Reform the Western Continent (Good Aligned Plans)

[hydroplatypus]

Original Idea from this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=322293)


This almost feels like it should be its own thread - come up with the best Neutral to Good plan possible to improve the Western Continent. I'd definitely be interested in seeing some proposals.


And here we go, a thread for discussing good and neutral plans to reform the western continent into something decent - or at least less miserable.

[zimmerwald1915]

Original Idea from this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=322293)




And here we go, a thread for discussing good and neutral plans to reform the western continent into something decent - or at least less miserable.
For purposes of this thread, who are we and what resources do we have? Are we most like Evisceratus, Ian, Elan, Gannji, or the ruler of West Despotania?

[Keltest]

For purposes of this thread, who are we and what resources do we have? Are we most like Evisceratus, Ian, Elan, Gannji, or the ruler of West Despotania?

From the other thread, we are any good-alignment individual or group of individuals with the ability to assume direct or indirect control of a number of countries on the western continent equal to or less than our number.

Our goal is to assume control of a majority of the continent without breaking the good alignment, which means that the countries we control must survive or be willingly assimilated by other powers (other meaning not the assimilated country, not non-us powers)

[DaggerPen]

Thank you. :smallsmile:

Anyway, assuming resources comparable to Tarquin's party, I'd say:

-For the party arcane spellcaster - Use Suggestion on the major empires' rulers to persuade them into reforming their infrastructure and creating a Good system of laws and enforcement
-For the divine spellcaster and any other spellcasters (druids especially) - Use extensive magic - creating food, encouraging plant growth, bringing in water for reservoirs from the elemental plane of water, what have you - to improve resources within your pet empires
-Also for the cleric - establish a church or pantheon, recruit initiates, get as many people up to "create food and water" level as possible.
-For the party rogue - Whenever a rival nation attacks, hit their treasuries and empty the soldiers' payrolls.
-For the party bard/other member with the highest charisma and best diplomacy- Spread dissent amongst rival nation forces, spread word about the nice payroll available for defectors to that nation they're planning to invade, and how much better life there is anyway. Bring your family.
-For the party fighter/tactician - reform the military, supervise training to create the best defense possible.

I think this is generally a pretty Good plan, if one that does have some potential holes. The biggest issue I think there is is the use of Suggestion on the leader, but it seemed like a kinder option than just killing them, and one that would lead to less chaos in the ranks than exiling them and assuming direct control.

[Keltest]

Thank you. :smallsmile:

Anyway, assuming resources comparable to Tarquin's party, I'd say:

-For the party arcane spellcaster - Use Suggestion on the major empires' rulers to persuade them into reforming their infrastructure and creating a Good system of laws and enforcement
-For the divine spellcaster and any other spellcasters (druids especially) - Use extensive magic - creating food, encouraging plant growth, bringing in water for reservoirs from the elemental plane of water, what have you - to improve resources within your pet empires
-Also for the cleric - establish a church or pantheon, recruit initiates, get as many people up to "create food and water" level as possible.
-For the party rogue - Whenever a rival nation attacks, hit their treasuries and empty the soldiers' payrolls.
-For the party bard/other member with the highest charisma and best diplomacy- Spread dissent amongst rival nation forces, spread word about the nice payroll available for defectors to that nation they're planning to invade, and how much better life there is anyway. Bring your family.
-For the party fighter/tactician - reform the military, supervise training to create the best defense possible.

I think this is generally a pretty Good plan, if one that does have some potential holes. The biggest issue I think there is is the use of Suggestion on the leader, but it seemed like a kinder option than just killing them, and one that would lead to less chaos in the ranks than exiling them and assuming direct control.
Doesn't suggestion not work if youre telling them to do something theyre fundamentally against? Reorganization of government would require them losing some power, which is what evil leaders are in it for (especially lawful evil ones)

[DaggerPen]

Doesn't suggestion not work if youre telling them to do something theyre fundamentally against? Reorganization of government would require them losing some power, which is what evil leaders are in it for (especially lawful evil ones)

It depends on how reasonable you make it sound, doesn't it? Stuff like "your people would be less likely to rebel if they had a more steady food supply," "this system of law is inefficient; people will respect your wisdom more this way" seems like it could take care of it. But if need be, deposing them outright is an option - it's just tougher to make sure the underlings are okay with the change.

[Muenster Man]

Doesn't suggestion not work if youre telling them to do something theyre fundamentally against? Reorganization of government would require them losing some power, which is what evil leaders are in it for (especially lawful evil ones)

You could frame the Suggestion in such a way that would fulfill short term goals while ruining long-term goals. Say, if the leader is hosting a party and a very critical ambassador is visiting, you could cast Suggestion on the leader and make him/her act like a buffoon to have fun at the party, but disenfranchise diplomatic relations with the ambassador. It may leave the previously evil or neutral leader little option but to reorganize. There would be a lot more steps, it's pretty indirect, and it's tricky, but it can work.

[Keltest]

You could frame the Suggestion in such a way that would fulfill short term goals while ruining long-term goals. Say, if the leader is hosting a party and a very critical ambassador is visiting, you could cast Suggestion on the leader and make him/her act like a buffoon to have fun at the party, but disenfranchise diplomatic relations with the ambassador. It may leave the previously evil or neutral leader little option but to reorganize. There would be a lot more steps, it's pretty indirect, and it's tricky, but it can work.

A situation like that would require constant monitoring and prodding. In a neutral or chaotic evil society, its far more likely that the leader would simply be seen as weak and become overthrown, while a Lawful society would have enough evil underlings that any reorganization would likely be just as evil.

[DaggerPen]

A situation like that would require constant monitoring and prodding. In a neutral or chaotic evil society, its far more likely that the leader would simply be seen as weak and become overthrown, while a Lawful society would have enough evil underlings that any reorganization would likely be just as evil.

My thought was a situation more akin to what Tarquin and co. are doing - manipulating a puppet ruler while in reality maintaining close control over the situation. So the limiting factor in the success of this plan, I think, is how quickly the most Evil-serving members of the bureaucracy could be replaced with Good or Neutral counterparts.

An open coup may be better after all. The most politically minded member of the party would work on overhauling the bureaucracy, the divine spellcaster and/or druid would start solving any food and water shortages and improving farmland, the rogue would start working on palace/throne room security and sabotage, the warrior would work on overhauling the army, and the arcane spellcaster and any other party members would tackle border security via a combination of scrying, teleporting and summoning allies. This, combined with the high turnover rate of countries in the area in general, would hopefully serve to keep away invaders until the country had been well secured. Then I think the solution is to get the bard to start plying neighboring farmlands and armies with tales of how much better this other new nation is, and how they're very welcoming to defectors, in order to weaken the most likely attackers. Then slowly absorb the outlying farmlands of the neighboring kingdoms, and throw the leaders into exile when the time is right. (If any neighboring leaders are Neutral or Good, instead build up as good an alliance as possible.)

The main catch with this, I think, is the "coalition of a zillion nations against you" issue that you would face after absorbing more than 3 or 4 other nations. At this point, I'd actually take a leaf out of Tarquin's book, in that I'd start installing the most loyal supporters as the new regents/establish a democracy, such that the various nations could secure themselves well enough for the party to start reforming a new nation.

[Keltest]

My thought was a situation more akin to what Tarquin and co. are doing - manipulating a puppet ruler while in reality maintaining close control over the situation. So the limiting factor in the success of this plan, I think, is how quickly the most Evil-serving members of the bureaucracy could be replaced with Good or Neutral counterparts.

An open coup may be better after all. The most politically minded member of the party would work on overhauling the bureaucracy, the divine spellcaster and/or druid would start solving any food and water shortages and improving farmland, the rogue would start working on palace/throne room security and sabotage, the warrior would work on overhauling the army, and the arcane spellcaster and any other party members would tackle border security via a combination of scrying, teleporting and summoning allies. This, combined with the high turnover rate of countries in the area in general, would hopefully serve to keep away invaders until the country had been well secured. Then I think the solution is to get the bard to start plying neighboring farmlands and armies with tales of how much better this other new nation is, and how they're very welcoming to defectors, in order to weaken the most likely attackers. Then slowly absorb the outlying farmlands of the neighboring kingdoms, and throw the leaders into exile when the time is right. (If any neighboring leaders are Neutral or Good, instead build up as good an alliance as possible.)

The main catch with this, I think, is the "coalition of a zillion nations against you" issue that you would face after absorbing more than 3 or 4 other nations. At this point, I'd actually take a leaf out of Tarquin's book, in that I'd start installing the most loyal supporters as the new regents/establish a democracy, such that the various nations could secure themselves well enough for the party to start reforming a new nation.

youre assuming that an evil ruler would allow a good advisor into their court, and give him enough consideration to radically alter his policies. A neutral person might be able to get in, although the degree of influence would be limited.

[DaggerPen]

youre assuming that an evil ruler would allow a good advisor into their court, and give him enough consideration to radically alter his policies. A neutral person might be able to get in, although the degree of influence would be limited.

In terms of an open coup? I was thinking less "slip into court and overthrow by stealth" and more "teleport in, Hold Person, knock the guards unconscious, ask if anyone else has a problem with your authority". If we're going the Suggestion route, I'm thinking something similar, except it's a "teleport into bedchambers/other isolated area, cast Suggestion/Charm Person, interpose self as newfound trusted advisor" situation.

[hydroplatypus]

youre assuming that an evil ruler would allow a good advisor into their court, and give him enough consideration to radically alter his policies. A neutral person might be able to get in, although the degree of influence would be limited.

