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

[Keltest]

Indeed (mind you, in some cases, the people responsible for the wrongdoing are often long out of office or long dead).

But yes: we do agree here. The people that have to pay for the misdeeds, at most, take it up with the government somehow, no? Since the alternative would clearly be the wrong going unrighted and/or unavenged.

Nobody is disputing that some level of redress is deserved. Its just the part where you go "and then after that, the victim should go and do a bunch of horrible things to tangentially related people" that's wrong.

[The_Weirdo]

Nobody is disputing that some level of redress is deserved. Its just the part where you go "and then after that, the victim should go and do a bunch of horrible things to tangentially related people" that's wrong.

Except that's not what happened here.

Hilgya obtained her redress.
Hilgya got out of the wrong done to her.
And it cost all members of the clan money.

How exactly is that different from someone that was mistreated by a government gaining said redress? She didn't go to court over it? That's not Evil, that's Chaotic.

[Peelee]

Except that's not what happened here.

Hilgya obtained her redress.
Hilgya got out of the wrong done to her.
And it cost all members of the clan money.

How exactly is that different from someone that was mistreated by a government gaining said redress? She didn't go to court over it? That's not Evil, that's Chaotic.

If the Government of Peeleeia awards a judicial settlement paid by taxpayer money, the taxpayers don't have to give up all their money immediately. Instead, things that rely on taxes, such as repaving the roads, are put off for a year or so (gross oversimplification, but it hey, welcome to Peeleeia). Hilgya, conversely, took the taxpayers' metaphorical houses. Your analogy fails at the point where she actively and immediately harms other people. Which, coincidentally enough, is where it becomes Evil.

And in any event, I'm not sure why you're so gung-ho on Hilgya being Chaotic when you have proven yourself to be quite Lawful.

[The_Weirdo]

If the Government of Peeleeia awards a judicial settlement paid by taxpayer money, the taxpayers don't have to give up all their money immediately. Instead, things that rely on taxes, such as repaving the roads, are put off for a year or so (gross oversimplification, but it hey, welcome to Peeleeia). Hilgya, conversely, took the taxpayers' metaphorical houses. Your analogy fails at the point where she actively and immediately harms other people. Which, coincidentally enough, is where it becomes Evil.

And in any event, I'm not sure why you're so gung-ho on Hilgya being Chaotic when you have proven yourself to be quite Lawful.

The taxpayers in question can easily go after the head of the government, kill him and the higher-ups in the government structure and sell their organs for new houses.

Sure, Hilgya could have waltzed her fifteenth-level Cleric self into the halls of both clans, killed the leaders, taken their stuff and informed the rest of the clans of the very grim fate that would befall them if they ever dared to try and oppress her again in any way. But that might result in the courts - you know, these very same courts that had to be gamed in order to grant her a clean divorce from a marriage into which she was forced at crossbow point - might consider her a criminal.

You know, a criminal like it doesn't consider the guy with the crossbow.

[Peelee]

The taxpayers in question can easily go after the head of the government, kill him and the higher-ups in the government structure and sell their organs for new houses.

OK, you have really got to stop going straight to the "kill people" option. The entire point of this exercise is to minimize killing. Stop trying to add more killing!

[The_Weirdo]

OK, you have really got to stop going straight to the "kill people" option. The entire point of this exercise is to minimize killing. Stop trying to add more killing!

I thought the point was to maximize justice and minimize the damage to innocents.

[Peelee]

I thought the point was to maximize justice and minimize the damage to innocents.

Justice does not mean "any crime deserves killin'." The word you're looking for there is "Evil." That is maximizing Evil.

[The_Weirdo]

Justice does not mean "any crime deserves killin'." The word you're looking for there is "Evil." That is maximizing Evil.

Well, what would you suggest that preserved the right of the party that was hurt to get redress now?

[Kish]

Also, the definition of an "innocent" is not "someone who The_Weirdo identifies with."

[The_Weirdo]

Also, the definition of an "innocent" is not "someone who The_Weirdo identifies with."

Well, I already said they could see to it that all damage was redirected to the people that did the misdeed. What more do you want from me?

[Sgt_Dubie]

Except that's not what happened here.

Hilgya obtained her redress.
Hilgya got out of the wrong done to her.
And it cost all members of the clan money.

How exactly is that different from someone that was mistreated by a government gaining said redress? She didn't go to court over it? That's not Evil, that's Chaotic.

How is that different? Well, it’s more like someone was mistreated by the government. But rather than file for some kind of human rights tribunal and follow the proper channels for a grievance, they decide to empty the nations treasury and plunge the land into a recession from which it may never recover, causing many more to suffer.

