I don't like those equations above (in the topic), i think they rather childish, however - those equations are dominant in the DarkSun campaign setting.
Are defilers bad?!
ye, the sorcerer-kings are bad, that doesn't make all the defilers bad too. maybe defilers don't care much about the environment, but it doesn't make them the ultimate evil - in our real world, there are fine men who don't care much about the environment, and we certainly don't judge one's morality just by his activity in "greenpeace".
However, athas is not our real home, while we do have water and trees, athas lacks them, and the defiling magic is destroying the few plants that survived. but in the past, in the green age, defiling shouldn't have been such a malevolent act - there is no reason why defilers didn't reject rajaat's champions - on the contrary! the enemies of the champions should have used the powerful defiling magic to stop the champions, after all - who cares about the trees when your family is brought to the slaughter?
Are preservers good?!
We agreed that in the current age in athas, defiling is evil act, ok, but that doesn't make preserving necessarily a good act. A wizard might learn preserving magic, not to guard the environment, but rather to be able to spellcast discreetly (defiling magic is hard to conceal...).
It's bring me to another point - it's not rational to claim that the sorcerer-monarchs use defilers as court-wizards, the sorcerer-monarchs are known for their cautiousness and it very incautious act to support a defiler that can gain a large power easily. It's better to the SM to support several preservers that can be "treated" if they gain too much power. As a bonus, those preservers could try to spy in the "veiled alliance".
Originally posted by SandChicken
Hey, I'm new here, and i already want to start a debate
I don't like those equations above (in the topic), i think they rather childish, however - those equations are dominant in the DarkSun campaign setting.
Well, actually, it makes sense that defilers are move evil than preservers IMHO.
Are defilers bad?!
ye, the sorcerer-kings are bad, that doesn't make all the defilers bad too. maybe defilers don't care much about the environment, but it doesn't make them the ultimate evil - in our real world, there are fine men who don't care much about the environment, and we certainly don't judge one's morality just by his activity in "greenpeace".
However, athas is not our real home, while we do have water and trees, athas lacks them, and the defiling magic is destroying the few plants that survived. but in the past, in the green age, defiling shouldn't have been such a malevolent act - there is no reason why defilers didn't reject rajaat's champions - on the contrary! the enemies of the champions should have used the powerful defiling magic to stop the champions, after all - who cares about the trees when your family is brought to the slaughter?
They don't merely ignore the environment - they actively seek to destroy it so they can have some power right now. The effects of defiling magic is plain to see across the tablelands - the deserts, sea of silt, and more. It's not even the same scale of what has been done in real life - our ecosystem has a way of not only adapting but also balancing the equation. A defiler on Athas destroys the means to balance the equasion - they wipe out all plant-life in an area, their spells affect animals in still unknown ways, and with dragon-magic they do to animals what is done to plants normally. Unchecked, defilers will destroy Athas and leave it nothing but a barren, desolate wasteland.
Are preservers good?!
We agreed that in the current age in athas, defiling is evil act, ok, but that doesn't make preserving necessarily a good act. A wizard might learn preserving magic, not to guard the environment, but rather to be able to spellcast discreetly (defiling magic is hard to conceal...).
Preservers, while using the same basic mechanic as a defiler, have something defilers seem to lack - self control. Preserving draws from a wider source of plants and doesn't take enough energy to kill them. They are attempting to save what precious little is left on this world - however Druids, defenders of the land, rarely can tell the difference. The difference isn't so much good vs bad, as it is wanton destruction vs conservation.
It's bring me to another point - it's not rational to claim that the sorcerer-monarchs use defilers as court-wizards, the sorcerer-monarchs are known for their cautiousness and it very incautious act to support a defiler that can gain a large power easily. It's better to the SM to support several preservers that can be "treated" if they gain too much power. As a bonus, those preservers could try to spy in the "veiled alliance".
The Sorcerer-Monarchs tend to not have court magicians. They are rather jealous of their magical power, and tend to kill just about any and all wizard within their cities. Occasionally they might take a defiler into their employ (however that defiler could eventually pose a threat - SM's don't want to groom someone who could replace them, after all). Most often, however, these defilers are sent away from his SM, primarily to protect the little vegitation around the city-state.
Preservers hate defilers and all they stand for - that's easy enough to see, with preservers doing what they can to conserve and protect the precious plant-life, while a defiler destroys it. The penultimate examples of defilers being the SM's themselves, so preservers tend to hate them, hence the veiled alliance. The SM's cannot trust a preserver to be anything other than a member of the veiled alliance, or possibly maneuvering to kill him. As such, they wouldn't bring a preserver into their employ. And if they even got some brilliant idea to do that, the preserver would be considered "tainted" by his/her fellows.
Understand, however, preservers can be of any alignment - there's evil preservers, there's also neutral and good ones. Defilers tend to be of an evil alignment (falling into the classification of willingly and rather forcefully desiring to destroy life for their own benefit, kinda hard to define that as anything other than evil overall), however some can rationalize their defiling a little, and so there are some neutral defilers in the mix - those who attempt to preserve while only using defiling when they feel it is absolutely necessary. It is very hard for me to even concieve of, much less allow a defiler player (or make a defiler NPC) that is of a good alignment. Assisting in the destruction of their world and the eventual damnation and extinction of all life upon it cannot be a good thing in my eyes. Especially a world which is already as far gone as Athas is.
It's not cut and dry however. Sadira is a borderline defiler, and she is in her heart a fairly decent person. She has just taken an "end justifies the means approach" a few times. She didn't consider it evil, but if she kep doing it, such that it became habit, then that same attidude would start warping her outlook and pursuits in life in general. She would care less and less.
And defilers don't merely turn a blind eye to the state of the world, they do what in the real world would be not only cutting down all the trees and burning away the shrubs, they then go through and salt the ground making it impossible for other plants to grow there. It would be like having a low-yield nuclear destruction that effects only the plants and changes the composition of the soil at the same time.
Maybe, like sadira, some can justify small uses of it to themselves, but on a grand scale, it's hard to not know what you are doing. Defilers generally just don't care - after all, they figure they'll be dead long before the rest of the defilers finish what the Dragon had started.
They don't merely ignore the environment - they actively seek to destroy it so they can have some power right now. The effects of defiling magic is plain to see across the tablelands - the deserts, sea of silt, and more. It's not even the same scale of what has been done in real life - our ecosystem has a way of not only adapting but also balancing the equation. A defiler on Athas destroys the means to balance the equasion - they wipe out all plant-life in an area, their spells affect animals in still unknown ways, and with dragon-magic they do to animals what is done to plants normally. Unchecked, defilers will destroy Athas and leave it nothing but a barren, desolate wasteland.
i disagree, they don't "seek to destroy it", they just take the easy way - exactly as many of us in the real life.
Preservers, while using the same basic mechanic as a defiler, have something defilers seem to lack - self control. Preserving draws from a wider source of plants and doesn't take enough energy to kill them. They are attempting to save what precious little is left on this world
not necessarily, instead, a wizard would become a preserver to gain the support of the "veiled alliance", or simply to be able to cast a spell discreetly.
Most often, however, these defilers are sent away from his SM, primarily to protect the little vegitation around the city-state.
I disagree again, the SM have those "trees of life" which prevent the destruction of plants.
