Quote from: Kyle Aaron;915021Now, if I was Marzipan or whatever the fuck the commie's name is, I might as the white dragon say, "Since you have slain so many goblins, your next task is to adopt their orphan goblin babies." Wouldn't that be LOADS of fun?

But no. The players make their choices, and the world still moves.

I'm wondering if the whole "you must not kill goblin babies" crap of his applies to characters who are Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, or Chaotic Evil. What about Chaotic Neutral? Do they get to save one group of goblin babies as long as they use them to kill other goblin babies?

Quote from: Bren;914982I'm really unsure what your example is supposed to be an example of. I've never seen two swords like that. Now if you were talking about two swords with different costs, weights, size, appearances, and/or stat requirements and those two swords did different amounts of damage...well I've seen a lot of RPGs that had two swords kind of like that.

Yeah, that was crap. Let me make another run at it.
Exceptions aside for just a moment, there's no choice between good and evil for a typical character. If I'm an evil orc, I'm not going to hesitate to do evil things that I want to do*. Putting a moral choice between good and evil in front of an evil character isn't much of a choice. Likewise for a good character.

*"That I want to do" is the key to that statement, of course. And that's where the exceptions come in.

Quote from: jeff37923;915028I'm wondering if the whole "you must not kill goblin babies" crap of his applies to characters who are Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, or Chaotic Evil. What about Chaotic Neutral? Do they get to save one group of goblin babies as long as they use them to kill other goblin babies?

Jesus, you and Kyle Aaron are just incredible fuckheads, lacking basic comprehension of language. And here I had always doubted that people's brains could actually be damaged by playing D&D.

EDIT: Actually, that isn't entirely fair of me. The "fuckheads" part is fair and entirely valid for a couple little twat cowboys that want to start shit on an on-line forum. The "lacking basic comprehension of language" is the unfair part. You have that. What you don't have is the slightest grasp of nuance or subtlety.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;915033Exceptions aside for just a moment, there's no choice between good and evil for a typical character. If I'm an evil orc, I'm not going to hesitate to do evil things that I want to do*. Putting a moral choice between good and evil in front of an evil character isn't much of a choice. Likewise for a good character.

Yeah, that's not much of a choice. You get a more difficult choice if the choice is between two goods or between two evils.

Aaaaand this thread has become a perfect exemplar of why there are no goblin babies in my world.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;915038Aaaaand this thread has become a perfect exemplar of why there are no goblin babies in my world.

No goblin babies? Then who eats all the Happy Meals in the dungeon McDonalds?

Quote from: Manzanaro;915035Jesus, you and Kyle Aaron are just incredible fuckheads, lacking basic comprehension of language. And here I had always doubted that people's brains could actually be damaged by playing D&D.

EDIT: Actually, that isn't entirely fair of me. The "fuckheads" part is fair and entirely valid for a couple little twat cowboys that want to start shit on an on-line forum. The "lacking basic comprehension of language" is the unfair part. You have that. What you don't have is the slightest grasp of nuance or subtlety.

Allow me to run that through the translator:

Quote from: Manzanaro TranslatedGoddamnit!! Between you and Kyle Aaron, my argument is being shredded!! Wahhhh!! Fuckheads!! Bastards!! How dare you advocate letting players choose and not bowing down to my pseudointellectual absolutes!!

I played in a MERP campaign for a few years a while back. My character was a healer, one who specifically attended to the horses at Minas Ithil. Though visually based on Nathan Explosion from Deathklok (random chargen gave him the stature of a WWF wrestler), I patterned his personality on the main character from All Creatures Great and Small.

In the course of the campaign, several times in an area of wilderness we encountered packs of Dire Wolves. We generally were able to drive them off without too much effort, they were hungry but reluctant to face an enemy that could bite back.

 Then one night they cornered us in a cave we'd holed up in and a ferocious battle ensued, fought to the bitter end, the wolves raging against us even as we hewn them down, and almost killing one of our group. It was only afterwards we discovered why: a small litter of pups had been stashed away at the back of the cave. My companion made ready to hew them down with his sword, an I immediately intercepted. It turned into a bit of an (in-character) argument amongst the group, with tensions getting higher an higher until almost coming to blows. I refused to step aside and allow an execution, and was willing to fight anyone who attempted. Some of the party saw it as a betrayal of the group, some thought I was just being ridiculous, but the situation resolved with me delivering a good ten minute long speech about what differentiates us, as men, from the orcs. And it convinced them, both the characters, and the players (at least to the extent that they saw the validity of my PoV even if they didnt share it). I rescued the pups and took them to a nearby village, where I paid a local man handsomely to raise and train the pups.

Roughly 3 months later I watched the Game of Thrones Premiere with one of the fellows in the game. It was an incredibly surreal experience.

Quote from: jeff37923;915043Allow me to run that through the translator:

You really want to do this, don't you? Okay.

