|
Post by Biblically Accurate Angel on Feb 9, 2017 23:15:04 GMT -5
Exactly. That's why we don't need BT. If he's not going to do something about the real problems then he doesn't need to exist.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Feb 9, 2017 23:18:28 GMT -5
@toz
Exactly
Good cannot exist without evil, evil cannot exist without good.
@d11
Remember, his story is one about where his greatest enemy is himself
|
|
|
Post by Biblically Accurate Angel on Feb 9, 2017 23:26:37 GMT -5
Couldn't it be done some other way though? I dislike this omnipotent figure being present, it feels like a good version of Big Brother, and Big Brother is no fun good or evil.
Like I said - love the character, dislike what he does.
|
|
|
Post by Toz76 on Apr 21, 2017 23:39:15 GMT -5
I wanted to revisit this thread because something is really irking me. Why does there need to be a "balance" of good and evil at all, or even a measureable, objective morality? I don't like the idea of an objective morality, and VEC proves that "evil" isn't necessarily "bad". Frank said earlier that the last time good and evil were equal was WWII, which is why there has to be more good, but I disagree. There's more evil than good in the real world, and since we're oh so insistent on being realistic when it comes to ancient gender roles, we ought to be equally realistic when it comes to morality. Evil is everywhere. People lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, and deceive on a daily basis. Murder, rape, sexual harrassment, and bigotry are in the news daily. Compared to the good in the world, there's much more evil, and we're not as bad off as we could be despite this. So basically what I'm saying is, let's get rid of the whole "more good than evil" thing. It's unrealistic and serves to remove all tension from the story by making it impossible for anyone but the Colorfolk to have any lasting impact. I have a way to incorporate this change in story, but I wanted to talk it over here first.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Apr 22, 2017 1:22:57 GMT -5
In hindsight, I do agree that this was probably a stupid concept; I was just trying to figure out how to define something so abstract and confusing.
But I suppose do whatever you want I guess; again, once the game II ends Im backing away from the game to focus on novels
(going back to what I was saying a while back about the game just not being "satisfying" anymore)
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Apr 22, 2017 1:30:30 GMT -5
Also- that balance thing was created with the intention of solving a conundrum that was a problem for us a while back- battles kept stalling the story. So I was trying to end the batted and establish a workable status quiz that made sense so the game would not stall
|
|
|
Post by Biblically Accurate Angel on Apr 22, 2017 7:45:17 GMT -5
Toz76 I've felt the exact same way, since we started the good / evil thing in The Game. Like you said, evil is much more present than good is in the world. But if we are being realistic, I think we can agree that evil people do good things sometimes. Even Hitler had his moments, and he was one of the worst people in history. IMO, people are naturally bad, however most people try to master themselves and act good. Some manage to, others don't. So yes, I agree with Toz in this - there's more evil in the world and I'd like to see some realism in The Game. However, why can't evil win? I know you said that'd end up killing The Game, but it doesn't have to. There's a lot of stuff you can do if evil does win. Another question - why can't the evil characters be the protagonists? VEC are the closest thing to that, but they're still the bad guys in The Game. Do they have to be? And just for fun, here are the main groups n The Game and they're alignments: Colorfolk - good VEC - evil SOM - evil GOD - neutral PIC - neutral (but more good than anything else) So really, we have more evil groups than good in The Game, which showcases why there is not more good in the world.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Apr 22, 2017 10:05:47 GMT -5
I' meant there weas more good present in another sense, but it doesn't matter; once the game ii is over I'm moving away from it. To focus on novels.
and I thought it over- its not so much realism as it is believability I want to go for- you know, in the sense that when you read a story, yes it's fantasy, but there is just enough there that grounds the story and it makes you go "wow, that's amazing!" And not "ugh, that's ridiculous!"
