Topic: What is "evil" in Rolemaster?

[markc]

IMHO, Evil can also be defined as the opposite of the God who you worship.
MDC

[intothatdarkness]

These are nice speeches, but I would rather see an approach in posting thatkeeps in mind how would I i structure a rule set in RM dealing with and defining evil?

I hope the discussion turns towards producing some results; i.e. how should the rule set in RM define evil and what should the game mechanics look like?

I touched on that to some degree. I took the "Evil" in this discussion in the context of "where do Evil spellcasters get their PPs from" and then began defining my evil gods and power sources based on that jump-off point. Evil with the big E in my world is linked to spell use. Evil in terms of moral conduct is something else again, and is defined by the various realms and cultures in my world. The little 'e' version is quite often used by the big 'E' version.

You don't need RM rules and mechanics to define these, but you do need a consistent ethos in your world and the deities to provide some theological backbone for that ethos. In RM terms, unless you see a major rework to include D&D-style alignment systems, that's most likely (IMO) where it will stay.

[Marc R]

I think actually there's a possible angle here that might help.

e-vil is a philosophical, subjective labeling of this or that thing as contrary to cultural convention. You can point at something and say "I think that's evil" but you can't get your evil meter out and measure it, nor collect a bucket full of it. It's a value judgement and completely non tangible.

E-vil, is a tangible, actually present force with actual substance. You can detect it, measure if it's weak or strong. A person, object or place can be imbedded with it.

That being the line between one and the other. . .and the GM can always choose to decide that purely human acts and judgements have solid tangible form. . .that say a Slave ship, death camp or prison would detect as evil, having been imprinted with the suffering that happened there. . .but that's not the basic rules based concept of E-vil. . . .demon spit carries the taint of hell in it, it's going to radiate as evil, it's at least "of darkness" due to it's origin from an E-vil being. . .Hitler's spit likely wouldn't do so. . .he's not a demon, regardless of our moral judgement of his actions he's not made of hell stuff, so his spit isn't the tangible moral equivalent of nuclear waste. . .the abject, objective E-vil contained within the system is just that. . .concrete actual tangible evil.

Does that help at all?

[yammahoper]

E-vil, is a tangible, actually present force with actual substance. You can detect it, measure if it's weak or strong. A person, object or place can be imbedded with it.

I like that.  It follows then that Evil requires a defined source, from "its always been here" to "dark gods", whatever.  Detect spells work on any object or power from or tainted by this source.

Clear guidelines for all new, and even us old, GM's.

Social evil is defined by law and local morales.  I think it might be wise to describe the possibility of actions/behaviors so henious, so outside the cultural norm, that it taps into/draws Evil, imbedding the event, local or principal involved.

?

[Marc R]

Exactly, and the rules even give a "once removed" factor of "Of Darkness" meaning the thing itself isn't evil, but has been touched by or has it's source in evil.

So for instance if Orcs are made via evil magic from Elves, then even a morally good orc opposed to evil will still carry that "Of darkness" taint. They are not evil, but evil made their ancestors, so they still carry the taint. A Person who was bloodbound by a vampire for years, then eventually broke free and became a vampire hunter, may always carry that "of darkness" taint from their time as an undead servant.

In a dimension where E-vil exists, high levels of e-vil may involve it. . .like if one were to believe the rolling stones, the devil "drove a tank, held a general's rank", in Hitler's e-vil. . . .the forces of E-vil are out an about promoting E-vil, and likely promoting and encouraging e-vil at the same time.

[markc]

Marc R;
 Yes that does help.




 Also all this talk of Evil and concentrated Evil has me thinking of the movie Time Bandits. I think the line is "Mom, Dad! Dont touch that it is Pure Concentrated Evil!" But I could be wrong about the quote.
MDC   

[yammahoper]

Great ideas that will offer clarity to one sticky subject.  The Evil list in SL have always seemed a reckless, if well intended and very cool, addition to the books.  Those list require much more information, as does the RM system.  The flavor described would be fun, and so much more can be extrapolated (Remember the chaos tables in RMCIII?  Or the high stat abilities from the same companion?  Stuff like that, built on a solid theme/thesis...which is how DnD made so much money, i.e. LOTS of source books...includingone for good).

One positive affect of taking the time to define terms for Evil and Good even without setting, but as part of the core rule set, is the strong flavor and structure those rules would provide.  That has to be a positive.  Many GM's, well, they don't have the time to invent all the flavor that inspires.  How appropriate the game company does.

[arakish]

e-vil is a philosophical, subjective labeling of this or that thing as contrary to cultural convention. You can point at something and say "I think that's evil" but you can't get your evil meter out and measure it, nor collect a bucket full of it. It's a value judgement and completely non tangible.

E-vil, is a tangible, actually present force with actual substance. You can detect it, measure if it's weak or strong. A person, object or place can be imbedded with it.

I was actually writing up something very similar to this.  Psychic overwash?

That is how I have defined good/evil.  The above definitions can also be applied to good/Good.

Also all this talk of Evil and concentrated Evil has me thinking of the movie Time Bandits. I think the line is "Mom, Dad! Dont touch that it is Pure Concentrated Evil!" But I could be wrong about the quote.
MDC   

You are correct.  You may even have quoted it verbatim.  Will have to watch my DVD copy...

rmfr

[intothatdarkness]

One positive affect of taking the time to define terms for Evil and Good even without setting, but as part of the core rule set, is the strong flavor and structure those rules would provide.  That has to be a positive.  Many GM's, well, they don't have the time to invent all the flavor that inspires.  How appropriate the game company does.

