I'd choose option C. and do something different depending on the situation, not going with the black or white choices thrown before me

Captcha: iropec guardian

Yes, i shall be the guardian

Depends on how strong the character's martyrdom complex is. I've played paladin types who would gladly chose option A and ones who would only chose B.

False dichotomy is false?

I pull a batman and save both ferries.
Fuck you, GM.

Depends on the character.

This is a classic question posed to every superhero/paladin/generally awesome dude by most every writer. Most every writer who doesn't want to take them into utilitarian anti hero territory (option B) will give them a third option in this ultimatum. A few will have them go with option A to kill them off or make a point, possibly resurrecting them.

For me, personally, I can't see myself ever encountering the situation. Any situation like that, you'd have gone with A every other time, because there is always the risk of death, sometimes greater than others. You go with A and do your damndest to make it back out by being competent, brave, or lucky. If not, you knew the risks.

>>15648474
I approve of this

Get a party member to rez you after you do A.

>>15648440
Secret hint: Batman didn't do crap to save the ferries.

>>15648607
though he did break physics to take a third option in batman forever..fuck that movie

Most Characters I've played would pick A in a heartbeat.

Why? You can't predict the future. You could be hit by a car on the way back from this fight and never save another person. These people need help NOW.

>>15648438
It's not false. There are situtions in which one must sacrifice themself in order to save others with no third option.

>>15648711

Oh, so you can predict the future and any and all consequences perfectly?

You fucking asshole, why are you allowing genocide and major disasters all around the world? You evil, evil bastard.

>>15648724
pelor demands it

>>15648724
Because I chose super-secret option C, be powerless to do anything.

>>15648711
There is always a third option. You're just not looking hard enough.

this comic perfectly answers the OP's question
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2305#comic

I choose >>15648474 with a side of >>15648698. Better the immediate good I know I can accomplish than the hypothetical future good that I may or may not be able to accomplish -- but best to pull off both.

>>15648474
>>15648440
This.

There is always a third option. Always.

>>15648361
your job is to save people. your job is dangerous. do your fucking job.

>>15648812
>>15648739
Sadly, no there isn't. The real world is not that nice. Sorry you can't be Paladins IRL guys.

>>15648825
who here is an irl paladin? the question posed was obviously for game sessions. don't be so obtuse.

>>15648825
If anything the real world is even more flexible than a game. If there is no third option, you use your wits and your strength and your determination to carve one out.

>>15648825

The world is never just two choices. There are nigh-infinite ones. There is likely an option to win, you just can't see it.

>>15648825
Well you could be, you'd just be taking option A every time. Which would in all likelihood would be just one time.

>>15648739
>>15648812
A grenade lands at your feet. You're surrounded by people. Make a choice.

>>15648825

Except a lack of any but two options shows only a lack of creativity and a deliberate desire to shoehorn yourself into a situation.

Oh look, my toast is done, do I get the toast or leave the house? Wait, what if I just sat here instead, or went to my fridge first before getting toast? Oh shit, why didn't I think of that?

Look, your constant herping about "No you can't be real life Paladin, no third options in real life herr derr" business is just wankery on your part inasmuch as a lot of moralfag characters are wankery on the part of the PC. You want to wank about the world being grimderp (it isn't) and they want to wank about their fantasy character being awesome (they can be).

To each their own, I don't judge.

>>15648849
shove it in the portable hole and close it

>>15648849

I grab the grenade preventing it from going off until I can toss it elsewhere. What do you think those handles are for jackass?

>>15648849
I throw it back.

>>15648849

Kick it away. I can kick pretty damn far. If it got to me, it can likely get back.

>>15648849
Am I a superhero?

because if I'm a superhero then I'm throwing it into a lake or something.

>>15648854

This. A thousand times this. Realistic =/= Everything sucks and the world is made of dreary fail.

>>15648849
Hahaha. Okay. This scenario is bullshit so it doesn't matter. The grenade comes from where? A portable hole? The aether? Sorry.

>>15648865
It's a WW1 grenade without a handle.

>>15648874
>>15648867
It explodes, killing any people in the crowd around you. You chose option B.

>>15648890
the bad guy's familiar flying above you, but since you failed your spot check you don't know that

>>15648910

Actually, something else wrong with the scenario: even if you don't jump on it shrapnel kills you anyway. It's either succeed at option A or die anyway. Plus, someone has a vintage WW1 grenade and is using it to commit acts of public terrorism? Really?

>>15648865
GRENADES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!

Seriously though, often times the safety lever is launched off the grenade after it's been released. Granted this makes them more dangerous to people throwing them, but the idea is that people CAN'T just grab it and prevent it from exploding

>>15648911
i see the problem here. you're a railroading dm trying to justify your rape fantasies.

>>15648910

No I didn't. I chose C and it's well away from everyone by now.

I can make just as many unjustified statements as you.

Or how about this: I dump my many many kilo backpack onto it, muffling the explosion so no one died. It's worked before.

>>15648926

>oftentimes
>acknowledges that there is a safety handle
>implying some asshat tossing grenades in public would know how to do anything beyond pull the pin and throw it

Oh I'm sorry, did I step on your wankery like I did the "derp the world is grim derp"-fag's wankery? My bad.

>>15648910
FUCK YOU STEVE, YOU ALWAYS DO THIS!

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY MOM'S BASEMENT!!!

>I dump my many many kilo backpack onto it, muffling the explosion so no one died. It's worked before.
>It's worked before.
Wat.

>>15648956

There have been instances of people doing the 'Jump on the grenade' thing, except they put their heavy pack between the grenade and themselves, providing enough protection to survive the blast.

>>15648925

Well if you want to play it that way, you could go with option C. Just throw some other poor bastard on top of it. He's dead but he would have died anyway so together you and he saved everyone else and you're free to continue on your merry way as a hero...kinda...
hooray....

>>15648854
I don't want to wank about anything, but there can easily be situations in real life where someone innocent is going to get hurt. These can be inevitable outcomes to a situation. The world isn't grimderp, but at the same time it's not a particularly nice place, on the whole - its a world of privileges, and the lack thereof.

Seeing in absolutes, or "always take the third option", is not necessarily an admirable moral viewpoint. Stubborn attitudes can lead to ruin and greater sacrifice than is required.

If you want an example of a callous IRL attitude, I can point to the attitudes of judges and lawmakers. Often, when looking to overturn a law that is seen as unfair or unjust through case law, judges will wait for the 'perfect' case to rule on. Ultimately this is an action for the good - it's making a fairer law - but people are nevertheless being sacrificed to an unjust law, knowingly, because their situation is not clear cut enough to be the defining case. What's your reaction in this situation? Do you try to fix the law for the candidate, and potentially make a weak body of law, or do you wait so you can definitively fix the law with a more ideal candidate?

>>15648956
There have been cases of people in the army surviving jumping on a grenade by using their backpacks to take the shrapnel.

There are always options out of a situation. The problem is keeping calm and figuring out how to proceed.

>>15648361
I'm a utilitarian, I choose B.
If I am a superhero, I'll probably save a handful of people in the next few hours. No need to die right this minute denying the entire world my efforts just so a few people can live.

Real life moral situation: it takes roughly $200/child to save children from dying from preventable causes in third world countries. Over 30,000 children die every year from starvation or diseases they are susceptible to thanks to starvation. Why haven't you donated all of your money to African relief groups and saved a bunch of childrens' lives? Divide any expensive toy's cost or money you spent on some hobby by $200, that is how many African kids you let die in order to goof off.

>>15648991

See, your lack of ingenuity astounds me. You have a certain number of resources that simply aren't being mentioned in any scenario, and you always have more options that you simply weren't aware of.

Too few resources to feed everyone in the area for a prolonged period of time? Figure out more efficient ways to utilize them, talk to your innovators and experts, or just get relatively smart laymen to hash something out.

