Ethics and Rulership

[ryancaveney]

Perhaps more to the point, what actions are to be considered good or evil, and by whom?

This is precisely the question that always seems to lead to the present sort of discussion of ethical epistemology. Some of us say "whether the action is considered good depends on who is doing the considering." Others object that their own particular preferred method of consideration, whether derived from their reading of Gygax or some other prophet, is superior to all others and thus is the only consideration which matters.

[rugor]

What interests me is that there are so many different absolute moralities which have been advocated over the years. If I had to pick an absolute standard for Cerilia, it would be this: the elves can do whatever they like to the humans, because elves are better than humans. Naturally, Cerilia's humans will disagree with this particular absolute standard, but I think they're wrong. =)



I disagree completely. I find such moralistic bullheadedness to be the primary obstacle to my enjoyment of fantasy books and games and such. Suspension of disbelief is a vastly more difficult task for me when applied to the idea of rulers who aren't Machiavellian than to a system of biophysics which allows dragons to fly and breathe fire.



Ah, instinctive. Yes, that's always been the problem with any ethical theory. It is not possible to be logical about morality, because the utility function is an input, not an output. That is, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche or whoever says, "Action A is better than action B." The student asks, "Why?" The teacher replies, "Because A leads to X and B leads to Y, and X is better than Y." It is at this point that I ask, "Why?" The only answer I have ever gotten boils down to, "Uh, just because." Therefore, it is clear to me that all talk of having an ethical theory is really just a smokescreen to cover the fact that there is nothing more to morality than "I just like that answer better, and I'll beat you up if you disagree." We can argue logically about what consequences a given set of axioms may have, but we cannot argue logically about what consequences or axioms are better than others, because the very notion of "better" essentially _precedes_ logic. The reason we are still arguing about ethics after thousands of years of recorded history is that "instinctive knowledge of good and evil" has *changed* radically over time, and at any given point in time differs wildly between societies and between individuals within a given society. The real meat of the variation is not so much which things are wrong, but which bad things are worse than others. For example, "is it OK to kill a random stranger" is -- to some (many? most?) people, but not all -- a very different question from "is it OK to kill that particular stranger who is trying to mug you". The exact proportion of people voting "yes" changes constantly as you vary the clause after "who is trying to" over the wide range of options from "steal your favorite coffee mug from your desk" to "torture your spouse and child to death".

On that note, my thought on the elves is that while they find it regrettable to have to engage in genocide of the humans, it is merely self-defense on a time scale which they can appreciate but the humans can't. In particular, since it is human reproduction which is the driving engine of the conflict, "unarmed" women and children are *not* innocent -- they are *weapons*, and any sane policy of reducing the threat posed by the humans must include killing (at least some of) them.

Excellently thought out.

But in Birthright, the gods are real, what they represent then becomes real, which makes ethics and morals far more concrete.

Do these things... and your god will favor you and support you (with spells, protection, levels). Do these things... and your god will abandon you.

The more you represent and reflect your chosen god, in your actions and spoken words, the more that god will favor you (spells and levels).

With Priests and Paladins being a society's Doctors, Lawyers, Police Force and elite forces of the militia/army/defenders... its hard to imagine them not being a powerful force in politics, and for them not to have an even bigger say in society than the RCC did in the early middle ages of the real world.

What seems to be lacking in all of this, is the relationship of the gods to their worshippers, a god’s power is supposedly derived by the number of faithful… the more believers, the more fervent their belief the more powerful those priests and prophets should be, the more that god’s presence should be felt throughout the region.

Medoere came into existence because of the growth of Ruornil worshippers which inhabited that area became the predominant percentage of faithful amongst the population. Their faith was so strong, their god interceded on their behalf, and annihilated an entire army of Diemed forces, many of which were the faithful of Haelyn, who seemingly abandoned his own faithful followers who partook in the effort to reclaim the rebellious provinces and put down the foreign religion.

