The problem with some cultists

Shakiri wrote:I think you are getting confused with pretned cultists who are god emoting slightly and those who are talking in a shady bar and try to keep it [Low].

I haven't met or heard of a decent cultist in a long while. All I get to see and hear about is the kind you describe

Melnerag wrote:In same way they can go ranting about how proud they are to have rejected the Light and so forth. So I think in the universe full of people who worship dark powers and adhere to 'evil' philosofies it is completely normal to 'appear and sound evil'. It is however still stupid and suicidal

Exactly xD That's why I said that those being loud about it better be ready to take a beating...or two...or three >_>

To be fair, Thelos has a point here. RP-ers shouldn't 'need' a detailed motivation for being 'ebul', for two reasons:

1. It might be laziness, but some people casually RP characters and don't put so much depth into them to explain every motive simply because they don't want to. I dislike such behavior myself, but I can't say it's so bad I should ignore the person completely. Not everyone treats their characters like a play in a theatre.

2. The more important excuse is that there are indeed creatures in this lore that are inherently evil, such as the Old Gods, the Dreadlords and whatever corrupted Sargeras (if he was corrupted at all). These are, at the moment, valid evidence that something can be evil by nature. Now what if a person decides to RP their character like this as a disfunction or a governing idea? If there are examples of such things I'd assume it's also acceptable to actually be evil by default. They wouldn't commit evil to gain power, influence, a death toll of innocents or destroy everything, but instead they'd do so the other way around: Use power, influence, commit mass murder and destroy everything to feel evil and feel satisfied.

Thelos wrote:No, I disagree that-

Amaryl wrote: "Lol I'm so ebul!"

-is not a valid motivation.

Dont think I can make it any clear-cut than that, I'll leave others to discuss it lest we derail this thread completely.

so you think "Good" and "Evil" is actually a motivation? and not an adjective that is pasted on people because of the moral code they uphold.
since usually people put the term evil or bad on a moral code that they dislike. and the term good on a set of morals that they like or approve of.

i'm not saying you can't play a lich or any other cool character the type. but ICly there should be motivation or imo, its just a boring character.

but that's fine really.

Frazl wrote:To be fair, Thelos has a point here. RP-ers shouldn't 'need' a detailed motivation for being 'ebul', for two reasons:

1. It might be laziness, but some people casually RP characters and don't put so much depth into them to explain every motive simply because they don't want to. I dislike such behavior myself, but I can't say it's so bad I should ignore the person completely. Not everyone treats their characters like a play in a theatre.

you can do the most depraved things you like without remorse, as long as ICly your character doesn't think he's doing wrong.
if you do depraved stuff and your character thinks icly he's doing wrong, then that's an interresting Character struggle. like say death-knights could have, or paladins that take their retribution a step too far.

2. The more important excuse is that there are indeed creatures in this lore that are inherently evil, such as the Old Gods, the Dreadlords and whatever corrupted Sargeras (if he was corrupted at all). These are, at the moment, valid evidence that something can be evil by nature. Now what if a person decides to RP their character like this as a disfunction or a governing idea? If there are examples of such things I'd assume it's also acceptable to actually be evil by default. They wouldn't commit evil to gain power, influence, a death toll of innocents or destroy everything, but instead they'd do so the other way around: Use power, influence, commit mass murder and destroy everything to feel evil and feel satisfied.

inherently evil because all the races on azeroth thinks what they do is just sooooooooooooooooooooo wrong.

not because they themselves think they're doing bad. that's not something that's portrayed in lore, since you get lore from a perspective or multiple perspectives.

say i play a sadist.

he gets off, by seeing people suffer, by inflicting suffering on others.

and getting off is a strong character motivation. the more the better, the higher the high, the better the climax... etc... but to reach further and further he'll need to do worse and worse things. to more and more people.

does he himself think he's being bad? While everyone else also struggles to get off, be with with a lot of women or by preaching to chior boys.

it takes 2 seconds to think of a motivation for why you do something. but considering yourself Evil without the inner struggle should not exist.

and explaining that motivation is really not necessary to do ever. but it does drastically change the way people rp "evil guys"

Mind you, as I said, I don1t agree with that notion. Whenever I RP an evil character, no matter how two-dimensional, I always have them consider they're doing something good, either towards themselves or to others in a twisted way.