To use your scenario: judge finds an excuse to allow the case to be overturned on a technicality, or better yet supports groups that attempt to utilize alternate means to have the law repealed, such as repealing it through congress, and supporting candidates with that idea as a ticket on their platform.

That's 2-3 options you didn't present. People who want to imagine the world in the way you are presenting it are just intellectually lazy and looking to have their lack of moral vigor coopted by a shit tier world view.

>>15649016
Go solve Palestine and Israel, or power struggles in the DRC.

Hypothetical mechanics are bad because they are rigid and absolute. First it is assumed that the choices are finite. Second it is assumed that the choices will be perfectly executed.

A third possibility will be devised and tried as a compromise, since heroes are not planning to die. They are planning to save people. Only if every other option is exhausted do they commit self sacrifice, as they should.

Also, as noted previously, every option has a rate of success and failure, and has different returns. Logically the greatest return is given by an option to save people AND helps the hero to survive to live on and help others. Thus this needs to be weighed against the nature of the threat (s) and the respective reward (s).

This is usually where the sidekick deus ex machina comes into play. The hero is forced to face death, however the sidekick has its own range of actions that can change the situation significantly enough to save the hero. And vice versa. Thus individual heroes are, in a sense, seldom heroes. Only the lone-hero or anti-hero is the architype that demonstrates the constricted nature of such "if-or" type situations.

Having to pull a heroic sacrifice just means you weren't clever enough to achieve the same result without dying.

Anyways, I'm not really the heroic sacrifice, go out with a bang, types. I could certainly do heroism ,given the resources or powers needed to effectively achieve it. However, I'd be cautious, I'd plan, and I'd be careful how I went about things, preferably to avoid situations where a heroic sacrifice would even be needed.

>>15649032

This can be done. I'm a member of the Enough! Project, and that's what we're trying to do. I have met with Mr. Prendergrast when he was going on campus tours. We are working on a solution to the problem in the DRC.

What have you done lately negative-fag?

I'm a Paladin/Grey Guard.

Because it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission, especially when it doesn't cost anybody XP to cast Atonement on me.

>>15649032
extermanatus
no more power struggle

>>15649031
>judge finds an excuse to allow the case to be overturned on a technicality
This simply may not be a possibility. It could be possible, but it's by no means guaranteed to be.
>or better yet supports groups that attempt to utilize alternate means to have the law repealed, such as repealing it through congress, and supporting candidates with that idea as a ticket on their platform.
This is more likely, but it still does not solve the problem of the immediate case, which is the issue in question - and it may also be the situation where a judge is trying to act against the interests of repressive legislature.

>People who want to imagine the world in the way you are presenting it are just intellectually lazy and looking to have their lack of moral vigor coopted by a shit tier world view.
I am a highly moral person, but I also believe the world is a deeply flawed place, and the idea that harm can always be avoided is a laughable one.

>>15649073
There's no perfect solution, so we should go for the choice that provides maximum possible gain for minimal possible harm.

YOU ARE COVERED IN EVIL JUICE BY A DARK WIZARD. YOU CAN ONLY REMOVE THIS JUICE BY RUBBING IT ON ORPHANS. IF YOU DON'T REMOVE ALL THE JUICE, YOU'LL DIE ONE YEAR LATER.

FINAL DESTINATION.

>>15649087
There we go. That's a damn sight more applicable to actual problems than 'always choose the third option'.

I don't quite agree with utilitarianism in its entirety, but the core message is certainly an admirable one, and one I am sympathetic to.

Sacrifice myself. I can get a true rez and keep on saving people.

inb4 "No true rez".

>>15649089
Are the Dark Wizard's parents alive?

>>15649089
–noun
1. a child who has lost both parents through death, or, less commonly, one parent.
2. a young animal that has been deserted by or has lost its mother.
3. a person or thing that is without protective affiliation, sponsorship, etc.: The committee is an orphan of the previous administration.


plenty of stuff i can rub it off on, including random stray feral animals

>>15649028
Your situation ignores a number of other factors, such as corrupt governments or various things like the inherent political instability of all of Africa that may result in the kid dying anyways to something else.

It's attempting to strike at symptoms rather than causes and is thus ultimately pointless, albeit well intentioned. However, problems must be addressed at the source.

>>15649130
Symptom treatment is not unwarranted, though - it only becomes flawed when no attempt to lance the boil at the source is made with it.

>>15649073

No. See, there is a difference between trying options and failing, and pretending that there are only two. You are saying "Oh, this might not always work out", or that there are problems and difficulties with your third option.

That doesn't mean it isn't an option. That just means that you aren't pursuing it because it might not work out. In any given situation there are a vast number of workable scenarios, and the more polish and time you spend on them the more likely they are to be successful. That said, failure happens, but that doesn't mean you didn't have chances, it doesn't mean you can't take chances that could fail.

This is where wank comes in: instead of attempting multiple options that could fail, or one option that could fail but would solve your problem, you pretend that there are only two because the others can fail. That's the fallacy, that's the heart of the wankery, and that's the heart of the problem.

>>15649121
Yes, but the evil juice is so evil that it can only be rubbed on nice people and you need to rub it on at least five people.

>>15649121
I like where you're going with this.

>>15649150
find orphans with cancer who will die in less than a year and rub off on them

>>15649150

I'm a cleric. I cast Miracle. Diety beats Wizard. Evil Juice gone.

>>15649130

Except that there are multiple sources. Conflict minerals and their value are one of them: we at Enough! are striking there, both in Congress and by lobbying businesses directly.

That said, I did splinter from Enough! because I don't feel they are doing... enough.

>>15649150
OH come on, that's bullshit. It's a scientific fact that evil people are twice as absorbent.

>>15649142
I'm not disputing that these opportunities can succeed, I am quite specifically saying that it is a perfectly realistic scenario where they may not be present. You may not be able to overturn the case. You may be able to pressure congress, but this does not solve the case at hand. You may not be able to pressure congress. It's not a case that these avenues might fail, but that they may not be present. If this is insufficient for you, then consider that they were tried, and have failed. What do you do then? This is something that can happen!

I'm sure you see this attitude as a distortion of the possibilities, and I do not - I see it as a perfectly plausible, if unusual, scenario which has, can and probably will arise in legal systems. At this point I think there's no chance we can come to an accord, our approaches to the issue are too different and seem too fallacious to each other.

>>15649205

But you're missing the point: there was an option C, and you took it, it just failed, leaving you with a handful of corollaries. That said, in a situation you have described, there are more options than the very simplistic 2 you have presented that aren't apparent simply because the situation isn't fully described.

Even in a hypothetical situation, hypothetical solutions do present themselves. There were options c-z, and they were options that may have at least been attempted. If they were attempted you took them. You didn't have to go with only a or b.

>>15649180
Go back to high school. Evil people generate evil juice meaning they can't absorb it.

Alright well let's say you're a paladin, You're a pretty cool guy and doesn't afraid of anything.
As for what resources you've got
You have a sword n' shield, plate mail ,some rations, a bedroll, grappling hook, 50 feet of rope and a 10ft pole(because you're an adventurer dammit) and your balls of steel
You're on a road in the middle of the country walking along with your party when all of the sudden you see a couple of peasants tearing ass out of a village chased by an orc warband. Your party plainly states that they have no plans on dying to help said pesants as you are massively outnumbered and if you decide to try and help, you'll do so on your own as they will be hiding in the nearby woods while you die like a man.
You've got no back up, no resources that are obviously helpful to this and if there is a third option you're not quite clever enough to see it because once again, you're a paladin. You're tough as nails and really likable, but you're no Doctor Who.
So in this situation, what do you do?

>read a choose your own adventure book
>"you come to a door A) open the door, pg 127. B) go back the way you came, pg 579
bitch i turn to page 394

>>15649255

How many orcs? How high morale? How well equipped? What are they odds they break and run off if I hit them form the side? What are the odds of them bringing me down quickly in a fight?

