PDA

View Full Version : Can a good-aligned character have revenge as a motive?



Giegue
2012-11-06, 11:05 AM
As the title asks. Revenge is fundamentally considered a evil motive by many. However, in some cases, revenge can be justified. Thus I have the following question: could one make a good-aligned character with revenge as their primary motive if their revenge is justified in a big way? I mean, revenge is obviously evil when pushed to extremes, but if a good-aligned avenger showed restraint and didn't hurt innocent people/only target the corrupt in the pursuit of vengeance would they be able to fall under good if they had other good qualities? Could they commit crimes to achieve their ends and be unforgiving to enemies, yet as long as they only target the evil and corrupt, and make an effort to help others who are innocent, could they still be considered good?(Though they'd probably fall under chaotic good, I would assume.)

In shorter terms: Is it possible to make a good-aligned avenger/character who seeks revenge, and if so, how would you do it?

CarpeGuitarrem
2012-11-06, 11:24 AM
There are some systems of ethics (and religions, but we can't go into that here) which maintain that because revenge seeks to destroy a life (and generally sustains a hatred towards that life), it still remains an evil act. It's at the very least a very uncharitable act.

I mean, look at it this way. You're describing a character who could very easily be championing justice. There's one key difference, though. If they're doing it for revenge, this means that they're seeking to hurt someone for their own personal satisfaction. They're not doing it because it's the right thing to do, they're doing it because somebody got hurt, and it makes them feel better to hurt the perpetrator in revenge.

There's a line, in fact, where justice crosses over into vengeance, and vice versa, and that can be very interesting to play with. When you're righting wrongs, that's doing justice. When you're hurting wrongdoers because you despise them, that's revenge.

It's actually pretty easy to tell the difference between the two: observe what happens when justice is served (i.e. the perpetrator is caught and sent to prison). Is the character satisfied? If so, then they were truly seeking to right a wrong, and it was probably justice. If not, then what they really wanted to do was achieve emotional satisfaction by punishing the "bad guy" themselves.

In reality, the two are never exclusive. You're always going to have characters who have both as a motivation, just as a character has good and bad reasons for doing anything; what's key is which motivation is the primary, driving one, and which motivation is subordinate to it.

Blightedmarsh
2012-11-06, 11:32 AM
Confucius wrote "If you go seeking revenge you must first dig two graves". The Aesop isn't that you have give up on revenge because it will destroy you but that you should commit yourself to the cause of revenge above and beyond your own life. In classical Athens they where laws dictating a succession of who was responsible for exacting revenge and for what.

Different strokes for different folks.

For further information you could try enter the dragon as well as pretty much every action movie made in the eighties.

Morty
2012-11-06, 11:40 AM
Good characters aren't saints devoid of personality flaws. So I think you can.

TheSummoner
2012-11-06, 11:45 AM
I'll second what Morty said. Revenge in and of itself is not a good thing, but so long as enough of the other things the character does/believes/has as motivation are good, then the character can still be good overall. People aren't driven by a single motivation and while revenge may be a major one for this character, he or she is also driven by other things that aren't as negatice. His or her actions could largely be good and he/she could do enogh good to still be considered a good character despite the motivation of revenge.

Giegue
2012-11-06, 11:45 AM
You make good points, though I think the trial scenario is a bad example because that, to me, was always a more lawful then good thing. I mean, what about a chaotic good character who thought that the systems and laws of the land are not an adequate means to deliver justice due to their distrust of governments and the legal system? In that case, the character would not be satisfied with the trial but not because they wished to cause harm to the guilty themselves. Rather, their reason would be that they feel laws and governments are an unfit means for delivering justice and that if justice is to be done the guilty that it should be divorced from any kind of bureaucracy.

Despite this, though, I understand your example. I just wanted to point out that the whole chaotic good alignment messes it up. On that subject, would a chaotic good character killing, or at the least leaving a villain to die because he/she dose not believe that the government/law is an adequate means of justice shift them to chaotic neutral or chaotic evil? Or could they do such a thing and retain their goodness?

EDIT: Triple Ninja'ed.

Spiryt
2012-11-06, 11:48 AM
Can't really see revenge as "evil" on it's own - surely can and often will lead to evil deeds.

But if somebody murdered your people/enslaved the young and destroyed the old, and so on - then revenge inflicted on him is in fact good thing on it's own....

lightningcat
2012-11-06, 12:01 PM
The all consuming, do anything to destroy your enemy, style revenge? No.

