Shattered Kingdoms

After a discussion with josephusmaximus3, he suggested I started this thread.

I am starting this thread because currently, the scrupulous alignment helpfile is worded in a way that allows lighties to do anything they want and they would excuse it as them being "ruthless." To be ruthless one must act without ever the possibility of remorse. This allows them to do anything they want.

This is a rough draft, but I think this more represents the spirit of what a true scrupulous char should be:



opinions?

Make a poll! But yeah, I think it's worded better this way personally.

For reference, the original is:



I disagree with the proposed change. Scrupulous people are willing to use harsh means to achieve the greater good. That's a key difference between scrupulous and principled. Considering these harsh means can include killing people, or even allowing some harm to innocents, ruthless is not too strong a word.

This alignment's restriction is not so much on means as on goals. These characters have to be constantly working towards common life/freedom/happiness. That restricts them a great deal, or at least it should.

It's true that scrupulous characters have a good deal of freedom to harm dark-aura characters, whose continued existence may well threaten general life, freedom, and happiness. That's one of the disadvantages of evil alignments.

As far as I know, according to SK, to be ruthless is to commit a vile act. I might be wrong, but even lighties should not be cruel, merciless or without pity or compassion.

Note: The change I wrote above is an example of something that is closer to what SK has been about. If someone can word it without using ruthless or some other word that relates to cruel or merciless. Fine by me. I know that scrupulous char's will hurt innocents sometimes. That is not what I am arguing. I am arguing that just because they happen to be in the vicinity of their "target," does not mean they should be purposeful targets.

Wow . . .And you want to know why too many people think that the Hammer is no different then the MC? Well, here it is.

This is a tactice used by the MC and every other darkie group. If the Hammer's try to use this tactic in a town. They should not only be banished from the Zhenshi, but should be hunted down by everyone else (including other lighties). This tactic is what would of happened to Pakistan if they wouldn't of allowed US troops head to Afghanistan for no other reason than they didn't want to get involved. Not only would that of been wrong, the Hammer example is wrong.

Even to necromancers or other doers of great evil? I think you're getting perilously close to asking all good characters to be principled. They're the ones who try to avoid unnecessary violence, not the scrupulous.



But I'll agree this is poor play. How does killing the Talon contribute to the greater good? I see three possibilities off-hand:

1) The Talon was physically defending the enemy, and the enemy was so vile and dangerous that the enemy couldn't be spared, even at the cost of an innocent life. Such an extreme event is very unlikely.

2) The Talon was not intentionally targeted, but was killed by accident in the chaos of the fight. This I can see happening from time to time. Still, I would expect good characters to be less than happy over their accidental slaughter.

3) The Talon was assumed to be evil himself, because surely no one else would defend such a villan. Characters with such naive thoughts can be fun as well as legitimate. Two caveats: First, the character shouldn't only be such a fool when it's convenient for him. Second, the character should have other traits that are clearly good-aligned. In isolation, such arrogant killings might fit aberrant better than scrupulous.

[Edited for grammar/spelling/tag cleanup.]

No. You're wrong. What you're thinking of is the Fist. The Hammer can, have, and will likely continue to do what it takes to destroy darkness. If you've ever seen The Boondock Saints, that's about as close to a modern day Hammer that you're going to find. Evil men = dead men. The Hammer fields all kinds just like in the movie, you have some aka the princs that wouldn't kill women and children, then you got the Rocko-esq scrups that are willing to do whatever it takes, no matter what that may mean.

Those that willingly allow evil to flourish are no better than those actually committing the evil acts.

I don't like any helpfile specificying what the goals of 'good' are, especially defining them as "life, freedom, and happiness." Freedom is only arguably a goal of good, as witnessed by its only recent introduction to Zavijah's secondary sphere. Life precludes sacrifice, a significant virtue. Happiness is utterly grey, and precludes any sort of asceticism.

Being cruel (ruthless) has nothing to do about being good. In fact it is the antithesis of it. Players are justifying their actions by the helpfile. Since, they are justifying their actions of the helpfile, I don't want the helpfile to include things that are inherently wrong. Sorry, the example is as bad as what happened whenenver any religious group become zealots. Spanish Inquisition (for the greater good), Crusades (for the greater good), Slavery (they even rationalized it for the greater good).

My point is this. People actually use the help files to justify their IC actions. I just want the help files to not give players an excuse to do whatever the hell they wish. The reckless and ruthless parts of the scrupulous help file gives players so much mobility, they can excuse any and all of their actions.

What does "Wert option" mean?

It seems to me there ought to be another kind of good person. A good person who's good to everybody, even evil people. The kind of Gandhi-like guy who'll give you the shirt off his back even if he knows you'll probably kick dirt in his face later. But also the kind of guy who doesn't give a darn about rules and laws. Some laws are just stupid. The only rule for this guy is the golden rule. But, you can't really play a pacifist in SK and level, so he'd also be a bit of a hypocrite.

My way of thinking is that there are just too many shades of good and bad to really describe them well in a help file. Maybe consistency is the key to judging good RP?

Marilyn