|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:55 pm
his reaction was sorta like angel dust xd
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:01 pm
And you'd know what that's like how H.P? Huh? HuH? HUH? WHERE WERE YOU ON THE NIGHT OF JULY 26? AWNSER ME!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your right though, it was alot like the reaction to angle dust......or at least that's what I've read. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:50 am
Wings_of_Esh Jeffry Naiom I noticed that we're having a discussion about the whole motivation of the shadow clan thing, and how the war would actually start. Evildoers don't need to have good motivation to do evil things, because in there eyes what they're doing is the right thing. That means that the shadow benders can have evil motivations. You seem to miss my point. I am argueing that what the Shadowbenders are doing and why has to seem rational and a good thing to them. Their motivation doesn't have to be rational or good to us. But they need to have a reason to justify to themselves that what their doing is the right thing. It doesn't need to be the most sound arguement as long as they can repeat it to themselves to keep faith in what they're doing. This sort of romanticism or insanity of actions is something a villainous character needs in order to have depth. I was merely pointing out that, whatever the justification, they need one. Actually, again, they don't. =P Evil can be evil for the sake of being evil, they don't HAVE to have misguided senses of Good or Justice. Maybe they woke up on the wrong side of life and took it to heart to piss in everyone's corn flakes before slapping a clip into their pistol and dropping a hot one between the eyes of anyone who doesn't eat their cereal. People can easily have the acceptable view of Right and Wrong and still choose to do Wrong to as many extremes as they wish, so there doesn't actually have to be justification in that light.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:41 am
Komm Kayriel Wings_of_Esh You seem to miss my point. I am argueing that what the Shadowbenders are doing and why has to seem rational and a good thing to them. Their motivation doesn't have to be rational or good to us. But they need to have a reason to justify to themselves that what their doing is the right thing. It doesn't need to be the most sound arguement as long as they can repeat it to themselves to keep faith in what they're doing. This sort of romanticism or insanity of actions is something a villainous character needs in order to have depth. I was merely pointing out that, whatever the justification, they need one. Actually, again, they don't. =P Evil can be evil for the sake of being evil, they don't HAVE to have misguided senses of Good or Justice. Maybe they woke up on the wrong side of life and took it to heart to piss in everyone's corn flakes before slapping a clip into their pistol and dropping a hot one between the eyes of anyone who doesn't eat their cereal. People can easily have the acceptable view of Right and Wrong and still choose to do Wrong to as many extremes as they wish, so there doesn't actually have to be justification in that light. Okay, do you know any real people who decided to do some evil act or something because they thought it would be evil to do? If You have a villain who does that they loose all sympathy and stop being a character. They are now a plot device, you can't role play a plot device well. Oh sure, there are plenty of characters in fiction that are "evil for evil's sake" but they generally aren't very interesting; or at least the fact that they are interesting doesn't have particular backing in their evil choices. Plus it is harder to defeat people who have a reason for what they are doing. They can have a screwed-up, twisted reason; but as long as it's there, the situation is not always black and white. This is why I love Avatar, it refraines from making villains who do evil for evil's sake. Once you get to know a character, you find out their complexities and that they are not just one sided. Look at Zuko and Zhao, the major antagonists of the first season. Zuko wanted to no longer be exiled from his home and to find favor from his father (after his mother died the only encouragement that he gets comes from Iroh.) and therefore he spends most of the season treading the line between hope and despair. He needs the Avatar to regain his honor, his home and his family's respect. This makes him much more interesting that if he just wanted the Avatar to do something evil. That is his character depth. Zhao is slightly harder to understand because he gets less screen time. I've gathered from various remarks that he believes very highly in his own honor; so much that he'd rather die then be made a disgrace. This reflects his lashing out at Zuko after the Agni Kai as well as his attempted assasination of him after discovering he was the Blue Spirit(another perpetraitor of his disgrace) and Finally his refusal to be saved at the North Pole after loosing the battle. He is highly motivated by the honor of the Fire Nation aswell. These traits, among others, gives Admiral Jhao a personality that he might otherwise be lacking. In order to have an interesting role play with many moral dilemmas you cannot have a black vs white storyline. If you do, it becomes all too easy to have very little internal conflict about proceeding forward on either side of the main conflict. The Bad guys don't occasionally doubt their own motives and the Good guys don't wonder if there is any way to save the bad guys without having to kill them. These moral complexities and shades of grey in the plot make up a lot of a role play's appeal. (At least to me)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:49 am
Youre looking too far into things. Take a look at some major characters Darth Vader, he had no reason to go all evil on the Jedi's a**. But he did. That is the point EVERYONE is trying to make to you. They dont have a reason they are just bad because they want to be bad.