Less extreme versions? Yes.
Luke original reason to go after Darth Vader is revenge based. Heck, Roy's reason for going after Xykon is revenge related as well, although with a generational gap.:smallamused:

Wyntonian
2012-11-06, 12:09 PM
Depends.

"He killed my child! I'll show him what that pain is like...before I kill him!" Pretty much evil.

"He killed my child! I'll never let him do that again, even if it means killing him in the process!" A less-than-perfect but still reasonably good. I wouldn't make a PC paladin fall for that.

Kyuu Himura
2012-11-06, 12:12 PM
I think I have something interesting to add to this conversation, let me explain... no, there's too much, let me sum up:


Hello. My name is Iņigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

CarpeGuitarrem
2012-11-06, 12:15 PM
Depends.

"He killed my child! I'll show him what that pain is like...before I kill him!" Pretty much evil.

"He killed my child! I'll never let him do that again, even if it means killing him in the process!" A less-than-perfect but still reasonably good. I wouldn't make a PC paladin fall for that.
I would actually consider the latter to be solidly Good.

This also (IMO) is a really good illustration of what I was trying to say about the distinction between revenge (the former example here) and justice (the latter example).

Kitten Champion
2012-11-06, 12:17 PM
I bring Hunter x Hunter up a lot, but it's actually pertinent here. Kurapika, one of the main characters of the manga series, is essentially motivated by revenge for his fallen clansman at the hands of bandits. This in itself is morally neutral, it's a reason why he acts just like everyone else has. In spite of revenge becoming his raison d'etre, he maintains being lawful good -- or the closest equivalent in a grey-grey morality setting.

How?

He has sense of responsibility to others, even when struggling against his thirst for vengeance. He maintains his professionalism by living up to his word on the job he's hired to do, even when it bars him from pursuing the bandits. He insists on leaving his companions and any potential bystanders out of the conflict, taking all consequences on himself in every conceivable way. He also operates entirely within both the spirit and letter of the law while doing it, although the law is something of a limited force in this world.

When he first does confront his quarry, in spite of his justified anger, he's still hesitant to kill them. He gives them the opportunity to explain their actions, to express remorse and face justice of sorts. At one point, when be believes they're dead at the hands of another he is extremely disheartened -- but ultimately chooses to embrace another objective which is significant for him -- get what was stolen from his clan back, piece by piece.

His vengeance is, to a degree, hollow -- but the message is more nuanced -- he's noble enough to be aware of the fallacy he's basing his actions on, but he's too inextricably attached to his emotions to simply forgive. All he can do, short of drowning in depression, is perpetrate his vengeance in such as a way that he doesn't destroy what's good in himself in the process.

AKA_Bait
2012-11-06, 12:53 PM
I'll second what Morty said. Revenge in and of itself is not a good thing, but so long as enough of the other things the character does/believes/has as motivation are good, then the character can still be good overall. People aren't driven by a single motivation and while revenge may be a major one for this character, he or she is also driven by other things that aren't as negatice. His or her actions could largely be good and he/she could do enogh good to still be considered a good character despite the motivation of revenge.

I'm with Morty and TheSummoner on this one. It's important to remember with alignment discussions that a character's alignment is not a straight-jacket. Good characters can do bad things sometimes or even be movtivated by bad things sometimes, just like generally good people can in real life. It would be really difficult for me to say that a character who otherwise acts in ways that are good would fall outside of that alignment generally because of one area of their motivations. This is particularly because of the vengence/justice dynamic that was discussed a bit above. I'd doubt that many revenge seekers view themselves as acting out of vengence rather than justice, even if they have crossed the line.

I'm trying to think of a good fictional example of this, but not having the easiest of times. Perhaps Sam Vimes from the Discworld series? Sometimes he breaks the rules and does an evil thing to an evil person, either for revenge or what he percieves as justice, but I don't think it would really be arguable that Vimes is good aligned.

navar100
2012-11-06, 01:17 PM
Two words - righteous anger.

Madwand99
2012-11-06, 01:51 PM
Imagine that you a a very good character, nearly a saint. One day you return from a trip to find your village burned, your family slaughtered. Survivors report that orcs raided the village.

