Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good? Can

>>50266197
>Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good?
Punchclock villain, the trope.
>Can evil characters retain strong morals while remaining evil?
Lawful Evil

>>50266232
I disagree with the punchclock villain example, if they were good they wouldn't be commit the evil acts while "on the clock"

at best punch clock villains would be neutral

File: 1456878300690.jpg (37KB, 509x724px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 509x724px

>>50266232
>Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good?
it would be the "I just followed orders kind of "good"" or the i am a fully retard kind

>>50266280
I realized that as I hit send.
>>50266310
Not quite that, but the Volk was good people living under an evil regime. They were serving the Reich in their own way, but you can't say that the entire Deutsche Volk was evil.

File: 1457364621803.jpg (29KB, 300x360px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 300x360px

>>50266197
>Can evil characters retain strong morals while remaining evil?
I would ague that most very evil characters have a strong set of beliefes and/or ideals

>>50266348
yes therefor i used a pic of a ss officer (a political elite korps) and not an average german

>>50266197
Yes and yes.

Good and evil are subjectively defined, so it depends on the perspective of the one making the moral claim.

>>50266197
>Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good?
the character should at least activly try to escape or breake the influence of master when he kows he is evil

>>50266372
Most of the SS were LN.
Hitler was CN. The NSDAP ranged from LN to CE. Common folk is all across the grid.

>>50266472
But I'm probably going the moral relativism route. And D&D alignments don't work well with relativism

>>50266472
>these folks wuz x
Yeah, you don't get to claim that without x being definite, and x is nothing if not variable.

>>50266197
>>What is lawful evil?

>>50266310
The "I just followed orders" can work assuming the person in question can work harder to be lenient

For example, a servant of an evil overlord commanded to capture a town could take the town but keep the villagers inside from undue harm, could offer enemies chances to surrender and then abide by the surrender terms and give mercy when it's possible to do so

Still a shade grey of absolute good, but certainly not as dark as a rampaging looter or a cold, ruthless killer

>>50266232
>>50266495
Lawful evil I always viewed as tyranny, not evil but with morals

>>50266355
Except your pic, that's famous for being a sociopath that used idealists for the only purpouse to attain and mantain power, and deported them all in Siberia when they were no longer needed

>>50266472
>Most of the SS were LN.
>Hitler was CN.
And not evil at all despite their evil actions?

>>50266197
>Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good?
Easily, and in many ways. From the noble "my country, right or wrong" stereotype to the paladin who realizes his king is evil and depraved, but can be limited. Pretty dark shit could happen, like the paladin tolerating the king picking up little girls off the street so he's too busy doing .... things... to think about burning down "dissenting" villages to make an example or what Pétain did in France, if Zemmour is to be believed.

>Can evil characters retain strong morals while remaining evil?
Having some kind of moral code? Sure.
Objectively being a moral person? No. That comes with the whole "being evil" thing.

>>50266472
>A literal genocidal maniac and his stormtroopers who, unlike the average Wehrmacht conscripts, supported him all the way
Nah, the're the posterchildren for evil.

>>50266540
Why are their actions evil? Is intent not important? What about consequences?

The fact is that these terms, good and evil, are not statements of fact in any sense, and indeed, cannot be. They are shorthand terms of preference, and occasionally for an non-internalized ethical frameworks.

What is good is only good according to a standard of good, and that standard is, ultimately, arbitrary.

>>50266540
You have to understand german culture to see that the SS were LN. They had that Germany above all mentality since way back when they were gothic raiders.
As for Hitler, he did a lot of good as well. Healthcare reform, smoking ban, ending the inflation, the Autobahn...

>>50266197
I once had a Priestess of Lolth that helped remove corruption from the order of Paladins. All you need is a loose leash. Lolth doesn't care too much as long as I'm not acting disgracefully or making friends with elves.