I shouldn't be surprised at the faultiness of your mental translation. Let's see if I can walk you through the actuality of things though.

My first encounter with Kyle Aaron was him screaming wildly that I was an SJW and that I should go back to Tangency. Why? Because I made a passing comment that not many players would enjoy roleplaying the murder of children, even if they were goblins. Like I said, lack of nuance combined with the tendency of a certain crowd to see SJWs behind every tree. And for the record? I did used to post on RPG.net with some regularity, before parting ways over a matter in which I was decidedly not on the side of those nefarious SJWs that hound some of your dreams.

My second encounter with him was the post which you seem to view as such an intellectual triumph, which was actually just a warmed over rehash of the post Krueger had made on the same fucking page. He even stole Krueger's tag-line of "The world still moves!' while entirely missing any actual point that had been under discussion, and contriving to "forget" my SN, because he couldn't be bothered to glance up the page, though he would take the time to rewrite Krueger's post. Fucking genius.

Then there's you, who initially came at me with an anecdote that had very little bearing on anything, though I politely acknowledged it. Next thing I know, you are accusing me of not being able to differentiate between a game and reality and saying that I hear voices in my head. Who the fuck are you again? Oh yeah, some asshole.

You then pretend to quote me with the words "you must not kill goblin babies" though that is not anything I have said... But I should just shut up and be your straw man, right you fucking stooge?

And now you "translate" what I am saying  into not letting players choose? Not bowing down to my absolutes? What absolutes are you talking about? Where are you even getting this shit? Sheer stupidity.

Anyway bro, keep coming at me with your talent for "maximum offense". I'm a polite guy when treated politely, but I will admit to having a sadistic streak a mile wide when it comes to pompous, vacuous, internet tough guys.

Quote from: jeff37923;914973There is only the Omega Way and no possible others.

No. Theres reading the damn book. Or not and making some crackhead claim.

Try again please.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;915038Aaaaand this thread has become a perfect exemplar of why there are no goblin babies in my world.

Theres pretty much no kids at all in mine.

These threads allways devolve into "my way of playing is the only way to play." arguments.

Quote from: Bren;914853It all follows from my misinterpreting your one statement about that nature of evil in a fantasy campaign.

Fair enough.

Quote from: Bren;914946There is no ethical conflict involving Black or White. If Black and White are absolute EVIL and GOOD, then making choices involving EVIL or GOOD is simple. There is no conflict or difficulty in choosing between GOOD and EVIL, you choose GOOD. Of course that's always an easy choice. Even choosing between good and evil is easy. You pick good.

Ethical or moral conflict arises when you need to make a choice either between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods. But any choice where either GOOD or EVIL is one of the choices, is a simple choice. You pick GOOD or you avoid picking EVIL.

I know that bringing up Christianity/Catholicism will probably annoy you, but as far as the above assertion of yours goes, it really is the easiest real-world comparison.

Because the truth is that Christianity might as well be a "black and white" absolute EVIL vs GOOD choice, if you actually believe in it.  Christ (the guy who we're supposed to be following) gave a pretty short and simple list of unambiguous junk we're supposed to do if we're GOOD. Simple enough if you read the book. Somehow, though, it has ended up in disaster after fucking disaster on planet Earth, everything from crusades to inquisitions to organized pedophilia cover-ups.  

"Where the fuck did I say 'build a water-slide?'" -Bill Hicks.

We can agree so far, right?  Easy instructions. "Do unto others" and "Love one another" ftw.  Result: horrific catastrophic fail after fail in the hands of mortals.

If we can agree that this is how Christianity plays out on Earth, then what reason is there to think that any made-up "black and white" GOOD vs EVIL religion would be any different?

The God of Truth commands only that you shall never lie!  Well, shit. That's too easy. I'll just never lie.  

I suggest that few authentic human characters would find this "simple" - only a simplistic player would - and here let me insist that I am not trying to get a rise out of you by saying that, so bare with me please. It's sort of the inverse of what I think you have been suggesting

And here I am also NOT trying to put words in your mouth so I'm going to sum up what I believe you've been saying: that black and white morality is by definition simplistic and therefore uninteresting to roleplay, that if you know with absolute certainty that your god wants X, then to do X is very easy and therefore there's no real roleplaying to be done.

I reject this entire line of reasoning.  In fact I think that this very mindset is anathema to the concept of roleplaying itself.

An excellent roleplayer may feel the urge in certain circumstances to twist or defy the letter of the law, simple and clear as it may be, because that is the human condition, and if there is complex emotional content in the campaign, then situations will arise when a three dimensional character will be tempted to break his code.  Ironically enough, it is the simpleton who would never consider taking the role of a character in a BLACK and WHITE cosmology seriously enough to do so.

and I know you might be getting pissed but hang in there...