Your heart burns with the desire for revenge. Do you suddenly become evil, or neutral? No. Perhaps you seek out these orcs, track them out to their camp and slay them all. Is there a difference between justice and revenge here? Only in motivation, I would argue. You change alignments through your deeds, not solely your motivations (though if you were truly motivated to perform evil acts, then you would be evil.)

As a good person, you might spare the lives of orcish women and children. You would probably not torture enemies to discover the location of the orcish camp. If you discovered the orcs were dominated by a vampire to perform their evil deeds (and were otherwise peaceful), you would instead seek out the vampire, rather than continuing your quest to slay the orcs. It is these differences that separate good and evil in a D&D world. Revenge is a perilous quest, because it might lead you to stray from the path of good, but it is not necessarily evil of itself.

Kelb_Panthera
2012-11-06, 02:43 PM
Of course.

Revenge is a common motivation for a character to take up adventuring. There's absolutely nothing to keep a good character from wanting to right the wrongs done to him. The tricky part is not letting the lust for vengeance consume him and shift his alignment away from good.

Vengeance as a motive = morally neutral
Vengeance as an obsession = evil

neonchameleon
2012-11-06, 03:27 PM
Depends on the revenge. There are basically two sorts. "That was bad. I never want it to happen to me again." and "That was bad. I never want it to happen to anyone again." The latter can be good.

Lord_Gareth
2012-11-06, 04:00 PM
BoED suggests that vengeance for wrongs is a 'right' all beings have, and that many Good-aligned beings choose to abdicate that right in favor of mercy. Of course, evil actions taken in pursuit of revenge (harming innocents, torture, the like) are probably not okay, but revenge itself isn't necessarily a non-good motive.

Of course, depending on the character revenge can be a very chaotic motive, so do keep that in mind.

Dr.Epic
2012-11-06, 06:48 PM
In shorter terms: Is it possible to make a good-aligned avenger/character who seeks revenge, and if so, how would you do it?

No. You can't. You can make a good character that seeks justice, but not vengeance.

Sutremaine
2012-11-06, 06:51 PM
Survivors report that orcs raided the village.
Orcs again?

I don't think the desire for revenge is a Good motivation, but it's not enough to change a character's alignment. It's both subjective and abstract, and whatever alignment it might have is overshadowed by how you go about getting your revenge.

Tengu_temp
2012-11-06, 06:53 PM
Two words - righteous anger.

Which is often the first step towards becoming a fallen hero. A good character can seek vengeance, but must not be blinded by it.

Knaight
2012-11-06, 07:06 PM
No. You can't. You can make a good character that seeks justice, but not vengeance.

The problem here is one where an absolute statement like this contradicts everything else. Say a character is driven by revenge, but they are also a genuinely good person in a huge number of other ways. They do what they can to make things better, they are generally unwilling to cause harm to those other than the very specific person they are getting revenge on. Yet, somehow, revenge nullifies all of this? I don't think so.

Dr.Epic
2012-11-06, 07:11 PM
The problem here is one where an absolute statement like this contradicts everything else. Say a character is driven by revenge, but they are also a genuinely good person in a huge number of other ways. They do what they can to make things better, they are generally unwilling to cause harm to those other than the very specific person they are getting revenge on. Yet, somehow, revenge nullifies all of this? I don't think so.

Revenge is specifically about bringing harm to someone that harmed you for the sole purpose that it will make you feel better, not about bringing someone to justice. It doesn't matter that you don't harm anyone else. That just means you have some standards. You can have standards and not be good; they call that lawful neutral or lawful evil. If you're really good, then you would just forget about it. Be the bigger man and realize you hunting this person down will not heal whatever damage they did against you.

Lord_Gareth
2012-11-06, 07:18 PM
Revenge is specifically about bringing harm to someone that harmed you for the sole purpose that it will make you feel better, not about bringing someone to justice. It doesn't matter that you don't harm anyone else. That just means you have some standards. You can have standards and not be good; they call that lawful neutral or lawful evil. If you're really good, then you would just forget about it. Be the bigger man and realize you hunting this person down will not heal whatever damage they did against you.

And the suggestion from BoED that vengeance is neutral?

Grim Portent
2012-11-06, 07:20 PM
I would say you can make a character with revenge as a motive and yet still have good as an alignment, it depends more on the manner in which the vengeance is sought and the way that you handle events that do not pertain to the revenge.