>>50266598
>Why are their actions evil? Is intent not important? What about consequences?
I'm Russian so please tell me about moral ambiguity of their actions, /pol/. You Western fucks love bashing us for being evil Mongolian horde. Now I want to see how you bash Nazi mass murderers (hint: genocide happened not only to Jews and gypsies).

>>50266614
>to see that the SS were LN
You shouldn't use DnD alignments outside games. It's a rigid system to begin with, prone to misuse and completely unapplicable to our real world.

>>50266197 (OP)

Evil isn't about selfishness, though it most commonly is. "I will burn the world for my own sake" is certainly evil, but so is "I will burn the world for the sake of my love".

You could have a man dedicated to his country and king, who volunteers his spare time to improve the kingdom, who would gladly die for its sake... but much more happily make others die for it. This man could believe in duty, loyalty, generosity to his subordinates, kindness to his people. If, however, he slaughters foreigners to take their land and resources for his own nation, if he tortures anyone who might know information that would benefit or secure his country, if he sees to the deliberate crushing of the spirit of another nation's people by making them live in terror so that they will remain subjugated to his own people's needs, then the man is evil.

Burn the world for the sake of your country, burn the world for the sake of your family, burn the world for the sake of your god? Burning the world is evil.

Good characters apply goodness unilaterally. They care for strangers as well as their friends and family. They care for their enemies, at least a little, even if it's just some little corner of their mind that wishes they could find some more merciful way to finish them. They don't need a personal motivation or excuse to help others. They do need a personal motivation to do evil acts.

Evil characters, on the other hand, ONLY do good if they have a personal motivation or reason to do so. Those personal motivations might end up being quite broad, and they don't necessarily need to fit with self-interest or pragmatism. Evil characters can be romantics or idealists or emotional as much as anyone.

tl;dr No and yes, OP.

>>50266667
I don't know what you're expecting. What I said makes the point clear.

Your good is /your/ good, not /the good/, and in fact there is no absolute good.

Nearly everyone believes they're doing the right thing, and their conception of good is just as valid as yours or mine.

>>50266716
>and their conception of good is just as valid as yours or mine
This kind of limp dicked tolerance is revolting. Despite are different moral values there are things all people consider precious: life, happiness, hope. Exceptions are far and few enough such as death cults. People who deny these to others are viewed as evil assholes. Going on killing spree and torture tour is in fact evil.

>>50266695
I have already written a disclaimer here >>50266488 and I know that the alignment grid can't be applied to real life.
The point that germans put a lot of their thought into Deutschland uber alles still stands. Shit, even Romans told about their fanaticism when it came to the tribe and the leader.
And I reread this post and found the alignment I'm looking for. Lawful Stupid

File: Loyalty.png (110KB, 188x300px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 188x300px

By having someone with such a strong sense of duty and loyalty, that they might hate their king, but still defend him and save him from harm against his own allies.

>>50266598
>all moral labels are arbitrary, but the nazis definitely werent evil

>>50266716
>there is no point in arguing because morals are arbitrary but you're also wrong

>>50266805
I didn't imply that you should tolerate other perspectives, especially ones you believe are wrong. I'm a racist, sexist, anti-Semitic nationalist who would love nothing more than to gas the Skypes and RaHoWa. You should absolutely have strong convictions. But recognize they are not objectively superior to any other set of convictions.

>muh boglobaust
>pretentious grandstanding
First off, fuck you for being a whiny little emotional bitch. Calm down and act rationally.

Second, universal values are only universal, not objective.

>>50266861
I believe the Nazis were quite good but that is only my belief, not some impossible fact.

>>50266877
See above.

>>50266890
>But recognize they are not objectively superior to any other set of convictions
I have no reason to do what Nazi apologist wants. Also fuck you, Nazi little bitch.

>>50266927
>u like nazis so that means u r evil and always wrong and i shuldnt listen to anything u say
That'll be the shrunken amygdala.

