Faith

Durgan · Post by **Durgan** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 3:33 pm

Yes, but the Elves saw Order as something completely different than the Havenites. That's why it's in the eye of the beholder, which negates it from being in any way religious, in my mind.

Order and Chaos are differing means to an end, not good or evil. At least that seems to be the leaning they are given at Winter Haven.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 3:36 pm

So would you say the people of haven are more inclined to Choas or Order.

I like this tought pattern, but it does not explain good and evil.

What would killing a person be, Choas.
Now what if you killed a baby and feed it's blood to the crops to make them grow to feed the people? Is that Choas or order?

Do the ends justify the means? I know many characters of Fh would say yes. But the minority would say no. The means must go hand in hand with the results.
If you have to kill 10 children to save a village of people, is that choas or order. Or is that good or evil?

I'm a firm believer of the is absolute evil and good.

Durgan · Post by **Durgan** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 3:45 pm

I just hate defining good and evil because everyones knee jerk reaction is to classify them religiously.

So would you say the people of haven are more inclined to Choas or Order.

Definitely Chaos, because most of them are friggin' stick jockeys, and attack first, question later. It's quite simply why Corbyn got the better of them.

For instance the woman who had been horribly slighted (I can't remember her name) on the Friday night of the last FH was immediately attacked by everyone she confronted, except Durgan and Voralen, even after Voralen was violently struck after she burst into the inn. We simply spoke to her and let her explain her position, and asked if we could do anythng to help, something that was NEVER done by the others she confronted. Eventually she was satisfied, with no further violence.

In my opinion, the compassion of Order prevailed over the impulsiveness of Chaos.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:03 pm

I have to agree with you on the good and evil thing. I personly don't see good and evil as neccesaly a religous aspect. There are just some acts and behaviors that are considered plan evil in any culture. It is what it is to be human. If you don't think so, than, are you still human?
Mass murder
Rape
Torture and killings of the innocent (kids, etc..)
Killing of babies (Corbyn good at this

)
etc...

And that can be said for same for good acts. Acts the trencend all relegions and cultures.
Giving food to straving people
being nice to a person
etc..

There are some basic good and evil things peole do at FH. Some of the time it is straight evil acts in the name of good. Which to me, makes the those acts as plan evil, even if you have good intent. Evil is just plain evil.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:30 pm

Good and Bad are a lot more than religous ideals. Much of it is a natural law type thing (if you buy into it). How many semi intelligent animals kill for fun (dolphins and killer whales excluded)? How many crap where they eat? Attack their (own) young? Etc. Sure there are examples of any of the above but it being good or bad has nothing to do with anyone's religion. Feeling protective over a child is instinctive for example. This is done to increase their survival rate as birth rates are lower (aka we don't lay 200 eggs). Granted, you could also say that your deity instilled that value into every living being too, but that is neither here nor there. The fact is, certain values exist whether you believe in a specific deity or not.

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:39 pm

Durgan wrote:Yes, but the Elves saw Order as something completely different than the Havenites. That's why it's in the eye of the beholder, which negates it from being in any way religious, in my mind.

Order and Chaos are differing means to an end, not good or evil. At least that seems to be the leaning they are given at Winter Haven.

Dude, how many religions are there? Wait, not even that, how many protestant religions are there? Even people that agree, can't agree!

If the PC's at WH have adopted order and chaos(man that stuff was FINALLY dying town at CARPS, sigh) as good and bad respectively then they have just taken two opposing words and assigned a morality to them. Those opposites could be anything, large and small, shy and outgoing. Order and chaos have nothing to do at all with morality.

Example, arcanes use magic in an orderly way, they take components and with rituals and spells they manipulate the magic to do what they need it to. Empaths rip the magic from their surroundings and use it any way they want without any ritual or spell. Arcanes do their magic orderly and empaths do their magic chaotically. Neither is "bad" or "good" just different ways that things are done.

Aaron the careful planning and execution of a person in a ritualistic killing would be orderly, deciding on a whim that "this person needs to die" is chaotic.

Durgan · Post by **Durgan** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:42 pm

That's why I think that Order and Chaos would be good ideals to allow characters to follow in FH. They are the means, and good/evil are the ends. Order can end in Evil (the elves slaughtering all of us), Chaos can end in Good (sending an assassin to kill an evil warlord who would otherwise be free to kill innocents).

