Evil Or Good?

[Miro Fox]

or somewhere in the middle?

I for one, my first run am going to go Dark Evil Wizard. AVADA KADAVRA!

[LunarGatta]

Crucio on random students.

Why? Because yes.

[Miro Fox]

Originally posted by TheCampingOwl:

Crucio on random students.

Why? Because yes.

We ain't having no Draco's In our run, because WE'll make HIM OUR ♥♥♥♥♥!

[PaulGR]

Highly doubt you get a choice like that (e.g., it's not Skyrim-level RPG). There is a set story.

[KarlThorsten89]

"There is no good or evil, there is only power, and those who are too weak to seek it."
Lord Voldemort

[AdahnGorion]

No such thing as "Evil" or "Good" there is only actions and consequences, that is the moral of Harry Potter, the villains you see, might be heroes at the end of the day and the heroes, might have dark secrets.

Originally posted by PaulGR:

Highly doubt you get a choice like that (e.g., it's not Skyrim-level RPG). There is a set story.

This ia an Action Adventure, it is not a RPG.

[Scheneighnay]

I don't believe in expelling mudbloods, I just believe in eugenics to make them less likely to produce squibs.

[Dragon Master]

Originally posted by Darkie:

No such thing as "Evil" or "Good" there is only actions and consequences, that is the moral of Harry Potter, the villains you see, might be heroes at the end of the day and the heroes, might have dark secrets.

Originally posted by PaulGR:

Highly doubt you get a choice like that (e.g., it's not Skyrim-level RPG). There is a set story.

This ia an Action Adventure, it is not a RPG.

Another that had been present from the very first book is that a lot of magic revolves around the intent of the caster. The Mirror of Erised showed the users fondest and most desired dream and Dumbledore hid the stone inside it with the caveat that the only type of person who could retrieve it would be someone who wanted to find the stone but NOT use it.

In Chamber of Secrets Harry suffers a lot of doubt when he becomes a pariah in the school because he's a parselmouth and he noticed that he and Tom Riddle had a lot of similarities and Dumbledore pointed out they were different in the ways that mattered and that was how they chose to use their gifts.

In Prisoner of Azkaban Lupin is teaching Harry how to cast a patronus and it is made very clear that in order to do so it requires supreme focus on a happy memory, it can't be some fleeting moment or something that made you feel good but genuinely happy.

Order of the Phoneix had the opposite example when Harry tried to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix and it barely lasted. She certainly felt it but it wasn't that effective because Harry was fueling it with righteous anger and not an absolute desire to make someone suffer and to enjoy causing them pain.

In the Deathly Hallows the snitch only opened when Harry accepted his fate, and he only managed to cheat death (again) because he willingly chose to let Voldemort kill him, and him choosing to let himself be killed ended up granting everyone in Hogwarts the same protection that his mother gave him as a baby.

Intent seems to be king in the wizarding world.

[Dragon Master]

Originally posted by Scheneighnay:

I don't believe in expelling mudbloods, I just believe in eugenics to make them less likely to produce squibs.

That would be the purebloods. lol.

[Necroel]

A good magician acting with evil methods. I don't like villains, they are boring and predictable, their road is to nowhere. But their methods are good, tough, resolute, bringing things to the end. The good ones, on the contrary, are moving in the right direction, towards balance and justice, but the methods are weak, uncertain, constantly giving evil a second chance.

[AdahnGorion]

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

Originally posted by Darkie:

No such thing as "Evil" or "Good" there is only actions and consequences, that is the moral of Harry Potter, the villains you see, might be heroes at the end of the day and the heroes, might have dark secrets.




This ia an Action Adventure, it is not a RPG.

Another that had been present from the very first book is that a lot of magic revolves around the intent of the caster. The Mirror of Erised showed the users fondest and most desired dream and Dumbledore hid the stone inside it with the caveat that the only type of person who could retrieve it would be someone who wanted to find the stone but NOT use it.

In Chamber of Secrets Harry suffers a lot of doubt when he becomes a pariah in the school because he's a parselmouth and he noticed that he and Tom Riddle had a lot of similarities and Dumbledore pointed out they were different in the ways that mattered and that was how they chose to use their gifts.

In Prisoner of Azkaban Lupin is teaching Harry how to cast a patronus and it is made very clear that in order to do so it requires supreme focus on a happy memory, it can't be some fleeting moment or something that made you feel good but genuinely happy.