>>15649231
We dispute the eternal existence of an option C, so I was making a concession to you that it was closed off or, my original point (which you reject), did not exist. As my core assertion is that 'harm is sometimes inevitable' I don't really see this as a weakening of my point.

Your issue seems to be attacking the fallacy there are always two options, which isn't really what I was trying to argue. If I've communicated badly, I apologise - I was trying to get across that it is not always possible to avoid harm. Those people saying 'I choose the third option' seemed to imply it would be a magical solution, free of the problems of option 1 or 2. That is not a guaranteed thing.

>>15649255
Slap the rest of the party back in line and proceed to kill every single last one of the orcs.

Strike down the beast of darkness that treads the fields of green, for I am the Sword of Justice, Guardian of Light and the Avatar of Retribution!

Do B. But feel kind of bad about it.

>>15649279
It's a raging orc warband in the distance,
as stated, you're a paladin and not too bright
You have no idea how likely they are too break up and run if you hit them from the side, you have no real clue as to how high their morale is but your guessing pretty high(orcs get fired up about killing pesants) and you have no idea how likely they are to bring you down quickly in a fight. Your at full health and a pretty tough guy but there is a lot of them.
Thing about this is, you don't even know if you can stop them from killing the pesants, maybe they're all level 20 and you won't land a hit. Point being, it is pretty much a guarantee that you will die if you try this, are you willing to do it anyway?

>>15649309

If harm is inevitable, then it is due to failure to prevent it. Failure happens, and is inevitable.

I agree that the third option isn't always a magical solution, save in literature ala >>15648474 but I think that in any given situation there are more than two options.

On a larger level, I look at it like this: if you ask people to explain something, you get a better explanation the more intelligent and informed the person is. Society asks us the question "Why aren't you, or all of us, doing something about the evils in the world?" The more intelligent the one asked, the more in depth, complex, and compelling the answer. Thus we can see complex logical and moral justifications that allow anyone (mostly everyone) who doesn't want to get involved in trying to prevent anything unpleasant, or go out of their way to at least put in some effort on an option C, a reasonable excuse to duck out of doing anything.

Fuck all this "HURR DURR THERE'S ALWAYS A THIRD OPTION" shit

Here's a fucking scenario.

You're locked in fibreglass cube, you are naked, there are no cracks, there is no nothing. In front of you there's a button, it is completely flat and smooth you cannot remove it and it would not do any damage to the fibreglass in any case.

If you do not push the button in one minute, then in front of the fibreglass cube 500 innocent people will be burned to death, but if you push it they are saved.

But if you do not push it then every day for the next 50 years a six sided die will be rolled, and on a 6 a child that would be sure to die will be taken from their despair and given a new life in happiness and wealth.

WHAT. DO. YOU. CHOOSE?

>>15649255
>if there is a third option you're not quite clever enough to see it
read that as "there are multiple ways out of this but you are not allowed to use any of them". please never ever DM

>>15649360

You are suggesting that I am too stupid to come up with a solution or concrete facts, even an idea about something I do for a living, namely taking out sick fucks who prey on the weak in melee combat? Really?

Translation: I don't want to try and give you any details because if I did you could think your way out of it, and I'm handwaving it by suggesting you are automatically stupid as a Paladin, even ignorant of the things you do on a regular basis, but I'm sliding it in there so no one calls me on it.

Called.

>>15649370

I starve to death, or rather die of asphyxiation before any of that matters you fucktard.

>>15649370
I choose that this is a stupid fucking scenario

>>15649370
I stop watching Saw.

Shitty torture porn from a shitty DM.

>>15649370
So thats the lives of about 3042 kids give or take versus 500 people? Even if it were a 12 sided die your still saving about 3 times as many people by not pressing the button
Yay math!

>>15649408
the kids would be saved, not killed

>>15649370

I'd push the button. Those kids, while otherwise perhaps in the most wretched circumstances imaginable, still have their lives. Their fate is uncertain, even with wealth and comfortable living given to them.

Whereas the 500 people in front of me, if I do not press the button, have their fate sealed. I give them their life to do with as they see fit from that point onwards.

>>15649394

Yes, yes it is.

But the point of the OP was to pose a very clear hypothetical question, but because you people are all utter anal and impossible to please you decide to tear his rather vague scenario apart.

The point of the OP was not the scenario but you people insist on making it about the scenario, so i contrived a scenario that, while it may be retarded, is completely clear in what options you have.

>>15649442

Holy shit that was some horrible spelling and sentence stuckture.

Time to go to bed.

>>15649370
Don't push the button.

Over 18,262 days, a six will be rolled 3,043 times.

This assumes a non-weighted die.

>>15649394
How about something like this?

You're a policeman. A serial killer says that unless you kill yourself he keep on killing. If you kill yourself he'll turn himself in and he always keeps his promises.

So the choices are:
A) You die and prevent deaths.
B) You don't die and maybe stop the killer. You maybe stop other killers.

>>15649370
I flip the table and kick you in the dick for presenting such an absurd situation.

>>15649511
Also, no faking your death.

>>15649442
So, a contrived, closed, hypothetical situation, posed on a board

FILLED WITH PEOPLE WHO'S INTERESTS INVOLVE CREATIVE LYING, IMAGINATION, AND TACTICAL PLANNING.

What the fuck did you think was going to happen?

Here's one: you can troll and amuse yourself or not troll and enrich the lives of everyone else by your lack of conspicuous presence.

I'm waiting with bated breath to see how you choose to act, Sherlock.

>>15649551

>>15649511
i shoot him then and there

>>15649511

I find and take down the killer. Duh.

Seriously, the reason why no one includes any wording or serious detail in these situations, or tries using Fiat, Magic, or Handwaving, is that in any real scenario third options can be attempted, and the more details you give the more the scenario can be picked apart and gleaned for these options.

Your insistence that this is not the case is based upon wankery. Question was answered upthread within the first few posts. Now we are talking about it from a different angle.

>>15649551
It's a freaking hypothetical. It's something along the lines of "would you prefer a perfectly ordered society or a perfectly free society?" It's never going to happen but it's nice to think about.

If you see a thread about something like "what if Orcs rule the Earth" do you barge in and say "orcs will never rule the Earth."

>>15649629

You can explain why such a situation would reverse itself in short order, that's legit.

No one here has said yet "situation doesn't happen", merely explained the limits and ways out that don't require you to be shoehorned into two choices.

For instance: "What if Orcs ruled the Earth?" is very different than "Orcs rule the Earth, do you join them or fight against them?"

See the difference?

>>15649601
So you choose option B. You stay alive and hope that you will be able to make up for it later. Sure, you might be able to save many lives, but you might never find the killer.

>>15649629
Someone actually posted something pretty close to that one the other day. It was openly ridiculed and mocked before being hijacked into something actually fun and meaningful.

>>15649629
This is /tg/. Yes, people barge into threads and nit-pick.

>>15649629
Being hypothetical does NOT excuse a situation from logical fallacy. False dichotomy if false dichotomy. If your situation arbitrarily precludes any otherwise possible outcome, it is a "forced fork" scenario.

There ARE situations in which there are literally only two or three outcomes. None have been brought up in this thread.

What's wrong with binary choices?
They happen sometimes.
It's not about not being clever- it's about the odds stacked againts you by the forces that be that assail you.

It happens.

For example, here's one choice I put on my players:

A powerful villain has sundered the chains of destiny on the ancient mythical snake beast, Niyradammar. It is a being of cosmic nature, entwined with the existences and fate of all mortal life- and it is it's duty to one day consume nearly all life once it is awakened, and return all souls to the One Above All, continuing the cycle of life, death and rebirth.

