Originally Posted by
Trenchfoot
Right I'm not for 'no system'. I'm for a system which gives players a heavy incentive to stop other players from doing bad things, and a heavy consequence if they don't.
As long as the only 'bad things' you can attribute directly to evil are theft, destruction of personal property, and murder. All other 'bad things' should be 100% police-able by the player base. And the main reason the aforementioned 'bad things' need a 'system' to regulate them, is that death isn't final. If it was, you could easily police 100% because you would literally be putting a definite end to the players evil rampage.
Which I personally would love to see, but would be the first to admit that this isn't practical in terms of retaining subs.
My problem isn't that the game defines theft and murder as evil, my problem would be if it defined the defense of your interests as necessarily evil.
For example: A bandit attacks one of my neighbors and loots him, the neighbor informs me. On his way out of the area the bandit passes thru my area, so I retaliate and kill him and take the loot back. Should I then be labeled evil for my actions?
Or another example: Two nations labeled good want the same resource, yet their only recourse shouldn't be for one of them to turn evil to take that resource by force. Perhaps one claims divine right to the resource, or squatters rights. It should be a political/cultural/religious/idealism right and wrong, as opposed to a good and evil right and wrong.
See what I'm getting at? I'm not saying allow players to define right and wrong themselves morally speaking (theft, murder, etc.), but ideologically speaking players should have free reign.