Interactions between good and evil characters

[Rhytania]

The purpose of the wiki was to show the part where it discusses the gross stereotyping of 'good' and 'evil'. Lathlain said it best and took the words outta my mouth, is that your characters dont have to be so 2-dimensional. Its ok for goods and evils to have moral dilemnas, to think twice about going on a blood thirsty rampage, and perhaps learn to work with and heaven forbid accept opposing alignments for roleplays other than PKills. How many times do good pcs or even a party of them always have dilemnas when it comes to their alignments and paths in the novels, even a group of good PC's will argue, bicker, and even fight amongst themselves becuase of differing viewpoints.

[Grafghur]

My 2 cents on the whole good/evil thing from the an orc perspective.

There is good rp, where the confrontation is multi-layered, everyone has fun and leaves with a positive experience. This might of might not involve pk. But what makes this a good fun is that on both sides, ppl are there to rp, no matter if you lose or win. If a pk is to happen then it usually ends up with someone getting knocked unconscious.

There is okay rp, where the players take the event a little too personal. (ie, they are afraid that they will lose) and even though they participate, they end-up doing something out of IC or make some comment OCC to avoid a pk situation etc..

There is bad rp, where those involved don't take the situation IC at all. For example, making fun of an orc when the orc is twice as big as you, or an elf that walks into a room with an orc and acts as if there is nothing wrong with it.

To me it pretty much all comes down to some players are more mature than others and see their character as part of a game. There isn't that emotional attachment to getting all bent out of shape if you lose. Losing a pk or a rp situation can be just as fun as winning. I still remember on my best moment was when Graf had a large barricade set on fire in the middle of the road and was asking for tolls. Sure, I was asking for trouble (It's tough to get any rp as an orc, trust me. I have to go look for it) and Graf did die at the end. It was all the events that led to his death that made it fun, sure, the end result was a pain for me to get resurected but it was worth the 1hr (or was it longer?) good vs evil experience. You win some, you lose some, no harm done.

[Ninde]

I still remember on my best moment was when Graf had a large barricade set on fire in the middle of the road and was asking for tolls. Sure, I was asking for trouble (It's tough to get any rp as an orc, trust me. I have to go look for it) and Graf did die at the end. It was all the events that led to his death that made it fun, sure, the end result was a pain for me to get resurected but it was worth the 1hr (or was it longer?) good vs evil experience. You win some, you lose some, no harm done.

That was the brightest moment for Ninde and Miriel.

[Lerytha]

And it was a LOT longer than 1hr. As I recall, it lasted several. Ah, I still remember that barricade with immense fondness...

[Kilak]

I've had some interesting RP with evils. Now I'm pretty sure some people will get on my case as I was playing a good dwarven fighter and coming to the defense of Chameleon the half drow. It was a fun RP in that I got to see the bigotry that exists between goods and evils. Good characters confronted me later about how I could side with the half drow and the tieflings, and I was upfront in the fact that I was siding only with Chameleon and that I would always keep one eye on the tieflings as I did not trust them one bit.

That large arguement in front of the Waterdeep gates was probably the best RP I ever had in FK, and it showed that there has to be shades of gray. I trusted Chameleon as she had shown me she had good in her. Almost all the goods that interacted with her showed her how "evil" goods can be when they are blinded by their beliefs.

So I guess what I am saying is I've seen some nice good/evil RP. I don't have a problem with evils in Waterdeep or goods in the Keep. I've been in the Keep multiple times in actual Pen and Paper D&D. These places don't automatically keep little Detect Evil sentries all over the place. Besides, what is evil? I'm sure Waterdeep has it's share of merchants who gouge and swindle everyone they come across.

[Ninde]

That large arguement in front of the Waterdeep gates was probably the best RP I ever had in FK, and it showed that there has to be shades of gray. I trusted Chameleon as she had shown me she had good in her. Almost all the goods that interacted with her showed her how "evil" goods can be when they are blinded by their beliefs.

This is the point, should we be all nice within the game ICly just the modern morality of us force us to be nice to all? IRL, I am studying human rights, but ICly, my elf is a highly racist one. There are few who would remember that, she was smirking at every non elf she saw, and the life changed her a bit, in some ways, and some ways not.
FK world is a highly racist world, and people were taught since they are in the wombs, or they are little kids about culture and morality of these lands. These lands are harsh to survive for the races, as there has been battles and wars for thousands of years. And I can say it is not different in real life. Just because we live in comfortable lives, that doesn't mean that kind of racist way of living doesn't exist. Think about an individual, spent all his life in military battles, violence and crime. How would you blame him for having such different moralities than you have?
Think about the same. People are suspicious to some races, considering the history. That doesn't mean it is evil. It is the way of protecting others she/he cares.
I had been quite alot in pkill situations for this way. Keep it clean and a nice roleplay is all I care in the end. Is it a bully or a roleplay? This is the point should be looked when considering pkills between good and evil.

