Are you good or evil? (rpg question)

[KoolHndLuke]

4 minutes ago, Resdayn said:

Killing Nazeem is not evil action

Actually I think that gives you a boost in relations with everyone in Whiterun- including his wife.

[Resdayn]

Just now, KoolHndLuke said:

Actually I think that gives you a boost in relations with everyone in Whiterun- including his wife.

Really?  

[KoolHndLuke]

1 minute ago, Resdayn said:

Really?  

Are you kidding?!! They hate that guy more than Alduin!! The Grey-Manes and Battle Borns partied all night together in celebration!!

[Pork Type]

14 hours ago, Ernest Lemmingway said:

More likely "neutral." Evil entails active maliciousness.

Um.

 

Hitler didn't think of himself as "evil." He was preserving the Aryan race.

 

Stalin didn't think of himself as "evil." He was simply terraforming the Soviet Union in the name of his Workers' Paradise.

 

Same as Mao. Pol Pot.

 

The mustache twirling villain of our imagination is pretty rare (They're the actual psychopaths.) But they exist in the world *cough* H-H-H- *cough*

[worik]

42 minutes ago, Pork Type said:

The mustache twirling villain of our imagination is pretty rare

Indeed, they are.

Spoiler

 

Clean shave. No stubbles

 

[Ernest Lemmingway]

3 hours ago, Pork Type said:

Um.

 

Hitler didn't think of himself as "evil." He was preserving the Aryan race.

 

Stalin didn't think of himself as "evil." He was simply terraforming the Soviet Union in the name of his Workers' Paradise.

 

Same as Mao. Pol Pot.

 

The mustache twirling villain of our imagination is pretty rare (They're the actual psychopaths.) But they exist in the world *cough* H-H-H- *cough*

Evil never thinks it's evil. It just convinces itself it's doing things "for the greater good," is so convinced of its own righteousness it can't imagine what it's doing is harmful, or justifies things by saying good and evil are just relative philosophies. Plus each of your examples all showed signs of severe psychopathy and sadism. Mao in particular had his oldest friend and longest supporter, a known diabetic, locked in prison without insulin for a year and then filmed him being beaten to death so he could watch it later for his own amusement. All because the man said he had doubts about Mao's plans. Even today the People's Republic has completely abandoned Maoism as a result.

[Celedhring]

On 1/19/2019 at 7:54 PM, Resdayn said:

Killing Nazeem is not evil action  

Oh you mean that guy?  *points to a rotting body behind a house* Nobody seems broken up about his death. THey didn't even bother taking him to the Hall of the Dead..just left him out for the birds to peck at.  And his widow seems to be unnaturally happy.  

[Molevalence]

No matter what I play I tend to go nice guy. (Unless its SWTOR I went as evil as possible. Sith rules)

 

-I play Fallout NV I have max good Karma and wipe out Caesars Legion

-I play the Mass Effect Trilogy I go Paragon.

-Skyrim I tend to help people. Even RPed as a good vampire married to Vilja and only feed on bandits and criminals.

 

It's funny too being a Misanthropist. :S

[Just Checking]

I pretty much always play good characters.  Being evil makes me feel bad, and being good makes me feel -surprise- good.  When I was younger I was a little more inclined toward evil runs, though very rarely, because I was still occasionally prone to the notion that edgelords are cool.  This was back in the days of Fable on the Xbox original, though, and that game was so comically... extra, I guess that even massacring a whole village just to buy the now empty houses barely seemed as bad as it should have.  In other, slightly more serious games like KOTOR I'd play good runs to completion, then start an evil one, get a third of the way through, and lose interest.  Anyone here ever seen that tumblr post saying "In a game without any real consequences, why are you still playing the good guy"?  Whoever posted that confused me because it's like they're saying the only reason everyone isn't evil is because Johnny Law says not to.  My guess is they were one of those 13 year olds that liked to say the only reason they don't kill someone is they don't want to go to jail.  I can play a villain and suffer no consequences, yes, or I can play as a hero and still suffer no consequences.  Both are equally crazy, I'll never be a hero or villain in reality, but if I had the choice I'd rather be a hero, and I might as well get some feel good vibes out of my compulsive escapism.

