Results 1 to 10 of 103
Thread: Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
-
10-15-1998, 10:45 AM #1TriztGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
Kenneth Gauck (c558382@earthlink.net) wrote:
- -> At 04:48 AM 10/14/98 -0700, Gary V. Foss wrote:
- ->> There is a really weird interpretation of "evil" by most people out
there.
- -> I agree with Gary's points on evil here. That "evil" is missunderstood
- -> strikes me as odd because in several places the books offer complemantary
- -> pieces on alignment.
- -> In general I would argue that doing good for the sake of good,
irregardless
- -> of how it impacts you, is required for an act to be good.
- -> When the ends are allowed to justify the means, we are talking about
- -> neutrality.
- -> When the means no longer need justification, when only the ends matter,
we
- -> arrive at evil, irregardless of harm. Because the willingness to do harm
if
- -> required to achive the ends was always present. Evil requires nothing
more
- -> than a total disregard for doing harm. If one does not care who they
hurt
- -> or why, they are evil.
I must say this was the best description of goodevil that have ever
written and should be included in future editions of PHB and DMG.
I guess that most of you would say that killing a defencless Orc would be
evil act, but you should look it from the Orc's point of view. Let say that
the PC's has hit a Orc so bad that he fall uncouncens (spl?), they bind him
with rope and gag him in case he would wake up before they are finished so
that he can't call for help.
Let say that the enough many Orc survive the PC's attack:
In the evil society, the Orc would not be treated well as he was to week, he
prolly would be the next offer for the gods. Even if he wouldn't be put to
death he would be treated as shit.
Let say no other Orc did survive:
The Orc would sarve to death if no other monster would find him first and
eat him.
In both thise cases it had been better to end the Orc's life, but I guess
most of you would scream out, "THAT'S AN EVIL ACT!!!"
//Trizt of Ward^RITE
-
-
10-15-1998, 02:29 PM #2Gary V. FossGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
einarh@fagerborg.vgs.no wrote:
> Picture humans almost eradicated from the world.
> Then you want to fight back with whatever means neccessary right?
> No matter the cost, just to hurt your opponent the most....
> Are you good or evil?
>
> I'd say good, but its just a matter of Point of View...
> The ones killing humans would undoubtledly portray you
> as evil. But who has the correct answer?
I don't think that's really what is going on in Cerilia. There are what?
Eight? Ten elven nations? There are thousands and thousands of elves on
Cerilia. People keep talking about the elves as if they had only a couple of
years left on the continent, as if they were being actively hunted by humans,
when in fact the opposite is true. Humans are usually too busy fighting each
other to dedicate all their time to fighting elves. From what I can tell there
is no reason why elves should not continue pretty much indefinitely.
I can find no evidence to indicate to me that elves are the persecuted race
that they make themselves out to be. (Or that they are made out to be on this
message board.) Oh, humans have a tendency to cut down trees, but how does
that kill elves? They might find it aesthetically displeasing to have ancient
sources ruined, but I don't see how that is some sort of genocidal movement on
the part of humanity. Elves are not destroyed by deforestation, they just have
fewer things from which to hang their hammocks. Boo hoo for the elves.
And the elven response to humans cutting down trees? Kill them! Kill them
all!
We don't really have to analyze that to describe it as evil, do we? It seems
obviously so to me. In fact, I think the burden of proof should be on the side
of someone trying to convince people that the GS is NOT evil, rather than the
other way around.
> I'd actually urge TSR/WoSC to remove all Alignment from AD&D.
> Alignment was meant as way to easilly define a characters view on life,
> right? I'd say its only a hindrance, just look at the discussion here and
> real through my first paragraph.
> Use the "NPCs (Personality)" page 114 in the DMG!!
> It would make much more sense, and it can easilly be improved.
I'd rather they described alignment better than got rid of it altogether. I
grant you that many games get along just fine without an alignment system, or
by stipulating "motivations" rather than good and evil, but I'm starting to
think alignment is one of the AD&D characteristics that makes the game what it
is. To lose the alignment system would be to lose a lot of the game as a
system, and would require quite a lot of redesigning of the game. What would
happen to paladins? How would the Outer Planes exist? There are many spells
that rely upon good/evil to exist.
