| Author |
 Topic  |
|
eeorey
Seeker
Bulgaria
96 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Oct 2014 : 19:12:33
|
Actually in Baldur's Gate II when you go to get your license to do magic in Athkatla with Viconia in your party one of the NPCs there will remark that you need to pay a special tax for her in order to have her in the city. She of course recounts her incident and makes some threats and is excused from the tax.
|
 |
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2014 : 19:19:18
|
yeah i know, but BG2 is not exactly cannon, u become a god in the end and im pretty sure we never see that after the game.
so i take stuff from BG2 with a grain of salt.
also Amn has a city with 1% orcs that are treated as free hard working men. so i find that kinda hard to swallow that there that racist.
i think some Amnians would do business with a Balor if they would trust him. maybe even Jorge the Farmer because even farmers have a surplous and thus savings and some buisness sense.
(in my mind Amn is somewhat like Argentina and USA in (1900) prosperty and culture and a mix of Spain and Italy in culture a bit)
|
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 00:52:00
|
| Athkatla is a Lawful Evil city. Racism is not all that surprising of a behaviour. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 01:56:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
yeah i know, but BG2 is not exactly cannon, u become a god in the end and im pretty sure we never see that after the game.
so i take stuff from BG2 with a grain of salt.
also Amn has a city with 1% orcs that are treated as free hard working men. so i find that kinda hard to swallow that there that racist.
i think some Amnians would do business with a Balor if they would trust him. maybe even Jorge the Farmer because even farmers have a surplous and thus savings and some buisness sense.
(in my mind Amn is somewhat like Argentina and USA in (1900) prosperty and culture and a mix of Spain and Italy in culture a bit)
Being a working free man does not necessarily mean you are given equal treatment, and it certainly doesn't preclude racism. Just look up the term "second-class citizen." |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:13:00
|
well there is second-class citizen and people dont treat u nice, which is bad but not horrible.
and there is really being a second class citizen where u have "laws for you" (usually not good laws). for my knowledge there are no such laws in Amn. i mean theres being treated bad but its not the same as having violation of your rights. its one thing to get nasty looks when u cross the street, its another to be killed at the stake.
first i dont know where it says Lawful Evil. on the other hand JP Morgan, the greatest banker in history and the man who made General Electric ,and with it electricity affordable for the masses, via finance would be considered Lawful Evil. why? he cared only to make money, and was selfish but he had his word. this is omitting the fact that everyone's lives are much better because of him.
so i think calling Athkalta Lawful Evil is the cultural prejudice (much like racism and usually associated with antisemitism; Jewish Bankers) there is toward profit seeking people i think that's the case. usually the richer you are the eviler you become.
in my book i would call Athkalta Lawful Good because it is the cuase of the great trade and cheap viable agricultral produce. with out the mercants of that city surplus food made in farms would not be transported to people who would buy it. also that is probably true for many more essential products. without Athkalta many people in Faerun would die of starvation.
its one thing to call a man evil for no fault of his own. it is a whole other thing to call a man that because of whom u are alive evil for the reason that he keeps you alive. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:24:25
|
Lawful Evil doesn't mean 'cackling moustache-twirling villains'. You can have a Lawful Evil state that's wealthy and prosperous and a trading center of the kingdom. Maybe merchants and traders appreciate the stern, draconian laws, since they keep away bandits and ensure that the merchant's safety in the realm isn't compromised.
Maybe there are otherwise good people who like living under the tyrant's rule, because the tyrant ensures that his kingdom is kept safe and prosperous under his reign. Maybe the villagers are happy that the Church of Bane is enforcing the peace, and executed the raping thugs that once terrorized them. Maybe the city doesn't mind thir necromancer mayor, because his undead patrols keep the orcs at bay and have helped take down the worst tribes of the region. |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:46:18
|
yeah but they do mind that every once in a while there summuned to the sluaghter. so if ur good with that u must have a pretty low self esteem seeing urself as a sheep for sluaghter. i dont think most people would think the church of bane is any good. though im quite skeptical that Baners would be able to function that way. its not like people in soviet russia said "well Stalin is bad but he keeps the Germans at bay...". or Kim Jung Unn to give a more modern example.
btw if there is a law that is stern agianst theft that is a good law. i dont get why at any point would that be Evil. maybe because someone sees Robin Hood as an ideal. thoug Robin stoll from the looting rich and gave it back to the people who made the money. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:50:10
|
it just occured to me that there must be some women who find orc attractive because of their... well size and aggression. dont call me a sexit or anything because i know for certian that there are women like that in real life.
that might be one way u get half orcs.
also it mentions that half orcs are born where humans and orcs are on the same level of civilization. like 2 barbaric tribes, one human one orc. or 2 nomad peaceful tribes at the south. or civilized orcs who were once slaves and now free citizens, like in Purskul in Amn.
