Questions about the early strip and Sapphire Guard

[Fyraltari]

It's possible I suppose, but that also winds up killing off the nobles who actually agree with Shojo's policies. Not an ideal strategy for maintaining your long-term power-base.

I don't think Shojo is concerns himself with "long term" that much.

I mean faced with the same problem, I would have used the paladins to conduct a systematic investigation of the nobility class and heavily fined/imprisoned/executed and striped of nobility those guilty of assassinations or other crimes and given their titles to commoners with a history of loyalty, competence and/or integrity. And tightened security, of course. It makes you look good in front of the common folk, gives you a bunch a new (public) servants you can trust, earn you the paladins' respect and trust for being a defender of justice, allows you to leep soundly at night, funds the treasury and doesn't leave your heir to deal with a huge festering pile of corruption and trained assassins. Plus you can pay for the whole thing with the convicted's money.

Shojo decided to gowith the complexed gamble that required him to pretend to have schizophrenia and estrange himself from his beloved nephew.

Guess that's why I'm not a benevolent dictator that manipulates people from the shadows.

[Lacuna Caster]

I mean faced with the same problem, I would have used the paladins to conduct a systematic investigation of the nobility class and heavily fined/imprisoned/executed and striped of nobility those guilty of assassinations or other crimes and given their titles to commoners with a history of loyalty, competence and/or integrity. And tightened security, of course. It makes you look good in front of the common folk, gives you a bunch a new (public) servants you can trust, earn you the paladins' respect and trust for being a defender of justice, allows you to leep soundly at night, funds the treasury and doesn't leave your heir to deal with a huge festering pile of corruption and trained assassins. Plus you can pay for the whole thing with the convicted's money.

Given that Shojo's strategy is to play the nobles against each other so that he, in the eye of the storm, can rule as he sees fit, I'd say he would take very careful steps to ensure no one noble family is permanently in favour of his decisions.

I think there's something of a vacuum of evidence when it comes to Shojo's justifications, and both the ease and methods of assassination in D&D might differ somewhat from reality, but I will say it sounds like Azurite politics might be interesting to play around with.

I'd like to delve into it in more detail, but I feel the risk of investing in the urban intrigue is it gets harder to wrench away the focus to some unrelated portion of the wilderness for interacting with the Order and the Gates- not in terms of causal justification so much as in pacing and payoff. Miko's not exactly a political animal either... though I suppose, in some ways, she's closer to it than the other paladins.

It is a mistake to view anything Shojo or Miko does through the lens of reason, because they do not see the world as existing by logical rules. They know without a doubt that the world was made for them by gods who watch over them. Ideas such as fate are not only wishful thinking on their part; they are scientifically demonstrateable truths of the Stickverse.

That's partly what I'm driving at, yes. Miko inhabits a world where, for example, actual atheism is about as intellectually tenable as being a Flat Earth conspiracist. That might make for an amusing character, actually- some kind of high-level crackpot Expert who denies intelligent design or planar cosmology and tries to prove the conservation of matter and energy or the descent of all species from a common ancestor. Heh.

[Fyraltari]

That's partly what I'm driving at, yes. Miko inhabits a world where, for example, actual atheism is about as intellectually tenable as being a Flat Earth conspiracist. That might make for an amusing character, actually- some kind of high-level crackpot Expert who denies intelligent design or planar cosmology and tries to prove the conservation of matter and energy or the descent of all species from a common ancestor. Heh.

One of my favorite jokes of the Discworld series is that in Small Gods the Omnian Church fervently claims that the world is a ball orbit the sun (they aren't sure which one the moon orbits) despite all empirical evidence to the contrary. There's also a god of atheism in a later book trying to invent evolution.

Though, in OOTS world a case could be made for atheism, depending on your understanding of the word god. That is an extremely charged subject and there are rules here so I'll just say that :
1) The OOTS gods clearly aren't Omnipotent, Omniscient and Benevolent.
2) The fact that several gods are in fact ascended mortals allowfor reasonnable doubt on their claim of making the universe (I'm pretty sure they did but theoritically someone could doubt that in-universe whithout being ridiculous).