Hence, suspension of disbelief is maintained.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Apr 22, 2017 10:15:38 GMT -5
One last thing- the novels, when we get to the present, probably may diverge from the game at some point. Yes, they will remain as faithful as possible to certain events, but between the loss of the main game on the other forum and way too many other things, the novels may change/cut some details for an assortment of reasons. But that's down the line, and though it is a painful decision, at this point I feel no other practical options exist.
|
|
|
Post by Tug on Apr 23, 2017 22:13:45 GMT -5
To settle this debate, let me add in my two cents, and what my view can be summarized in as this: I don't think there is a clear "Good VS Evil" Karma system or whatever, but there is a form of it that forms the very real and very dangerous grey area found in our modern society, and these two quotes from a 'certain flamingo bastard' I think sum up the debate entirely: "Those who stand at the top determine what's wrong and what's right! This very place is neutral ground! Justice will prevail, you say? But of course it will! Whoever wins this war becomes justice!โ And... "But what happens now?! The number of pirates have fluctuated so much... And there's only one throne!! You get it, don't you...? It's starting already!!! The biggest one in all of history!!! THE THRONE WARS!!!" And to dissect the meaning of those quotes, what I believe is the fluctuating numbers of the factions, all which really are caused by the Cubii releasing the Prism (The Big Bang to say the least), is going to descend into a clash of forces so great a war that will engulf all will take place, but that's more of a big finale to 3WSR so that's not happening anytime soon, though all it takes is one character to get this eventual war to take place. So in short, Good and evil are in such varying numbers that one day, a big war will occur to decide the reigning victor that will prove the other triumphs over the other in this morally grey society we live in today
|
|
|
Post by Toz76 on Aug 5, 2017 10:29:53 GMT -5
So I came up with this idea for how morality works:
Hundreds of years ago, a war was fought in mainland Europe between the Entropy Enforcers and the Order Of Gerade. The Entropy Enforcers believed the destruction of the world was inevitable and wanted to speed the process along, but the Order believed the world was worth protecting. The war eventually caused the formation of a splinter faction, the Indifference Conglomerate, which didn't really give a crap about the world. Eventually, realizing the fight was getting nowhere, the three factions began peace talks. And one of the results of those peace talks was InterAlign, the Coalition Of Absolute Morality.
The purpose of InterAlign was simple. When word of a new organization of magic surfaced, they were required by magical law to submit to inspection from InterAlign. The InterAlign council always consists of one good, one neutral, and one evil being. For the longest time, it was Sol, Kendarboo Flickerbee, and The Incinerator, but after the mysterious death of The Incinerator Lightbender now holds the evil seat. InterAlign inspections involve InterAlign using its magic ability to study an organization's actions and give them an alignment based on their findings. There are actually seven possible alignments: Pure Evil, Generally Evil, Leans Evil, Neutral, Leans Good, Generally Good, and Pure Good.
The rankings of major factions, based on this system: Colorfolk: Leans Good. Their rating is tainted by the very recent reign of the evil colorfolk, and is expected to go up soon. VEC: Leans Evil. SOM: Generally Evil. GOD: Fluctuates, currently at Neutral. PIC: Unknown, not enough is known about them.
And what about the Order Of Gerade, Entropy Enforcers, and Indifference Conglomerate? They've become the de facto overseers of Good, Evil, and Neutral respectively. Their treaty forbids them to act directly against each other, but their reserves and total magic power are even greater than the war days, so they manipulate lesser factions to their will in the hopes of weakening the other two factions and eagerly wait for the day when one of them breaks the treaty so they can go to war and eliminate the other two alignments forever.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Aug 5, 2017 10:39:51 GMT -5
Then it looks like I have work to do; the Colormen do not "lean good" they ARE good. In the first first era, the Prism would punish them for doing evil; first by taking away their artifacts, then their access to higher level spells, before finally stripping them of their powers all together.