>>50266890
>I believe the Nazis were quite good but that is only my belief, not some impossible fact.
H E R E W E G O
E
R
E

W
E

G
O

>>50266953
Whatever you say, Nazi bitch

File: 1479105463389.png (459KB, 450x696px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 450x696px

>>50266197
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

>>50266696
>Evil characters, on the other hand, ONLY do good if they have a personal motivation or reason to do so.
Isn't it the other way around? Evil characters do good things only when pressured by others, to influence others and to uphold their reputation?

>>50266197
Define "good". Define "evil.

the answer is yes, people are extremely complicated things, and so nearly anything you can think of is entirely possible

how you justify it is entirely up to you

>>50266197
Don't know about the first one but definitely yes on the second if serving good right now is the most beneficial thing for them to do

File: 405px--1.jpg (47KB, 405x599px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 405x599px

>>50266472
The SS was Chaotic Evil.

Corrupt, bureaucratic and power hungry - and filled with infighting. It was notorious for corruption and nepotism - as well as backstabbing.

It was also the dumping ground of Wehrmacht rejects and produced a pretentious anti-Prussian counter culture in hopes of becoming the new German aristocracy.

>>50266197
I don't understand why these questions are being asked on /tg/ as if we're somehow going to come to a satisfying answer that everyone agrees on.
My answers are
>Perhaps, depending on their level of disconnect with and understanding of the master's atrocities
>It can happen. Committing atrocities "So someone else doesn't have to" is still committing atrocities.

>>50267206
>It was also the dumping ground of Wehrmacht rejects
Wait, wasn't the SS elite as fuck? Basically Hitler's "fuck shit up" squad?
I admit my history of the German Reich isn't impressive, but it sounds like your description is more fitting of the SA to me.

>>50267490
That. My granddad once told me: "Whenever they showed up we sent prayers of thanks to the Lord above, they cleaned the place... you wouldn't be able to fathom."
Germanfag, oviously

File: 1479177894174.jpg (132KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 400x400px

>>50266197
>let's have another 350-post thread angrily chasing our own tails trying to apply D&D's unworkable combination of virtue ethics and deontological ethics.

>people totally haven't been having this same discussion for all of human history!
>and they certainly haven't attempted to cram it through the lens of tabletop roleplaying since the beginning of the hobby!
>we'll put it to rest this time, for sure!

File: 1474326507783.png (284KB, 1280x738px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1280x738px

>>50268292
>unworkable combination of virtue ethics and deontological ethics.
My desire to know more has grown exponentially.

>>50266890

Get help.

File: ba_dum_tsh.gif (1MB, 776x434px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 776x434px

>>50266197
we'll find out over the next four years

>>50268434
If you're seriously this upset by someone having different opinions I think /you/ need help, anon.

>>50268493

I'm not remotely upset, I'm simply recommending a mentally ill person to find aid so theu can get better.

>>50268555
Not everyone who disagrees with you is mentally ill, sport.

>>50268603

Of course not. But advocating genocide is not sane either.

>>50266696
>If, however, he slaughters foreigners to take their land and resources for his own nation, if he tortures anyone who might know information that would benefit or secure his country, if he sees to the deliberate crushing of the spirit of another nation's people by making them live in terror so that they will remain subjugated to his own people's needs, then the man is evil.
But none of that is evil.

>>50268363
D&D's alignment system is used in part to categorize people by their innate moral virtue, kind of lazily aping virtue ethics. A character's alignment tells you "anon is a good person", "anon is a bad person", and so on. This is already problematic for a number of reasons, including some that are not immediately apparent. It is further complicated by the inclusion of 'lawfulness' and 'chaoticness' as dimensions of alignment, the definitions of which are about as hazy and controversial as those of 'good' and 'evil'.

And then there are parts of it that try to categorize actions as good or bad, by a very crude deontological standard. That is to say, it tries to establish a sort of 'code of goodness', a set of rules that objectively determine whether an action is morally good or bad (or "lawful" or "chaotic", or "lawful good", or "chaotic neutral", and so on). You find it in reference to "evil acts". Thankfully this aspect has been de-emphasized to a large extent in the newest editions, but the idea and accompanying arguments still linger.