What I disagree with is the complete dismissal of characters that are evil on a primordial level. Now a reason for that can be that they were brainwashed by Twilight Cultists or that the player itself doesn't develop enough depth, but but they can exist on the basis there are creatures in this game's lore that are evil on a primordial level, and as long as they aren't explained why they are like that, one can only, and solely, assume. If we aren't told why Ragnaros and all the denizens of the Firelands want to destroy everything (though it's a bit obvious, but Blizzard explained it anyway) and if they weren't fiery just shades of purple with no connection to the Elements, do you think they have any form of an inner struggle?

If such things exist, so can player characters become such things. It's not smart or deep, indeed, but I won't dismiss it.

There are proven cases of serial killers who know they are doing the wrong thing and know they are a menace but they cannot stop themselves. They have as you mentioned the urge to satisfy their sexual desire through killing.

But it's true what Amaryl says: these individuals never act solemnly on the fact that they are evil and wish to be evil. Evil itself cannot be a reason because it is a hollow word used differently by people with different morals.

So much for RL however. Fantasy setting is a whole another thing which I won't get into.

no but i don't think they considering themselves "Evil" either heck. i'd doubt they know what the hell that term means in the conventional sense.

heck you dont think a cat is evil for torturing a mouse. the cat doesn't think he's evil either, its just his nature to play with that mouse first.

Even if they don't know that, a played character can, based on the input and experience from others. It can be quite a deep character profile who considers being evil, by conventional sense, is their thing to do. It's borderline silly and I wouldn't do it, but making these comments of how, on a primal level, Evil can't exist is superficial for me.

I could definitely make a character that can represent 'Evil' as an entity in this game's Lore. Don't mix RL into this please, there are a few things a lot more clearly defined in this setting to actually enable us this kind of liberty and that's something I'd stick with until things get retconned or described with the whats and hows.

The biggest problem with "evil" characters is that they need motivations to be realistic. Or no, that's to strong a word (realistic). They need motivations to be counted off as good characters.
And I'll say here that destruction for destructions sake isn't a good motivation. While lust for power is. One leads to nothing but ruins. The other leads to a stronger character, even if it is destruction due to the lust for power and more destruction (more power).
So, when you do "evil for evils sake" you get boring 2d cutouts of characters that could be good.

An example of difference here would be from the Wheel of Time series. "The Dark One" that is the "main" bad guy through the books ... very much lacks deffinition and is an "evil" force that will destroy the world. Yet portrayed as a character. Yet, it's a lackluster thing and readers keep wondering "Why".
It's followers on the other hand. Now those are fleshed out characters driven by character traits that are generally seen as "sins" rather than virtues and lust for power, glory, vengance. Well, the whole assorted mix, yet they have some smaller human sides to them. Which make's them far easier to root for.
Right there we have "evil for evils sake" which make's a lackluster picture that make's you ask "why" and then you have "Evil for selfish reasons" which quickly turns it into better built characters.

Same should always be true when roleplaying. Even if you make a madman for some humourous roleplaying occationally there should still be some form of order to his madness. Even the craziest of crazies has something they focus on. In one way or another.
That's why I'd say you should never roleplay evil for evils sake.
And, on the brainwashed case they have a motivation after brainwashing. Just not their own. (The motivation is serve the god/master/et c for glory and rewards (or well, eternal happyness in the afterlife)).

Frazl wrote:
I could definitely make a character that can represent 'Evil' as an entity in this game's Lore. Don't mix RL into this please, there are a few things a lot more clearly defined in this setting to actually enable us this kind of liberty and that's something I'd stick with until things get retconned or described with the whats and hows.

I'm not getting real life in it, i'm trying to use examples to explain what I mean.

the thing is, you cannot think you're evil unless you believe that what you're doing is Abhorrent, wrong, unjust, etc, etc, etc. since that's the definition of Evil. You are relating the "being of evil" to your own personal ooc frame of reference of "what is evil" which means you link it directly to your own personal set of morals. Just like the lore writers write lore from a certain perspective. (As in burning legion tries to destroy every world they come across, and everyone living on those worlds don't like that hence, burning legion is defined as evil, by everyone and their mothers, except the burning legion itself.)

the point is, if your character truely believes he himself is evil, and his actions are inexcusably wrong, atrocious and cruel, and has no inner struggle to cope with his evilness, sleeps just like a baby, because doing things he dislikes is just his nature then i'm not sure if you've made a good character.

