Tarquin and Shojo: A Comparison

[Carry2]

I recently participated in a discussion on Malack that wandered onto the subject of Tarquin, his alignment, and whether the empire was a net curse or a blessing for continent, where I said some technically-accurate things that I'll probably regret in the morning. (Short version: Anarchy tends to suck. Conversely, self-defence when dungeon-crawling doesn't make the other guy evil.)

What's struck me, however, is that there are some marked similarities in technique between Tarquin and Shojo, despite having ostensibly opposite alignments. Both maintain a position of power through lies and manipulation behind the scenes, in an effort to maintain/establish peaceful hegemony over fractious, squabbling regional power-blocs (the various desert empires and azurite noble families, respectively.)

This feeds into an observation I made a while back about the Godfather series- that Don Vito's rise to power could be interpreted as either CG or LE depending on the timing and perspective involved. During his early days, he's providing for his family and neighbours through petty crime, then deposes and usurps the abusive crimelord. In his later days, his clients turn to him for draconian, but effective, local law-enforcement, while he uses his power to intimidate and blackmail the uncooperative. But it's not that his methods or even scope of concern have really changed, it's just that he used to be on the bottom, and now he's on the top.

Leaving aside the G/E axis for now, what is it that makes Tarquin lawful and Shojo chaotic? Both are well-organised and make long-range plans. Both use blackmail and deceit. Both are concerned with avoiding direct blame or attention for their actions. Both manipulate the legal system from within. Tarquin definitely seems to be more belligerent, even vindictive, but their ethical positions seem damn-near identical.

Thoughts?

[Procyonpi]

Taquin believes in Order, Shojo much less so. Although Tarquin's means of achieving order appear somewhat chaotic on the outside.

[The Giant]

Tarquin built a system and uses it. Shojo inherited a system and subverts it.

[Carry2]

Taquin believes in Order, Shojo much less so. Although Tarquin's means of achieving order appear somewhat chaotic on the outside.

Wouldn't that imply a consequence/intention-based ethics, though? That it's not the means, but the result/end, that determine alignment? (And according to some interpretations, pragmatism is itself a chaotic quality, in that there's a discord between goal and methods.)

Tarquin built a system and uses it. Shojo inherited a system and subverts it.

Interesting. Are you saying that Azure City would actually have been more organised if Shojo wasn't on the throne? (And... y'know, not razed/occupied.)

We only have limited exposure to azurite politics-as-usual, but based on the meatloaf day incident and Kubota's behaviour, it seemed to revolve around surreptitious assassination attempts and dynastic power grabs, which is not typically the most orderly system of government. Or were uppity nobles largely the result of Shojo upsetting the establishment by, say, passing more liberal laws or making concessions to the plebs? (Which would at least explain the Good alignment.) Was he trying to shift azurite society from, say, LN to NG?

[EnragedFilia]

Interesting. Are you saying that Azure City would actually have been more organised if Shojo wasn't on the throne? (And... y'know, not razed/occupied.)

We only have limited exposure to azurite politics-as-usual, but based on the meatloaf day incident and Kubota's behaviour, it seemed to revolve around surreptitious assassination attempts and dynastic power grabs, which is not typically the most orderly system of government.

It might not be orderly, but Imperial China managed to make it work for quite a while. I'd always presumed that Shojo took up the 'acting insane' thing when he started getting too old to keep the nobles in line with the usual mix of military strength and political maneuvering.

[Chantelune]

Interesting. Are you saying that Azure City would actually have been more organised if Shojo wasn't on the throne? (And... y'know, not razed/occupied.)

I don't think it's a matter of organisation. Shojo was willing to do whatever it takes for the good of his city, even if that means ignoring some laws and breaking promises.

As for the fate of AC if Shojo wasn't in command... I think the situation would have been worse, actually. If Shojo was not in charge, he wouldn't have seek to investigate the gates through the OOTS, which mean they might not have been aware that Xykon was after the gates. And the OOTS might not have been there for the battle of AC, which not helped winning, sure, but most probably cut their losses all over the place.

[NerdyKris]

Interesting. Are you saying that Azure City would actually have been more organised if Shojo wasn't on the throne? (And... y'know, not razed/occupied.)

I don't think he's saying that at all. He's simply stating the difference between the two characters. Azure City fell because of a surprise attack by an army that outnumbered them, along wtih most of their army being outside the city or outright breaking ranks due to what the nobles considered no good reason to go to war. Hinjo refused to tell them what Xykon wanted. For all they knew, it was a cheesecake recipe.

