If you use the same methods of the villain but you use them for good, are you the same as the villain?
>>47726505
Depends on what those methods are, how you use them, and when.
But you're still probably a pretty big douche.
>>47726505
Not if the villain's methods are candy, cute kittens and long strolls in the moonlight.
>>47726505
If you use methods that work, you're the hero.
If you use methods that don't work, you're corpse #1853.
>>47726505
most of the time we are murdrhobos.
THe villain do crueler shit then us only cause he got access to more resouces and the DM have no manual restriction in building him.
>>47726505
If you believe in Cosmic Good and Cosmic Evil, then you're still the good guy.
IF you don't, nah man, you're now the monster you sought to destroy, Captain Ahab.
>>47726505
It entirely depends on what methods the villain is using.
You could have a villain who amassed legitimate political power, for instance.
>>47726505
Depends on whether you are following Kant or Bentham
>inb4 >300 replies 150 image replies
>>47726625
I think those are the best kind of villains; using legal ways to gain power.
>>47726606
...At no point did Ahab become a whale. (Or a metaphor for god or nature.)
At least, not in current editions of the book.
>>47726505
No, because I am the hero and thus, by definition, I can do no wrong. Shut up, the orcs needed re education to improve themselves and the camps are for their own good. The elf 'genocide' was the result of an unfortunate misunderstanding. And the crucifixions, well, you have to stop banditry somehow. The fuck you mean there's a populist uprising! Bloody peasants, kill every ungrateful mud-ass serf!
Depends on the methods.
Outward killing the enemies is ok, but delving into slavery, torture, or dragging innocent people into the conflict to be unwittingly sacrificed in your cause is not.
>>47726505
>>47726505
No.
Man-slaughter and homicide are two different charges for a reason. Intent is everything, especially when it comes to morality.
>>47726505
To quote an episode of the Mighty Max cartoon:
[Horrible nigh-unkillable viking warrior that has murdered every loved one Norman ever had]: If you kill me, you'll be no better than me.
[Norman]: I can live with that. *swings sword*
No because you are you and he is someone else which means you are right and good and he is wrong and can fuck off.
>>47726505
If you kill them they win
T. Canada
>>47726739
>...At no point did Ahab become a whale.
But he did become a monster in his quest to slay the monster.
That was kind of the whole point of the book, dude.
>>47726505
Maybe the villain was using them for good?
Maybe I'm actually the bad guy and I just didn't understand his full motivations?
>>47727777
I disagree but those quads...
>>47726739
Sounds like a really bad (or good) fanfic
>>47726505
>Fight through the BBEG's tower
>Kill dozens if not hundreds of minions who were either drafted or just took the job because it's the most stable and lucrative way to feed their families
>Claw your way through the dismembered bodies of multiple young adult men with their whole lives ahead of them
>Face LITERALLY DRAGON HITLER 2: DAEMONIC BOOGALOO in a duel to the death
>Let him live, because killing him would make you just as bad as him
>>47728730
Classism at work. Join the proletariat masses and fight the good fight.
>>47727600
I only came here to say "fuck off Justin"
I'm glad you're already here.
>>47727600
>>47729004
In a world of mass-media and counterterrorism he has a point of some description.
>>47726505
Your pic is a bad example. That's a post Apocalypse where you've already led troops into battle against enemies because the villain was manipulating both sides to test his scientific war-crime weapons on human subjects.
A bullet to the head is a courtesy by that point. At best, you'll capture him alive, hold a 'trial' where everyone agrees he's a douche, then shoot him because you're low on supplies as is.
>>47726739
The monster was never a whale, anon. The whale was just the macguffin.
>>47730081
When counterterrorists counter terror, just what the fuck do you think they're doing?
>>47726505
Who cares?
No, I don't mean this in a flippant sense. At the point where we catch him, it's academic, isn't it? I'm going to kill him anyway. I'll just shrug and shoot him on the spot.
I'm going to say no, killing does not automatically make you a villain. That's horseshit. Murder is a villainous act, this is true, but not all killings are Murders. BBEG kills a bunch of people, fucks shit up, and you deal with him, that isn't Murder. Anyone who tells you different has been hitting the cool aid to hard.
>>47726505
No, you're an anti-hero. You're still a good guy, you're just a hell of a lot meaner.
>"If you kill me, you'll be no better than me!"
>"I can live with that."
>>47726505
>crippling my enemies by chopping their limbs of?
