Print

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

[scapheap]

Just going to cut in here and say no butterflies.  Please.

We should build angels to watch over our afterlife and repair it though.  Maybe winged humanoid looking angels wearing armor that looks like it's steel plate but light enough for them to easily fly?  Oh and they'd be on fire of course.

Since we're back to angels, I'll put forth again the previous fire atronach model.
Shifting corona of fire, body made of shifting vines, fire atronach look.
Fire, Life, and Chaos, with a more ethereal look suitable for an afterlife.

And will put forth my burning, teleporting, walking trees that can throw mini-tree(or saplings as some call them) that explode.

[Gentlefish]

The butterflies aren't for defense - they're for repair. Specifically, the caterpillar is for repair. They just fix the holes for us. They're in no means a way to subvert voidspawn that may slip through.

[Koliup]

I agree on humanoid tree things that are constantly on fire for our angels. The details are unimportant.

[kaian-a-coel]

I agree on humanoid tree things that are constantly on fire for our angels. The details are unimportant.

I agree and further push a TES V fire atronach global appearance, with wood instead of the black metal.

I am also interested in the repairbots butterflies. Sounds nice.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Also, GWG: Dogs are considered property under the law. And were, in fact, 'made'(in a manner of speech) to be subservient to humans. Is that so wrong?

Considering that dogs are not sentient? Not so much as it would be for the troglodites. Also, we're not just enslaving a species under your proposal--we'd be creating a race for the sole purpose of enslavement.

I'm not saying we allow our people to mistreat and murder them willy-nilly(would you murder your dog(if you had one)?), but we would do well with a race of workers to tend to menial tasks.

Why on whatever planet this game is set on did you call them slaves if you didn't imagine using them anything like slaves?

Hell, if we can build them to have no attachment to family members, and love working, it'd work out fine. In other words: is it wrong to force a robot to work if it's been programmed to love work?

No, but it is wrong to program a fully sentient robot to love work.
"Of course whatever Dark wizard who created them in the first place was evil beyond compare, but that was no reason to deny the poor creatures the servitude they were bred to enjoy." --Harry
Potter, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality
It would be wrong to force them to like working their hindquarters off and then exploiting them. Just giving them menial jobs is fine, but NOT if we force them into slavery with their psychology!

Before I go on; you used sentient in an odd way. Perhaps you meant sapient?

What do you mean when you say sentient?

The power of a being's soul is seemingly tied directly to its capacity for free will. Troglodytes have weak souls. Therefor they lack free will in all its power, falling somewhere between really weak willed humans and stems(which, by the way, are essentially undead analogues) in their ability to defy us. And dogs are arguably sentient. Can they suffer? Can they experience their own little life? Yes? Good enough. And how is creating a race for the sole purpose of having workers around any different from breeding wolves into servitude? Actually, this brings to mind a curious idea; life-long body guards/manservants for our people? But I digress.

Dogs completely lack free will in the sense that humans lack it. Also, your argument could be used for the enslavement of humans with mental disabilities as well. I'm sure that's not something you support, but as your argument can be used to justify it, I advise you to reconsider said argument.

Now, are they sapient? Which is what really matters. I think not, or at least not in any way beyond a particularly wily coyote. It's obvious they're lacking in a multitude of 'higher' brain functions, or at least a good chunk of self-awareness. They're probably between dogs and orcs(though orcs may just be stupid) in that regard, to be honest. How would making them enjoy working be so evil? Your quote itself illustrates the point: Why deny a being built to take pleasure from its work the pleasure it derives from working? Perhaps building them that way could be construed as evil, but then again, Krait has his labor force, and he's a pretty okay guy.

A few things.
1. Did you not notice how the quote, which you seem to agree with, described the act of making house elves to love work, quote, "evil beyond compare"?
2. Just because troglodytes are less free-willed doesn't put them on the same level as dogs. It puts them on the same level as duller humans.
3. There was once a man who loved dogs and ordered genocide. Does that make genocide okay, or loving dogs bad? No person is 100% good or 100% bad, and this goes for gods too. Don't assume everything Krait does is okay just because Krait's okay, and for that matter don't assume that Krait made his snakepeople to love work.
4. My opposition isn't to making them good at labor; it's in denying them the capacity to advance past that lowly state.

Also I called them slaves for one reason: Because it was the first term to come to mind(all are slaves to Armok). 'Unpaid workers' had too much of an indentured servant feel, and they're not working to pay off a debt. 'Robots' is a term that only really applies to Stems, and implies a great degree of disposability. And just plain old 'workers' implied they had more free will than they do now. Perhaps the easiest way to describe it would be 'slaves with rights'. Like permanent indentured servants.

I'd be fine with "workers," because it describes what I imagine them doing well. The neo-trogs would be people as much as humans--maybe not quite accepted, but undeniably people.

WE ARE FUCKING CHAOS. WHY DO WE GIVE A SHIT WHETHER IT IS ETHICAL TO MAKE SUBSERVIENT BEINGS SENTIENT. YOU'RE SOUNDING LIKE THOSE EOT ASSHOLES AND THEIR STUPID ASS GENDOVA CONVENTION. "OH, WE SHOULDN'T EXPLODE OUR ENEMIES INTERNAL ORGANS BEFORE KILLING THEM. THAT'S INHUMANE." THE WHINY BITCHES.

...
You idiot. This isn't Law v. Chaos, this is Good v. Evil. Law =/= Good, and Chaos =/= Evil.

No no, no ant-things. At least, not for the afterlife.
Fucking BUTTERFLIES.
The feed off the nectar of the chaos berries as adults and flit around and look pretty, while the caterpillar spawn eat leaves and shit. They weave their coccoons out of pure existence, and weave them over the cracks in the afterlife to seal the void out.
Our afterlife stays pretty, and the holes are sealed up tight!

