Can we get choices that really matter and have a effect?

[Rannie]

not really if you were in Emets shoes you would do the exact same thing he was doing ... everyone would and well honestly if you had any of those characters experience you would do the same thing .. nothing concerning about it just the way things work

I've been reading this thread and responses so far but this one...

I lost my mother 2 years ago this Feburary 15. That's right as of me posting this its 4 days until the second anniversary of my mother's death. She was wasnt even 63 years old and died of congestive heart failure. Do I empathize with Emet on his losses? Yes I do. Would I go about destroying lives just to bring my loved ones back who have died? HELL NO! The ends do NOT justify the means in this Scenario nor did Hydaelyn kill people to split the world into the Source with 13 shards. Life is still life weither the memories are completely intact or not. It's like saying that someone who has amnesia is dead or even people suffering from an illness such as dementia or Alzheimer are no longer living.

[linay]

On the other side of the coin, liberally throwing around labels such as good and evil, outright dismissing the villains as genocidial maniacs (...ok it might apply to Nidhogg) in a story clearly aiming for some moral relativist tones, is naive, self righteous and ignores most of the nuance behind the scenario.

While I feel that certain labels may not be necessary in some situations, an attempt at a nuance can become largely irrelevant when there are two choices in the end: stop what the antagonist is trying to do or not.

If what the antagonist is doing must be stopped, then the action is evil from the perspective of the protagonist regardless if the protagonist can understand why the antagonist is doing it and can even be tempted to do it given similar circumstances, and if the antagonist is not meant to be evil or is meant to be morally redeemed, then they must be made to see the error of their ways even if they still lose/die in the end. Nuance can be irrelevant here, and can even distract from or even undermine the reason why the antagonist must be stopped in the first place if handled incorrectly.

I also disagree with moral relativism and wouldn't want the protagonist to have that worldview. I do think it's completely valid to have the protagonist seek to question and clarify their moral worldview, but the end goal should still be to have moral convictions. That's different from moral relativism and I don't think it's naive or necessarily self-righteous to have moral convictions even if not everyone agrees with you.

[Alleo]

I mean if you were really your character what would you have done be honest
because I would have helped hog destory ishgard
I would have tried to marry Zenos and help Emert

So you wanna play as a bad guy but cant. Yet state that it should not be about major events but smaller ones..you do know that you change the whole story if you do even just one of them? Emet wants to destroy everything, which means siding with him destroys everything. Any NPC you may have liked will be death, there wont be any zones on the first because the first would be destroyed. Any new primal or dungeon on this shard will never be seen by you, the same how you probably wont even be able to learn anything from any job trainer ever again since you would be enemy nr. 1. I mean I guess you would have your story but not a single bit of a game at the same time..

This is simply not the type of game that could handle such changes.

really you would pretend like nothing happan while the people who forgot everything praises the one that destroyed your people like she is the hero doing nothing to change anything that is a type of betrayerl you know.

No I believe lots of people would not turn around and start a genocide on a whole amount of people that had nothing to do with the death of the others..remember that they kinda killed themselves by having their creation power turn on them and create an even worse calamity. And afterwards when the sacrifices were done they suddenly decided that people (or newborn souls) who had nothing to do with any of that should be killed of to get the others back that went willingly. This is not a war that was fought on both sides and the other side won. It were some of the ancients that were against this plan and summoned Hydealyn.

So in your view you would just kill of a huge amount of people because in the past your own people killed each other?

Nidhoggs tale has shown us quite enough that revenge on something wrong can be bad for both sides. It will be a circle of hate that might never end..dont punish the sons for the sins of their fathers..

But if the souls of your people were shattered and you were able to reconstruct them, is it really genocide? Hydaelyn was more the perpetrator of genocide than the ascians in this situation. And wouldn't undoing that genocide be the actual good thing to do? Isn't that what we should be rooting for?

Please dont forget that Emet and his team plans to sacrifice the complete souls at the end too. There is no future for those of us, only for the Ascians (and maybe those ancients if they can come back). Its not their goal to restore us to how we once were and then live on with that..no they want to make us whole and then sacrifice us..Hydealyn never did genocide. She split the people but it was never said that this would kill them..which would also make no sense because if splitting would have killed us none would be living right now because babies are still born the normal way.

[Lersayil]

While I feel that certain labels may not be necessary in some situations, an attempt at a nuance can become largely irrelevant when there are two choices in the end: stop what the antagonist is trying to do or not.