so not all orcs are born by rape says i. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 07:17:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
yeah but they do mind that every once in a while there summuned to the sluaghter. so if ur good with that u must have a pretty low self esteem seeing urself as a sheep for sluaghter. i dont think most people would think the church of bane is any good. though im quite skeptical that Baners would be able to function that way. its not like people in soviet russia said "well Stalin is bad but he keeps the Germans at bay...". or Kim Jung Unn to give a more modern example.
btw if there is a law that is stern agianst theft that is a good law. i dont get why at any point would that be Evil. maybe because someone sees Robin Hood as an ideal. thoug Robin stoll from the looting rich and gave it back to the people who made the money.
I have no idea what that first sentence is meant to be aside from incoherent rambling.
Banites are Lawful, primarily. Your mistake is that you're assuming that Evil people are morons. The Banites don't have to be sadistic nutjobs; the law brought by the Banites would be a relief to a village besieged by bandits and looters.
Likewise, a LE city that enforces draconian laws against bandits and robbers would be a godsend to harried merchants. Think the Legion in NV, without the rampant sexism. Hell, look at Thay; it's an evil country, but it's a growing economic powerhouse and a meritocracy.
At least, 3.5e Thay, not 4e or 5e. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 12:54:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
i dont think most people would think the church of bane is any good. though im quite skeptical that Baners would be able to function that way. its not like people in soviet russia said "well Stalin is bad but he keeps the Germans at bay...". or Kim Jung Unn to give a more modern example.
See, there's a big difference between "good" and "better than the alternative". "Lesser evil" policy is still used because it works. Usually the main goal is not being praised by a few loud morons as the greatest thing since baked clay (however ego-stroking that may be), but being deemed acceptable by majority.
Yes, "foreign threat" is around back from prehistoric times - and it's not always empty... and rarely reaches the ridiculous demonization level of "dirty baby-eating savages are coming!!1".
And yes, from around 1920-s communists and fascists used to point at each other saying "that thing will eat you raw if you don't work with us" - and they still do, in case you neither watch TV nor English-typing internet (beyond peaceful fan sites). 
Only lunatics choose between living in a hut and living in an air castle from fairy tale. People with a shred of sense estimate whether something is within reach at all before considering it an option for themselves. So "lesser evil" is a scam only when it purposefully nips off the availability (real or perceived) of "within reach".
Yes, it's kind of obvious that a nice man won't get nicknamed "Impaler", but compared to the mess before him, apparently this was a big step up. And seeing how this attitude didn't drop long ago, we may hazard a guess that he is also perceived as better than, at very least, some puppets after him.
Moreover, this applies not only to "Lawful" version.
Ivan IV himself admitted he is a vicious man. So? His rule "worked" - for most people most of the time. When he listened to a few good advisors and his reforms mostly were sensible - of course. But also after he occasionally did let himself and his favorites go over the top. Why? He got real power in the wake of a riot against old aristocracy and later absolute power via vote of confidence explicitly against them. Everyone remembered this.
quote:
btw if there is a law that is stern agianst theft that is a good law. i dont get why at any point would that be Evil.
See? You're accepting it already little by little... |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 14:10:38
|
That's also without mentioning that a Lawful Evil city wouldn't be a bad place to live if it was actually Lawful. Pragmatic villainy and all that jazz.
Just look at that necromancer example above. What if the village violently opposes attempts made to depose the local Velsharan church, because the undead patrols have increased village safety and have taken over the jobs that are too dangerous for the living? |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 15:19:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
That's also without mentioning that a Lawful Evil city wouldn't be a bad place to live if it was actually Lawful. Pragmatic villainy and all that jazz.
Just look at that necromancer example above. What if the village violently opposes attempts made to depose the local Velsharan church, because the undead patrols have increased village safety and have taken over the jobs that are too dangerous for the living?
...Or they are benefiting from the cheap labor. A lot of simple tasks can be accomplished by mindless undead, for a fraction of the cost of having living people do it -- look at Thay, for example.
If I was a farmer, and the local necromancer kept the peace in the village, increased my profits, and otherwise left me alone, I'd not be in any kind of hurry to get rid of him. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 18:12:07
|
I think the debate has dissolved a little into a philosophical one of whether evil is defined by actions or intentions.
I've personally experienced racism being caused by the following factors in the real world: ignorance of the capabilities of others, being unable to escape a racist upbringing, overreaction to a perceived threat and stereotyping an entire race by the actions of a significant minority.
Those are the ones I can speak to because I've seen them in action. There are supposed to be others, but I shouldn't comment on those.