GENIUS!

2. No, they don't. They just can't be used as long and set stuff on fire.

I can mathematically prove that anything on fire is more useful than that thing not on fire.
Let's say the usefulness of our object is represented by x.
x>=0, because nothing can be negatively useful.
Let's represent the usefulness of fire by y.
Fire can be used for some things, so y>0.
Therefore, x + y must be greater than x.

You fail to realize that fire can be harmful, both to the user and the object. Also, fire on a quarterstaff is less useful than fire and a quarterstaff, for an analogous reason to that by which adding chlorine (deadly) to sodium (dangerous) results in a compound far safer than either, or why chocolate-covered bacon is disgusting rather than doubly delicious.

Just going to cut in here and say no butterflies.  Please.

Why not?
They are as living as any creature, often as brightly colored as fire, and can be the cause of great chaos just by flapping their wings in China or being stepped on a million years ago or something.

[racnor]

For the angels, I still think we should have at least a few ophanim/thrones. We are a god of life and fire named Donut for goodness sake. The circular shape made the connection for me, but the hundreds of eyes cinched it.

[Remuthra]

For our symbol I like a really old idea here.
Two concentric circles, the outer of fire, the inner of vines. The fire and vines are constantly coiling about one another, the fire destroying the vines and the vines regrowing into new shapes.

[Corruptor]

For our symbol I like a really old idea here.
Two concentric circles, the outer of fire, the inner of vines. The fire and vines are constantly coiling about one another, the fire destroying the vines and the vines regrowing into new shapes.

Like an Ouroboros symbol divided into Fire and Life components?

[Remuthra]

For our symbol I like a really old idea here.
Two concentric circles, the outer of fire, the inner of vines. The fire and vines are constantly coiling about one another, the fire destroying the vines and the vines regrowing into new shapes.

Like an Ouroboros symbol divided into Fire and Life components?

Essentially. It also looks like a donut.

[GreatWyrmGold]

For our symbol I like a really old idea here.
Two concentric circles, the outer of fire, the inner of vines. The fire and vines are constantly coiling about one another, the fire destroying the vines and the vines regrowing into new shapes.

Like an Ouroboros symbol divided into Fire and Life components?

Essentially. It also looks like a donut.

I liked the idea before you said that.

[Remuthra]

For our symbol I like a really old idea here.
Two concentric circles, the outer of fire, the inner of vines. The fire and vines are constantly coiling about one another, the fire destroying the vines and the vines regrowing into new shapes.

Like an Ouroboros symbol divided into Fire and Life components?

Essentially. It also looks like a donut.

I liked the idea before you said that.

It's a subtle nod to our name. Just pretend it doesn't exist.

[Koliup]

Words.

Sentient means the ability to know suffering, or at least experience. You know suffering. I know suffering. Dogs know suffering, even rats. Simpler creatures(insects), and plants, maybe not so much.
Sapience is essentially having a mind(that can create, etc.), and it seems to me the Troglodytes have none more advanced than a wise dog's(though if tool useage can be proven, early man). By which I mean they're probably driven almost entirely by instinct. Sure, duller, or even mentally disabled humans operate on instinct far more, but they're capable of learning and even of choice. Look at the bottom of the post for what I have in mind.
Dogs lack free will in the.. what? Are you implying both humans and gods lack free will(not that I disagree)?
Though we should see what the soul power of a mentally impaired human is.
Nobody has the decency to turn the elves back, do they? The people in that universe are complicit with the evil. Perhaps the point where we're misunderstanding each other is thus: I do not see it as evil to, in committing genesis, enable a creature to love doing a particular act, provided it's not completely detrimental or used in a detrimental way. But breaking in an existing creature, with an existing mind, would be far darker. Which was why I suggested morphing them into completely different beings in the first place, to erase what they used to be. Hell, we might be able to make them.. I don't know what, but more sociable.

As it is, I see an opportunity here, in a compromise. We could have a force of public worker bug people devoted to us, while at the same time civilizing them, and making them smarter/more capable than their root being. We could make them enjoy serving us(though not necessarily bound to us like stems- we need souls), in whatever way we choose. Like a secondary population of willing-to-forgo-luxuries-in-service-of-god creatures. That way, they have some measure of freedom, will work for us implicitly due to their inbuilt faith, and count as citizens, essentially. I can't quite figure out a proper analogue for this. Zealots who serve their god because they love serving their god?

[Karnewarrior]

Why not turn the Trogs into Neanderthals? Bigger, hairier, and not quite dumb, but less adaptive than most. They can also enjoy working more than the average human, but not to the extent of house-elves. Only so far as they dislike not working with their hands.

Since we only have three we don't have a breeding population but the dwarves will bring us some more, I'm sure.

[Koliup]

Why not turn the Trogs into Neanderthals? Bigger, hairier, and not quite dumb, but less adaptive than most. They can also enjoy working more than the average human, but not to the extent of house-elves. Only so far as they dislike not working with their hands.

Since we only have three we don't have a breeding population but the dwarves will bring us some more, I'm sure.

Our slight bug theme is the reason I suggested bugs. We'd be wise to make them intelligent, but to replace that animal part that's eating their soul with blind devotion.
And yeah, once we get a pattern down, no matter what we choose, I think we can re-sleeve any Trogs we buy into the creatures.

[Origami_Psycho]

Or we incorporate the trogs into our army, doing what we did with the stems, but giving them natural armour, increasing their intelligence a little, making them faster and stronger, and making them naturally subservient to us.  And then we have instant shock troopers.