If I recall correctly there is a spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/undetectableAlignment.htm) that hides a person's alignment, making them register as true neutral to any detect alignment spells cast upon them. Have that cast every day and they will assume that the good person is a neutral person.

[davidbofinger]

For purposes of this thread, who are we and what resources do we have? Are we most like Evisceratus, Ian, Elan, Gannji, or the ruler of West Despotania?

I suggest: we're the Order of the Stick after the story finishes. We've destroyed Xykon, killed Redcloak, maybe helped Hinjo crush Gobbotopia's nascent nationhood, probably resurrected Durkon. Then we wiped out Team Tarquin but in the process the Empires of Blood, Sweat and Tears disintegrated and the continent was engulfed by chaos. Now we feel we should build a union of good on the ruin of evil, where the people will be safe and there'll be lots of smoking hookers. (We had to compromise a little when we wrote the mission statement.) We're at least a few levels up from where we were as of the escape on the Mechane. The elves are watching doubtfully: they don't much like the idea of a great empire down there but they respect us for having avenged the death of their beloved Lirian and as long as the new state seems good-aligned they won't actively try to break it up.

[Amphiox]

Split your party in two and conquer to neighboring nations by overthrowing evil rulers. Make sure those two nations are smallish to start with, so they are readily defensible.

Set up a mutual defence pact between those two nations.

Then reform both of them internally with political freedoms, major public works, etc.

Under no circumstances make any apparent aggressive moves on other neighbours. Establish a reputation as two peaceful, inconspicuous nations mostly interested in trade, but armed to near impregnability, like Switzerland.

Pretty soon, by increasing your citizens' standard of living, the citizens of other nations will want to emulate you. They will either immigrate to you (let them in to the extent that you can afford to), or pressure their host nations to become more like you.

If any neighboring nations chose to become more like you, offer them a mutual-defence pact once they pass a criteria for "goodness".

If neighboring nations instead chose to attack or undermine you to steal your wealth of eliminate the you as a source of making their citizenry jealous, make a vivid example of them. Activate your alliances. Crush them utterly. Then annex their territory.

Never attack anyone first. But mercilessly destroy anyone who attacks you first. You will never appear to be a big enough threat to motivate an alliance against you, and soon enough only the foolish will dare attack you.

Then sit back and let your example spread until you win what in the Civ-type games is called a "cultural victory".

[hydroplatypus]

I suggest: we're the Order of the Stick after the story finishes. We've destroyed Xykon, killed Redcloak, maybe helped Hinjo crush Gobbotopia's nascent nationhood, probably resurrected Durkon. Then we wiped out Team Tarquin but in the process the Empires of Blood, Sweat and Tears disintegrated and the continent was engulfed by chaos. Now we feel we should build a union of good on the ruin of evil, where the people will be safe and there'll be lots of smoking hookers. (We had to compromise a little when we wrote the mission statement.) We're at least a few levels up from where we were as of the escape on the Mechane. The elves are watching doubtfully: they don't much like the idea of a great empire down there but they respect us for having avenged the death of their beloved Lirian and as long as the new state seems good-aligned they won't actively try to break it up.

First thing that comes to mind would be the fact that Elan could probably gain control of a good chunk of the former empire of blood given that he is Tarquin's son. After all, Tarquin was the constant figure in the military and probably made sure that the soldiers would be loyal to him. Granted, Elan in charge of a nation isn't a good idea, but as long as he was coached by the rest of the team (minus belkar) he could probably be OK. Much more so if Haley is officially his wife/consort/some-official-title and have her actually run things. If nothing else it would provide a good starting off point, and if they are competent they could probably reunite the empire of blood's territory into a moderately large nation without too many problems. Of course, they would need a new name.

Another game changer in this case would probably be their allies in other locations. Assuming Azure city gets back on its feet having th backing of a reasonably powerful nation makes them much less vulnerable to a coalition, as they won't be alone. Plus I imagine Haley with a few potions of glibness could probably bluff the enemy nations into focusing elsewhere.

Given the ruler turnover it probably wouldn't be too difficult to install a few puppet kings in neighboring kingdoms who would be good aligned. This would provide allies, a buffer zone, as well as setting off less alarm bells than conquest, provided they could not be directly linked to it.

From there on get these nations to "conquor" or otherwise unify with each other, so that instead of a single large nation you have several moderately strong nations with close ties. Perhaps you could install both sides of a couple as king/queens of neighboring nations, have them marry and unify the kingdoms under a single dynasty.

From there I assume periodic border wars will occur for whatever reason with no instigation from the party. Use these to have various small puppet nations conquor some territory. Never too much for a single nation (2 conquests max, or else coalition time), but with a few puppets this amounts to a large amount of territory.

With this much territory it should be possible to encourage good/neutral aligned rulers that must periodically occur to join their alliance, as they would like the trade benefits and the protection that it would give them. Or better yet simply come to their aid when they end up in a pointless war, give them the opposition's territory, and presto, more nations in your sphere of influence.

From there establish something similar to the European union, as a vague trading union to negotiate intercontinental trading practices, slowly diplomatically merge the most willing nations into the larger nation, and ensure that the union is slowly given more and more power. Eventually it should effectively become a national government, as more power is slowly given to it, for whatever reasons. States would maintain a fairly large amount of power, but the union would have control over military deployments and foreign policy. After that it shouldn't be difficult to get the stragglers to join when they see the benefits of a well run nation, especially if states still maintain most of the control over the domestic sphere, if not foreign policy.

Granted the end result is a very loose association, and there are probably more than a few holes that I missed, but the general idea sounds viable to me.

[Keltest]

If I recall correctly there is a spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/undetectableAlignment.htm) that hides a person's alignment, making them register as true neutral to any detect alignment spells cast upon them. Have that cast every day and they will assume that the good person is a neutral person.

That foils any detection spells, but unless youre going to act extremely out of alignment and advise him as a neutral or evil person would, suspicions are still going to be raised and/or your usefulness as an advisor questioned.

[Kish]

That foils any detection spells, but unless youre going to act extremely out of alignment and advise him as a neutral or evil person would, suspicions are still going to be raised and/or your usefulness as an advisor questioned.
This seems to hinge on the assumption that there is no pragmatic reason to avoid doing evil things. That, in fact, good (aligned) advice on ruling is inherently bad advice.

[Keltest]

This seems to hinge on the assumption that there is no pragmatic reason to avoid doing evil things. That, in fact, good (aligned) advice on ruling is inherently bad advice.

It seems like the people on the western continent are used to being brutally oppressed. By all indications, all governmental overthrows come from external armies inexplicably generated from... mercenaries I guess.

While "your people will be less likely to try and kill you" would certainly be valid to a long term ruler, someone who only has a few years to rule is not going to be overly concerned with his popularity either way.

It certainly wouldn't be impossible to influence an evil ruler like that, but the degree of control would be limited and the danger would be significantly increased.

[Amphiox]

One point to consider: would a good-aligned plan for the Western Continent necessarily require the unification of everything into a single nation-state?

For a real-world example, the situation on the Western Continent, a gaggle of endlessly warring small states with oppressive authoritarian governments could be considered analogous to both the situation as it was in medieval Europe, and the state of China during the Warring States period. In one of these cases, a single strong leader lead one of the states to conquer the others and unify everything into a single nation. In the other, that never happened (despite many attempts!), but eventually the area moved towards diplomatic cooperation.

In the long run, which model is the better one?

[Keltest]

One point to consider: would a good-aligned plan for the Western Continent necessarily require the unification of everything into a single nation-state?

For a real-world example, the situation on the Western Continent, a gaggle of endlessly warring small states with oppressive authoritarian governments could be considered analogous to both the situation as it was in medieval Europe, and the state of China during the Warring States period. In one of these cases, a single strong leader lead one of the states to conquer the others and unify everything into a single nation. In the other, that never happened (despite many attempts!), but eventually the area moved towards diplomatic cooperation.

In the long run, which model is the better one?
Neither is ideal, but if the goal is "improve the situation on the western continent" then both are valid outcomes (assuming that the state/states aren't horribly oppressing the people like they were beforehand)

[Copperdragon]

Culturally highly diverse continent with a lot of wilderness and scarcity of ressources? Sorry - lasting, widespread peace is not going to happen there.

You need to make a north-south cut through the northern areas, moving the elves on one side (east or west) and then you can distribute the other races into the free northern parts, so they can use the ressources from there in south.

Or you get even more radical and destroy the elven dominance in the north at all and mix all races, so they can form new, open realms.

But even then you have all those people from the south who want what the north has and who have to compete for what little space and ressources the south itself offers. I fear that the geography of the western continent makes it a very instable place and even if you're achieving some stability it's nothing that is likely to last more than a very few generations.

[King of Nowhere]

One point to consider: would a good-aligned plan for the Western Continent necessarily require the unification of everything into a single nation-state?



Not necessarily, but given how warlike are the nations on the western continent, the only way to force them to cooperate is to do it through power.

My plan would be to do roughly what team tarquin is doing, minus the gratuitous brutality. gain control of the whole continent that way.
then form an illuminated dictatorship and slowly reform the system. gradually change the laws to something more civilized, set up schools, use your propaganda to talk about human rights. your goal is to have democratic elections within 20 or 30 years, after you have an accultured population.
It is important to do things slowly enough that the people will accept it.

[Copperdragon]

My plan would be to do roughly what team tarquin is doing, minus the gratuitous brutality. gain control of the whole continent that way.

That does not work. Tarquin can do what he does because of his brutality. You would just end up to be tied up in a lot of intrigue, hassle, talks, negotiations until you either get outwitted/outplayed by a competition you did not murder/poison because you try to be "the good guy" or you get outright murdered or overthrown by an even more brutal/reckless competitor.