Ninde would never trust a halfdrow, going with your example. Because of her moralities and knowing her thousands of history of elves. And people might frown upon her ICly, and she won't care at all. It is her "truth" and her "reality". She won't sit and drink a glass of wine with Grafghur, for the same matter. I don't think this ICly suits, even if you are a good or evil. I can't imagine an orc befriending with an elf either, unless he wants to eat the elf or trying to corrupt the elf.

[Kregor]

That large arguement in front of the Waterdeep gates was probably the best RP I ever had in FK, and it showed that there has to be shades of gray. I trusted Chameleon as she had shown me she had good in her. Almost all the goods that interacted with her showed her how "evil" goods can be when they are blinded by their beliefs.

An open minded dwarf... towards someone with Drow blood. I'll echo Ninde's sentiment. The 21st century open minded, racial tolerant kum bah yah mentality really has no place in FK. ESPECIALLY in Dwarves, elves and etc., that have an underlying mentality in their RP. And yes, bigotry is one of them.

Dwarves are slow to trust anyone. When I say slow, it means decades for such a long lived race. When they DO trust, they trust for just as long. A dwarf tolerating a drow blooded individual is just as off a dwarf RP as a boat riding, horse riding, magic loving, normal english talking dwarf.

[Kilak]

Yep. Saw that coming. I was not using current thinking. I had RP with Chameleon in the past and had no qualms with her. I even tried to get her to stop being around the teiflings. Is this bad RP in some people's mind? Obviously since you are getting on my case. If I used the decades approach the what is the use of me even playing FK??? I initially started playing FK as I moved away from my friends and wanted to continue role playing with them.

Yes, I understand that the "traditional" view on dwarves would not allow being friendly towards a half drow, but even prior to my first RP with Chameleon I was basing my RP off of my first impressions. All races and people are different. Just because elves and dwarves have quarelled in the past does not mean that all elves are evil in Kilak's eyes. Chameleon had not shown any desire to conform to her drow blooded ways, so I gave her the benefit of the doubt until it was shown that she could not be trusted. This is how gaining trust works!

[Kregor]

Not getting on your case, in particular, Kilak. My comments should be directed to the modern morality and tolerance mentality as a whole. You'll never see it in a Forgotten Realms novel, as tension and hatred between races, cultures, alignments, etc, are the fuel for conflict and drama in the stories. It's why the rulebooks, like Races of Faerun, even include relations with other races for each race entry. Forgotten Realms is a hybrid of dark, ancient and medieval culture, none of which are tolerant, at all, to someone who's not in the circle of acceptance for a race.

Humans, perhaps halflings, might be the few of the races who are more open than others. But most of the humanoid races are driven by pride and distrust.

But this is digressing the topic, and there are plenty of threads to this effect already in the racial forums where we can continue to debate modern vs. ancient toughts on diversity.

[Kilak]

All I was trying to get at is that yes there are race specific things, but the fact is we are dealing with individuals. Most adventurers are not the exact, traditional models of their race. This would fall in the good vs. evil RP. I know FK tries to shy away from the individuals like Drizzt, but that is what makes the Forgotten Realms unique. He is different and as time goes by people learn to trust him because of his actions. That is what I was trying to get across with my example RP with Chameleon.

[Aland]

If you have seen goods getting "high and holy" then 500 bonus experience for them. That is what goods are supposed to do. In the dnd world it's good vs evil. Good destroys evil just as much as evil does good. It's completely in character for any evil to right out kill a good, as it is a good to kill an evil. If you're not rping that, then you are not playing a good alignment right.

I have to strongly disagree. If it was really that simple than the DnD alignment system would be completely pointless, there should only be two, "Good" and "Evil."

But as it is there is room for incredible variation. There is a whole world of difference between a Lawful Good Paladin who does go out and champion the causes of good and a Chaotic Good Rogue who is just out for a good time. Similarly there is a huge difference between a Chaotic Evil Malarite who hunts down and butchers druids and a Lawful Evil Merchant who twists the law to fill his pockets
I can't really see a great Crusade being launched to cut down greedy merchants wherever they stand, nor the Church of Shar committing the time and resources to kill off friendly drunks all over the Realms.

