That's actually really interesting. In the context of this video it looks like the higher levels of evil are when you treat others as objects while the lower levels of evil are when you treat yourself as an object.
I would be very grateful if you continued other videos like this and went over larger forces and archetypes. About any category. I think about connecting aspects of this game with real life all the time.
I can understand all the other examples for the sixth level, but why Azathoth? Sure, it _can_ erase the whole of existence, but he's actively ignorant of doing so. Considering our reality is supposedly just his dream, he's no less evil than we are for waking up after a dream - or a nightmare.
"Those daring to oppose the Elder Gods who ruled from Betelgueze, the Great Old Ones who fought against the Elder Gods ... were instructed by Azathoth, who is the blind idiot god, and by Yog-Sothoth ... Ye blind idiot, ye noxious Azathoth shall arise from ye middle of ye World where all is Chaos & Destruction where He hath bubbl'd and blasphem'd at Ye centre which is of All Things, which is to say Infinity ... " I will give Azathoth some more consideration, but as best I can tell, he is difficult to pin down with exact description. This is a peculiar trait of Lovecraft's writings: He goes overboard on descriptions yet at the same time illustrates entities that are beyond our comprehension and that defy our attempts to describe them. As in the above quote, Azathoth is a bubbling and blind entity, which seems like some primordial ooze or black hole, yet he also arises, instructs, and blasphemes, which are willing acts. Getting into the specific arguments for each character/creature is beyond the scope of this simple overview video, but it seems that Azathoth is indeed the greatest level of evil. Spanning everything from the blind idiocy of the 1st level all the way through the utmost malevolence and rebellion against all that is sacred of the 6th level.
@@esperthebard With regards to the example you give with which evil harms what part of the tree. I'd say Azathoth is more the corrupted earth, water, light, and air in which the tree grows, destroying not only the root, trunk, and branches, but also preventing any seedling from growing in the first place. Azathoth could be beyond six level evil, an elder or primal evil if you will. That which begat evil. Maybe.
One of my favorite characters in all of fiction is Granny Weatherwax from Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels. In the book Carpe Jugulum, she claimed that Evil is as simple as treating people like things, and anyone who says it's more complicated than that is just worried they might not be as righteous as they hoped. The book that comes from is about vampires trying to convince people that living as livestock is better for them. The vampires are constantly trying to demonstrate they aren't evil, that this is all natural and right, but because they have so much more power than average humans they feel they are able to completely disregard them except around lunchtime. Granny, on the other hand, is one of the most powerful characters in the world, able to give Death himself pause. Yet no one is beneath her notice. If someone comes to her with a problem, she either solves it or shows them that they had the power to solve it for themselves. And when people make it clear to her they don't want her help, "I know where I'm not wanted, I'm sure." Where other characters in the story dither about right and wrong, Granny makes confident decisions and leaves it to others to debate them. She knows the world is black and white, and grey's for people with something to hide or be ashamed of. When I think of good and evil, I think of Granny Weatherwax. I think of how often evil will hide behind what is nice or technically legal, and for good to win it must be sure and unashamed. But to have that surety, those that would do good must always remember to treat people as people.
Everyone fails, everyone falls, we must not forget mercy. We must also not confuse mercy for weakness, or we become accomplices to evil. There's no gray to be had there, but the reminder that cruelty and callousness are evils in themselves.
I do like that you explicitly noted "root flaws" for each level. Ultimately, evil is just a selfish desire for control - the heart of it all is "gimme that, it's mine!" From there, it's all about degree and methodology. The only difference between imposing your will with a big nasty club and imposing your will with an empire is that the former can only extort one victim at a time.
I usually go with selfish=evil, selfless=good. Rule following is sometimes a strategic habit that tends to get you what you want. Chaos is sometimes a way to shake tyrants out of power, or at least draw their evil out for everyone to see.