Spoiler:

It's a good logic, but I'm not sure I agree entirely. I think some people rejoice in being evil, sadistic, or bastards. Some people willingly choose ill, for personal gratification. We see it in traffic every day, and on the internet even more.
There is a difference between them knowing what is bad and feeling bad because of it. Some people choose to hurt.

Jeanpierre wrote:

It's a good logic, but I'm not sure I agree entirely. I think some people rejoice in being evil, sadistic, or bastards. Some people willingly choose ill, for personal gratification. We see it in traffic every day, and on the internet even more.
There is a difference between them knowing what is bad and feeling bad because of it.

The thing is here, -we- as in we all are indoctrinated into what is "wrong" and what is "right" what is socially acceptable, and what is not. and mostly we behave because of that upbringing or because of the social disapprovement if we don't. and if you don't believe something is actually wrong or because you can get away with it, unseen from those prying eyes, we do it and do it and do it.

but that doesn't mean there isn't an entire motivation behind that.

its the "my personal gratification means more to me then your misery" that's the moral that guy has. if I put it rather bluntly. but it is a moral code. and you still don't think you're evil, even though you know everybody else thinks you're a bad bad guy.

which brings me back to my main point. nobody ever wakes up thinking "What kind of evil thing will I do today, muahahahahahahaha"

They'll wake up "hmm, i'll have to gut open this girl in my basement today eat her tendrils and and learn imbibe her soul so i can cast a larger shadow-bolt which i'll need for this blablabla" its just as cruel since the action is exactly the same, but one character is actually believable, the other is not.

Some people choose to hurt.

yep nothing wrong with that, since that makes sense.

The thing is, while it is possible to choose to do something you personally consider evil, the motivation should not simply be 'I'm doing it for the ebulz' (though a character can claim they are doing it for that reason). There will always be some deeper meaning behind it.

"Some men just want to see the world burn." They want to do evil. They know they are doing evil. They have stopped caring that they are doing evil... there are people like this in the world. But ultimately, something has happened in their life that has thrown them into such a mindset. Whether it be personal satisfaction, or taking out their anger and hate on the rest of the world, a mental illness, etcetera, there is a real meaning behind it.

You cannot commit evil for evil's sake. You can knowingly and wantingly commit evil, even enjoy committing evil, but not for a real, subconscious motivation of simply doing evil. You might think and say you're doing it 'for the evulz', but ultimately, the fact that you enjoy doing it is the real goal, not simply doing evil itself.

Even the Burning Legion, the epitome evil force in the WarCraft universe, is doing evil for a specific purpose... that is, because they believe that the law and order of the galaxy is wrong, and that the galaxy must be brought into a chaotic state. Amongst the individuals, the reasons become a bit more specific... Sargeras wishes to see the work of the Titans laid low (and believes that the galaxy is so evil that there is no point in trying to be good), while the Man'ari Eredar seek personal power (while KJ wants to kill the draenei because he feels they betrayed him). The Burning Legion is not massacring across the galaxy for the sake of being evil... they're doing it to accomplish a goal.

Evil is a means. Not a goal.

(although, as stated, it can be a conscious goal, that someone claims and even thinks is their motivation... but ultimately there will be a subconscious reason for why they think that, and that reason is the true reason)

Well, since there's no concievable way to separate RL with this setting, I'll just agree to disagree. Oh well, I thought it was a bit too abstract to argue about.

Cyrdain wrote:

This good Sir, wins the Game.

Okay, let me as an evil character, say that i like to think of it as jedi v sith.

Seems cheesy i know, so dont dismiss it just yet. Let us now call this light and cult.

The light can fall to the cult, be tricked by it, be beaten by it and just as likely, defeat it.

The cult is the same, only some are ebul beyone reason wanting power, more and more, much like Lich's and some have made the choice to further their own goals and end up getting sucked into the trap and prehaps even scared to leave. Another cheesy example of this would be darth vadar/anakin and the emperor.

But enough, i have star wars on the brain. Let me know if that made no sense so i can slowly retreat to the shadows of the corner of the room where i may grab my coat.