Prematurely awakened, the beast soon rouses- but for the moment, it is still mortal, as it gathers it's mighty cosmic strength.But if slain, the planet, and all it's inhabitants are doomed to never know cycle of life and rebirth, their spirits forever doomed to wander the planet, cut off from the One Above All.

So, they had a choise- allow the cosmic beast to do it's work and continue the cycle of death and rebirth- and guide the survivors to a new tomorrow-

OR

Slay the snake now, and save all the millions if not a billion people on the planet- but doom their souls to never know a new life, forever to walk the underworld and never know peace.

My players made their choise.
What would you have done?

>>15649682
>There ARE situations in which there are literally only two or three outcomes. None have been brought up in this thread.

Please see: >>15649370

And tell me how it has more than 2 outcomes.

>>15649693
>>15649682

Binary forks aren't real. You can do the same thing with many, many variations, or do one option with something else.

>>15649693

Put it back to sleep. Time travel. Delay the creature indefinitely until the timing is better. That's three off the top of my head. Stop derping.

>>15649645
Let's say that the OP is asking for help working out what civilisation would be like if orcs are in charge. People then join in and say that obviously elves would come in and take over. It's totally ignoring the point of the thread.

It doesn't matter if these situations exist when you want to talk about them. No human is ever going to see a perfect circle, but we can work with them.

>>15649712

It has only one outcome you fucktard: your own death. You asphyxiate because of lack of oxygen before the ramifications of any of that shit happen.

If you explained how air got in, that would provide possible means of escape. If you explain how food and water got in, same deal. The more detail, the more possibilities.

In the described scenario you just die. I pointed this out upthread, you ignored me because you have no ready answer.

>>15649693
Pointed out that anything that can be done can be undone and chained that fucker down. If I can kill it, I can knock it out. Or maybe: I'd have gone on an epic quest to petition whoever is in charge of this shit-tastic "cycle" that some hobo vandal had busted it up, and they could please fix it, thank you.

If you railroaded that as an either-or situation, you sir should not be GMing.

>>15649720

You're kidding right? You don't see "Elves would take over after a time, here's my argument" as a valid point? Really? Even though we are starting with "Orcs do rule the world" and in the given scenario they do but simply cannot hold it, that isn't legit to you?

>>15649720
Why do you assume it would be elves? Dwarves are an equally valid option.

>>15649682
Being hypothetical can excuse fallacies. Assuming that correlation implies causation is a fallacy, but we could assume that there exists a universe in which correlation always indicates causation.

>>15649714

What made you think time travel was possible?
Or that putting the beast to sleep was possible?
It is a being of cosmic, raw, unadulterated nature, beyond the ability of mere mortals to control.

The creature is awakening within MOMENTS, and within a few moments more, it will do it's duty.

Sometimes, there is NO third choice.
You slay it now, when it is mortal or allow it to do it's deed, when it has gained power beyond the Gods which, as it awakens, is inevitable.

>>15649727

Oh for fucks sake, this is exactly the kind of anal bullshit is was talking about.

FINE i'll modify the scenario.

Fuck all this "HURR DURR THERE'S ALWAYS A THIRD OPTION" shit

Here's a fucking scenario.

You have just been locked in fibreglass cube the top of the cage has been welded and clasped shut with industrial power tools, you have more than enough oxygen for the one minute you need. You are naked, there are no cracks, there is no nothing. In front of you there's a button, it is completely flat and smooth you cannot remove it and it would not do any damage to the fibreglass in any case.

If you do not push the button in one minute, then in front of the fibreglass cube 500 innocent people will be burned to death, but if you push it they are saved.

But if you do not push it then every day for the next 50 years a six sided die will be rolled, and on a 6 a child that would be sure to die will be taken from their despair and given a new life in happiness and wealth.

When you have chosen the cube will be open immediately and you go on with your life

NOW, WHAT. DO. YOU. CHOOSE. YOU. ANAL. PIECE. OF. SHIT?

>>15649761

Except that we wouldn't understand it because the laws of basic causation don't work anymore: your turn left=pb&j sandwich. That ceases to be something we can understand.

>>15649763

No. You're a shit tier GM is all. I will spend no further time debating this.

>>15649761
That is a clause of ceteris paribus, and therefore allowed. Putting all viable options aside but two is not comparable and is still fallacious.

>>15649769
You're whining about people actually thinking instead of following your bullshit scenarios, but everyone else is anal?

Just...fuck off.

>>15649734
I didnt rail-road anything.

My players were 18th level.
They had taken their sweet time doing side quests and having fun times, and the plot advanced. When they focused on the main quest, the Villain was already near completion, accelerating the destruction of the chains of destiny, which, regardless, where time constrained- he had merely accelerated the process.

They had arrived just in time to slay the villain- and to actually have a say in the matter.If they had arrived later, they would have had even less of a say in the matter.They had little time to come to a choice.

The adventure was not necessarily OVER at that point, also.

>>15649769

I use my superpowers to punch my way out of the box, save those 500 people, and then go out and save 32,000 kids, which is more then would have been saved on average. I also punch your supervillian face, and drag you down to the police station to collect my bounty.

>>15649763
Shooting down valid options until all that remains are the ones you wanted to begin with, negating all input from the players. Hm. How do we call that again ?

Ethics are always situational, what we call an "ethical/moral code" is simply a fancy name given to spur-of-the-moment judgements based on emotional appraisal of the given situation and lead to absurd conclusions when generalized. /thread.

>>15649769

How do I know this? Did someone tell me before I went in? The existence of a button and a mechanism it goes to indicates that there is something I can tamper with. At the very least I can attempt to disable the explosive device, or whatever it is. Or I can attempt to break out, even though my odds are very low regardless.

See, it is you who are the anal piece of shit. This is you wanking, and getting frustrated no one is playing to your retarded negative-fag fantasy. You want to imagine a world in which such choices are the only ones because it validates you for whatever reason. That's fine. There are other boards for wanking, perhaps visit there?

>>15649769

>>15649769
I choose not to play your game, DM. It is obvious you have constructed this scenario for the expressed purpose of having my character naked and at your mercy.

I do not wish to partake of your ERP garbage, and I say good day to you, sir!

>>15649743
It's valid. It's not relevant.

As I mentioned above, you can make a perfectly valid argument that perfect circles don't exist in our universe, but if I stay a thesis by saying that I'm working with perfect circles, there's no reason for you to chime in with "perfect circles don't exist."

>>15649792

YES! You are an intolerable anal faggot for the very simple reason that you completely ignore what the question is actually about and focus on something completely irrelevant.

I know that my scenario is complete and utter horseshit, i've said so in other posts, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT! The point is to shut you fucking nit-picking retards up so you can focus on what the scenario IS ACTUALLY ABOUT ie. THE FUCKING CHOICE!

>>15649820
How is it a choice if you have already predetermined all the actions possible and have scripts for each outcome? Why don't you just roll a dice so we can get this over with and do something fun?

>>15649817

But that's not a good comparison at all!

You say "Perfect circles in x scenario", and I say "They wouldn't stay perfect for very long due to y". Okay then. Now if you want to say "This scenario defies all logic and causation you can provide, even giving the initial basic parameters", then fuck man, I'm only human.

>>15649820
I find this man's use of caps curious and amusing.

Please, carry on.

>>15649802
I didnt shoot down anything, like I said here-
>>15649797
They were 3.5 DnD players.
They had 3 minutes until the snake had awakened to full might.One was a rogue, one a barbarian, one a sorcerer, and one a cleric.All 18th level.
>>15649782
Again, I resent that.
That's not fair.
Under the circumstances of their actions, they still had options, but all relegated to what they were, the time they had, and what they could do.

Which, boiled down to slaying the beast, or letting it do it's job.

Tell me. What COULD they do againts a timeless, ageless beast?