[Lacuna Caster]

One of my favorite jokes of the Discworld series is that in Small Gods the Omnian Church fervently claims that the world is a ball orbit the sun (they aren't sure which one the moon orbits) despite all empirical evidence to the contrary. There's also a god of atheism in a later book trying to invent evolution.

Though, in OOTS world a case could be made for atheism, depending on your understanding of the word god. That is an extremely charged subject and there are rules here so I'll just say that :
1) The OOTS gods clearly aren't Omnipotent, Omniscient and Benevolent.
2) The fact that several gods are in fact ascended mortals allowfor reasonnable doubt on their claim of making the universe (I'm pretty sure they did but theoritically someone could doubt that in-universe whithout being ridiculous).

Small Gods and Feet of Clay are my two favourite Discworld books.

There's certainly some role for scholarly disagreement on various aspects of the Gods' roles and metaphysical abilities, but you can only choose to 'not believe in the Gods' in the same sense as you can choose to 'not believe in the Government', if you knew for a fact that the Government would one day inevitably arrest and judge you based on the state of your soul. I mean, Rich has constructed Dwarven society as being quite brutally moulded by the parameters of their afterlives, but as far as I can tell most human societies in OOTSverse would be subjected to similar pressures by the existence of the Seven Heavens and Nine Hells (and/or their chaotic variants.) Living in abject terror of divine judgement is something many humans have done in our own universe, never mind one where the clergy have visibly miraculous powers to heal and bless and there are reliable eye-witness accounts of devils and succubi. All the theocratic tendencies of regular human societies would be multiplied by a factor of ten.

The question here isn't, "why is Miko how she is?", the question is "why isn't everyone else?"

[Fyraltari]

Small Gods and Feet of Clay are my two favourite Discworld books.

If I had to name two it'd be Small Gods and Hogsfather.

There's certainly some role for scholarly disagreement on various aspects of the Gods' roles and metaphysical abilities, but you can only choose to 'not believe in the Gods' in the same sense as you can choose to 'not believe in the Government', if you knew for a fact that the Government would one day inevitably arrest and judge you based on the state of your soul.

Agreed except for the fact that Roy's apatheism doesn't not seem to have been an issue rearding his afterlife.

I mean, Rich has constructed Dwarven society as being quite brutally moulded by the parameters of their afterlives, but as far as I can tell most human societies in OOTSverse would be subjected to similar pressures by the existence of the Seven Heavens and Nine Hells (and/or their chaotic variants.) Living in abject terror of divine judgement is something many humans have done in our own universe, never mind one where the clergy have visibly miraculous powers to heal and bless and there are reliable eye-witness accounts of devils and succubi. All the theocratic tendencies of regular human societies would be multiplied by a factor of ten.

The question here isn't, "why is Miko how she is?", the question is "why isn't everyone else?"

Well there are mitigating factors here :
Everyone presumably know each god's alignment, so anyone trying to build a theocracy centered around a god with "Evil" in theirs will have big trouble. Good gods presumably don't want to strip their flock of their free will and their servants who are one step of alignment removed* at most would in most case not want that either. And if someone, say a Lawful Neutral servant of a Lawful Good god goes too far for the god's liking he could spectacularily fall which would decredibilise the whole church.

And I don't think Chaotic Neutral deities would be that interested in barking orders at everybody.

So basically we are left with Lawful and True Neutral theocracies. But this is a world where they invariably have to deal with small groups of megalomaniacal overpowered "heroes". I would guess most end up like Malack's : stillborn.

For sake of completeness I must mention that if Hel did use to receive as much worship as she remembers (nostalgia googles, anyone?) it is possible that there were Helish theocracies on the previous world. Maybe that's why Loki wanted her off-game?

*How does that work with afterlife, by the way? Does a NG follower of a LG god get a pass to hang out with his boss on the LG plane, or does the LG god have a summer palace on the NG plane or what?

[Jasdoif]

How does that work with afterlife, by the way? Does a NG follower of a LG god get a pass to hang out with his boss on the LG plane, or does the LG god have a summer palace on the NG plane or what?

If you're asking about in D&D...the former.

