Praetoria is NOT "goatee" Paragon
By
Anti_Proton,
Posted on: 2009-10-26 15:41 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
(shrug) So you say; I happen to think that over-intellectualism is worse, and I've seen a helluva lot of it in this thread.
|
Originally Posted by KaliMagdalene
Also, anti-intellectualism is unflattering on anyone, without exception.
|
Quote:
But in the end, they're still the baddies - just like Tyrant - and whatever the final mission is when we face him, I'm pretty sure we're not going to be able to talk sense into him |
Originally Posted by KaliMagdalene
Saying "They're the bad guys, they're irredeemably evil, and that's that" is just about the least interesting possible way to present characters, and there's a reason that the so many of the most popular villains have more substance to them than that.
|
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
Escapism for who, though? Do you enjoy it as much if you find that you or people like you excluded from the side of good? What if the idealism and moral absolutism justifies historical or modern excesses that you find ethically unsound?
|
Originally Posted by Autonomous Prime
Indeed. A comic book universe should be a world to escape TO, not FROM.
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
Yeah, the "You have to let this many people die or kill an order of magnitude fewer people to prevent those deaths" seems like a false dilemma. It's hard to visualize a situation quite so binary.
|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
Just to clarify, I'm with Captain Photon on that one. I just tend to RP horrible, terrible people. Whether there's a "right answer" to this, villainy would tend to side with the "G'bye hundreds of thousands" mentality.
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
Who decides that the person deserved it? Is there an end to this particular rabbit hole?
|
Originally Posted by Morac_Ex_Machina
Question: can killing for fun be considered moral if the person really deserved it?
(Disclaimer: This is not a question stemming from my own beliefs, it is designed to get people talking). |
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
This is actually a bit superficial, because first you have to decide that who someone is is a lifestyle and then assign a moral value to a state of being while saying that it is a state of acting. So it's not as simple as being against an "immoral lifestyle" but declaring people immoral just because of who they are.
|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
A more recent example would be the way American society treats the LGBT community. One side feels that denying people rights is evil. The other side feels that advocating or forgiving an immoral lifestyle is evil. Both would think they're right.*
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
I want to point out that while you make an excellent point about morality at the time, that explanation of morality doesn't account for how the enslaved human beings felt about being slaves - rather, it sort of establishes them as objects to be acted upon rather than subjects with their own lives, thoughts, and beliefs.
|
Originally Posted by Catwhoorg
Its not so very long ago in Human History, that a 'good man' was someone who treated his slaves well.
1772 in England, 1777 in Vermont (first part of what became the US) was the recognition that slavery was illegal. The idea that 'owning' another person was wrong, and dare I say evil, was completely alien to many people before the abolitionist movements. Of course it took a lot longer (a century or more) before the owning of slaves was abolished and the cessation of treating women as 'property' (of their fathers, or then their husbands) occurred in the West. Were these people Evil ? Or just a product of the morals and over-riding opinions of their times. |
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
And the best way to get them to invade is to ______?
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
Actually, I think Malta would be totally terrified of a Praetorian invasion - it'd be like their worst nightmare - a world ruled by meta-humans who've grouped together, and are totally ruthless.
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
So standard military adventurism? Or perhaps manifest destiny?
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
Arachnos is oppressing the people of the Rogue Isles - so we're justified in looking for a little bit of regime change
 |
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
Well, I don't think so either, but your argument sort of parallels the justifications for colonialism. Heck, so does arguing for freedom or justice - in a previous post you argued that "Freedom and justice" justifies a military invasion of a sovereign nation.
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
I don't think colonialism and imperialism counts as promoting freedom or justice
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I'm pretty sure that comes close to the record for most consecutive posts.
There is a multi-quote feature. Please use it. (Button in the bottom right of the post, next to the quick-reply and regular quote buttons).
@Morac | Twitter
Trust the computer. The computer knows all.