Order of the Phoneix had the opposite example when Harry tried to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix and it barely lasted. She certainly felt it but it wasn't that effective because Harry was fueling it with righteous anger and not an absolute desire to make someone suffer and to enjoy causing them pain.

In the Deathly Hallows the snitch only opened when Harry accepted his fate, and he only managed to cheat death (again) because he willingly chose to let Voldemort kill him, and him choosing to let himself be killed ended up granting everyone in Hogwarts the same protection that his mother gave him as a baby.

Intent seems to be king in the wizarding world.

Indeed.

[PaulGR]

Originally posted by Darkie:

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

Another that had been present from the very first book is that a lot of magic revolves around the intent of the caster. The Mirror of Erised showed the users fondest and most desired dream and Dumbledore hid the stone inside it with the caveat that the only type of person who could retrieve it would be someone who wanted to find the stone but NOT use it.

In Chamber of Secrets Harry suffers a lot of doubt when he becomes a pariah in the school because he's a parselmouth and he noticed that he and Tom Riddle had a lot of similarities and Dumbledore pointed out they were different in the ways that mattered and that was how they chose to use their gifts.

In Prisoner of Azkaban Lupin is teaching Harry how to cast a patronus and it is made very clear that in order to do so it requires supreme focus on a happy memory, it can't be some fleeting moment or something that made you feel good but genuinely happy.

Order of the Phoneix had the opposite example when Harry tried to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix and it barely lasted. She certainly felt it but it wasn't that effective because Harry was fueling it with righteous anger and not an absolute desire to make someone suffer and to enjoy causing them pain.

In the Deathly Hallows the snitch only opened when Harry accepted his fate, and he only managed to cheat death (again) because he willingly chose to let Voldemort kill him, and him choosing to let himself be killed ended up granting everyone in Hogwarts the same protection that his mother gave him as a baby.

Intent seems to be king in the wizarding world.

Indeed.

So pretty much it's all in your head. You can think you are an "evil" wizard in your head ("intent" or whatever), but gameplay-wise you are just a student on a set story.

[Dragon Master]

Originally posted by PaulGR:

Originally posted by Darkie:

Indeed.

So pretty much it's all in your head. You can think you are an "evil" wizard in your head ("intent" or whatever), but gameplay-wise you are just a student on a set story.

Not quite.

If I were to hypothetically cast the cruciatus curse on you, I'd have to intend for you to feel pain AND enjoy it for the spell to be effective. I may cause short term pain but the spell will lack the full impact it otherwise would.

Just like Harry casting a patronus was just a white mist or a fog before he mastered it. It worked but wasn't very effective.

In order to cast the unforgiveables effectively you have to genuinely want people dead, truly desire to dominate them and enjoy their pain and suffering.

[Borjalyokox]

I'm actually not sure. I want to be good, of course, but from a realistic point of view, learning how the unforgivable spells work is incredibly helpful to know how to counter/dodge them.

The Sebastian Sallow mission will give us three choices:

-Learn Crucio and cast it on Sebastian
-Let Sebastian cast it on us
-Learn Crucio and let Sebastian cast it on us.

My attention went to that third option immediately. Will learning the unforgivable spells force us to use it in the story? Will it lock us from the good/best ending?

[Mitth'raw'nuruodo]

Originally posted by Darkie:

No such thing as "Evil" or "Good" there is only actions and consequences, that is the moral of Harry Potter, the villains you see, might be heroes at the end of the day and the heroes, might have dark secrets.

Originally posted by PaulGR:

Highly doubt you get a choice like that (e.g., it's not Skyrim-level RPG). There is a set story.

This ia an Action Adventure, it is not a RPG.

It is quite literally described as RPG (among other things) by the developers themselves.

And that is absolutely not the moral of Harry Potter. Majority of the villains in the stories are pure evil, cartoonishly so. This does not include characters like Snape who was willingly playing a double agent, or Draco who was just a naive fearful kid. Voldy, Bellatrix, Peter Pettigrew et al are not heroes of any story, and portrayed as irredeemably evil.

Harry Potter is among the most morally unambiguous popular fantasy stories, becacuse it is primarily written for children. Servitude, torture, racism (or bloodism perhaps lol), animal cruelty etc are all shown as evil acts. Kindness, friendship, self-sacrifice etc are shown as heroic. It is not meant to be Game of Thrones lol.

[Sao1987]

I'm not evil but I am pretty lazy. And the unforgivable curses seem pretty convenient.