>>15649820
We don't want your choice. If we wanted your choice, we'd consturct that fiberglass box and magical, life-saving D6 ourselves. As it is, you've tried to put your bullshit in our ethics, and we're pissed over your faggotry.
So get off the board, kaythanx.

>>15649769

The very fact that I was placed in such a situation means my acts are meaningless. The person in charge of this project is not guaranteed to fulfill his promises, either to murder 500 people or to save innocent children. Especially the latter, as it is an extended promise that requires considerable investment with no oversight. Therefore, considering hte person in charge is clearly both evil and insane, one can be quite sure that the children will never be saved or placed into a life of wealth in this way.

Might as well push the button, not that there is any guarantee that the Joker (come on, its obviously the joker who concocted this nonsense) will not just kill the 500 people anyway.

>>15649831

Are you seriously saying that it's not a "real choice" because the options are binary and because you know the outcome of each decision?

It's about whether you would rather see 500 men, women and children burn to a crisp in front of you or be comforted in knowing that you have most likely saved a great many more.

That's what the scenario is actually about, not about how much fucking air you have.

>>15649820
Without any proof that pushing the button will do anything, the scenario is pointless. How do we know we're not being lied to, and pushing the button will actually kill the 500 other people?

>>15649831
What? What do you think this is? No-one is forcing you to answer. No-one is forcing you to be in this thread. This is just asking you something.

This is a question along the lines of "Would you rather be blind or deaf?" It has no results. It just says something about you as a person.

>>15649848

Let it go out, level up, lock it up. They were almost epic level by this point and just killed the BBEG for an assload of xp and gear.

Alternately, petition the powers that be since almost epic level.

Alternately, get to epic level, invent time travel after escaping long enough to get there, go back and undo that shit.

Any number of things, still off the top of my head, all of which are viable and none of which are ingenious, but all of which could be attempted.

>>15649861
>>15649853
>>15649852

Oh for fucks sake, are you really so dense that you can't see that the scenario is just casing for a completely metaphysical question that is supposed to say something about you as a person? The scenario is irrelevant that's point i've been trying to make by contriving a scenario that is such utter implausible bullshit.
But you guys refuse to let go of the scenario.

>>15649769

That choice isn't even remotely similar to the one you started the thread with. In this choice, you get to choose between your inaction killing a bunch of people, or to make a small action through which some other agency will save a greater number of other people. In the original scenario, you had the choice between dying to save a few people and living in the hope that your continued existance would contribute directly to the saving of more people than your sacrifice would save. That means that, if you choose to live, you must personally devote your life to saving these people. There's no button you push to activate a magical life-saving third party, it's all you. Notice the difference?

tl;dr fuck you and your poorly-constructed faux-trolley problems.

>>15649866
As a DM, I would have allowed all that.
But that doesnt still stop you from the CHOISE of that situation. It wasnt the end of the campaign or anything- it was a critical, climax choice that the players had, which at the moment, there was little else they could do.

But yes, AFTER the critical moment, there were still more options, but the choice still had to be made.

I hate being called a bad DM just because a tough choice is presented to you. Players cant deal with it. Even if I allow them to do whatever they want AFTER the choice.Apparently everything should be bright and happy rainbows.

But yeah, the campaign didnt end there, my players made their choice, and the plot continued as they tried to find a solution.

Look, I'm this guy: >>15648474

Everything in this thread can be boiled down to: do your damndest, accept that failure can happen, but carry on and try to save the day anyway regardless of the potential fallibility of your plan. That's it.

Suddenly, there's a swarm of anal douchebags later in the thread who have this "perfect scenario" riddled with bullet holes that they don't want to provide information on because that would destroy their special little scenarios.

That's why such things are wankery. In the real world this is why people can sit and tolerate shit like genocide, unjust wars, and systemic injustice. People are pushing a bleak, lazy, and ineffectual world view because they want society to buy in and coopt their moral weakness, and you know what? It's working.

So I call upon you, moralfags of /tg/ unite!

>>15649863
So... did you just imply a third option? :D

>>15649848
One way would be to beat the beast into unconsciousness, defeat the villain guy, then have the cleric use a powerful miracle to call down the gods and have them restore the chains of destiny.

If the sorcerer has teleport through time, they can use that too and go on a quest to set right what once went wrong.

Of course, you seem to be the sort of GM who would just go "lolnope" to this, right ?

We get these stupid things every fucking day in the form of shitspam, and here you are throwing more of the damn shit at us.

We get it, moralfaggotry offends and upsets you. Too bad. Some of us have thought process beyond "fuck, eat, die".

>>15649909
I can accept this.

>>15649905

PSSSST!

[nospoilers]I'm not OP[/thankgod]

>>15649906

So you would have allowed the pursuit of additional corollaries other than kill it or stay your hand? That means the situation didn't require a binary choice. That defeats your stated premise.

>>15649903
Your entire argument is based on that (supposedly unimportant) question! You're asking us to make a choice based on parameters we aren't willing to accept! Our only choice in a matter like this, seeing as all of use are PKOJ-type paladins, is to refuse your two choices because that's not how we play your fucking game.
Your going to have to accept that we aren't going to go along with even the basic premise of your argument. It's based on a moral dichotomy, but in that same dichotomy there are, by definition, many choices. You're asking us to choose between a sword and a quarterstaff when we have bolters and lasguns.

>>15649910
There is a third option. Don't play the game. This is always an option.

>>15649958
That is, "Even silence is an answer."

Very famous, very old dwarven axiom.
Or maybe it was roman, I can't remember.

>>15649922
Did you read :
>>15649906
?

I said I'd allow ALL that...but after the CHOICE took place.

Which meant they had to do one, or risk the other. Regarding the "Cast Miracle, ask for Deus Ex Machina", why do you think that's a good choice for a DM to allow that?"

I'll tell you later what they did.

>>15649950
None of that matters. You're answering a different question. If a waiter asks if you want soup or salad they're not asking for your favourite food. If you can't accept the parametres, don't answer the question.

>>15649976

That's like saying it's a binary choice that I can either turn or keep going straight. Wow, I can either turn or keep going straight, given the sheer amount of choices that are intertwined with the specifics of that turn or the process of going straight, the idea that "turn or keep going" is any kind of meaningful binary choice is as much of a meaningful limitation as the one you have described.

/sarcasm

>>15649996
>If a waiter asks if you want soup or salad

Then I'd be eating in a restaurant, in which case I'd ask him if the chef could make something else. That's what I'm paying for, after all.

>>15649996

Except that 90% of the people objecting have accepted the parameters, examined them, and found exploitable flaws. That's the fundamental problem you are encountering, stop misrepresenting it.

/thread

>>15649999
There was a gas station a ways back. We could ask Miracle there and ask my God for directions...?

Really? Really? 160 posts on /tg/ and not a single person has used the one true answer to why there would be this situation?

A wizard did it.

>>15650003
>"Pepsi or Coke?"
>"Just water, please."

>>15650013

>Borderline epic level characters in a campaign involving underlying cosmology of the world and it's implications.

You meant that as sarcasm, but yes it's perfectly viable.

>>15650015
What? How the fuck did he get around my SR? Fuck you, DM! Fuck you!

>>15650004
No they haven't. The parameters do not allow exploitation. You have only two choices. That is the core of the question. Seriously, read the OP.

>>15650030

He's caster level 50000 and has taken my home brew +80000000 to spell penetration feat 1000 times.

Fuck you right back.

I guess the end is that people dont like Binary Choices.

Finito.

There is no discussion here regarding that, because people always believe that there is always a third choice,no matter what, and that a real binary choice is so stacked towards making it one, that it's unreal.

Well, they arent unreal.
I once had to make a binary choise in real life too.It's called Court Duty, and as a juror, I had to make a choice, Guilty or Innocent.

Life is like that.

>>15650024
Sorry, that's not part of the meal deal.