Fuck yeah
>Raping women or murdering children?
Fuck no
I'd utilise some of the villains methods , but i'd ignore those that pull in and harm innocent people.
>>47726505
Only if you lose.
>>47726505
Is the villain doing shit that threatens the things you care about? Will your own actions result in similar damage to the things you care about?
In the end you've just got to remember what you're fighting for and go fight for it. If all you're fighting for is to be seen as the hero, then you're not fighting for much at all.
>>47726505
I don't care if I am.
I'm not fighting for justice, honor, or glory.
I'm fighting because that idiot messed with MY life. He messed with MY people, with MY loved ones, and interrupted MY routine.
If I save the world, so be it - but this?
This is personal.
>>47726505
Uh, no? You're doing them for good.
>>47726505
Who cares?
>>47726505
Not if the methods aren't villainous in and of themselves.
>>47734566
So if you torture someone to gain information to save a thousand people, youve done a good act? Commiting an evil act to save people transforms into a good act?
BRENNER IS A TRUE HERO
>>47734699
If the good greatly outweighs your evil. Especially if you didn't hurt anyone innocent in the process. If a villain chooses to hold his tongue rather than save a thousand lives, then that makes him the evil one.
>>47734723
So if you torture a thousand to save a thousand is it still a good act?
What about torturing a thousand to save one?
Or how about raping someone to save another?
Is any act permitted so long as it can be used to save an innocent or are there some acts that are evil no matter what they are used for?
>>47734792
If you want a solid answer to that, don't ask someone morally fallible.
You'd need to create a morally infallible machine and then have that answer, or hope such a being already exists.
>>47726505
The same? No. If we're beating him at his own game then we are much worse.
>>47734872
Thankfully, I dont have to find such an impossible creature thanks to the fact that there are thousands of ethicists out there that have built reasonable answers to these questions.
And they all agree that intent and ends are secondary to means. That performing evil acts to save another doesn't excuse their evil. Because there is literally no person out there who thinks that they are the bad guy. They think they are permitted to use the actions they do since they are on the side of good.
Killing 2,996 innocents to strike at the heart of the empire of evil that opposes their god and spreads sin to all lands is a good act.
That sending all the degenerates and bad parts of society into special camps, and then killed, is a good act to revitalize their country.
That murdering doctors, nurses, and innocent people is a good act to save future children.
"Rape, torture, murder, and all other acts opposed by good people are permissible when it's our side doing them since we are doing it for the greater good" - both sides of the conflict.
There are acts that are evil, and when you do them, you are evil. There is no such thing as the greater good, as its just a rationalization for evil people to do evil acts and not have to realize they are evil.
So as an answer to the OP, if your doing the same actions as the villain, you're on his side and are just as villainous, it's just that your goals are different.
>>47734792
Your theoretical and highly implausible situations do not change that torturing a villain to save civilians is fine.
>>47735347
Torture is never acceptable. If you want to think yourself a good person, you aren't allowed torture.
Its also utterly useless as has been attested to by literally every institution that has investigated its usefulness.
>>47735446
>Torture is never acceptable.
Maybe to you. But fuck you. A villain has no right to comfort nor security when they refuse to cooperate to save innocents form their crimes.
>Its also utterly useless as has been attested to by literally every institution that has investigated its usefulness.
It depends on the kind of information you want, and whether or not the person in question thinks they actually have what their captors are looking for
Rolled 16 (1d20)
Damn
>>47735508
>It depends on the kind of information you want, and whether or not the person in question thinks they actually have what their captors are looking for
No it doesn't. 24 is not reality.
It's useless. When I said it was literally useless, I meant it. Every organization that has tested tortures usefulness has found it utterly without merit, as there is no guarantee of getting the info you want. How would you even know if you got the right info? You can't.
Our own government agencies that tried to utilize all the various techniques of torture that were illegally authorized by the Bush administration, found them to be useless. They don't work and are very often used merely as the means to inflict needless suffering upon another, universally recognized as an evil action.
This doesn't mean you can't torture someone, but you have to recognize you aren't a good person by doing it. Torture sets you on the same path as the villain, and makes you just as evil as them. Congratulations, you've become the villain who hunts villains.
>>47735728
>illegally
The bill of rights does not extend to foreign nationals
also you're wrong about your notion that every organization has found it useless. It's certainly much less effective than was previously thought, but is situationally valuable.