Preservers hate defilers and all they stand for - that's easy enough to see, with preservers doing what they can to conserve and protect the precious plant-life, while a defiler destroys it. The penultimate examples of defilers being the SM's themselves, so preservers tend to hate them, hence the veiled alliance.
the "veiled alliance" sourcebook claims that the veiled alliance members are all preservers not because of idealistic reason - but a realistic one. stop considering the veiled alliance as a charity fond, it's rather a terror organization (and a wizard's club).
The SM's cannot trust a preserver to be anything other than a member of the veiled alliance, or possibly maneuvering to kill him. As such, they wouldn't bring a preserver into their employ. And if they even got some brilliant idea to do that, the preserver would be considered "tainted" by his/her fellows
1) the SM could "simply" teach the preserving technique to a mundane, instead of recruiting preserver.
2) not all the preservers are idealist, actually, idealist are rare as rain in athas. i'm sure that there are preservers who'd love to take of the veil and enjoy the support of the SM.
This isn't reality though, this is fantasy, and fantasy exists at least partially on stereotypes.
it's realy lame excuse, especially in the darksun setting that tries to break the stereotypes (even though they replaced by new one).
Defilers chose their path in pursuit of power, and people who want power have some level of internal corruption to them.
c'mon, give me a break.
Originally posted by SandChicken
As i wrote, i agree that "today" defiling is rather evil act, however it doesn't make the defiler evil automaticly, Sadira - as you said, is a great example of good defiler (i know that the "formal" stats declare her as a neutral preserver, but she isn't).
The only examples we have today of what could even approach the level of destruction that the dark sun defilers are wielding that I can think of is the ancient practice of salting the ground, which renders it impossible for plants to grow and renders the land quite infertile. Nuclear destruction, while it has an immediate effect of vast destruction and for "dirty" explosions renders the area unsafe, can and has been recovered in a much faster and more efficient method than attempting to reverse the process of salting. Crude oil spills kill eveything in the area, but within 2 to 3 years, when the area isn't oversaturated with it, the effect actually boosts plant growth - crude oil is an excellent fertilizer - the area where the exxon-valdez spill occured is now teeming with an abundance of life.
i disagree, they don't "seek to destroy it", they just take the easy way - exactly as many of us in the real life.
True, it is the easy, quick means to gaining power at the expense of others. here's a quote from the 3.5 SRD about good vs. evil:
GOOD VS. EVIL
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.
“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
“Evil” implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.
Being good or evil can be a conscious choice. For most people, though, being good or evil is an attitude that one recognizes but does not choose. Being neutral on the good–evil axis usually represents a lack of commitment one way or the other, but for some it represents a positive commitment to a balanced view. While acknowledging that good and evil are objective states, not just opinions, these folk maintain that a balance between the two is the proper place for people, or at least for them.
Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral rather than good or evil. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior.
As such, someone who is actively destroying the well-being of those around them (by destroying the plant-life around them), would fall into the classification of "evil". They profit from it (quick power), and do it quite willingly, even if they are oblivious or ignorant of the long-term effects. In the case of someone like Sadira, all I can say is "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
So, by the very definition of what those alignments are, from the game system we are working with, a defiler is most often evil, with some of them falling into a category of neutral, as they tend to either have a lack of commitment, or a balanced (conflicting) good-evil situation that would tend to neutralize each other. A defiler, which understands the mechanics of what they do (or else they couldn't use the magic at all), who understands that they are destroying plant-life, would be classified as evil. Using defiling magic in the attempt to do good could possibly be a neutral act, if there is a balance between the good of their action vs. the evil of laying waste to the countryside.
not necessarily, instead, a wizard would become a preserver to gain the support of the "veiled alliance", or simply to be able to cast a spell discreetly.
the "veiled alliance" sourcebook claims that the veiled alliance members are all preservers not because of idealistic reason - but a realistic one. stop considering the veiled alliance as a charity fond, it's rather a terror organization (and a wizard's club).
The Veiled Alliance opposes defilers and defiling. They may have been formed out of necessity for their survival, but they do have a rather extensive political agenda. It is a terrorist organization - to uproot the local government (the SM's) and bent on exterminating defilers themselves. The SM's in turn do have their spies within the Alliance, which use magical items to simulate the effects of preserver magic without defiling when they are under the watchful eye of the Alliance.
I disagree again, the SM have those "trees of life" which prevent the destruction of plants.
Last I checked if I recall, the SM's were actively seeking trees of life, they didn't actually procure any (druids and preservers tend to keep that secret hidden from them). Plus, if one was to gain the power of a tree of life, that SM would find war on his or her hands, as all the neighboring SM's would fight to gain it as well. The SM's don't get along, if you remember - only working together in the most dire of circumstances (like Rajaat being released to go monkey-stomp them all out of existance).
1) the SM could "simply" teach the preserving technique to a mundane, instead of recruiting preserver.
I disagree. I don't see how the SM's could teach someone how to preserve - especially if you look at how preserving & defiling magic works, and the little detail that preservers can defile, while defilers cannot preserve. Part of the training has always been implied (if not expressed) that the master has to be able to lead by example - and the SM's cannot provide an example of preserving (Oronis excluded in every concievable way in this, however).
2) not all the preservers are idealist, actually, idealist are rare as rain in athas. i'm sure that there are preservers who'd love to take of the veil and enjoy the support of the SM.
True, they aren't all idealists - many are just trying to survive. Survival from day-to-day has always been [IMHO] a main overriding theme of Dark Sun. There are preservers who aren't part of the Veiled Alliance, not wanting to get involved with the politics of that organization - but then they also don't have th support and like defilers, generally are not found within a city, living on outskirts or small villages - however they become easy pickings for the more powerful defilers that roam out there. I see those most often slipping to defiling than others.
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
[b]The only examples we have today of what could even approach the level of destruction that the dark sun defilers are wielding that I can think of is the ancient practice of salting the ground, which renders it impossible for plants to grow and renders the land quite infertile.
No, salting the land is done deliberately such that plants will not grow. The real-world equivalent to defiling is (believe it or not) excessive use of irrigation, which raises the water table, causing salination of the land.
As such, someone who is actively destroying the well-being of those around them (by destroying the plant-life around them), would fall into the classification of "evil". They profit from it (quick power), and do it quite willingly, even if they are oblivious or ignorant of the long-term effects. In the case of someone like Sadira, all I can say is "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
So you're saying that someone who's ignorant of the consequences of their actions is, nonetheless, evil? Wow, guess that makes everyone who participated in putting Tithian in charge quite evil, not to mention everyone who's attempting to stop the sacrifices to the dragon...
Defilers don't actively destroy the land around them. It's a means, not an end. Defiling when there's a tree of life to stop the damage is, believe it or not, probably not evil at all...
So, by the very definition of what those alignments are, from the game system we are working with, a defiler is most often evil, with some of them falling into a category of neutral, as they tend to either have a lack of commitment, or a balanced (conflicting) good-evil situation that would tend to neutralize each other. A defiler, which understands the mechanics of what they do (or else they couldn't use the magic at all), who understands that they are destroying plant-life, would be classified as evil. Using defiling magic in the attempt to do good could possibly be a neutral act, if there is a balance between the good of their action vs. the evil of laying waste to the countryside.