Quote:
To an anti-intellectual, any degree of intellectual discourse is probably over-intellectualization. That's what anti- means.|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
(shrug) So you say; I happen to think that over-intellectualism is worse, and I've seen a helluva lot of it in this thread.
|
And that's what you're doing.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
I use it sometimes, but not always. The consecutive posts aren't hurting you, nor do they violate forum guidelines, TOS, rules, etc.|
Originally Posted by Morac_Ex_Machina
I'm pretty sure that comes close to the record for most consecutive posts.
There is a multi-quote feature. Please use it. (Button in the bottom right of the post, next to the quick-reply and regular quote buttons). |
My posts have actual content, please address them or don't respond.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
JMS said at the time that they do not. So this one was Jossed before Joss. | I'm not sure the Shadows really had civilians. |
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
I'm hoping for some decision trees where you won't know until after you choose which side you just pushed yourself towards.
15 minutes after a closed beta containing such a feature was opened, the trees would be posted to a Wiki in their entirety.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Quote:
Of course, the fact that we have had dimension travel X number of years, does not in any way say that other dimensions haven't been doing it much longer, or in the same numbers, etc.|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
. . . Has Portal Corp been open that long? If it has, then yes us going in to other dimensions without any form of non-interference certainly ...
|
.
<QR>
Anyone who thinks CoH/V exists in moral absolutes as it currently stands needs to go back and look at the game. It is packed full of moral ambiguity.
Let's take one example: the Ouroboros mission where you end up creating the Council out of the Fifth Column. It is very much the case of picking the lesser of two evils.
Or perhaps fighting the Carnival of Shadows - a group dominated by innocents who are mind controlled, yet not one iota of restraint is used on them. We set them on fire / blow them up / freeze them / irradiate them / beat them with foot or fist with exactly the same relish as if they were Nemesis Automatons. As heroes, shouldn't we be dealing with these innocent victims in a different way? (Game mechanics aside of course - same for Loyalists being 'villains' and Resistance being 'heroes' since they really don't have to be.)
In terms of Statesman himself, he is very much a morally conflicted character. He is partly responsible for creating the threat of Lord Recluse and has sent friends and family into situations they might not come back from (and haven't). He's lived "for the greater good" in many of his sacrifices. He has an awful lot of blood on his hands as the premier hero leader and I've viewed his 'jerkness' as his psychological reaction to that.
As for the Praetorians: they are self-interested superpowered beings. Tyrant has set up a society where the best rise to the top (by whatever means necessary). He has also arguably made his world a better place by providing the basics for free and crushing those who would abuse the freedom they are given.
I'll be interested to see where GoRo takes CoH/V lore.
Quote:
Funny, one of my big pet peeves is the "everything gets resolved, no matter how hard it is to get there." Occasionally, I just want to see people try their best and fail anyway.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
While the third option solution is clever (VERY clever
) I don't think that's the point. The point is to test whether a person can excuse themselves doing a terrible act by a sufficiently convincing excuse. This one, in particular, is a tough choice, but it's an extension of a moral question we actually see every day - we know something bad is going to happen, so it might as well be us that do it, such that we may profit from it. I mean, it'll happen anyway, right? What's the harm in cashing in on the inevitable?The response to this, and it's one I've actually given in real life, is "I don't care if it's going to happen. I refuse to be the one to do it." This is, of course, subjective and that's just my opinion on the matter, but if kill an innocent or die AND get the innocent killed anyway are the only options, I'd still pick the latter for a good guy. I'm not sure what I'd do in real life (haven't had enough of a close call to know how I'd react), but I subscribe to a more idealistic, romantic vision of fiction, where it comes down to not just saving the world, but ensuring you end up with a world worth saving in the end. Which actually brings about my own view on moral relativism. I don't mind questionable morality, grey characters and even a world half empty as a PLOT POINT, as long as everything gets resolved by the end. As long as the narrative doesn't become malicious (Japanese anime tends to go there half the time), I can accept a LOT of crap thrown my way by a story provided it ends with a resolution. But when a story ends with it essentially telling me that there IS no resolution and that we really live in a crapsack world, my response is to flip my TV a birdie and go watch something else. |
"Men strunt �r strunt och snus �r snus
om ock i gyllne dosor.