>>47728730
Basically this.
If he's a cunt I'm going to stick him with the sharpest object in the room, even if he surrendered or parleyed or any other bullshit like that.
If I've already killed 30+ people to get to him, what makes him so special compared to the other 30+ fuck offs I've already shanked? He bleeds just like the other 30+ dudes.Also that save one life or a thousand lives moral dilemma is retarded and if you ever choose the former you're a retard.
>>47734180
Badass line
>>47729004
>>47730081
Diversity is our strength. If you take donations from russia/america/australia/mexico then you lose. Hire africans companies that steal money from their workers denying them minimum wage and then make Alberta pay the africans instead.
>>47726505
If you have to ask this question, you've lost the battle already.
>>47734699
>So if you torture someone to gain information to save a thousand people, you've done a good act? Commiting an evil act to save people transforms into a good act?
If somebody has committed evil acts for evil, self-centered reasons, I no longer deem them as deserving of my goodwill. If the harm I bring to them is less than the suffering they've caused to others, it's still a bad thing to do, but not bad enough to matter. You're not evil for getting revenge unless you deliberately harm innocent people just to exact your revenge.
If you commit a bad deed for a good purpose, such as torturing one to save a thousand, it really just depends on the severity of each deed. The well-being of one villain is less important than the lives of a thousand innocent people, so it's obvious what the choice is going to be. Torturing the villain would be a necessary evil at this point, so there's no point in getting hung up over it.
>>47737048
>Diversity is our strength.
I hate this phrase because so many people uncritically believe it even though its untruth is self-evident. It's as internally contradictory as "oppression is freedom".
>>47737191
You've clearly never dealt with actual problem solving before.
If everyone brings the same thing to the table, you're going to get very little actual problem solving done.
>>47737191
Similarity breeds in weakness. Diversity allows for unexpected solutions from unexpected sources.
Diversity is not the polar opposite of strength, which is true of oppression and freedom.
>>47726505
No, because they're dead and you aren't.
>>47734327
This! Strength is the truth.
>>47735899
>Also that save one life or a thousand lives moral dilemma is retarded and if you ever choose the former you're a retard.
Not really, what if this one person was your mother or waifu? Would you really sacrifice someone that has serious personal value to you to save a thousand people you don't know?
>>47726505
Morality is less defined by methods and more by rational and results.
>>47737496
>Not really, what if this one person was your mother or waifu?
If you change the circumstances, you invalidate the question.
>>47726505
The Villain's methods: Swords and Magic
Our methods: More Swords and Magic
....yes?
>>47726505
Are you the last one standing?
If yes, that means you're the Good Guy. Who's going to say otherwise?
>>47726505
Goodness is relative to the judge. This is why most characters can be alignment-lawyered neutral if you specifically dissect their actions.
For example, to kill a person is murder and evil. The death penalty is murder, but for the good of society, so it's socially constructed good. Killing many people is obviously much worse than killing one, except if you're defending your homeland, or expanding your empire. It all depends on who is determining what "goodness" is.
For an objective answer, look more at the intent of the actions. If someone is self-aware of their evilness with regard to an action, in my opinion they're inherently worse than someone who is ignorant, despite being more respectful and transparent.
>>47726505
good game
>>47732527
I guess they mostly work so they won't need to be in a position where they have to kill someone. It's much better to just catch potential terrorists two months in advance while they're still in their pajamas.
If you think about that quote it actually makes sense.
>>47726505
> his villains aren't acting for the greater good
Do they kick puppies?
>>47737191
And yet, give someone total freedom to make any choice they want, and they'll never reach a real decision. They'll either stand frozen in thought or try to do everything at once.
To unfetter them breeds indecision. Indecision breeds indolence. They are oppressed, then, not by laws or tyrants, but by the absence of context or guidance. Freedom becomes its own form of slavery.
There is nothing in this world, this universe, without contradiction.
>>47737240
>oppression and freedom have anything to do with strength
baka baka baka
>>47737609
I didn't found it that great
>>47726505
The road to hell is paved with good itentions
>>47726505
doesn't matter who's good or who's evil
it matters who wins.
Not exactly, no, but it certainly sets a bad precedent. Even if you never do anything that bad again, critics of the new world will constantly bring up the fact that it was unethically obtained. This is the real danger. It creates the potential for dissent.