And even those who would fall into the extreme ends of the spectrum do have certain constraints. A Paladin cannot be walking along and upon noticing someone with an evil aura, without knowing anything else about them, just casually draw his sword and take off their head simply because he is good and the other person was evil. Similarly even the most evil character, out of self-preservation if nothing else, is not just going to randomly kill someone on the street in broad daylight simply because they are evil and the other person wasn't.

Yes, in the FK medieval culture there are plenty of biases and grudges to go around, but there is no reason at all that interactions between good and evil should be limited solely to threats/bullying/aggression.

[Rhytania]

A Paladin cannot be walking along and upon noticing someone with an evil aura, without knowing anything else about them, just casually draw his sword and take off their head simply because he is good and the other person was evil.

I agree with you their Aland. If anything that Paladin would seek to find out more about the person with the evil aura and if he cared enough, would seek his redemption rather than instakilling him on sight.

[Lerytha]

Good people must automatically kill all evil?

Well, then they're not good, are they? If they kill so capriciously then they are evil, and cease to be good. Look at Khelben Blackstaff. He is Lawful Neutral, but fights for goodness. Now, why is someone who fights for "good", Lawful Neutral?

Precisely because he doesn't care about killing evil people. Killing people IS evil. Now, the idea behind traditional "good" heroes, is that they only kill in self-defence, or kill for justice, or kill those who have done something bad. So, Khelben in his heart wants to help, but he doesn't want to bother with the niceties of waiting for people to try to kill him. He is also more concerned with the greater good (ie, look at him allying with Fzoul Chembryl of the Zhentarim, of all things!).

So, the idea that any lawful good character sees any evil person and (without proof of a crime) goes to kill them is quite frankly a little weird. A Lawful Good character is someone who sticks to the rules as best they can and is an instinctively good person. Is someone who is instinctively good and law-abiding the same person who rattles sabres and threatens death?

Similarly, is a lawful evil character, as someone who is instinctively law-abiding but also instinctively likely to commit greedy acts, automatically going to stab you because you are good? Nope. They're more likely to toy with you, manipulate you, etc.

Now, its not right (I don't think) to bring RACE into this, because that is a completely different kettle of fish, as it were. A traditional novel elf WILL automatically try to kill a drow (or halfdrow) or orc (maybe even halforc). Most humans would automatically try to kill a drow or an orc.

I think its is entirely simplistic to say "goods kill evil" "evil kill goods". That's not a direct victimisation of you there, Scylere. I know what you mean. Fantasy is (traditionally) about the epic struggle between concrete symbols of evil and good. However, more and more in recent times, fantasy novels that deal with absolutes are selling less. Readers want to know about the GREY. Readers want to know about the moral flexibilities, the difficult choices of characters. When the GREY issues first hit the shelves in fantasy publishing, people were amazed. "What? Why is this hero agonising over whether to kill this person?"

I think in Forgotten Kingdoms it is time we hit the same (relatively) sophisticated point. GRAY all the way, dudes!

At the same time, D&D is different to other roleplaying worlds. It actually -does- have physical planes devoted to evil. Nine Hells for all those lawful evil characters; Abyss for all those chaotic evil characters. There is EVEN a neutral evil place. So there IS an argument for some of that epic battling, dealing with such simple issues of good/evil.

Anything I've written here is not trying to say, "You suck because you prefer epic, straightforward good vs evil" or "You rock because you prefer the more moralistic, grey-area conflict". No. I'm just trying to say that I think we could do (sometimes) with some more of the grey.

What about race v race RP? Is it neutral good to hate all drow? Probably not, but my elf still does. What about temple v temple RP? How weird is it that a peace-loving chaotic good Sunite would instantly want to slay a lawful good Tempus follower? What about organisation vs organisation RP? Two Mielikkians, one in a guild of mages the other in the rangers' council disagree about something.

That is the stuff that really adds further depth. Yes, keep the good vs evil. I love anguishing about villains about as much as the next character. But RPing divisions, weirdness, anomalies... they are much more fun.