A few baddies who do the wrong thing just because:
Saddam
Freddy Krueger
Jason Vorhees
Frank Cotton
That fellow who got that cult in Texas and killed everyone (the whacko in Waiko!)
Hannibal Lector
Pinhead (Movies 3 and up)
The Sith lord
Sauron
The list just keeps going on.
This storyline isnt going to be just another good versus evil plot line. Take a look at Komm's profile (second page of the fire nation) The Sanada clan will play a role in the plot, and if you like go to the northern air temple and check out my last few pages of posts. (Cain) is another character that is complex and evil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:11 pm
Esh -
You're putting too much romanticism into evil acts and suppositions. I have successfully Roleplayed evil characters of all shades for the last eleven years, interspersed with the occasional neutral character or the rare goody-good. Your experiences may be different, but this is the way things are. Might not be the way Humbra will wish to have things, as he obviously has final say, but I'm letting you know just how it is. =P
Don't take that as a rebuttal or hostility, but your view of evil and its causes are somewhat... enhanced by your own personal preconceptions of what might make evil alluring or even interesting. Sometimes a complex villian with a twisted sense of justice or improper guidance is extremely boring, and cliche... what is no longer cliche is the villian who is disruptive for the sake of chaos itself. Entropic overshadowing replacing reason and point... in the day, that's all there was. Now, it's all topsy-turvy "I'm right, you're wrong" - on both sides that becomes tritely droll. It takes a light, subtle hand to create the truly powerful evil plot, and even moreso a skilled touch to birth and unleash a perfectly evil character... perhaps Humbra has that ability.
This is something we will wait to see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 10:12 pm
Well I think the whole nature of good and evil changes if the charactar veiws it as the nature of chaos vs. order. Because then he can be doiong things for evils, but they are no longer evil they are just fuffling their natural roles.
A few baddies who do the wrong thing just because:
Saddam: Meh he was a small middle eastern country in which you have absolutley no say in the U.N. due to your treatment of women you're banned from world events, and you have to fight for power tooth and nail. I'd ssay he deffinetly did wwhat he did for a reason, but that dosen't make it an allright reason.
Freddy Krueger: He was intended to be a pure persronification of evil according to his creator, so you can't really use him as an example.
Jason Vorhees: He was almost murdered as a child, and his sole possesion was his mothers severed head at that point your grasp on reality was so frail he probably thought if he shot a duck it be like daffy, and keep talking.
Frank Cotton:
Hannibal Lector
Pinhead: All where written by different authors than the ones who created him. Saying that he did that for no reason would be like me writing a story where Zuko is a goody goody, and say that all of a sudden made it trued that Zuko is a goody goody
The Sith lord: See my above notes on Order and Chaos.
Sauron: He was a god, an omnipotent being of the first age, who was first to take physical form by the other gods when he tried to take more power. I'd be pretty pissed off about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:24 pm
*cough* Pinhead in movies one and two did what he did for a reason, he was summoned by the lament configuration. Movies after 2 (3-8 ) he became a demon obsessed with causing pain and suffering.
Freddy Krueger- Dude, "pure personification of evil" that says it all. Because he is evil personified that makes it "evil for the sake of evil"
The sith lord was obsessed with chaos. Corruption of people and manipulation of the mind. He had no reason to do what he did.