What Tarquin does only works if you're willing to crush some hens with the iron boot at times.

What might be a working idea is to tie the realms to three or fewer empire through marriage. Secure yourself a powerful position in one of the most powerful realm, be a very strong king. Tie your neighbours into your own realm with alliances, create a political climate that does NOT resolve around violence and a line of succession that relies on what you determine. Then marry the heir of the second most powerful realm, get a lot of children and marry these away into the other realms, securing them this way.
And even to manage that is going to be a true lot of work to get it right and stable but it is your only hope to secure the dominance in the Western Continent without resorting to war and violence in general.

[rbetieh]

I see a lot of attempts to use force to effect a change. In essence, this amounts to playing good on Evils terms. Stop fighting wars with Evil, wars make everyone evil over time.

Try this on for size,
1) Target a rare and valuable resource - a certain crop that grows only in one specific region of the desert, or a mineral that is rare and concentrated - and monopolize it (the Good way to do this is via fair purchase, but you are a super-rich high-level adventurer, so you can).

2) Recruit Good-aligned wizards, sorcerers, clerics and other spellcasters to help you create and maintain magical army-stopping quality barriers around your land. With all these spellcasters around, you can easily create from thin air any other resources you need, and for the most part, you can "pay" these adventurer classes in "Obstacle Overcoming XP".

3) Create a limited-restriction Immigration/Emigration policy....allowing people from other nations to come and go, visit your lands and report on it's relative progress and affluence to other nations. Ensure you have a decent police force though, to prevent thievery

4) Create a trade policy as follows: "The nation of PeaceLandia will trade our very rare and valuable resource to any nation not currently engaged in or supporting a nation engaged in a war"

As the resource becomes more precious, the other nations will have to enter into peace periods to trade. They can't steal it from you, because police; they can't take it from you because spellcasters. The smarter overlords will create puppet states that remain in peace and can't be seen as a peaceful supporter of a party at war just to get your resource, but that is still a win for Good because there is not a larger percentage of the continent at continual peace. More importantly, these "peace-pockets" will prosper from the benefits of being able to move resources from defense industries to growth industries, and the examples of prosperity through peace will entice other nations to stop going to war and start trading.

Of course, you have to find the rare resource and find enough spellcasters willing to follow along, but they are good aligned working on a good endeavor so they ought to be willing to consider pro-bono work.

[CaDzilla]

Hire a bunch of low level druids to create and find water every day. If you can find some mid or high level druids, have them use control weather for rain and flashflood. If by any chance you come across an epic level druid, have them cast a spell that creates a large area of livable land. Do not hire an evil druid. If you can't find some druids, become one yourself and start a druid order.

[konradknox]

You could always go the Miko Miyazaki way. Roll in with an army of paladins, dictate your terms, offer terms of surrender, and smite evil on all who oppose your plan. A holy crusade followed by a global liberation.

[Amphiox]

You could always go the Miko Miyazaki way. Roll in with an army of paladins, dictate your terms, offer terms of surrender, and smite evil on all who oppose your plan. A holy crusade followed by a global liberation.

That is the goodish version of what Tarquin did the first time, and he was quickly overthrown by an even bigger coalition.


A good aligned plan cannot have, as a large aspect of it, coercion or trickery.

What you really have to do is create a good state, defend it, and then peacefully get others to follow your example and emulate you.

[oppyu]

You could try the Nonprofit NGO route; roll in with some high-level casters and start feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless. Never openly opposing the various regimes and doing what you can to organise branches all over the continent, but also being willing to hide a democratic political dissident or two when needed. Win the hearts and minds of the people all over the continent without ever actually opposing the people who run the continent, and you'll have some decent leverage for instituting political reform. It's not a perfect strategy for actually reforming the continent, but you'll help lots of people.

[DaggerPen]

You could try the Nonprofit NGO route; roll in with some high-level casters and start feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless. Never openly opposing the various regimes and doing what you can to organise branches all over the continent, but also being willing to hide a democratic political dissident or two when needed. Win the hearts and minds of the people all over the continent without ever actually opposing the people who run the continent, and you'll have some decent leverage for instituting political reform. It's not a perfect strategy for actually reforming the continent, but you'll help lots of people.

Not a bad proposition. If we're doing that, though, I'd think it'd be best to get another branch working on freeing slaves and political prisoners and helping them to safety.

[oppyu]

Not a bad proposition. If we're doing that, though, I'd think it'd be best to get another branch working on freeing slaves and political prisoners and helping them to safety.
Perhaps, although they'd have to be able to maintain strong seperation between the 'feeding people' and 'freeing people' branches. The NGO route only really works if the empires see you less of a threat and more of innocuous do-gooders who won't do anything revolutionary. If the evil empires feel threatened and actively oppose you, then things can get violent and messy.

[Math_Mage]

What about just doing what Tarquin's doing, minus the domestic totalitarianism and assorted whatnot? I mean, it's not like he's totally wrong; what he's doing could be really good for the Continent if the people doing it actually gave a bleep about the good of the Continent.

[Keltest]

What about just doing what Tarquin's doing, minus the domestic totalitarianism and assorted whatnot? I mean, it's not like he's totally wrong; what he's doing could be really good for the Continent if the people doing it actually gave a bleep about the good of the Continent.

Theres been a discussion going as to whether a "good" aligned character would be able to get enough influence with evil dictators (who do get their titles under their own power sometimes) to make that kind of a difference without getting kicked out and/or executed.

[Math_Mage]

Theres been a discussion going as to whether a "good" aligned character would be able to get enough influence with evil dictators (who do get their titles under their own power sometimes) to make that kind of a difference without getting kicked out and/or executed.
Is that really in dispute? Between Lord Tyrinar, the Empress of Blood, and the Weeping King, the first thing we learn about the 'dictators' in Tarquin's scheme is that they are naive and/or easily manipulated (and not uniformly Evil, for that matter). They will not magically become stiff-backed canny tyrants when faced with a Neutral/Good version of Tarquin.

[Keltest]

Is that really in dispute? Between Lord Tyrinar, the Empress of Blood, and the Weeping King, the first thing we learn about the 'dictators' in Tarquin's scheme is that they are naive and/or easily manipulated (and not uniformly Evil, for that matter). They will not magically become stiff-backed canny tyrants when faced with a Neutral/Good version of Tarquin.

Honestly, I don't think we have enough data to make that call. Lord Tyrinar was weak-willed, aye, but we haven't really seen the lengths Team T goes to on the "average" ruler, since we barely ever see them when theyre manipulating the day to day politics.

[Math_Mage]

Honestly, I don't think we have enough data to make that call. Lord Tyrinar was weak-willed, aye, but we haven't really seen the lengths Team T goes to on the "average" ruler, since we barely ever see them when theyre manipulating the day to day politics.
To make the call? What call? There's only some halfheartedly asserted magical factor preventing Good and Neutral people from being effective, or there isn't. That's not an even debate worth 'calling'. Gratuitous brutality is not magic.

[Keltest]

To make the call? What call? There's only some halfheartedly asserted magical factor preventing Good and Neutral people from being effective, or there isn't. That's not an even debate worth 'calling'. Gratuitous brutality is not magic, and it doesn't make Tarquin's plan work.

It was explained earlier that without empires constantly switching hands, everyone in the area would see the long surviving kingdom as a threat and unite against it. That gives them a very real chance of getting killed or found out.

[Math_Mage]

It was explained earlier that without empires constantly switching hands, everyone in the area would see the long surviving kingdom as a threat and unite against it. That gives them a very real chance of getting killed or found out.
Tarquin and co. manage that by finding patsies to 'topple' the kingdoms occasionally. All the hypothetical Good/Neutral Tarquin has to do is manage the transitions more smoothly, while putting out propaganda to the same effect.

[rbetieh]

Perhaps, although they'd have to be able to maintain strong seperation between the 'feeding people' and 'freeing people' branches. The NGO route only really works if the empires see you less of a threat and more of innocuous do-gooders who won't do anything revolutionary. If the evil empires feel threatened and actively oppose you, then things can get violent and messy.

Well, you also need to not draw the attention of the greedy dictators, because you know, his armies need free food water and medical supplies too.....

You can do a lot of good the NGO way, but there is a breaking point where you will draw attention for being "too rich". Dont get me wrong, I am not saying it can't work, because I don't know where the breaking point is. You can get a lot of good this way, and it may be enough, I don't know.

[oppyu]

Well, you also need to not draw the attention of the greedy dictators, because you know, his armies need free food water and medical supplies too.....

You can do a lot of good the NGO way, but there is a breaking point where you will draw attention for being "too rich". Dont get me wrong, I am not saying it can't work, because I don't know where the breaking point is. You can get a lot of good this way, and it may be enough, I don't know.
Ironically enough, this breaking point would be a great situation for anyone planning to take over the Western continent by force. Lull the enemy empires into making their armies dependent on your support, then completely withdraw that support and invade with your own very well-fed army!

[King of Nowhere]

What about just doing what Tarquin's doing, minus the domestic totalitarianism and assorted whatnot? I mean, it's not like he's totally wrong; what he's doing could be really good for the Continent if the people doing it actually gave a bleep about the good of the Continent.
Theres been a discussion going as to whether a "good" aligned character would be able to get enough influence with evil dictators (who do get their titles under their own power sometimes) to make that kind of a difference without getting kicked out and/or executed.

