Friendly reminder that ontologically evil races always make a setting better. The best stories all have 100% evil races (Sranc, Shanka, Trollocs, demons).
>>94361336I mean, Duh?Zero consequence punching bags are the bread and butter of RPGs
>>94361336Reminder: water is wet
OP is correct, >>94361422 is dead wrong.
>>94361336What game?
>>94361336"Ontologically evil" is a buzzword that people who use it don't even understand the meaning of.An ontological property is something that is so inherent to the subject that it can't even be conceived as existing without it. Having three angles is an ontological property of a triangle. It's literally what defines the shape as a triangle. If you tried to imagine a more-than-three-angled triangle, you're by definition thinking of some other shape like a square or a pentagon.Being evil, however is not an ontological property of demons. Even if every demon is 100 % evil all the time, you could still imagine the demon doing something good even if it would never do so in reality. At best, being evil is an inherent property of demons (all demons are also automatically evil), but it's not an ontological property.
Why is everyone talking about Bakker lately?
>>94365554If you think of a demon not being evil you are definitionally thinking of something which is not a demon.
is there a reason why Slaanesh loves crab claws so much?
>>94365613So, do you believe that demons are beyond redemption? Any story that involves a demon turning away from evil and finding within themselves the capacity for good is strictly and totally impossible?Do you believe the reverse as well? Do you believe that an angel is incapable of an evil act?
>>94361336Then why did you post Slaaneshi Daemons?>>94365653>is there a reason why Slaanesh loves crab claws so much?I mean other than the Crabs joke and the inherent irony of the sensory faction having hands made of unfeeling chitin...
>>94365613IRL mythology disagrees with you.Demons being made of elemental evil is a D&Dism.
>>94365690Demons can't be redeemed, anon. Union rules.
>>94365653>is there a reason why Slaanesh loves crab claws so much?Like most things GW it's derived from shameless plagiarism.The first Slaanesh Greater Daemon models were literally repurposed D&D Glabrezu minis.Same reason Jokaero are orangutans. They're repurposed 2000AD Dave the Orangutan minis.
>>94365653 Getting pinched hurts a lot.
"Good" and "evil" are nonsensical concepts that almost exclusively refer to emotional reactions to culturally sanctioned behavior. In 6,000 years of written history no conclusive definition or shared understanding of them has been reached. I don't like it, it exhausts my soul every day to admit it, but even a cursory glance through the history of philosophy makes it clear: the concepts make no real sense. An ontologically (or inherently) evil race is, thus, just a cultural projection. It doesn't challenge anyone reading it, doesn't make them think about what good and evil is, they are unconnected from any meaningful message about the complexity and uncertainty that defines real life, and exists only to emotionally satisfy the reader/player. You can argue this makes brainless escapes from reality better, but it doesn't make settings better, as they're typically supposed to be a little deeper than just a place to play pretend murderhobo. I wish this wasn't the case. I've spent decades searching for some conclusive, proven, absolute definition of good and evil, but all I've found is thousands of years of brilliant men arguing well defended positions with no real progress towards a conclusion. Which means that presenting an ontological evil in a fiction setting is equally without a meaningful conclusion or point.
>>94361336>this thread again/tg/ is at least 50% nogame shitposters at this point
>>94365653in terms of retroactive lore i guess it's symbolic of their inability to 'let go', or having a literal vice grip?
>>94365613I suggest you look up the etymology of the word demon.
>>94365726>Demons being made of elemental evil is a D&Dism.more like Christianitybut anyway there seems to be something common to many fantasy creatures>original entity is vaguely defined>different names for the same entities>some stories portray those entities quite differently>autism and d&dism leads to people ~needing~ clear definitionsThat's how you get elves and fairies being something different when they were the same thingsimilar thing with dwarves, gnomes, goblins, kobolds, imps, ghouls, and others
>>94365690>>94365726>>94366127Behold!
>>94366127nta but what do you mean?sure, greek daimōn weren't necessarily evil, but since christianity, daemons were always explicitly evil
>>94366127>the dictionary defines love as
>>94361336The thing is, most no-names demons of Tzeentch, Slaanesh and Nurgle in Warhammer Fantasy aren't even evil, for their minds are twisted in a way they believe they're doing only good stuff.Nurgle's minions spread plague because they cannot conceive of why their diseases and shit cause such dismay amongst their victims. In their mind they're like kids throwing flowers and rice at you.Daemons of Slaanesh revel in excess and the torment they bring is the most philanthropic of blessings for them.Tzeentch's daemons are just bored and believe you're just as bored so they change/torn your ass with change juice, it's a win-win for them.Khorne's daemons are pure assholes tho.