Stick with noble and morally justifiable actions and you count as good, stray into cruelty and spite too far, or abandon innocents to die in order to pursue the character's revenge and you would become neutral and eventually evil.

Knaight
2012-11-06, 07:26 PM
Revenge is specifically about bringing harm to someone that harmed you for the sole purpose that it will make you feel better, not about bringing someone to justice. It doesn't matter that you don't harm anyone else. That just means you have some standards. You can have standards and not be good; they call that lawful neutral or lawful evil. If you're really good, then you would just forget about it. Be the bigger man and realize you hunting this person down will not heal whatever damage they did against you.

I'm not saying just "don't harm anyone else", I'm saying that the revenge shouldn't be enough to counteract being an active force for good in the world. Lets take a concrete example - Say there is a healer who has been wronged somehow, and wants to seek revenge. They set aside a decent chunk of their income to try and bring down the person who wronged them, for a reason of revenge. They also go out of their way to provide for the sick, freely heal those who do not have the means to pay them, and move to protect those with less power in society. Because of them, dozens of people do not starve, hundreds or thousands have not died or do not live in a state of illness, and those with less power in society have a voice. Is this character somehow not good because they set aside some of their income they get from treating the wealthy to bringing down a tyrant, and they do so because of being personally wronged?

Your assertion says no. That seems absurd to me.

Dr.Epic
2012-11-06, 07:38 PM
Is this character somehow not good because they set aside some of their income they get from treating the wealthy to bringing down a tyrant

No. They're removing a harmful force in the word that would harm others and bring his foul deeds to justice.


and they do so because of being personally wronged?

Yes. They're being brought joy from bringing suffering to someone else. Does that sound like a good person? Someone who delights in the harm of others? That's all revenge is: you making yourself feel better by harming someone else.


Your assertion says no. That seems absurd to me.

Honestly, your description sounds absurd. No good person is going to go through all that. What kind of good person who selflessly helps others is going to spend so much of their own time and money tracking down and harming someone that harmed them without this being about helping the greater good and is only interested in petty revenge? Sounds like someone who is not mentally well and has a very obsessive personality/mind.

Slipperychicken
2012-11-06, 07:53 PM
Yes, Good people can do some Evil acts and still be Good overall. The attitudes which vengeance will likely bring about, however, will begin leading them down the path of darkness. Over time, the characters' moral outlook may eventually shift enough to warrant alignment-change. But it's a very gradual and reversible process.


Remember, we're taking Good here. Not Paladin, nor even [Exalted]. Good alignment a really flexible definition, which can encompass a lot of archetypes, including some who use small Evils (but try to minimize them) for greater Goodness.

Ninjadeadbeard
2012-11-06, 08:05 PM
No. You can't. You can make a good character that seeks justice, but not vengeance.

Um...

Pardon signore.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101109221426/assassinscreed/images/7/7a/Char_ezio.png

navar100
2012-11-06, 08:13 PM
Revenge is specifically about bringing harm to someone that harmed you for the sole purpose that it will make you feel better, not about bringing someone to justice. It doesn't matter that you don't harm anyone else. That just means you have some standards. You can have standards and not be good; they call that lawful neutral or lawful evil. If you're really good, then you would just forget about it. Be the bigger man and realize you hunting this person down will not heal whatever damage they did against you.

A Lawful Good person most likely will go out for Justice, but for the Chaotic Good, vengeance on. Neutral Good depends on the individual. A Lawful Good person going on vengeance would more likely lean on his Lawful side for tit for tat. He'll behave Lawful Neutral which is fine for him.

Knaight
2012-11-06, 08:46 PM
Honestly, your description sounds absurd. No good person is going to go through all that. What kind of good person who selflessly helps others is going to spend so much of their own time and money tracking down and harming someone that harmed them without this being about helping the greater good and is only interested in petty revenge? Sounds like someone who is not mentally well and has a very obsessive personality/mind.

I'm not saying that they are only interested in petty revenge, merely that revenge is among the things they are interested in. They clearly also care about everything else they are doing (e.g. the legitimate help of the people), and they probably have reasons to remove said tyrant beyond revenge. That doesn't mean that revenge isn't there, and I'd consider the character entirely plausible. So: Does revenge being there make someone like that evil all on its own, or not? It's the extreme cases that are relevant here, as your assertion was all encompassing.