The issue with that thought is that many of the 'tyrant' evil variants, especially in fiction, can really end up fairly selfless. "I am the smartest and therefore if only everyone did what I told them then everyone would be better off" is a prime example of that thinking. Just as an example, many of the atrocities carried out by the early Soviet Union were caused because they though the farmers were greedy for refusing to take a loss on the sale of food to cities. They viewed the farmers as evil because they refused to buy into the communist utopian ideal. You could make a very good argument that the only reason Lenin and Co. were evil was because of something like cultural ignorance; many of the economic fallacies with early communism weren't developed until years later when the study of economics was more refined. As an aside, the origin of the law vs chaos alignment is based on someone who wished to remove the good vs evil dichotomy. It is a much more ambiguous system because it is very easy to see how each of them can be abused. From a historical perspective, this is remarkably easy to see. The leading result of most revolutions is a regime as least as bad as the one it replaced. Look at the Haitian revolution for example. Instead of slaves being forced to work in terrible condition in sugar plantations, you have freemen instead. There is a fictional empire in a series I liked as a kid who decided the best policy to read with revolutionaries is to offer them governship of their province and realize that being in charge is great in theory and nightmarish on paper. Its not that far fetched. Using the Haitian example, Toussaint L'Ouverture, the new guy in charge, forced the freemen to work on the plantations because he was afraid their economy would collapse since it was a lucrative industry, the only one the island had, and nobody work on the plantations willingly.
Unfortunately there could be a mix. Some people are will to disregard the welfare of others to do good deeds. This is why virtue signalling are such a destructive trait.
@@michaelpettersson4919 virtue signaling only makes them feel better though, if they were to actually do something about the problem, law and society be damned, while trying not to hurt actual people, they would be chaotic good, but their actual actions more closely resemble hurting others to make themselves feel better about their own place in society. So it's more evil.
@@cp1cupcake the lack of perspective they had was caused by narcissism, they thought they were universally right when they only had a small piece of reality pinned down. A selfless person has to recognize how small their corner of reality is, and they realize that they don't know everything so asking the evil people to explain themselves can lead to more insight, and that can be the best way to beat them or the fact that they aren't actually evil, they just understand economics better than you do. Most of those atrocities could have been avoided if Lenin was interested in having honest conversations.
Ultimately, I'm a firm moral relativist, so asking what "good" and "evil" are will always yield subjective answers and definitions that don't subsume the entirety of what they're intended to describe.
He's there in the expanded version, my penultimate draft of the script. In the final cut, I tried to keep the examples down to 4-7, and Morgoth is less well known beyond fans of Tolkien deep lore.
D&D's demons fit the 5th level as much as the devils They want to destroy the world to _remake it in their image_ Material worlds ravaged by the demons may become new layers in the Abyss, and each Demonlord has a vision of what they should look like
The difference is that demons try to kill all people and destroy all civilization. That's what is required to subsume the world into the Abyss. Devils want to corrupt people and civilization, but not annihilate them. That would defeat their entire agenda of luring mortal souls to Hell.
@@esperthebard The devils' goals of conquest involves destroying rival "civilization", eliminating all liberty and joy in the name of the utopia they fail to enact in their own plane, I could see an argument that becoming immortal in such world is a fate worse than death
@@user-vm9xz4kv9z The issue I have with 5e devils is they are so poorly written in MToF that they are very sympathetic as a group, though individuals are assholes. They are very much portrayed as "we were forced to do evil things because we are the frontline against the demons trying to destroy everything while nobody else is helping; they are sitting on the sidelines hoping we and the demons will wear ourselves out enough so they can come in and take both of us out with little effort." The trail of Azmodeus is a great example. "I am not trying to trick anyone and I don't really want mortal souls. I make it perfectly clear what the conditions are, the loopholes, and what is stated in the agreement. The only reason I am doing this at all is because I need more soldiers to fight off the demons and the bunch of you would rather spend time looking down on my than actually giving a hand!"
@@cp1cupcake Not really, it says Devils only fight demons because there won't be a world for them to brutally subjugate if the Demons destroy it, and vice versa, the Demons attack the Nine Hells not only because they have coolest stuff to wreck, but also because they're the biggest threat to their dominion.
