Quote from: CRKrueger;915123Since you guys are talking about Lancelot, if you're speaking about the Mallory version, then Lancelot dishonors himself, betray's Arthur's trust, brings discord to the Knights of the Round Table, ruins Arthur and Guinevere's marriage, basically destroys Camelot...and damns his eternal soul.

Actually he went into a monastery and presumably repented, confessed, and was forgiven and was not eternally damned. But he totally broke his knightly vows as well as the the Round Table, and he can't fix that. King's getting excommunicated almost every other Tuesday back then (then being Mallory's time, in case that wasn't clear) only to provide a big fat donation and a public show of repentance and presto, sins forgiven. But the Round Table is like Humpty Dumpty. He's not putting that back together again.

QuoteSo for Lancelot the character, as well as the audience, adding that component of a Mortal Sin makes that a much more serious and powerful choice, because it has more consequences.  As far as consequences go, World < World+All Eternity.

Given the threat of damnation for an imaginary character is very imaginary, how does that eternal damnation consequence play out at the table?

QuoteNow, I'm guessing what's coming is that a Mortal Sin to a Catholic or violating one of the ten Commandments to a Christian is not something you would consider an Absolute.

Repentance. Confession. Forgiveness.

QuoteWhy don't you give an example of a couple Absolute Goods and Absolute Evils since you admit there's probably a definitional issue.

Because I'm not the one who feels there is a difference at the table playing Lancelot when the GM says, "Well Lance, you've broken your vows, dishonored yourself, screwed you best friend and his wife, destroyed the Round Table, killed your fellow knights whom you were sworn to treat as brothers. Off you go a madman in the forest, roll up another character."

Player: "Oh, man that sucks."

And the GM tacking on ""Oh and your character, when he dies in the forest, he's going to spend eternity in hell" to all that other stuff.

Can you explain what else happens for you that adds to the roleplaying experience when the GM tacks on the damnation of your imaginary character to all that other stuff?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;915167I have to quibble with everyone saying that the cosmology of the world should be made obvious to the players.

That "everyone" isnt me.

As the DM. If the players ask me I'll tell them what the characters know and/or believe.

But if its ok for kobolds to eat your babies... Why is it not ok for adventurers? :confused:

Quote from: Omega;915180But if its ok for kobolds to eat your babies... Why is it not ok for adventures? :confused:

I don't care if you are some sort of hot shot adventurers. I'm still not letting you chow down on my babies. Or am I mistaken about which noun you intended that pronoun to represent?

Quote from: Bren;915177Can you explain what else happens for you that adds to the roleplaying experience when the GM tacks on the damnation of your imaginary character to all that other stuff?

Roleplaying a more difficult decision is roleplaying a more difficult decision.  Is roleplaying an alternate belief system that hard to understand?

Not going to give an example of Absolute Good or Evil in your view, huh?  Just flag all examples as not Absolute.  You're incapable of even engaging the premise, then, which explains much.  Got it. Moving on.

Quote from: jhkim;915150For those who don't like moral dilemmas in their gaming, it's pretty easy to accomplish this by *not having goblin babies* - and more generally by having clearly categorized characters and situations. i.e. Bad guys are clearly bad, and good guys are clearly good.

Or you could just treat a game like a fucking game and keep killing them thar goblin babies.

Quote from: Bren;915182I don't care if you are some sort of hot shot adventurers. I'm still not letting you chow down on my babies. Or am I mistaken about which noun you intended that pronoun to represent?

Wait... its not an adjective? :confused:

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;915167I have to quibble with everyone saying that the cosmology of the world should be made obvious to the players.

It's not like we know in real life if God is real or if absolute morality exists. Why would the PCs.

So even if goblins are inherently evil, that doesn't mean the PCs would know that; it makes more sense that they should all act and decide it themselves amongst each other, just like morality in real life.

I think the idea was that PCs will probably have an existing opinion based on race/culture/religion/etc...  They haven't led their whole lives up to now in a goblinless vacuum, so what have they been exposed to.  Whether it's True or not is another matter.  A Tilean Templar of Sigmar might have a different opinion then a Kislevite Priestess of Shallya, but they will probably have one.

For me the interesting question is not whether killing goblin children is per se an evil act, but what the characters believe about it and how they act on that belief.

A character might well believe that slaughtering helpless children is always an evil act, even if tey are goblins, but that allowing the goblins to grow to maturity would be a greater evil. This in character belief does not depend on the metaphysical nature of goblins or evil in the campaign world. Goblins could be little knots of "Pure Evil" walking about the world and a character could still believe that killing goblin children was an evil act.

It is easy enough to leave the gobo kiddies out of the adventure if the group would rather not deal with them. My group would most likely slaughter them without batting an eye, unless I really went for the heartstrings.

I'm murdering some goblin-kids this week in protest. I'll make sure my character worships Isis, then it'll feel more simulationist.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;915167I have to quibble with everyone saying that the cosmology of the world should be made obvious to the players.

It's not like we know in real life if God is real or if absolute morality exists. Why would the PCs.

So even if goblins are inherently evil, that doesn't mean the PCs would know that; it makes more sense that they should all act and decide it themselves amongst each other, just like morality in real life.

In a D&D campaign, the gods can show up and do stuff.* Forgotten Realms, Time of Troubles, for one instance.
Not to mention Planescape.

*I suppose God showed up in the old testament, but then we'd be off on a theology tangent.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;915161I think that's true on all levels--Happy Meals were introduced in June 1979.

Well, yeah; the McDonald's on my seventh level is from 1975 or 1976.  75, I think.

Quote from: Bren;915177Can you explain what else happens for you that adds to the roleplaying experience when the GM tacks on the damnation of your imaginary character to all that other stuff?

Because if I'm playing a knight who is a Christian, I'm going to try to avoid that fate in character, even if it means "the character lives the rest of his life as a holy hermit praying his repentance."

Because the character cares about it, presumably.

Quote from: Bren;915177Because I'm not the one who feels there is a difference at the table playing Lancelot when the GM says, "Well Lance, you've broken your vows, dishonored yourself, screwed you best friend and his wife, destroyed the Round Table, killed your fellow knights whom you were sworn to treat as brothers. Off you go a madman in the forest, roll up another character."

Player: "Oh, man that sucks."

And the GM tacking on ""Oh and your character, when he dies in the forest, he's going to spend eternity in hell" to all that other stuff.

Can you explain what else happens for you that adds to the roleplaying experience when the GM tacks on the damnation of your imaginary character to all that other stuff?

This is exactly what I was getting at. You will not or can not put yourself in the role of a character who considers eternal salvation a valid concern. The difference in character outlook between one to whom this matters are profound, however there is no way to explain why to you because you are not able to understand that character's point of view.

Quote from: Kyussopeth;913942killing goblin children is evil?

In my games, evil monsters create miniature evil monsters - not "children." The miniature evil monsters are about as childish as that small-sized alien that burst from what's his name's chest in Alien and then quickly grew into a full-sized, acid-blooded killing machine. Of course, you know, some people prefer "monsters" that are basically just humans with funny features and different colored skin. If those people want to navel gaze over their "monsters," it's no concern of mine.