OR - the character you play could certainly be legitimately so simplistic as to be a flawless paragon (and here I am not using "simplistic" as a pejorative, but rather in the sense of "virtuous").  There is no reason that such a character in such a "BLACK and WHITE" campaign would be boring either, because of the situations it would put him in in regards to other players and NPCs.  Your 'simplistic' character who refuses to bend to the human tendencies and flaws of the rest of the world would have no more "boring" a time of it than Serpico or Detective Frank Lucas in American Gangster if the roleplaying is worth anything.

Another example: Lancelot. All he had to do was NOT touch Guenevere.  How hard is that?  Well, it turns out that in Lancelot's case, it was a little more complicated than reading a "rule" and then checking the box "I agree."

The meat and potatoes of roleplaying is playing the role of your character. This can become vastly more interesting especially in the case that the rules of the campaign setting do not match your own personal "philosophy" and so a so-called BLACK and WHITE cosmology can of course be much more interesting in many ways if you are open-minded and willing to accept something that is different from your own cosmological outlook.  If, for example, the GM's setting, killing goblins is GOOD and letting them live is EVIL, and the GM tells you that this is the case, then all of a sudden you might have a "complexity" moment in a black and white cosmology, if you are willing and able to take it on.

Instead of insisting that the GM is blind or stupid or simple-minded, accept that he is actually the GM and play the role instead of rejecting it.  Now, suddenly, you have a character who WANTS to be GOOD but might defy the will of his own god out of hubris, or craven weakness, or however you want to play it.  There are a millions ways to go with it.  You might have a character who goes through obediently killing the gob kids but then develops a resentment towards a GOOD god.  I see an antipaladin in the future.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onbiOVpX0_w

Many times, dismissing a different cosmological structure, philosophical outlook, etc, is a big mistake.  From a roleplaying standpoint you are actually just cheating yourself of a rich roleplaying opportunity.

I have played in a whole lot of campaigns. I have GM'd a whole lot of them too.  Some of them were static alignment cosmologies, like D&D, and some of them were much more ambiguous or completely devoid of religion, like Shadowrun.  I do not agree with you if what you contend is that one type of campaign morality/ethics scheme is superior, or more complex, or more interesting.  I will agree that some campaigns are more interesting than others, but that is usually a reflection of two things:

1. the talents of the particular GM
2. the involvement of the particular players

You say above that there is no ethical conflict in a "BLACK and WHITE" campaign and I just plain disagree with that statement. I do find the assertion itself to be "simplistic" and I realize the kind of emotional reaction that might elicit which, while I find it an unproductive consequence and not what I want to happen, I think is worth risking in order to balance out the "simplistic" accusation which is constantly tossed in the other direction whenever this topic comes up.

I don't think that any general campaign cosmology I have ever encountered has been "simplistic" by definition.  It is only ever the treatment, by those involved, which ultimately determines a campaign's complexity. Saying that BLACK and WHITE campaigns are by nature less complex or inferior is simply one example of such treatment.

It's not a flame post. Take it at face value. I think I see where you are coming from but I just think you're missing out by categorically dismissing an entire cosmological scheme as uninteresting.  It's a value judgment. It might be uninteresting for you, and that may never change regardless of my clever posts, however if you're trying to demonstrate some kind of objective truth based on black/white vs moral relativism or any other philosophical breakdown, that's where you lose me.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;915038Aaaaand this thread has become a perfect exemplar of why there are no goblin babies in my world.

[video=youtube_share;dDkp7GysvbY]https://youtu.be/dDkp7GysvbY[/youtube]

Quote from: Manzanaro;915047My first encounter with Kyle Aaron was him screaming wildly that I was an SJW and that I should go back to Tangency. Why?

1. I wasn't screaming, I was typing.
2. Because you are.
3. Because you should.

QuoteMy second encounter with him was the post which you seem to view as such an intellectual triumph, which was actually just a warmed over rehash of the post Krueger had made on the same fucking page. He even stole Krueger's tag-line of "The world still moves!'

Well, this is what happens in discussions sometimes. It's not all Monty Python's "I'd like to have an argument" skit." Sometimes one person says something, and another person says, "yes, and -" builds on it. In fact that's what happens in many good rpg sessions, we each build on what the last person has contributed to make things happen - whether it be a hack or thesp game.

I followed with an example from play. I realise that, being a Bitter Non-Gamer, play examples may be alien to you, and that hypotheticals admit of more extreme weirdness and thus are more preferable for you to discuss, but there it is. I have been running a game where the players are (reluctantly) on the side of goblins. Consider it a case study.

For the record, I don't like it when people do the "fixed that for you" posts. It's a pain in the arse. So I don't appreciate his efforts there. Your posts are parody enough, we don't need to make shit up.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;915021Now, if I was Marzipan or whatever the fuck the commie's name is, I might as the white dragon say, "Since you have slain so many goblins, your next task is to adopt their orphan goblin babies." Wouldn't that be LOADS of fun?

What, and expecially who, are you talking about?