That was roughly what I was sugesting. I don't think getting a dictator to listen to you would really be a problem: you'd only need to find the right person to become your puppet dictator, as team tarquin has apparently been doing. it's not like you get some powerful warlord and try to manipulate him; you get some random dumb guy, and offer him to be his general while he conquers the continent.
The real question is whether unifying the continent mostly with wars would be a good deed, or an evil deed done for a good purpose. Basically, it would boil down to a "morally justified" question, and so better to let it drop.
But the practical feasibility should not be a great concern.

[veti]

Split your party in two and conquer to neighboring nations by overthrowing evil rulers. Make sure those two nations are smallish to start with, so they are readily defensible.

Set up a mutual defence pact between those two nations.

Then reform both of them internally with political freedoms, major public works, etc.

Under no circumstances make any apparent aggressive moves on other neighbours. Establish a reputation as two peaceful, inconspicuous nations mostly interested in trade, but armed to near impregnability, like Switzerland.

Pretty soon, by increasing your citizens' standard of living, the citizens of other nations will want to emulate you. They will either immigrate to you (let them in to the extent that you can afford to), or pressure their host nations to become more like you.

You have to remember who the enemy is, in this scenario. The people who are going to try to stop you aren't politicians, or even kings in the usual sense - they're adventurers: small groups of people who are motivated first and always by XP and loot. So "military impregnability" is no guarantee of invulnerability.

The moment your two countries are seen to be co-operating, these enemies will spot you and start to home in. If your countries are getting visibly richer, that just makes them more tempting targets.

I still think the only answer is a version of Tarquin's own con. Set up two or three power blocs that are, outwardly, rivalrous at first. Manoeuvre - through wars, trade, alliances and coups as required - until all the minor kingdoms are affiliated with one of these large blocs, and scared of the other(s). Then start to soften relations between them.

[CoffeeIncluded]

It's a shame that the religious situation is as fractured and bellicose as the political situation (see Malack's statement on the querulous nature of the Western Pantheon), since otherwise you could have someone take advantage of that and ascend to the throne with a "divine right to rule" excuse or something like that, and influence them from behind the scenes. You need stability more than anything else here.

[davidhanna]

One of the most important things to think about is how much time you have to reform the continent.

If your group of reformers is primarily human and of adventuring age, (for the sake of argument let's say 20-35) than you probably have about 50 or 60 years to establish a lasting society before most of them die of old age.

Conversely, a group of reformers consisting of mostly elves, with maybe a Good-aligned dragon or two, might be able to operate for centuries and escape detection by working on a timescale that most of the other powers on the continent simply won't notice.

[rbetieh]

Ironically enough, this breaking point would be a great situation for anyone planning to take over the Western continent by force. Lull the enemy empires into making their armies dependent on your support, then completely withdraw that support and invade with your own very well-fed army!

I don't know if we could consider this approach; which reminds me of the cliched drug-dealers business strategy, a alignment-Good methodology to reforming the continent. It seems Neutral-aligned at best, the kind of plan Enor and Ganji might have come up with.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

What makes an idea to reform the Western Continent "Good aligned" or not?

[Ghost Nappa]

What makes an idea to reform the Western Continent "Good aligned" or not?

A good first step to see if you're a good-aligned ruler is to answer the question "How much are you enslaving and oppressing the people you're supposedly in charge of?"

If you have a single-individual in that group, there are some follow-up questions to be raised. Among them, "Why?"

Edit: As for an idea? Compare it to RAW definitions of LG and LE.

[rbetieh]

What makes an idea to reform the Western Continent "Good aligned" or not?

Everyone is free to interpret the alignment system as they wish of course, but my quick and dirty rule is this:

If you have to justify your action to a Good-Aligned character then your action could not have been Good-Aligned.

This doesn't mean it was Evil-Aligned necessarily. It just means that it strictly was not a Good-aligned act. So for this conversation, assume you are bringing your reform proposal before Celia to be judged. If you are forced to convince her that your plan will be Good in the end, it probably is not a Good-aligned plan.

[Amphiox]

You have to remember who the enemy is, in this scenario. The people who are going to try to stop you aren't politicians, or even kings in the usual sense - they're adventurers: small groups of people who are motivated first and always by XP and loot. So "military impregnability" is no guarantee of invulnerability.

The moment your two countries are seen to be co-operating, these enemies will spot you and start to home in. If your countries are getting visibly richer, that just makes them more tempting targets.

I still think the only answer is a version of Tarquin's own con. Set up two or three power blocs that are, outwardly, rivalrous at first. Manoeuvre - through wars, trade, alliances and coups as required - until all the minor kingdoms are affiliated with one of these large blocs, and scared of the other(s). Then start to soften relations between them.

Well, in D&D there is no scheme of any alignment that cannot be disrupted by a band of sufficiently levelled adventurers. Tarquin's scheme can be brought down and destroyed by a band of high-level good adventurers too. The Scribblers were probably powerful enough to have done it.

The only defence to a threat from high level adventurers in D&D is higher level adventurers. We ARE positing an equivalence here, right? So this good-aligned scheme will be run by an adventurer team on par with Tarquin's team in level and resources.

Unless one is allowed to cheese with Candles of Invocation....

(Which brings up a funny, crazy alternative: use the Candle trick to summon an infinite army of extraplanar beings of pure Law and Good, then ask/convince them to "fix the Western Continent", then just sit back and watch what happens....)

[Liliet]

I'm supporting the "get some magic to make a desert livable" side.

Epic-level adventurers should fight the roots, not the leafs. Give people more resources, make it so they don't have to fight for scraps, as Laurin so kindly phrased. I believe it is entirely within capabilities of epic spellcasters to turn desert into lush meadows, and from there it's a lot less work to do. Such a service would be a powerful negotiating tool, and even if the whole continent wanted to get such a party for themselves and make them work only for them, I believe an epic party can protect themselves from that sort of assault without anything resembling a problem. So long as there isn't another epic party managing the puppet kingdoms opposing you, that is, but that's something you must find out about and take care of before even starting. You have an advantage of surprise, and if you are Good, quite probably of a number of supportive allies.


Basically, you have two routes open.

1) You just patch-by-patch, without making any distinction and playing favorites, transform the whole desert as fast as you can.
Upside: everyone likes you.
Downside: absolutely unpredictable political consequences, and not terribly likely to stop the wars immediately.

2) You offer your services to the nations that conform to your demands, like stopping wars, establishing a fair court system, denouncing slavery... step by step, piece by piece, keep them wanting more. More and more livable land over time for those that continuously follow your advice and keep not engaging in wars.
Keep it secret who exactly has received your help (or will it be obvious?...), or take it upon yourself to protect those who have got your help from those who want to take their nice things. If you are both Good and politically savvy you should by epic levels have quite a resource of potential "investors" who'll take it upon themselves to send some military forces over to the Western continent with you providing a guarantee that it will pay off in long term.
That way, you'll get a lot of small and vulnerable nations on your side. Have them form alliances, defensive pacts...
Upside: stable, long-term results. There won't be nearly as much reason for wars, and you'll stop those already happening.
Downside: common folk will HATE you the same way they now hate elves, only MORE. Because you could go the first way mentioned above and give everything to everyone at once, and you didn't, playing favorites with condition they have no influence on (although there will probably be rebellions "stop it with the stupid fight and give us food" across the continent, which will also help your agenda).


So basically, either you go the populist way, or you go the actually working way. If you are Good, you know what you'll choose, even if it'll be a lot of work with little reward - except, you know, actual results.

[hydroplatypus]

I'm supporting the "get some magic to make a desert livable" side.

Epic-level adventurers should fight the roots, not the leafs. Give people more resources, make it so they don't have to fight for scraps, as Laurin so kindly phrased. I believe it is entirely within capabilities of epic spellcasters to turn desert into lush meadows, and from there it's a lot less work to do. Such a service would be a powerful negotiating tool, and even if the whole continent wanted to get such a party for themselves and make them work only for them, I believe an epic party can protect themselves from that sort of assault without anything resembling a problem. So long as there isn't another epic party managing the puppet kingdoms opposing you, that is, but that's something you must find out about and take care of before even starting. You have an advantage of surprise, and if you are Good, quite probably of a number of supportive allies.


Basically, you have two routes open.

1) You just patch-by-patch, without making any distinction and playing favorites, transform the whole desert as fast as you can.
Upside: everyone likes you.
Downside: absolutely unpredictable political consequences, and not terribly likely to stop the wars immediately.

2) You offer your services to the nations that conform to your demands, like stopping wars, establishing a fair court system, denouncing slavery... step by step, piece by piece, keep them wanting more. More and more livable land over time for those that continuously follow your advice and keep not engaging in wars.
Keep it secret who exactly has received your help (or will it be obvious?...), or take it upon yourself to protect those who have got your help from those who want to take their nice things. If you are both Good and politically savvy you should by epic levels have quite a resource of potential "investors" who'll take it upon themselves to send some military forces over to the Western continent with you providing a guarantee that it will pay off in long term.
That way, you'll get a lot of small and vulnerable nations on your side. Have them form alliances, defensive pacts...
Upside: stable, long-term results. There won't be nearly as much reason for wars, and you'll stop those already happening.
Downside: common folk will HATE you the same way they now hate elves, only MORE. Because you could go the first way mentioned above and give everything to everyone at once, and you didn't, playing favorites with condition they have no influence on (although there will probably be rebellions "stop it with the stupid fight and give us food" across the continent, which will also help your agenda).


So basically, either you go the populist way, or you go the actually working way. If you are Good, you know what you'll choose, even if it'll be a lot of work with little reward - except, you know, actual results.

