Is Hilgya Chaotic Evil or Chaotic Neutral? (Or Lawful Good?)

[The MunchKING]

A) When she first left the Dwarven Lands. As in, when she ran away. You think she would have if she had legal recourse?

Probably. She was going on about how much Dwarven Honor stifled her free spirit.

D) Not really, it's Neutral. Courts worldwide do it all the time.

*citation required*

Shouldn't her family be punished for what it did to her?

NO!

At worst the people who wronged her should be punished. Not everyone up and down the family line.

She's entitled to the easy way.

No, she's really not.

Well, she's not asking to be allowed to rob a bank. She's asking not to be forced into marriage.

BY MURDERING INNOCENTS!

So yeah. Textbook Evil.

She didn't murder anyone, she bankrupted them.

Only because Murder would have hurt her baby. She was totally down for the Murder before that occurred to her.

And she's still trying to kill Durkon.

Still doesn't deserve it.

He doesn't deserve it like Nale did, but Treason is really something no government will let slide.

Roses aren't all red either
If you want tonitpick, do it better.

Well the original ones were until people bred them to be all colors. But the point is are any violets not violet?

"...if you saw someone in a dream that already proved herself to correctly predict the future in an earlier dream in a world where both ghosts andprophecies are real..."
Not a valid lesson either.

Wait do we have any evidence Mama Firehelm had ever seen the future before? Bro firehelm just says "She appeared to me looking like she did before you were born and told me to be it all on #8". Not that she had ever done this before.

[Kish]

"Hilgya knows dwarven traditions and she thought she had justifications for murder" is just as bad as "Durkon knows dwarven traditions and he thought she had an obligation to go back to Ivan." Hilgya shows every sign of being thoroughly irrational. Her early description of Ivan was lampshaded as being ridiculously off-base; her current description of Durkon is just as ridiculously off-base. She shows no sign of valuing the lives of anyone but herself and Kudzu; "I do like you" was not a reason for her not to help a succubus attack and nearly kill the person she was speaking to.

[The_Weirdo]

Well the original ones were until people bred them to be all colors. But the point is are any violets not violet?

Roses were red
Breeding changed that
Genetic engineering is awesome
It can make you blue.

[Fyraltari]

He doesn't deserve it like Nale did, but Treason is really something no government will let slide.

Are we discussing the morality of the Empire's of Blood's actions or Ganji's? Treason against a dictatorial imperialistic murderous slave-driven absolute monarchy should really be given the benefitof the doubt.

Well the original ones were until people bred them to be all colors. But the point is are any violets not violet?

Wait do we have any evidence Mama Firehelm had ever seen the future before? Bro firehelm just says "She appeared to me looking like she did before you were born and told me to be it all on #8". Not that she had ever done this before.

What did you think she told him before the other guy was born that would be relevant to this discussion that wouldn't be predictiing the future (as in most likely "you are going to have a nephew/half-brother/cousin/son")?

[GooeyChewie]

Re: courts, okay; but is the State Evil for applying penalties?

That depends. Is the court delivering justice, or vengeance?

[enderlord99]

Has Fel posted here yet?

[zimmerwald1915]

Could've sworn those were poppies.

[The MunchKING]

Are we discussing the morality of the Empire's of Blood's actions or Ganji's? Treason against a dictatorial imperialistic murderous slave-driven absolute monarchy should really be given the benefitof the doubt.

A little of both, as I am arguing that Ganji isn't responsible for the Empire of Blood's crimes. So if he's told this guy is a dangerous treasonous insurgent, he can treat them as targets without worrying where exactly on the moral spectrum his targets lie. He's being paid to bring them in for Crimes Against the Empire, and what those are isn't really his problem.

Of course the fact that he was willing to sell out the Empire of Blood when the price was right ( read "revenge for his scaly hide") means he wasn't even particularly loyal to the Empire itself, just the money they paid out.

What did you think she told him before the other guy was born that would be relevant to this discussion that wouldn't be predictiing the future (as in most likely "you are going to have a nephew/half-brother/cousin/son")?