 

At my most evil, my play throughs of games are neutral, but even then I accidentally lean towards good more.  Replaying KOTOR2 recently I decided I'd try to do Kreia proud and be a methodical neutral strategist type, but while I was playing I noticed that most of the smart choices were light side ones, a jedi fugitive trying to keep a low profile tends to be one that avoids unnecessary conflict or making enemies.  Most evil choices boiled down to threatening one liners that ended with you blowing a hole in a guy and then declaring to your appalled team mates that it was his own fault because he didn't stop you fast enough.  I ended up maxed out on light before I knew it and the only reason I ever dipped was to encourage people to find personal strength and independence, or stand up for themselves and their beliefs, because apparently valuing yourself is the mindset of FILTHY SITH.

 

Playing something like Skyrim I'll usually be good, but that doesn't really mean a lot because of how black and white morality is in those games.  You're either a murderous psychopath or you're not.  If I'm RPing a character it'll usually be some kind of loose archetype, like one of my recent ones was just supposed to be a kind of paladin, destroying undead wherever they were found and generally rolling around with a mace and dispensing whatever passes for holy justice, or another that was a sneaky dungeon delver that used illusion spells to avoid conflict and violence.  Both still morally good characters (if you ignore the how easily the religious fanaticism can go wrong on the first), but again that's the default in skyrim unless you're a homicidal kleptomaniac.  My most evil bethesda characters are in Morrowind when I pick a great house that isn't Redoran.  And I'm still just a Telvanni dude with a penchant for freeing slaves and otherwise living that mage dream.

 

But the bottom line is I rarely choose any evil options in a game.  Being a killer or selfish dick just for the sake of it isn't really all that entertaining to me, and I'd much rather do good things anyway.  I appreciate a good villain, but that's because I want to see how the hero beats him rather than experience what the villain does myself.

[Alter Native]

23 hours ago, Ernest Lemmingway said:

Evil never thinks it's evil. It just convinces itself it's doing things "for the greater good," is so convinced of its own righteousness it can't imagine what it's doing is harmful, or justifies things by saying good and evil are just relative philosophies. 

So how do you know you/we are not evil then?

Doesn't everyone think him/herself as good following this logic and we can't decide ourself whether we're good or evil?

[FauxFurry]

4 hours ago, Alter Native said:

So how do you know you/we are not evil then?

Doesn't everyone think him/herself as good following this logic and we can't decide ourself whether we're good or evil?

It is one of those things that arises through a combination of critical consensus and hindsight more than self identification. 

[Ernest Lemmingway]

5 hours ago, Alter Native said:

So how do you know you/we are not evil then?

Doesn't everyone think him/herself as good following this logic and we can't decide ourself whether we're good or evil?

 

1 hour ago, FauxFurry said:

It is one of those things that arises through a combination of critical consensus and hindsight more than self identification. 

What FauxFurry said regarding real life.

 

In an RPG, just cast detect evil. Unless it's the Ravenloft setting where moral alignment can't be detected directly.

[landess]

After consulting my family planning guides:

 

Spoiler

 

I identify as Chaotic Neutral.

[Pork Type]

2 hours ago, landess said:

After consulting my family planning guides:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I identify as Chaotic Neutral.

That PHB is righteously ancient... Dunno about the rest of your kit, tho

 

Smells like 2nd ed

[Shadowscale]

I'll be the odd one here: I actually usually play evil in DnD (DM trusts me since I haven't ruined a campaign yet) with an odd good character. If I had to identify my Skyrim character she's Chaotic Evil with taking what other's have as hers and taking lives for the Dark Brotherhood.

[Ernest Lemmingway]

11 hours ago, Pork Type said:

That PHB is righteously ancient... Dunno about the rest of your kit, tho

 

Smells like 2nd ed

I recognize all five editions of the PHB. Haven't even bothered buying much of 4 or 5e, though. Nobody much liked 4e and 5e is still too "streamlined" for my taste. I'll stick with 3.x.