Destroying plant life - no. Otherwise anyone who lights a fire or eats an animal gets hit up as evil. If they know that they're willingly condemning athas to an eventual death, that's possibly a bit different - although there's still the perception that athas is a huge place, and they're not really having that much of an impact. This is more apathy than evil. I really don't think that defiling comes into a measure of good and evil at all...
The Veiled Alliance opposes defilers and defiling. They may have been formed out of necessity for their survival, but they do have a rather extensive political agenda. It is a terrorist organization - to uproot the local government (the SM's) and bent on exterminating defilers themselves. The SM's in turn do have their spies within the Alliance, which use magical items to simulate the effects of preserver magic without defiling when they are under the watchful eye of the Alliance.
Or alternately, the SMs could just have some preservers. I mean it's not like the knowledge would be totally out of the realms of the SMs. Which means there are evil preservers out there.
Last I checked if I recall, the SM's were actively seeking trees of life, they didn't actually procure any (druids and preservers tend to keep that secret hidden from them). Plus, if one was to gain the power of a tree of life, that SM would find war on his or her hands, as all the neighboring SM's would fight to gain it as well. The SM's don't get along, if you remember - only working together in the most dire of circumstances (like Rajaat being released to go monkey-stomp them all out of existance).
I believe the books state that all the SMs have trees of life which are used to avoid them defiling the fertile farmlands around their cities. Which really strikes me as not necessarily being evil.
I disagree. I don't see how the SM's could teach someone how to preserve - especially if you look at how preserving & defiling magic works, and the little detail that preservers can defile, while defilers cannot preserve. Part of the training has always been implied (if not expressed) that the master has to be able to lead by example - and the SM's cannot provide an example of preserving (Oronis excluded in every concievable way in this, however).
Apart from anything else
SK - "Hey nice little dominated VA member - teach my apprentice to preserve!"
OR
>SK Concentrates for a second<
*BZZT*
SK - "There - a lifetimes worth of memories of learning how to preserve. Have fun good buddy!".
Originally posted by incubus
No, salting the land is done deliberately such that plants will not grow. The real-world equivalent to defiling is (believe it or not) excessive use of irrigation, which raises the water table, causing salination of the land.
Defiling is quite deliberate. It is extraordinarily destructive, and takes decades to recover from the damage that had been done.
So you're saying that someone who's ignorant of the consequences of their actions is, nonetheless, evil? Wow, guess that makes everyone who participated in putting Tithian in charge quite evil, not to mention everyone who's attempting to stop the sacrifices to the dragon...
No, you are comparing a one-time event, or very small number of events to a massive, almost innumerable set of events - remember, every time a defiler casts a spell, he or she destroys a part of the land rendering it useless for growing anything for decades. That is one hell of a damaging influence. So, if a defiler casts.... let's say 1 spell a year, or even one every two months or so, he isn't as bad as one who.... let's say uses their spells to defend themselves or otherwise in day-to-day use like most every other wizard in a D&D setting.
Defilers don't actively destroy the land around them. It's a means, not an end. Defiling when there's a tree of life to stop the damage is, believe it or not, probably not evil at all...
You mean to tell me that wiping out the vegitation in an area, destroying an ecosystem and potentially wiping out all life there all together is not evil? I'm unable to follow your logic on that one.
Destroying plant life - no. Otherwise anyone who lights a fire or eats an animal gets hit up as evil. If they know that they're willingly condemning athas to an eventual death, that's possibly a bit different - although there's still the perception that athas is a huge place, and they're not really having that much of an impact. This is more apathy than evil. I really don't think that defiling comes into a measure of good and evil at all...
No - I'm not saying anyone who lights a fire or eats an animal gets hit up as evil. There is a HUGE difference between a defiler and someone who burns down a forest. A forest that is burned down can come back. That same forest, if defiled is lost forever. This is why fire clerics aren't adverse to burning the plants around a defiler to save the land in the end.
Or alternately, the SMs could just have some preservers. I mean it's not like the knowledge would be totally out of the realms of the SMs. Which means there are evil preservers out there.
I never said there weren't evil preservers. I only said that I can't imagine a "good" defiler. Further, as per the game rules, in all versions of Dark Sun, a defiler cannot use preserver magic. He must first atone for what he's done, then, (according to 2nd Ed) relearn how to use magic, to learn that self-control he had lost. That is how Oronis had to learn to become a preserver, and why it took so long for him to do it. Preservers can be evil - that's easy enough, and still be a preserver. I cannot see how someone, who obliterates the life-producing capabilities of an area, especially in a world where there is very little left that fits that description, could possibly be good. Neutral or Evil yes, but good I cannot see, because the very act of defiling is a corruption of both mind and spirit. Someone can very well have the best intentions, gbe using it to defeat evil, and they still, in my book, would only be neutral - because the means do not justify the end.
I believe the books state that all the SMs have trees of life which are used to avoid them defiling the fertile farmlands around their cities. Which really strikes me as not necessarily being evil.
Which book, where? The Sorcerer-kings have means to avoid defiling their homes, primarily they use their magic sparingly, and even then they tend to use the lower-level spells to avoid extraordinary damage. Plus they can tap into the life-energies of animals as well as plants, and that could be one of the uses of their dungeons and prisons.
Apart from anything else
SK - "Hey nice little dominated VA member - teach my apprentice to preserve!"
OR
>SK Concentrates for a second<
*BZZT*
SK - "There - a lifetimes worth of memories of learning how to preserve. Have fun good buddy!".
and.... here's what happens to said dominated VA member: another one sees he was dominated and kills the dominated member at his earliest convenience. Sure, I can see that maybe some have had it happen and are moles within the organization, but the VA has their ways to weed out all but the best spies, and those cannot be under mind control to be able to play it off right.
Plus - there is absolutely nothing in Dark Sun that ever says that (Oronis excluded) SM's use preservers for anything other than their boredom (which then they tend to use preservers for target practice).
And there's the fact that while SK's tend to kill preservers for sport, they consider a defiler a threat - if they get too powerful the defiler might get the notion that he could kill his monarch, and take over as the new SM (minus the templarate-spell-giving thingy). SK's tend to be ok with Psionics - after all there are psionic academies across the tablelands in nearly every city-state. Magic, however is neither loved nor trusted; the Veiled Alliance being the only organization where multiple spellcasters tend to work together short of Kurn.
An action that in itself could be considered to be not evil might have such a stigma or taboo against it that the person performing that action would consider themselves or the action itself to be 'evil'.
In almost all athasian societies (bar maybe Ur-Draxa) casting of sorcerous magic is 'evil', almost all children are brought up believing this. Those individuals who practice such acts without investigating the ramifications (ie why is magic bad) will either consider themselves 'bad', 'evil', or feel that such ideas of good/evil should not apply to them (which in itself makes their moral judgement questionable at best). Otherwise the individual will have to investigate and question his/her's societies preconceptions about magic. Such an investigation will inevitably lead to the realization that defiling is phenomenally destructive (to a microbiological level), to consider continuing along the path of a defiler with this knowledge is pretty damn evil.
"I wish to be able to use this 'power' and I do not care what it does to those around me"
Hell, defiling causes physical pain to those in the defiling radius.
