Of Virtue and chivalry...

[Solas]

Hmm, I was wondering something through the perspective of my character. Where exactly do the great city-states of Zalanthas get their notion of peace, order, mercy, and whatnot when everyone is living for their own survival? Of course, some would say the Highlord, but through some examples of the Templarate and past history, the Highlord and his mysterious servants don't really seem like good people. So how exactly does the population know how to love and give mercy and restrain themselves from doing bad stuff...if there is no notion of such among the high social statuses? I might be wrong, I'm sure there are some noble nobles out there who feel beating a slave for saying something stupid is wrong, but I havn't really met one yet, let along heard about one. And where might such a noble get this personality from?

I'm trying to stay away from religion in Zalanthas, but that's sorta what this topic is based on...  :wink:  Eh, this is probably gunna be one of thoughs topics that shuts down after two posts.  :cry:

[Agent_137]

They don't, in general.

Some one who's high and honorable and noble and kind and giving is a freak, numbers-wise.

Lawful good - yea, no one wants to die by the milita's spam attacks.
chaotic good - not so much.
lawful evil - but there's so much money to be had by being sneaky.
chaotic evil - not so much.
nuetral - yes, probably the majority.

[Larrath]

Commoners are either taught these 'values' by their friends and family, have it internally...or they don't.  Most don't, and the biggest reason why the Militia and the Templarate is obeyed is because of fear.

Order, mercy, peace...these vary greatly between personalities and races, and this is drawn to a greater extreme in Zalanthas.  Finding kind people who would nurture a wounded person out of their own pockets and without any repayment would be harder than to find a black grain of sand buried in a dune.


The Sorcerer-Kings and their templars, on a general level, are not good people.  Let's look at the Highlord Tektolnes, for example.

Tek's father, Quintus Tektolnes, united and conquered some tribes and stuff.  Tek murdered his own father and took over and built Allanak and all that.  That's not nice.  Tektolnes allows his templars to do practically anything they please, especially when the common citizen is involved.

I think it's about time we saw some 'bad mood' taxes.


The Noble Houses are the ones who catch and train the slaves, and they can treat them pretty badly if they want to.

Nobles do what they do because they have status to worry about.  The Houses are in constant competiton over the higher rankings.  The higher your House, the better your lifestyle is going to be.  Because of these concerns, I also believe at least most nobles would have a fairly strict education that would stop them from doing some things.
Nobles, however, can be as bastardly or as nice as anyone else, but since most of them would probably see commoners as some sort of animal, don't expect merciful and kind treatment.

Why are people good in Zalanthas?  Good question.  Most aren't, though; they're just trying to stay alive and fed.

[Solas]

Larrath said:

...Why are people good in Zalanthas? Good question. ...

A much more simplified question.  :lol:

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Some roughly in-character answers to where certain values and ideals come from... just something to think about.
Love: My momma loved me. She fed me, clothed me, warned me about all those scary magickers and evil people in the world. So did my pappa. He taught me his trade so I could support myself when I grew up. Yup. I sure do love my family.
Mercy: Yeah, I remember this one time, I accidently kicked some kankshit on a Templar while I was leaving the stables. He was thinking about killing me, he said, but instead he just had some soldiers beat me to bloody pulp so I could learn my lesson real good. Yeah, that Templar's alright. I'll never make that mistake again, I can tell you that much.
Restraint: Sure, I guess I could just grab a knife, dive into the 'Rinth, and be a regular baby-murdering, spice-sniffing, kank-humping longneck wanna-be... but feck, if I did that, I'd be torn apart by the first Templar to get ahold of me.
Honor: Yeah, I know this guy that fought in <insert historical conflict>. Imagine that, fighitng to protect all of us commoners from <insert different culture>. What a guy, even if he is missing a few body parts now.
Order: It might not be pleasant all the time, but feck, I'm sure glad I live in <insert culture>. Otherwise, I'd just be another barbarian over in <insert different culture>.
Peace: I don't see nobody fighting around here, do you? Yeah, that's what those big walls are for.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Double-post of deth and destrukshun.

[Solas]

I'll add on abit from a different perspective.

