The Great Sphynx asks you a Riddle:

File: 631dcb9d9073d8ca139c8fe55ed2bd79.jpg (61KB, 500x602px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 500x602px

>>51798731
Good and evil, whatever gets the job done.
The ends justify the means.

>>51798731
Better idea: these three men rule bordering nations and cause political strife, making them quite potent wartime settings.

>>51798731
Wisdom and fairness are not morally obligated.

>>51798731
That's not a riddle that's a multiple choice question! BAD CAT! BAD

>>51798731
That's not a riddle.

File: ASTROSPHINX.png (259KB, 1339x693px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1339x693px

>>51798731
You cannot fool me, Astrosphinx!

>>51798731
The one who killer the other two. Because dead people rarely make good kings.

>>51799428
Don't go talking smack about King Mortimer the Posthumous, anon!

>>51798731
The correct answer is that is not a riddle.

>>51798731
Doesn't feel like a riddle, so I'm just going to answer the question straight-on and skip the characterization part:

A good man is, well, good, but is not necessarily a great king. Evil and fear will never last long. Frederick II of Prussia was willing to do good and evil, but never held to a promise if he could avoid it, and he was the best king that I can think of in terms of 'doing what was best for his country,' if not being the morally best man. So the last option.

>>51798731

Hmm. Both the evil man and the good man seem situationally useful, but I can safely say the neutral man should stick to being a useless commoner that is led by one of the above as that kind of ambiguity is detrimental to the upper echelons of power.

>>51798731
The first. Evil triumphs when good compromises.