As if it wasn't unclear enough, a person's actions are supposed to be capable of changing that person's alignment. That is to say, a good person who does enough bad things becomes a bad person. Controversially, D&D has not given much good guidance as to when an alignment change is meant to happen.

To the designers' credit, most of this can be safely ignored in the newest editions, but for much of the history of D&D, the game's basic mechanics have been closely tied to alignment, making it of great consequence. That has made it imperative for groups to make snap judgments regarding the alignments of both characters and actions, often with very high stakes, with characters often losing their powers through failure to adhere to certain virtue standards (alignment shift could cost a paladin all his powers, or forbid a character from taking levels in classes with alignment requirements, like bard or barbarian, and so on).

File: 1466228390274.jpg (69KB, 425x282px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 425x282px

>>50268682
>[And then anon hit the post-length limit and couldn't be assed to write more]


So yeah, I hope you learned something. I've already seen this thread a thousand times before, so enjoy the seemingly never-ending debacle that it represents.

>>50266890
>the stormkiddo Nazi is the only one in this thread speaking the truth
What a world we live in.

>>50268633
Yeah, you're just wrong about that.

>>50266280
If you want a different trope name, try "noble top enforcer".

>>50266805
>Tolerance

I do not and would not tolerate you even in the slightest if I had to, but that doesn't mean I'd pass off my eager willingness to slap the impotent little tyrant sneer off your bitch face as cosmic absolute moral rectitude you drooling simpleton.

>>50268823

And here we go with the insanity again.

File: vimes.jpg (109KB, 536x1110px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 536x1110px

>>50266197
>Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good?

>>50269044
>YOURE A PSYCHO YOURE A PSYCHO
>I disagree and I think differently
>PSYCHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I'm not that anon but you're doing a great job convincing me to listen to Nazi sympathizer arguments by writing like an absolute jackass.

>>50269094

>I think the mass murder thousands of innocent people is ok
>Why don't you respect my right to think differently, check you privilege

>>50269585
>Der Juden
>innocent
Oy vey

>>50268649

Go eat some cheeseburgers, America.

>>50271745
I just did, glory to Pax Americana, the most glorious hegemon in the world's history!

>>50269094
>>50268990
>>50268788
You didn't need any convincing to begin with

>>50271760
Then 9/11 wasn't evil at all

>>50272148
>objective, universal morality
It was evil from my and my nation's point of view, and that's all that matters you godless communist heathen.

>>50272200
>It was evil from my and my nation's point of view
It was evil from most people point of view, you fat fucktard. You killing innocents abroad is just as evil.

>>50272270
>You killing innocents abroad is just as evil.
From their perspective, but maybe they should try not being 3rd worlders if they don't want to get imperium'd.

>>50272352
Typical Anglo tier hypocricy

>>50272404
>Anglo tier hypocrisy
Back to /pol/, Krautposter.

>>50272411
Back to /pol/, walking shart

>>50272470
>Sausageniggers
>acting like they're people
Kek'd

>>50267490
Maybe at the beginning, but by 1944 the deteriorating situation in Europe forced the SS to take a more fully military role, 'promoted' from paramilitary force to fully military role than they had previously. They thus suffered an enormous drop in quality. There were elite divisions, sure, but for every one of them there two or three full of conscripts who's job it was to stop Russian bullets with their bodies.

>>50266614
In order:
-Weimar German plan that he appropriated
-Fair point, but considering that the Nazis literally had every one of their soldiers hyped up on meth by the end of the war...
-Also Wiemar
-Guess what? Wiemar

Source: twenty seconds on wikipedia for each

>>50266197
>Good and evil dichotomy
>He posts the cover of Leviathan
Top lel

File: drinkThePain.gif (1009KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

