Print

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

[Tormy]

I'd like to point out that I disagree with the idea of a designated "evil" race. The concept of evil is in the eye of the beholder, so I'm all for "evil" dwarfs, but strongly opposed to the idea of "an evil race of dwarfs".

I don't see any problems with having an evil race of dwarves even...just think about the Dark Dwarves [Derro] in Dragonlance for example.

[SirHoneyBadger]

Aside from how two-dimensional D&D monster races tend to be, the Derro are insane.

[Random832]

Amoral, sure, corrupt, degenerate, decadent, and with the backing of a culture that reinforces the very worst behavior, that certainly is a possibility, but good, altruistic, unselfish acts *do* have their rewards.

No, they don't - that's actually part of the definition of altruism. What you're looking for is rather "there are plenty of acts that someone can plausibly make with selfish motives that have beneficial effects to others"

[Granite26]

Is the character capable of recognizing and following a risk rewards structure to get what he wants?  If so, he's lawful, otherwise he's chaotic.

Is what he wants inherently for the greater good (either at his cost or at no detriment to society)?  If so, he's good.  Is it to society's/the world at large's detriment? If so, he's evil.

Nowhere in that alignment scheme does the concept of 'does bad stuff because it's bad, or fun, or inately evil'.

People don't eat puppies because it's wrong, they do it because puppies taste good and they don't CARE that it's wrong.

TL/DR Modern TV writing sucks

[SirHoneyBadger]

Amoral, sure, corrupt, degenerate, decadent, and with the backing of a culture that reinforces the very worst behavior, that certainly is a possibility, but good, altruistic, unselfish acts *do* have their rewards.

No, they don't - that's actually part of the definition of altruism. What you're looking for is rather "there are plenty of acts that someone can plausibly make with selfish motives that have beneficial effects to others"

I *think* what you're referring to is anarchy?

Altruism is the opposite of selfishness.

The definition of an altruistic act is something that is done unselfishly, without the expectation or desire for a reward, and ideally without announcement, in order to benefit...the greater society? But it definitely is a benevolent act, and it definitely is performed in order that some good be done.

The good act itself is the reward. 

Otherwise, it's an act of anarchism.

[Mel_Vixen]

Well all this good/evil discussion bases on the idea that all kinds of Intelligent creatures are equal. I for once can imagine that an demon sees Goblins Humans and dwarfs more as animals then as intelligent individuals.

By this all demonic actions would be altruistic for the entire society which is all in all only the demon himself. Its alike to the worldview of many Slaveowners till the 19th Century that thought that "Wilds" ("Wilds" is only used as illustration, we are all people after all) are not more then well trainable pets. The fact that we deal here with truly different Races and the truly advanced powers of any Demon would only support this view.

Anyway back to topic:

More varied civilation Events would be nice. Political decions for example Portraing the sittuation.It would be neat for example to read about an "No attack pact" between elves and Dwarfs cause both are treated by goblins at the same time.

Accidents like Cave ins or fires (started by Lightning maybe?) would also be sometimes notable if it has an certain impact on an civ by example killing important figures like kings and Nobles.

[SirHoneyBadger]

I agree with you about viewpoints on what's "good/evil" often being contained within the species (or culture, or nation, or family.) If you hunt a deer, you're a hunter. If you hunt a human being for sport, you're a murderer. Arguably, you're even worse than a murderer, if you eat the human being you kill (within most modern human societies). If you eat the deer, however, you're arguably more moral, instead of less, for not wasting the meat.

Different moral guidelines might be something that intelligent beings, including demons, would be able to adopt, and-apart from that-they might also have a list of friends/relatives/compatriots/pets, and ofcourse enemies, that can expand to include members of other species, or contract to the point where sibling takes up arms against sibling.

So you might *possibly* have a situation where a demon might adopt one of your dwarfs, or another situation where a specific elf became enemies with a specific treant.
 

[Granite26]