The main problem with that is that the gods may very well decide that they like - or feel obligated to keep - the continent as a desert. Or that the nations that feel left out of your little reformation won't form a coalition and destroy your pet nations. I think a coalition crushing your movement seems likely as it the dictators could easily make their armies support them in their quest to get the goods for themselves. Given that tarquin and pals could get defeated by a coalition we can't assume that the adventurers will have enough personal power to stop this from occurring. So the party just nuking the coalition out of existence seems unlikely. As such you would need some way to keep a coalition from forming against you.

[DaggerPen]

I feel like Liliet's solution is one that particularly calls for a druid to research ways to increase resources without completely overhauling the environment. Tapping into potential underground water reservoirs, modifying desert plants and wildlife to increase food output, etc. has the potential to increase resources without significantly altering that desert theme the gods liked.

The coalition thing is a lot harder to solve, though.

[Deliverance]

1) You just patch-by-patch, without making any distinction and playing favorites, transform the whole desert as fast as you can.
Upside: everyone likes you.
Downside: absolutely unpredictable political consequences, and not terribly likely to stop the wars immediately.

Objection!

Doing something that is benefical in general and will be beneficial to everybody in the long run is absolutely not guaranteed to make everyone like you. Whether you play favourites or not is pretty much irrelevant - somebody will be better off in the short run and others worse, and this will, as you note, have unpredictable political consequences - and THAT is pretty much guaranteed to make somebody absolutely hate you and what you are doing given that we are talking about an political environment of warring city-states. You aren't a good guy when your actions aid an enemy.

In your case #1 you are a destabilizing factor of the highest order, and one that the smarter dictators will know undermines their rule in the long run, so however the world will end up dealing with you, taking action or accepting you as a force of nature that cannot be stopped, it certainly won't be with universal liking.

And that's not counting those who make their living off the desert environment and would be out of a job and/or forced to start all over in your lush world!

[RadagastTheBrow]

Here's a thought...

Is the goal to make the Western Continent less Chaotic... or more Good?

I think that, maybe, the continent can possibly be made a better (friendlier, freer, more benevolent and humane) place without tackling its inherently disorganized, chaotic nature.

For example, maybe try the Batman: Inc route: City by city, establish local good, honest power figures (Essentially, Batmen) capable of defending the city, and establishing a clean, healthy market by which the city can honestly prosper. Since these city defenders aren't equipped for aggression, there's no cause for a coalition of defenders to thwart our efforts. Go along, city by city, establishing good conditions for trade, and wealth will follow.

Whatever solution is implemented, you'd have to account for (IE beat the Nine Living Hells out of) aspiring Tarkies anyway; this paints nice, juicy targets towards which despots will come out of the woodwork, and gives these targets reasonable means by which to defend themselves.

Much lower long-term maintenance this way, and it gives good character origins for later campaigns! Er, stories, rather. "Oh, my previous character liberated City X, and my new guy is starting up as a fresh recruit for the City X guard!"

[Haldir]

Start with a great PR campaign for turning local authorities against the larger evil authorities. It all comes down to economics, if you can convince enough of the taxable and conscription-able people to get out of the governments resource pool, you can confine them to the cities and the fanatics, force them to draw out those resources in a guerrilla-style war for the rest of the conflict. Build alliances with good-aligned nations across the sea for resources of your own and helping you to deny the evil-government resources. Attack ports with secret agents sympathetic to your cause, steal food and distribute it on your own. Disrupt trade with banditry and agents within the government.

[Math_Mage]

Here's a thought...

Is the goal to make the Western Continent less Chaotic... or more Good?

I think that, maybe, the continent can possibly be made a better (friendlier, freer, more benevolent and humane) place without tackling its inherently disorganized, chaotic nature.

For example, maybe try the Batman: Inc route: City by city, establish local good, honest power figures (Essentially, Batmen) capable of defending the city, and establishing a clean, healthy market by which the city can honestly prosper. Since these city defenders aren't equipped for aggression, there's no cause for a coalition of defenders to thwart our efforts. Go along, city by city, establishing good conditions for trade, and wealth will follow.

Whatever solution is implemented, you'd have to account for (IE beat the Nine Living Hells out of) aspiring Tarkies anyway; this paints nice, juicy targets towards which despots will come out of the woodwork, and gives these targets reasonable means by which to defend themselves.

Much lower long-term maintenance this way, and it gives good character origins for later campaigns! Er, stories, rather. "Oh, my previous character liberated City X, and my new guy is starting up as a fresh recruit for the City X guard!"
The issue with the Batman route is that it doesn't scale. You can't take a certain number of Batman types defending X cities and use that existing base to handle city X+1; you need to find another Batman, reinventing the wheel for every new city.

[warrl]

and the state of China during the Warring States period

China is an example of another approach: Be conquered and absorb the conquerors.

China did it twice that I'm aware of: to the Mongols, and to the Manchurians.

However, it's a long-term strategy. In the case of the Manchurians, it wasn't essentially complete until I think the fourth or fifth emperor after the conquest. So maybe something for elves to pursue...

(It was easily marked in that case because of the language. The first Manchurian emperor decreed that only Manchurians would be permitted to learn Manchurian - their new Chinese subjects were not worthy of such an honor. Which meant that the Manchurian nobility had to learn Chinese, but none of the Chinese had to learn Manchurian. After a few generations they got a Manchurian emperor who spoke only Chinese. Today Manchurian is listed as an endangered language, with fewer than 100 native speakers out of 10 million ethnic Manchurians.)

The English also did it to the Norman French. After, a century or two earlier, doing it (but with only about a third of the country) to invading Danes.

[RadagastTheBrow]

The issue with the Batman route is that it doesn't scale. You can't take a certain number of Batman types defending X cities and use that existing base to handle city X+1; you need to find another Batman, reinventing the wheel for every new city.

That is the Batman route- a chicken in every pot, and a Caped Crusader on every rooftop! :smalltongue: In all seriousness, it's probably easier to set up Heroes' Guilds or something than a whole mess of political intrigue. Or, hell, as you go town-by-town, explore it, get to know its problems, and leave the strapping young lad who introduced the city to you well able to defend it.

"You all walk into a bar. It's part of a chain of bars, all owned by the same guy who franchises them out to local businessmen, but it's a bar."

[veti]

Well, in D&D there is no scheme of any alignment that cannot be disrupted by a band of sufficiently levelled adventurers.

Exactly. And therefore you need to either prevent that band from forming, or, if it already exists, not do anything to draw its focus. The more you look like "just a few more squabbling statelets" for as long as possible, the better.

In this case, the adventurers you're worried about are the ones who are ruling the other kingdoms. The goal is to conceal the fact that you're any different from them, until it's too late for them to do anything about it. So the reduction in violence comes not from treaties and prosperity, but from a fragile balance of power between three rival blocs; they'll accept that because (a) it's the sort of thing they understand, and (b) more importantly, they're part of it. The kings in Power Bloc East will positively enjoy peaceful trade and prosperity, if (and only if) they can be persuaded to think of it as a form of economic warfare against those rotten Northerners and Westerners (i.e. "we get rich now so we can steamroll them in a few years").

[CaDzilla]

Form an alliance of druids and gradually make the desert livable from the center-out. If any local dictator tries to bully/assassinate you, send a legion of bears, lions, tigers, dinosaurs, and trees after him (be sure to ward them against the elements). If they send any dinosaurs after you, use wild empathy to turn them to your side. If everybody tries to attack you, convince some of the peasants to join your side by promising them food and/or dinosaur rides. If any of the armies reach you, use your druid powers to turn them into fertilizer. If any of the god's goons, walkers in the waste, or waste crawlers try to stop you, they will make great sources of XP.

[Liliet]

The main problem with that is that the gods may very well decide that they like - or feel obligated to keep - the continent as a desert. Or that the nations that feel left out of your little reformation won't form a coalition and destroy your pet nations. I think a coalition crushing your movement seems likely as it the dictators could easily make their armies support them in their quest to get the goods for themselves. Given that tarquin and pals could get defeated by a coalition we can't assume that the adventurers will have enough personal power to stop this from occurring. So the party just nuking the coalition out of existence seems unlikely. As such you would need some way to keep a coalition from forming against you.
1) A team of epic adventurers should include a cleric. It's their job to deal with the gods. Or maybe go with the route DaggerPen suggested and find a way to live better in the desert rather than change desert into something else.


2) I addressed the coalition problem here:

"Keep it secret who exactly has received your help (or will it be obvious?...), or take it upon yourself to protect those who have got your help from those who want to take their nice things. If you are both Good and politically savvy you should by epic levels have quite a resource of potential "investors" who'll take it upon themselves to send some military forces over to the Western continent with you providing a guarantee that it will pay off in long term.
That way, you'll get a lot of small and vulnerable nations on your side. Have them form alliances, defensive pacts..."

The basic idea is that while Evil adventurers will by epic level have the best equipment and lots of money, and also lots of enemies all over the world, Good adventurers are more likely to have earned lots of friends and allies while having more of less mediocre personal power. You know, what with Good adventurers being helpful, altruistic and helping install Good regimes in place of Evil ones or just uphold the existing ones throughout their career? Even OotS who are not yet epic and whose level 1-10 adventures we have not seen, already have Azure city supporting them. And had V been less... indiscriminate in vir violent rage to protect vir kids, they'd probably have Draketooths by now.

[TuggyNE]

A good aligned plan cannot have, as a large aspect of it, coercion or trickery.

Whyever not? A good-aligned plan to remove diabolic influence in an area could certainly include coercing any devils around to vacate the premises and any dedicated cultists to stop their work, and may well depend on those. And Robin Hood, generally held up as classic CG, was all about trickery and clever plans.

