260 réponses à ce sujet

[Esther]

As being evil comprises the lack of genuine feelings.

[Seagloom]

1Magnolie wrote...

As being evil comprises the lack of genuine feelings.

That is it in a nutshell. An evil character is basically a sociopath. They may be able to feel anger or fear, but are completely unable to empathize with another being. Since love is by its very nature, an ultimate emotion of empathy for another being, an evil character is incapable of it. They may feel lust, attachment, or infatuation that seems like love at a glance, but will not endure as their interest wanes and those feelings are challenged. Ultimately any shade of evil is concerned about themselves first and foremost.

Love as most people typify it in western culture requires a neutral or good alignment in D&D. Bishop might be capable of love if one believe his chaotic evil alignment is erroneous. Personally, I think it fits his character perfectly. Of course, everyone knew that already.

It should also be noted that we cannot know for sure if Obsidian's writers started writing Bishop with the intention he should be chaotic evil, or wrote him first and decided to label him chaotic evil after the fact. I presume the latter, if only because Bishop is a well written character from a staff noted for its writing ability. That, among his various actions during the campaign, is why I believe is evil, and therefore, incapable of true, lasting love.

[Vaalyah]

Sorry, but I totally disagree. Maybe the "love" is disturbed, like for stalkers and maniacs and so on. But feelings are feelings

[Esther]

Rather than love, wouldn't that be possessiveness then?

[Seagloom]

Feelings are feelings, but evil characters do not possess the same range of them a neutral or good person might. We are talking about characters with such a lack of empathy, they derive pleasure from hurting others however they can. Bishop does not show anyone a shred of compassion throughout the entire game. When he finally comes close with the KC, he chooses to betray her and flee instead.

Can you imagine enjoying beating someone to within an inch of their life, or putting people down for its sheer entertainment value? If not, congratulations. You are decent human being. That same lack of understanding applies to a character like Bishop when it comes to love. It is literally beyond his comprehension.

Modifié par Seagloom, 16 septembre 2011 - 08:39 .

[Vaalyah]

I still remember a wonderful post in another thread were a girl explained that no one think about him/herself as "evil". A person do things for a reason, so for his/herself no one is evil. How can you just say "an evil doesn't have love feelings"? That person doesn't feel is evil, so s/he has feelings, also love. I think it is just too complicate in real life just to say "you're evil so you can't love".

[kevL]

Vaalyah wrote...

@ Everyone: guys, even the must dreadful murders actually can fall in love. Why you just assume Bishop can't just because he's evil?

imo, Because it's defined that way. Evil = selfish. Love = unselfish.

there's a strong tradtion ... ( barring propaganda )


hence i feel the need for an alignment shift (for Bishop) before he gets to fall in Love.

But feelings are feelings

.. and actions are actions: Judge a tree by its fruit, & all that. What is the outcome (the manifestation) of those feelings? Are we talking Pechorin or Gandhi ....?


w/ due respect, nino, my Philosophy (sic) goes Seagloom's route


"And we shoot people like that" - Bill Hicks

Modifié par kevL, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:49 .

[kevL]

@Vaal : many evil people don't think of themselves as evil; it's called hypo-something ..

[Seagloom]

Bishop is a character with finite limits to his personality; not a person. He is a narrative device in a game. That aside, his personality is an almost textbook correlation of antisocial personality disorder. So textbook in fact that any laymen can easily make those connections with minimal reading involved. When I state Bishop lacks empathy, I am basing it on his behavior and what is known about individuals with that personality type.

Someone told me elsewhere that this discussion essentially boils down to what is one's definition of love. Well, in my eyes love of any kind is at its core, putting those you care for before yourself. Their well being supersedes yours. Not because it always makes sense, or is the right thing to do. Rather, you care about them first and foremost.

A sociopath like Bishop cannot, based on what we know of human behavior, care about anyone beyond himself. He can find a woman's appearance or personality attractive. He might do things to win her over. But he will never place her before himself. His affection will crumble the moment it requires too great a self-sacrifice to maintain. His every action will be selfishly motivated.

Infatuation and directed passion wilts the moment it is truly tested. True love is not so fragile, nor fickle.

Modifié par Seagloom, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:26 .

[Vaalyah]

You say: "in my eyes love of any kind is at its core, putting those you care for before yourself". There are criminals, even murderers, that actually risk their life for their beloved ones, as wives and children. So, again, being evil towards the entire world except 2 or 3 people doesn't imply you can't love those 2 or 3 people. My 2 cents.