@@cp1cupcake Asmodeus was just making up excuses, Primus himself couldn't declare him innocent but he lost his patience as Zariel was disrupting the court, so he declared a mistrial.
Morality should be the key focus in campaigns and its what most seem to lack. The conflict of polarized interests is what drives good stories. This may be the most important video you have ever released, for it is the crux between all others. Thank you for this gift!
I get the idea of the narrative you proposed in this video. But, I can't ignore that it is quite essentialist. Saying that people that commit evil acts for not knowing better would be saying that lots of oppressed people ARE evil. But are they really? I liked the video as an examination on evil doers for the purpose of learning how to create a good villain in a rpg. But, in a sociological sense, there is much to be desired. Hope you understand my criticism.
Please help me understand how do oppressed people relate to willfully or culturally ignorant people Edit unless you are referring to people like under a dictatorship oppressed because then the video is saying those in command of the dictatorship are responsible on the majority. The rest falls on the heads of those who commanded the ignorant and the last and least amount of responsibity would fall on those who fought in a war as a result their responsibility would be killing people because they didn't think war was horrible and used national pride to deny the killing they would do So then I agree in that particular situation would I say oppressed people would relate to willfully ignorant people
How exactly does the amount of oppression a person is experiencing factor into the determination of whether or not an act is evil? Not disagreeing but not agreeing either, merely enquiring.
@@darkphilosopher8726 He's Brazilian like me, probably in social studies. It's very common they follow a relativistic standpoint of morality where people with certain characteristics (Black, women, LGBT) have a "social credit" that compensates for any otherwise wrongdoings they commit. If he followed his own words (and I'm willing to bet he doesn't), he'd start jumping with joy when he realizes he got mugged by a Black kid in the suburbs, happy that his wealth was "rightfully redistributed" to the "victims of society". Madness.
@@alexandrefigs Be that or be that not the case in this instance, that really is a good point for me to consider in regards to such things moving forward. For me, good and evil are concepts completely separate from the concepts of right and wrong which I further sperate by distinguishing as separate from what should be done and what shouldn't be done, so I often struggle understanding other peoples moral view points.
I think level 6 has one trait that you completely overlooked, it's their defining trait. Existence is pain to them. Further, in the mythos, many are immortal and cannot look forward to death. They must end reality itself to end their torment.
Lately I have been thinking a lot about what evil actually is. Specifically, what is an evil act? Glad to have stumbled across this in the midst of your exceptional D&D content. You're a bright guy, you put a lot of thought into things. I'd love to see more philosophical content - you're one of the rare people that can pull it off.
Imo that's cause you're viewing it wrong... Evil and good, law and chaos are opposing forces in which the multiverse is made of. While the material plane is the center and this morally gray is so abundant... You go to the lawful plane of clockwork constructs and they cannot be changed of shape or mind controlled due to how lawful they are. You go to the abyss where you can find chaotic demons and it's their very nature to be evil and do such acts and deeds. Humans and such are again mostly in the middle of all these forces. Yet can you say one who made a pact willfully to serve demons would be morally good? They might attempt penance later but still...
@@elgatochurro You can judge actions as evil or good, therefore creatures can be judged by the sum of their actions. I recommend a channel called The Loading Crew, he tries to apply this to fictional characters and decide their overall alignment. Another important aspect to evil is motivation. You can roughfully break it down by (construction = good, destruction = bad). Real world religions like the Christian church, Hinduism and (I think) Taoism have representations of evil often aligned with this concept (daemon means "separator or Destroyer" in latin, Kali is a godess of destruction born from Shiva, the whole concept of polar opposites like yin and yang, where evil and destruction are both in the "yang"). I think your disagreement comes from the fact that it's sometimes really hard to determine the "evilness" of an act, therefore It wouldn't make sense to use a moral system that's faulty at its purpose, working on circunstational matters at best. However, with enough ethical study, I do believe more concrete ways of judging morality can be achieved. That's why I like this video, it's a shot at that.