Azure City fell due to a surprise attack by an enemy they never expected and because the reason for it's not surrendering was kept secret from the generals. Not because of the alignment of it's previous ruler. Almost anyone would have had the same results.

[AstralFire]

Azure City wouldn't have been more organized because in the state it was in, a ruler who better adhered to the laws would have been less able to get things done. Shojo's subversion of the system saved it, in much the same way that a reed's bending prevents it from cracking.

[Porthos]

Azure City wouldn't have been more organized because in the state it was in, a ruler who better adhered to the laws would have been less able to get things done. Shojo's subversion of the system saved it, in much the same way that a reed's bending prevents it from cracking.

Well, that's what Shojo thought. We really have no idea whether or not that is true.

[Snails]

I would also suggest that Shojo understood losing control of the throne risked open civil war. The Sapphire Guard itself could not allow the physical location of the Gate to be under control of a LE noble like Kubota, even if that meant the streets would flow with blood.

[Man on Fire]

The line between Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil is often drew in the sand.

[Snails]

The line between Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil is often drew in the sand.

The difference being that the CG in question could avoid such crises with assassination but chooses not to, and the LE would employ the assassination to precipitate the desired crisis.

[ZerglingOne]

The difference is the means. While state building may often result in a similar end. In that a given people are free to live their lives within the laws.

It's things like slavery vs. tradesmen. Gladitorial death sentencing from a court in which you're guilty until proven innocent compared to life imprisonment in a less corrupt(arguably) court system.

A house of commons and noblemen vs. a dictator (relatively hidden though he may be). Planned death camps vs. an army to PROTECT the citizens.

I got a bit hyperbolic on that last one, but the point still stands, the means to their end is -awful- in the EoB.

[SaintRidley]

It's things like slavery vs. tradesmen. Gladitorial death sentencing from a court in which you're guilty until proven innocent compared to life imprisonment in a less corrupt(arguably) court system.

Just a slight correction there. If you wind up in the EoB's court, you're guilty. Apparently, even if you don't make it to court you're probably still found guilty. There's a 114% conviction rate.

[Snails]

Just a slight correction there. If you wind up in the EoB's court, you're guilty. Apparently, even if you don't make it to court you're probably still found guilty. There's a 114% conviction rate.

I think it means that 14% of the defendants are silly enough to plead Not Guilty, and get additional charges thrown at them as a result.

[EnragedFilia]

Alternatively, 14% of defendants are dumb enough to try to pin their crime (to use the term quite loosely, as the case may be) on someone else, and when found out they're both convicted just on principle.

Alternatively, Phil isn't much better at math than he is at lawermancy.

[Koo Rehtorb]

I thought it meant that some of their lawyers got sentenced along with them for pissing the court off.

[EnragedFilia]

Or maybe when a defendant that escapes from the prison before the trial it still counts as a conviction, just to avoid rewarding that sort of thing.

So many possibilities!

[Psyren]

Just a slight correction there. If you wind up in the EoB's court, you're guilty. Apparently, even if you don't make it to court you're probably still found guilty. There's a 114% conviction rate.

Hey man, lizgreapers gotta eat.

[Carry2]

Azure City fell due to a surprise attack by an enemy they never expected and because the reason for it's not surrendering was kept secret from the generals. Not because of the alignment of it's previous ruler. Almost anyone would have had the same results.

I'm not trying to blame Shojo for the fall of Azure City. I'm just saying: In the hypothetical scenario where AC wasn't besieged at all, what would the overall effects of his reign have been? Did he, in fact, make the city more or less politically stable, more or less liberal in outlook, more or less comfortable to live in, etc.? What makes him CG, in other words?

I mean, aside from being concerned about the Gates- which plenty of nefarious characters also took a lively interest in- we don't actually see Shojo do anything especially benign.

It might not be orderly, but Imperial China managed to make it work for quite a while. I'd always presumed that Shojo took up the 'acting insane' thing when he started getting too old to keep the nobles in line with the usual mix of military strength and political maneuvering.

...Well, unless he actually went senile, getting old wouldn't prevent him doing that. But my point is that, regardless of whether that system 'works', a situation where you have a single ruler on the throne for several decades is arguably less chaotic.

[Psyren]

I'm not trying to blame Shojo for the fall of Azure City. I'm just saying: In the hypothetical scenario where AC wasn't besieged at all, what would the overall effects of his reign have been? Did he, in fact, make the city more or less politically stable, more or less liberal in outlook, more or less comfortable to live in, etc.? What makes him CG, in other words?