[kevL]

there's gradations: it goes from 1 to 100

[Vaalyah]

Sure. So why Bishop shouldn't be allowed to love himself 100 (like everyone on Earth), love the world 1 and maybe love the PC 90?
However, going to bed, that here is quite late :-D Bye!

[HoonDing]

I can't really see an alignment shift working for Bishop. The way he was portrayed in the game, he doesn't have a speck of goodness within him for there to be any room for redemption, unlike say Viconia who still has goodness in her which becomes apparent when she talks about her brother and her refusal to sacrifice an infant. Another interesting comparison is Artemis Entreri.

Again, it all boils down to what Obisidan had originally planned with the character, and how much content was cut.

[Seagloom]

Vaalyah wrote...

You say: "in my eyes love of any kind is at its core, putting those you care for before yourself". There are criminals, even murderers, that actually risk their life for their beloved ones, as wives and children. So, again, being evil towards the entire world except 2 or 3 people doesn't imply you can't love those 2 or 3 people. My 2 cents.

Yes, but why? What is the reason behind that person's actions? Are they selfless or selfishly motivated?

Have you ever seen Dexter by chance? There is a good example of an evil character that "cares" about his girlfriend/wife, her kids, and his sister for entirely self serving reasons until much later seasons.

I think we agree more than it seems, and you are simply hung up on the semantics of what love is. If you feel the attention Bishop's character displays to a female KC is genuine, fine. I would not call that love, though. It seems as if labeling that relationship anything other than loving is unacceptable to you. We are using different words based on differing interpretations.

Also agreed with kevL. The type of person I was describing is essentially a monster. A common thief might just be desperate, and a murderer may not be a serial killer. I just think Bishop is very low on the ethical scale.

Modifié par Seagloom, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:30 .

[kevL]

virumor wrote...

I can't really see an alignment shift working for Bishop. The way he was portrayed in the game, he doesn't have a speck of goodness within him for there to be any room for redemption, unlike say Viconia who still has goodness in her which becomes apparent when she talks about her brother and her refusal to sacrifice an infant. Another interesting comparison is Artemis Entreri.

Again, it all boils down to what Obisidan had originally planned with the character, and how much content was cut.

agreed. The way I see it, it wasn't just the buggy mechanics of NwN2 that was rushed - but the plot & narrative was also. the way I see it, Bishop's character sheet may say Chaotic Evil ( 15 / 15 ) - or whatever - but his attitude and actions in the OC seem more like 3 / 1.

I believe Vaalyah's intention ( at heart ) is to fix this! (as i mentioned earlier, it would be difficult but not impossible) and the rest of this 'people are like this, people are like that' is just blah blah


now, let's talk Dragons .......

[nino1979]

To me Bishop is as subtle as Herzouu in porcelain shop,yes he could be compared to Dexter.On,other hand if u really want to create proper evil charcter look at tan'ri or batzeuu and how they mess up Shandra in Haven.Bishop simply lack capacity for anything then murder....

[nino1979]

@kewl Dragons..? wich ones...

[I_Raps]

Let me toss in my own two copper...

Bishop can't love because he's scared to death of it. Vaalyah - at the very end, if your influence with Bishop is high enough (and I assume it will be), you can ask him why he did what he did. He tells about his history before becoming a barstool at the Flagon. I hate to spoil it .... but it's not that big a revelation compared to what you've already rooted out.

He killed his home town. That would include everyone that he presumably felt anything for growing up. And what's more, they rejected his warnings - they rejected him, effectively. He was already a bad boy, apparently, but the one time he tried to do something decent, he was rejected.

He's not about to let that happen again.

[I_Raps]

kevL wrote...

now, let's talk Dragons .......

My current paladin has just been knighted.  Should I hold off going into the mountains for a while?

p.s.  Can you have my cousins pre-cast  the simple, level 1 spell that will keep them from being Isaac'ed to death so easily?

Modifié par I_Raps, 17 septembre 2011 - 01:30 .

[XEternalXDreamX]

I_Raps, you blew it out of the water with that one! You're exactly right. Any one of us would act according to our feelings. If my hometown was going to be annihilated because of my action, and the people I actually had some kind of feelings with denied my request to get the hell outta there..

He choose his way of dealing with his past mistakes. I would have felt so much guilt that I would have a)massive guilt and hatred toward others who acted like I once was, and redeem myself somehow which would have been a lifetime of protecting lives and effectively dying protecting someone (Not a paladin, per say..my last moments would be a release of happiness from that nasty past mistakes. Or Batsh*t insane.