>>15650035
>The parameters do not allow exploitation.
Yyyes, yes they do. As demonstrated by many, many posts. Are you in the right thread, Anon?

>>15649976
If the chains can be broken, they can be restored. The gods have a vested interest in doing so. And since the players have temporarily knocked the beast unconscious, they're not in danger should they approach. On a more metagame level, you've had your final climax with the confrontation with the beast and the villain.

Yes. A good GM would accept this.

>>15650035

Except I did read the OP. Here's my response >>15648474

The conversation has progressed beyond that point to specifics and application to the real world including in actual situations, which became the core of what we were discussing since then.

I'm assuming you tldred and made your own conclusion up instead of following the conversation.

Seriously, read the thread.

>>15650040
>Your honour, I find this man partially guilty
>What?
>You know, super-secret option C.
>Wh-What?

>>15650048

>If the chains can be broken, they can be restored.

Based on what info do you make this judgement?

>The gods have a vested interest in doing so.

Who the fuck are you to decide what the gods have a vested interest in?

You are a doctor with two patients who require organ transplants to live when a perfectly healthy person comes in for a checkup and it turns out they're a perfect match for the two patients needing transplants. How do you justify not taking the organs from the 1 healthy patient to save the lives of the 2 dying ones?

>>15650040

You could have not participated, risking jail time. Hunger strike. Flee the courtroom. Pled insanity in the middle of jury duty. Feigned a breakdown. Faked a heart attack.

You just chose not to do any of that because A or B was preferable.

>>15650042
>Now say that you are in a situation where your choices are: A or B
If there are more than two options, this is a different question.

>>15650063
It is called a mistrial. Then they get retried.

I don't know how legal systems work in your country.

>>15650067
The healthy patient hasn't given consent for the organs to be removed. Furthermore, the organs may be rejected by the recipients, meaning saving them is not guaranteed.

>>15650067

You suck, you fail at logic and scenario writing, go fuck yourself you desperate, anal, cocksucking piece of shit.

>>15650081
Doesn't the judge call the mistrial, not the jury?

>>15650069

None of those actions have anything to do with the choice given. all of those options simply boil down to not making a decision and that does not constitute a third option.

If i ask you a question with 2 answers you can choose not to answer, but that does not constitute making a choice with regards to the question i asked.

>>15650086
Wow. You're rather upset about this.

>>15650094

All of those options preclude signing a ballot indicating Guilty or Innocent. Doing anything is a decision. That's like saying Red or Blue, and picking any other color doesn't count because you didn't pick a color: I just didn't pick one of the colors you gave me.

>>15650065
It is called internal consistency. If your setting doesn't have it, get rid of the DM, they are shit.

Someone or something had the beast placed in elaborate, purposeful constraints. This having been done once presupposes that it is a viable option due to internal consistency. As stated, there was a hierarchy above this beast.

Can you tell me what 2+2 equals? Maybe it is 22, I don't know anymore...

>>15650113

No, but I encounter enough people who think this way in real life that I am vigorously attempting to combat and reign in the mentality whenever I encounter it.

>>15650048
Well, I'll tell you what happened.

See, like I said, the Beast, and the Original Chains of Destiny where wrought by the One Above All, and made to eventually break. It is their function.What the Epic level Wizard did was merely speed up their decay.

The Gods themselves?

The Cleric did cast Miracle, and the party members begged. But the Gods were in disarray, as you could expect. As servants to the One Above All, they had a duty to Him and his design.Niyradammar was above their judgement or power, as it was an extension to his will.

However, the Cleric's God judged that it had a higher duty to OAA's TRUE design, and convinced some of the Gods that it was too early, that the Evil Wizard had derailed his true design. Some asked "How do you know that? What if this IS his design?"

They quarreled...as Niyrammadar awakened.

A, because I might get hit by a bus or something tomorrow.
Plus my HEROIC SACRIFICE will be all over the news and inspire others to a life of being helpful.

>>15650094
>all of those options simply boil down to not making a decision and that does not constitute a third option.
"See ? You HAVE to make a choice between guilty or not guilty here.
Oh and hey, if you do anything else, that doesn't count as a third option because you didn't make a choice between guilty and not guilty."

Flawless logic

>>15650086
>>15650085
Actually, it's a variation of the Trolley Problem in Utilitarianism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem#Transplant

>>15650134

Actually I know what the Trolley problem is, but so many additional factors have been thrown into the scenario that it no longer functions.

Hence why you fail at both scenario writing and logic.

>>15649996
Fuck the salad or option C, I take the soup.
Because the choice between soup or salad should be easy enough for someone to make.

>>15650133

I'll try once more.

I ask you this question: Would you like drink A, or drink B, no other drinks are available.

You CAN choose to ignore me and not answer, however within the context of my question that simply means that you didn't make a choice, it does NOT mean that not making a choice was somehow a third option.

Unless I have low self esteem or am incompetent I will choose op. B
too easy

>>15650164
I cut my hand and drink my blood.

>>15650164

Depends on which drinks they are.
I want them to compliment the taste of my soup.

>>15650164
A choose not to order a drink.

>>15650192

Morrigan Approves (+10)

ITT: people who dont understand a true hero would find a way to save the people and himself

>>15650164
I will deliberate, ask you dozens of questions about what is in each, how many calories, allergens, artificial sweeteners, which you are affiliated with, have you tried either, what was your opinion...

An then decide that I'm not that thirsty, thanks.

And yes, this is a valid and viable third option in your scenario.

>>15650164

I'm not thirsty.

I throw a rant and jump up and down on the table.

I pee upon the waiter.

I order A, toss it out, and fill the cup with my own blood.

I walk out of the restaurant.


You're going to say that none of those count because they do not belong to the cluster of choices you verbally presented to me, but the scenario itself presents numerous choices in a tacit manner by virtue of existing. You are attempting to pretend those do not exist, but defining a scenario in such a manner is impossible, and attempting to derp your way out of it by saying that anything that doesn't fit the false dichotomy you are presenting isn't a "real choice", even though it is.

ITT: /tg/ argues about a known and proven logical fallacy for hours, with a handful of very stubborn people insisting that False dichotomies are not false, but real and try and give scenarios that are repeatedly proven impossible.

>>15650164
Spill both and run off, laughing.

CHAOTIC NEUTRAL LOLRANDOM FOR LIFE!

>>15650208
A true hero cant go againts fate, though.
If the Heavens decide the time has come, even if you are mighty beyond might, all you are doing is delaying the inevitable.

All things come to an end, all things die, and even death itself may die.

The true final boss is the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

>>15650164
>Would you like drink A, or drink B

I tell him I don't want any drink. My choice is 'neither'.

>>15650164
I take drink A.
...What ? I like drink A.

What did that waiter ever do to you anyway ? Goddamn chaotic neutral assholes.

>>15650236

Third option: delay fate. There we go.

>>15650236
>The true final boss is the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

thelastquestion.jpg

>>15650246
Does your choosing drink A preclude I or anybody else choosing drink A?

If so, I attempt to punch you in the crotch and take yours.

>>15650209
You are in a room. If you leave the room then someone will die. If you remain in the room then nobody will die. The room is made of featureless white steel. There is a single open doorway which is monitored by a camera at the end of the hallway. You will not be given food or water, so if you choose to remain in the room you will die after about 3 days.

What do?

>>15650246
When you take a sip of Drink A, you find it disgusting, even though it's normally quite good.

What do you do?

>>15650248
Reminds me of the Shin Megami Tensei series.
Most of the endings were mostly BAD END.
Mostly because of that fact- delaying fate is just postponing the inevitable, and there are things simply undefeatable in the long run.

You cant simply grow a bigger drill.

Option C. Options A and B are not what heroes end up taking.

>>15650236
>A true hero cant go againts fate, though.

A true hero fights against fate, though.

>>15650270
Mix A and B together!