Saying this, many of the racists I have encountered in my life have not been bad people. They have merely failed to overcome an opinion that they have self-actualized. From the outside looking in however, they appear to be bad people.
Athkatla is listed as a Lawful Evil city. This does not mean that every resident of the city belongs to that alignment - there are paladins, devoted healers, Robin Hood types and depraved criminals. But in a society that places the acquisition and expenditure of personal wealth over and above the welfare of their fellow citizens - people are far more likely to be Lawful Evil. Since our perception of racism is evil, I think it's fair to assume that an evil society is more likely to be racist (especially since it's been explicitly stated that Athkatlans discriminate against all foreigners unless they are both wealthy and assimilate to their cultural norms).
The example that was given in Athkatla - Viconia being burned at the stake - was a bad one because it involved priests of Beshaba (Maid of *Misrule*) whipping a crowd into a frenzy over a drow, who, to the common person, are symbols of terror akin to spotting a horde of orcs on the horizon charging at you.
The majority of elven communities are Chaotic Good which we would not typically assume to contain many racists but, as I wrote in my first post, elves are an exception, I think, because of their heightened sense of superiority, pridefulness and aloofness. This does not mean that elves are intolerant, rather that their communities are more likely to contain more people with racist leanings than you'd expect in a Chaotic Good community. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 18:34:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
That's also without mentioning that a Lawful Evil city wouldn't be a bad place to live if it was actually Lawful. Pragmatic villainy and all that jazz.
"Pragmatic villainy" isn't limited to Lawful. In fact, "pragmatic" characters tend to be neutral - if it's "on a principle", it's not pragmatic, is it?..
As to how attractive it is - well, compared to that? Usually such situations arise after dysfunctional or "dog eats dog, both eat you" anarchy or semi-anarchy. If someone got trains to run on time (or at all) and wiped out robber barons (or a voracious unbridled oligarchy, same deal) - of course the comparison is favorable. There is some security (both immediate safety and reliability) to be gained - vs. none at all. For a while, at least. So it's "yay iron hand".
It gets to be seen in unfriendly light only much later, after all the main problems are result of control freakery, aavarice and other encroaching abuses, when it becomes obvious that "looming threats" that still stand are either imaginary or manufactured... q.v.: Star Wars: say what you want about Lucas's senility, but hey, that's more or less how it happens.
quote:
Just look at that necromancer example above.
Hmmm.  It's not even unambiguously evil at all as written? |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 19:20:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
Just look at that necromancer example above.
Hmmm. It's not even unambiguously evil at all as written?
I believe he was referring to the pragmatism of accepting evil, when there is a benefit from it. That was certainly how I took it, and framed my own response. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 20:28:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
yeah i know, but BG2 is not exactly cannon, u become a god in the end and im pretty sure we never see that after the game.
Actually, you had the choice of becoming mortal at the end of BG2 too.
When it comes to games with multiple endings, there's only a canon ending if the developers decide to enforce one in a sequel.
For example, you could complete BG1 with a variety of different parties, but BG2 heavily implies that the canon party consisted of Imoen, Jaheira, Khalid, Minsc and Dynaheir. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 04:00:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
btw if there is a law that is stern agianst theft that is a good law. i dont get why at any point would that be Evil. maybe because someone sees Robin Hood as an ideal. thoug Robin stoll from the looting rich and gave it back to the people who made the money.
I have no idea what that first sentence is meant to be aside from incoherent rambling.
Banites are Lawful, primarily. Your mistake is that you're assuming that Evil people are morons. The Banites don't have to be sadistic nutjobs; the law brought by the Banites would be a relief to a village besieged by bandits and looters.
Likewise, a LE city that enforces draconian laws against bandits and robbers would be a godsend to harried merchants. Think the Legion in NV, without the rampant sexism. Hell, look at Thay; it's an evil country, but it's a growing economic powerhouse and a meritocracy.
At least, 3.5e Thay, not 4e or 5e.
well the first sentenced used a phrase in it.
listen evil really really is stupid, if it was any smart it would choose to be evil. evil makes you miserable, it makes ur life a waste and make you hate the day you are born. no evil person can say that he is happy with their life. The Banites might bring rule of law, which is better then anarchy, but it is non the less very bad. i dont know too much about the Banites though.
Well Thay becoming poor is spot on with what should happen, was it the North or the South of the USA that was rich? In Brazil was it the North (slavery until 1888) or the South (little slavery) that is rich?(for those of you not from South America the South is much much richer)
Slavery is stupid, it does not allow anyone to think. Even the slave masters. Can you compare the productivity of 100 slaves to 1 cotton harvester? Can you teach a slave to operate and maintain a harvester?
heck can you teach him to improve his methods?
NO!