I feel like miser isn't the best include for 3rd level. Aaron Swartz is a miser in its true sense. He had atleast a million USD and just chose to live in a closet of a house. He actively tried to take up as little space as possible. " I feel my existence is an imposition on the planet. Not a huge one, perhaps, not a huge one at all, but an imposition nonetheless." -Raw Thought #9, Neurosis
@@drago939393 1-He presents himself as a deep philosopher but his main life-advice is basically "You have problems because you're not organized, clean your room and your problems will go away" 2-He's a right-winger
@@drago939393 Nah he's not bad, some people just can't stand it when people doesn't adhere to their political beliefs (as he so clearly stated in his response).
This is such am intriguing take on this. You could almost take the concepts here and treat it like levels of hell, like dantes inferno. Each vile person is punished based on their level of corruption, as it were. I might introduce that into my homebrew universe
Too often in fiction and media, evil is just a costume change, just a red and black color palette, and someone for the heroes to fight. Just a token, a McGuffin, something to do. The reality of evil, from the lowly thug to the megalomaniac, can be summed up in these words "this is why we can't have nice things." Furthermore, the ultimate quest of the good, in the most general sense, is having nice things. In other words, in the end, evil is the very antithesis of fun. In the Bible this is symbolized by the loss of the ultimate nice thing - paradise - with the introduction of evil.
You miss one important literary (movie) character that fits the 4th tier of Evil to the letter. And that’s Anton Chigurh from “No Country for Old Men”. A character who exists in the late 1970s who represents the most Violent, most disturbed Human Monster you image. As he is the Assassin, the Shooter, the Human Terminator that people fear. Even worse is that his code of ethics is Chaos, and will force someone to do a coin flip as if to say you are in control of your own death. But when on business, he doesn’t hesitate to kill at all without so much of a Coin toss! If you’re just in the way, than that’s that! Going up against someone like him, your either prepared, or you’re not! Cause squaring up to men like Chigurh will force you to be vigilant and well-armed just to survive a trained, and very dangerous killer.
I just read and watched No Country for Old Men a week ago, and I've been thinking about it quite a bit. Chigurh is an extremely powerful villain, both in terms of his own abilities and in terms of the narrative power that portrays him. Yes indeed, he would be in the 4th tier of evil. One criticism I have of Chigurh is that as time went on, I found myself less able to believe in him. He was just too lucky, too often. Like he had some magical aura that conveniently kept witnesses from observing his many terrible crimes and allowed him to always get away. Also, his secondary weapon (the pressurized bolt), while quite interesting and unique, functioned too well at blasting out door locks, so it was like the world had no deadbolts, no chain locks, no bar locks. I’m also not sure what kind of suppressor he had on his shotgun, because it took all the “bang” sound from the buckshot/slug rounds.
Strahd Von Zarovich rests in the 6th level of evil. His fall from grace involved his willful, selfish, knowledgeable pursuit of darkness in order to capture a single soul. His subsequent motives also include expanding his domain to the rest of the material plane. He is a dark conqueror heading legions of evil, and the only thing stopping him are the mists.
5 дней назад
I agree with everything in this video except for the Drug addict. I would say they are weak yes, that weakness leads to an actual sickness that goes far beyond their control and takes a supreme act of will (and those in groups like NA and AA would say a power much greater than themselves) to rise above. I see where you are coming from with the idea that addicts could be seen as evil, but I see them as more of a tragic and pitiful thing rather than evil. I also don't know that the 6th level of evil even really exists in humanity, that evil is the comic book villain who is evil for the sake of evil and really just doesn't exist in the real world that I have ever seen. The old saying goes, "Few are villains in their own story." This video was GREAT food for thought though and I could see your point of view being just as valid as my own.
Thanks for the very thoughtful comment. I am extremely cautious before deeming any real-world person as evil. They do exist, but are very rare. Especially in the case of someone such as a drug addict, the person is not evil, rather the person is committing evil: acts that are morally wrong, that cause grave harm to the person and/or those around them, that the person knows are wrong. This is also why I put drug abuse as a lower level of evil. As you said, we have to consider the factors of addiction's powerful grip and that the person might be very sick. The abuse is still wrong, still harmful, still violates the dignity of human life, but there are factors that mitigate it.