>>15650269

Paradox: if I remain in the room nobody will die, but you said I would die in 3 days if I did that!

That said, this sounds like you depend upon a human agent. I find a way to contact my allies and have them rescue the hostages, then escape to kick ass!

>>15650295
You're naked.
You're a normal human being.
The Camera is beyond your reach, even if you're prized Jackie Chan athlete level.

Someone will die.
You or them.
Make your choice.

>>15650295
If you remain in the room nobody but YOU will die.

You are naked, but the room is at about 75 degrees F so you are not uncomfortable. There is nothing inside the room.

You know who else took the third option?

Hitler.

Seriously, National Socialism was originally a synthesis of right-wing ideologies and left-wing ideologies.

>>15650316

Fool the camera, surveillance is never perfect.

Even if that fails, I tried to save everyone.

Game over. Stop failing rationality forever.

>>15650269
Wreck the camera and incinerate the whole room. Maybe my ashes are still in the wreckage, in which case the other guy should live. Maybe I left.

Now you have a choice to make. Choose A, and kill the other man, without knowing whether I left the room or not. Choose B, and let him live, even though I may have left the room.
WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU DO NOW ?!

>>15650285
Well, yeah, that's what makes them a true hero.
But here's a question.

What if fighting againts fate's providence means that there will be greater suffering and destruction for all?

Will you still fight?
Even if your fighting would bring a greater damnation to all?

>>15650333
Congratulations, you just took the second option.

>>15650316
So, I'm like a 1d2? I don't know if dice actually decide, since the decision is already based on presupposed outcomes.

Still, this is again sounding like a sick ero-rp gm-watched-too-many-saw movies scenario.

>>15650333
How do you try to fool the camera? It's just a camera. It doesn't turn off and it doesn't move.

>tried to save everyone
Tried to save YOURSELF, you mean.

>>15650326
WOOT WOOT WOOT!
GODWIN ALERT!

>>15650365
Good job guys. Everyone take five and get a drink.

But you can only choose between milk or water.

>>15650356
I am a solipsist, these two are not individual.

>>15650383
I already grabbed a soda on my way in, I'm cool, thanks.

>>15650164
Choosing not to drink is a choice.

Also, I can bring my own drink or go elsewhere - or are you saying that all drinks in the world are one of the two options?

And how do piss, blood and water (salt and fresh) not count?

>>15650387
As a solipsist, what action would you take?

>>15650269
I extend myself as far out of the room as I possibly can without actually leaving it, and look around.

>>15650416
A speaker at the end of the hall blares out - in a digitized voice
>Keep all parts of your body inside the room or you forfeit the stranger's life. This is your only warning.
Past the doorway is a featureless grey hall leading to a partially-open door, past which you are unable to see.
There is a camera at the end of the hallway, mounted on the wall. It is pointed at you.
The hallway is narrow, only wide enough for 1 person to walk down.

Fine, last challenge.

You are a cosmic God. Mighty, but not omnipotent.Another cosmic God has come into your quadrant of space, and wants to Highlander you.

He's stronger than you, by far. But if you permanently harvest most of the souls of your sentient creations on your galaxy, their souls would empower you enough to defeat the other Cosmic God.But if you do so, their souls will be permanently bound to you, consumed, and even beyond your ability to bring back.

What do you do, sojourner?

>>15650407
I stay at home and imagine I am in a featureless room facing a false dichotomy. I pretend to obsess and angst over imaginary people.

And then I have dinner.

>>15650453
I empower a team of adventurers and give them a quest to defeat the other god.

>>15650444
Throw feces at camera. I am not without tools, even if they are made of disdain and poo.

I'm not killing anybody, they are.

>>15650444
I examine the ceiling and floor.

>>15650453
I see a few choices here :
-Fight a desperate, losing battle
-Harvest souls and win in a despicable manner
-Attempt to make peace with the other god
-Create alliances with other minor gods so that the big leaguers can't just stomp around and kill you off
-Step down as a god, casting off your godly mojo, avoiding the fight entirely

Any any situations there is always more than two options. Even in choosing between heaven and hell. YOu can allways choose to not choose. God anyway who has ever listend to Rush knows that one.

In the original example I choose Option A, and IF I end up dieing It's while I'm bussy trying to KILL your ass for creating this lame situation to begin with.

Lob a gernade into a crowd. Hell I'm shouting "Gernade! RUN! heading for cover, and getting behind something solide like one of those concreate protected rubbish bins around the city, or any other hard cover. Yes people will get trampled by my action, not all will die, and that should save lives. Wow look at that.

>>15650467
In your delerium brought on from dehydration you slip deeper into unconsciousness. The last thing you see is the plain white ceiling of the room, which looks to you like endless milky void. Congratulations, you have saved someone's life at the cost of your own.

This situation would not be hard to replicate in the real world. Sometimes there is no 3rd option.

>>15650453
I create an immovable object and laugh at the other god when he tries to comprehend the stupidity of our situation.

Then we team up to highlander whoever put us up to this shit. That's right, we're on to you.

>>15650513
I do not think you understand solipsism.

>>15650471
Like I said, you're mighty, but not omnipotent.
You're empowering mortals to try to fight for you- even though even if you consumed most of their souls, including all their potential and selves, you'd only have enough to defeat the Cosmic God?

You know, when Zordon empowered teenagers with attitudes to become Power Rangers- it was because he was weakened, dying, in a capsule designed to safeguard his existance.

You are not in that condition.
You are mighty amongst mighty, and face one even mightier.Why would you empower the weak to face one mightier than you?

>>15650493
>>15650486
You crap in your hand and fling it as hard as you can. It lands several yards short of the camera.

The floor of the room is made of featureless white steel, as are the walls. The ceiling is featureless and white, but appears to be translucent as light is shining through it. It is well out of reach.

You now have crap on your hand.

>>15650529
Because it is my CHOICE.

Don't get all butthurt because your situation wasn't as binary as you thought.

>>15650506
That's not the question. The question pre-supposes that there are two options. Only two options. If there is a third option, it has nothing to do with the question.

>>15650529
I'm not sending them to face the other god directly. I'm sending them on a quest to defeat it. The manner in which they do so is up to them.

Adventurers have never failed me in the past, though the odds have always been stacked heavily against them.

>>15650529
Adventurers, dude. Give them a good BBEG, an apocalypse plot, make sure there are a few decent monsters on their way, and each of them will be stronger than most major gods in a month or two.

Here is a question of ethics.

You are on the third floor of a four story office building. As you approach the stairwell, a quick-spreading fire breaks out on this floor and the floor above. You are not sure if it is the result of arson or some other circumstance, but the fire cannot be contained. There are many options, but only three will be considered for the purposes of this question.

1) You leave. The reasoning behind you leaving does not matter, the point is that you do not try to save these people yourself.

2) You stay, and try to help the people that you are capable of helping. That is to say, those who you can reach without sucuumbing to smoke inhalation/heat/etc and carry to safety.

3) You stay, and you try to help everybody. Even if they are trapped, you would risk your life to try and rescue those people. Only when the firefighters arrive would you try to leave the building.

Of these three options, which one would you prefer to choose?

>>15650539
.......it all boils down to winning or losing, though.

You either almost everyone's souls (including anything below you in your realm) to give yourself enough might to (WIN) or you do something else that will mean you (LOSE).

What is it that you want to do?
WIN or LOSE?

>>15650564
Two.

>>15650546
As stated several times throughout the thread, if a question presupposes only two options, but a third can be presented, then the question is invalid under its own premise.

When Joshu, the zen master, was asked whether a dog had a balanced nature, he answered 'Mu,' a word meaning neither yes nor no, due to the question not making sense and presupposing things which are not even hypothetically correct.

>>15650574
If all you are concerned with is winning or losing, then you are no longer playing the game. Lack of perspective is a vice.