I think alignment should be fundamental, but essentially background information
for characters. It should dictate their behavior only in the broadest sense.
Minor moral issues can be solved quite easily without dealing with alignment.
Gary
-
10-15-1998, 02:30 PM #3einarh@fagerborg.vgs.nGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
Picture humans almost eradicated from the world.
Then you want to fight back with whatever means neccessary right?
No matter the cost, just to hurt your opponent the most....
Are you good or evil?
I'd say good, but its just a matter of Point of View...
The ones killing humans would undoubtledly portray you
as evil. But who has the correct answer?
I'd actually urge TSR/WoSC to remove all Alignment from AD&D.
Alignment was meant as way to easilly define a characters view on life,
right? I'd say its only a hindrance, just look at the discussion here and
real through my first paragraph.
Use the "NPCs (Personality)" page 114 in the DMG!!
It would make much more sense, and it can easilly be improved.
Siebharrin the Lich
-
10-15-1998, 03:35 PM #4GalwylinGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
At 07:29 AM 10/15/98 -0700, Gary V. Foss wrote:
>
>I can find no evidence to indicate to me that elves are the persecuted race
>that they make themselves out to be. (Or that they are made out to be on
this
>message board.) Oh, humans have a tendency to cut down trees, but how does
>that kill elves? They might find it aesthetically displeasing to have
ancient
>sources ruined, but I don't see how that is some sort of genocidal
movement on
>the part of humanity. Elves are not destroyed by deforestation, they just
have
>fewer things from which to hang their hammocks. Boo hoo for the elves.
I think you're overlooking the information given about elves and humans in
the Atlas and the start of the gheallie Sidhe. In fact, the point of view
you've given could be used to show that the Shadow War was evil and the
Cerilians should have bow down before Aduria and Azrai. They weren't going
to kill them, just subjugate them. On page 6, "The elves fiercely resisted
conquest... When we began to force the elves from their ancestral homes,
the elven leaders devised the gheallie Sidhe." I think you give a
wonderful view point of humans toward elves though. But would that same
view be held if elves were routinely destroying homes and cities of humans?
So what, they have to sleep without roofs over their heads. Boo hoo for
the humans. ;>
After rereading some of the main books for Birthright, I noticed more than
a few references to ancient elven ruins within the lands of Anuire.
Doesn't that indicate that elves were forced from their homes? And if
humans are so quick to war with each other, was that force peaceful? There
enough bloodshed to go around on both sides and painting one more evil than
the other seems to be ignoring history.
This has been a Galwylin® Production
galwylin@airnet.net
http://www.airnet.net/galwylin/
-
10-15-1998, 05:12 PM #5einarh@fagerborg.vgs.nGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
>> Picture humans almost eradicated from the world.
>> Then you want to fight back with whatever means neccessary right?
>> No matter the cost, just to hurt your opponent the most....
>> Are you good or evil?
>>
>> I'd say good, but its just a matter of Point of View...
>> The ones killing humans would undoubtledly portray you
>> as evil. But who has the correct answer?
>
>I don't think that's really what is going on in Cerilia. There are what?
>Eight? Ten elven nations? There are thousands and thousands of elves on
>Cerilia. People keep talking about the elves as if they had only a couple of
>years left on the continent, as if they were being actively hunted by humans,
>when in fact the opposite is true. Humans are usually too busy fighting each
>other to dedicate all their time to fighting elves. From what I can tell
there
>is no reason why elves should not continue pretty much indefinitely.
Nothing lasts forever. And the humans chaotic nature (selfishness) makes
sure of it. The Gheallie Sidhe is just a natural reaction on
loosing all their territory. Hmm... What if US got invaded and you were
only left with one of the original states? Wouldn't you use any option
available to regain US territory?
>I can find no evidence to indicate to me that elves are the persecuted race
>that they make themselves out to be. (Or that they are made out to be on
this
>message board.) Oh, humans have a tendency to cut down trees, but how does
>that kill elves? They might find it aesthetically displeasing to have
ancient
>sources ruined, but I don't see how that is some sort of genocidal
movement on
>the part of humanity. Elves are not destroyed by deforestation, they just
have
>fewer things from which to hang their hammocks. Boo hoo for the elves.