Wonderful, poignant video, my good sir! I'd only like to add the entities of Morgoth from the Silmarillion, and Demise/Ganon to the examples you quoted about the sixth level.
I'd say it's like someone who doesn't want to be a hero, who doesn't really aim to do good, but then a certain opportunity comes along which they take, and it ends up helping people or defeating an evil force.
IRL Level 1 is the most dangerous due it's colossal headcount imo. Without them level 4 and up are just a few angery bois, but without 4-6? Level 1's can still cause alot of damage. The idiocracy movie for example.
He still is evil but to him it like going to work every morning when he could try to stop going to work evil is a choice no matter what your situation with a disposition toward evil you still make that choice he could choose to do nothing and he still could choose to give up his power but he doesn't want to. I am not saying he will become a good god he is in H,Ps pantheon after all but evil is a choice
"Those daring to oppose the Elder Gods who ruled from Betelgueze, the Great Old Ones who fought against the Elder Gods ... were instructed by Azathoth, who is the blind idiot god, and by Yog-Sothoth ... Ye blind idiot, ye noxious Azathoth shall arise from ye middle of ye World where all is Chaos & Destruction where He hath bubbl'd and blasphem'd at Ye centre which is of All Things, which is to say Infinity ... " I will give Azathoth some more consideration, but as best I can tell, he is difficult to pin down with exact description. This is a peculiar trait of Lovecraft's writings: He goes overboard on descriptions yet at the same time illustrates entities that are beyond our comprehension and that defy our attempts to describe them. As in the above quote, Azathoth is a bubbling and blind entity, which seems like some primordial ooze or black hole, yet he also arises, instructs, and blasphemes, which are willing acts. Getting into the specific arguments for each character/creature is beyond the scope of this simple overview video, but it seems that Azathoth is indeed the greatest level of evil. Spanning everything from the blind idiocy of the 1st level all the way through the utmost malevolence and rebellion against all that is sacred of the 6th level.
This was a fascinating video, though it fits well with similar concepts like levels of sin, hell, virtues, and so fourth. Personally I actually see some of the things called evil in it to be virtues not vices, but I get it. Applying this to TTRPG's I have yet to play a good character, for even my LG Cleric fits into some of these levels. My Good types fit further up the rankings, while my CE characters are barely on the lists. But then again in real life some of the virtues are grievous sins to me. Fascinating video.
Yeah I'm just wondering what would levels of virtue or goodness be. Since I associate law with control and control is expressed as on of the greatest evils, which could be subjective, but I agree with.
I don't watch your game vids/streams (just not my thing) but this...this is what I subbed for. Things like this. Very well said sir, thank you for making this. In troubled times most do we need reminders of not what only what it is to be good, but what it is to identify evil.
Thank you Charlie! This one really took a ton of time and effort to produce, but I felt the inspiration. It seemed important, both from a narrarive and storytelling standpoint, and from a real life standpoint.
@@esperthebard I can appreciate the hell out of that man. I've been trying to write my own stories and have come to see more and more how important well told stories are to our lives as humans.
@@esperthebard It's shocking how real that is. And to think of how well told good stories made by old civilizations can inspire future generations is IMO one of humanities greatest aspects. Hell its one of the reasons most Mythology and tales like King Arthur are still around!
This is an extremely complicated subject. I spent the better part of a month working on it, but even that is only enough time to create a simplified overview. Nevertheless, I can't stall out and cease to create. And let's see, this might serve as a launchpad for other videos.
@@esperthebard Would love to see a follow up video with a more nuanced approach to categorizing... well... hopefully not just plain old evil but antagonistic behavior and conflict in general, and the moral implications of doing nothing especially. Keep up the good work!
A purest form of Evil is a sentient being which brings harm for the purpose of bringing harm. Bringing harm is not neccessary for one's survival. Also Azatoth belongs to the 1st level on account that reality itself is it's dream, it is even called the Blind Idiot God. While the Night King is simply fulfilling it's purpose of creation.