>>94366163You sick fuck.
>>94365726>Demons being made of elemental evil is a D&Dism.And D&D demons can be redeemed. There are cities in several settings, extraplanar of course, where redeemed demons, fallen angels, and other weird versions of alignment based creatures exist. Even D&D doesn't make its demons or any other alignment thing ontologically based on that property.
>>94366142>more like ChristianityIn Christianity demons are the opposite of being made from elemental evil. They're literally just tarnished versions of divine good beings. If anything, they're made from elemental 'good', just covered in the filth and muck that comes of doing evil.I can't think of a single IRL belief system where demons are 'made' of evil. Even older Judaic stuff just has them either as bits of unfinished discarded parts of creation, or as powerful and alien spirits of the natural world, with the morality of a thunderstorm or a famine.
>>94366380Zoroastrianism maybe? They have a strong duality theme.
>>94361336No, you are just latching onto culture war shit. Race isn't even a factor, all you need is a faction regardless of race. And even then, them being 100% enemies can be simply justified in other ways and don't need to be anything more than "they''re bad because they just are for this particular setting/story". Needing to make it the race itself is a bizarre extra step.
>>94366551The ugly truth is that modern people's very sense of good and evil is completely fucked up. You are right that one-note evil races are dumb and having a more nuanced conflict is more interesting, but this kind of shit doesn't apply anymore because people want to play Game of Thrones characters who are cynical soulless pieces of shit and still be hailed as heroes. The issue here is the very idea that someone's actions might be labeled as "bad" in the first place, that's why zoombies get upset if there's an evil tribe of orcs on another continent that you will never see: if there is any evil at all, there is evil, and there can't be evil because if there is evil then I might be, so you're saying *I* am evil (you fucking bigot).
>>94366591I dunno, anon, this reads an awful lot like you've never encountered anyone who acts like this and have instead invented them in your head so that you have a reason to remain mad after conceding the actual point.
>>94366591Nah. Even to this day I guarantee you could slap down a bunch of random multiracial bandits and have them be unceremoniously killed off or defeated and most people won't give a fuck because they know bandits are bad, and they attacked you first.
>>94366728this reads an awful lot like you haven't played a game in 10 years
>>94366380Well, yeah, I should have been clearer.The idea of demons being always evil is predominantly from Christianity.Being made of evil, yeah that's D&D.
>>94366591>modern people'sOr you're just "old man yelling at clouds" idealising a past that never existed.
>>94366728>>94366752>>94366841>and they hated him for he told the truth or closer than your narrative anyway. Most people don't like having to deal with the possibility of being bad or evil, especially for fun pretending to be heroes. Its not generational, there will however be a variety of age cohort specific techniques. That's okay really, its ttrpgs not civics class or some shit.
>>94365719>chubster Daemonette Hmm yes.
>>94366956>t. anon with zero reading comprehension
>>94367328nou
>>94367233EXCESS BABY!!!
>>94365952i love this imageit's supposed to show slaaneshi degeneracy but it's just a bunch of people chillin and having a good timeit isn't shocking or scary it's just a cool themed bar full of purple hoes
>>94369695I mean the monk with the bitching moustache is clearly uncomfortable getting that close to the talent...That or the book he's holding.
I'm begging you to use fresh pasta
>>94361336The Sranc are not ontologically evil. They are the products of a process the Inchiroi employed to twist existing creatures (the Nonmen) into hideous parodies of themselves with hyper-enflamed passions and no consciousness. Khoringus The Survivor uses his Dunynain 7000 IQ mentalist skills to read one and realizes that there's nothing to read, they're smooth-brained animals, maybe smart enough to learn language, but never smart enough to actually think about anything deeply.I.E. they're "evil" in the same way that particularly vicious animals are evil, but "ontology" implies that this is not something that could be changed or separated from them--but the Sranc themselves ARE the product of being changed, they were degenerated by the Tenke, but some of them were actually regenerated part-way BACK to being Nonmen, the Ur-Sranc are larger and more intelligent, and less mindlessly vicious.This also applies to orcs, serial killers, basically anything whose evil is the product of some physical quality. For them to be ontologically evil, evil would have to have an ontology, meaning it would have to be an actual physical thing which exists in them as a positive force. Most people view Evil as the absence of good (Christians for example) and thus this is conceptually a non-starter. Satan isn't Ontologically evil, because he was once good but fell, for example. The Inchiroi are though. A good example of an actual Ontological Evil, though, are the Myrddraal, and by extension the Trollocs Because these things are actually birthed expressly and wholly from the cruel will of Shaitan, they aren't just naturally antisocial or dangerous, they are actual manifestations of evil, more evil than most depictions of demons.But what setting actually has this? Warhammer 40,000 doesn't even deal in ontological evil because the Chaos Gods themselves have positive, even noble aspects. Nurgle is love, Khorne is courage, Slaanesh is beauty, Tzeench is wisdom, etc.