Love: Was beaten and harrassed by my parents, who were greedy, 'sid-loving people.
Mercy: Watched a man get his feet chopped off for running away from the soldiers.
Restraint: (Preatty much fear that drives this argument.)
Honor: Hmm, because of the Highlord's mercy and the fear that he produces, and perhaps a reward, I'm going to hold off as many of these invaders as I can. (of course, someone in a tribe would think much differently, but this is from the city perspective)
Order: The more efficient, the more 'sid and less work.
Peace: Due to a combination of order and fear, and perhaps some of FDMW's love.  :wink:  

Happiness: None, unless your talking about FDMW's love. Can't get happiness from money.  :lol:

[Ghost]

I'll add on abit from a different perspective.

Love: Was beaten and harrassed by my parents, who were greedy, 'sid-

I dont agree with this one.  Because, if your parents were greedy sid loving harrassers, you would be sold a slave after you are born.  One less stomach to feed for the parents, and fresh sid.  So I agree with FDMW on the love.

[Solas]

Ok. *shrug* Beats me.  

[My 2 sids]

I agree with FDMW.  What people fail to realize is part of survival means relying on others to help once in awhile; this is what a community does.  On a basic level people within the community are having their needs met by other members of a community.  If there was no community, no love/mercy/restraint/honor/order/peace things wouldn't be like they are now.

As for the religion part... well although I believe religion provides people with value systems I've been told by non-religious that people without religion can still be and do good.

[Tamarin]

Ultimately, if you try and play a trule virtuous character, it probably isn't going to work, because no one else does, and the social system won't accomodate it.  If you're going to have any fun, you'll probably have to end up doing something sketchy (by our standards) at one point or another.  This has happened to me again and again, in my early days here, with characters who I wanted to be "good" by earth standards.  They turned out to be backstabbing, cheating, lying, money grabbers in the end, because that's what everyone expects, so that's what they offer to you when they propose a relationship (be it spying, assasinating, etc).  

The only exception to this rule that I can think of is tribals and other types of PCs like that who live beyond the normal boundaries of society.  They are able to remove themselves from that sort of intrigue if need be, but it still requires a lot of effort and self control.

[sjanimal]

5 Disgruntled Monkeys,

I liked your explanation.

[Agent_137]

In the cities, society doesn't need everyone pulling together to survive. The god-kings are there with their powers and their minions to keep everything in order.

This is unlike many early societies where you HAD to work together or you'd get eaten up by your surrounding neighbors who were jealous of your land or your women. The tribes would have more of this type of flair, as stated.

[Intrepid]

It is not in human instinct to love or have positive emotions.  In
general, selfishness and apathy is closer to the human means.

I may be wrong, but I think the original post was asking more
along the lines of: "How is it that Zalanthas developed any sort
of non-sociopathic behavioral trend, since the world and its
societies have a "No one else gets theirs until I get mine!" sort
of attitude?  And for that matter, how is it these ideals even stay
in the Known World, given its encouragement of sociopathic and
psychopathic behavior?"

[Agent_137]

It is not in human instinct to love or have positive emotions.  In
general, selfishness and apathy is closer to the human means.
[

That is a HIGHLY debateably statement. There are three schools of thought on it, not one.

Man is inherently good.
Man is inherently evil.
Man is inherently nothing.

And I think the discussion on this thread as been very good and insightful, though I will say I don't think zalanthas should have maintained too much in the way of chivalry and ideals. At most, someone may just identify with the people around him, and want to help them because he sees himself in them. But there should be little to no formal concepts of this.

[amoeba]

It is not in human instinct to love or have positive emotions. In
general, selfishness and apathy is closer to the human means.

Love is not only in our nature, it is an extremly strong motivating factor,
and critical to our survial.

Just look at the famous Harlow monkey experiment
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Harlow/love.htm

There are many more examples.

[SRB]

In all honesty, I suggest you read Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus. This actually sheds some light on what man can be "inherently" viewed as, wether it be good, evil, or neutral.

IMO, man is essentially nuetral. He is neither good, nor evil. Based upon observations s/he will make, that particular person will develop a personality centered around their experiences.

This is why we have balance.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Well yeah, we all know that people without religion to fall back on are pure evil and are mean to children and small animals.  Being Agnostic, I can confirm this.

In a society such as Zalanthas, where religion is rarely the underlying theme of a culture, moral values that are helpful to survival will invariably be adopted.  Here are the values that a nomadic tribe should have.  I can't speak on the values a city-dweller might have, as there is not historical precedent for a city-state dominated by an omnipotent God-King.