1009KB, 500x280px

>>50268292
>exceedingly efficient

>>50269085
>implying Lord Vetinari is evil

File: ctf.jpg (48KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x600px

>>50267047
That's still more or less a personal Motivation. That fact the stimulus is outside, doesn't negate the fact the character is still working in their best interests. A lot of character's I've played are 'evil' but does good for the people around / people he cares about. As long as working together produces the best outcome in their minds they'll take it. Chaotic Evil is way more short sighted in this regard, unless they have a long term plan in motion to screw up shit on a large scale. (dethroning the king/poisoning watering holes)

>>50274246
Well He's definitely self interested, and does use underhanded tricks from time to time. That fact that a lot of it is for -his- city. and therefore for the betterment of most of its citizens makes it morally complex. He's got a good side to him, he just doesn't show it much. Like when he was a kid and joined vimes' fight. But if anything he is Pragmatic

>>50274389
Yeah, not saying he's good, but if anything I'd go with lawful neutral

I do think he genuinely cares and is good for the city, at least more than other politicians would be

Still, Carrot if he was to take up kingship would probably be a better ruler, if only because his plot armor charisma is so powerful that the guild leaders would more or less be forced to work with him

>>50267490
>Hitler's "fuck shit up" squad?
So long as they were fucking up the shit of unarmed civilians, sure. That's what they were most used for. Raze a village here for hiding jews, killed a few hundred there because a resistance attack was nearby, machine gun some troops surrendering to the Wehrmacht.

That's why they were feared and at the beginning of the war were very active. Once they had to fight on the front lines against equipped soldiers they got flattened.

>>50266197
Yes, of course, unless you use alignments.

>>50266890
Nazi punks fuck off

>>50266197
>Can good characters serve evil masters and remain good?
Changing the evil organization from the inside
>Can evil characters retain strong morals while remaining evil?
Yes. If their morals are incorrect but still strongly believed.

Alternatively, someone who knows what they are doing is wrong, but has other priorities.

>>50266472
Hitler was CE to the fucking bone
The SS were mostly LE, but Himmler was definitely NE
Most of the Wehrmacht could have been characterized as variations of neutral, mostly LN, while commanders might be more diverse
Rommel was CG to CN depending on the times, Ribbentrop would be somewhere around TN, etc ...

A good character could do a couple evil deeds for an evil master if it gives him a clear shot at taking down bigger and badder evil. I don't think they would emerge from it the same kind of good they were when they went in, but CG at worst by the end of it. Or maybe they were CG going in so LN at the end but the specifics are mostly irrelevant.

Undercover cops or infiltration agents are a good example, they ultimately do some bad shit to get in good with the bad guys but it's all to take that bad guy down eventually.

>>50275015
This should have been the first reply.

>>50266927
>>50266978
>>50266975
>>50274941

Hysterical babbies and armchair - or wheelchair rather - revolutionaries.
You lot are a fucking embarrassment.

>>50266890
>recognize they are not objectively superior to any other set of convictions.
>he says while daydreaming about mass murder of his ideological opponents

I have to respect your ability to trick people into taking you seriously by maintaining composure while expressing yourself though.

>>50276399

There's nothing incoherent there.
You don't have to believe that others' convictions are less valid than yours in order to kill them.

>>50276426

Fair enough.

On my part I'll stand by my conviction that people like you need to be mocked, ostracized and if they actually decide to do more than sperg out, locked up or, in emergency, shot.

File: eaten russian child.png (421KB, 936x688px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 936x688px

>>50275015

>Yes. If their morals are incorrect but still strongly believed.

Then the game designers are lawful evil for indulging the idea of correct morality and making it a torturous axiom of their system, causing mental pain to thousands.

>>50266614
>They had that Germany above all mentality since way back when they were gothic raiders.

If that were the case then the holy roman empire wouldn't have been such a cluster fuck.

File: without gold or silver.png (503KB, 680x798px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 680x798px

>>50276440

I'm not that guy, or a Nazi.
I don't know what your politics are, but I'm almost certain that mine are better. As far as I'm concerned you may have your own opinions until you hear mine, after which the only sensible course of action is to correct your thoughts along the lines I set out for you.

t. the mind controller,

>>50266533
Trotsky plz go.