Kelb_Panthera
2012-11-06, 09:04 PM
Dr. Epic, you're trying to paint a bright bold line where none exists. The distinction between justice and vengeance is quite often a fine one, and sometimes doesn't exist at all.

The simple fact is that sometimes taking vengeance -is- doing justice.

E.g. My father is murdered by the son of a count, simply because the count's son is a cruel man with a penchant for blood-shed. Because we live in a feudal society, that count's son will -never- be called to account for his actions by the law. If I hunt him down and disembowel him, I will have done justice. I will also have taken vengeance.

(and I'll probably be drawn and quartered, since I'm not a member of a family beyond the law's reach, but that's irrelevant to my point. :smalltongue:)

Madwand99
2012-11-06, 09:10 PM
It's also important to realize that the desire for vengeance is a primal, instinctual emotion, which we have for a reason. Humans -- and most primates, and a few other species as well -- are social creatures. Most animals don't desire revenge, they just adapt and live on. Humans and primates, though, live in a society in which it is necessary for wrongs to be punished. Revenge is a natural, evolved response to rulebreaking. Just as with any other base emotion, it is not inherently evil or wrong -- that's impossible -- but actions taken in the service of such an emotion CAN be wrong. Good people do not allow their baser instincts to guide every action, but they DO feel such emotions nonetheless, and may even act on them without doing evil.

Agrippa
2012-11-06, 09:23 PM
Which is often the first step towards becoming a fallen hero. A good character can seek vengeance, but must not be blinded by it.

I have to say my thoughts exactly. In fact I don't have much respect for heroes who say, like Dr. Epic does, that you should just forget about the person who harmed you or your loved ones. That you should basically let them get away with what ever they want. Yes, vengence is typically a bad idea and going overboard with it is inexcusible, but letting people get away with harming innocents is also a bad idea. It almost seems to say that the weak and oppressed should just lie down and die when their abusers wish it. People are people, not spiders or butterflies.

Techwarrior
2012-11-06, 09:44 PM
Yes. They're being brought joy from bringing suffering to someone else. Does that sound like a good person? Someone who delights in the harm of others? That's all revenge is: you making yourself feel better by harming someone else.


Ahem... Once someone starts commiting Evil acts, a Good character can literally do anything they want to them. Good specifically calls out Innocents, both the description for Good and Evil then talk about what they imply, but the alignment descriptions only talk about how one treats innocents. If you want vengeance on someone, I'd guess they probably don't qualify as innocent.



Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.

-snip-

People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions killing innocents, but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.


So, by my reading you are fine making personal vengeance a goal of your character. At worst, it is Neutral. Vengeance isn't really a Moral issue though (which is what the Good/Evil scale deals with), so this is unsurprising. Its an Ethical issue, which makes it fall on the Law/Chaos scale.

Deophaun
2012-11-06, 09:59 PM
Revenge is specifically about bringing harm to someone that harmed you for the sole purpose that it will make you feel better,
And you lose it in the last five words.

Yes, some people pursue revenge on the basis that it will make them "feel better." Others do it so that it sends a message; tit-for-tat thinking (which, actually, is proven to be a good model for cooperation. Not the best, which is a tit-for-two-tats, but good), or because they have nothing else left to keep them going.

Justice implies that there is some procedure being followed to ensure that the accused really is guilty and that the crime fits the punishment. It does not exist to remove satisfaction or enjoyment from the punishment of the condemned. Some people pursue justice because it makes them feel good as well. That must make justice evil.

Dienekes
2012-11-07, 01:35 AM
Go read The Count of Monte Cristo.

Or if you don't have the time to go through about 1500 pages the answer is yes. I mean sure they're not Superman level of wholesome goodness but they can definitely still be good.

TuggyNE
2012-11-07, 02:31 AM
Go read The Count of Monte Cristo.

Or if you don't have the time to go through about 1500 pages the answer is yes. I mean sure they're not Superman level of wholesome goodness but they can definitely still be good.

I'm gonna have to take some exception to the portrayal of the Count, or really any of the characters, as Good. From memory, they are at best a bunch of jaded and embittered Neutrals with a few shreds of Good aspirations vaguely remaining.

Plots within schemes with strategems, framing evil people to ensure slightly less evil people don't get punished quite yet until they're ready to really bring the hammer down, and so on.