Slavery is a toxin to what makes an economy grow, a toxin to ingenuity. No can perform the complex task of thinking while being forced to, or even if he could he would not.
This is to show agian that evil is stupid by its nature, if Thayians were any smarter they would look at other nations that are rich and figure "you know slaves are a bad plan". But they dont, they evade it.
Also if in one day they decide to give the slaves more freedom so they might be able to think and Thay might be able to compete with the free states? Nope, too late, if slaves get smart enough to turn a profit they would figure the need and way to make a revolt.
They didnt think of that did Thay? :P
This is the short sighted nature of evil. "I'll have slaves now, and if something happens in the future ill figure it then.
"oOH im being economicly overshadowed by nations without slaves who could see that coming??? (answer: everyone) what do we do now? ehhh"
|
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 04:18:54
|
about the thing that "evil is good because it gives you security"
i would like to quote Franklin (i think)
"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."
And he is completely right. There is no security without liberty, it might be that you are in secure position now. But what if the tyrant one day decided that he wants to take all your possessions and sacrifice you to his god? Can you protest? Nope.
That is why security on the long term can not exist without liberty.
In fact liberty is how we secure Security in a society. Liberty grants every man a right to his own life and secures it by making sure that no one enters your life without your consent. Without liberty your life becomes meaningless in political matters.
Lacking liberty is the same as being on death row. You will die one day, the question is when?
so no one is better off for long, even the span of a human life time is enough to see a tyrant to make sacrificial sheep of his followers. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 04:35:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
Athkatla is listed as a Lawful Evil city. This does not mean that every resident of the city belongs to that alignment - there are paladins, devoted healers, Robin Hood types and depraved criminals. But in a society that places the acquisition and expenditure of personal wealth over and above the welfare of their fellow citizens - people are far more likely to be Lawful Evil. Since our perception of racism is evil, I think it's fair to assume that an evil society is more likely to be racist (especially since it's been explicitly stated that Athkatlans discriminate against all foreigners unless they are both wealthy and assimilate to their cultural norms).
The example that was given in Athkatla - Viconia being burned at the stake - was a bad one because it involved priests of Beshaba (Maid of *Misrule*) whipping a crowd into a frenzy over a drow, who, to the common person, are symbols of terror akin to spotting a horde of orcs on the horizon charging at you.
"in a society that places the acquisition and expenditure of personal wealth over and above the welfare of their fellow citizens"
no, the acquisition of personal wealth is what drives an individual and society, its the essence of good.
if you value the welfar of others - without connection to your well being. then essentialy you treat them as without dignity. can they take care of their own life? maybe,probably not, but someone is going to have to take care of them
. well if most people can not handle their own life then who should take care of them? well the leader of course.
How does the leader know whats in everyone welfare? dont ask silly questions.
What if some people dont care about the wellfare of others? (and in good reason since they were never given a reason to care about it)
well were going to have to force them into it.
now this is a Stalin/Hitler type. everytime someone wants to elevate a collective above the individual he is a tyrant in disguise.
the collective can not form decisions. There is no group think just as their is no group breathing. The dictator wants for some people to leave their lifes, and their guns, in his hands to direct them as his will, all for the collective welfare that only he can know.
look at any time of oppression and death in history. The welfare of all was its motivation.
Free societes on the other hand, as Britian circa 1900 and USA and Argentina and Canada never made it about the welfare.
In the declaration of independence it says you have a right to the "pursuit of happiness", yes your selfish greedy happiness.
It says nothing about welfare of the collective.
the USA was built on individualism and selfishness USSR and Nazi Germany were built on selfless sacrifice and and collective welfare.
so long story short, the dude who called Amn Lawful Evil is wrong, Amn is Lawful Good.
also the Robin Hood type is horrible, if u want to concertize Robin Hood think of a robber coming to your house and saying "well u have more then me so..." |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 07:56:06
|
I get the feeling that this is less about how evil can be pragmatic and more about how Xal thinks every evil character has mental ability scores in the negative ranges. Maybe he just doesn't like evil being played intelligently or something, or maybe every evil person is a cackling madman in his worldview.
|
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 13:31:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
I get the feeling that this is less about how evil can be pragmatic and more about how Xal thinks every evil character has mental ability scores in the negative ranges. Maybe he just doesn't like evil being played intelligently or something, or maybe every evil person is a cackling madman in his worldview.
Actually, it is about how evil is not really evil as defined by standard D&D, and he is trying to recolor and re-flavor the setting to fit Objectivism, a philosophy which was created and popularized by Ayn Rand.
"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." -- Ayn Rand
That pretty much sums up his world view, and what he is trying to push onto the Realms. For him this world view is good, and everything that deviates from it is evil. His idealized "heroes" are individuals such as Howard Roark from the book the Fountainhead, and "John Galt" from the book Atlas Shrugged. Both books were written by Ayn Rand.
