you really despise, break into a nobles house and loot his trapped safe, cast magic and become immensely powerful because you're a god spawn of Murder from Hell.

Often I don't care much about the characters alignments, I see them as something like the very basics of a NPCs character. They act as they do, but if they have to decide, they would choose a path with fits to their alignment. Everybody has flaws and is evil in his/her very own way, not just ingame but in reality too. So Aerie is bitchy, Anomen is arrogant and egoistic an believes hes a shining light, Keldorn kills evil NPCs with pleasure, because they are "evil", but what about their families?

Fot the shadow thieves, I'm also not fond of allying with them, but it really doesn't matter if you choose the vampires or the thieves. In points of morality both are the same: fellowers have a kind of choice, both let the innocent suffer, both do as they like, even with fellow members. In Morrowind, I would have 1000 possibilities to get to Spellhold, and if I have to cast a Swift Swim Spell and swim to the dang island. No faction needed ^^ It really is a pity that there isn't a quest to get rid of the thieves and the Coweld (?) Mages too, or even the Council of 6. Athkatla has a flair of a police state or tyranny.

My really long 2 euro cents to this

Edited by Leonard DeVir, 05 August 2008 - 02:32 PM.

[Alain]

I agree about alignment. I think the extent to which people use the system to define their character is silly. I always viewed it as a very general guideline and open to interpretation.

[Lythari]

I believe that such things that good and evil exists but world isn't like a chess match: "here white, there black, and all fields are square". Sometimes it is hard to decide what choice would be the best, because both option may cause some wrong, lesser or greater, but there is an objective border between what is good and what is evil and it cannot be disregarded.

I'm usually playing good characters and try to make good deeds. I don't rob houses and never kill innocent bystanders, even if it is only game. I'd just feel really bad with it. Also I always try to spare life of creatures who ask me for it, vide those orcs in Firkraag's lair. I just think that killing someone who is begging for mercy is honorless. Even in BG1 I prefered to charm the Flaming Fist's soldiers who were after me after the Candleekep and make them go away than kill them. You know, they were only following their duties and Charname was commonly considered as a villain.

But I admit that in the game sometimes evil gives more profit. I personally don't feel good about Lilarcor quest. To gain it, you must take the stuff from the kobolds, who didn't do nothing wrong to you (of course you can buy it, but it resembles simple corruption too much) and kill Quallo's friend. But on the other hand, if you don't do this you won't free Quallo from Lilarcor's control and the man won't be able return to his family, so you must do something evil to achieve something good.

And for the question about Shadow Thieves and vampires. I find the thieves a lesser evil. Of course they are stealing and blackmailing, but they are at least human beings and are able to some humane feelings sometimes and they can act within some rules, and vampires, on the contrary, rather not. What's more, vampires wants to take Shadow Thieves place in the Amnian hierarchy. Just imagine: instead of simple burglar who steal your goods but spare your life if you won't annoy him you have a vampire who first kills you and your family for blood and fun, and then steal your goods as a bonus.

[Leonard DeVir]

I've read the BG 2 manual once more (forgot about the turn/round thingy oO), and it states: "...You might say that your alignment shows your basic attitude and points of view, and together with your reputation it describes, how you live your alignment..." Yay, broken English! Of course it's a BG 2 manual description and therefore far away from any correct (A)D&D rule sets.

But I like it that way: like you have a fundamental attitude towards everything, but depending on the situation and the resulting outcome, your actions/alignment may shift. For me between LG and TN, it seems.

[Nuuskamuikkunen]

I think morals are too subjective for much good/evil labelling to be effective or accurate, so I never really look at BG in good/evil terms much. That or my morals aren't easy to categorize into good/evil neatly. Shrug.