>>47728730
>>47728920
>>47735899
Generally you're not killing him in a fight, you're killing him after the fight. And if you kill the soldiers or minions when they've surrendered or want to escape, then literally fuck you.
>>47737528
No you don't. The entire point of "save one or save a thousand" is that everyone is someone's waifu or mother. Or, you know, the equivalent. If you argue that you'd plug someone instantly to save the numerically larger amount of people, then not doing the same when it's someone you care about is bullshit.
>>47732527
The real world isn't Counterstrike. You counter terrorism with information; both information to the "good guys" that allows them to stop the bad guys before they start their plans, and information to anyone the "bad guys" might try to sway. If you make Muslims fear and hate you because they think you want to oppress or kill them, killing a bunch of Muslims doesn't solve terrorism, it creates it.This is also why Batman is shitty. You cripple Big Jimmy and now Little Jimmy has to drop out of med school and join the mob.
>>47735803
>but is situationally valuable.
Care to support that claim with evidence?
>>47737496
Wouldn't change the fact that saving the many is objectively the right answer, even if saving your mother/waifu is the subjective right answer.
>>47737699
>His villains are fighting for "greater good"
*Yawn* Are their families dead and they lost an eye as well?
>>47726505
If you kill a murderer, the number of murderers remains the same.
The trick is to kill multiple murderers.
>>47742679
But then you increase the number of serial murderers, which is arguably worse.
>>47745664
Well if you kill a serial murderer then there's one less serial murderer in the world. Call it quits there, ignore >>47742679.
Quit while you're ahead!
>>47742679
>>47745664
>>47745717
Not if you kill yourself! Oh, wait...
>>47745664
The trick, therefore, is to always kill murderers who have committed at least one more murder than you have.
>>47726505
There's nothing good, or evil, about a duel. Thwart the villain's plan, challenge them to a duel, kill them that way. You are neither good, nor evil, just honorable.
I mean, unless you cheat or play dirty.
>>47745816
What of the methods you use to thwart the plan?
And what if they simply refuse the duel? What have they to gain from fighting you honorably?
>>47745867
>And what if they simply refuse the duel?
The idea is that if you're going this far to ruin their plans, they're going to want to kill you already, so you're officiating that chance. Plus if you kill in self-defense then that's definitely not evil.
>>47727626
A whaler is a monster because he wants to kill a particular whale?
>>47737609
I thought it was pretty good. A little grimdark, but I still pull it out to play sometimes.
Lin would be my waifu but she's honestly a little creepy.
>>47738074
That wasn't what he meant, ya dildo.
>Freedom and oppression: Polar opposites
>Strength and diversity: Not polar oppositesI probably just got baited, but fuck it.
>>47726505
As long as you do less harm than the villain in the process of getting rid of him, it can be argued that you are better than him. But "better than the villain" can still mean "pretty bad" depending on how much harm you did.
i.e. shooting a school bus (30-ish young hostages included) to prevent uberterrorist from getting away and kill yet another 200 people next time he decides to blow up something is objectively acceptable. But only if it's your last resort (everything other option is impossible or has failed), and it won't stop a lot of people from bitching at you.
>>47746069
My favorite CO. Also, Tasha is awesome as well.
No, methods are irrelevant, what's important is intent and effect.
>>47735446
>Torture is never acceptable
I would agree.
If only because it's unreliable.
>>47727600
The people who voted for him should feel bad.
>>47735446
>Torture is never acceptable.
We call it enhanced interrogation.
>>47726505
I run Only War/Deathwatch, so if my party use the methods of the enemy the Commissars and/or the Inquisition are going to get pretty pissy.
>>47746535
Depends on the methods, I guess. If a Sorcerer happens to use a non-corrupting Psychic power on your Librarian because he can't be assed, or the Cultists just have perfectly ordinary lasguns but with some drawn on eight-pointed stars, I don't think they'd mind if you used the same things against them.
>torture is never acceptable
In ticking-bomb situations it's morally acceptable, unless you're a Kantian or a consequentialist who seriously fears slippery slopes.
Those are maybe 1% of the situations where torture might be applied, so perhaps as a general rule "torture is bad" makes sense, but as a philosopher I'm compelled to point out that it's not universally applicable.
>>47746442
I didn't make much use of airpower, so I didn't really find much use for her CO bonuses. As a person, though, definitely great.
If you let your enemies go, they will escape, kill your friends, and you'll share the blame for permitting their evil to continue when you could have stopped it.