>And the elven response to humans cutting down trees? Kill them! Kill them
>all!
Hmm... you forget that elves are children of the elements. They have based
their life on the forrest. Taking away that forrest causes them much mental
harm, according to the BoM. Seems to me you don't think
Imperialism is evil? Conquering other nations?
>We don't really have to analyze that to describe it as evil, do we? It seems
>obviously so to me. In fact, I think the burden of proof should be on the
side
>of someone trying to convince people that the GS is NOT evil, rather than the
>other way around.
What is so obvious about GS? As I see it, there are at least thousands of
different views on it. You represent one view, I represent one. Do not
claim you speak for all.
I'd rather brand the humans as selfish than GS evil.
The first we know is true, GS is but a way to defend their land and
culture. The Hunt is not *only* against the humans, its against
*anyone* who trespasses elven lands. Goblins, orogs, trolls, gnolls and so
on... Everybody..
There are two versions of elven lands:
1) Realms where the elves thrive.
2) Realms where the elves *once* thrived, but they were derpived of.
I stick with the first, but number two is not wrong. Its still defence of
your ancestral grounds.
What would you have thought about it, if elves were a subrace of humans,
and were a minority group?
To give an example coming from your history (please comment if totally
wrong): Englishmen, French and Spanish colonized America.
How many indians died? Why? How did they die? Did they try to defend at any
cost at any time? Are they evil?
In the beginning they lived side by side, but as humans are selfish by
nature, they wanted to expand. And they took the way with the smallest
resistance. Think about what consequenses of england trying to invade
france because of the land. (they did wage war, but not because of
landgrabs). And they viewed indians as easy targets, then waged war,
assimilated, used diplomacy and deception in order to gain the land.
Who is evil? the war-waging, land-hungry, fat europeans? or the indians,
who were waging war against themselves, and generally just survived?
Indian culture is as good as gone, and the same situation is in cerilia.
>> I'd actually urge TSR/WoSC to remove all Alignment from AD&D.
>> Alignment was meant as way to easilly define a characters view on life,
>> right? I'd say its only a hindrance, just look at the discussion here and
>> real through my first paragraph.
>> Use the "NPCs (Personality)" page 114 in the DMG!!
>> It would make much more sense, and it can easilly be improved.
>To lose the alignment system would be to lose a lot of the game as a
>system, and would require quite a lot of redesigning of the game. What would
>happen to paladins? How would the Outer Planes exist? There are many spells
>that rely upon good/evil to exist.
Paladins would have moral codes, and they would try to live by them.
Outer Planes? They can keep their alignment, because its so generalized
that its not important.
>I think alignment should be fundamental, but essentially background
information
>for characters. It should dictate their behavior only in the broadest sense.
>Minor moral issues can be solved quite easily without dealing with alignment.
::nods::
Siebharrin the Lich
-
10-15-1998, 09:13 PM #6GalwylinGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
At 04:21 PM 10/15/98 -0400, Daniel McSorley wrote:
>
> The indians who behaved similarly to the GS, that is, killing settlers,
>traders, anyone who came near them, were definitely evil, on the alignment
>scale. Fighting armies is one thing, killing innocent people is something
>else entirely.
Apparently, Native Americans weren't evil enough. They've been reduced to
a fraction of their former population and they're culture has almost died
out except as a museum piece.
This has been a Galwylin® Production
galwylin@airnet.net
http://www.airnet.net/galwylin/
-
10-15-1998, 09:53 PM #7Ryan FreireGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
>I think you are associating Cerilian elves with real world Native
>Americans in a way that just doesn't apply. First, I haven't read
>anywhere that said elves existed in the millions before humans >arrived
in Cerilia. In fact, I haven't read anywhere that elves had >even
settled all of Cerilia before humans arrived. Second, Europeans
>launched an overtly militant pogrom against Native Americans. The
>humans who came to Cerilia did no such thing. They cut down some
>trees and the elves started killing them for it. Third, Native
>Americans were subjected to the actions of colonialism. That's
>different morally from the actions of people fleeing corruption and
>the Shadow as the humans who came to Cerilia are described. Native
>peoples were enslaved by Europeans and when that didn't take they >were
killed. Where does it say that anything even remotely similar >happened
when humans came to Cerilia?