I honestly don't like the idea of Evil being defined by rules as opposed to setting. Most game concepts of Evil (as in the source of PPs) need to have associated gods or goddesses. I think the original Evil spell lists did have a rider on them...something to effect of the lists being optional and that GMs might assess consequences for their use.

To address the flowover of Evil into evil, my world uses a system of taints to accomplish this. Evil spell users are automatically tainted, while those associated with Evil (necromancers and sorcerers, for example) become subject to taint over time. There's a series of checks involved, with access to higher lists contingent on the casters accepting taint. Eventually (if they continue in that profession and using spells) they become tainted and thus Evil. For non-casters, a taint check may be required if they accept certain items from "patrons" (who are themselves tainted), with the eventual slide being the same unless they stop accepting items or abilities.

Once a character is purely tainted, there's no going back. The non-caster types eventually become chaotic warriors or chaos commanders, while casters may aspire to Chaotic Lords (if you call that an aspiration) or possibly liches of one sort or another.

[Marc R]

The specific of "What is the E-vil / G-ood" is defined in the setting, but the rules end I guess comes down to:

If it's a tangible thing, if you can detect it, if you can measure it, if you can in some literal sense "Get a bucket of evil/good" and carry it around with you, people objects and places can be "Evil/Good" in the same sense that they can be light/dark or hot/cold. . .then it's Evil/Good as defined in the books, objective forces in the universe with tangible form, substance or flavor.

What that tangible form, substance and/or flavor are specifically is where game world specifics come into play, but the fact that they are tangible is where the rule mechanism comes into play.

The non objective, non tangible philosophical concepts are little e, little g, evil and good.

[Witchking20k]

Does that mean Morgoth was ME-vil?

[markc]

Does that mean Morgoth was ME-vil?

MDC

[dutch206]

E-vil in Shadow World seems to be defined as the Unlife.  (That is, anything which hates and opposes life energy and creation).

[markc]

Does that mean that Sarumon the White; was Evil or evil?
MDC

[Marc R]

He fell to the seduction of Sauron, who was the major E-vil broker of his game-world instance, so I'd go with E-vil.  . .the descriptions of his actions would fall into my personal definition of e-vil also.

[rdanhenry]

Saruman allied with Sauron who was Morgoth's stand-in. Even a treacherous alliance with the Devil's right hand is pretty Evil. Plus he was studying Sauronic magic and probably had tapped into the Morgoth element for more power -- definite Evil there.

[intothatdarkness]

He fell to the seduction of Sauron, who was the major E-vil broker of his game-world instance, so I'd go with E-vil.  . .the descriptions of his actions would fall into my personal definition of e-vil also.

I would agree. If you break down his powers, he'd draw his PPs and main lists from Sauron as well (at least by the time we encounter him in the story). In my world terms he might have started out as a Sorcerer or Warlock perhaps and succumbed to Taint, making him E-vil in terms of power source. Clearly his conduct is e-vil as well, but within my world the little e- tends to follow the big E- quite closely.

[Marc R]

They almost always go hand in hand, the few instances I can think of where they don't involve either obsession approaching madness, subtle and sneaky corruption, or turned victims.

Like the good man who delves dark arts to try and resurrect his beloved wife, totally going off the rails into dark magics that shouldn't be trifled with until they eventually succumb.

or

The Magician who exposes his apprentice to evil, while hiding the fact it's evil from him. "Yes, now sacrifice the frog and repeat after me.". The apprentice is led down the big E path without knowing what they're getting into, based on misplaced trust their master is teaching them, not corrupting them with taint.

or

The Vampire food source who through constant exposure goes Stockholm syndrome and "loves" their master, happily drinking in their tainted blood as a reward. I dunno that that's really little e evil, since they've been conditioned and forced into it to the point where free will is gone, they're just a victim, though they've been corrupted with taint, so they are big E Evil.

Though, I guess, eventually the obsessive husband, the corrupted apprentice and the bloodbound thrall probably cross over into evil acts due to the influence of their Evil taint, so that stage of being Evil but not evil is transient. (and strangely seems to be the case just as the PCs arrive on the scene to wrestle the moral ambiguities for the amusement of the GM, lol).

[RandalThor]

(and strangely seems to be the case just as the PCs arrive on the scene to wrestle the moral ambiguities for the amusement of the GM, lol).

Timing is, well, if not everything, then certainly accounts for a big chunk of......whatever.

I prefer that, instead of evil (that somewhat nebulous concept that philosophers and psychologists are continually debating - along with screenwriters) the spells deal with what is considered the Big Bad of the setting. Like Morgoth, The Dark One, Satan, etc... And then only if the target is somehow supernatural, like a ghost, werewolf, or high-level spellcaster, instead of just the guy in the bar that is aligned with the Big Bad.

There should be something more than just bad thoughts and deeds for the spell to pick up on, otherwise all nations would be strictly and very effectively aligned, ala:

"Yeah, I know you haven't done anything YET, but the city gate keystone is a Detect Respect For Law And Order gauge and you're in the bottom 10%. By which I mean, show me your hands. SHOW ME YOUR HANDS!" (My sig from RPG.NET)

[markc]

 So maybe Detect Evil should detect how far away from your gods "good" the target is?


MDC