I love the validation of having characters mentioned that i thought would fit with each level, especially considering they were ones that had nothing to do with the fantasy genre.
An important topic to consider is whether or not evil behavior is a coping mechanism? An interesting TED video titled "Everything you think you know about addiction is wrong" might explain part of why some people are evil.
I know im a bit late to the party but as someone studying philosophy I find this categorization to be fascinating and have a bit to add. I think some of these categories are too dependent on specific tropes and less on the broader style of behavior.
1. Ignorant evil doesn’t necessarily make the individual themselves evil however their actions indisputably are. The people of this group however are not representative of the actions they take because they don’t know any better.
2. Id rename the second form of evil to be the evil of contrition: The individual knows what they do is evil and feel conflicted over the acts they take perhaps even remorseful but in the end they always convince themselves even if unintentionally that they have no choice in the matter. This would include those who pursue pleasure in disproportionate manners but it’d also include those striving for a greater good or simply are just trying to meet their own needs of survival.
3. I would rename The evil of indifference: the individual can be manipulated by money or power but these are not the only possible motivations for evil of this type, any motivation that would cause a person to look upon the harm they cause with indifference and uncaring. They may not want to do evil but they aren’t going to lose sleep over it either. Some traitors from the later levels could reasonably fall under this instead while others would be beyond it.
4. The violent: the individual that takes pleasure in causing harm. 5. The malicious: the individual that not only takes pleasure in causing harm but actively seeks it out and tries to maximize its impact or make it personal. The traitor which does so with the intent to hurt another individual is worse than the traitor that does so out of indifference. Treachery itself varies in the type of evil it presents much like murder does but it comes more down to the intention behind the act to determine it’s level of evil.
6. The corrupter/anihilator: no complaints in the description here. Someone who either wants to destroy everything or make everything as bad as possible to fully reject anything remotely good. My only other input on this level would be that there are two examples that you left out which I think would also entirely embody this last form. Carnage as he is from marvel comics and from D&D Im quite surprised you didn’t include the Nightwalker as this deep unquenchable hatred for all life is literally included in its monster description on its stat-block.
Awesome work! I use a similar but simplified version for role-playing. Creatures on the “Darkness” side of the scale range through Selfish, Malevolent to Depraved.
Spectacular editing Esper! And the depth of your though regarding all topics has grown and become superb. 19:35 Indeed, you said it :) Book Euron (even though I grew to hate him too lol).
@@esperthebard I had indeed :) I would say that it's the best piece written about Euron yet. But I don't know... With time this image of an edge lord just stuck with me lol I used to be a big fan of the character. But something down my line of thoughts just "snapped". Then, I started viewing him as a try hard pirate, who "knows so much" and who is "the darkest" and "the most dangerous/mysterious"... I know it's just me, but I can't break away from this image, after it came to my mind :) All the while I started enjoying Victarion more, even if he seems more simple on the surface; and especially Moqorro: the mystery about him feels more toned down than Euron's. I guess that to me, Euron's premise became to overwhelmingly "dark/evil/epic/the darkest!/the most evil!/the most epic and deep and twisted and much more!" premise. That being said, I want to read about a lot more about him :) I'm just in a phase of "being over Euron" for the last couple of years lol
The original storry of Medusa shows her not as an evil doer, but a cursed being twisted by the forces she beleved in. What remains is a monster carying her name, corupted by al the poor woman had to endure.
Your kind of right, but also wrong. The telling that you are familiar with is actually a latter telling, Ovid's or a translation of Ovid's telling. In the original Myth Medusa was just one of many Gorgons, likely daughters of Echidna and Typhon, though not much is actually explored. However, a latter myth shows the earliest version of her popular origins, Medusa slept with a man of her own accord despite having taken a vow of celibacy to serve as one of Athena's priestesses. A later telling inserted Athena's long time rival Poseidon into the role of the man she slept with, adding insult to injury. While finally Ovid's telling removed Medusa's agency in the act, changing the story's message from one about keeping oath's, to one of a mortal suffering due to the acts of cruel and petty gods.