>>50266716
>Your good is /your/ good, not /the good/, and in fact there is no absolute good.
Kek you said that to a russian in a conversation about nazis.

File: ten_thousand.png (41KB, 462x316px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 462x316px

>>50266197
My favorite examples of these are those who are bound by 'the other alignment' axis.

For example: A Lawful Good Paladin who willingly serves the Evil Overlord because he considers Law and Order to be of more importance to society and Anarchy and Chaos. (Or perhaps he rightly believes that by serving as the Overlord's domestic police chief, less of his beloved civilians will die than if the Overlord himself were overseeing community discipline)

Similarly, the Lawful Evil Viceroy would help the Paladins take down his Highlord Master if he judged the Highlord to be acting too Chaotic Evil.

Or the Chaotic Good rogue who willingly aids the Patriarchal Templar overthrow the freely elected President because she learns the President is wholly Evil.

>>50268292
Oy, spoiled-sport: Don't shut down other people's discussions because they're covering ground you've covered before.

These threads happen all the time because it's one of those 'entry-level' problems with the DnD system and everyone will eventually ask this question. Sometimes the answers this thread provides aren't satisfactory and people involve themselves in more than one of these threads looking for something.

Don't make fun of people for thinking. Don't stymie a person's effort to grapple with reconciling morality and reality. Don't be that guy who mocks the skinny (or fat) new guy at the gym because he's doing exercises you've done before. Don't be that guy who mocks freshman for not understanding concepts you spent years of your life also learning to understand. Not everyone thinks it's fun to blitz the archives.

When you see threads like these, let people explore their own thoughts. You can just, like, -ignore the thread- and realize these threads are no longer for you.

You don't want to be one of the reasons that tabletop games seems insular and unwelcoming.

Alternatively, maybe the OP is running a campaign very soon and needs to remind himself of these thoughts before developing a setting.

File: final_fantasy_iv_snes_02.png (8KB, 512x448px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 512x448px

>>50266197
>This guy sure did. Taking up the dark sword, pillaging towns. Of course, his loyalty could only assuage his conscience so long...

>>50266197
>ever had a job toiling under capitalism?

Yeah, you can be good while serving evil overlords. Just keep your head down and serve up that latte, pleb.

>>50266398
Happens in the real world all the time. The key is desired endstate. My raging cockhole of a boss is very career driven and isn't bothered at all about risking the lives of my guys as long as she gets ahead. All she really cares about is results though, so every half thought out or dangerous directive she passes down I figure out what she really wants out of it and break it down into something reasonable. She usually chews my ass a bit for not doing exactly what she said, but as long as the results can make her look good to her boss she doesn't move past just berating me.

>>50278216
Yes. This. I often have trouble wrapping my head around the system and I like when these threads pop up. They help me make better sense of the alignment system. Thank you for saying this.

>>50266197
Short answer cause thread's on page 10 is yes. Long answer I'll type in a sec.

>>50266197
>>50280743
Okay, so depending on who the villain is, you can totally have good-aligned characters who willingly work for them. A good example would be the evil overlord who has a kind-hearted paladin lieutenant. The paladin knows his master is evil, he knows that the empire is built on the bodies of innocents, but he -also- sees that doing so got results. He won't be happy about it, but he won't deny it either. For the most part, the empire's people live a fairly peaceful, prosperous life so long as they obey the law and don't try to rebel. What happens to those that rebel is horrible and unforgivable, but the paladin looks the other way when it happens. Because he also realized that actually overthrowing the evil emperor would throw the whole empire into chaos. People would fight for power, there'd be anarchy in the streets, kingdoms would fight for independence and go back to warring with each other, only for another cruel leader to one day unify them again and keep them in line with an iron fist. The emperor's crimes are unforgivable, but as it stands only a few suffer his wrath. The far greater sin would be overthrowing him and making the entire empire suffer in the resulting power vacuum.