If what the antagonist is doing must be stopped, then the action is evil from the perspective of the protagonist regardless if the protagonist can understand why the antagonist is doing it and can even be tempted to do it given similar circumstances, and if the antagonist is not meant to be evil or is meant to be morally redeemed, then they must be made to see the error of their ways even if they still lose/die in the end. Nuance can be irrelevant here, and can even distract from or even undermine the reason why the antagonist must be stopped in the first place if handled incorrectly.

I also disagree with moral relativism and wouldn't want the protagonist to have that worldview. I do think it's completely valid to have the protagonist seek to question and clarify their moral worldview, but the end goal should still be to have moral convictions. That's different from moral relativism and I don't think it's naive or necessarily self-righteous to have moral convictions even if not everyone agrees with you.

Look, I don't mind stories about good and evil, but the writers are clearly trying to go the moral relativist route to some degree here. Good and evil are simplistic, reductive and dismissive labels if used outside of absolute morality situations.

Based on your arguments, you also might be confusing moral nihilism with relativism?

Please dont forget that Emet and his team plans to sacrifice the complete souls at the end too. There is no future for those of us, only for the Ascians (and maybe those ancients if they can come back). Its not their goal to restore us to how we once were and then live on with that..no they want to make us whole and then sacrifice us..Hydealyn never did genocide. She split the people but it was never said that this would kill them..which would also make no sense because if splitting would have killed us none would be living right now because babies are still born the normal way.

Heavily depends on how you define life. If you define yourself as the collection of memories and experiences you've had then they're not that much different.

[LolitaBansheeMeru]

They're either a better troll than Titanmen or have a rather disturbing point of view and may need to seek counseling.

Im not the one that has a disturbing view point that is society that lets people walk away unjudged if anything I'm more of a hero type than the ppl who say such characters are evil or bad when they had to take that action.

also you assume this characters are villians they are not villians they just take diffrent methods to do what needs to be done. Someone has to play the "god" to save everything even if sometimes some eggs(lifes) have to be cracked in the process it doesn't matter as long as in the end great good happans those who are sacrficed were nothing more than eggs that had to be cracked for the greater good.

its like if you had to cure a illiness that was causing mass casualitys but in order to cure it you had to experiment which would lead to lets say 500 deaths those 500 deaths do no matter for in the long run you will be saving millions and billions of others.

What your all assuming is because X character murders that makes them a villian well even alot of heros like green arrow,batman murdered even superman did... but it isn't that action that matter it is the fact that what they did it for. And honestly what we are doing as WOl could be consinder murder in character view but whats funny is noone bothers thinking about it because its for the sake "of saving lifes" which is really no diffrent than any character i support.
Deathstroke did it for greed
Bane for w/e reason but was not really that great
Joker for fun
Ivy to save nature
Mr.freeze for his wife and so forth
Now on this list I agree Deathstroke-joker are evil villians however Ivy-mr freeze are not villians.


Also I'm not asking to play with villians I'm asking to play with who I believe is truely the good guys. big difference

but whatever I give up I should have known

Choice is always good because this enforce morality they believe in which is weak and soft is forced on others with forced path even though characters offer you a choice YOUR character refuses to take it

[TheMightyMollusk]

Im not the one that has a disturbing view point that is society that lets people walk away unjudged if anything I'm more of a hero type than the ppl who say such characters are evil or bad when they had to take that action.

also you assume this characters are villians they are not villians they just take diffrent methods to do what needs to be done. Someone has to play the "god" to save everything even if sometimes some eggs(lifes) have to be cracked in the process it doesn't matter as long as in the end great good happans those who are sacrficed were nothing more than eggs that had to be cracked for the greater good.

Your "heroic" point of view so far has included letting Ishgard burn for the sins of people who have been dead for a thousand years, even though the people of the present want to atone and find another way; letting Zenos run free even though we've seen that his leadership style is to deliberately make people suffer just so he'll have people to fight because he's bored; and letting the Ascians wipe out several planets worth of people because they're incapable of moving on from their past. And apparently this is all for "the greater good".

At this point, I'm convinced that you're either unwilling or unable to actually have this discussion, so I'm bowing out. But please, before you bring up "the greater good" again, have a look through a few history books and see how many real tyrants used that to justify their actions.

[LolitaBansheeMeru]

Your "heroic" point of view so far has included letting Ishgard burn for the sins of people who have been dead for a thousand years, even though the people of the present want to atone and find another way; letting Zenos run free even though we've seen that his leadership style is to deliberately make people suffer just so he'll have people to fight because he's bored; and letting the Ascians wipe out several planets worth of people because they're incapable of moving on from their past. And apparently this is all for "the greater good".