Dienekes
2012-11-07, 03:46 AM
I'm gonna have to take some exception to the portrayal of the Count, or really any of the characters, as Good. From memory, they are at best a bunch of jaded and embittered Neutrals with a few shreds of Good aspirations vaguely remaining.

Plots within schemes with strategems, framing evil people to ensure slightly less evil people don't get punished quite yet until they're ready to really bring the hammer down, and so on.

Now It's been awhile since I read that one (over a decade so if I'm wrong by all means correct me), but I'm pretty sure Dantes also goes out of his way to save the innocent, rescue those in need, and is very careful to only screw over those who deserve it. I'd call it good, just not paragon good.

A Tad Insane
2012-11-07, 04:05 AM
I'm going to reference to a classic Chaotic Good character, V ( for vendetta)

Here is a man that wants to free the people from a totalitarian government,and will even let himself die to make sure the people can live happy lives.

His motivation is based off of a vendetta, another word for revenge.

The line for when revenge is evil is when you let it blind you to all else but making the other person suffer

Dienekes
2012-11-07, 04:12 AM
I'm going to reference to a classic Chaotic Good character, V ( for vendetta)

Here is a man that wants to free the people from a totalitarian government,and will even let himself die to make sure the people can live happy lives.

His motivation is based off of a vendetta, another word for revenge.

The line for when revenge is evil is when you let it blind you to all else but making the other person suffer

Movie or comic? Movie was a good freedom fighter. Comic placed much stronger focus on him as a torturous terrorist who kills without mercy and manipulates innocents effectively ruining their lives to achieve his ends.

GolemsVoice
2012-11-07, 04:19 AM
Yep, comic V is solidly neutral. He basically says: Here's freedom, now see what you do with it.

To answer the original question: sure, you can. As others said, being Good, in the D&D sense, doesn't mean you have to take the most good solution every time (if there even IS such a thing as the best solution), since you're no saint. However, a good character would likely know that revenge isn't everything, and that there might come a a point where revenge isn't worth pursuing anymore, likely as soon as it actively endangers others.

Killer Angel
2012-11-07, 04:27 AM
I think I have something interesting to add to this conversation, let me explain... no, there's too much, let me sum up:


Hello. My name is Iņigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.


The man was a mercenary, that worked with an assassin, kidnapping a girl to cause a war. If this isn't Chaotic Evil, i don't know what else!

supermonkeyjoe
2012-11-07, 11:10 AM
I think ultimately yes a good aligned character can have revenge as a motive BUT and this is a very big but, it depends very much on the character, the motive and the means;

Doing evil acts in the pursuit of revenge; not Good.
If someone is prepared to sacrifice his allies or do other Evil acts to carry out their vengeance, they would not be Good.

taking revenge for selfish reasons; generally not Good.
If the subject has already been punished, or the revenge is disproportionate, not Good.

taking revenge for a Lawful Good action, not Good.
If your father was an Evil villain and was lawfully tried and executed for heinous crimes, then seeking revenge for this would not be a Good act.

There are certainly situations where revenge can definitely be a non-Evil act, seeking to topple the evil empire that ruthlessly murdered your aunt and uncle merely because they happened to encounter the wrong droids: not Evil In such a case it would be the methods employed that determined whether the character was Good or not.

NikitaDarkstar
2012-11-07, 01:19 PM
Um...

Pardon signore.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101109221426/assassinscreed/images/7/7a/Char_ezio.png

To be fair here, the young Ezio who was motivated by vengeance was some shade of neutral really. Sure he later grew into a force of Good (mostly), but the young one who just wanted revenge for the death of his family? Yhea, he didn't exactly start out as good.

paddyfool
2012-11-07, 01:38 PM
It's also important to realize that the desire for vengeance is a primal, instinctual emotion, which we have for a reason. Humans -- and most primates, and a few other species as well -- are social creatures. Most animals don't desire revenge, they just adapt and live on. Humans and primates, though, live in a society in which it is necessary for wrongs to be punished. Revenge is a natural, evolved response to rulebreaking. Just as with any other base emotion, it is not inherently evil or wrong -- that's impossible -- but actions taken in the service of such an emotion CAN be wrong. Good people do not allow their baser instincts to guide every action, but they DO feel such emotions nonetheless, and may even act on them without doing evil.

This.

Also, it can be a matter of honour in many societies - to not seek vengeance against someone who has slaughtered your family, say, would be to dishonour your family and their memory. Although this runs up against the other issue of going too far in seeking vengeance also dishonouring said memory (see the plot of many a Western).