When a living creature dies, its soul departs its body, leaves the Material Plane, travels through the Astral Plane, and goes to abide on the plane where the creature’s deity resides. If the creature did not worship a deity, its soul departs to the plane corresponding to its alignment.

Complete Divine elaborates on this a bit, especially with a couple edge cases (the standard Greyhawk deities who reside on the Material Plane, characters who worship an entire pantheon instead of an individual deity....).

[Fyraltari]

If you're asking about in D&D...the former.Complete Divine elaborates on this a bit, especially with a couple edge cases (the standard Greyhawk deities who reside on the Material Plane, characters who worship an entire pantheon instead of an individual deity....).

Well I was asking for OOTS but I see no reason why that should not apply here.

Thanks, for the info.

[Lacuna Caster]

Well there are mitigating factors here :
Everyone presumably know each god's alignment, so anyone trying to build a theocracy centered around a god with "Evil" in theirs will have big trouble.

Good gods presumably don't want to strip their flock of their free will and their servants who are one step of alignment removed* at most would in most case not want that either. And if someone, say a Lawful Neutral servant of a Lawful Good god goes too far for the god's liking he could spectacularily fall which would decredibilise the whole church.

And I don't think Chaotic Neutral deities would be that interested in barking orders at everybody.

So basically we are left with Lawful and True Neutral theocracies. But this is a world where they invariably have to deal with small groups of megalomaniacal overpowered "heroes". I would guess most end up like Malack's : stillborn.

That's an interesting analysis, and probably partly valid, certainly insofar as Chaotic and Lawful deities would emphasise different ethics and values. But I think this isn't so much a case of the Gods imposing their desires from the top down as it is a case of mortals' natural incentives shaping society from the bottom up. The broad point is that the quality of the afterlife you receive is an overwhelming incentive compared to anything that goes on within your biological lifespan. Death is slow, but death is sure, and getting right with the Gods is your key to the right afterlife, so the people who commune with and visibly channel blessings from said Gods are going to have immense social influence. Nobody is going to do jack that might jeopardise their celestial 401K without checking with the clergy first.

There's something of a question-mark over why anyone is Evil in a universe where that nets you eternal torment, but one could imagine that Evil religions function as a kind of ongoing spiritual Ponzi scheme, with disproportionate benefits accruing to a tiny minority of especially powerful or persuasive followers. Contrary to the tome of fiends I don't think it's all fair and balanced, but there's certainly no clear long-term benefit to being Evil if you're not acting in league with an Evil deity. They presumably don't tolerate freeloaders.

So from both ends of the spectrum, there's this intense pressure to defer to the clergy as mouthpieces for the will of the Gods. Good deities might have relatively laissez-faire attitudes when it comes to the minutiae of daily life, but that just means they're being benevolent dictators- not that the dictatorship doesn't exist.

[Peelee]

There's something of a question-mark over why anyone is Evil in a universe where that nets you eternal torment

You seem to live in a world where all people always think things through to their logical conclusion, and never make any decisions (or even major life choices) actually thinking about the consequences.

Imean, don't get me wrong, that sounds like a delightful place, and I'd love to go there. It just doesn't resemble the real world very well.

[factotum]

There's something of a question-mark over why anyone is Evil in a universe where that nets you eternal torment

Real life is littered with examples of people doing stuff which they know is likely to end up badly for them, but they go ahead anyway because getting the immediate benefit outweighs some nebulous potential consequences in the future. It's the same logic that leads people to buy lottery tickets--the chances of winning a major prize are insanely low and no-one who thought it through logically would buy the things, but people don't think about it logically, they just think "I might be able to retire from this crappy job and never have to do a day of work again!".

[RatElemental]

There's also the fact that only the evil afterlives are really meant to be hells. The neutral ones (mechanus, limbo and... concordant opposition?) aren't really bad places to be, really.

And as for piety, once again you don't need to be pious to get into an alignment afterlife.

[Fyraltari]

That's an interesting analysis, and probably partly valid, certainly insofar as Chaotic and Lawful deities would emphasise different ethics and values. But I think this isn't so much a case of the Gods imposing their desires from the top down as it is a case of mortals' natural incentives shaping society from the bottom up. The broad point is that the quality of the afterlife you receive is an overwhelming incentive compared to anything that goes on within your biological lifespan. Death is slow, but death is sure, and getting right with the Gods is your key to the right afterlife, so the people who commune with and visibly channel blessings from said Gods are going to have immense social influence. Nobody is going to do jack that might jeopardise their celestial 401K without checking with the clergy first.