Too often this force of faith is ignored or belittled because we often reflect our own reality into the Birthright world. However, I would have to think inquisitions and crusades would be far more of a factor in a world where Gods are involved in the health and wellbeing of humanity and society, and where POWER is gained by how many faithful a priest can gather to his god.

[rugor]

.

Remember that elves, especially Cerilian elves, are an arcane magic using race. It's very much their thing. Arcane magic is the magic of experimentation, it has rescearch libraries, it has formal schools, it has laboratories. If the elves were ment to be animistic nature-casters who's powers are more intuitive than practiced, they would have been given druidic-ranger magic as their principle focus.

In other words, just being educated doesn't mean you can't like nature. If anything, I could see that as one of the reasons the elves still have a grudge against humanity: only the most barbarous of their tribes, the Rjurik and the Vos, have a consistant respect for nature, and both groups have a disrespect and fear of the education that is so dear to the elven heart. Certainly, there are elves who honestly think that they can shove humanity off of the continent and make the whole place into a green paradise, but in the source material these guys are consistantly treated as a minority group. Who says elf philosophers can't have ideas beyond 'Laying in sunlit fields being fed grapes.' and 'Kill all humans!'? The whole concept of, "Law is a part of nature." seems very fitting of the character of Cerilian elves to me, especially since they don't have any spiritual source to derive law from.

Giving elves a philosophizing aspect gives some value to all that leisure time, it reinforces the idea of elves as scholars of the arcane, and it opens more possibilities for interesting twists in game time. Like, what if the major villain in your campaign isn't the ol'GS come a calling again, but a group of radical young elves who have noticed how animals "evolve" to succede in the world and, seeing as the elven race is in decline, resolve to do something to make their species more evolutionarily vyable?

I think the Cerilian elves are far closer to the Tolkien elves, than they are the D&D elves created in many oth their other "realities".

I think they are very well described, they are part of the very fabric of magic, connected to it in ways humans cannot be:

The world of Aebrynis teems with magical earthpower. This force, referred to by the elves as mebhaighl (meh-VALE), is the very essence of the living earth. Although many can sense it, few know how to access it.

Cerilian elves are creatures of faerie dust and starlight, gifted with immortality and powers of mind and body beyond those of humankind. They are a force for neither good nor evil

I think they are as unfathomable to most Cerilian humans as aliens landing in a space ship would be to us. I think the elven interaction with humans should be very limited, with the exception of Rhuobe Manslayer who is at war with the entire race, and situated himself right in the heart of their most populace and powerful empire... for that purpose.

Speaking of Manslayer, I think it is very reasonable to attribute the civil war between Alamie and Tuornen to him... reading the PS of Tuornen you can see hints where it is alluded to, that an immortal bent on destroying humanity could have easily devised such a long term plot, to seperate the empire into factions and have them fighting amoungst themselves. Sorry, I digress...

The problem Elves have is they are immortal, that likely gives them no sense of urgency, and a viewpoint that we as humans just can't fathom. Just how would you approach things if you had eternity to get to them?

They also have no gods, because in part, they are gods, in part they are part of the very world they inhabit, tied to it in a way we see humans not tied to it. Humans have souls which go to another plane of existance in the after-life... elves do not.

As far as the Elves "grudge against humanity"... I think a fine example of what happened to them can be seen in American history. What immigrating Europeans did to the Natives of the continent is very similar to what immigrating humans did to the elves of Cerelia.

[ConjurerDragon]

rugor schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4139
> ...
> Excellently thought out.
>
> But in Birthright, the gods are real, what they represent then becomes real, which makes ethics and morals far more concrete.
> Do these things... and your god will favor you and support you (with spells, protection, levels). Do these things... and your god will abandon you.
> The more you represent and reflect your chosen god, in your actions and spoken words, the more that god will favor you (spells and levels).
>
Spells and levels are not only gained by the faithful of a god but also
by the entirely godless in Birthright.
Levels are only a measure of your experience and not your faith. Spells
can be cast by sidhelien wizards or humans that shun the worship of
gods. The faithful of one god can even fight the faithful of the same
god using spells of that god - after all Birthright deities have
followers of a very broad alingment spectrum.

