At which exactly point of time and for which exactly type of bird? Hint: if you drown a crow PETA will, probably, hang you; if you leave a penguin without sea fish he will, probably, die from hunger. The same is true for other animals and plants.
Don't, it's a downward spiral.
Very PETA friendly. Filthy sentient people are transformed into undead and do not spoil the ecology anymore, and endangered species thrive and prosper.
He can be multiple things. News at 11That is usually called Lawful Evil. You do Evil acts thinking it is for the greater good.Liches can be any alignment. Per the 2e ruleset, at least.Decided to peak reddit questions (I know my mistake)
Why people always ask this garbage question? Do they know that the Lich ritual involves the sacrifice of a innocent life?
Liches are basically turbo-autists who are beyond good and evil. They just care about theirto-scale miniature model train setsmagical research. However, they don't care about human life, so they're usually seen as evil based on their actions.
Though, yes, it requires a lot of humanoid blood to be shed. Including a virgin and some infants. Maybe they could have used orcs?
My main issue with this argument, which is to say Takamori's, not yours, is that "you do mean things" is not the definition of "evil" in these games usually. Sure they may say, "Evil is being selfish", but that's in the eye of the beholder despite the core conceit of the alignment system being black & white morality.
Is a lich who ascends by sacrificing only evil aligned people still evil? Golarion's lore is so retarded the proper answer would be, "Yes" but only because they replaced Sigil with the Boneyard and the Ao with Pharasma who hates Undead. But in terms of just pure alignment faggotry, I think it's heavily up for debate. And I know Owlcat tends to lean in the direction of providing different paths even if it isn't supported by the idiots who wrote the Pathfinder setting.
Also a character like Dexter only killed Evil people. He was still not considered a good guy.
Nah, a Lawful Evil character is like a corrupt official or lawyer. He abuses systems for his own selfish gains or malice.
I won't even call it evil. It's just natural. (Almost) everyone will become compost one day; they just follow the seasons and help the nature where the help is needed the most. True Neutral indeed.
Loving your children, teaching them, and raising a family is in the nature of man and the truth of it is written on our hearts. By 'natural' I mean "the true ends of things" (e.g. man does not exist only to satiate his hunger, he was given intellect for a purpose and his natural end cannot be spoken of without speaking of the will and intellect), and by the 'nature of man', I mean "that by which a man is called a man". A child left alone in the woods with no upbringing by other humans will be deeply scarred; a human child was not intended to develop without parents. To speak of a primitive "state of nature" of this sort is to speak of something entirely unnatural in the relevant sense.
The nature of a bird is that which all birds share in common, such that they can be called birds at all. You are right that an animal without food will die. Further, the purpose of an animal is to live and reproduce, and so being properly nourished is good for animals. More to the point, man is a rational animal, and what is good for man is what leads him to flourish in body and intellect.
Now what do you mean by that?
That is completely wrong. Alignment is not assigned to you by other humans but by Gods and world itself. Good and Evil are basic forces, never changing and not something to discuss. You are not evil because you are selfish or want best for others, you are evil when you do evil acts.That is usually called Lawful Evil. You do Evil acts thinking it is for the greater good.Liches can be any alignment. Per the 2e ruleset, at least.Decided to peak reddit questions (I know my mistake)
Why people always ask this garbage question? Do they know that the Lich ritual involves the sacrifice of a innocent life?
Liches are basically turbo-autists who are beyond good and evil. They just care about theirto-scale miniature model train setsmagical research. However, they don't care about human life, so they're usually seen as evil based on their actions.
Though, yes, it requires a lot of humanoid blood to be shed. Including a virgin and some infants. Maybe they could have used orcs?
My main issue with this argument, which is to say Takamori's, not yours, is that "you do mean things" is not the definition of "evil" in these games usually. Sure they may say, "Evil is being selfish", but that's in the eye of the beholder despite the core conceit of the alignment system being black & white morality.
Is a lich who ascends by sacrificing only evil aligned people still evil? Golarion's lore is so retarded the proper answer would be, "Yes" but only because they replaced Sigil with the Boneyard and the Ao with Pharasma who hates Undead. But in terms of just pure alignment faggotry, I think it's heavily up for debate. And I know Owlcat tends to lean in the direction of providing different paths even if it isn't supported by the idiots who wrote the Pathfinder setting.
