Is attacking someone and stealing their property evil?

DeletedUser

I think thomas' points of arguement are reduculous and I think most of his opinions are flawed and I'm eighty percent sure he's a Scorpio but I respect the fact that he takes an enthusiastic and proactive stance to try and improve the game. Just because we are at opposite sides of the spectrum when it comes to how that should be done doesn't mean I dont like him and don't want him around. It just means that we disagree. So can it with the personal attacks and dontvread his posts or tell him his ideas are dumb. Either way you get your point across without making yourself looking ignorant.
 

DeletedUser

keighlon said:
I'm eighty percent sure he's a Scorpio
Click to expand...
What does that have to do with ANYTHING?!

That said, kudos on sdjx22 for invoking Goodwin's Law ;)
 

DeletedUser3741

  • Is attacking someone and stealing their property evil?
Of course not, stealing is a legitimate way of earning an something

  • Is witnessing an attack and doing nothing to stop it cowardly?
The cowardly thing is not taking advantage of the attack to earn something for yourself

  • Is defending a weak victim from a strong robber good?
if the victim is weak, after the strong robber does his part to weaken him even further then use your power to take whatever is left from the weak victim, or if youre stronger then the robber, take what he took

  • Is revenge the same thing as justice?
Doesnt matter what you call it really

  • Do you oppose adding “good-guy” options to the combat logic?
I dont oppose making combat logic more complex

  • Should Innogames continue to market The West as a game where you can “choose which way you want to go”?
No, most games always end up as ultimate evil spawn of satan or pooping flowers and farting angelic hymms as ultimate good with never any middle ground, if you want to add a "good and evil" system then at least add the 9 spectrum - Lawful, Chaotic, Good, Evil, and Neutral
 

DeletedUser

God no.

The options in moral spectrum always fails, as Talamare says, but the 9 spectrum D&D model will not work much in this game either, atleast not the way it is now.
 

DeletedUser

Okay

I have to ask, were those rhetorical statements two posts above this one, or simply another try to stimulate the debate? Or were they something else? I dont want to respond further until I know more or less what was intended.
 

DeletedUser

kroesus said:
Hw has started at least three threads in the last week + about how he thinks dueling the helpless (him) is evil and should be done away with.
Click to expand...

There are enough cowards who won't fight someone their own level in this game to help make points in favor of fixing how duels are done to make it more equitable for everyone involved... and when someone three normal levels and five dueling levels higher than another can attack without any chance of retribution... that should definitely make somebody wake up and smell the gunpowder!
 

DeletedUser3741

Prudhomme said:
I have to ask, were those rhetorical statements two posts above this one, or simply another try to stimulate the debate? Or were they something else? I dont want to respond further until I know more or less what was intended.
Click to expand...

I thought the reason for questions was to state what you believe
 

DeletedUser

Okay, sure

So if I understand you correctly, those statements reflect what you actually think. Wow....so many fallacies, so little time. Where to start?
Or, on the other hand, Ill just let the content of those statements speak for themselves and not even get into it.
 

DeletedUser

Has it ever crossed your mind that thomas may also be winding us all up? Not saying he is, but it's possible.

I never quite go those people that go on about cowardly attacks. Like you should deliberately try and lose a duel because that's the noble thing to do. If they play soccer do they deliberately miss the goal? It's just a game!
 

DeletedUser

Huh?

Im not sure what "winding us up" means....Im assuming its something like either having us on or is it maybe stirring us up? I dont know that either applies. When Thomas debates he, like any other debater matches his energy level to that of the adversary.
 

DeletedUser

What I'm saying is that he may not actually mean what he is saying. Obviously I could be wrong but it IS a rather extreme position to take on a cowboy game. I mean how does he cope with the duelling quests? Surely they would be morally wrong in his eyes? It's a bit like entering a game of basketball and then saying balls are evil.
 

DeletedUser2708

Ulthor said:
What I'm saying is that he may not actually mean what he is saying. Obviously I could be wrong but it IS a rather extreme position to take on a cowboy game. I mean how does he cope with the duelling quests? Surely they would be morally wrong in his eyes? It's a bit like entering a game of basketball and then saying balls are evil.
Click to expand...

Hardly. The dueling quests, for the most part, involve helping the lawman apprehend an outlaw. Others, he may simply turn down. But your notion that "surely they would be morally wrong in his eyes" would only apply if he were a pacifist, and I don't see anywhere in his posts that he advocates such a position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top