So no, having gods in Birthright does not make ethics and morals any
more concrete as in real life.

> With Priests and Paladins being a society`s Doctors, Lawyers, Police Force and elite forces of the militia/army/defenders... its hard to imagine them not being a powerful force in politics, and for them not to have an even bigger say in society than the RCC did in the early middle ages of the real world.
>
Levelled characters have always been very rare in the Birthright world
since 2E. Not every doctor/lawyer/sheriff etc. is a Cleric or has any
spellcasting levels or even has any PC levels, but most of the
population are simply commoners and experts.

What is the RCC? Real Catholic Church?
If so - again no. When in the middleages of our real world someone
really believed - and most did - that he would burn in hell for 400
years if he did this or that god would strike his house with ligthning
if he would act so then all that is needed is that belief to make the
person act so - not that it actually happens. Remember people gave money
to buy forgiveness from sins which was critiziced by Luther.

[rugor]

Spells and levels are not only gained by the faithful of a god but also by the entirely godless in Birthright.
Levels are only a measure of your experience and not your faith.
Spells can be cast by sidhelien wizards or humans that shun the worship of
gods. The faithful of one god can even fight the faithful of the same
god using spells of that god - after all Birthright deities have
followers of a very broad alingment spectrum.

So no, having gods in Birthright does not make ethics and morals any more concrete as in real life.

Elves can wield magic... blooded can wield powerful magic... the rest of humanity and humanoids cannot, or so the intent of Birthright was meant... no god-blood in your viens (elves aside), you are relegated to being a rather weak, 2nd class citizen of Cerilia where magic is concerned.

But Magic is not Faith, it requires ingredients be blended together, and other restrictions (elven magic aside) that praying to a god does not.

There are indeed varying degrees of faiths, just as there are varying degrees of christians. As in the real world, every faith expects you to follow certian rules, and demands certian participation and donations from its followers.

As in the real world, you can have a King Henry declare himself the supreme representative of god, the highest representative of faith in the realm.

As in the real world, you can have one sect supressing another, as Catholics and Protestants have often done... just as you can have differing faiths crusade/jihad against one another.

However UNLIKE the real world. Preists of Cerilia cast spells that heal and cure, or strike down enemies, or create water or light, etc.

A Priest would gain levels by doing his gods work, by reflecting his god with action and words... now techincally, a Priest can gain levels by running around killing humanoids or undead... but again, following the guidance laid out in Birthright, a game meant to be much more than hack and slash, a Priest would gain levels by increasing his flock, by removing competitive faiths in the region that is his own, by aiding his followers and keeping them healthy and happy, etc.

So in essence, levels represent the closeness of a Priest to his god, and how many followers he has, the more productive he or she is to their faith, the higher in power they should go... Priests should be tied to their flock, and their temple, the way regents are tied to their lands, or wizards are tied to their sources.

Not every doctor/lawyer/sheriff etc. is a Cleric or has any
spellcasting levels or even has any PC levels, but most of the

I don't imagine there would be ANY successful Lawyers or Docters NOT members of a Haelyn Temple in Anuire. Some oddball specialists in the employ of a regent perhaps, thats about it.

Same for Avani dominated cultures. Those Priests would dominate those nitches in their society. And so on...

Really now, if you had a deadly disease or injury... who are you going to run to, a Priest who can call on his god to heal you instantly, or someone who will bleed you and leave you suffering?

[kgauck]

However UNLIKE the real world. Preists of Cerilia cast spells that heal and cure, or strike down enemies, or create water or light, etc.