~Ol

[Ceara]

I'd just like to comment on the drow / dwarf thing. There is an example where a dwarf who at first distrusted a drow but became lifelong friends with one. Drizzt and Bruenor Battlehammer. So to say it's OOC for a dwarf to befriend a half-drow is unfair. People keep acting as though half-drow are full blooded drow, in some cases they would be treated worse by the drow than most other races because they are an abomination. There is the arguement that surfacers wouldn't know the difference between a half-drow aand full blooded one, but some half-drow may look more like their human parent. And what of those half-drow that have obvious features that are non-drow?
Point is I don't think it's fair to say this person isn't acting ic or that person isn't because do you really know everything about their character? What their thoughts are, what their past has been?
Secondly I agree that there are many shades of grey and that is what makes it fun. It's not all black and white. I think others that have posted here recently have covered that quite well. Kudos.

[Kregor]

Yes, Bruenor befriended Drizzt, but that as an example cannot apply in the FK roleplaying envorinment, because of the stated, and restated "no drizzt's" clause in the rulings of this game, that has been applied to both drow AND halfdrow as a race.

It is also presumed, as stated in other threads here, that the PC half drow are assumed to favor the drow parent, which is why they get thrown out of Waterdeep. As it has also been ruled in past threads that tieflings have to look sufficiently planar to give away their abyssal or infernal heritage.

The clauses above are supposed to serve as a disadvantage to the player who chooses to play a half drow. Being an outcast and hated/distrusted by most goodly people is supposed to be a trade-off for the additional stat bonuses and abilities that this, and some other exotic races get at creation. Sadly, it's not a disadvantage, when the other players around them choose not to outcast them, and treat them no worse than a human.

As a whole, yes, there are shades of grey, alignment-wise. There is in fact two spectrums, from law to chaos, and from good to evil. And there is not only good vs. evil, there is evil vs. evil RP that goes on, and even good vs. good. Because as mentioned above, there is SO much more that plugs into conflict, like race, culture, faith, etc... besides just alignment.

[Lathander]

There is an example where a dwarf who at first distrusted a drow but became lifelong friends with one.

The key word here is "an." This is extremely rare and should not be looked at as precedent. There ARE areas of gray, but the NORM is black and white. The grey area is more a thin, smokey line rather than a vast, encompassing field of "do what ever you want." It is a delicate balance, we WANT players and their PCs to be individuals and rp as they see fit, but we also want it within the system/genre we love so much. Too much adapting of current morality to the FK world is a bad thing. The most glaring example is alignment. People today, or any REAL time period for that matter, don't have alignments. FK does, D&D does, and we are willingly restricted to the structure of that system. It defines the core of PC beings. Half-drow are SEEN as evil as are many other races. Elves are SEEN as good and so on.

[Ninde]

I'd just like to comment on the drow / dwarf thing. There is an example where a dwarf who at first distrusted a drow but became lifelong friends with one. Drizzt and Bruenor Battlehammer. So to say it's OOC for a dwarf to befriend a half-drow is unfair. People keep acting as though half-drow are full blooded drow, in some cases they would be treated worse by the drow than most other races because they are an abomination. There is the arguement that surfacers wouldn't know the difference between a half-drow aand full blooded one, but some half-drow may look more like their human parent. And what of those half-drow that have obvious features that are non-drow?
Point is I don't think it's fair to say this person isn't acting ic or that person isn't because do you really know everything about their character? What their thoughts are, what their past has been?
Secondly I agree that there are many shades of grey and that is what makes it fun. It's not all black and white. I think others that have posted here recently have covered that quite well. Kudos.

It is said there are a few million population of drow, and it is said they are three times bigger population than surface elves. Drizzt, what is given as an example often, is one among millions. Then, an elf would be alright with all drow, just because there is a drow ranger named Drizzt? I don't think so. The thousands year of history of Crown Wars, which dwarves were included in some parts-also the beginning of elf vs. dwarf conflicts- is full of battles of elves against orcs, goblins, demons, devils and drow. They all came together and destroyed Aryvandaar, Myth Drannor and much more. And since elves are within the womb, because of the interaction with the mother and the child, an elf already knows of their culture and history. Elves raised by humans, use the apology of, "I don't know elven culture" quote, which I am not buying. Because then elf child should be within the womb of a human also. Considering these all, which part would a "Average Joe" elf take, in the atmosphere of Forgotten Realms world?
Don't get me wrong, Caera, I am not writing those just to oppose you or something, rather talking for general stuff, and my alts have had quite different roleplay and interaction with evil characters, not that all ended up with a pkill. And it is fun, I like it. The point is, even FK consists of special "adventurers" of the realms, it still doesn't mean that they should have different moralities than most of their kin. Same for elves, dwarves or drow. Same for evil and good.

[Scylere]

Killing people IS evil.