[mungbean]

Hey Seagloom and folks just a point for when we start digressing about sociopathy and other specific diagnoses and disorders with too much investment, coffee table psychology printed in womens magazines and on daytime tv isn't medically qualified diagnoses or theory. Unless you got it from a medical journal or academic tender a lot of published psychology (which is at the minimum a six week course you can do online in a trailer park between beer bongs), most of what you read has agendas like appealing to inaccurate populisms for career reasons. It's crap bascially, made up crap to make a buck from gullible audiences. It's sensationalises and misunderstands, the field itself and fosters witchburning community mentalities instead of enlightened ones.

Psychology as opposed to psychiatry is a counselling tool, it is not a method of diagnoses but can be part of a treatment (although you should approach clinical psychologists not criminal psychologists and sociopathy is a term used by criminal psychologists).
Fully qualified psychiatrists are a legal requirement of any declaration of mental incapacity, because it's based on hard sciences where psychology is a social science (meaning in practise serious academia from it varies widely from erroneous public masturbation to pretty insightful depending on the individual psychologist's background and other qualifications).


The CAT test (competency assessment) is a lengthy questionairré and interview session with a recognised clinical psychologist and a medically qualified psychiatrist, who's signature is required.
The prelimenary header of the CAT sheet is that the patient must be distressed to be considered medically and/or legally incapacitated. If a patient is not in distress they cannot be declared mentally incompetent (ie. legally insane) no matter if they're talking to fairies in the interview room and pulling their pants down. That's eccentricity, the patient must be in distress for it to be an aberrant mental state.
For medical science recognises: whom has the right to dictate what normal behaviour is, if you're healthy and you're happy and you're not hurting anyone? And no, not their families.

So first misconception blown, you must be in distress to have a psychiatric condition, it is an absolute requirement and overrides all other considerations. Lots of psychologists fail to recognise this and get cut to pieces in peer review when they publish their tripe academically.

Pretty harsh on psychology as a field I know, but I've read the ridiculously unqualified and erroneous commercial (not medical journal) publications claiming to define things like sociopathy and whether or not your husband is cheating on you and dozens of other dumb dumb dumb housewife crap they put on daytime tv. I think the plan is to make you so stupid you shop the telemarketing channel.

So here is the concise definition of sociopathy: to hold others responsible for your personal issues.
Key point there: personal issues are a prerequisite. Patient distress.

This business about being "unable to empathise with others or emote normally" is complete and utter commercial rot. In fact sociopaths or any other kind of criminal or mentally incapacitated individual feel and work in a totally healthy and normal fashion, this is actually how and why you get psychiatric conditions. It's because your emotions and psychology are working correctly, not incorrectly. It's where the correct functioning of your body starts to work against you.

An erroneous rendition of a sociopath: feels nothing, cannot empathise with others, doesn't understand right/wrong.
A correct rendition of a sociopath: feels causally distressed, is not in a position to even recognise right/wrong but understands it conversationally.

The scary thing about sociopathy, which once again is a criminal psychology term and not a psychiatric term, is that populism is to write off people like that, but it's a perfectly natural mechanical thing which happens to any human being at all given appropriate circumstances.
If you decide all by yourself that it describes an alien kind of thinking then you are safer from it. If it becomes a lot more like catching a cold then that's a bit scary.

So ergo the witch hunt social mentality about terms like sociopathy, it's fear. Personally I have nothing but contempt for the attitude.

[mungbean]

dp 

Modifié par mungbean, 17 septembre 2011 - 02:32 .

[kevL]

I_Raps wrote...

p.s.  Can you have my cousins pre-cast  the simple, level 1 spell that will keep them from being Isaac'ed to death so easily?

aaaaaaaaarfgtghthgph -> shoves head back in compiler.

[Seagloom]

I'm not going to reply to the content of your post mungbean on account of not being a psychologist or psychiatrist, or having more than a superficial understanding of diagnoses based on life experience in that area. I will just accept your correction, throw out the sociopath angle.

Moving on... If I assumed Bishop could feel a full range of emotions, that would actually ramp up my dislike of the character. I rarely care about a character's feelings as much as what they decide to do with them. It is why I cannot feel sympathetic towards Morrigan in DAO, either. What does it matter if someone shows a twinge of feeling once or twice, if they still make the wrong choice in the end? Not that Bishop actually had any moments like that I believed. >.<

In any case, I am going in circles at this point. Not much left for me to say about this after seven pages.

[mungbean]

Well the point was merely using terms like sociopathy as a tool of subjection is a temptation to be avoided, it's criminal psychology used for profiling, predicting and thus capturing serial criminals. It's not a medical diagnosis. For all intents and purposes there is really no such thing as sociopathy, there is no medical disorder known as sociopathy.