Deception is not inherently evil, and neither is use or threatened use of force.

[Amphiox]

Whyever not? A good-aligned plan to remove diabolic influence in an area could certainly include coercing any devils around to vacate the premises and any dedicated cultists to stop their work, and may well depend on those. And Robin Hood, generally held up as classic CG, was all about trickery and clever plans.

Deception is not inherently evil, and neither is use or threatened use of force.

As I said, "a large portion". And since trickery and coercion are are justifiable only against evil, unless you are claiming that the large majority of the common citizens of the Western Continent are evil, then coercion and trickery cannot be a LARGE part of the plan.

Robin Hood never coerced any of his Merry Men into joining him. He never used trickery with the common people he tried to help. Even with Robin Hood, coercion and trickery were minor strategies, reserved for dealing with evil foes, and not his primary activities.

[TuggyNE]

As I said, "a large portion". And since trickery and coercion are are justifiable only against evil, unless you are claiming that the large majority of the common citizens of the Western Continent are evil, then coercion and trickery cannot be a LARGE part of the plan.

The common people need not be the primary targets of such trickery; fooling a nation in order to ensure that its rulers are fooled, even if it is only the rulers that are known to be evil, seems perfectly reasonable. (Letting the citizens in on the secret might also acceptable, presuming the risk is considered low enough, both of letting the cat out of the bag and of retribution on the citizens involved.)

[DeliaP]

<snip>

Under no circumstances make any apparent aggressive moves on other neighbours. Establish a reputation as two peaceful, inconspicuous nations mostly interested in trade, but armed to near impregnability, like Switzerland.

Pretty soon, by increasing your citizens' standard of living, the citizens of other nations will want to emulate you. They will either immigrate to you (let them in to the extent that you can afford to), or pressure their host nations to become more like you.

If any neighboring nations chose to become more like you, offer them a mutual-defence pact once they pass a criteria for "goodness".
<snip>
Never attack anyone first. But mercilessly destroy anyone who attacks you first. You will never appear to be a big enough threat to motivate an alliance against you, and soon enough only the foolish will dare attack you.

Then sit back and let your example spread until you win what in the Civ-type games is called a "cultural victory".

Sounds a bit like Ian Banks' Culture, no?

I can even see the elves situation as having started out this way, but it clearly having gone wrong.... :smallwink:

OK, how's this plan:

Phase 1: The triple pronged fork.

- The fighter and the arcanist are installed either as ruler or power behind the throne of two distinct, moderately good, not too large (don't attract much attention) states. Do this by a straightforward "overthrow the existing tyrant and establish LG regime with popular uprising/support" route. Pick the two states to be well placed for a particular resource: not a luxury (eg. gold) or too obvious (eg. water) but useful, especially for armies (eg. iron). Present the two states as Good, but competitive trade rivals for that resource;

- The cleric and druid create one or two apparently independent NGO type movements: improving the lot of the poorest through food, water, irrigation, healing. Start out sounding humble, modest and as far as possible under the radar of the tyrants, who probably won't care too much. Gradually spread that. When they start to draw attention, offer variations on the following deal: "Allow us to keep operating in your territory and we will agree to covertly allow some of our food/water/healing to be diverted to your armies but we also want to be able to visit and provide basic food & health care for your prisoners and slaves. (We promise not to report on what's going on)." Then after further growth, establish one of the NGO's as a neutral provider of care and healing to all sides in a conflict.

- The bard and the rogue establish underground political movements. Covertly they are in fact being informed by the information the NGO's have about the states of the armies, prisons etc. These movements include both plans for popular uprisings, and underground railroad movements to free prisoners/slaves etc.

Phase 2: Building blocs.

Target states first which are also rich in the resource. Each of the rivals attempts to draw the target state in to an alliance. If target state is evil, at a critical moment, the NGO pulls out, claiming their workers are not being given safe passage. This suddenly cuts the army off from much of its food/water/healing; creates unrest in the army and the population; and the underground movement then launches an uprising under cover of which the rogue and the arcanist covertly execute a decapitation strike against the evil leadership. With a popular movement ready to step in and form government, the return of the NGO calming the army, and an immediate and generous trade agreement offered by one the trade rivals, a new Goodish government is established and supported.

So far nothing too out of the ordinary for the region. After a few such states have been drawn into the trade agreements, there are two rival Good aligned blocs, apparently snarling at each other, but starting to dominate the resource.

Before that gets /too/ dominant though, start a third bloc, with access to a different resource, that is poor in the first resource. Also presented as Goodish, competitive trade rival, but which positions itself as the champion of the people who aren't happy with the resource domination of the first two blocs. The third bloc, maybe led by the charismatic bard, establishes itself as a clever trader, apparently wining at the game of playing the two rivals off against each other to win favourable trade agreements for itself and it's allies. Discontent with the two existing blocs naturally allies with the third bloc!

Meanwhile, the NGO's are, of course, going to town at improving (by magic means) the environment and conditions within all three trade blocs, unfettered by having to deal with tyrannical regimes, while still operating (with terms much as before) in the regions outside the blocs.

Phase 3: Building the Economic Union.

Once about a third of the area has been drawn into one of the three blocs (each of which, of course, only needs to hold one ninth of the area, so has not drawn enough attention to unite the continent against them), each bloc has formed a close and favourable economic union within itself (along with a mutual defense pact), and starts to offer an affiliation to other states that also provides favourable terms (although not as favourable as full membership). Conditions for this affiliation include being neutral or good, and a non-aggression pact.

Now continue to pull the overthrow trick on evil states, but the newly installed popular movement requests (and is granted) affiliate status to one of the unions. Target the evil leaders most likely to be worrying something is going on.

The unions start to offer Good, stable affiliates the chance to join the union.

Phase 4: We've won.

After between a half and two thirds of the continent is drawn into union or affiliate status, start an complex negotiation by which the three blocs merge into one Union.

At this point the Union and NGO's already control much of the resources that would be needed to fight a war to oppose them; the Union states have had the benefit of much more of the NGO's food/water/irrigation work; the Union states have been peacefully trading (while maintaining armies) for so much longer that they are stronger than the divided evil states; the population of the evil divided states have underground popular movements that want their country to join the Union.

So any remaining tyrants that could put aside their disagreements to unite, would suddenly find enough of their own regimes falling apart to prevent them effectively doing so.

In the meantime, the explicit terms of the newly formed Union would offer: the relative stability and luxury of affiliate status to /any/ of the remaining states willing to reform enough to achieve Neutral status and agree to a non-aggression pact; in the longer term, full Union status to any affiliate state that has demonstrated stability and Good alignment; and covertly a quiet retirement package to any tyrant wishing to step down and live out the rest of their days in a mansion in the mountains.

NB1. This Union does not need to imply political union. Diverse different countries and cultures still remain. All that is agreed is: a fair share of the resources through mutually beneficial trading arrangements; non-aggression/mutual-defense; Good alignment ensuring that the population at large share the resources; and Good alignment ensuring that appropriate human rights exist.

NB2. This plan, of course, takes place over several decades, so up until Phase 4, each new round of tyrants only sees gradual increases in each of the rival blocs.

NB3. Only Phase 1 and Phase 2 really use the PC's.

[Liliet]

I still want to remind people that things are not really going to become better until you do something about the scarcity of resources. I mean, sure you could make some difference, but there IS an option of solving the global problem available...

[Amphiox]

The common people need not be the primary targets of such trickery; fooling a nation in order to ensure that its rulers are fooled, even if it is only the rulers that are known to be evil, seems perfectly reasonable. (Letting the citizens in on the secret might also acceptable, presuming the risk is considered low enough, both of letting the cat out of the bag and of retribution on the citizens involved.)

If the common people are not the target, then the trickery cannot be a "large" part of the plan.

Because dealing with the common people is the most ongoing, common, and time consuming aspect of any plan for reforming a continent, where, you know, the common people live and are the most numerous type of person.

And if the common people do get fooled, even if they are not your primary target, then what you have done is removed from them their agency as free willed individuals. You are imposing upon them YOUR vision of what YOU think is good, without giving them a chance to choose it. What if they happen to disagree with what you are offering? What if they don't actually want it?

In short, you have become a tyrant yourself, and what you are doing is no longer "good". You have become no different from Tarquin, who has decided what HE thinks is "good" for the continent, and decided that HE is entitled to impose that on everyone, regardless of what anyone else thinks.

[Amphiox]

I still want to remind people that things are not really going to become better until you do something about the scarcity of resources. I mean, sure you could make some difference, but there IS an option of solving the global problem available...

I would argue that if you are patient enough (REALLY patient), you could, as a epic character, end up helping the continent in the long run simply by applying your epic abilities to the resource scarcity and ignoring everything else, including all the complicated politics.

So, you know, do that usual epic-character-secluded-in-some-hideaway from which can not be dislodged because, you know, he's epic and nigh-invincible, but focus all your activities on creating lasting change to the local area that, critically, will naturally spread out from your epi-center. After many centuries, you turn the desert into a garden paradise, starting with your center of power and radiating outwards. There will be much turmoil in the transition period (which you can ameliorate by making your changes slow enough for people to simply adapt to them over generations, but if you don't care about that, in the end you will achieve a better state for all concerned.)

Imagine for example if the Draketooth's, instead of being dedicated to protecting a gate, actually were druids (or whatever) planning on turning the desert into a lush forest, incrementally. So, from their illusion-protected hideout pyramid, they gradually, bit by bit, turn Windy Canyon into forested land, that then gradually spreads outwards, bit by bit, until it covers the whole continent, over the course of tens or even hundreds of generations.