>>94366034>"Good" and "evil" are nonsensical conceptsWe get it satan. Now shut up and go back to hell.
>>94366380Being nearly all evil(not sure why OP used "Ontologically") is not the same thing as being made of evil.Christian demons Invented evil to the point that its defined by their actions. You literally can't get more evil than that.
>>94371558>thus this is conceptually a non-starterOnce you permit the existence of a ontological good, this becomes a valid argument; its invalidity presumes a materialist perspective. Bakker is one step around on the supernatural vs material reaction ouroboros Tolkien started. To read the rebuttal to Bakker you need only pick up CS Lewis' That Hideous Strength.
>>94365653Carcinisation heavily implies crabs are the perfect lifeform so obviously the chaos god of perfection would love crabs
>>94365653Crab claws are are type of Vice and Slaanesh is the chaos god of Vices
>>94361336As a vampire player, by cain do I love punching Baali in the face for being cartoonishly evil. Settites too but sometimes they pretend to be people and catch you off guard.
>Its another case of a midwitt with grognard fantasy tastes missusing words to sound smartOp, what you are talking about are universal villains. Evil has fuck all to do with, except of course the grognard DnD obsession with defending the idiotic "always chaotic evil" attribute. Race also has fuck all to do with it as there are many universal villains in media, from Nazies in films to nations like Thay in Faerune that serve this purpose. So is the trope good? No, its neutral. If you are a talentless hack you'll just press the "insert orcs here" button for bitch basic opponents. Better authors will use it well by creating good lore around this universal villain and/or using this threat to give character growth to the good guys. So in short, its a tool, like all the other tropes and if you think otherwise you are either an auteur dipshit that thinks its possible to not use tropes or you are even bigger dipshit that is hard-stuck in their safespace of only consuming reehashes of the same genre trope to the point that the lack of these tropes somehow makes the work lesser. Oh, but of course, there is the third possibility that you are just bandwagoning the contrarian train of "old is better than new" and made this pointless thread to get hugbox replies from fellow hipsters.
>>94371754>presumes a materialist perspectiveEven materialism allows for the possibility of objective good/evil based on logic.Arguing against the possibility of objective good/evil is solely the ground of subjectivists, who try to gain legitamacy by parasitically wearing the skins of other philosophies.
>>94372076>everything is subjectiveFuck off subjectivist hack.
>>94366142> more like ChristianityI am not aware of any Bible verse that says that demons are beyond redemption. Would you care to point it out to me?
>>94361336Consider this: according to Christianity, humans are inherently evil. This evil can be cleansed temporarily through God, but if you believe in original sin and the sacrament of the baptism and all that, then you are admitting that the natural state of mankind is that of evil and only through direct and intentional action can they be given chance to be anything else. And even if you do all of the rituals that cleanse you of sin through the power of god, most people still fuck it up and return to their natural state of sin anyway and need to re-cleanse themselves periodically.
>>94361336>ontologically evil>Shankalil bro hasn't read the second trilogy yet
>>94361336This statement appears to be unsupported by any argument and is therefore meaningless. No, I will not be reading this thread. If OP can post, then OP need not depend on a third party to defend her assertion.
>>943724651) Everything is subjective and facts don't care about your fee fees.2) Learn to read, the point wasn't about subjectivity but about tropes being neutral since what matters is the execution. Both the most subversive and the most cookie-cutter trope genre piece can be good so long as the writer knows their shit.
Pure evil races are the refuge of the lazy and those who have no faith in their audience or players.
Depends on the game. I like that some settings lead to everyone disgreeing wholeheartedly about who is the good guys.
>>94374004>Everything is subjective and factsAnd here is where you fail to understand your own stance. If everything is subjective facts don't exist, just different perceptionsAgain, fuck of subjectivist scum. Your kind are philosophical zombies.
>>94361336THEY DINDU NUFFIN!ITS THEIR CULTURE!!
>>94374138U r an idort
>>94371865