I thought it was more "Hilgya looked like Young Mom" than "Mom had precog powers when she was younger"...

What? Random nitpicky poems I got from YouTube aren't accurate sources of botanical information? INCONCEIVABLE!

[The_Weirdo]

INCONCEIVABLE!

You killed my father. Prepare to die. Yes, it is a "Princess Bride" joke, in case this becomes an issue.

[Fyraltari]

Could've sworn those were poppies.

I don't know about poppies but (at least in my tongue) those are violets.

A little of both, as I am arguing that Ganji isn't responsible for the Empire of Blood's crimes. So if he's told this guy is a dangerous treasonous insurgent, he can treat them as targets without worrying where exactly on the moral spectrum his targets lie. He's being paid to bring them in for Crimes Against the Empire, and what those are isn't really his problem.

Yes they are. He is giving them people to exert power on. If he knows for a fact they seldom use their power justly, then he is responsiblefor the ills that befall them.

"Look the kid asked me to help lower him into the lions' den. What the lions do with a 6-year old isn't really my problem"

Edit because I forgot:

I thought it was more "Hilgya looked like Young Mom" than "Mom had precog powers when she was younger"...

Yes, Hilgya look like her precog motherdid when she was younger which is why she pretended to be her.

[RatElemental]

Sure it does. She had a right not to be even officially married to Ivan.

I'm sorry but I have to say something here. She has a right to have people not believe or think something about her? If some madman met her one day and decided that she was actually married to the tree in his front garden, would she be within her rights to kill him just so that no one alive believed her to be married? Does that apply to other beliefs about her, true or not?

The dwarves can think she's married all they want, but she doesn't have to let that opinion affect her actions. And if she doesn't act like she's married, doesn't respect the marriage, has escaped her husband, and would rather not have been in the first place, well that's hardly different to not being married at all.

[The MunchKING]

You killed my father. Prepare to die.

He was Oppressing me, so take it up with my English Teacher.

Edit because I forgot:
Yes, Hilgya look like her precog motherdid when she was younger which is why she pretended to be her.

I am saying we have no evidence her mother could see the future. Nothing said that. Dude blew all his money on a vision but does NOT say "She was totally a prophet with infallible foresight so I knew she would be right".

[Fyraltari]

I am saying we have no evidence her mother could see the future. Nothing said that. Dude blew all his money on a vision but does NOT say "She was totally a prophet with infallible foresight so I knew she would be right".

Then what is he saying? All it takes is a few level of wizard and bam! dead prophetic parents.

I guess it is conceivable that he could just saying that he once dreamed of his mother without it having anything to do with the situation, but I find it more likely that he is saying that last time he dreamt of his dead mother she had accurate knwoledge about the future (ie Other Dwarf's birth) which is why he was so sure she was right when she told him to bet everything.

[Kish]

I don't think you generally need the person who have had prophetic abilities in life to listen to what you think is a ghost.

I do think you're misreading "looking just like she did right before you were born"--the vision looked just like their mother when she was alive and Hilgya's age, before the other dwarf was born. There's no indication that she was a ghost at any point before (or after, for that matter) Hilgya disguised herself as a ghost, no indication that she ever appeared in her son's normal dreams, and no indication that she could predict the future, though she probably had a pretty good idea that one of her children was about to be born.

[Peelee]

I am saying we have no evidence her mother could see the future. Nothing said that. Dude blew all his money on a vision but does NOT say "She was totally a prophet with infallible foresight so I knew she would be right".

Even the spells that let you see the future don't give infallible foresight. And, as previously indicated by Eugene, we've already had one dead parent predict the future to a child. It's not that farfetched.

[The_Weirdo]

I'm sorry but I have to say something here. She has a right to have people not believe or think something about her? If some madman met her one day and decided that she was actually married to the tree in his front garden, would she be within her rights to kill him just so that no one alive believed her to be married? Does that apply to other beliefs about her, true or not?

The dwarves can think she's married all they want, but she doesn't have to let that opinion affect her actions. And if she doesn't act like she's married, doesn't respect the marriage, has escaped her husband, and would rather not have been in the first place, well that's hardly different to not being married at all.