(1/2)

>>50281117
So the paladin bites his tongue and does as he's told. But yet, he avoids becoming neutral or even evil himself by doing his best to help people. Replacing the system would plunge the empire into chaos, but maybe he can change it from the inside-out? When he marches an army against a rebel army, he still has to slaughter them even if their reason for rebelling is fair. But he can spare the children, maybe even the women. The orphans can be taken in and re-educated, given a chance at a better life which also brings them closer to the structure and thus makes them less likely to rebel when they grow older. The women he might be able to support for a while off his own high salary for a while, use his influence to get them educated and let them start over again in a new town. Maybe they'll even remarry and live a happier life than before. Their husbands are dead, but at least their children survived, and now they have a better quality of life thanks to the mercy of the system. Essentially, he'd be the symbol that the common people look up to. He's still a servant of a tyrant, but he's able to alleviate the pain caused by the tyrant. He's the system's merciful hand, some might resent him for allowing the emperor's cruelty to continue, but others will respect him for doing what he can to make life a little more bearable. And the emperor allows this, as doing so placates his people and makes them more likely to obey.

(2/3, I ended up typing more than I expected)

>>50281137
Said paladin could even be a bit of a tragic character in a campaign, fighting against the PCs when they try to overthrow the corrupt government. He knows their hearts in the right place, but he still stands against them because he really believes that he's preventing a greater evil, albeit at the cost of accepting a lesser one. Depending on how the party handles it, they might succeed in swaying him to their side. Otherwise, he might die defending the system, smiling because he knows that if anyone can overthrow the emperor and still keep the empire at peace, it's them.

TL;DR - Yes, good characters can serve evil masters. Often because they believe they're preventing some greater evil, and believe they can do something to mitigate even the evil they're accepting to an extent.

File: Around a duck don't test your luck.png (49KB, 261x239px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 261x239px

>>50266197
Objective morality is absurd.

Men do as they do and justify it as the consequences of their needs or desires.

Evil is a thing you call someone else; or occasionally yourself in a crisis of conscience, but only if your character is an existential prat.

Fuck me, Rune Quest shits all over D&D; the emphasis in character motivation is on cultural mores and personal goals, none of this cosmic alignment impacting your character's personality malarkey.

Just gets in the way of making a fucking character.

>>50282465
Amen.

>>50282465
How is Rune Quest? I've always wanted to try it.

>>50278319
Found the heathen commie

File: Games Workshop Runequest licensed Broo.jpg (49KB, 600x499px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x499px

>>50283049
I've got first edition MRQ, which is widely considered a rather shonky version (got it cheap), but even that has some base virtues, espeically once errata'd.

It uses percentile die, which I like, plays like Call of CH'thulhu because COC, and indeed the whole BRP line is a descendant of Rune Quest.

No classes, no alignments.

You have a species, this determines the die you roll your stats with; RQ doesn't balance species against each other because it favours simulationism over gamification; technically any race is playable, from a house spider to an ancient dragon, because they are all statted the same way.

Then you pick a culture which gives you some base skill levels, often a choice of a few, and perhaps some stat bonuses if your ethnic group is a bit freaky.

Then you pick your background from the book or assemble your own from the skills list; arrange your skill points as you please; RQ is pretty innately flexible and encourages you to create custom backgrounds.

Combat is deadly; hp totals are low and weapon damage is high, HP is also split between hit locations.

Armour directly subtracts damage from hits to the armoured area, but can penalize your skills with it's weight.

It's not uncommon for combat between skilled opponents to consist of a few rounds of cut and thrust where nobody scratches the other, followed by a single maiming or killing blow that ends the fight decisively.

It has a native setting, Glorantha, which I adore, but if you just want use of the flexible system you can take it or leave it.

Rune Quest derivative systems include BRP and Mythras, both worth a lookin.

There is rq6 which is what Mythras used to be, the recent reprint of old retro RQ2 (Glorantha-centric) and also a new Glorantha-Centric Rune Quest edition in the works.