Nomadic values:

Bravery in battle
Generosity
Hospitality towards strangers
Persistance in Vengeance
Patience

[Intrepid]

Love is not only in our nature, it is an extremly strong motivating factor, and critical to our survial.

That's a popular belief.  But I think love is nurture, not nature.  As is
forgiveness.

That is a HIGHLY debateably statement. There are three schools of thought on it, not one.

Everything is a highly debatable statement. :wink:

Man is inherently good.
Man is inherently evil.
Man is inherently nothing.

You left out one: Man is inherently selfish and dependent.  I don't
consider this good, evil or nothing.  In fact, I tend to consider it
closest in thought to neutrality.  Ideals and selflessness, imo, are
special because they go against basic human nature.  Some people,
even now, have no concept of the true meaning of love, self-sacrifice,
chivalry, honor, featly, piety, etc.  But one thing that all people do
have in common is the inherent need for self-gratification, even if
they have to suppress it for the sake of others.  Laws and peers
keep humanity in line more often than its ideals.  This is why books
like Lord of the Flies and 1984 are so chilling; while they may not
be 100% accurate, we can, as human beings, often identify with a
few vagaries in their pages.

[HardCarbon]

It is the will of the dragon that you raise your children to be good workers.. should you fail to have enough children.... or they become a problem.. things will go bad for you and your husband.


 an OOC Note.. back in the 60's  if you worked for IBM and your kid made the news for getting trouble.. YOU  got called on the carpet for making the company look bad..

[My 2 sids]

It is the will of the dragon that you raise your children to be good workers.. should you fail to have enough children.... or they become a problem.. things will go bad for you and your husband.


an OOC Note.. back in the 60's if you worked for IBM and your kid made the news for getting trouble.. YOU got called on the carpet for making the company look bad..

This is actually fairly good.  The Highlord of they city wants the city to continue.  That means, to some degree, people must be civil to each other and produce and raise enough offspring to continue the the city's power.  

Because, not in spite of, the harsh nature of the world familes would be extremely important.  Just look at how important families are to the nobles and even merchant houses... the same concepts would filter down to the commons just like the latest clothing fad.

[Anonymous]

I discovered that we have no impact on any of the events that go on in our lives, we merely respond to stimuli that is constantly forced upon us.
And if you don't believe me - go out and VOTE!

I should be a comedian.

[Agent_137]

I discovered that we have no impact on any of the events that go on in our lives, we merely respond to stimuli that is constantly forced upon us.
And if you don't believe me - go out and VOTE!

I should be a comedian.

Subtly is humorous.

[Tlaloc]

Hmm, I was wondering something through the perspective of my character. Where exactly do the great city-states of Zalanthas get their notion of peace, order, mercy, and whatnot when everyone is living for their own survival?

As someone posted above: they don't.

On Zalanthas, everyone is looking out for number one - and that number one is themselves. The commoners are peaceful and don't revolt because the people in power (the Nobility and Templarate) hold all the cards, and would have them killed in a terrible fashion if they didn't - or, worse still, The Highlord or the Sun King would do it, instead.

The only thing that keeps the peace and moral ethics on Zalanthas are fear, greed, and  ambition. The notions of 'Honor' and 'Chivalry' actually should be relatively alien concepts - and yes, I realize this might fly in the face of what many people in a certain Noble House may believe. Nevertheless, the idea of 'honor' on to a Zalanthan would be (possibly) similar to what ERS mentioned, or more to the point: something far more personal to the subject (for example, finding honor in winning battles for your House and Citystate at any cost, but not doing things like giving your enemies a fair chance, or even blindly going into battle yourself).

If someone is being nice to you, chances are they have some ulterior motive. If a citystate is acting peaceful, chances are its because its best for the citystate (or someone with enough leverage to keep the peace) to be peaceful at that time. If someone is being polite, its probably best for their ultimate goals to be polite at that time.

At least, thats the way the majority of Zalanthans should be. Do people play that way? Sadly, probably not as much as they should. In any case, however - life on Zalanthas is like a gladiator dwarf: ugly, nasty, brutish, and short. Given the opportunity, many people would kill you for a drink of water, just as they would make friends with you to get that opprortunity.

[jstorrie]

From help guild_warrior:

There is only one calling which warriors follow: to fight, and perhaps to die fighting. Although motivated by innumerable goals, there are a few commonalities among warriors. In nearly all warriors there exists some notion of honour and fairness, and often a vague conception of glory.

This should likely be corrected, then.