Shattered Kingdoms

As she may have been selfish at time, she was still good and acted like a griffon of scrupulous alignment.

I approve of this character's ejection from the Harlequin, maybe not so much from the church - overall, however, I don't agree that this character's RP was appropriate.

Here's an alternative way to think about the character: was she closer to scrupulous, or was she closer to anarchist.

Everything I saw of the character matched the definition of anarchist, rather than scrupulous. Through some wild stretch of the imagination, yes, perhaps she was within the boundaries of scrupulous (I do not see how a scrupulous griffon can justify eating griffon meat), but the fact remains that she was more akin to anarchist, than anything else.

Son of a b**ch. So if you are light hearted you CANNOT be selfish at all? Damnit, all you lighties trying to improve your armor stash or bank accounts need penalizing it seems. Experience cuts to all the rich/well equipped who weren't explicitly given the money... wait, would it be selfish to keep it and not share. I see something fundamentally wrong with using good, selfish, evil when it is good, neutral, evil everywhere else. Damned help files.

Yes, there is something fundamentally wrong with "selfish" being in place of neutral, specifically in the case of Dogmatic . . .


However you weren't gray. So that point is moot.

This is the entire point I'm trying to make, and why I haven't resorted to just calling you [REDACTED] and moving along.

The reasoning behind your actions are almost everything.

Killing someone for pleasure is definately evil.

Killing someone to protect someone weaker than you from harm is usually good.

What makes it good, or evil, or selfish are the reasons behind it. Most things you do ICly are going to fall under the same kind of reasoning.

Improving your armor just so you can look more awesome is selfish, improving your armor so you can protect the innocent more effectively is probably going to be good, improving your armor so you can protect the innocent so that they will join you as minions to murder and enslave a neighboring populace is probably going to be evil.

These are all almost the same thing, you just said the main goal of your characters life was pure selfishness, with that said it's obvious that the right thing was done in your case.

Read the help files a bit closer and try again.

I agree that an evil/grey griffon should be allowed, yes deep-elves are inherently evil and elves are good, but then shouldnt the same be for griffons? Human, half-elves, halflings and others can be anything it all based on how you are raised. You have a griffon that was raised by evil selfish people, maybe turns out evil or at least grey aura'ed. I dont know it sounds feasable to me

While this point seems valid, it is not related at all and distracts from the point.


Also as for the playerbase handling it, I would constantly attempt to duel her, and hit her with every malediction possible just to keep her out of the loop for a little while.

I support Marfik's decision based on his reasoning. Though I haven't rp'd with her one can't help but think the big anarchist A in her description kinda set's the mood for her character.

And I believe there is a big difference between being scrupulous and anarchist. I would think a scrupulous player would be disgusted if her religion actively sought to overthrow a peaceful government. A anarchist would not.

Again, I haven't seen her play too much so I'm not making any judgment here.

See, that's where the question of your motives comes into play, and why I asked what hers were.

If you're overthrowing governments because you think it's better for people seeing the slavery and racism that most of the governments have spawned, and think it'd be better and bring about a greater good in the world at large. That's definately scrupulous material.