@@patrickbuckley7259 and here i was thinking the modern aproaches where what changed her charakter. Meanwhile my own picture of her whent thru atleast two revisions already. Thank you for sharing this. The first two versions also fitt Athenas charakter much better.
@@nes819 A lot of our modern knowledge of Greek Myth has been colored by Ovid's work. However, that's not to say the original myths where all sunshine and rainbows, or that Ovid's works are without merit. In fact many myths would have been completely forgotten without Ovid. I think the main issue I take with Ovid, is that it often erases the original messages of the Myth. All to convey one message about power, and those who abuse it. Even though Greek myth already has stories about that, Sisyphus is one I can think of off the top of my head, Tantalus another...
Six-level be like:( if reality could be remake than the reality I live in is a lie🤔🤔🤔 therefore I could not justify the existence of inhabitants), it's like being able to rewind a movie you just saw and watch it and the way you wanted it to exist in every detail in every way even though rewinded it destroys any part of the original, but then again to anyone else but your knowledge there was no original but this 🤔🤔🤔
I highly disagree. Dolphins are malevolent and vile beings. They are conscience of their horrific acts and unabashedly enjoy them. To trust a dolphin is always a mistake.
Love the video man, personally I usually use villains around the level 4 range in my campaign. I plan to be running a Rolemaster campaign eventually using one, can you give me a bit of help in what to do for writing a compelling villain around that level?
A lot could be said here, but one compelling way to go is a villain this is intelligent, has plans and ideals and motivations and secrets. In other words, a villain who is connected to important people and things, who has reasons for what he does, and who is hiding something (maybe some shameful personal flaw or taboo).
one thing you forgot to mention is how higher evils can often lead to lower level evils. At least in the real world. A controlling parent or partner can make some one else slip into bad habbits and unhealthy life styles and so on.
I am confused with your placement of Joffrey and Cersei Lannister. Joffrey is a bloodthirsty sadist who relishes on the misery of others, even those who didn't deserve it, much like the 4th lvl (and was placed on 3rd). Cersei on the other hand only acts of envy, vengeance, pride and seeking to maintain power against adversaries, much like the 3rd lvl (and was placed on 4th). Edit: I'm pretty sure the chromatic dragons (with the exception of the white dragon) are all 5th lvl of evil. They are betrayers, currupters and tyrants with god complex who literally shape reality by just existing into something more twisted.
I did consider Joffrey for the 4th level, but in the end, he's an erratic, incompetent, weak, cowardly child. He is in a position of power, in which he can abuse the violent means afforded to him ("Ser Illyn, cut off his tongue"), but he himself does not have the conviction nor the ability to act out the worst kinds of violence (e.g. he is frightened over the thought of fighting in the Battle of the Blackwater and goes inside the castle). Cercei, on the other hand, orchestrates the murder and torture of so many people, with true ruthless conviction and full agency. Just imagine how many people she killed when she blew up the High Sept of Baelor.
@@esperthebard I'd say Joffrey does have the conviction and ruthlessness to commit great acts of violence. Don't you remember Rose the hooker? He bought her from little finger specifically to torture and kill her in a very gruesome way. Him being a coward doesn't reduce his wickedness in the slightest imo, don't forget he was only a child. And don't forget about the butcher's boy! He tried to kill him for no reason by himself then commanded the hound to do it for him. He also threatened to kill his mother, his closest kin if she ever slapped him again (like 5th lvl). His motives and actions are far more wicked than a simple corruption of power or infantile impulses. I think a grown up Joffrey could easily be as evil as the mad king who is basically the fictional version of Stalin (5th level). But I do agree that Cersei is 4th lvl.
For level 6, an example that is real and human may include the Order of Nine Angels, but they may potentially fall into a lower level depending how you consider them.
There are some placements within categories that I disagree with you on; Joffery Baratheon should be in level four because he seems to only want power so that he can get away with torturing others. Tywin is more like level 3 since he just wants power and status, he never tortures anyone himself (well except psychologically), and he never calls for anyone to be tortured, though he does allow his sadistic underlings to torture. Pirates should be in level 3 since, in popular culture, the evil ones are only really interested in amassing wealth and don't care whether or not they have to kill to get it.
