Skip to main content

Further dialogue on the nature of evil

strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_style_default::options() should be compatible with views_object::options() in /var/www/drupal-sites/all/modules/views/plugins/ on line 0.
Nenicirene's picture
Posted in

Does the ends justify the means?

Some ends justify more means than others.

As a lowbie quest you're sent to poison a Stormwind noble for nothing more than snooping around.

That doesn't scream evil to you?

It's only evil to kill people who don't deserve it.

Fitting for the real world, but not for a fantasy world. In fantasy Good and Evil aren't just terms used to describe relativistic shades of morality. They are very real concepts that define the universe itself.

In your example above, the actions of the people in the village would be considered evil. However, if the law of their society was to mutilate the child and toss the baby to the elements, then they would be following the laws of their people, which would make them lawful. Lawful Evil, but still Evil.

You are confusing the nonsensical morality system of Dungeons and Dragons with the entire fantasy genre.

I see why we have differing views.. You have added players to the equation.. Look at the class before the randomness of people are thrown in. You are correct that they "can" be "played" good or evil,, any class can. But it doesnt take away the taint of their history or skills that define the class.

My argument is the base class could be considered evil, like the base Pally class could be considered good.. Remove the people,, examine the class.. The question was warlocks=evil? not how warlocks are played=evil?

The warlock point of view is that a class cannot be evil outside of its specific actions. Warlocks are not inherently evil. We are inherently pragmatic. We realize that all things have a price, and are willing to weigh our options and pay prices that others shirk at.