The thing is Good, Evil, Chaos and Law are, within this universe, physical forces that can be measured by mortals and they have the testimony of people that have physically beento heaven to know that ultimately, this is all that matters. Of course many people will ask the clergy for spiritual guidance, just like in RL, with the exception that here they can choose people who they know can't be evil and have little chance to be neutral.
Besides, being demonstrably real is a double edged sword for gods : people can't doubt your existence but they can doubt your worth. Think of Om from Discworld : since he signed his covenant with Saint Brutha he stopped with the miracles and the prophets and all that and he has the fastest religion on the Disk because of that, because his followers can think he isn't a self absorbed vain idiot like the rest of Dunmanfestine.

So from both ends of the spectrum, there's this intense pressure to defer to the clergy as mouthpieces for the will of the Gods. Good deities might have relatively laissez-faire attitudes when it comes to the minutiae of daily life, but that just means they're being benevolent dictators- not that the dictatorship doesn't exist.

If you consider that a dictatorship that doesn't weigh on its subject is still a dictatorship then all gods are inherently dictators on account of having the power to wipe out humanity if they so choose.

There's something of a question-mark over why anyone is Evil in a universe where that nets you eternal torment, but one could imagine that Evil religions function as a kind of ongoing spiritual Ponzi scheme, with disproportionate benefits accruing to a tiny minority of especially powerful or persuasive followers. Contrary to the tome of fiends I don't think it's all fair and balanced, but there's certainly no clear long-term benefit to being Evil if you're not acting in league with an Evil deity. They presumably don't tolerate freeloaders.

Yeah, I don't think they are nice servants that can't benefit them anymore either.
I think its more of a survivorship bias thing everybody think they've got what it takes to rule in hell despite the fact that 99,99999% of them are necessarily wrong. That and not thinking ahead.


I think there is a bit of misunderstanding betweenthe two of us about what a theocracy is here:
I have been trying to explain why I don't think the world of OOTS wouldbe rife with nations where clergy and state are one and only and disregard their subjects' well-being. Is that what you mean or do you ascribe a broader meaning to the term?

[Lacuna Caster]

@Peelee, factotum: There are certainly individuals who wouldn't respond to these incentives, basically because they combine innate cruelty with poor impulse control and indifference to punishment, but those individuals are called psychopaths and are thankfully rare. The vast majority of people would respond to either pressure from peers, the long-term benefits of a cosy afterlife, or would actively seek the patronage of an Evil god if they had the inclination and self-perceived ability.

And as for piety, once again you don't need to be pious to get into an alignment afterlife.

Yes, but you do need to be Lawful Good, which still amounts to a kind of 'proxy religion'. That's a standard of behaviour that you need to adhere to if you want to reserve an apartment suite on Cloud Nine, which means talking to the Clerics who talk to the Devas who actually perform the audit process is... highly advisable. (I mean, that hundred-foot-tall book wreathed in holy fire sounds very much like a religious text to me.)

The thing is Good, Evil, Chaos and Law are, within this universe, physical forces that can be measured by mortals and they have the testimony of people that have physically beento heaven to know that ultimately, this is all that matters. Of course many people will ask the clergy for spiritual guidance, just like in RL, with the exception that here they can choose people who they know can't be evil and have little chance to be neutral.
Besides, being demonstrably real is a double edged sword for gods : people can't doubt your existence but they can doubt your worth.

Sure, you can doubt the Gods' worth. But if you're a Dwarf and fail to die in battle, no amount of reasonable skepticism about Thor's wisdom and prudence is going to keep you out of Hel's clutches. I presume that a Goblin who fails to meet the Dark One's standard of conduct and didn't work hard to please some other more amenable deity is not going to fare well when they shuffle off the mortal coil. Even if humans have a wider range of destinations to chose from, the smart strategy is always going to involve picking a particular cosmic patron and consulting with the relevant experts on how to meet their standards.

