Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[irmo]

"Good" and "evil" are moral judgments. It's far too complicated, and arguably not in the spirit of the game, for the terrain to make moral judgments about creatures living on it, so those categories of terrain should go away.

If we need a place where the dead rise up and attack the living, that should be called an "undeath region". It's a specific thing, and by itself neither good nor evil.

[Manveru Taurënér]

Actually, since this is a fantasy world after all good and evil aren't really moral judgements, but rather descriptors of the forces of good and evil, which generally in fantasy are characterized as undeath/darkness/pestilence etc. and light/nature/fairies etc. respectively. Renaming them wouldn't really make much of a difference (since removing them completely is out of the question I'd assume)

[Neonivek]

Ignoring that good and evil regions will not be in the game forever and are eventually going to be replaced with "Sphere Lands".

Good and Evil Regions are not truely good or evil. they are collections of concepts and ideas that are either called a "good land" or a "evil land" by the ingame options only.

There is nothing in game that tells you a land is "very very good" only that it is some sort of weird bubbly land or that the land is some sort of weird hellish place on earth.

[truckman1]

I'm sort of in agreement with you about this.

On the bright side, "good-aligned" creatures aren't necessarily any less hostile or dangerous.
Maybe there should be "good mists" which mutate people into beautiful fairy people, who still go and kill people just like mist husks.

[Ultimuh]

Maybe there should be "good mists" which mutate people into beautiful fairy people

The vampires here sparkle!

[Kavalion]

The terms are being used metaphorically, not literally.  "The place is evil" is just suggesting a resemblance to a person with malicious intent and nefarious purpose.