Right. When reading this I'm just so happy I'm playing a forsaken that belive in shadow. Makes things so much easier it seemes. But yes, being evil in deeds, just to be evil, is a bit meh. The thing with "good" and "evil" is always, as has been pointed out, from point of view. But being "evil" should not be the goal. The goal should be whatever reason you are doing your "evil" deeds. Example: The forsaken cultist kill living. But we do so out of compassion, a twisted form of compassion but we belive it is the truth. We just end their painfull lives so they no longer need to feel sorrow or pain. Is this evil? Yes. Is this good? No, but still yes from the forsaken point of view.

What I'm trying to say is, if someone is RP'ing evil just for the sake of being evil, that person need to try and flesh out a REASON as to why he/she is doing their evil deeds. But most who do evil deeds also know that such actions is not supported by the rest of the people around them, thus do not brag openly about it.

To everyone who has said that doing evil for the sake of evil cannot be a proper motivation:

Do you feel the same way about doing good for the sake of good? Does a character need an ulterior motive to do good? Do we do good because it feels good? Or do good characters want to do good simply because it is the right thing to do?

Doing good for the sake of good.. Same as always, define good. Paladins kill evil persons, in the name of the light. Is this good? Yes and no, but through philosophy they belive it is good. But yes, doing good may make that person feel good aswell, hence that is his motivation. But usually there is some kind of philosophy behind said good behaviour to explain WHY it is good and why it feels so good. This is easy to explain from a philosophical point of view, much harder to understand as such due to us being taught/indoctrinated in certain ways of thinking from RL. But trust me, I've seen some stuff in guildchats that need to be hit down on due to it not being "the proper view on things", even if that IS the proper view from people in some countries.

Thelos wrote:To everyone who has said that doing evil for the sake of evil cannot be a proper motivation:

Do you feel the same way about doing good for the sake of good? Does a character need an ulterior motive to do good? Do we do good because it feels good? Or do good characters want to do good simply because it is the right thing to do?

As I have said in our PM discussion, yes I feel the same way--you can no more do good for the sake of good than you can evil for the sake of evil. The way someone has been raised, the direction their life has gone in, is what ultimately determines how they will act in various situations. People are not good or evil by birth. What is the 'right' thing for them to do is what they have learned is right.

I smell Existentialism here, Drustai.

Tsurana/Lorainne wrote:I smell Existentialism here, Drustai.

I didn't know what that was until I just wiki'ed it now after you said it.

But yes, I suppose my views are similar to that.

Thelos wrote:To everyone who has said that doing evil for the sake of evil cannot be a proper motivation:

Do you feel the same way about doing good for the sake of good? Does a character need an ulterior motive to do good? Do we do good because it feels good? Or do good characters want to do good simply because it is the right thing to do?

Yes.
Good is a morality stand point. So the characters that does good do those deeds because they feel good about them or they see them as the right thig to do. A simple act as making a friend is in essence a selfish act. Why do you do it? To feel better about yourself by having new company that you enjoy, get's you healthier (in general) and lots of things like that.
So, as Dailor put it, those who do good are driven by their motivations. Those motivations are just pointed in a far less selfish way. Help others not yourself etc.

Examples would be Josef Stalin, the one responsible for probobly the most deaths of humans ever. He saw himself as doing the world, and the society he was a leader of, a favour. He removed those who didn't fit in.
So, from his point of view he did a good thing. Still looking at it in hindsight it is: "What the **** went on in that lunatics head?"
Then look at Martin Luther King or Ghandi. Both driven to make the world a better place for other. (In the formers case himself as well). They questioned systems by speaking peacefully and rallying support both from their own groups and the rest of the world.
I'm sure as hell that Stalin didn't have all the death camps he had because he "wanted to be evil", and King and Ghandi didn't do what they did because "THey wanted to be good". All three saw it as the right thing.

The defense of "Well, this is a game world! This is Azeroth! Here I can just be Evil because of Evil! (Or good)" is a horrible excuse. Frankly, it is also one that imo a bad roleplayer who have trouble understanding how humans work would go about doing it.
When you roleplay you are supposed to put yourself into a situation other than the one you live. Not just play with actionfigures.

Hear, hear. Muzjhath nailed what I was trying to say. I should realy try to learn to add some good examples on what I'm trying to say.