As a first point, I think it's important not to place too much stock in the stock universe, since I'm not very attached to it and really would like to use it as a springboard for more varied, generated civilizations and so on over time.  That said, some of the mechanics that persist will likely take sides one way or another in nature vs. nurture arguments and various historical determinism paradigms and all that.<P>Right now, and it's likely to continue more or less in this way for a long while, the creature definition says what part is nature, and the entity definition says what part is nurture.  For instance, at this point, a kidnapped elf will still use the elven personality definition to determine their personality profiles, and in this way, an elven leader for a goblin civilization will behave differently from a goblin leader, even though the elf still has the goblin culture.  At this time, the post-kidnap process is entirely unspecified -- whether or not that should have impact on an elf's personality or self-image and so on is all up in the air.  I don't think it's a given that an elf would feel bad about being an elf in a goblin civ, since kidnapping is such an important part of goblins society, and in that way elves are valued in goblin society -- they could very well feel at home among the other elves there, and made to feel as if they belong, but nothing is decided here.  Certainly the stock creatures will have pliable minds when it comes to goblin indoctrination -- there'd be no point for the kidnapping mechanic otherwise, though it would certainly be interesting to have their individual personalities affect the outcome, leading to conflict with the more obstinate ones, etc.<P>"Alignment" is something I'd like to avoid.  I'd rather deal with specific universe metaphysics, which I'd hope to have generated.  It would be a fair mechanic to have some sort of "evil" associated to creatures like demons that is inherent to their nature, and as it stands, the stock demon in the raws would receive any such concept that arises, but the custom world map fields and creature variables that come up don't have to be alignment-driven.  As it stands in the raws at this time, there's a basically unused [EVIL] tag for demons and goblins (which is sort of a placeholder for their underworld status), and the evil of goblins is cultural -- aside from their negative personalities, which are inherent traits.  The demon in particular has a very nasty personality, and it's always set to extreme values on certain traits -- this is a natural property in that all demons generated will be this way, though we have no idea what the underworld was like...  perhaps it affects demons in horrible, horrible ways.<P>I think racial loyalty/xenophobia could work as both a creature (natural) and an entity (cultural) parameter.  Ideally, for modding purposes, every parameter would be handled that way, so that you could set a xenophobia value wherever you think it should be for humans, and then have some of their societies modify that value.  Wherever I'd stick that on the DF humans, I think the system should probably be set up to allow that sort of wiggling.<P>As for leaders and good vs. evil ones etc., there really isn't a lot of interaction at this point between the leader's personality and their overall culture.  Of course, that sort of thing is a drama/conflict goldmine and should be exploited, but we aren't there yet.  In general though, instead of good vs. evil, it would have to handle the creatures personality and ethical framework vs. the personality and ethical framework of the host culture -- that would just have to be handled a step at a time.  An elf enslaved from its formerly tree-loving society and placed in the role of a woodcutter currently feels no conflict -- I basically have to go through all of the professions and teach it more about each one so that critters can better judge their situation.<P>I'm sorry this is all sort of vague/rambling/dodging, but like I said, the core response here is that I'd like to have the game designed to answer most of the questions in more than one way.  I don't really have a desired direction so much as I'd like a robust system.  Of course, this is a lot of work, so many of the issues will fall squarely on one side of the fence or the other and choices will be made, but it's not something I can really anticipate for a given DF civilization, since I don't have strong feelings about it.<P>The same holds for all the metaphysical/deity stuff -- I'll put in as much as I can put in, and for magic and religion in particular, I'm not planning to do much with stock DF at all -- it really should be world dependent (though the already-defined religion spheres such as "fire" and so on will certainly constrain the outcome in stock DF a bit).  Some of the religions should be fake (they are all fake now), and some of them should be real (probably has to wait for magic, though some elements can be put in early).  Right now, religious groups can build temples and convert people within sites, but there aren't any attempts to convert outside of that, and there's no general notion of cultural diffusion or anything like that.  This will start to come up more with the caravan arc when civilizations start to have non-violent dealings with one another.<P>...  I have to get back to work.  I apologize in advance for the lack of proofreading.

FYI

[SirHoneyBadger]

No matter how many times it's been said, it merits restating that Toady's a very smart man.

I'm not too worried about the core game, though. My intention is to explain my reasoning and my side of things to my fellow modders and players.

Not that I expect to be agreed with, but I atleast want to put certain thoughts out there, in the hope that they'll be judged and considered against others' beliefs.

After all, homogenous "alien" species are a very common trope in both fantasy and science fiction.

[Granite26]

For me, it's more of a nature of evil in the universe thing.

Is there absolute evil, or is it all relative?

If there is absolute evil, are there beings whose nature is absolute evil?

(These are as much 'engine supports' as they are 'true in Toady's world)

[SirHoneyBadger]

There may or there may not be absolute good or evil in the Universe, but whether or not they exist, I think that we, as human beings, lack the sort of omnescience to comprehend the nature of such.

I think the most we can hope for is to look beyond our own species and maybe achieve a global sensibility, and that's got to be a hard enough task by itself.

[madrain]

Alignment is one of the stupidest abstractions I've ever seen, and trying to shoehorn moral behavior into 9 (or 6) opposing viewpoints is an exercise in futility.

That said, I don't see why demons couldn't persist as purely evil beings.  You just have to stop seeing demons as some sort of Judeo-Christian invention and instead view them as elemental forces.  Perhaps demons are entropy incarnate.  Their existence is not tied to some sort of eternal punishment - they exist in order to bring the universe back to its original state of nothingness.

They don't have a choice in the matter.  There are no benevolent demons any more than there are benevolent tornados.  They exist, and that's enough reason for them to do what they do.  The smarter ones may realize that enslaving a race allows them to bring much more destruction, both to the enslaved race and their enemies, than they could accomplish on their own.  They are not a culture of their own because they do not fit within any ecology...

I love that goblins are not always at war and will sometimes send trade caravans to your fortress.  I like that wars can be started over ethics, such as the murder of diplomats or massive-scale deforestation.  I'd love to see opposing dwarves, but nothing so simple as evil dwarves.  That's boring.  Whether they are evil or not should simply depend on whose side you are standing on.  Kind of like threetoe's recent story about elves + animalmen vs. dwarves.

[SirHoneyBadger]

I just think that oversimplifies demons too much, madrain. They can be a lot more interesting than just sheer destructive "events", and in the process, they'd help make the game itself that much more interesting.

[Tormy]

I just think that oversimplifies demons too much, madrain. They can be a lot more interesting than just sheer destructive "events", and in the process, they'd help make the game itself that much more interesting.

Care to post some examples? We are talking about demons, so I am really wondering that what did you meant on "They can be a lot more interesting than just sheer destructive "events".

[Mel_Vixen]

Take for example Mephisto from "Faust" or Edgar Alan Poes "The Raven". The demon(s) from "Xanth" are an example too for demons beyond dumb destruction. 

Cubi are not destruction oriented nor was legion from the bible iirc. And there are Irfits and Ghins that often are pictured as demons or demonlike but destruction itself is not theyr goal after all.

 Hellboy, to employ an more popular example, thought out of the normal demonic context is still one.

IIRC even Satan did hold war in heaven and was thrown to earth by his brothers but never tried direct destruction at least in the old testament. "God" had the monopole on accidents and catastrophes and massdestruction (untill 1945).

Sidhe, alb, Banshee and many other creatures with demonic attributs are trickers, violent, and owe breaking Monsters but were never without purpose, without detailed personality and goals far apart from blind destruction. 

(note: i am not christian or whatever but i did read that damn books )