Oh? What about the Puritans and Pilgrims, they did the EXACT same thing.
When they fled europe from persecution and the corruption of the church
they landed, at first peacefully with the natives then..as more arrived
they began to expand, pushing natives further inward and into the
territories of other neighbors when the natives wouldnt voluntarily
move...they killed them and TOOK the land. And the elves warned and
asked the humans to not chop down the trees, the humans basically
laughed it off and continued. The elves may have not settled ALL of
cerilia, but they had almost all of anuire where the aelvinwode USED to
be. Greatheart is a good book to read to find out this POV as well as
the entry under rhoube in the blood enemies sourcebook
>Again, I think this is an association with Native Americans that
>doesn't really make sense. Diseases and plagues? I've never even
>heard someone bring up elves being brought down by disease before.
>Poor nations? How's that related to elves? Elven nations aren't
>poor. It's also hard for me to accept the concept that elves would >be
starved by having forests turned into much more productive >farmland.
I wasnt referring to elves getting diseases...mainly humans. The short
lifespan they have coupled with the fact of disease would probably give
the humans a urge to have as much as they can before their time is up
that would confuse the elves. As well as explaining the greed the
humans would have for the land. The poor HUMANS (ie: serfs and
peasants) in an effort to better their lot..would have expanded into the
territories of the elves. Which is also why the GS is attacking the
civilians...its not the ARMIES marching into the elvish territories..
its the peasants who want to make more money, the woodcutters, farmers,
and herdsmen. With it in that light its far less evil than if they WERE
attacking the armies. The members of the army havent done anything to
them, its the peasantry.
>Where is all this coming from? I think you're statement about
>misapplication of MODERN morality is actually correct, but I don't
>think I'm the guy applying modern standards. There's a very thick
>undercurrent of political correctness in this whole POV morality that
>people are advocating that is the real source of this confusion.
>Gary
The statement that ALL killing of intelligent life is evil IS modern
morality. In that time period, people were killed for all manner of
things and it was not considered evil.
Ryan
__________________________________________________ ____
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-
10-15-1998, 11:10 PM #8Kenneth GauckGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
At 03:30 PM 10/15/98 +0100, einarh@fagerborg.vgs.no wrote:
>Picture humans almost eradicated from the world.
>Then you want to fight back with whatever means neccessary right?
>No matter the cost, just to hurt your opponent the most....
>Are you good or evil?
>
>I'd say good, but its just a matter of Point of View...
>The ones killing humans would undoubtledly portray you
>as evil. But who has the correct answer?
>
Acts of desperation are hardly acts of virtue. Self restraint is a
requirement for goodness. Self interest is a dangerous road which easily
corrupts.
Kenneth Gauck
c558382@earthlink.net
-
10-16-1998, 12:16 AM #9Daniel McSorleyGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
From: Galwylin
>Well, I think the history is important in understanding any people.
Understanding, sure, but even if they have a "reason", killing innocent
people is evil, which was the original question.
>Now,
>I'm not saying this is correct but I don't think most humans have to worry
>about the gheallie Sidhe. It takes place mainly in elven lands (or near
>them).
And Hitler only killed the people he could catch, right? That sounds
like a slam, but I don't mean to be cruel, but the fallacy in saying that it
only takes place in a limited area, so it isn't so bad, is absurd.
>And we've barely even mentioned that the gheallie Sidhe isn't a
>cohesive organization. Rhuobhe's, the Sielwode's, and Tuarhievel's aren't
>all the same. Some are based on hatred, some on distrust, some of
>protection.
But all of them kill innocent people. Look at Tuarhievel, the most open
of the elven lands, even the Prince of the land doesn't support it, but
whole caravans disappear. These nutcases are killing the humans that
actually like them enough to try and trade with them! And this is the open
elven land?