So you have two cases, one where the mage is ignorant of the detailed consequences of their action and two where they understand them. In the first case they have been brought up to feel that what they are doing is 'evil' in the second they know that defiling is massivly destructive. In both cases they ivdividual could not be considered 'good'.
It was mentioned also that the VA is not an idealistic group and that they are a terrorist organization. This is a contradiction. Yes they are most like terrorists, which in itself makes them an idealistic group, although this does not make them good as such. Not all VA members have the same ideals or even profess to have the same ideals. The VA will sacrifice almost anything to achive on of two goals:
Hurting the SKs and Keeping the VA alive.
Everything else is pretty much secondary. The VA could not be considered a 'good' society in fact most will be close to being 'evil'. This though does not reflect on the individuals within the society there will be good, neutral and evil members of the VA, very few chaotic and mostly lawful. Outside of the VA or any other power stucture it would be exceedingly rare to find an evil preserver as there is no reason to continue preserving and all the reason to defile.
Develope personalities instead.
Originally posted by felixmeister
It was mentioned also that the VA is not an idealistic group and that they are a terrorist organization. This is a contradiction. Yes they are most like terrorists, which in itself makes them an idealistic group, although this does not make them good as such. Not all VA members have the same ideals or even profess to have the same ideals. The VA will sacrifice almost anything to achive on of two goals:
Hurting the SKs and Keeping the VA alive.
Everything else is pretty much secondary. The VA could not be considered a 'good' society in fact most will be close to being 'evil'. This though does not reflect on the individuals within the society there will be good, neutral and evil members of the VA, very few chaotic and mostly lawful. Outside of the VA or any other power stucture it would be exceedingly rare to find an evil preserver as there is no reason to continue preserving and all the reason to defile.
The above puts it excellently. I can not emphasise enough how the Veiled Alliance is NOT a "Good" organization.
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
Nobody said it was a good society. I'm still trying to find where I had supposedly mentioned it was goody-two-shoes. I said preservers join it, but it is a terrorist organization. I've beein saying that preservers could be good, neutral or evil. Defilers, however due to the very nature of what they are doing on a daily basis, I cannot see being good but; they could be neutral or evil.
Sorry, wasn't implying that you'd said any such thing.
Just that, over many many years I've seen the argument that, since Defilers are evil, that means Preservers must be good (Or something that boils down similarly) ... Despite the logical fallacy, and the ample evidence otherwise. I've had quite a few discissions where I've tried to impress upon people that the VA is not a good organization, simply because they hate defilers and the sorcerer kings (the dominant evils).
I just find it nice when someone else grabs that baton for a little while.
I think with DS, TSR built maybe the best world they ever had, free of the moralty questions that hunged heavily all over the other worlds. No heroes, no do-gooders, a dark and cruel world where to surive is the first and only commandment. The problem is that after that they systematicly destroyed this. First the Prism Pentad (killing an SK and later the Dragon, mass freeing of slaves, introducing democracy, etc.) than the modules (especially Arcane Shadows and The Forest Maker). They simply inserted back the heroics, and the 'preservers and VA=good, defilers=evil' sterotype and choked the modules with magic items just like a simple Greyhawk adventure, and everything! And with that they ruined the uniqueness and the spirit of the world. And lead a massive amount of players on a false way.
True, it is the easy, quick means to gaining power at the expense of others. here's a quote from the 3.5 SRD about good vs. evil
I'm trying to make a discussion more intelligent than the superficial stereotypes of DND's alignments. but if you want to have it the hard way, let's go for it:
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
sounds like rikus to me....
actually, i can't name even one main character in the prism pentad novels, that don't match this definition!
killing someone isn't considered always evil, it rather depends on the *intentions* of the killer.
Last I checked if I recall, the SM's were actively seeking trees of life, they didn't actually procure any (druids and preservers tend to keep that secret hidden from them). Plus, if one was to gain the power of a tree of life, that SM would find war on his or her hands, as all the neighboring SM's would fight to gain it as well. The SM's don't get along, if you remember - only working together in the most dire of circumstances (like Rajaat being released to go monkey-stomp them all out of existance).
quoting from age of heroes, page 79: "Though originally created by wizards to combat the destruction of nature, trees of life are now heavily exploited by defilers, who use the trees' powerful life forces to charfge their defiling spells. Sorcere-kings ofter have large gardens within their cities, even within their palaces, where groves of trees of life are tended and maintained. thus, defilers can exercise evil magic from their citadels without decimated the cities below - a measuse to keep their tiny verdant belts as plentiful as possible."
well, that's exactly the problem i'm talking about, what's so evil in defiling magic while one's using tree of life and avoid destruction?!
I disagree. I don't see how the SM's could teach someone how to preserve - especially if you look at how preserving & defiling magic works, and the little detail that preservers can defile, while defilers cannot preserve. Part of the training has always been implied (if not expressed) that the master has to be able to lead by example - and the SM's cannot provide an example of preserving (Oronis excluded in every concievable way in this, however).
i think he can, after all, rajaat did teach the champions preserving magic (in addition to defiling magic).
Another point to mention is the taboos and morals of the society in which the character lives.
An action that in itself could be considered to be not evil might have such a stigma or taboo against it that the person performing that action would consider themselves or the action itself to be 'evil'.
In almost all athasian societies (bar maybe Ur-Draxa) casting of sorcerous magic is 'evil', almost all children are brought up believing this. Those individuals who practice such acts without investigating the ramifications (ie why is magic bad) will either consider themselves 'bad', 'evil', or feel that such ideas of good/evil should not apply to them (which in itself makes their moral judgement questionable at best). Otherwise the individual will have to investigate and question his/her's societies preconceptions about magic. Such an investigation will inevitably lead to the realization that defiling is phenomenally destructive (to a microbiological level), to consider continuing along the path of a defiler with this knowledge is pretty damn evil.
"I wish to be able to use this 'power' and I do not care what it does to those around me"
Hell, defiling causes physical pain to those in the defiling radius.
So you have two cases, one where the mage is ignorant of the detailed consequences of their action and two where they understand them. In the first case they have been brought up to feel that what they are doing is 'evil' in the second they know that defiling is massivly destructive. In both cases they ivdividual could not be considered 'good'.
1) So nonconformism is necessarily evil?
2) many times moal questions are judged by price-cost consideration: are the disadvantages weight of specific action overweight the advantages weight?
what about a defiler who uses his spells to free slaves, fighting raider tribes ETC? does the life of one plant worth more than preventing the mass **** of 15 years old girl? i think that even in the barren world of athas, the only moral answer is NO!
Simple. Ditch alignments.
Develope personalities instead.
I agree. but the problem is still on - why defiling is considered inherently evil?
It was mentioned also that the VA is not an idealistic group and that they are a terrorist organization. This is a contradiction. Yes they are most like terrorists, which in itself makes them an idealistic group, although this does not make them good as such. Not all VA members have the same ideals or even profess to have the same ideals.
it's not a contadiction: terror is a mean, idealism is a cause. there are a lot of reason of using terror - idealism (free the slaves, bla bla), pragmatism (resist the occupation), greed (terror organization are often powerful political & economical force) and more.