At this point, I'm convinced that you're either unwilling or unable to actually have this discussion, so I'm bowing out. But please, before you bring up "the greater good" again, have a look through a few history books and see how many real tyrants used that to justify their actions.

Ishgard wasn't innocent at the time how are you believeing that when the pope kept lieing to the people while covering up what happan and mean while playing the dragons as great evil hunting them for sport they were not innocent not a single life in ishgard was innocent they sit there idealy believing what the "church said" they were just as guility has the ones that did it.

as for zenos he just wanted a play mate to fight with he wasnt evil or good he was chaotic neutral

and like has been said its not murder if the people don't really exist as Emet set said he wouldn't ever "murder" he said in his own words Its not murder if the characters are not complete thus they don't truely exist. beside his kind lives forever a mortals life last 1-90 years maybe longer depending on the race but still dies evently so honestly those lifes have no value to a character that lives forever who wants to restore things.
its like in real life A Ant,cow has no value what so ever the only value of a cow is making meat from it

as for that advice heres my advice to you watch the movie called "The Final"

[KalinOrthos]

OP is the type of person to shout an incredibly racist thing then wonder why everyone calls them a racist. The lack of self-awareness tells me their either too juvenile to understand empathy, too conceited to see anything but their own personal justice, or too stupid to understand that ones actions determine how the world views them. Maybe a combination of all three. Or they're just a very elaborate troll. I am hoping desperately this is just a very elaborate troll, because the thought of someone existing like this as anything more than an edgy teenage boy is, frankly, very concerning.

[LolitaBansheeMeru]

OP is the type of person to shout an incredibly racist thing then wonder why everyone calls them a racist. The lack of self-awareness tells me their either too juvenile to understand empathy, too conceited to see anything but their own personal justice, or too stupid to understand that ones actions determine how the world views them. Maybe a combination of all three. Or they're just a very elaborate troll. I am hoping desperately this is just a very elaborate troll, because the thought of someone existing like this as anything more than an edgy teenage boy is, frankly, very concerning.

I'm well aware the world might hate me lol but the worlds view on me or what I believe is what would lead to the world being a better place. As Prince Arthas said when he was willing to pay any price bare any curse as long as it helped him save his people. he took it on because it was to save life not end it that isn't evil that is self-sarfice for the greater good. I find concerning is how ... you people think this is bad or evil when your soft weak justice system only creates more suffering than it prevents humanity needs someone with no mercy no remorse to save it. beside how others view me doesn't matter do you really let how others view you effect what you believe in? thats rather sad

Right, I'm just going to duck out if this conversation, but I want to leave you with a thought.



This right here tells me everything I need to know about how you view the world. You're stupid or naive enough to believe that alignment is based on the words you write in the "Alignment" space. The truth is, your alignment is based on how you affect the world around you, how your personality fits within the paradigm of Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos. Zenos is, at the absolute best, Neutral Evil, and at worst Chaotic Evil. If you cannot realize why that's so, then there is genuinely no help for you.

Coincidentally, it also makes me genuinely pity anyone who has the displeasure to play D&D with you if you think wanton murder is justified with "But I'm just chaotic neutral, guys". Screw you.

I wasn't justifying zenos all I'm say is his like Aizen in bleach they just want something or someone to fight with he had every chance to kill alot of characters including us but he choice to not do it because he wanted to "play" some more
beside I play lawfull characters mostly lol

Yeah, that turned our great for the people of Lordaeron and Stratholme.

I'll throw in my vote for the people calling troll.

believe what you want it doesn't matter but just know the Lich king had controll and had foresight of future enemeys such as old gods and was also really only doing what he felt was the best option (which funny as it is they turned the lich king into a good guy in current wow)

[Lersayil]

I'm well aware the world might hate me lol but the worlds view on me or what I believe is what would lead to the world being a better place. As Prince Arthas said when he was willing to pay any price bare any curse as long as it helped him save his people. he took it on because it was to save life not end it that isn't evil that is self-sarfice for the greater good. I find concerning is how ... you people think this is bad or evil when your soft weak justice system only creates more suffering than it prevents humanity needs someone with no mercy no remorse to save it.

Yeah, that turned our great for the people of Lordaeron and Stratholme.

I'll throw in my vote for the people calling troll.