[The_Weirdo]

How is that different? Well, it’s more like someone was mistreated by the government. But rather than file for some kind of human rights tribunal and follow the proper channels for a grievance, the decide to empty the nations treasury and plunge the land into a recession from which it may never recover, costing many more to suffer.

And if the land ever does recover, it will have learned its lesson and not do it to anyone ever again.

[Sgt_Dubie]

And if the land ever does recover, it will have learned its lesson and not do it to anyone ever again.

No... It means many innocents are plunged into poverty, famine and epidemics. Infrastructure crumbles, crime rises and more people are victimized because the selfish need for one person to have revenge now.

[The_Weirdo]

No... It means many innocents are plunged into poverty, famine and epidemics. Infrastructure crumbles, crime rises and more people are victimized because the selfish need for one person to have revenge now.

Not revenge. Redress. Remember Hilgya needed her clan penniless in order to get out of the marriage, per her plan.

And, well, if it weren't for the clan's selfish forcibly marrying someone, that someone would want no revenge and need no redress, now, innit?

[Kish]

No... It means many innocents are plunged into poverty, famine and epidemics. Infrastructure crumbles, crime rises and more people are victimized because the selfish need for one person to have revenge now.

I think Peelee figured it out. What matters to The_Weirdo is that his rules are followed and those he defines as nonpeople don't get anyone's sympathy. Costs to the innocent and even to the person who is going on the (theoretical or actual) roaring rampage of revenge are something he occasionally pays lip service to caring about--nothing more.

[Sgt_Dubie]

Not revenge. Redress. Remember Hilgya needed her clan penniless in order to get out of the marriage.

I don’t think she needed it. It was a matter of convenience. Kind of like paying off witnesses to win a court case. I may be inocent and win anyway. But it’s so much easier if I don’t have the prosecutor working against me.

[The_Weirdo]

I don’t think she needed it. It was a matter of convenience. Kind of like paying off witnesses to win a court case. I may be inocent and win anyway. But it’s so much easier if I don’t have the prosecutor working against me.

And what's wrong with that if you're innocent and were set up?

I think Peelee figured it out. What matters to The_Weirdo is that his rules are followed and those he defines as nonpeople don't get anyone's sympathy. Costs to the innocent and even to the person who is going on the (theoretical or actual) roaring rampage of revenge are something he occasionally pays lip service to caring about--nothing more.

Maybe. Except my rules don't really go beyond "don't oppress".

Usually, Evil acts and Good reacts, no? Well, I'm in favor of reacting.

[Ironsmith]

Well, I already said they could see to it that all damage was redirected to the people that did the misdeed. What more do you want from me?

Well, for one, they invariably won't. Let's say in yet another fictional country (we'll call it Ferros), we've got a head of state who's done something awful... no need to go into specifics as to what, since that's somewhat beside the point. A sizable portion of the population (may or may not be the majority) decide that this action is unforgivable and stage a revolution. After a hard-fought battle, they manage to overthrow the head of Ferros, and get a new order going. Well and good, that guy was a... not good, we'll just go with that.

But Ferros has a fair number of government-based jobs that have been annihilated now (assuming their tenants weren't killed in the revolution). Aside from just administering to their orders, which they have no control over, they haven't really done anything wrong, but now they're going to suffer for the actions of their boss. Military personnel are now either dead or out of a job for similar reasons. Innocent citizens now have to deal with the massive upheaval that comes with the entire flamin' government coming down. Additionally, this is a prime climate for both domestic criminals and foreign threats to strike, potentially causing everyone to suffer from more ne'er-do-wells that would not have otherwise been able to do so.

Now, obviously, the Firehelm clan isn't a country. But as a group of significance, they're big enough that their sudden bankruptcy will cause no shortage of unintended, detrimental side-effects; anyone relying on the Firehelm clan is now screwed, members of the clan itself that had nothing to do with Hylgia's plight are now gonna suffer, and then there's extra damage that's gonna occur on a macro level, caused by the power vacuum that's bound to occur when an influential clan suddenly drops out of the picture. Sure, Hylgia's gotten her revenge, but that's a very hefty price to level on so many innocents just so she can get out of her marriage (which was more or less just a vanity at this point) more quickly than she normally would.

[The_Weirdo]

Snip.

Re: countries... Without getting into real life examples, using, maybe, Galt from PF as a fictional one, I'll just say that, sometimes, it's better for a revolution and violent overthrow, with a reign of terror for some five years or so, to happen than the dictatorship slowly and "politely" restoring democracy in its own terms, with an amnesty to all officials (or "both sides", as if oppressors and those that fought them were equivalent) and with a lasting legacy of teaching present and future generations that it's okay to be a tyrant and that you'll never get really punished for it. Even because, in the second scenario, the democracy is always threatened by so much as a peep by top military brass, while a bunch of evil, authoritarian fascists scream for another tyranny to take over, torture, kill and disappear their opponents. You very much can trust me on that. Five years of Galt are better than a hypothetical unstable Andoran that can be taken over by tyrants any day.