The VA will sacrifice almost anything to achive on of two goals:
Hurting the SKs and Keeping the VA alive.
the first goal isn't accepted by all the VA's, in gulg for example they considering cooperation with the SQ.
the second goal is a real goal, but IMHO you can't say "sacrifice" about such a goal.
introducing democracy
i think this is a backgroung for great twists, one just have to keep in my mind that everything new in athas will eventually turn to be bad somehow, and that freeing all slaves doesn't mean a scandinavian-type democracy...
sounds like rikus to me....
actually, i can't name even one main character in the prism pentad novels, that don't match this definition!
killing someone isn't considered always evil, it rather depends on the *intentions* of the killer.
These characters did have compunctions about killing. There are numerous instance through the books where they did not use combat or used non lethal means when fighting. They killed when they needed to.
well, that's exactly the problem i'm talking about, what's so evil in defiling magic while one's using tree of life and avoid destruction?!
Because you are still hurting the tree and and anyone in the defiling radius. Those things lose an entire HD for every level of spell you cast.
i think he can, after all, rajaat did teach the champions preserving magic (in addition to defiling magic).
No he didn't. He invented magic, both preserving and defiling.
To the outside world he taught preserving, to the champions he taught defiling as it was quicker and more 'powerful'
1) So nonconformism is necessarily evil?
2) many times moal questions are judged by price-cost consideration: are the disadvantages weight of specific action overweight the advantages weight?
what about a defiler who uses his spells to free slaves, fighting raider tribes ETC? does the life of one plant worth more than preventing the mass **** of 15 years old girl? i think that even in the barren world of athas, the only moral answer is NO!
No non-conformism is not necessarily evil, but if someone commits an act that they believe to be evil then they are either 'evil' or a sociopath. It took a long time for homosexulality to be considered something other than a base despicable act. Because of this many people considered themselves 'wrong' simply because of their desires.
No, moral questions when judged by a price/cost consideration cease then to become moral questions and are simply accounting. The defiler does not have to use his spells to do this there are other methods available to him. Yes you could find a very specific situation where there was a simple choice, defile or allow the **** to continue, but if the person has any moderate level of morals (as defined by his culture) they will attempt to find another method. That kind of argument is what allows some of the greatest tragedies to occur. A simple reduction of a situation into one of two choices is not realistic, there are always others options, we may not like them but they are always there.
I agree. but the problem is still on - why defiling is considered inherently evil?
The athasian society considers sorcerous magic to be 'evil', why they feel (and rightly so) that the state of the land, the desert, the general nastiness of the place, not to mention the SKs is the fault of defilers (remember that normal athasians don't know the difference.). Thats why, remember its the culture that defines what is evil.
it's not a contadiction: terror is a mean, idealism is a cause. there are a lot of reason of using terror - idealism (free the slaves, bla bla), pragmatism (resist the occupation), greed (terror organization are often powerful political & economical force) and more.
Terrorism is to use terror, fear and any means that have the greatest effect to achive ones goals. Unless one is a psycopath (not a sociopath) it is not possible to pursue this path without believing in the 'rightness' of the cause. This is idealism.
resist the occupation - idealism
"terror organization are often powerful political & economical force" - yes this is true, but the person using the organisation will distance themselves and the terrorists themselves will be idealists to some cause (not nessecarily the same cause that the person controlling them believes in).
the first goal isn't accepted by all the VA's, in gulg for example they considering cooperation with the SQ.
the second goal is a real goal, but IMHO you can't say "sacrifice" about such a goal.
And they are about to be wiped out due to it. And if you gave them the chance to bring her down (without risk) they would take it. Yes you can, the group is more important than the individual. If a VA member threatens the VA even unwittingly, they will not hesitate to remove them.
You think that there's rationale or some sort of reasoning that there would be pure-hearted good defilers who not oinly have the best intentions but also that defiling is simply a means to an end, and somehow that the means justify the end, so be it.
True, it is the easy, quick means to gaining power at the expense of others. here's a quote from the 3.5 SRD about good vs. evil
I'm trying to make a discussion more intelligent than the superficial stereotypes of DND's alignments. but if you want to have it the hard way, let's go for it:Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
sounds like rikus to me....
actually, i can't name even one main character in the prism pentad novels, that don't match this definition!
killing someone isn't considered always evil, it rather depends on the *intentions* of the killer.
Once again, you are looking at single or individual situations, like killing a sorcerer-king (which would be removing a great evil from the world, almost always typified as a good deed), or even a life of surviving in the pits (which fending for one's life daily isn't the same thing as murdering someone for pleasure) and then comparing it to someone who destroys everything around them on a daily basis, someone who doesn't need to do such a thing, who could have learned a different trade, but decided that this is what he or she was going to do.
i think he can, after all, rajaat did teach the champions preserving magic (in addition to defiling magic).
No he didn't. He invented magic, both preserving and defiling.
To the outside world he taught preserving, to the champions he taught defiling as it was quicker and more 'powerful'
Actually yes, he did - he chose his champions from his preserver student, those he felt would have the most potential for the tasks he had in store for them. But the whole point of defiling is that there was something that made it far more desirable, and that the person finds it impossible to preserve, especially if they are constantly defiling. Plus, with them having advanced into dragons, I've always seen them as being totally unable to preserve, short of doing what Oronis did.
I agree. but the problem is still on - why defiling is considered inherently evil?
The athasian society considers sorcerous magic to be 'evil', why they feel (and rightly so) that the state of the land, the desert, the general nastiness of the place, not to mention the SKs is the fault of defilers (remember that normal athasians don't know the difference.). Thats why, remember its the culture that defines what is evil.
It's more than just socially unacceptable. I've provided my case, in full, as to why defiling would be evil. I have yet to see one arguement, other than "well I don't see it that way" comments. Why wouldn't defiling be evil? I personally am beginning to think you may not realize what all defiling does, or just simply don't care.
Hell, for the very same reasons I've presented, the Star Wars "Dark Side" is evil, and generally accepted by anyone (however I think you might believe that the Dark Side is not evil, and in fact can be good, with some of the arguements presented) as evil, and that's that. However for some reason, you just can't seem to grasp that defiling is an inherently evil act.
No he didn't. He invented magic, both preserving and defiling.
To the outside world he taught preserving, to the champions he taught defiling as it was quicker and more 'powerful'
Actually yes, he did - he chose his champions from his preserver student, those he felt would have the most potential for the tasks he had in store for them.
:embarrass Heh that'll teach me for not checking my research. I'll just blame the inconsistant info from the modules and soucebooks. :D
I agree. but the problem is still on - why defiling is considered inherently evil?
The athasian society considers sorcerous magic to be 'evil', why they feel (and rightly so) that the state of the land, the desert, the general nastiness of the place, not to mention the SKs is the fault of defilers (remember that normal athasians don't know the difference.). Thats why, remember its the culture that defines what is evil.
It's more than just socially unacceptable. I've provided my case, in full, as to why defiling would be evil. I have yet to see one arguement, other than "well I don't see it that way" comments. Why wouldn't defiling be evil? I personally am beginning to think you may not realize what all defiling does, or just simply don't care.
It's not just socially unacceptable. The question was asked 'why is defiling considered inherently evil?'. Now as there was no specfics as to RW vs Athas, I assumed athasian considerations were the subject. The athasian society considers sourcerous magic inherently evil, therefore a member of that society drawing energy to cast a spell is performing an inherently evil act.