>Elves may even have a stake in the reformation of the Anuirean
>Empire knowing that once humans are united, their next foe will be the
>elves. It's still a more complex situation than just labeling the gheallie
>Sidhe as evil. If they elves were to form a large army that could stand
>against the human kingdoms and invade, driving them from their lost lands,
>would that be evil? If soldiers in a war aren't evil for killing the
>enemy, what would it mean if the elves see humanity as the enemy and the
>current situation as a ongoing war, are they still evil?
I never said soldiers that killed the "enemy" weren't evil. I said
fighting armies is different from killing innocent people. There is a
difference there, but it's subtle. Soldiers in battle are justified in
killing the enemy _troops_. Any group might be declared to be the "enemy",
but to kill them just because they are declared "enemy" is nothing like
fighting someone who is also shooting back at you, because that's what you
were both ordered to do. "Humanity" is not trying to kill elves. Some
individual humans might be, but not "humanity" in general. There is
therefore no comparison between war, and the actions of the GS.
>If the elves have
>formed the gheallie Sidhe to keep humans out of their lands, why have
>humans continued to ignore that and enter to become vicitims of it? Or
>built their homes near elven lands?
>
The traders enter the elven lands to trade with the elves: the GS doesn't
even like this, so they kill merchants. The peasants have no recourse but
to try to make money and survive, these people are dirt poor, and the best
method for this is often chopping lumber and selling it. The elves kill
them for it. How's that?
>How long is elven grief?
Doesn't matter. It's no excuse to kill people who had nothing to do with
the cause of their grief.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley.1@osu.edu
-
10-16-1998, 01:39 AM #10GalwylinGuest
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
At 08:16 PM 10/15/98 -0400, Daniel McSorley wrote:
>
> I never said soldiers that killed the "enemy" weren't evil. I said
>fighting armies is different from killing innocent people. There is a
>difference there, but it's subtle. Soldiers in battle are justified in
>killing the enemy _troops_. Any group might be declared to be the "enemy",
>but to kill them just because they are declared "enemy" is nothing like
>fighting someone who is also shooting back at you, because that's what you
>were both ordered to do. "Humanity" is not trying to kill elves. Some
>individual humans might be, but not "humanity" in general. There is
>therefore no comparison between war, and the actions of the GS.
I've not decided fully on if the gheallie Sidhe is evil or not. But if
humans aren't killing the elves then why are the elves in decline? We have
elven ruins through out the lands that humans dwell in yet it wasn't the
humans that did this? I'm inclined to agree with the post before that
armies aren't the true enemy to the elves so much as its the common people.
> The traders enter the elven lands to trade with the elves: the GS doesn't
>even like this, so they kill merchants. The peasants have no recourse but
>to try to make money and survive, these people are dirt poor, and the best
>method for this is often chopping lumber and selling it. The elves kill
>them for it. How's that?
Yes, its cruel. But there's only one resource to divide between humans and
elves, the forests. There isn't the abundance that there once were. Do we
give it to the humans because they are victims of their own society or do
we give it the elves? I say give because the ones we label evil also
inherit being the ones non-deserving of the forests. I haven't had the
chance to read up on how elves treat the Rjurik. They have a more
nature-loving society. How are they treated by the elves and the gheallie
Sidhe?
> Doesn't matter. It's no excuse to kill people who had nothing to do with
>the cause of their grief.
I agree its no excuse but I'm not trying to excuse the gheallie Sidhe. I'm
only trying to understand it. I don't think you can understand it without
understanding elves and, in that case, elven grief is important. I've said
before that I think Birthright is a mature setting and that things aren't
so black and white is one reason.
This has been a Galwylin® Production
galwylin@airnet.net
http://www.airnet.net/galwylin/
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Gheallie sidhe
By Sorontar in forum MainReplies: 0Last Post: 06-19-2008, 11:43 PM -
Gheallie Sidhe Units
By Vallariel in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 EditionReplies: 0Last Post: 09-02-2003, 05:53 PM -
Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
By Kenneth Gauck in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 5Last Post: 10-14-1998, 10:56 PM -
RE: Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
By Kariu in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 0Last Post: 10-14-1998, 02:21 PM -
RE: Gheallie Sidhe and Alignment
By Kariu in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 0Last Post: 10-14-1998, 01:08 PM
Bookmarks