A Song of Ice and Fire / Game of Thrones characters are quite difficult to pin down, because they are quite complex. In the case of Joffrey, the evil he commits (and that he orders be committed) is typically motivated by pride "I'm the king! I'm in charge!" He's a power-tripping brat, a sociopathic adolescent. This brings him through the 3rd level. But he doesn't actually have the guts, the conviction, or the harshness to quite reach the 4th level-which is where we find Tywin and Cercei, who order brutal mass killings and other atrocities. Tywin co-orchestrated the Red Wedding, murdering the Starks, even the women and Robb's unborn child. He ordered the Mountain rape and kill Elia Martell and her little children. When he discovered that Tyrion had wed a peasant girl Tysha, he order his soldiers gang rape her then forced Tyrion to rape her last. When it comes to Tywin, it's not a debate between 3rd and 4th level evil, it's a debate between 4th and 5th level. He betrayed the Targaryens, he betrayed the Starks, he betrayed his own son Tyrion, and at times he acts as a shadow tyrant, pulling the strings behind the scenes while his grandson(s) sit the throne.
What if the accident was caused out of something like...greed? Like say, a car malfunction that shouldn't have happened but it did happen thanks to the creator wanting to avoid "wasting money" on something and that had a terrible sideeffect? Would that be concidered evil? The act of NOT putting something into the car wouldn't be outright evil and greed, despite being one of the 7 deadly sins, isn't itself nessesarily evil...but if that greed makes other people suffer even if it is by accident..would it be concidered evil?
Here are corresponding country leaders, which all have committed genocide. Level 1: George W. Bush Level 2: Any Ottoman Emperors which had harem wives from slave raids in Africa and Europe (that mixes with all Levels of 1 to 4) Level 3: Napoleon Bonaparte Level 4: Leopold II. Level 5: Adolf Hitler Level6: Genghis/Dschingis Khan (yes, he fits here much better IMO since he wanted to harm people just for seeing them harmed. If you look for citations of him, this will become obvious.) I am not sure yet if I agree with your ranking since the results matter as well, but these people fit pretty well in these categories. Is an adulterer really more evil than G.W. Bush who commanded the destruction of vital infrastructure in Iraq and caused hundreds of thousand civilian deaths, rapes, and torture. The Americans used napalm and uranium ammunition - causing deformed babies. Even if he did not do it himself, isn't responsibility for such evil acts out of ignorance much worse than cheating on your wife which harms only your family not 24 million people?
Disclaimer: Malous citation is following. Maybe don't read this, it is not fun. "The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters." - Genghis Khan
You got me thinking with this esper. Is it truly possible for terribly evil person to work with a group of extremely good people? Could make for one crazy story. What are your thoughts everyone? Is it misguided to think an evil can aid the good or is it just me overthinking it?
It must be possible, though it's probably not likely. People are very complex, so there must be a certain circumstance with the right combination of people in which extremely evil characters would ally with extremely good characters. It could make for a heck of a story.
I have one character that sees his society as inherently devoid of innocence and to survive he has to do things that His unjust society condemns. Its very fun to write through the eyes of someone who has totally given up on the idea of goodness. Sometime evil must be confronted by an unbreakable Nihilism.
My fellow adventurer and traveler of the land, speaker of many tongues and whisperer of a 1000 odes, bearer of forgotten stories and chimer of hidden wisdom... Esper the Bard... I speak to thee! Please, guide me with your words and bless my ears with the directions on how to possess the mighty hardback that is the Emporium of Esoterica!
9:40 be careful not to glorify celebrities too much there, Esper. People often use exactly this rhetoric to excuse those who are both talented AND malevolent.
I believed that this would resonate with many whom oppose the Russian invasion of Ukraine on moral grounds, so I hope you wouldn't mind me providing hyperlinks to this video for others outside your typical audience to view.