I'm not defining 'Theocracy' in terms of 'bad wrong oppressive medieval state'. I mean in the sense of 'state where religion and political power are conflated and most social values are derived from religious doctrine'. My point is that, in our universe, most human societies have historically given religious authorities a large degree of political and economic influence, even when they couldn't multiply loaves and fishes on a regular basis or connect-call to your ancestors. I don't see that influence being in any way diminished when they can.

.

[Peelee]

@Peelee, factotum: There are certainly individuals who wouldn't respond to these incentives, basically because they combine innate cruelty with poor impulse control and indifference to punishment, but those individuals are called psychopaths and are thankfully rare. The vast majority of people would respond to either pressure from peers, the long-term benefits of a cosy afterlife, or would actively seek the patronage of an Evil god if they had the inclination and self-perceived ability.

Again, in the world in your head, yes. In the real world, not so much. If you wish to write your own world like that, feel free. If you want to writs in someone else's world, don't be surprised when you encounter significant issues in what that world presents and what you want it to be.

[Lacuna Caster]

Again, in the world in your head, yes. In the real world, not so much...

To a large degree this is the case in the real world. Leaving aside warfare, the only people in modern societies who regularly go about killing other members of that society are either psychopaths or those hoping to climb the pyramid of a criminal organisation. Because the vast majority of human beings respond to the incentives of effective legal deterrence combined with the benefits of long-term career investment.

Now imagine what happens in a world where any kind of wrong-doing- not just the openly violent kind- is ultimately held against you and the punishments aren't just severe, but potentially infinite. There might be differing definitions of wrong-doing, depending on who you pray to, but you're gonna have to serve somebody.

[hamishspence]

Roy demonstrates that in the OOTS-verse, you don't have to serve any particular deity to get into the afterlife that suits you.

The churches in the OOTS-verse are powerful - but that doesn't mean everybody, or even most people, are actively devoted to any specific deity.

[Lacuna Caster]

The churches in the OOTS-verse are powerful - but that doesn't mean everybody, or even most people, are actively devoted to any specific deity.

Not all religions are necessarily focused on a particular deity either. Replace 'The Tao' or 'Confucian Ethics' with 'Lawful Goodness' and the social effects are going to be much the same. (For example, Eugene's refusal to fulfill the terms of the Blood Oath has not worked out well for either him or his descendants. There are, quite evidently, standards of conduct that such characters need to fulfill or face severe consequences, and a summoned Deva could probably have told him as much.)

[hamishspence]

Roy theorises here that knowing there's an afterlife:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0669.html

means a higher incidence of warfare - people don't take as much care with their lives as they would if they didn't know.

However, his conclusions are a bit dubious.

[Peelee]

To a large degree this is the case in the real world. Leaving aside warfare, the only people in modern societies who regularly go about killing other members of that society are either psychopaths or those hoping to climb the pyramid of a criminal organisation.

There is a vast swath of evil actions that are not murder. Just throwing that out there.

[RatElemental]

Yes, but you do need to be Lawful Good, which still amounts to a kind of 'proxy religion'. That's a standard of behaviour that you need to adhere to if you want to reserve an apartment suite on Cloud Nine, which means talking to the Clerics who talk to the Devas who actually perform the audit process is... highly advisable. (I mean, that hundred-foot-tall book wreathed in holy fire sounds very much like a religious text to me.)

Why lawful good? Bytopia accepts lawful good AND neutral good people, and Elysium is explicitly for the neutral good ones. Ysgard accepts both chaotic good and chaotic neutral people, with Arborea being just for the chaotic good ones and limbo for the chaotic neutrals for whom Ysgard is not a good fit. And then there's Mechanus for lawful neutral people, but they have a chance to enter Arcadia too. Most of those are explicitly paradises, and I could see Limbo and Mechanus being alright places to be for the right mindsets.

[georgie_leech]

Why lawful good? Bytopia accepts lawful good AND neutral good people, and Elysium is explicitly for the neutral good ones. Ysgard accepts both chaotic good and chaotic neutral people, with Arborea being just for the chaotic good ones and limbo for the chaotic neutrals for whom Ysgard is not a good fit. And then there's Mechanus for lawful neutral people, but they have a chance to enter Arcadia too. Most of those are explicitly paradises, and I could see Limbo and Mechanus being alright places to be for the right mindsets.