Also a character like Dexter only killed Evil people. He was still not considered a good guy.
Lawful Evil is supposed to mean using the Law to accomplish acts that only benefit yourself (i.e, evil). In original alignment system, killing babies of a race that is evil is not an evil act. Everyone has their own idea of what this means, but largely this rule still applies to a lot of the modern iterations of D&D, except when the moral system of some author intrudes.
In Golarion, the rule seems to be undead are evil across the board... because. No real justification except Pharasma says so. I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't played yet, but the NPC Lich whoprovides some help on your path to becoming a Lich in WOTR is basically a perfect example of the original question. He's a guy who became a Lich for all the right reasons, to win a battle for the "greater good", and it is only after being a Lich for a long time that he "goes bad". But you could as well argue he is still sticking to the greater good in terms of prioritizing destroying the Worldwound over the welfare of living beings, and this SAME rubric applies to the actions of the Gods and even "good" rulers in the story, who do all sorts of horrible things to some living people with the justification that less will suffer once the Worldwound is dealt with, rather than standing on principle. But the gods and the mortals doing heinous things are good just because, while undead are undead because original sin or something.
To a certain degree I think Owlcat is playing off the inconsistencies in the alignment system as presented in Golarion by providing you different choices in most Mythic paths, but what "good" or "evil" means in terms of Wrath's storyline gets really fucking confusing even from the outset. Sometimes doing mean things to demons is evil. Other times its good. Its all very schizophrenic. This especially goes for the Hellknight stuff which is often classified as Lawful Evil even when it doesn't make sense (for example, the Hellknights are not prioritizing their own benefit, quite the opposite).
This is why I gave my example of LE character that does evil acts but for what he considers a greater good.
I use LE as example for this because Evil characters that do evil acts for "greater good" are usually doing it for Order and Law thinking that those are more important than just doing Good. Also Fallen Paladins usually stay Lawful but can turn Neutral or even Evil.
BTW you can still kill evil people and not become evil but you have to have a good reason for it. You don't just go down the street, cast Detect Evil and murder anyone that shows up on it.
OK, let's see...
So what does this nature dictate?
"The purpose of the animal"? What? There is no purpose in animals - unless they were bred for a particular goal that was put by the only animals who can have such goals which are humans.
In no world, fictional or otherwise, can "existence" be logically coherent without a singular, all powerful, sustaining cause. Any "almighty" that can be dethroned is no more than a powerful outsider; the foundation of reality must be a necessary entity whose essence is synonymous with its existence.
I am an Aristotelian, so I think that there is no existence without teleology (i.e. there is no "purposeless" existence).
Yeah... no... please continue to keep romances tastefully brief.Are there any polyamorous romance options?
- permalink
- OwlcatThainen 9 points 2 hours ago
Unfortunately, not this time
I really wanted to do this, but this game imposed a whole new level of complications on the Narrative team in the form of the Mythic paths. Something had to be simplified to a smaller choice of options, and it was the romance system that was cut down to size. It broke my heart, but killing your darlings is a part of the job.
Ah, I see. We killed many of the likes of you in 1917-1937, but they rear their ugly heads again.
Does alignement affect your Mythic Path options? E.g. can a good character become a Lich? And is it more difficult to become a Lich starting from a good character or does your alignement change rapidly/story wise when choosing the Lich path?
- OwlcatThainen 9 points 3 hours ago
It's complicated. Each alignment is tied to a specific bunch of alignments, and the actions you take on that path tend to fall into these alignments. You can be a good Lich, but you'll have to skip some of the more evil actions this path includes. You'll be able to end the story as a good-aligned Lich, but you won't be very good at being the Lich
- Plato82 3 points 3 hours ago
Thanks for the answer. Does this mean you can be any alignment when choosing a mythic path, but you wil be given less powers when choosing an alignment further away from the intended alginement that fits the mystic path?
- OwlcatThainen 3 points 2 hours ago
Yes. No spoilers, but it generally goes this way: as you choose a mythic path, you start a long questline that requires you to make decisions. If you act against the mythic path's expected alignment, you keep your roleplaying integrity, but miss some of the opportunities the mythic path gives you. You can end up being a good lich, or a lawful trickster, keep most of your powers, and reach the ending, but this way you won't explore all the opportunities that mythic path presents.
But I want polyamorous romances...