As a result of this only the most rational individuals in the setting will succeed. Of course, Xal gets to define who is rational and who is not, and being irrational results in being anyone who disagrees with Xal. Of course, it also means that anyone who everyone agrees is irrational can NEVER have any long term, perhaps not even temporary, success. Because if someone who is irrational has long term success then it undermines Xal's philosophy.
Similarly, those who act in their own self-interest are the most noble of heroes. However, it is important to note here that Xal believes that acting in your own self-interest benefits society as a whole. This is problematic; however, when Xal is faced with a situation in which self-interest leads to results that everyone can see are obviously awful and bad. When this happens (see Thay as an example), Xal decides that it is not RATIONAL self-interest, and therefore is doomed to fail. Remember, once again, that Xal gets to determine what is and is not rational.
Never mind the fact that sometimes racism in the Realms would cater to rational self-interest. For example, it makes sense for the Elves to want to reduce the number of humans on Toril, as their own race is greatly out numbered by them. If the human problem is not dealt with, eventually the only rational alternative for the Elves is to make peace with humans and intermingle culturally. However, should this happen they will lose their own distinct culture. Therefore, to preserve Elven culture, it becomes necessary to reduce the number of humans on Toril. As a result of this rational observation, it is in the self-interest of the Elves to use their High Magic to do two things. First, to magically increase Elven birthrates similar to the Dwarven Thunder Blessing. Second, to unleash some type of "genophage" like plague against all other intelligent species on the planet (Humans, Orcs, Goblins, Drow, etc.) to reduce their birthrates to less than that of Elves. As a result of these two things Elven culture will be preserved, and the Elves will be able to eventually start reclaiming their lost lands--achieving a level of power and influence not seen since before the Crown Wars. Of course, doing this to the other races would be considered evil within the D&D alignment system, and thus Xal must either make the argument that it is not rational self-interest or how it is not really evil. |
Edited by - Aldrick on 20 Oct 2014 13:35:36 |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 14:28:23
|
That gives a startling amount of insight to the more tedious statements he's made.
Knowing Xal, at this point, he'd probably argue about how that would cause devastation to the global economy, which in turn would harm the elves short term. Keep in mind that he's a blood red Capitalist and rightist, so anything that doesn't follow capitalist ideals in favor of more communistic ideals is also evil. As the elves would be damaging the current economical state instead of improving it, clearly it can't be a 'good thing'. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 16:40:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
about the thing that "evil is good because it gives you security"
i would like to quote Franklin (i think) "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."
And he is completely right. There is no security without liberty, it might be that you are in secure position now. But what if the tyrant one day decided
Of course. Only this happens later. Hence my Star Wars example.
There are 3 mitigating factors, however:
1) This applies to "trading" freedom for temporary security.
For those who didn't have either in the first place, it still may be better than nothing.
2) This strongly depends on "what if" part.
A predictable dictator is less of a looming threat. If he lashes out without good reason (due to temper tantrums, paranoia, etc) only at those in visual range is not very fearsome for people wit enough of sense to remain out of sight (and those approaching knew the risk, after all).
3) The tyrant is a mere mortal and as such is not omnipresent.
Usually the situation when they rise is "one tyrant vs. hundred of pettier tyrants". Which usually means risk is greatly reduced for almost anyone in particular, simply because one tyrant is farther away. And one generally is easier to predict. The bigger tyrant may be harder to keep in check, but this makes any difference only if with the hundred of them it was feasible at all. When they are wiped out and replaced with the big tyrant's satraps, the main issue is whether he keeps those in check - if yes, it's likely to be an improvement; if not, it got worse.
That's why the likes of Vlad III and Ivan IV, though obviously dangerous, not only get popular, but often end up actually improving situation for vast majority of people who weren't robber barons to begin with.
A less impulsive, but more villainous fictional example would be the Lady from Black Company. Yup, she's an Evil Overlord, no question. She removed all the petty nobles from power and promoted medicine (her own troops need that, for one), too.
Result: rebels exist, but generally are neither loved or reviled any more than her servants.
quote:
no, the acquisition of personal wealth is what drives an individual and society, its the essence of good.
Drive where?
The thing is, it's good when you happen to... ah... acquire the neighbour's cows and drive them to your pasture, but it's not good at all when the neighbour does this to you. 
quote:
Free societes on the other hand, as Britian circa 1900
Good one.  The colonial leech that visibly descended into drooling senility and anarchic convulsions, on whose health status even Chesterton and Kipling mostly agreed? This thing is your gold standard? 
quote:
and the USA was built on individualism
Even better. Which tradition do you refer to - oligopolist conspiracies, lynch mobs or "little-endian vs. big-endian" style parties run by local barkeepers?.. I'll put down 'very enthusiastic' and 'seen too many John Woo movies'.
quote:
USSR and Nazi Germany were built on selfless sacrifice and and collective welfare.