I'd consider myself more Neutral Good than Lawful Neutral, and even I could see Mechanus being a fascinating place. Though the Chaotic part of me would rather have the freedom to visit rather than stay there for eternity, so I probably wouldn't end up there.

[Lacuna Caster]

There is a vast swath of evil actions that are not murder. Just throwing that out there.

Sure, but none that you can get away with under the all-seeing eye of the celestial bureaucracy. 'Big Odin is watching you', so to speak.

Why lawful good? Bytopia accepts lawful good AND neutral good people, and Elysium is explicitly for the neutral good ones.

I think is somewhat missing the point. There might be room for variation across the law/chaos axis, but there are massive, massive incentives against being evil during life, and even neutrality still kinda sucks by comparison. (The differential in outcomes is merely 'infinity' as opposed to 'twice infinity'.)

Also, there are usually family members and past acquaintances that you'd want to meet up with again. Since maintaining social bonds is a pretty universal human impulse, one can assume that most mortals will be under significant pressure to conform to the entry standards for a particular afterlife. (Particularly when you can visit your great-great-great-great-grandmother via Plane Shift and hear her ask why she doesn't have great-great-great-great-grandkids yet.)

[woweedd]

i've stated before my theory of the evil afterlife as a Ponzi scheme. Evil people are, by definition, selfish pricks. And, in the Evil afterlife, if you're a selfish enough prick, you end up becoming a Demon or Devil or Daemon, ruling the roost as a King High Bastard for the rest of your immortal existence. Sure, you had to go through a lot of **** to get it, but so what? If someone's power-hungry enough,they'll tolerate just about anything for more power. Sure, statistically-speaking, they're far more likely to just spend the next thousand years as a Lemure, getting stomped on by the big guys for the rest of time, but, well, frankly, Evil people are not well-known for having a realistic assessment of their own abilities, ya know? Plus, i've been partial to the theory that the Afterlives aren't rewards or punishments, (Why would they be? There are both Good and Evil Gods, after all, so it's not like the universe is based one way or the other.) they're just the natural results of having worlds entirely inhabited by one alignment. A World with nothing but Good people in it is gonna become a Utopia, while a world composed of nothing but Evil *******s is gonna be exactly what the Evil afterlife looks like: A bunch of pricks stepping over one another to become King Of the Mountain. Evil people can only be successful when they can exploit those who are not Evil. In a world with nothing but Evil? Everyone's just being a jerk to each other, all the time, and nothing's getting better. It's a moral Prisoner's Dilemma. Everyone's nice? Happiness for all. Everyone's a jerk? Happiness for no one.

[brian 333]

Ever try to tell a teenaged boy not to ride a shopping cart off the roof of his house?

"It won't happen to me!" is the refrain of that song, and far too many people deny reality this way. "It doesn't matter that hundreds of kids are addicted and living lives of misery, it won't happen to me," is usually the last thing a kid says before becoming addicted.

I once heard a preacher, (Southern Baptist,) say that when he was a younger man he fell by the wayside because nobody ever told him how much fun sinning could be.

So, don't be in a hurry to write off the idea that a great many believe, (usually without justification,) that they are simply too smart, too courageous, too agile, or too lucky to fall victim to the things which crush others because they are somehow exceptional and immune to the consequences.

[Fyraltari]

there are massive, massive incentives against being evil during life, and even neutrality still kinda sucks by comparison.

I am fine with that.

[Lacuna Caster]

@woweedd, brian 333: I don't disagree with any of what you're saying, per se. It's entirely possible that a fair swathe of evil-inclined individuals would over-estimate their chances of climbing the heap. (I'm guessing that Nale had some vague ambition to become a half-fiend and thence a prince of the lower planes, probably after attaining world domination in some form, for example. Sabine would dig out some variant rules if need be.)

Tarquin never seems to talk about his long-term retirement package, though, and he's clearly a guy who's both managed to climb the heap and isn't exactly a spring chicken. Did Malack negotiate a settlement on his behalf with Nergal, or something?