Consider, for instance: "I will find the man who betrayed and murdered my father, and I will see him executed by law if possible, or outside the law if not". This could interface with a character who is otherwise entirely benign and LG (especially if it was far from their sole motive in life... but what fully fleshed character ever has only one?). Or it could be the beginning of their path to damnation. Up to the player, really.

hamishspence
2012-11-07, 02:43 PM
Ahem... Once someone starts commiting Evil acts, a Good character can literally do anything they want to them. Good specifically calls out Innocents, both the description for Good and Evil then talk about what they imply, but the alignment descriptions only talk about how one treats innocents. If you want vengeance on someone, I'd guess they probably don't qualify as innocent.

there's lots of ways in which a person might "feel wronged" and "want vengeance" without the other person having done anything morally wrong.

And there's acts which qualify as "always evil" no matter what the victim of those acts has actually done. Torture and soul-harming spring to mind (sources- BoVD for soul-harming, BoED and FC2 for torture).

What BoVD says is that an act of vengeance doesn't have to be evil.

BoED says- page 9- "revenge is not an acceptable cause for violence, although violence is an appropriate means of stopping further acts of evil (as opposed to paying back evil already committed."

So, if you want to avoid it at least being a tiny bit evil, then the vengeance will, at minimum, need to be a nonviolent one. If it's the primary motivation, anyway- it as a secondary motivation and justice, helping protect others, as primary, may ensure that it doesn't have any problems.

On the Law/Chaos axis- there are Chaotic and Lawful deities of vengeance- Hoar the Doombringer is Lawful, Kiaransalee the Revenancer is Chaotic. So it may not be especially aligned either direction.

INoKnowNames
2012-11-07, 06:20 PM
It depends on how far in the revenge you go. "Someone doing something bad; I'll make sure he can't ever do it again" isn't a bad motive. It can occasionally be worded a bit dirty (ie "teach him a lesson", or "get him for this"), but revenge by itself is a perfectly natural aspect of a living being's psyche.

It's what you do in that revenge that makes it good or evil. Commiting Evil Acts in seeking that Revenge makes you no better than your enemy. Targetting those who have nothing to do with who you're trying to revenge because it furthers your path to revenge isn't exactly a good thing, either. And when you have the chance to take your revenge, it's about justice, not self-gratification.

In Taken, Liam Neeson, through the biggest set of balls in existance and epic level bad assery, tracks down his daughter's kidnapper. He then tortures him to get the information he needs. Some Dms might be upset by now, but I'd give him the benefit of the doubt so far. He's certainly not Exalted, but he's playing against some vile people and has to play to win, so I can side with him for a bit-oh wait, he just left the dude to be electrocuted to death, rather than droping his butt off at the authorities, or at least shooting him. That's definitely a straight up evil act, no matter how you twist it.

A little later on, he has to confront an old partner for more information. Said partner is corrupt. So they fight a bit. Understandable. Shooting said partner's wife, and terrorising his kids, all completely innocent and merely on the sidelines of what's going on? Yeah, not as understandable, alignment wise.

Good is Good because it is (morally) better than Evil. Paying Evil unto Evil isn't always the Good way. Even though it is frequently the Bad Ass Way.

Is your revenge Good? Or is it Bad Ass?

Blightedmarsh
2012-11-08, 12:17 AM
Or you could say that personally the guy doesn't care, that he knew the "loved one" had it coming and it was just a matter of time.

Now he seeks revenge because his honour, society, religion or possibly legal code demand it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feud#Vendetta_history); not because he actually wants it.

Arranis Thelmos
2012-11-08, 11:33 AM
Of course revenge is a perfectly acceptable motivation. A count kills your father, so you spend the next several years studying sword fighting to one day slay the count who killed your father. Of course, revenge doesn't pay the bills. Prompting a life of adventuring and working with Sicilians.

... Did I mention it was a count with six fingers on his right hand.

Jay R
2012-11-08, 04:49 PM
It depends on the culture. Revenge is almost required among some Nordic tribes, but a violation of the stricture to "Love thine enemy" in Christendom.

Also, in many areas, not avenging a wrong is proof of cowardice. The conflict between that and the cultural religion led to many ineffectual sermons against dueling in the 16th-19th century.

scurv
2012-11-08, 04:56 PM
Good aligned chars normally call it justice.