[Kish]

While I have less sympathy for Shojo's ruling style than pretty much anyone else seems to, I think suggesting that mass deception makes someone no different than a serial rapist who gratuitously tortures people in the preparation of things ranging from dinner to magical ointment is ever so slightly over the top. And--the aforementioned Shojo--the idea that deceiving the people one rules over is incompatible with a Good alignment in OotS is utterly insupportable.

[Mike Havran]

I would like to point out that the fact there's a barren desert south of Goaway Mountains is most likely the Will of the Gods. There's a desert there not because some wind happens to blow this way or some sea current happens to flow that way. The Gods probably made it that way. So, before thinking about how could we utterly change the local climate/environment, it would be nice to have our team Cleric commute whether we actually should. There's more to the material plane than humans and lizardfolk.

As for improving the government ... Tarquin's scheme minus Evil stuff seems a good start. Then make each puppet state focus on a different aspect of economy (one would focus on metalworking, one on pharmacy and the third on, say, magic). Then, the needed trade would probably quench the warfare.

[Math_Mage]

I would like to point out that the fact there's a barren desert south of Goaway Mountains is most likely the Will of the Gods. There's a desert there not because some wind happens to blow this way or some sea current happens to flow that way. The Gods probably made it that way. So, before thinking about how could we utterly change the local climate/environment, it would be nice to have our team Cleric commute whether we actually should. There's more to the material plane than humans and lizardfolk.

As for improving the government ... Tarquin's scheme minus Evil stuff seems a good start. Then make each puppet state focus on a different aspect of economy (one would focus on metalworking, one on pharmacy and the third on, say, magic). Then, the needed trade would probably quench the warfare.
Of course, the gods also made the whole mess with monstrous humanoids, and could use a bit of judicious defiance once in a while. As defying the gods goes, making the Western Continent livable probably beats The Plan.

[hydroplatypus]

--- snip ---


Seems to be the most viable plan so far. Particularly like the retirement option for former tyrants. After all, it will probably result in a lot less bloodshed in the final stages of the plan. Several things though.

1. How will the good kingdoms be kept stable?

Given the ruler turnover rate, how willl you keep your good-aligned allies in power over the long term, as opposed to falling to some tyrant or other? Are you planning on pulling something like Tarquin, and replacing the figurehead every few years (presumably with a cushy retirement off continent as opposed to killing them)? Otherwise your adventurers will have to be constantly running around putting down revolts

2. What if someone figures it out?
Reptilia (and presumably the occasional other nation that got conquored) figured out Tarquin's plan, so it presumably happens occasionally. How will this be dealt with prior to the stage where you become too large to realistically conquor?



Also, the elves up north might make a good trading partner to entice people into the union. Later stages of course given that doing this early on in the plan would get you killed by everyone in the area. A defensive pact might also scare off the opposition if you end up with a coalition too early and/or are not certain of your chances of victory. Of course they may not agree to this, but it seems a good possibility.

[veti]

1. How will the good kingdoms be kept stable?

Given the ruler turnover rate, how willl you keep your good-aligned allies in power over the long term, as opposed to falling to some tyrant or other? Are you planning on pulling something like Tarquin, and replacing the figurehead every few years (presumably with a cushy retirement off continent as opposed to killing them)? Otherwise your adventurers will have to be constantly running around putting down revolts

The problem isn't "revolts", as such. The cartographer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0680.html) describes it as: 'Every year, half a dozen new hotshot military "geniuses" raise an army each and conquer themselves a new kingdom'. Those are what you've got to deflect.

It should be possible to do that mostly just by not being the lowest-hanging fruit. Let the hotshots have their fun in the other 30-odd countries; yours are more stable and more strongly defended (not a very high hurdle, that), so won't be first on the hit list. What you'd have to look out for is the risk of assassination by a mid-high-level enemy looking to take over, rather than conquer, your "operation".


2. What if someone figures it out?
Reptilia (and presumably the occasional other nation that got conquored) figured out Tarquin's plan, so it presumably happens occasionally. How will this be dealt with prior to the stage where you become too large to realistically conquor?

It doesn't matter if "the occasional" other nation figures it out. They'd have to be able to persuade others to support them against you, before they become a threat. In the meantime, remember that your potential enemies are also Reptilia's potential enemies. The trick is to persuade them that they'd gain more by supporting you against them, than vice-versa. If you've got good trade terms to offer, that should be doable.

I would part company from DeliaP's excellent plan in one aspect: I wouldn't demand that countries institute "good" governments before I start trading with them. That makes the whole game too obvious, and it closes the door to tricking/entrapping your most dangerous potential enemies. I would gently encourage them in that direction, and support those who did go that way, but wouldn't actually institute the coups/revolutions to ensure it until the plan was already well embedded.

[Amphiox]

While I have less sympathy for Shojo's ruling style than pretty much anyone else seems to, I think suggesting that mass deception makes someone no different than a serial rapist who gratuitously tortures people in the preparation of things ranging from dinner to magical ointment is ever so slightly over the top. And--the aforementioned Shojo--the idea that deceiving the people one rules over is incompatible with a Good alignment in OotS is utterly insupportable.

No different from Tarquin in that particular aspect of his behavior and character, not in his behavior as a whole.

Also, Shojo was a good character for a variety of complex reasons, not least of all his motivation for doing what he was doing. But that does not say anything about his scheme with all its deceptions being a good one. Frankly, I consider that scheme neutral at best. And just as an evil character can commit a good scheme from time to time and still be evil, and a neutral character can cast familicide and still stay neutral, Shojo can be involved in a neutral scheme and still be a good character.

[Miriel]

1- Build yourself a solid, well-defended kingdom. A coastal city is best. Make what good you can for your people through reforms, etc., that the people actually want. At first, do not attempt to conquer anything for yourself so as not to be a threat, but do build alliances with other warlords and stay a minor (but appreciated) participant in local squabbles.
2- Discretely spread your reform ideas, especially in farther countries. Try to create a sort of affiliation between people who hold the same reform ideas as you. Ideally, nearby warlords won't see you as a menace because of it (since you are seen as a standard foreign policy agent with flavour), but you will be seen as an ideal example by those who like your ideas abroad. You should not use puppets because you want you/your country to be associated with whatever ideas you have.
3- When other countries adopt your reforms, try maintaining diplomatic bonds with them. This works better with coastal nations, because you can send reinforcements without appearing like too much of a block. Just help each other weather out the petty warlords.
4- With each other's help, try to expand your regional power. Form local, divide-and-rule leagues in your region, and dominate these by offering protection to local warlords in exchange for reforms (small at first, but enough to let the people see them, and know that they come from you). The local league under your control (and under those the control of your progressive allies) should start absorbing territory from other warlords, but slowly enough to keep some area for the despotic will of aspiring dictators.
5- If your local league rebels against you, call progressive allies for help and incite rebellions. If global coalitions form, you, your local league, your progressive allies, their local leages and the oppressed subjects of enemy states who want your reforms should grant you enough power to hold a chance and at least throw up a good fight, or confuse things enough that it will last a good time.

Given enough time, this could work. It hasn't in the real world, but oh well...

[DeliaP]

I still want to remind people that things are not really going to become better until you do something about the scarcity of resources. I mean, sure you could make some difference, but there IS an option of solving the global problem available...

Absolutely, fixing this is essential. My Druid's NGO is basically trying to incorporate that into the scheme. It's just that it might be a long term (centuries, has been mentioned??) plan to truly turn that around, and maybe we don't need to wait to get to work on the other problems...



1. How will the good kingdoms be kept stable?


Basically, what Veti says. In Phase 1, you just need to keep your initial states well defended against attack, and prevent a coup by presumably evil-aligned would-be tyrants. For this you primarily have to rely upon being a bunch of high-to-epic level characters. The fact that you are running a good aligned government at least means you aren't as susceptible to popular unrest (provided you are actually competent at running a government: but if you can't arrange that, then this clearly isn't the plan for you!)

In Phase 2 you are even less of a low hanging fruit because each of the states in each bloc has a number of allies to call upon, within their bloc, in the event of attack. This develops into the mutual self defense pacts of Phase 3.

One assumption I'm making here: a trading bloc of good aligned states, with a mutual self defense pact would be more prosperous than the surrounding states because: 1) mutually beneficial trade arrangements; 2) lower expenditure on internal security/prisons etc. 3) lower proportion of resources needed on military expeditions (while maintaining a large defensive force in aggregate across the bloc); 4) happier workers are more productive workers. And (5) the whole Druidic NGO "make the desert bloom" thing, which will be able to operate much more effectively in the trading bloc countries. Prosperity compared to surrounding states is also likely to lead to stability.

Of course, this prosperity would start to attract attention from acquisitive states, which is where the mutual self defence pacts become necessary, as the size of the prosperous regions will need more defense than that provided simply bt a high-to-epic level party.

As far as the new-military-hot-shot is concerned: if they are lower level than you and evil, pull the overthrow trick on them when you can; if they are higher level than you and evil, some of YOUR states call the alarm against THEM (in the way that the continent united against Tarquin's first attempt). If they are not evil, encourage them to attack weaker evil states and draw them in to your trade alliance.

By Phase 3, each trading bloc ought to be sufficiently well-defended by the mutual self defense pacts to be resistant to outside attack. The affiliate states might have to be a win-some-lose-some kind of situation, but you have to keep the trade blocs out of offensive military actions, to avoid raising any kind of alarm.



2. What if someone figures it out?

Again, as Veti says.