Hey I consider defiling evil, when defiling it not only hurts the land but anyone that relys on that land or anyone that relys on anything that relys on that land etc etc. Imagine working day after day eeking out an existence with a few measly crops, just enough to feed you and your family. Someone comes along, destroys your food and strips the land of every nutirent and goodness that you have painstakingly added to the land year after year. Now that is evil.
Take one slave who is a 'Good' person who doesn't always think about the long term consequences (low Wis).
Another slaves offers to teach him magic that will allow him to escape as well as help others to escape.
He gets taught defiling magic and uses it to help his fellow slaves to escape but during the escape templars track them down and he sacrifices himself to save the rest.
This person is definitely both a defiler and has a good alignment.
Spamdrew
Now I am assuming that the slave in question has not been brought up in normal athasian circles and would not consider a mage as evil. This slave if she had not died and if she continued to defile and not repent would become evil.
Originally posted by Spamdrew
I think it is very very unlikely that a defiler could be good but that does not necessarily mean that it couldn't be possible. Imagine this situation;
Take one slave who is a 'Good' person who doesn't always think about the long term consequences (low Wis).
Another slaves offers to teach him magic that will allow him to escape as well as help others to escape.
He gets taught defiling magic and uses it to help his fellow slaves to escape but during the escape templars track them down and he sacrifices himself to save the rest.
This person is definitely both a defiler and has a good alignment.
Spamdrew
As I quoted earlier - "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." What the person did was, in fact, a good thing. However the ends do not justify the means, and while what that person was like is good, the slave was doing an act that I cannot see but being evil - defiling the surrounding area. Of course, in your example, maybe it's not like he did it very much, or for very long.
It's all about scope. A defiler who has been a defiler for years, or effectively several levels, would prove to be an extreme menace to his surroundings. Especially one which remains in roughly the same area. Now, unless he reamins hidden under a rock, and only casts maybe..... one spell every other month, which is unlikely, especially since wizards tend to use spells every day, he's devastated a sizeable area of land around him, which the repercussions from such recklessness and wanton destruction. People and animals in the surrounding areas most likely will not be able to support their populations; so the defiler is, effectively responsible for those people dying. And he did it just so he could cast a few spells. In just about every single piece of literature, roleplaying game, or other medium, the "quick and easy" path, which is powerful and generally at the expense of other people, is defined at the evil path.. It's more powerful, and thus more tempting, but is not good. When comparing Preserving to Defiling, Defiling is more powerful than Preserving. Preserver magic is defined as being identical to the standard wizard magic for D&D - as such, Preservers could be of any alignment, but they do tend to be lawful (as explained in the PHB). Defiling was a sort of advanced method, produced by Rajaat, to allow himself and those he specifically had chosen (originally) to be more powerful than the Preserver wizards, and grant them the ability to do what he sent them out to do (ie: his champions and their quests).
Magic, to the untrained eye on Athas, is Magic, which is why the mass majority of the tablelands don't differentiate between Preservers and Defilers. They know that they've been told that magic destroyed their world, they also know that the Sorcerer-Monarchs and Templars wield Magic, so they tend to fear and hate magic, not just the two paths through the Arcane, but also tend to fear and hate even the Divine. Someone who becomes a wizard, most often than not, understands this at least a little - he's not loved. In fact, he has more enemies than he can shake a stick at. There is another path available on Athas for people to become - that of Psionics. Psionics are acceptable to the main population, and even to the Sorcerer-Monarchs most often than not.
There is two basic way to go in any RPG:
-the alignment defines the character and the behaviour
-the behaviour dictates the alignment
The first one is more like Star Wars-feeling, where evil is evil, good is good, and that's the way of things. The evil whatever do is evil (even if she is helping somebody in a rare case), good whatever do is good (even if she has to hurt somebody). Evil and good is absolute, clearly defined. In the old d6 SW rulebook it is written at the Dark Side of the Force: if an act is evil by the rules of the Force, it is considered evil, even if a culture holds it acceptable or even good. So the character receive a Dark Side point for doing it. The Force is the absolute measure of such things.
The second case is more like our real life, almost no pure evil and good exists, but a lot of shades of gray in between.
As even 3.5 uses strickt alignments, and absolute alignment definitions in the PHB it is closer to the first version.
With that defilers by definition are evil, or became that sooner or later (like fallen Jedi), because defiling is evil by definition. Practicing it leads to evilness. And as was written here: the end doesn't justify the means.
But I like more the second approach in a Dark Sun, most importantly as DS is not about morality, and including such moral issues simply ruins the whole feeling of the world. In that case the use of defiler magic is not neccessary leads to evilness, especially in a controlled form. As here the end can justify the means.
Both approach are acceptable. But as the first step in any RPG camapaign it should be choosen which one is used for the campaign and it can't be changed later, as it is again ruins the whole consistency and style and feeling of a given campaign.
After this question is clarified, it can be decided that defiling is good or evil.
It only my humble toughts on this matter...
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
You keep saying that someone who is not necessarily aware of the consequences of his actions is still held morally responsible for them.
What you're basically saying is that all those people in the early 20th century who devastated the environment were EVIL, despite not knowing the consequences of their actions.
Is that what you really mean?
Evil is about intent. If a defiler is going around deliberately laying waste to the land, then he's evil. If he knows that laying waste to the land is a side effect of his magic, and he still performs that magic, that's an evil weight on his alignment, much the same as casting [evil] spells is an evil weight on the alignment. If he thinks that defiling is only a short-term effect, and the plant life will recover (a fairly reasonable assumption for a travelling wizard), then that taint will be significantly lessened. Finally, if he somehow remains oblivious to the fact that plant life is being destroyed, there is no evil taint on his soul.
If your attitude is as you seem to be suggesting - that people are morally responsible for consequences of their actions that they don't know about - then I'd really hate to play any sort of priest or paladin in a game with you. I dare say it'd reach all of a single session before my alignment drift from unintended consequences had stripped me of my class.
Originally posted by incubus
You keep saying that someone who is not necessarily aware of the consequences of his actions is still held morally responsible for them.
What you're basically saying is that all those people in the early 20th century who devastated the environment were EVIL, despite not knowing the consequences of their actions.
Is that what you really mean?
What was done in the early 20th Century was actually fairly easy to repair, compared to what a defiler is capable of. As I said before - in the real world, our world has a tendency to "bounce back" from environmental "disasters" caused by humans - except in the case of something so drastic (and time-consuming) as salting the land, or anything similar. As I said, it's all about scope.
Evil is about intent. If a defiler is going around deliberately laying waste to the land, then he's evil. If he knows that laying waste to the land is a side effect of his magic, and he still performs that magic, that's an evil weight on his alignment, much the same as casting [evil] spells is an evil weight on the alignment. If he thinks that defiling is only a short-term effect, and the plant life will recover (a fairly reasonable assumption for a travelling wizard), then that taint will be significantly lessened. Finally, if he somehow remains oblivious to the fact that plant life is being destroyed, there is no evil taint on his soul.
That would help determine if he was more or less neutral or evil. If he feels that the plant life will recover, as you stated above, then I'd say he'd be a neutral-aligned defiler, as would one which may be oblivious to the detrimental effects.
If your attitude is as you seem to be suggesting - that people are morally responsible for consequences of their actions that they don't know about - then I'd really hate to play any sort of priest or paladin in a game with you. I dare say it'd reach all of a single session before my alignment drift from unintended consequences had stripped me of my class.