Re: Hilgya, one, her brother saw fit to forcibly marry her off, two, her brother saw fit to gamble away the family fortune. So whose fault is it, really?

[Sgt_Dubie]

And what's wrong with that if you're innocent and were set up?



Maybe. Except my rules don't really go beyond "don't oppress".

Usually, Evil acts and Good reacts, no? Well, I'm in favor of reacting.

Because my actions also have consequences. Now we got presumably innocent witnesses that may have seen things wrong, or been miss informed. Now they’re liable for accepting my bribe... you could argue that they deserve punishment for taking the bribe in the first place I suppose... but they wouldn’t be in the position to take free money that they might have desperately needed if I wasn’t so willing to do things the less good way because it was more convenient for me. Now instead of feeding their kids with the unexpected windfall, they loose everything under some proceeds of crime law, he’s in jail and his family is in the street...

[Ironsmith]

Re: countries... Without getting into real life examples, I'll just say that, sometimes, it's better for a revolution and violent overthrow, with a reign of terror for some five years or so, to happen than the dictatorship slowly and "politely" restoring democracy in its own terms, with an amnesty to all officials (or "both sides", as if oppressors and those that fought them were equivalent) and with a lasting legacy of teaching present and future generations that it's okay to be a tyrant and that you'll never get really punished for it. Even because, in the second scenario, the democracy is always threatened by so much as a peep by top military brass, while a bunch of evil, authoritarian fascists scream for another tyranny to take over, torture, kill and disappear their opponents. You very much can trust me on that.

Re: Hilgya, one, her brother saw fit to forcibly marry her off, two, her brother saw fit to gamble away the family fortune. So whose fault is it, really?

Re: Countries; That was really more or less just an example, but even in cases where revolutions have caused tyrants to lose their positions and a government's stabilized after X number of years, tyranny's always returned, generally in fairly short order. Given the choice between A) One tyrant dies, a million suffer, and tyranny continues and B) One tyrant lives, a million get gradual improvement for their lives, and tyranny continues, B seems massively preferable. To not put too fine a point on it, A describes the vast majority of violent revolutions, while B describes civil rights movements (not just the Civil Rights movement in the US, but others as well) that have by and large been much more successful in the long run.

Re: Hilgya; Hylgia's brother, obviously. But he wasn't the only one to suffer. Everyone in the Firehelm clan (or who relied on it), regardless of their involvement in Hylgia's marriage, suffered for what Hylgia (and her brother) did. By the definition you gave (an unprovoked intrusion on their rights), they've now been oppressed. By Hylgia. Which makes it an Evil act.

[Kish]

Maybe. Except my rules don't really go beyond "don't oppress".

Obviously untrue. Your rules include an idiosyncratic definition of "oppress" which spells out exactly who is always and forever a victim no matter what they do, and who can never be a victim no matter what people of the first type do to them. If your rules were truly as simple as "don't oppress," you would object equally to a dwarf with a crossbow forcing another into an unwanted marriage; a dwarf with an illusion tricking other dwarves into bankruptcy; and a dwarf with fire burning other dwarves alive.

(And please don't bother to scream about who started it again. I am well aware that you, like Tarquin when he explains why it's unfair for Amun-Zora to accuse him of lying, consider your rules obvious and universally important; and just like his rules, I find them so meaningless that they're overdignified by calling them 'meaningless.')

[The_Weirdo]

Because my actions also have consequences. Now we got presumably innocent witnesses that may have seen things wrong, or been miss informed. Now they’re liable for accepting my bribe... you could argue that they deserve punishment for taking the bribe in the first place I suppose... but they wouldn’t be in the position to take free money that they might have desperately needed if I wasn’t so willing to do things the less good way because it was more convenient for me. Now instead of feeding their kids with the unexpected windfall, they loose everything under some proceeds of crime law, he’s in jail and his family is in the street...

So... Their being corrupt and bribable isn't really their fault, but you bribing them is yours, even though you'd not be in this situation in the first place if the system weren't rigged?

Obviously untrue. Your rules include an idiosyncratic definition of "oppress" which spells out exactly who is always and forever a victim no matter what they do, and who can never be a victim no matter what people of the first type do to them. If your rules were truly as simple as "don't oppress," you would object equally to a dwarf with a crossbow forcing another into an unwanted marriage; a dwarf with an illusion tricking other dwarves into bankruptcy; and a dwarf with fire burning other dwarves alive.