...and the best. Though too vague. Which one was the selfless-est marau martyr - Zhukov or Goering? Who provided better welfare - NKVD or SS? Questions, questions...
You managed to catch all 3 first places of "the most hilarious statement in the thread" with but one paragraph.
quote:
so long story short, the dude who called Amn Lawful Evil is wrong, Amn is Lawful Good.
Right... back to the monopolies, conquistadors, slavers, Banites and later Cyricists (q.v.:"Mountain of Skulls").
quote:
Lands of Intrigue:
To compel the divisive Amnian public into compliance with his newly formed Council of Six,
Thayze Selemchant and his allies spread hundreds of rumors throughout Amn, from talk of an elven
invasion from Shilmista or the Forest of Tethir to imminent attacks by Nelanther pirates or
Waterdeep's navy. All such rumors were baseless, but "a lie spread often enough with money to
attend it becomes as much truth as a coin is round" (as the Amnian saying goes).
Blood feuds still raged between the families, but to a far lesser degree than before.
...
Within weeks of the news being made public, merchant leaders in Murann and Athkatla were assassinated by
rivals trying to keep them from fronting expeditions to the new world.
...
The influx of Waterdhavian interests has forced the Six and some landholding families to bulk up their
army over there and remove the Waterdhavians before the latter turn the natives against New Amn (or,
worse, arm the natives with metal and magic).
So, uh... What's with excessive backstabbing, scams and corner-cutting... I doubt "Lawful" part as much as "Good". |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6352 Posts |
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 18:50:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
I get the feeling that this is less about how evil can be pragmatic and more about how Xal thinks every evil character has mental ability scores in the negative ranges. Maybe he just doesn't like evil being played intelligently or something, or maybe every evil person is a cackling madman in his worldview.
Actually, it is about how evil is not really evil as defined by standard D&D, and he is trying to recolor and re-flavor the setting to fit Objectivism, a philosophy which was created and popularized by Ayn Rand.
"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." -- Ayn Rand
That pretty much sums up his world view, and what he is trying to push onto the Realms. For him this world view is good, and everything that deviates from it is evil. His idealized "heroes" are individuals such as Howard Roark from the book the Fountainhead, and "John Galt" from the book Atlas Shrugged. Both books were written by Ayn Rand.
As a result of this only the most rational individuals in the setting will succeed. Of course, Xal gets to define who is rational and who is not, and being irrational results in being anyone who disagrees with Xal. Of course, it also means that anyone who everyone agrees is irrational can NEVER have any long term, perhaps not even temporary, success. Because if someone who is irrational has long term success then it undermines Xal's philosophy.
Similarly, those who act in their own self-interest are the most noble of heroes. However, it is important to note here that Xal believes that acting in your own self-interest benefits society as a whole. This is problematic; however, when Xal is faced with a situation in which self-interest leads to results that everyone can see are obviously awful and bad. When this happens (see Thay as an example), Xal decides that it is not RATIONAL self-interest, and therefore is doomed to fail. Remember, once again, that Xal gets to determine what is and is not rational.
Never mind the fact that sometimes racism in the Realms would cater to rational self-interest. For example, it makes sense for the Elves to want to reduce the number of humans on Toril, as their own race is greatly out numbered by them. If the human problem is not dealt with, eventually the only rational alternative for the Elves is to make peace with humans and intermingle culturally. However, should this happen they will lose their own distinct culture. Therefore, to preserve Elven culture, it becomes necessary to reduce the number of humans on Toril. As a result of this rational observation, it is in the self-interest of the Elves to use their High Magic to do two things. First, to magically increase Elven birthrates similar to the Dwarven Thunder Blessing. Second, to unleash some type of "genophage" like plague against all other intelligent species on the planet (Humans, Orcs, Goblins, Drow, etc.) to reduce their birthrates to less than that of Elves. As a result of these two things Elven culture will be preserved, and the Elves will be able to eventually start reclaiming their lost lands--achieving a level of power and influence not seen since before the Crown Wars. Of course, doing this to the other races would be considered evil within the D&D alignment system, and thus Xal must either make the argument that it is not rational self-interest or how it is not really evil.
yeah im a big Ayn Rand fan. but im always on the side or reality.
u didnt think this through did you, well if you would you would not set up strawman to attack. so come back to me when u have a semblance of an arguments. use this thing called logic and the syllogism its not new but its BIG.
also why should the elves preserve their distinct culture, or have more children or kill the other races who might be productive?