But I think they are good ideals to allow, because they give a grander way for people to join together then money or survival.

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:51 pm

Yeah but they are personality traits and have absolutely nothing to do with morality, that is my point. What difference does it make if everyone acts the same if they are still going to do the same evil or good they would have otherwise? You said yourself, either can be evil or good so how does it help anything just because people will all be split between two opposing ideas of traits?

I've had this same discussion IG over and over and OOG a few times as well and I still haven't heard a good reason why people aspouse one or the other as the way everybody should act.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:52 pm

Ideals are already allowed in FH. Religons aren't. Order and Chaos aren't religons. neither is Good or Evil. If a PC wants to take Order and Chaos to some higher meaning, go nuts. Just don't start drawing lines in the sand and dribbling blood onto an alter over it (unless it's part of an arcane ritual to wipe out the elves

)

Durgan · Post by **Durgan** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:55 pm

Good and Bad are a lot more than religous ideals. Much of it is a natural law type thing (if you buy into it).

But it's getting where anything even sounding like something remotely associated with religion in the real world are asociated the same way at FH/WH as a gut reaction (The question of Paladins for instance, even when in-game they are merely a force for good, not servants of a supernatural entity)

I was told by PC's that my WH character Garritt couldn't be essence-bound with a Daemon, because that sounds like the christian 'Demon', even though they are entirely different things. But as soon as I said, "Well, alright, howsabout it he's more like a cousin to the Fae race", it's was given wholehearted approval by the same people, even though he is described and Rp'd exactly the same way as before.

We can't have anything religious, so why do so many things have to be approved to the standards of the real-life religious players? If I had a pouch with a big pentagram on it, which opinion would be viewed first, that it's a 'Satanic' symbol, or a widely accepted symbol of magic in fantasy games?

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:17 pm

That was PC choice and possibly a bit over the top. Do demons exist in Phantara? I don't know. They may exist as something else (dark fae) or something. That's just symantics, not that it can't exist.

Post by **WayneO42** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:46 pm

Durgan wrote:
But it's getting where anything even sounding like something remotely associated with religion in the real world are asociated the same way at FH/WH as a gut reaction

We are going to associate out of game religious symbols with their out of game meaning because we are culturally conditioned to do so. There is no stopping that because we are in the real world much more often than we are in Phanterra.

I was told by PC's that my WH character Garritt couldn't be essence-bound with a Daemon, because that sounds like the christian 'Demon', even though they are entirely different things. But as soon as I said, "Well, alright, howsabout it he's more like a cousin to the Fae race", it's was given wholehearted approval by the same people, even though he is described and Rp'd exactly the same way as before.

Semantics. In FH/CARPS our demons are called Underlings. Why? To try to get rid of some of the inherent meaning that our OUT OF GAME culture associates with the word and give us more of a clean slate to develop the concept in the players mind. See above

We can't have anything religious, so why do so many things have to be approved to the standards of the real-life religious players?

Because we are players first and characters second.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 6:00 pm

Let me say this:

If you as a player want to believe in an afterlife that is fine. I just don't want simulated worship or religous symbols.

LOTR is a good exmample of how characters could act in FH and be allowed.

Durgan · Post by **Durgan** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 10:50 pm

That's absolutely perfectly fine with me. I like how LOTR approached things, in fact I prefer it in a roleplaying enviroment. But the fact remains that in my first situation where I mentioned such a thing in-game I got shut down completely and out of hand, and it really left a bad taste in my mouth.

Zaire · Post by **Zaire** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:42 am

Durgan wrote:Definitely Chaos, because most of them are friggin' stick jockeys, and attack first, question later. It's quite simply why Corbyn got the better of them.

One could argue that Corbyn's actions would mark him as an Agent of Chaos (Yay, Michael Moorcock) in that he unsettled and betrayed the established leadership of Haven. His betrayal of friends and allies, resulting in the death of one of the most influential military leaders (Donovan) caused nothing but Chaos for the surviors.

But then again I love the whole Order/Chaos dynamic and think it allows for such dramatic and intense philosophical discussions.