Anyway- I've probably bitched enough for the time being. I'm happy to leave it there for now.

[Peelee]

Sure, but none that you can get away with under the all-seeing eye of the celestial bureaucracy. 'Big Odin is watching you', so to speak.

And? You act like the same isnt true in the real world. People who enroll in college and then don't go to any classes, or people who have a court date and then don't show, for instance. Things that they know for a fact will end badly for them, yet they do it anyway. Not doing homework that is due the next day is a tiny issue, but then so is swiping a few copper could from your sibling, while stabbing somebody in broad daylight in front of a dozen witnesses and cameras all around is analogous to, well, stabbing somebody while knowing deities exist.

Again, if you live in a world where people don't make stupid decisions despite knowing that there will be consequences and yet still do them anyway, that sounds amazing, but that place does not resemble the real world.

[Lacuna Caster]

And? You act like the same isnt true in the real world. People who enroll in college and then don't go to any classes, or people who have a court date and then don't show, for instance. Things that they know for a fact will end badly for them, yet they do it anyway. Not doing homework that is due the next day is a tiny issue, but then so is swiping a few copper could from your sibling, while stabbing somebody in broad daylight in front of a dozen witnesses and cameras all around is analogous to, well, stabbing somebody while knowing deities exist.

Remarkably few people in modern societies actually stab victims in front of surveillance cameras. Sure, it happens all the time. People get struck by lightning all the time. But that's not a statistically accurate characterisation of how society works.

The consequences of skipping college classes are generally not good, but they're not analogous to eternal torment, or even life in prison. By comparison, imagine a world where the lobbyist who successfully swings enough votes to- I don't know, subsidise bear bile farming- knew as an absolute certainty that this was going to send them to Hell. These people aren't stupid. I expect that would have some impact on regulatory capture.


Of course, this actually leads to some rather paradoxical conclusions when it comes to the nature of morality. If all Good deeds have a potential eternal reward attached, it becomes impossible to distinguish the genuinely selfless from the rationally self-interested. That's rather the point from a social-engineering perspective, but it means that informing everyone on Earth about the situation in the afterlives makes genuine Goodness almost impossible to demonstrate. It also means you have a much stronger moral obligation to keep Evil people alive than Good ones. In fact, assisted suicide for the innocent is arguably the best thing you can do for them.

So, yeah. It's a very strange kind of world. I'm not saying I'd be entirely comfortable with it, and it certainly doesn't resemble OOTSverse all that closely. But I do think it's interesting.

[Peelee]

Remarkably few people in modern societies actually stab victims in front of surveillance cameras. Sure, it happens all the time. People get struck by lightning all the time. But that's not a statistically accurate characterisation of how society works.

The consequences of skipping college classes are generally not good, but they're not analogous to eternal torment, or even life in prison.

Skipping college classes don't need to be analogous to eternal torment. It just needs to demonstrate that people will do things that have absolute consequences that the people know about, because they simply do not consider long-term consequences if their actions. That answers your question of, "why would people commit Evil acts in a world with confirmed after lives?" Ten gold says a good amount of people in Evil afternoons did not peg themselves as Evil, and thought they would be going to a better afterlife.

As for the greater Evils, like stabbing someone in front of surveillance cameras, yes, it is not statistically relevant. That doesnt matter. What matters is that anyone who would do such a thing if almost certainly thinking one of two things - either they do not care about the consequences (regardless of how ridiculous that may seem to you or me), it that they think they can somehow get away with it (again, regardless of how ridiculous that belief may be). Both of these beliefs translate perfectly well to a D&D world. (If you can think of any other thing one may think as they do such a thing, feel free to throw that in, but my gold is on it also translating well to the D&D cosmology structure; simple psychosis, for instance.)

[factotum]

As for the greater Evils, like stabbing someone in front of surveillance cameras, yes, it is not statistically relevant. That doesnt matter. What matters is that anyone who would do such a thing if almost certainly thinking one of two things

Well, they might also be unaware that the camera is there. I suppose the nearest analogy to that in the Evil person would be someone who believes the Gods can't possibly be watching *all* the time and maybe they'll get away with it this time...