Tengu_temp
2012-11-08, 05:22 PM
Justice and vengeance are different things. Some people just use the word justice to explain things that are anything but.

Lord Raziere
2012-11-08, 05:49 PM
are you kidding?

revenge is the motivation of every single good-hearted farmboy given a sword and had their parents killed by whatever evil force of the story they are chosen by prophecy to someday rise up and vanquish.

a good character having revenge as motivation is not only possible- its common to the point of cliche. one of the most common character flaws given to heroes because it gives the audience a sense of sympathy for the character while providing a good flaw at the same time- the audience can connect to that "they are going to get PAYBACK" feeling, while at the same time you can write the character being slowly consumed by said revenge.

CarpeGuitarrem
2012-11-08, 05:52 PM
Good is Good because it is (morally) better than Evil. Paying Evil unto Evil isn't always the Good way. Even though it is frequently the Bad Ass Way.

Is your revenge Good? Or is it Bad Ass?
This reminds me of Misspent Youth.

In the game, each character has major character traits which fit into various categories. One such category lets you take "Bad" as a character trait, which means you're the edgy rebel kid. During the course of the game, characters "sell out" their traits to avert failures.

"Bad" sells out to "Perverse"--the character does bad stuff for kicks.

/tangent over

Kelb_Panthera
2012-11-08, 06:16 PM
Good aligned chars normally call it justice.

Vengeance and justice are related concepts, but they're not the same thing. They do often intersect, such as in the example I gave previously, but at other times they most certainly do not.

If the act of vengeance is disproportionate to the wrong being avenged its not justice. If the vengeance is being taken against someone for a percieved slight, instead of an actual wrong, it's not justice.

If the act of vengeance is proportional to the wrong being avenged and the wrong being avenged is something that's actually a case of wrong-doing then it's justice.

Both concepts stem from the idea that wrongs should be punished.

Friv
2012-11-08, 06:18 PM
I'm gonna have to take some exception to the portrayal of the Count, or really any of the characters, as Good. From memory, they are at best a bunch of jaded and embittered Neutrals with a few shreds of Good aspirations vaguely remaining.

Plots within schemes with strategems, framing evil people to ensure slightly less evil people don't get punished quite yet until they're ready to really bring the hammer down, and so on.

The whole point of Count of Monte Cristo, really, is that someone can be good when they start a quest for revenge, but if they follow through the end they are going to become increasingly less so. The Count is a good man who becomes bitter, and whose actions take him too far, catching innocents in the crossfire and resulting in at least one death of a totally innocent man. When that happens, the Count realizes that he's gone too far, steps back from the abyss, and is able to forgive the people that hurt him (well, the one who isn't dead, anyway.)

Anyway, the point that it makes is good. A good person can be driven by revenge, and many good people in stories are, but that drive is something dangerous that is very likely to push them away from being good. Managing that dichotemy gives you a built-in subplot that's pretty iconic - will you sacrifice your morals or your friends for revenge, or will you end up being the better person? Does the cycle continue, or do you break it?

Arranis Thelmos
2012-11-08, 06:18 PM
... So it looks live no one here has watched The Princess Bride then?

Wyntonian
2012-11-08, 06:34 PM
... So it looks live no one here has watched The Princess Bride then?

I have. Someone already made that joke in this thread, though.


Hello. My name is Iņigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

Killer Angel
2012-11-09, 08:44 AM
I have. Someone already made that joke in this thread, though.


Indeed. And if I can cite myself, from this same page...
The man was a mercenary, that worked with an assassin, kidnapping a girl to cause a war. If this isn't Chaotic Evil, i don't know what else!



In Taken, Liam Neeson,

Liam Neeson's character was a CIA agent. At best, he was neutral. :smalltongue:

Wardog
2012-11-09, 06:48 PM
Justice and vengeance are different things. Some people just use the word justice to explain things that are anything but.

Arguably, justice is just vengence regulated, limited and sanctioned by the courts.

I.e. it is a Law/Chaos distinction, not a Good/Evil one.

Kelb_Panthera
2012-11-09, 07:31 PM
Vengeance as a motive isn't inherently aligned one way or the other morally or ethically.

The alignment of an act of vengeance depends on what form that act ultimately takes and the alignment of the avenger depends on how he gets to that point.