Och rosor i ett sprucket krus
�r st�ndigt alltid rosor."
Quote:
Crap! I knew I was forgetting something! Thank, Morac! |
Originally Posted by Morac_Ex_Machina
I'm pretty sure that comes close to the record for most consecutive posts.
There is a multi-quote feature. Please use it. (Button in the bottom right of the post, next to the quick-reply and regular quote buttons). |
P.S. I'm completely serious.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Downer endings are not fun, that's the sum total of my argument. If the heroes are going to struggle against incredible odds and fail, then I just wasted an hour and a half watching a pointless, meaningless movie. It's like a plot point introduced, developed throughout an entire story, and then it comes to absolutely nothing. My usual reaction is "All of the work for this?"|
Originally Posted by Arilou
Funny, one of my big pet peeves is the "everything gets resolved, no matter how hard it is to get there." Occasionally, I just want to see people try their best and fail anyway.
|
It's realistic, it may even be dramatic, but it's not something I want to see. Heroes struggling against impossible odds lose by default. That isn't interesting. Exceptions are interesting, and them winning is the exception. That most movies are built around the unlikely exceptions in fiction doesn't change that fact.
Note, this is my opinion and preference. Nothing more.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Nah, Downer endings can be very fun. Especially when they are unexpected. Where's the tension in watching something you know is going to turn out right?|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Downer endings are not fun, that's the sum total of my argument. If the heroes are going to struggle against incredible odds and fail, then I just wasted an hour and a half watching a pointless, meaningless movie. It's like a plot point introduced, developed throughout an entire story, and then it comes to absolutely nothing. My usual reaction is "All of the work for this?"
It's realistic, it may even be dramatic, but it's not something I want to see. Heroes struggling against impossible odds lose by default. That isn't interesting. Exceptions are interesting, and them winning is the exception. That most movies are built around the unlikely exceptions in fiction doesn't change that fact. Note, this is my opinion and preference. Nothing more. |
In order for happy endings to have any meaning there has to be downer endings too.
"Men strunt �r strunt och snus �r snus
om ock i gyllne dosor.
Och rosor i ett sprucket krus
�r st�ndigt alltid rosor."
Quote:
That is actually the whole other side of that.|
Originally Posted by KaliMagdalene
I want to point out that while you make an excellent point about morality at the time, that explanation of morality doesn't account for how the enslaved human beings felt about being slaves - rather, it sort of establishes them as objects to be acted upon rather than subjects with their own lives, thoughts, and beliefs.
|
Its a sad state of the world that despite a couple of hundred years of it being illegal, trafficking in humans is very much alive and well through out the world.
Now THAT the Benevolent Emperor Cole would simply not allow.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Quote:
I disagree. If we consider fiction as a cross-section of the many, many events life has to offer, then I simply choose to pick my fiction from the selection of events that end in upper endings. Even if you expect the good guys to always win and the bad guys to always lose, a well-written story can still have you on the edge of your seat all the way through. If you want a good example, try Oban: Star Racers. It has a good balance between downer and upper without being ultimately depressing. It might give you a new understanding of Gaussian's arc and why all these characters have the antics they do.|
Originally Posted by Arilou
Nah, Downer endings can be very fun. Especially when they are unexpected. Where's the tension in watching something you know is going to turn out right?
In order for happy endings to have any meaning there has to be downer endings too. |
In order for happy endings to have meaning, downer endings are required. They just don't have to happen on camera in the story a the end.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
In Ancient Rome there was the arena: slaves killing each other and fighting beasts to dead. And it was OK then.
|
Originally Posted by Marcian Tobay
I was actually thinking about my statement a bit while I was away from the desk, and I think I need to add a caveat.
The only core human prerogative is to forward the survival of the species. Many have a preference for forwarding their own family line. As killing for fun is counter-productive to the species, perhaps it can be categorized as not good. |
Disdaining it tends to justify a lot of excesses in the name of personal definitions of good, too.
Also, I've found a lot more concern for the well-being of human beings in general and analysis of how humanity fails at this in postmodern writing than I've ever heard from "good is good and evil is evil" people.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)