Though you make a good point on Jason. Though after the whole camp crystal lake fiasco he really didnt need to come back to kill everyone who went to the camp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:35 pm
[Hollow point] Freddy Krueger- Dude, "pure personification of evil" that says it all. Because he is evil personified that makes it "evil for the sake of evil" We are talking about people; not things personified. Actual people. Freddy Krueger is therefore not included in my particular idea. And I haven't heard of half the other people you've mentioned Quote: Don't take that as a rebuttal or hostility, but your view of evil and its causes are somewhat... enhanced by your own personal preconceptions of what might make evil alluring or even interesting. This is true and what I was saying. I find villains done this way are often done interestingly and it is harder to say who is in the right. I find these sorts of situations make good for role playing because it causes a lot of internal conflict. I was in no way denying that villains can't be done well the other way; I just don't tend to find them as interesting. It might just be harder to stimulate internal conflict when one side is obviously in the right. They are simply different ways of looking at it. However, Quote: Sometimes a complex villian with a twisted sense of justice or improper guidance is extremely boring, and cliche... what is no longer cliche is the villian who is disruptive for the sake of chaos itself. This is not what I was talking about. Villains making chaos for chaos's sake is different in my mind than villains making evil for evil's sake. I find that characters who create Chaos for it's own sake to be interesting and often fun to play; and often have a variety of views on why chaos deserves to be. They can have plenty of good motivation. They can be under or over done of course, and I don't always like that sort of character. But I like that a lot more than simply doing evil deeds because it's evil to do. Creating chaos can be done in a variety of ways; not all of which involve simple murder. Unfortunately, often when people make characters who do evil for evil's own sake, it's all about killing. It can get repetitive after a while.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:30 pm
how is freddy any different than what youre talking about? Personified evil is just the same as any other evil person, just more... pure.
Youre fighting this too hard. it doesnt matter. There need not be a reason for doing something, you just do it. For example I didnt have a reason for walking seven miles up a very large pu'u (poo-oo) behind my house, i just did it.
Cant a person be nice to someone for the sake of being nice? Yes. The same thing is applied to evil for the sake of evil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:59 pm
Esh-
Personal opinion duly noted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:27 pm
[Hollow point] how is freddy any different than what youre talking about? Personified evil is just the same as any other evil person, just more... pure. Anything, when it is personified, gains human properties; it does not start out as a person. A Person, when gaining properties, simply adds onto their already human selves. Evil personified is not a person with pure evil motives but evil with human properties such as body, voice, etc. [Hollow point] Youre fighting this too hard. it doesnt matter. There need not be a reason for doing something, you just do it. For example I didnt have a reason for walking seven miles up a very large pu'u (poo-oo) behind my house, i just did it. Cant a person be nice to someone for the sake of being nice? Yes. The same thing is applied to evil for the sake of evil. Did you even read my last post? Let me remind you. Quote: I was in no way denying that villains can't be done well the other way; I just don't tend to find them as interesting. It might just be harder to stimulate internal conflict when one side is obviously in the right. I'm simply asserting my opinion that it is better to do it with a reason and it fits in better to the Avatar setting; I'm not trying to force my philisophy on you, I just want you to understand and respect it as a different opinion. You aren't even admitting that it's an okay opinion to have, and you aren't responding to my points, but only trying to display a counterexample. (Some of which I can't react to because I haven't heard of them) By awknowledging my point, Komm showed me he understands my opinion, so I stopped trying to explain it to him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:33 pm
Aye. I understand that it is your opinion and I understand what youre trying to assert here, but im trying to explain to you why a motive isnt necessary. I agree that motive can potentially be better, but I also think that it becomes too cliche at a certain point. That's why i compared Ibiki to Koh the facestealer. Koh having been wronged in the past now lusts to harm the avatar, motive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:56 pm
Humbra - the plot is going to turn quite bloody. Humbra He goes where the drugs go.
ANYWAY, I like the idea of working under people but I think that, if a RPC decides to do so, they could be a sort of grunt.? For instance, let's say Tsuzuki (my character) wanted to be a scout vs. a general or anything like that. But, at the same time, we would use NPCs for the other grunts because we don't have nearly as many people as we need.
hmmm. . . Avatar. . . I have no idea. xp
Shadow Clan will have their reasons later. I'll wait patiently for when that time arises. They kinda seem like the plot device that will bring the nations together to face a much greater threat (after they get more members, o course). Also, if they change the Avatar to one of them or at least capture him/her, then that would make things interesting, wouldn't it twisted ?
Also, the Sith Lord goes evil for power.
And something not related to Avatar at all. . . I think that Cassius is some sort of Sith Lord of Ceasar's time while Brutus feels more like a younger Snape. . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:33 am
Rachlarn! I assume your computer is less explod-y then?
Anyway I thought you were the avatar because youre the proper age, power, and you were in the tournament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[Hollow Point]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/de/fb/743c3911afbde_flip.png?t=1267651205_6.00_00)