Depends. Can that madman cause trouble in the long run? Because being officially married, in the view of a society, is one thing. Being married in the view of Treetalker is another.

[Fyraltari]

I don't think you generally need the person who have had prophetic abilities in life to listen to what you think is a ghost.

I do think you're misreading "looking just like she did right before you were born"--the vision looked just like their mother when she was alive and Hilgya's age, before the other dwarf was born. There's no indication that she was a ghost at any point before (or after, for that matter) Hilgya disguised herself as a ghost, no indication that she ever appeared in her son's normal dreams, and no indication that she could predict the future, though she probably had a pretty good idea that one of her children was about to be born.

I think you are right, I remembered "just like she did..." instead of "looking like she did...".
I should get some sleep right now.

[Liquor Box]

Is what the dwarves did to Hilgya by forcing her into marriage really that far removed from what she is trying to do to Durkon?

If you take the crossbow-point thin at face value, Hilgya was faced with the choice of marrying Ivan or having people try to kill her.

If Durkon had not dies he would now be faced by the prospect of someone (Hilgya) trying to kill him for not staying with her.

Both attempts to force Hilgya/Durkon into a relationship appear to motivated by an expectation that they do their duty. We know that Hilgya thinks Durkon had a duty to not "toss her aside" after sleeping with her, and we know the clan though Hilgya had a duty to marry Ivan (although not the details of why this duty arose). We know that Hilgya is trying to kill Durkon for neglecting this duty, and some people have interpreted the clan as prepared to kill Hilgya for not honouring her duty.

So surely anyone who thinks that the clan acted in an evil way by forcing Hilgya to marry, must also see Hilgya as evil for seeking to kill Durkon for tossing her aside?

[The_Weirdo]

Is what the dwarves did to Hilgya by forcing her into marriage really that far removed from what she is trying to do to Durkon?

If you take the crossbow-point thin at face value, Hilgya was faced with the choice of marrying Ivan or having people try to kill her.

If Durkon had not dies he would now be faced by the prospect of someone (Hilgya) trying to kill him for not staying with her.

Both attempts to force Hilgya/Durkon into a relationship appear to motivated by an expectation that they do their duty. We know that Hilgya thinks Durkon had a duty to not "toss her aside" after sleeping with her, and we know the clan though Hilgya had a duty to marry Ivan (although not the details of why this duty arose). We know that Hilgya is trying to kill Durkon for neglecting this duty, and some people have interpreted the clan as prepared to kill Hilgya for not honouring her duty.

So surely anyone who thinks that the clan acted in an evil way by forcing Hilgya to marry, must also see Hilgya as evil for seeking to kill Durkon for tossing her aside?

Goes the other way, too: if Hilgya is Evil for shirking her "duties", why would Durkon not be for shirking his?

[Peelee]

Goes the other way, too: if Hilgya is Evil for shirking her "duties", why would Durkon not be for shirking his?

Nobody has said Hilgya is evil for "shirking her duties." And if they did, they are wrong. Virtually everyone who's saying Hilgya is evil is saying that because of the ways she reacts to things, and the manner in which she does them.

If you're going to invent arguments, at least invent ones that can't be refuted immediately.

[The_Weirdo]

Nobody has said Hilgya is evil for "shirking her duties." And if they did, they are wrong. Virtually everyone who's saying Hilgya is evil is saying that because of the ways she reacts to things, and the manner in which she does them.

If you're going to invent arguments, at least invent ones that can't be refuted immediately.

And I'm willing to buy Hilgya being Evil for wanting to kill Durkon (though my money's on delusional), but I'll never be willing to buy her being Evil for sacrificing her clan to get freed from a marriage her clan forced her into. It was her right.

I'll give you an example:

I once got a job from a translation agency I later learned didn't pay their translators unless they sued them and so on (basically, deadbeats and proud of it). Now, by the time I knew this, I had done and delivered the job - let's call it Job 1.