If you kill your enemies, they are dead; unless it's a fantasy or /co/ setting, in which case destroying their souls may also be required.
Relevant song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reYJhvG9x3Q
>>47726505
> If you use the same methods of the villain but you use them for good, are you the same as the villain?
So, 70's/80s era Kamen Rider?
Basically debunked to hell and back.
>>47746716
Noice
>>47726505
>Use same methoods as villian to dispose of villian
>Kill self at end so cannot be corrupted further
Some sacrifices need to be made!
>>47726505
this is the kind of moral discussion that is out of the scope of /tg/ and belongs more on /lit/
>>47749887
I doubt /lit/ would know what to do with it, and they likely do not experience the - for lack of a better word - trope as often.
>>47749887
/lit/ is too nihilistic and/tg/ is so much better with morality.
>>47726505
Depending on whether I'm in a western saturday morning show.
But generally being a kamen rider, it's totally fine to reduce monsters to explosions or rip out some spines.
>>47728730
That really took out the fun out of Watch Dogs gang hideout missions.
>you MUST let the ringleader live, it'll send the message
>nah, don't care for regular gangers, they can get bullets to the head all day
Kill a bad guy, you're a good guy.
Kill a good guy, you're a bad guy.
That's how it works if you have adequate knowledge of who you're killing. If you don't really know the specifics of what the person you're killing is guilty or not guilty of than it depends on the killer's morality, or whatever.
>>47726505
It really depends on what the specific 'method' is.
But fuck you, "If you kill the bad guy you are just as bad as him" is completely retarded and illogical.
>>47749459
Capefags crying about a Rider kicking their bad guys in half are the worst, agreed.
>>47734792
If you are only targeting those who have voluntarily chosen to murder the innocent, and only targeting them to protect the innocent, then any act is permissible. Of course, once you get into "torturing a thousand to save one" territory you've gotta ask whether your innocent really is.
>>47734792
Depends,
Depends.
Depends.
Depends.
Mitigating circumstances are a thing in reality and fiction alike.
>>47735899
>Not saving all 1001
>>47734303
What if the bad guy wheres armor made of living women and children?
>>47754064
Find some evil women and children
>>47746492
If the choices were new shit, dumb shit, or old shit, which would you choose?
>>47753812
I still find it amusing that originally the monsters exploding was Shocker making them allahuakbars but then it transformed into effect of Rider's own kicks.
>>47754040
Now I want a Hail Hydra Captain edit of this.
>>47754064
Look, once they've been reduced to a fleshsuit kept alive by foul magics, killing them is a mercy.
>>47754304
That Ain't Freedom.
>>47734792
>raping someone to save another
How the hell do you save people by fucking with other people
>>47754040
>>47754304
Wasn't there a version of the trolley* picture with "one of them will grow up into Hitler"? Anybody got that? It'd be best fit for Hydra Cap
*(still can't stop having a giggle at "troll"ey)
>>47754040
BUT I WANTED TO GO ROUND THE LOOP!
>>47726505
No, but your game is super disappointing, angsty, and kills the franchise.
>>47730081
Yes, And the correct descriptions for that point are "willfully blind", "ignorant", "stupid", "cowardly", and, of course, "wrong".
The toll in innocent lives from his surrender will be bitter, but don't worry. He can hide behind his guards.
Some people push old ladies in front of buses. Some push old ladies out of the way of buses. if you say they're morally equivalent because they both push old ladies, then you're a piece of shit.
>>47735446
Misnomer. Khalid shiek Mohammed sang like a canary after being waterboarded, and that's not even something that really hurts someone. The intel we got helped us roll up several al Qaeda cells.
It doesn't ALWAYS work, and you may decide that the value of what you'd learn isn't worth it, or that it's morally wrong enough that it's worth letting innocents die because you'd never ever use it.
But don't take the cop out answer of telling yourself that it doesn't work so you don't have to face your moral dilemma. Like any intelligence gathering technique, it's useful but flawed.
>>47737222
I agree... except that the form of diversity you described- viewpoint diversity - is the one kind of diversity that the people who push diversity the hardest are dead-set against.
>>47754407
Time travel and rape Hitler?
>>47755077
So that he ends up even more angry and bitter and mixes jews with simple criminals in concentration camps?
>>47755093
No, you rape him until he's your mindbroken slave that can't live without your dick.
Just like in my japanese animes.