Actually, you seem to assume I'm talking an extreme. You seem to be putting words in my mouth. I did not say that Defilers were all evil, I said that defiling was evil. The action is evil, not necessarily the person. Someone which does an evil act in a good way is doing something neutral; cancelling one action with the other.
What makes defiling evil? It stems from what Athasian Arcane Magic use entails: Stealing the life force of some other creature (vegetable or for those powerful enough, animal) for personal gain. Why personal gain? Because the wizard casting the spell is the one most personally responsable for the effect of that spell, and frequently has the most to gain from the spell in question. Defiling and preserving split because one follows the belief that with some self-control on the wizard's part, he (or she) can use arcane magic for good, can use it without killing everything around them. It's a tricky situation preservers have, for they use a very deadly force, and they restrict themselves from killing everything around them. Defilers, on the other hand, throw caution to the wind, or they were never told/taught that their magic could be used without killing, or maybe have become addicted to the feel of the power surging through them. Defiling does more than simply kill the plants (or animals) in the area, it also renders the land totally infertile, and takes decades upon decades of hard labor to bring the land back to fertility. As such, much like how negative energy, being associated with undead is evil (and athasian arcane magic is tied with negative energy, according to most every book on it), so is defiling evil. Preserving, in an effort to not kill the source of energy (but still stealing that energy from its' sources) falls more into a neutral category. Preserving isn't really "good", it's still stealing the life energies from plants to power their spells.
As such, since preserving is a neutral act (balancing the evil of stealing life-force from things and the good of the desire to preserve or not kill the source of this energy), preservers could be good, neutral or evil alignment without problems. Defiling, however is an evil act (with the evil of stealing life-force from things, and the neutral disinterest/lack of knowledge to the concerns of what their actions are doing, or the evil of wanting to harm or cause destruction). As such, it can be a corrupting influence. Even if a defiler started out as a good alignment, I see them quickly slipping to a neutral alignment at the very least - the method to casting as a defiler is quite profane to the "natural order" of things. Defilers could think of themselves as "good" while in actuality would be "neutral". Those which desire to cause destruction, enjoy and revel in death, tend to dive head-first into the "evil" category (and are also very rare in a player character, in my experience). Ones with a more neutral personality/mentality in the moral scope could be effectively "neutral" or "evil".
Just as with a necromancer, who summons/creates/plays around with undead, death, disease and most often poisons; who uses spells most frequently laced with or utilizing negative energy, tends to become corrupted and evil, so do Defilers in my eye. Sure, someone could use necromantic spells for good... but eventually they slip. You could argue that necromancers aren't inherently evil just like defilers, and we could go round and round about it for eternity. You could also propose that defiling isn't like necromancy (however, once again, there's plenty of material for Dark Sun that ties Athasian magic with the negative energy that necromancers use), and we'd probably end up with the same arguement. You could even argue that there is no black & white predefined good and evil, which is yet another arguement for another forum all together in my mind. I still say that defiling, the very action of defiling is evil. I have had to substantiate every last little detail of my arguement as to why I believe this, and have yet to hear any arguements that would show that defiling, once again, the act of defiling is anything but evil. Defilers are just non-good. They don't just defile once every year, month, week or possibly even day. They tend to defile as often as they cast spells. They lay waste to the countryside. Travelling is pretty much the only real way on Athas, short of finding a real juicy location with lots of plants (like a forest, an oasis or maybe a tree of life).
And for my games - I let my players choose their alignments, however if during the game, they aren't playing the alignment they chose, and are rather playing their character as a different alignment, I'm not adverse to having them change it. If they do things that are corrupting or profane I tend to have them bump a step closer to evil, however if they are doing something pure or selfless I tend to bump them more to good. Just like if they are playing their character more and more erratic or blatantly ignoring laws of the land, I have them bump a step to chaos, and vice-versa. Some actions I see are inherently chaotic, lawful, good or evil. Doing these things once or twice, even a handful of times I don't change alignments - but repeated use, where it becomes routine for the character does invoke an appropriate alignment shift in my eye - and I only move it a single step for a certian set of circumstances - I don't make someone dive headfirst into an opposite alignment unless they specifically desire it.
The second point raised is that the people of Athas think defiling is evil and therefore if you chose to become a defiler you are evil. Your opinion on the morality of an action has absolutely no influence on whether an action is evil or not. An action is evil in a moral sense if a impartial viewer know all relevant information thinks it is. Of course their is another view of evil and that is what is evil is something that the community thinks is evil after it had learned all the relevant facts. This would accurately let you say that preservers are not necessarily evil while defiling is. However this system does not fit with the usual D&D system as it would mean that good and evil changes in different cities, countries and planes.
So we come down to the simple fact that defiling is usually an evil act as it causes more harm than good but when it is used as last resort to save a rational thinking being from death even when it is just the caster it is hard to see how a impartial observer could say that it was evil. Another example to show this is two good parties meet but due to a evil rogue one party thinks the other is completely unredeemable no matter what they do the other party can not convince them that this is false. Because it is such a close fight the party has to choose between dieing or kill the other good party. Is it evil if they save themselves by killing the other party I think not.
The problem of this is obviously that it is very unlikely that a good person will become a defiler but as I showed in my previous post it is possible if unlikely.
Spamdrew
The second point raised is that the people of Athas think defiling is evil and therefore if you chose to become a defiler you are evil. Your opinion on the morality of an action has absolutely no influence on whether an action is evil or not. An action is evil in a moral sense if a impartial viewer know all relevant information thinks it is.
Do you guys realize what kind of debate you are engaged in? The differences in your views of ontology and epistemology will not be easily swayed. I.e. how do you define evil? Is evil something objective and quantifiable - something we can measure, or is evil subject to individual opinion? In that case, is one individual's opinion worth more than another's? Does an impartial viewer even exist? I think you will have a hard time ever reaching agreement...
on the streets robbing parking cars
Hey! You got something agianst carjackers? We all need to make a living somehow you know
Originally posted by Jon, Oracle of Athas
Don't give them ideas.
This is a win-win situ for us anyway. If they remain here, the society of humankind has positive things, as I wrote before. If they go out, more server space remains for us to post comments. :D
Originally posted by Mach2.5
Hey! You got something agianst carjackers? We all need to make a living somehow you know
Mostly that I have a car. And don't want it to be robbed.
Mostly that I have a car. And don't want it to be robbed.
That's reasonable.
However, I suspect there are a number of people out there who would adapt the "I don't have a car, so I don't care" limited line of reasoning.
Originally posted by Jon, Oracle of Athas
That's reasonable.
However, I suspect there are a number of people out there who would adapt the "I don't have a car, so I don't care" limited line of reasoning.
I would add the "you will have a car, you will care" reasoning on top of that.
Originally posted by Spamdrew
The problem is that your current argument is something that destroys the surrounding vegetation for hundreds of years is a evil act. An inhabitant of Athas who cares deeply about the slaves of a city does not have an inherent duty not to destroy the surrounding habitat even if he know it will take hundreds of years to grow back. A good example of this would be the dropping of the atomic bombs during WWII by your definition it is impossible for the pilots or anybody else directly involved in ordering the bombs dropped to be good. In that case they decided that the sacrifice of two Japanese cities was less important than stoping the war. In a defilers case he decides that the destruction of the vegetation is less important than saving lives by casting his spell.
