Wish and Horrors

[Endoperez]

Sometimes the horrors appear and obey you, for a time. Then they disappear. Some of the horrors don't want to move away from the province you summoned them in, but stay in place causing madness in any troops and mages you happen to have around there.

[Wrana]

Yes, for example. Possibly Horrors, etc. should be considered to have Insane 10-50 due to their different thought process...

[capnq]

ArkhanTheBlack said: >> who says R'lyeh is evil.. they are just different.. a higher being like a serpah understands

Last time I checked, enslaving a whole race (Atlanteans in this case) was considered evil. If the Seraph understands that as okay, he should get himself a new job as fallen angel or angel of death.

"Seraph" is just a convenient label for an entity of a particular power level. Your version of the summoning spell will contact a compatibly aligned entity. "Horror" is a similar label that merely implies the entity is more likely to have its own agenda.

"Good" is the label for your worshippers; "evil" is everybody who opposes you. History is written by the winners.

[Edit] Afterthought: "last time [you] checked" was later than the mid-seventeenth century. Judging the past based on the moral and ethical standards of the present is just another case of the "us" versus "them" split that KO mentions in his reply.

[ArkhanTheBlack]

>> "Seraph" is just a convenient label for an entity of a particular power level.
No, it isn't! A seraph is an angel of the highest rank in christian religion (exists in jewish too, but it's not the highest rank there). Christian religion has very clear rules for 'good'. They are known as 10 commandments.

>> "Good" is the label for your worshippers; "evil" is everybody who opposes you. History is written by the winners.
That's just anarchism, nothing more.

[Kristoffer O]

>> "Seraph" is just a convenient label for an entity of a particular power level.
>No, it isn't! A seraph is an angel of the highest rank in christian religion (exists in jewish too, but it's not the highest rank there). Christian religion has very clear rules for 'good'. They are known as 10 commandments.

To my knowledge the ten commandments are not the christian definition of good. Jesus abolishes the law and says that you shall love the next. (Not sure of the english wording here). Thus honoring the sabbat is not part of the definition of good in christianity. Not doing what you don't want others to do to you is.

Actually christianity have less clear rules on good and evil than most religions, at least as presented by Jesus. Jesus places higher moral responsibility on the christians then most religious founders do. It is you who shall know what is wrong, and be judged. The old testament might guide you, but it is your thoughts and intentions that are judged. That is a very hard position, especially since very few have the moral fibre of Jesus. Fortunately Christianity allows forgiveness for all those who are unable to cope with this vast responsibility.

Oops. Sorry. Got carried away

Thus both the seraph and the Vastness are not good, by the standard humans should treat each other. Seraphs do kill and maim the unfaithful, quite in opposition of what Jesus said. Vastnesses shatters minds or whatever, probably rather indiscriminately.

>> "Good" is the label for your worshippers; "evil" is everybody who opposes you. History is written by the winners.
>That's just anarchism, nothing more.

It's not anarchism. Its history (the meaning of the term when applied to the study of history), sociology, or otherwise scientific (as in not value laden) perspective. Although the assessment 'history is written by the winner' is perhaps no longer a neutral sentence, but an expression of scienticism (not sure if this word actually exists ).

Hmm, lost focus there. My point is that it is the general perspective of most scientific studies that 'we' define 'us' as 'good', while 'they' are defined as 'evil'. If 'we' wrote history 'they' were evil.

Most religions have similar views on what is good and what is not (not kill, not steal, not have sex outside strict social structures, and other stuff that causes disturbances in society) but still they define each other as evil.

Hmm, I did not intend to go into religion and theology. Hope you don't mind.

[Cerlin]

Of course not Kristoffer! thats the whole basis of why we fight! (Both this game and in life!) So it is always interesting and good to talk about!

Being a historian by training you really realize that most all history is just propaganda that you have to interpret. Every religion sees itself as "good" and all those same religious groups have negative things that can be tied to their names. Jihad for Islam, Witch burnings and major civil wars for Christians just to name a few.

At the time when protestants killed catholics, both honestly believed they were right, and that the other side is going to hell.

[ArkhanTheBlack]

>> To my knowledge the ten commandments are not the christian definition of good. Jesus abolishes the law and says that you shall love the next. (Not sure of the english wording here). Thus honoring the sabbat is not part of the definition of good in christianity. Not doing what you don't want others to do to you is.
Actually christianity have less clear rules on good and evil than most religions, at least as presented by Jesus. Jesus places higher moral responsibility on the christians then most religious founders do. It is you who shall know what is wrong, and be judged. The old testament might guide you, but it is your thoughts and intentions that are judged. That is a very hard position, especially since very few have the moral fibre of Jesus. Fortunately Christianity allows forgiveness for all those who are unable to cope with this vast responsibility.

The 10 commandments are the best you can get if you want some rules for 'good' by human definition. The bible itself contradicts itself too much and has too much 'radical' stuff in it to be taken as a clear guide so easily. The inquisitors abused and misinterpreted a lot of stuff to kill lots of innocent people. Jesus said a lot of good stuff, but he has also some very 'extreme' speeches in the bible a la "You will burn in hell even if you just think bad of someone". Nobody can fullfill such extreme standards of moral and the also can't be considered as good. However, you are right to say that some common sense is needed to decide what's good an evil. In some conditions you have to fight and kill to save others. It's a very grey area sometimes.


>> Thus both the seraph and the Vastness are not good, by the standard humans should treat each other. Seraphs do kill and maim the unfaithful, quite in opposition of what Jesus said. Vastnesses shatters minds or whatever, probably rather indiscriminately.

Usually, the angles fight for the good, which means they only fight to protect others. Therefore they only fight if they have to and not for pleasure and egoism. However there also a bunch of fallen angles like Satan, Belial, etc. So angles are probably not perfect.


>> It's not anarchism. Its history (the meaning of the term when applied to the study of history), sociology, or otherwise scientific (as in not value laden) perspective. Although the assessment 'history is written by the winner' is perhaps no longer a neutral sentence, but an expression of scienticism (not sure if this word actually exists ).

History WAS anarchism² in most cases. However, in order to live in a social community you have to break the restrictions of anarchism. Therefore, even if human history is quite rough, the normal life was usually guided by the social rules of living peacefull together.

[Wrana]

even if human history is quite rough, the normal life was usually guided by the social rules of living peacefull together.

or, "peace is an abstraction we draw from the fact that there were short stints between wars".
Normal life was & is guided by the purpose of society's survival. And this has little in common with all-encompassing value of peace... Of course, anarchism didn't take this into account, so anarchists & those close to them thought that individuals can think out & bring about an eternal peace unobstructed by evil of governments...

[Professor_Dyar]

The Vastness in Dominions is clearly inspired by Yog-Soloth, one of the Outer Gods of Lovecraft, but is not as openly hostile as some of Lovecraft's other lovelies like Cthulhu. Obviously, Yog-Soloth is way more powerful than anything in Dominions short of the Pantokrators themselves, so the Vastnesses can only be aspects of Yog-Soloth. I am curious to whether Yog-Soloth can have conflicting sides to its 'personality'...

[capnq]

Professor_Dyar said: I am curious to whether Yog-Soloth can have conflicting sides to its 'personality'...

They only seem like conflicts to our pathetically limited human comprehension. One of Lovecraft's underlying themes is that most human conceits simply don't apply in the universe at large.