well you might meet a lovely human and actually like her culture, or human culture can create trade that would make ur life better then with magic by lets say someone inventing the internet. and why would you have more kids? your not a breeding horse the thought of it is disgusting btw.
see, self-intrtst is a hard job, u gotta think whats in it for you. not ur second uncle from your sun elf cuosions side who you never really liked
now these plans will not be better for any elf qua indivual so it will not be better for them qua group, this is because whats bad for an indvidual will never be good if u aggrigate him in a group. a negative number added to a negative number is still negative.
secondly this is the abdication of ones self intrest with a group self intrest, its really just a trick to make the will of one leader do the work.
see reality wins out at the end. (this should not be new to you...) |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 18:51:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
This is the tenth topic i have read this week that features one person arguing with the rest of the forum that right is now left and up is now down.
Is there no way to turn him off.
I doubt it. I've taken to utterly ignoring anything he says. It's really just not worth my time. Or anyone else's, for that matter. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 18:53:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
This is the tenth topic i have read this week that features one person arguing with the rest of the forum that right is now left and up is now down.
Is there no way to turn him off.
well u can ban me from the forum, and by that admit that this is by its nature an anti-intellectual forum.
or you can just not get into debates or just say "well if you say so"
or you can actually give some arguments, perhaps in syllogistic form rather then snarky remarks.
which should not be hard to do if your position was defendable in any way. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 19:00:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
[quote]Originally posted by LordofBones
As a result of this only the most rational individuals in the setting will succeed. Of course, Xal gets to define who is rational and who is not, and being irrational results in being anyone who disagrees with Xal. Of course, it also means that anyone who everyone agrees is irrational can NEVER have any long term, perhaps not even temporary, success. Because if someone who is irrational has long term success then it undermines Xal's philosophy.
Similarly, those who act in their own self-interest are the most noble of heroes. However, it is important to note here that Xal believes that acting in your own self-interest benefits society as a whole. This is problematic; however, when Xal is faced with a situation in which self-interest leads to results that everyone can see are obviously awful and bad. When this happens (see Thay as an example), Xal decides that it is not RATIONAL self-interest, and therefore is doomed to fail. Remember, once again, that Xal gets to determine what is and is not rational.
i already outlined why Thay ultimatly had to fail. Also where do u think people are happier, Amn or Thay? i dont think its Thay.
this is the thing, short sighed 'evil' greedy self intrest is really not in anyones self intrest, its stupid and bound to fail. as shown by numerous examples from fantasy to the real world.
"Because if someone who is irrational has long term success then it undermines Xal's philosophy."
it doesnt undermine my philosophy, it undermines the laws that govern reality. now i was objective and noticed reality hence now with minimal effort i hold that to be my philosophy.
but if you want to argue with reality, hey dont let me stop you. you will fail since reality is real but you dont have to live in it, though that will get you dead. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 19:18:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
br]
There are 3 mitigating factors, however:
1) This applies to "trading" freedom for temporary security.
For those who didn't have either in the first place, it still may be better than nothing.
2) This strongly depends on "what if" part.
A predictable dictator is less of a looming threat. If he lashes out without good reason (due to temper tantrums, paranoia, etc) only at those in visual range is not very fearsome for people wit enough of sense to remain out of sight (and those approaching knew the risk, after all).
3) The tyrant is a mere mortal and as such is not omnipresent.
Usually the situation when they rise is "one tyrant vs. hundred of pettier tyrants". Which usually means risk is greatly reduced for almost anyone in particular, simply because one tyrant is farther away. And one generally is easier to predict. The bigger tyrant may be harder to keep in check, but this makes any difference only if with the hundred of them it was feasible at all. When they are wiped out and replaced with the big tyrant's satraps, the main issue is whether he keeps those in check - if yes, it's likely to be an improvement; if not, it got worse.
That's why the likes of Vlad III and Ivan IV, though obviously dangerous, not only get popular, but often end up actually improving situation for vast majority of people who weren't robber barons to begin with.
A less impulsive, but more villainous fictional example would be the Lady from Black Company. Yup, she's an Evil Overlord, no question. She removed all the petty nobles from power and promoted medicine (her own troops need that, for one), too.
Result: rebels exist, but generally are neither loved or reviled any more than her servants.
well its not good to live under any tyrant, its like exchanging a termincal cancer for terminal heart failure. there both death, one bieng a diffrent variation of the other. the only rational option is to fight and die as a free man or live a horrible pathetic excuse for a life as a slave. the moral man can only choose life.
quote:
no, the acquisition of personal wealth is what drives an individual and society, its the essence of good.
Drive where?