And you are comparing a single event (or rather 2 seperate events) that did a horrendous amount of damage, cost people many lives, and damaged the area severely (however the area has, last I checked, been mostly recovered from the damage caused, and that's not been a recent change, it was taken care of decades ago). And yes, it did have a real, honest-to-god important purpose (to stop the war with Japan) at the time, it didn't have anywhere near the long-term effects of defiling (as is portrayed on Athas, in almost every book), further a defiler does not cast two spells in his entire life. A defiler tends to cast spells constantly, using magic to supplant the need for physical (or psionic) prowess. A single defiler easily could inflict more damage than one of those bombs that were dropped, I'd say, especially if he gains any decent amount of power - and if he becomes a fully developed dragon, watch out - because that defiler becomes walking WWIII - the condition of the Tablelands - the massive stretches of total wasteland, has been noted to be primarily attributed to Borys and his wild rampages.
The second point raised is that the people of Athas think defiling is evil and therefore if you chose to become a defiler you are evil. Your opinion on the morality of an action has absolutely no influence on whether an action is evil or not. An action is evil in a moral sense if a impartial viewer know all relevant information thinks it is. Of course their is another view of evil and that is what is evil is something that the community thinks is evil after it had learned all the relevant facts. This would accurately let you say that preservers are not necessarily evil while defiling is. However this system does not fit with the usual D&D system as it would mean that good and evil changes in different cities, countries and planes.
Actually, I simply was following a similar thought process as was already posted by another person. This was more of an assistance to my primary arguement, nothing more. I know it's a weak arguement, which is why I don't harp on it - simply was in addition to everything else, and to help show why people on Athas would believe it to be evil.
However, this arguement has achieved nothing other than frustration on both accounts. I'm too tired to continue the arguement. We are arguing morality, and there is differences in what one believes is morally right or morally wrong. If there wasn't, then many of the wars fought on Earth would never have happened.
But, since defiler usually uses defiles on DAYLY basis, it's pretty impossibile to be a good defiler.
I think that defilers are not necessarily evil' and preservers are not necessarily good, although defiling is a much quicker way to attain power, I can think of many exceptions for an evil wizard not to choose defiling: for instance, if he live in a place where defiling is not known.
a preserver may be evil, if for instance he choose to learn preserving in order to be counted as a "good mage" in Tyr for example, but has evil schemes in heart.
there are many thinkable exceptions like this.
but on the whole, it depends on how you define evil (as people stated here, and I am not going to repeat).
what I do in my campaign is that:
first I don't use alignments at all (I really think that in a world like dark sun, surviving requires a broader definition of good and evil, and most people live between both).
second, defilers are usually "evil" persons or "neutral"/
preservers are usually "good" persons or "neutral"/
If I look at athas as a whole, the evil kind of mages will probably choose the quick way to power, and the goodies will care more about the environ.
cheers!
Originally posted by eyalrein
what I do in my campaign is that:
first I don't use alignments at all (I really think that in a world like dark sun, surviving requires a broader definition of good and evil, and most people live between both).
second, defilers are usually "evil" persons or "neutral"/
preservers are usually "good" persons or "neutral"/
Preservers can be evil - someone could actively be using preserving for evil, they just see preserving as a means to keep their "fuel" around, and not waste it on a daily basis. Preserving is more of a neutral act, as I've explained above - that's not all that hard for someone to "run the gambit" and be any alignment with preserving magic. Defiling magic is evil, the act itself being vile and corrupting by nearly every sense of those words, as I've been attempting to point out over this entire arguement. Defilers, while they may have started as good, will slip into neutrality at the very least, if they struggle against the corrupting forces of defiling. Defilers could be neutral or evil, but any that have been a defiler for long enough (like at least a level) they run the risk of having their very souls corrupted from the effects of defiling.
Of course, as this thread also has pointed out, there are people who have radically different perspectives on the subject. And we don't seem to be able to get along on it.
Just remember - the largest organization of preservers on Athas - the Veiled Alliance is not a "good" group. They fall very much into the category of Terrorists, who write off collateral damage (like the occasional innocent bystander being killed) as just daily buisness, nothing to get too concerned over, as they feel their cause is far more important.
Originally posted by player1
Simple, one single defileing action, in special circumstances, does not need to be evil.
But, since defiler usually uses defiles on DAYLY basis, it's pretty impossibile to be a good defiler.
A single defiling action, in special circumstances, would be evil - but the circumstances could balance it out to a more neutral category when applied - as the circumstances above that others had used show. However a single defiling action (or even two or three, but not where it becomes a routine for the defiling character) isn't going to corrupt the individual and "damn their soul". But yea, your right
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
Defiling magic is evil, the act itself being vile and corrupting by nearly every sense of those words, as I've been attempting to point out over this entire arguement. Defilers, while they may have started as good, will slip into neutrality at the very least, if they struggle against the corrupting forces of defiling. Defilers could be neutral or evil, but any that have been a defiler for long enough (like at least a level) they run the risk of having their very souls corrupted from the effects of defiling.
This is a load of BS. Please point me to one cannon source that says that defiling is in any way corrupting in and of itself. Power itself can be corrupting and defiling allows for a lot of power. But like any power if used appropriately and not abused it does not corrupt.
The thing is in D&D as in most belief systems sentient beings are more important that plant life. Now obviously in Athas the fertile areas are probably more important than almost any number of people and a good defiler would let himself die rather than destroy it. However most people of Athas have no use for the sparse plant life in the desert and although this is not a very long term view most people would view the destruction of some of it to save lives a worthwhile swap.
Now we have two premises the first that defiling is not inherently corrupting and the second that some acts of defiling are not only not evil but at least in D&D terms good. Thus we can conclude from this that some defilers can be good although playing one would be incredibly difficult as you could only use your power when their was no other choice.
Spamdrew
Originally posted by Spamdrew
This is a load of BS. Please point me to one cannon source that says that defiling is in any way corrupting in and of itself. Power itself can be corrupting and defiling allows for a lot of power. But like any power if used appropriately and not abused it does not corrupt.
I was basing it on the pages and pages of arguements which I have already pointed out for my case. It is how I see it, you don't, which is fine - just it's not the same view I see defiling. Canon source? How about the Prism Pentad? Then again, as had been pointed on these boards in the past - really only the Wanderer's Journal could most likely be "canon", as it remains just vague enough to allow for lenience. Rulebooks - just look at the Defiler class for the AD&D 2nd Ed. books - Defilers cannot be good, only neutral or evil - I believe it's in both boxed sets.
The power being used is the arcane magic - preservers are those which have placed limitations on themselves, they "reign themselves in" and tend to focus on not abusing the power. Defilers abuse it - that's what they do. They steal the life energies of things around them (many even seeking other means - like obsidian to steal the energies of animals, as portrayed in the Prism Pentad, which changes defiling into a much more dangerous and corrupting nature), with little to no care about what the long-term effects are - Elves tend to have defilers with them, as they wander the tablelands and don't remain in one place; these defilers could be "neutral" in morality, or possibly evil - depending on the situation.
A preserver who occasionally defiles really walks a tight-rope, much as Sadira did.