Also, a key part of the plan is to ensure the NGO's, the trading blocs, and the popular uprisings are all presented as independent of each other. And the trading blocs aren't even uniting into single states. So it's harder to spot even than TT's plan! Note: even Reptilia hadn't really figured it out, and erroneously thought telling the Empress of Blood would stop Tarquin and Malack.

If anyone evil is looking like figuring it out, you need to focus the overthrow trick on them, quick and hard. If anyone good is looking like figuring it out, maybe they can be drawn in, or at least made freindly? Buy a neutral off with favourable trade agreements, and if they look like turning hostile, work to overthrow them.

Also, note that in Phase 3 it is important that most of the growth is in "affiliate" states, not in overt members of the bloc. This "affiliation" shouldn't be a formal, obvious thing (until Phase 4) just a gradual process of drawing more states into a web of interconnected favourable trading agreements, and non-aggression pacts.


I would part company from DeliaP's excellent plan in one aspect: I wouldn't demand that countries institute "good" governments before I start trading with them. That makes the whole game too obvious, and it closes the door to tricking/entrapping your most dangerous potential enemies. I would gently encourage them in that direction, and support those who did go that way, but wouldn't actually institute the coups/revolutions to ensure it until the plan was already well embedded.

Oh, I agree. The trading blocs trade with *everyone*. In fact, you try to make the evil states dependent upon you for the resources you are trying to monopolize (and you use the rival blocs to not make it obvious you have a monopoly). It's just you then pull the rug out from them when you want to pull the overthrow trick.

In Phase 2 and 3, Neutral countries that are prepared to enter non-aggression pacts just get offered more favourable trading conditions. Good countries get even better offers. It's only in Phase 4 that you overtly require changes in government to get better offers.

Re: the overthrow trick. It is essential that you have a underground movement in place, apparently independent of the trading blocs, who are going to be presented as responsible for the revolution. They then seek (and are granted) help from one of the rival trading blocs - and have the blocs make a big show of rivalry to be the ones to cut a deal with the "new" state...

Also, you don't expect to turn every revolution into a new Good aligned states. Some of them are going to fail and be replaced by new tyrant.

You use the overthrow trick in Phase 1 primarily to build up your two or three small coalitions of states, with a few key trade monopolies, and secondarily to remove aggressive states that might be threatening you. In Phase 2 you use it to primarily remove threats, and secondarily to pick up trading alliances with the newly installed governments when it does not draw suspicion (you want a slow growth here, to avoid scaring people). In Phase 3 you probably don't need it so much to defend the trading blocs, but you might want to use it to covertly help affiliate states against aggressors, and to help along the number of affiliates. In Phase 4 it's probably redundant.

[DeliaP]

<snip>
Given enough time, this could work. It hasn't in the real world, but oh well...
In the last sixty years, the European Union hasn't done a bad job of something a bit like these kinds of plans!

[Math_Mage]

No different from Tarquin in that particular aspect of his behavior and character, not in his behavior as a whole.

Also, Shojo was a good character for a variety of complex reasons, not least of all his motivation for doing what he was doing. But that does not say anything about his scheme with all its deceptions being a good one. Frankly, I consider that scheme neutral at best. And just as an evil character can commit a good scheme from time to time and still be evil, and a neutral character can cast familicide and still stay neutral, Shojo can be involved in a neutral scheme and still be a good character.
Well, by that standard, what Tarquin was doing (in a broad sense) was also Neutral, and it was only all the Evil he did in the course of executing that scheme that made him Evil. But I don't think that's a particularly interesting way to analyze either Shojo or Tarquin or their schemes. It's unreasonable not to factor in that, as the Giant put it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15378004&postcount=142), Shojo's instability increased the quality of life in Azure City, while Tarquin's stability decreased the quality of life in the Western Continent. It's unreasonable to ignore the ways in which their differing motivations influence the actual actions they take in pursuit of their respective plans.

In addition, your more abstract argument that such deception is immoral because it imposes one's vision on other people and removes their agency is untenable. Deception does not necessarily result in a net loss of agency, and Good is not bound to maximizing agency or minimizing imposition (it would be a limp-wristed Good government that could not enforce its laws for fear of imposition!). More to the point, since this entire debate is about imposing one's vision of a Good Western Continent on the entire Western Continent, your argument amounts to saying the entire thread is pointless.

[Amphiox]

Well, by that standard, what Tarquin was doing (in a broad sense) was also Neutral, and it was only all the Evil he did in the course of executing that scheme that made him Evil.

Absolutely not. Because Tarquin's scheme includes a lot more than just the trickery. It also includes, as integral components, assassinations, staged wars, betrayal of alliances, massive internal oppression, and the deliberate promotion of constant warfare. All these features easily tip Tarquin's scheme into Evil.

Apply your own metric here to Shojo, ie "all the Evil he did in the course of executing his scheme", and notice that Shojo did NOT do a single "good" thing in the execution of his scheme. The scheme in Shojo's case was entirely built on lies, deceptions, bending of the law, and outright breaking of the law where necessary, all neutral activities. The GOAL of the scheme arguably was good. In other words the MEANS of the scheme were neutral acts. Hence the scheme itself is neutral.

But in Tarquin's case the MEANS of the scheme are evil acts, and the GOALs are also evil (a few could be said to be neutral, but most are clearly evil).

But it is the MEANS of a scheme that determines whether or not a SCHEME itself is good evil (and this OP is about whether the SCHEMES/ie "plans" are good aligned, not the characters who are executing them).

[Math_Mage]

Absolutely not. Because Tarquin's scheme includes a lot more than just the trickery. It also includes, as integral components, assassinations, staged wars, betrayal of alliances, massive internal oppression, and the deliberate promotion of constant warfare. All these features easily tip Tarquin's scheme into Evil.

Apply your own metric here to Shojo, ie "all the Evil he did in the course of executing his scheme", and notice that Shojo did NOT do a single "good" thing in the execution of his scheme. The scheme in Shojo's case was entirely built on lies, deceptions, bending of the law, and outright breaking of the law where necessary, all neutral activities. The GOAL of the scheme arguably was good. In other words the MEANS of the scheme were neutral acts. Hence the scheme itself is neutral.
*shrug* The only way to establish the scheme as Neutral is to also establish that the scheme was totally insignificant to his rule. Otherwise you have to deal with the fact that his scheme was integral to producing Good, and for all the arbitrary separation of means and ends, results count, especially when they are the desired results.

[lt_murgen]

1- Build yourself a solid, well-defended kingdom.

But if I am an evil person on Team Tarquin, I won't give you the opportunity. Any non-dictatorial government will need a level of trust amongst the many people working in it- from the king to the lowliest clerk. Spread enough money around, create enough graft and corruption, and the trust will erode. Eventually you will either fail completely or be another dictatorship.

That is the same problem with the whole "NGO" route. In order to be effective and spread good, you need to involve others. These others can be corrupted. I wouldn't need to corrupt the druid changing the wasteland to farmland, just the pumpkin farmer to 'miscount' his yield and funnel the excess to me for a profit.

I take those pumpkins and sell them in another region for an obscene profit, and then bad mouth the NGO to that population, essentially blaming them for the scarcity and high costs. This poisons the well, so to speak, as the NGO tries to grow.

[Miriel]

But if I am an evil person on Team Tarquin, I won't give you the opportunity. Any non-dictatorial government will need a level of trust amongst the many people working in it- from the king to the lowliest clerk. Spread enough money around, create enough graft and corruption, and the trust will erode. Eventually you will either fail completely or be another dictatorship.
My project assumes a pre-Team Tarquin continent. Obviously, Team Tarquin is composed high-level adventurers at basically demigod level, so very few plans work if they are around and watching anyway.

Ancient/medieval administration being what it is, i.e. not very numerous, it's really far from impossible to at least know personnally every person in the whole administration of your own state and to select more or less corruption-proof staff, if you so desire. In any case, perfect government is not the point in my plan: you must create the idea of perfect government, and rally people (in and out of your country) around this ideal. The many warlords on the continent do not seem to have much in the way of intellectual or ideological commitments, so you should have a practical advantage in this.

[Amphiox]

*shrug* The only way to establish the scheme as Neutral is to also establish that the scheme was totally insignificant to his rule. Otherwise you have to deal with the fact that his scheme was integral to producing Good, and for all the arbitrary separation of means and ends, results count, especially when they are the desired results.

I'm not at all convinced that Shojo's scheme produced any good at all, relative to the wide variety of alternative schemes he might have used, both more and less good, only that Shojo intended good with it. I hold the deficiencies of Shojo's scheme, both tactical and ethical, as at least partially responsible for the fall of Azure City.

(And if you are trying to argue that the advancement of individual agency is not a critical component of goodness as it relates to politics, then you and I have incompatible notions of what political good is, about which further discussion is pointless and we can only agree to disagree.)

[Math_Mage]

I'm not at all convinced that Shojo's scheme produced any good at all, only that Shojo intended good with. I hold the deficiencies of Shojo's scheme, both tactical and ethical, as at least partially responsible for the fall of Azure City.
Then you'll have to take that up with the Giant, in particular his several posts in this thread. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15385275#post15385275) I can't really say anything more to that.

[Amphiox]

Then you'll have to take that up with the Giant, in particular his several posts in this thread. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15385275#post15385275) I can't really say anything more to that.

I do not "have" to do anything of the sort, and neither do you. People of good will can agree to disagree on what things they think are good.

[Math_Mage]

I do not "have" to do anything of the sort, and neither do you. People of good will can agree to disagree on what things they think are good.
Mmm. Then say, rather, that it would be useful to ensure that your view accounts for, and preferably answers, those posts. For the sake of robustness.