I mean, aside from being concerned about the Gates- which plenty of nefarious characters also took a lively interest in- we don't actually see Shojo do anything especially benign.

Did you see the other lords? Kubota et al.? That city would have dissolved in anarchy decades ago if it weren't for Shojo and the sapphire would have been even less defended than it was when Xykon got there.

Where Miko was concerned he could have done a better job, but he did try to rein in her more... Miko-y tendencies.

[Carry2]

Did you see the other lords? Kubota et al.? That city would have dissolved in anarchy decades ago if it weren't for Shojo and the sapphire would have been even less defended than it was when Xykon got there.

Well, yes. But this is what I've been trying to argue. If Shojo- like Tarquin- was- despite dishonest, unethical and manipulative methods- actually a net force for regional stability... and that was enough to make the latter Lawful... then we need something else to explain Shojo being Chaotic. (That, or something more to explain Tarquin's ethical alignment.)

Now, it's totally plausible that the other nobles were, for the most part, horrible oppressive murdering bastards, and thwarting their goals is what made him a benevolent dictator. But intentionally bettering the lives of his people and preventing anarchy from spreading would, all else equal, incline Shojo towards LG, not CG.

.

[veti]

As far as I can make out, the biggest difference between 'lawful' and 'chaotic' in OOTS is: how willing are you to tell an outright lie?

Chaotic characters, good and evil both, have no problem with lying. Lawful characters do. Hence Tarquin's and Malack's verbal contortions as they try to avoid making a direct statement (Malack never claimed to be LN, remember?) Redcloak tells the truth even when strongly motivated to lie. Durkon is obviously uncomfortable with even quite mild deception.

(I seem to recall Roy saying explicitly, possibly in OTOOPCs, that lying was - if not completely incompatible, then at least problematic, for someone lawful. Roy has lied, but the effort visibly strained him. Eugene has lied, and caused considerable shock on the forum at the time.)

Whereas Belkar, Elan, Haley, Shojo have no hesitation about lying (or in Elan's case, just plain fantasizing).

I'm not saying lawful characters can't lie, or never lie - but they are much more reluctant to do so than chaotic characters.

[Angulf]

But intentionally bettering the lives of his people and preventing anarchy from spreading would incline Shojo towards LG, not CG.

.

Yes, but tricking the paladins of the Sapphire runs against the law, something a fully Lawfull character wouldn't do. Shojo's last words were the true clue: "What I did, I did for my people (too lazy to fetch a link :P )

The means didn't matter to him, the welfare of the people were... and under a cold blooded murderer like Kubota, things were certainly not going to improve.

[Agnostik]

But intentionally bettering the lives of his people and preventing anarchy from spreading would, all else equal, incline Shojo towards LG, not CG.

Not all CG characters are extreme anarchists that balk at the notion of orderly government, unless that government is corrupt or severely flawed, in which case any Good character would take action. Shojo has seen the restrictive flaws and dealt with them in a "chaotic" manner.

[Rakoa]

Yes, Shojo ran a Lawful government through Chaotic means.

[Carry2]

Yes, but tricking the paladins of the Sapphire runs against the law, something a fully Lawfull character wouldn't do... ...The means didn't matter to him, the welfare of the people were... and under a cold blooded murderer like Kubota, things were certainly not going to improve.

Again, I'm not saying that Shojo isn't a good character, or even not a chaotic one. I'm just saying that if we're forced to 'fill in the blanks' in accounting for his Goodness, and accept that unsavoury means were acceptable given his ultimate goals, then his Chaotic credentials are also in question, if we assume that his policies also had the net effect of political stability.

If, on the other hand, as other posters have claimed, his, e.g, use of lies and manipulation prevents him being fully Lawful, then by the same token, neither is Tarquin.

The only alternative that I see (as I suggested earlier) is that Shojo was a net force for Chaos, just in it's more positive aspects (e.g, creativity and individual freedoms,) and/or that the basic traditions, power-structures and legal apparatus of Azure City were themselves in need of reform or circumvention. But in the absence of Word of God, we really just don't know if that's the case. So... I'm still kinda curious.

[Snails]

If, on the other hand, as other posters have claimed, his, e.g, use of lies and manipulation prevents him being fully Lawful, then by the same token, neither is Tarquin.

I perceive importance differences in tactics.

Tarquin has never told a outright literal lie, although he has been deceptive and manipulative on a number of occasions. He acts as if being, by some narrow definition, honorable and trustworthy were important.

Shojo will simply tell outright lies to your face, if he considers the goal important enough. Being honest and honorable do not seem important to Shojo -- they are just tactics that are useful when they are useful.