(And please don't bother to scream about who started it again. I am well aware that you, like Tarquin when he explains why it's unfair for Amun-Zora to accuse him of lying, consider your rules obvious and universally important; and just like his rules, I find them so meaningless that they're overdignified by calling them 'meaningless.')

Well, if he didn't want to get tricked into bankruptcy, why did he marry Hilgya off by force?

Re: Countries; That was really more or less just an example, but even in cases where revolutions have caused tyrants to lose their positions and a government's stabilized after X number of years, tyranny's always returned, generally in fairly short order. Given the choice between A) One tyrant dies, a million suffer, and tyranny continues and B) One tyrant lives, a million get gradual improvement for their lives, and tyranny continues, B seems massively preferable. To not put too fine a point on it, A describes the vast majority of violent revolutions, while B describes civil rights movements (not just the Civil Rights movement in the US, but others as well) that have by and large been much more successful in the long run.

Re: Hilgya; Hylgia's brother, obviously. But he wasn't the only one to suffer. Everyone in the Firehelm clan (or who relied on it), regardless of their involvement in Hylgia's marriage, suffered for what Hylgia (and her brother) did. By the definition you gave (an unprovoked intrusion on their rights), they've now been oppressed. By Hylgia. Which makes it an Evil act.

Re: countries: and in cases where the tyrants "gently" stepped down after decades in power, there's always been a threat of them taking over again because no one made an example out of them...

Re: Hilgya: wasn't it her brother the one that bet the family fortune? She certainly didn't Dominate him.

[Ironsmith]

Re: countries: and in cases where the tyrants "gently" stepped down after decades in power, there's always been a threat of them taking over again because no one made an example out of them...

Re: Hilgya: wasn't it her brother the one that bet the family fortune? She certainly didn't Dominate him.

Going back to Hilgya because that's what this thread is about... yes, her brother was the one to bet the fortune. If Hilgya hadn't set him up that way and he'd essentially hung himself with the ample rope he'd been given, that'd be all on him. But Hilgya did set him up, with intent to cause bankruptcy for the clan, and succeeded in doing so. Her brother isn't innocent, obviously, but Hilgya still actively screwed over a lot of people that weren't her brother.

[Sgt_Dubie]

You know... I just give up. Clearly Wierdo is set in stone about the ends justify the means. It’s the classic slippery slope that will lead one to do despicable things over and over again, blaming all the evil on someone else, because they started it after all. And time goes on, and nothing gets better, and more despicable evil people committing atrocities are born every generation (because the ‘good’ end goal of the time justify the evil acts we must commit to achieve it as quickly and easily as possible, and besides, it was the last evil doer that caused all this, so it’s their fault).

[The_Weirdo]

Going back to Hilgya because that's what this thread is about... yes, her brother was the one to bet the fortune. If Hilgya hadn't set him up that way and he'd essentially hung himself with the ample rope he'd been given, that'd be all on him. But Hilgya did set him up, with intent to cause bankruptcy for the clan, and succeeded in doing so. Her brother isn't innocent, obviously, but Hilgya still actively screwed over a lot of people that weren't her brother.

And all of it was for the greater cause of ensuring that her right not to be married was respected.

[Ironsmith]

And all of it was for the greater cause of ensuring that her right not to be married was respected.

So, her rights were granted... at the expense of those of a lot of people who'd done nothing to her. One person's rights are not a "greater good" than those of many others.

[Sgt_Dubie]

And all of it was for the greater cause of ensuring that her right not to be married was respected.

I’m just going to shoot that guy who took my lawnmower... after all, it’s for the greater cause of ensuring my right not to have my lawnmower stolen is respected.

[The_Weirdo]

So, her rights were granted... at the expense of those of a lot of people who'd done nothing to her. One person's rights are not a "greater good" than those of many others.

Maybe not. But, as I repeatedly said, they can take it up with Hilgya's brother. And, indeed, they will, for, by all appearances, he was the one that bet the family fortune.

To be sure? I'd not be surprised if Hilgya ended up being the one to save all dwarves by taking over her clan and voting against the destruction of the world...

I’m just going to shoot that guy who took my lawnmower... after all, it’s for the greater cause of ensuring my right not to have my lawnmower stolen is respected.

You must have missed the change. It's a load-bearing lawnmower now.

[Sgt_Dubie]

You must have missed the change. It's a load-bearing lawnmower now.

Nope... I’m still going to crush his family after I gun him down. I mean, they deserve to suffer right? Their dadand husband, who is an individual that makes independent choices shares a last name and some DNA with him. They deserve to suffer just as much.