The thing is, it's good when you happen to... ah... acquire the neighbour's cows and drive them to your pasture, but it's not good at all when the neighbour does this to you.
well why would the nieghbour do it to me? why would i sell my cows if i wouldnt think it helps me out? Well if you would look around you would see it drives to me and you using the internet right now.
quote:
Free societes on the other hand, as Britian circa 1900
Good one. The colonial leech that visibly descended into drooling senility and anarchic convulsions, on whose health status even Chesterton and Kipling mostly agreed? This thing is your gold standard?
well i dont espucally live britian, but they were once the freest country in europe and they achieved relevant prosperty, also they were in the right when it came to colonization, the places they colonaziled had no rule except rule of force, and britian was the strognest around. though it did not function by force, it fucntioned by rights.
also why did most of the places they colenized accept them?
and the English made their own wealth, most of the machines in the 20th century were designed and manufactured in England.
quote:
and the USA was built on individualism
Even better. Which tradition do you refer to - oligopolist conspiracies, lynch mobs or "little-endian vs. big-endian" style parties run by local barkeepers?..
well thats a big strech, i just look at the decolration of independce and the Constitution, but if i would see any of this things of oligopolies and monopolies you are talking about ill think of it, though now i havent found none and its on the same status, and level of contempt, as the Blood Libels agianst the Jews in Europe.
I'll put down 'very enthusiastic' and 'seen too many John Woo movies'.
quote:
USSR and Nazi Germany were built on selfless sacrifice and and collective welfare.
...and the best. Though too vague. Which one was the selfless-est marau martyr - Zhukov or Goering? Who provided better welfare - NKVD or SS? Questions, questions...
You managed to catch all 3 first places of "the most hilarious statement in the thread" with but one paragraph.
none of them did. that was their cheif concern though. Goering hated indivudalism thought. Hitler and Stalin said respectively that you must sacrfice to tribe or the class. thats as selfless as it gets.
the best welfare came from people like Caranagie and JJ Hill and Rockefellar. whom without the so called neccasties you and i use, Steel cheap power and cheap agricultural goods, would not exist.
quote:
so long story short, the dude who called Amn Lawful Evil is wrong, Amn is Lawful Good.
Right... back to the monopolies, conquistadors, slavers, Banites and later Cyricists (q.v.:"Mountain of Skulls").
[quote] Lands of Intrigue:
To compel the divisive Amnian public into compliance with his newly formed Council of Six,
Thayze Selemchant and his allies spread hundreds of rumors throughout Amn, from talk of an elven
invasion from Shilmista or the Forest of Tethir to imminent attacks by Nelanther pirates or
Waterdeep's navy. All such rumors were baseless, but "a lie spread often enough with money to
attend it becomes as much truth as a coin is round" (as the Amnian saying goes).
Blood feuds still raged between the families, but to a far lesser degree than before.
...
Within weeks of the news being made public, merchant leaders in Murann and Athkatla were assassinated by
rivals trying to keep them from fronting expeditions to the new world.
...
The influx of Waterdhavian interests has forced the Six and some landholding families to bulk up their
army over there and remove the Waterdhavians before the latter turn the natives against New Amn (or,
worse, arm the natives with metal and magic).
So, uh... What's with excessive backstabbing, scams and corner-cutting... I doubt "Lawful" part as much as "Good".
hell im not saying its a utopia, but its the closest you get to it since at the end of the day chaos on the street is really really bad for buisness. and Amnians love their business. i wouldnt say excesive, some people deal with that. its still nothing compared to Waterdeep backstabing, and almost none compared to Westros.
btw i live in south America and natives on the side of the Spanish was very common, the natives fought for spain in many wars of independence. so the Maztica politics is not reasonable.
also you can try and brign a real factual example instead of saying what you think is the case.
|
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 19:18:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xal Valzar
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
This is the tenth topic i have read this week that features one person arguing with the rest of the forum that right is now left and up is now down.
Is there no way to turn him off.
well u can ban me from the forum, and by that admit that this is by its nature an anti-intellectual forum.
or you can just not get into debates or just say "well if you say so"
or you can actually give some arguments, perhaps in syllogistic form rather then snarky remarks.
which should not be hard to do if your position was defendable in any way.
The fact that people don't agree with you does not make this an anti-intellectual forum. 
It is rather noteworthy that every time someone disagrees with you -- on any topic -- you say they are wrong, and claim that either facts or reality back you up. Even when someone with more experience than you speaks on a particular topic, you insist that only you are right.
I'm closing this discussion, for the same reason I closed a previous thread by you -- I'm getting tired of the "I'm the only person here who is right!" attitude, and the fact that you seem incapable of admitting to the possibility of not being right on something.
If you want to actually debate things here, you need to learn that debate consists of more than always claiming to be right and insulting everyone else. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 20 Oct 2014 19:19:12 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
How racist are the Elfs
Topic Locked
