Future game set-up concepts

[CSF - Flint]

I am confused, is this an in character post or an OOC post?

[CI - Charrek Ironfist]

I am confused, is this an in character post or an OOC post?

An OOC explanation of IC motivations.

[CSF - Flint]

An enlightening example of dehumanizing your rivals with false propaganda! I like that the final paragraph explains all the facts which contradict the 'saddam has WMDs' propaganda, and how aurelia rationalizes it to hold onto her hate despite reality.

[TF - The Fortress]

The lands of The Hunt were far more peaceful, advanced, and thriving than any other realm...and it wasn't even close. Riva took a trip away to contemplate what he had seen and on his return dedicated himself to Hircine as it was clear the beliefs of 'The Way' (previously Ishka) and Hircine were more fully in alignment than apart.

The Hunt is evil. It is the antithesis of everything Aurelia believes in. Literally, LG vs CE. Mishrak has shown himself to be reasonable and rational and useful but at the end of the day, he is an enemy. His people are miserable wretches who betray their own families for little gain. They are backstabbing monsters who need to spend some time re-evaluating their life choices. How Riva spent time evaluating his own and came to that side is incomprehensible.

We are poised now perhaps to fight on an open field with more then 100 units per side. That is reason enough to end the game from Juan's perspective. What we don't have right now is a cause for war. Mishrak has been....behaving himself. No outrage to avenge, no innocent realm to defend against a brutal invader. And there's always the problem that his team is better led and organized then my team(only cuz you defected) and we really don't have a chance a winning.

I have to leave LG and CG out of my assessments typically. For example, Ector Gladanil was 'LG' yet dehumanized and was villainous to anyone but humans. Shireen and Dhoesone were LN, and continued EGs racism. When it's okay to wipe out a peaceful realm or slaughter innocents just because they are different it quickly leaves the rational behind and becomes legalistic interpretations of alignment rather than moral ones. This is similar to the Holocaust. It was evil, period. Yes, some of the Germans involved were decent people who were scared to do the right thing, but from a realm perspective, it set Nazi Germany firmly into the category of Evil.

Are there still excesses in The Hunt? Very likely (but since litte information is really published on the individual realms by their regents or the news it is hard to tell). However, since the time of Riva's imprisonment, he has seen more positive actions from The Hunt and less negative ones. Is it due to Riva's influence? Probably not in the least. Does it make it worth considering them in a different light? Certainly.

[RaH - Rassan al Hamam]

Well from my perspective, since the invasion of The Goblin Lands, Mishrak has done nothing but be a good Ally/Overlord . Kinda hard to believe he is CE. LE might have fit better imo.
On the other hand those alignments can be interpreted all kind of ways and some people play them out more then others.

[TF - The Fortress]

+1

[CSF - Flint]

I got the impression that the C was more about personal power and personal freedoms derived through personal strength allowed him to pursue whatever goals he chose for himself without needing to be restrained by social systems imposed on him by others. MD got to dictate terms, not a law or societal structure that would have inhibited him, because of his emphasis on that personal strength, both of character and literal physical power.

[CI - Charrek Ironfist]

Whatever you have to say to justify your good religion serving a demonic master. But in Florence, we're LG. That means the laws are followed, people look out for each other, when a law is broken, its enforced with mercy rather then rigid dogmatism. CE means lots of law-breaking, violence, theft. And when we know someone is from a CE land, we lock our doors and watch over our loved ones extra hard in their presence.

And the alignment doesn't matter crowd might be N in character. That would accurately reflect the position that it doesn't matter.

The 4 corners of the alignment table are extreme. LG and CE are literal opposites. Of course I judge them.

[CSF - Flint]

FTC have you read Juan's alignment guideline link?

Summary in case you missed it: we are playing the 'heroic' slice of an alignment cube. CE does not mean chaotic evil. It means freedom and power. Opposition to tradition for tradition's sake on the law axis, and focus on the mechanics of power on the good axis.

IC it is totally fine for your guy to have whatever biases and motivations you want of course, but OOC you should know that is not the traditional hardcore black and white alignment system Juan's game is using. I am not trying to spin you, we are all playing 'heroic' characters, and a CE person can be as 'good' if not arguably more good than an LG person.

[TH - The Hunt]

'Good guys' don't eschew diplomacy in favour of violent conflict. So there's that. The whole 'wanting to be attacked' thing is definitely the most CE thing about Mishrak. If not for that, it'd seem he was doing whatever was necessary to gain and maintain unchecked power. That said... it seems strange that when counterattacks turned out to be a long time coming, he didn't provoke further conflict, he just sort of complained about its absence. I guess the aliens sort of explain that.

we are playing the 'heroic' slice of an alignment cube

The word the website uses is 'positive', not 'heroic'. And in terms of that third dimension, our characters are 'neutral' on average, at best. To the extent Mishrak is motivated by hedonism, for example, he's not just having fun, he's having fun at the expense of tens of thousands of lives. That's rather 'negative'.

Here's the most relevant part quoted (underlined where it's most relevant:)

The point of this exercise is to show that even though there are "chaotic" and "evil" alignments in D&D, members of these alignments can still possess character traits that are deemed desirable, perhaps even heroic. It naturally follows, then, that each alignment can be seen in terms of "positive" and "negative" attributes. We already know the negative attributes of the evil alignments; the D&D alignment system focuses on them exclusively. Evil characters are extremely selfish, cruel, merciless, and are typically unconcerned with the welfare of those considered not part of the "in-group." In the case of lawful evils, the in-group is clearly defined. For neutral evils, the in-group is whoever is contributing to advancing the aims of the neutral evil. For chaotic evils, the in-group is simply the self.

In a similar vein, D&D focuses only on the positive aspects of the good alignments. Good characters are benevolent, altruistic, and self-sacrificing. They "do the right thing." They help people, fight evil, and aid good organizations. These are all positive aspects of goodness. What are the negative aspects? Good characters can be pacifists, refusing to ever use violence, even if such violence combats evil and saves lives. Good characters can be martyrs, sacrificing the self to such an extent that they become doormats for anyone who comes along (good or evil). They can be self-righteous. Certainly a "holier than thou" attitude is a negative one. There are many other examples of good characters possessing negative traits based on their goodness.