In a fantasy setting, where there is good and evil, killing is not evil. How many goods kill at the Peaks? How many goods kill the orcs in Shilmista? How many goods kill supposedly "evil" mobs?

I have to strongly disagree. If it was really that simple than the DnD alignment system would be completely pointless, there should only be two, "Good" and "Evil."

This is what neutral alignments are for.

I see good and evil from this point of view:

Neither is a set of rules, a set of morals (which are rules in a sense), a set of guidelines, or a procedure or recipe for being good or evil.

They are innate states of being. You ARE good. You ARE evil. If you are neither or waver from side to side, you are neutral.

If grey is in the game, it should be displayed in neutrality. You cannot be good and be grey. You cannot be evil and be grey. They are static.

Back to suggestions of how to improve good vs evil interactions in the game, I would like to see rp specifically related to good or evil, one religion or another. Like a specific religion or faction coming together to finding a powerful item or explore an ancient tomb or kidnap an enemy or rage war against an enemy. Exclusive rps that only include a certain group, then the next time it could be another group.

[Penryn]

I'd just like to comment on the drow / dwarf thing. There is an example where a dwarf who at first distrusted a drow but became lifelong friends with one. Drizzt and Bruenor Battlehammer. So to say it's OOC for a dwarf to befriend a half-drow is unfair. People keep acting as though half-drow are full blooded drow, in some cases they would be treated worse by the drow than most other races because they are an abomination. There is the arguement that surfacers wouldn't know the difference between a half-drow aand full blooded one, but some half-drow may look more like their human parent. And what of those half-drow that have obvious features that are non-drow?
Point is I don't think it's fair to say this person isn't acting ic or that person isn't because do you really know everything about their character? What their thoughts are, what their past has been?
Secondly I agree that there are many shades of grey and that is what makes it fun. It's not all black and white. I think others that have posted here recently have covered that quite well. Kudos.

The drow characteristics are always dominate in the mating so they always look like their drow parents.



As for black and white, I never liked the alignment system and often used to just rip it out of my homebrew campaigns. There is always instances where the good person is actually acting in a sense that would be evil and evil acting in a sense that could be considered good. Now in my opinion there is no such thing as racism for fantasy worlds between different species. Things like drow vs elf, or dwarf vs goblin, orc vs elf, human, etc etc etc. Those hatreds are cuased by real living gods and passed down through bloodlines. They factor into survival of their different species. Pretty much making the ideal of racism there an invalid one

As for the example of a paladin, If I was them I would alert the town watch to the description of the individual so they can set up a watch upon the individual and let the "evil" hang himself. Following the lawful and orderly approach.

[Lerytha]

When I speak of grey areas, I don't speak about justice and the other progressive ideas we're trying to put into FK (racism, human rights, democracy). I'm just on about a differing reaction to evil/good.

Scylere, again, I know what you're saying. When I said "Killing IS evil", I know good killing orc doesn't make you evil. But the act itself is evil, its just justified by the fact you're killing an orc.

Also, the idea that just because you're good you always do good is fundamentally flawed. I tend to use my alignment as a guideline. However, my characters sometimes waver in response to certain provocations, as we all would. Take for example, that "What alignment are YOU the player?" test. If you answer GENERALLY in a certain way, you get a general alignment. I got LAWFUL GOOD, but on a few questions I wavered. Heck, on one question I took a downright evil approach.

That's what I'm on about. If each of our characters (evil, good or neutral) is perfect in regards to their alignment, it would be boring. When it is said "You aren't RPing your alignment" I think we mean a good person randomly killing random MOBS, we don't mean "a good person is offended and troubled so much that they would flee rather than..." (or whatever). THAT is the kind of grey I am on about. The grey that makes our characters more than living avatars of two letters. Instead of saying "Hi, I'm NG." You can say "Hi, I'm <insert name>" safe in the knowledge that though you roleplay your alignment, there are sufficient quirks and differences in how you act to make it interesting for yourself and everyone.

How does all this link back to evil interaction? Well, its because I think we have (even in this discussion) polarised evil and good onto two COMPLETELY different sides. Yes, there is an Abyss and an Elysium. Yes, good is completely opposed to evil. However, what makes a neutral good person? What makes a good person? Acceptance, general love of freedom, etc. Is going out of your way to slaughter every person with a slight blemish on their character "good"? Nope. No way.

That's all my call for grey is. An asking for a few quirks along the way. Maybe your good character feels they can ally with Loviatar's Church because they are not your direct enemies and if you try to get them to hurt your enemies, less people suffer?

Questions, dilemmas... that's what I love.