[landess]

23 hours ago, Pork Type said:

That PHB is righteously ancient... Dunno about the rest of your kit, tho

 

11 hours ago, Ernest Lemmingway said:

I recognize all five editions of the PHB. Haven't even bothered buying much of 4 or 5e, though. Nobody much liked 4e and 5e is still too "streamlined" for my taste. I'll stick with 3.x.

To be honest, that photo is from a google search, although they do represent the ones I've last used when I did play back in the early-mid '80s

[Ernest Lemmingway]

9 hours ago, landess said:

To be honest, that photo is from a google search, although they do represent the ones I've last used when I did play back in the early-mid '80s

That was...late AD&D 1e, early AD&D 2e? The golden age of D&D. There are dozens of books I want to read from the 2e era, specifically Planescape and Ravenloft. I used to have the whole collection of Dark Sun products when WotC was selling them as digital PDF downloads, but now I can't find them on any of my backup discs.  I liked Dark Sun, it was the one setting where psionics really stood prominent.

 

The one RPG that holds--and still holds--my attention is Shadowrun. Third Edition only, nothing by Catalyst Gaming labs (may CGL burn in Hell for what they've done to that and other franchises). There is no definitive good, just very realistic shades of gray and utter darkness for some people/entities. Runners have to decide if they're going to be absolutely mercenary and do anything for a nuyen, or if they'll follow a code of ethics. I prefer to play "hooders," named after Robin Hood, who do more than simply steal from the rich to give to the poor. A pistol using capsule rounds filled with gamma-scopolamine and DMSO is enough to incapacitate without killing, but even my characters are willing to kill if it becomes necessary. A fairly light shade of gray but still.

[Lunatiel]

Definitely Chaotic-Evil oriented. I hat picking sides, I'd rather just be on my side and choose what I want to do with it.

[joemonco]

Depends, if it's a BioWare game the best rewards go to the goody goodies, neutral and evil choices have a financial and XP penalty.

Obsidian's evil choices not in Mask of the Betrayer are best classified as kicking puppies which no one likes.

Bethesda doesn't reward or penalize moral choices outside of guild quests.

inXile basically ignores evil.

Owlcat is a mix of BioWare and Obsidian but in Russian Shovelware form.

 

So, basically, chaotic good.

[landess]

On 1/30/2019 at 6:03 PM, joemonco said:

Obsidian's evil choices not in Mask of the Betrayer are best classified as kicking puppies which no one likes.

Interesting they chose differently for the game Tyranny. I have found it somewhat difficult to embrace the choices which would make for the 'best' ending.

[joemonco]

Haven't played Tyranny.

[Clea Strange]

I tend to play a character that is in the middle of good and evil - Neutral or chaotic Neutral. where one second they could be good and helpful and the next be pure evil

[SexDwarf2250]

Good is admirable but usually dull.

Chaos is unpredictable but often shallow.

 

Lawful Evil, on the other hand... now that's interesting. Of course it is possible to add depth to any character regardless of alignment, but I find that Lawful Evil characters have an immediate advantage in terms of readily available conflicts - not that lawful and evil are necessarily opposites as is mistakenly thought sometimes, but they're both associated with things that are opposed.

 

For instance, they recognize order as superior - and this is the basis of successful societies - but at the same time they embrace a morality that is generally considered to be detrimental to society.  Now you have to answer the question of how they reconcile the evil they embody with their lawful nature, and how they came to be that way in the first place.

 

They're also interesting because they are inherently more redeemable than other evil characters.

 

I think Darth Vader in Star Wars is a good example below, the rest having motivations far more easily summarized.

 

 

 

Personally, I tend to play neutral evil in games, but lawful evil if it's social roleplaying type stuff.

[Matunus]

The more serious I take a game, the more likely I'm to play a good character. In Neverwinter Nights, most of my characters ended up being lawful good or neutral good in the end, while in GTA I'm having a lot of fun running over people. The more serious I take a story the more like I'm to relate to and care for the characters, thus I think more of moral decisions. If I don't take a game very serious however, I'm far more likely to use to let off some steam.