This is actually similar to the real world, indeed not just the medieval world, but for many people the contemporary world. People today and even more in the medieval world do believe that religious people (ordained and otherwise) do have the power to cure people, prophesize, absolve sin, cast out demons, and do anything else that D&D priests can do.

I don't imagine there would be ANY successful Lawyers or Docters NOT members of a Haelyn Temple in Anuire.

What does it mean to be a member of the temple of Haelyn? Is it like joining the lawyers guild? If it is, then of course everyone belongs, but its no different than the fact that today all lawyers belong to a guild (as do doctors).

A temple holding doesn't just include priests, but followers and temporal members.

Same for Avani dominated cultures. Those Priests would dominate those nitches in their society. And so on...

By priests, do you mean members of a spellcasting class? I don't think they dominate anything but the spellcasting. They don't have enough skill points to tie their own shoes. Classes like expert, noble, or OGL classes will actualy dominate most social niches. Spellcasters are useless for anything but adventuring. An expert with the heal skill can heal people until sleep overtakes him. The spellcaster gets a handful of heal attempts per day.

Really now, if you had a deadly disease or injury... who are you going to run to, a Priest who can call on his god to heal you instantly, or someone who will bleed you and leave you suffering?

What makes you think there is a difference?

[rugor]

This is actually similar to the real world, indeed not just the medieval world, but for many people the contemporary world. People today and even more in the medieval world do believe that religious people (ordained and otherwise) do have the power to cure people, prophesize, absolve sin, cast out demons, and do anything else that D&D priests can do.

That reply smacks of an argument for arguments sake.

There are NO priests healing compound fractures or blindness in this world.

There is nothing to compare to the instant ability to repair a body, or create matter instantly, in the real world, as exists in Birthright.

[kgauck]

It certainly makes sense that given a pantheon of gods, that we could describe various ethical positions as Avanian, Serimite, Nesiriean, and Azric. Or we could speak of Haelynite, Belinikian, Krishonic, and Laeremite. Either way (or both) we would know what the positions meant. One advantage is that "good" would be described as closest to the preferred position of the observer.

Game mechanics could drop alignment and substitute these alternate terms, and alternate meanings.

I think it would enrich the world a little at the expense of steepening the learning curve just a touch.

Plus, it allows an ethical position to exist directly in the game world, rather than being an abstraction. There would not be Lawful Good people, but rather Haelynite or Avanian-Nesirieans. So that people who occupied that place on the ethical chart would either be followers of Haelyn or would have blended some teachings of Avani and Nesirie. Other kinds of LG, certainly possible in D&D, should be vanishingly rare in BR.

[kgauck]

There are NO priests healing compund fractures or blindness in this world.

Two words: Faith Healer

[rugor]

This is precisely the question that always seems to lead to the present sort of discussion of ethical epistemology. Some of us say "whether the action is considered good depends on who is doing the considering." Others object that their own particular preferred method of consideration, whether derived from their reading of Gygax or some other prophet, is superior to all others and thus is the only consideration which matters.

Morality is of course relative, many people today think that individualism and choosing ones destiny is good - many other cultures would decry such morality as chaos or selfishness. In the Birthright setting, it is not hard to imagine that realms such as Talinie and Diemed see the State (Empire, Duchy, Church) as the highest good on earth, the ideology summed up would something along the lines of:

~While earning your place in Haelyn’s afterlife, you must do your best to strengthen and support the state. Individuality is all but irrelevant in the context of the state's wellbeing, the worth and dignity of an individual is directly related to how well they serve the state, and what contributions they offer.~

Similarly tolerance for other religions is seen as good to some cultures and abhorrent to others. Almost all cultures see themselves as good by some ideals, as would be explained in any Psychology textbook, we are a product of our environment/culture and that culture/society creates in us our beliefs of what is right or wrong.

In one culture, cannibalism of ones enemies is a fact of life, in another those of a different race or religion are beneath contempt. What makes such beliefs or acts evil, is the point of reference from which we view it, and the culture and society which produced us.