Before the due date for them to pay me, but after I had learned about their deadbeat tendencies, they sent me another one: Job 2. I could easily wait for the due date for them to pay me in order to start job 2 then - in case the rumors were unfounded.

Well, surprise, they didn't pay me for Job 1 on the due date.

So I didn't do Job 2. Instead, I told them they needed to pay me for Job 1 so that I could retrieve Job 2 from the cloud (I don't use the cloud, of course) and pay the electric bill to get Job 2 ready (my electric bills were paid and my service was working fine, of course).

At some point, after some two weeks of hemming and hawwing, they paid me for Job 1.

Five days after the due date for Job 2, they called me asking about Job 2, which I didn't do because, well, then they'd try to scam me again.

I told them that, due to nonpayment, the cloud deleted it. I heard the "But it's two hundred thousand characters!!!" (at five days overdue; two hundred thousand characters takes a fast translator about a week at least) lamentation of the man that somehow decided he could try and trick me and get away with it and told him that, if he had paid me in time, this wouldn't have happened. And that was the end of it.

Now, this is an agency, not the end client. The end client can (and will) take it up with the agency (translation agencies don't put end clients in direct contact with translators, for several reasons). Whether or not the end client knows the agency's (non-)payment practices is of no concern of mine.

I had a right to the money for Job 1 (I didn't for Job 2 and, indeed, never got paid a cent for it, as I shouldn't be). And I got it. That the end client got their document weeks late is unfortunate, but it very much is the agency's fault for trying to mess with me. As an added bonus, they likely got chewed out by and then lost the end client.

[Peelee]

And I'm willing to buy Hilgya being Evil for wanting to kill Durkon

And Ivan, I assume?

[The_Weirdo]

And Ivan, I assume?

She herself admitted she was and it's been a long while since I admitted she was Evil back then.

[Peelee]

She herself admitted she was and it's been a long while since I admitted she was Evil back then.

You have pointedly refused to mention that she tried to kill Ivan because she was Evil, and instead said that the proof she was Evil was based on her actions in Dorukan's Dungeon. And even now, when all I asked was "and Ivan?" you sidestep the question and just say you admitted she was Evil at one point.

[The_Weirdo]

You have pointedly refused to mention that she tried to kill Ivan because she was Evil, and instead said that the proof she was Evil was based on her actions in Dorukan's Dungeon. And even now, when all I asked was "and Ivan?" you sidestep the question and just say you admitted she was Evil at one point.

I admit she was Evil when she tried to kill Ivan. Heck, so does she.

[GooeyChewie]

snip

Withholding services due to lack of payment is not only not evil, it’s pretty much standard business practice. Now, if you had instead attempted to murder the employee who called from the agency then tried to dupe the owners of that company into a Ponzi scheme, I’d call it evil.

[The_Weirdo]

Withholding services due to lack of payment is not only not evil, it’s pretty much standard business practice. Now, if you had instead attempted to murder the employee who called from the agency then tried to dupe the owners of that company into a Ponzi scheme, I’d call it evil.

Well, to be sure, I pretended not to withhold Job 2. I used Job 2 as a hostage for the payment of Job 1. And then I went and killed the proverbial hostage. Really, I still laugh about how the guy screamed when he noticed just how screwed he was.

[Peelee]

I admit she was Evil when she tried to kill Ivan. Heck, so does she.

Again, you sidestep the question. I'm not asking if you think she was Evil when she tried to kill Ivan. I'm asking if you think trying to kill Ivan was an Evil act. It's a very simple question, yet this the third time I've had to ask it because you keep dancing around it.

[The_Weirdo]

Again, you sidestep the question. I'm not asking if you think she was Evil when she tried to kill Ivan. I'm asking if you think trying to kill Ivan was an Evil act. It's a very simple question, yet this the third time I've had to ask it because you keep dancing around it.

It was. One to be blamed on the clans.

[Peelee]

It was. One to be blamed on the clans.

Dang. Wish I had an alignment system where one could be Evil, but not responsible for their Evil actions. could simplify the 9 alignments into one, though: "Arbitrary."