As for now- there are no more evil Colormen, so they are back to their former glory. And as stated before- I will be reworking the dark era soon because the more I think about it, the more holes it has. As it turns out, not as many turned evil as initially believed
|
|
|
Post by Toz76 on Aug 5, 2017 11:13:58 GMT -5
The problem with that is that it still implies an objective morality, something I cannot condone. The reason I came up with this is it provides a hand wave for what makes a person/group good, and because this idea has comedic/dramatic potent down the line. Saying "the color folk are always good" when evidence shows that they sometimes do bad things that the Prism seems okay with leaves a plot hole. Having good and evil be vaguely defined by a council that doesn't really know what it's doing is both funny and solves the problem while still making the colorfolk good; arguably more so, since they're genuinely good without being forced to be by a rigid system.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Aug 5, 2017 11:30:01 GMT -5
Perhaps.
I'm sorry Toz; it just goes back to my character analysis. The Colormen embody that which is good about humanity; the are strong because they fight selflessly in defense of others, not for power or gain. So to say that they can do evil... well, I just can't figure out how it works because given what we know... we'll, it just doesn't seem like I can figure out how that works.
|
|
|
Post by Toz76 on Aug 5, 2017 14:08:08 GMT -5
Just because they are selfless doesn't mean they are always right. Massacreing the Orcs seemed like a good idea, but it clearly wasn't. Nobody is perfect, even good people can make mistakes. In a sense, what I'm trying to do is make them more human, by showing their flaws.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Aug 5, 2017 14:43:18 GMT -5
A fair point, but do not forget- the Orcs are not "free from sin" either
The Colormen only went after the Orcs after the Orcs refused to stop killing humans and pillaging their settlements. And the Orcs rejected any offer of peace, be it Colormen or another party (meant to clarify that in the timeline- most peace officers were through emissaries sent by the king); even going so far as to declare war the same day the King of Sodor offered peace.
in short, make no mistake- the Colormen fought for good in the Orc Wars, and I hope that once the story is written, what I am trying to say will come out better.
do not forget- the spirit does not allow the powers to be used for evil. If, at any point during the war, he felt they were committing evil against the Orcs, he would have taken away their powers.
|
|
|
Post by Toz76 on Aug 5, 2017 14:55:42 GMT -5
To be fair, the orcs were desperate. They can't eat plants, so they were forced to prey off cattle. The first offer of peace was sent by a colornan, so they became wary of all peace offers. I don't deny the orcs were also at fault, but they didn't deserve what the colorfolk did to them. Don't forget, the spirit is not omnipotent, and values change.
|
|
|
Post by Biblically Accurate Angel on Aug 6, 2017 1:39:01 GMT -5
Before discussion descends into more of 'Colorfolk are right!' 'No, they killed the orcs! BAAAAAD!', I just wanna say, PIC are neutral, pretty much forever. They're not bad at heart, but they're not the best people too and taking over Sodor probably automatically throws them out of the 'good' category. PIC = neutral. Just clearing that up for y'all.
Now, back to the orc v. Colormen debate.
Colormen had good intentions, did something that was completely and utterly over the top and downright wrong.
Period.
|
|
|
Post by frankthetriviaman on Aug 6, 2017 8:29:19 GMT -5
So you're telling me it's wrong to defend one's property?
Even if the orcs didn't believe in the idea of ownership, that's still not justification for killing other's livestock.
Make no mistake- the Orcs were offered peace, numerous times- they refused. The King of Sodor offered to create an arrangement that would benefit both species- the Orcs refused and declared war.
Yes, perhaps they did go too far in pushing all the Orcs out of Sodor, but make no mistake- the Orc's aggressive stubbornness made then unable to listen to reason. They were offered peace abd it was turned down, multiple times.
And again, since this was missed- the Colormen primarily studied and advised in the second and third Orc wars, other groups and kingdoms led the charge there. So I ask you- why aren't they being help accountable too?
|
|
|
Post by Biblically Accurate Angel on Aug 6, 2017 8:40:56 GMT -5
Because the Colormen are supposed to be pure good. Wiping out the orcs completely is not pure good. And you have to see it from their side too. They were suspicious about the Colormen just as much as the Colormen were suspicious of them. I'm sure they could justify wiping out the Colormen if they had done so.
|
|