I just read the entire thread and I don't know if it is stupid or awesome. Is that a third option?

I'm gonna archive it and let other people decide.

>>15650564
B
I run up the stairs and shout
>There's a fire everyone get out of here
Then I call 911
Then I run back to my office and try to save anything critical (if there's anything critical at all)
Then I gtfo

>>15650602
True, but you are a Cosmic Entity and another, mightier Cosmic Entity has come to consume you. You COULD defeat him, but only by doing something heinous.

So , yes, it's about survival.Fight or Flight, and without doing something heinous, you cannot succeed at doing either.

You know this because of your cosmic knowledge.

>>15650652
>You know this because of your cosmic knowledge.

Are we omniscient?

>>15650652
You are presupposing that there is only one way to fight, now? There is still a lot more to do than fight or flight, but your persistence in arbitrarily disallowing choice is undermining your scenario.

>>15650444
That's nice, but I happen to be deaf.

Guess they kidnapped the wrong person for their little morality play, eh?

>>15650693
The rival god can detect you as long as you remain in your universe.
If you leave your universe then your subjects (all living things) will die instantly.
As the rival god's powers exceed your own you cannot create a barrier that he cannot surpass.

>>15650683
No "omni" anything.
Just very COSMIC knowledgeable.
You know, limited precognition, the works. You're MIGHTY but not omnipotent.

And you're facing an opponent somewhat above you, in terms of scope. You've evaluated your options and you know your options.

>>15650693
Well, that's the point, no?
Whatever you can do, he can do better.

Unless you do the mentioned solution.

It's mathematics.

He has a 5 and you're a 4.

You cant beat his 5 until you empower yourself with your creation's might to become a 6.

Unless you can become a 6, you cannot defeat him in any meaningful way.

>>15650728
Suddenly remembering your deafness, you also suddenly notice words painted onto the walls, describing the situation that you are in, as well as your dilemma.

>>15650735
This does not in any way address the issue of arbitrary, reasonless constraints while adding additional arbitrary, reasonless constraints to limit choices already proposed.

Now you're just railroading. You only want one outcome and you already have it chosen.

>>15650652
So we're omniscient then?

Are there are other deities, and do I know where deities came from?


Also:
A lot of people would make one of the two decisions if they weren't presented as a closed question.
Give the scenario, list the things and see what people do.
For instance, instead of the OP's question:

You are a lvl 1 dude, leaving your village in the valley for the city, as a passenger on a small traders cart which is in a small trade caravan with a handful of guards. As you leave the valley you see a moderatly sized orc warband marching towards your village, it looks to be about as far from your village as you are.

What do?


See how the options people choose will still boil down, but its why the picked and how they fluff it that are wildly different, and they can feel and be more in control of their actions. Not only that, you're not setting yourself up in expectation of a binary answer to get all wound up over when you don't get one.

Don't try to constrain people, and then they'll pick more sensible things.

Real Paladins take options C. Save everyone, don't die, save more people later as they get into trouble.

>>15650776
Well, he was not me, but the whole scenario relies on the fact that you cannot defeat him without doing something horrible to empower yourself.

You can choose to lose and let yourself be consumed for the sake of your little creations- he has no interest in them.

>>15650767
Negative. The walls are featureless and bare, as stated. Make your decision and stick with it. If you're going to do tortureporn, at least make it consistent.

>>15650776
>want an outcome
Nope, I want a choice.

Being the god of your universe you are linked to it. If you leave it then everything dies.

Since the encroaching god is more powerful, you have no way to stop him without consuming your subjects.

>>15650783
Just because you take an option does not necessarily mean that you have the capability to carry it out.

>>15650808
Okay.

The walls are featureless and bare and as >>15650316 stated you are a NORMAL human being. That means you are not blind or deaf or have any other unusual handicaps.

You have crap on your hand, and you don't think you'll be able to defecate again.

>>15650819
I was just about to say that.

Just because you CHOOSE something doesnt mean you have the possibility to carry it out.

In fact, being irresponsible with your choices might mean there is more suffering in the end.

If there's two options presented, it usually means that they have the BEST chance of succeeding.

Are there witnesses?

Because B all the way.
Then kill the witnesses.

>>15650749
Then we cannot succeed. If we are cosmicly intelligent but he is cosmic+1 intelligent, then it is only plausible that he will succeed in killing everyone first to stop his downfall. If he does not, then it is obvious that he does not have superior intellect or is not actually an evil counterpart. In this case, it is plausible that he can be reasoned with or fooled.

As well, if we are mightily powerful and have the potential to become a minimum of might+2, possibly more if we highlander our supposed counterpart, it is entirely possible that we can undo or cosmically retcon any actions we take. This situation implies there is no accountability, so again any action we take is only based on our ability and no other concerns.

>>15650783
Real Paladins try for option C, the best Paladins live to take it again.

>>15650735
>>15650749
1. Don't ever suppose you've thought of everything we can think of, because you won't have done - this just leaves you open to having to begrudgingly change your mind, or arbitrarily disallow choices.

2. Why can't I eat the other deity's underlings/convert then?

3. If I can't leave my universe, can the other leave his own? If not, how does this fight happen?

4. What stops me from finding a way to make someone else able to become a 6? Or merge with an underling or another deity who is a 4+ to create someone with power to defeat the other deity?

5. Why not "be a "5" so it would be a draw? What would happen then?

6. Why can't the other guy consume all his stuff and become a 7 or something?

I return to this thread, some time later, to find the same fags still wanking and presenting logical fallacy.

Stay classy negative-fags.

>>15650846
So, you're implying that my deafness makes me less than human? Aside from assholes like you fucking with me, I feel pretty normal. Or that am I healed of my deafness when they put me in here?

>>15650851
No it doesn't. It means those two are the ones the people attempting to manipulate you want you to take.

>>15650937
This. Take dirgible's scenario for example. It becomes less a situation about what you chose and more about controlling and forcing accountability to the person posing the scenario.

>>15650918
>NORMAL human being. That means you are not blind or deaf or have any other unusual handicaps.
Where do I say 'less than human'? You're normal. You also have no unusual gifts.

>>15650958
You're free to leave the room to seek out justice, but then the person will die. Bringing their killers to justice wont bring them back to life.

>>15650453
In an instant, I use my cosmic powers to give all of my creations an understanding of the current situation, and pose a choice to them. Join with me, or do not.

>>15651017
You just HAD to say it, didn't you ?

>>15651063
>red hair and blue eyes
I said NORMAL.

>>15651096

>Your group plays at the DM's house.
>He asks that everyone either brings drinks or snacks.

Do you bring drinks or snacks.

>>15651133
Both.

>>15651156
Your DM and the rest of the group thank you for your generosity.

>>15651133
I bring both. But first I ask the DM and players what they would like. I also bring a couple of trays, a small folding table, bowls, and wet-wipes. And a plastic cover for the DM's table.

>>15651168
Begone, creature ! You are not of this world !

>>15651133
I am the DM.

>>15651200
BUT THERE ARE SO MANY FLAVORS OF CHEETOS TO CHOOSE FROM

>>15651217
Wait, hold the fucking phone! They make cheetos in different flavors now? Why didn't anyone tell me?

What have I been doing with my life?

>OP asks "Coke or Pepsi?"
>Everyone in the thread replies with "I like to wear a fedora."

>>15651251
Or Sprite or Fanta or I'm unable to drink carbonated drinks.

>>15651133

Hay guis I got the drink, that means I get all the snacks I want right?

>>15651251
see
>>15650024

So, RC Cola. The goddamn Royal Crown is in the house.

>>15651240
As usual, Japan takes the cake for unusual flavors.

They have strawberry and chocolate cheetos.

>>15651280
>>15651281
nerd mind!

>>15651240
Yeah bro.

Flaming Hot
Baked
Jalepeno
White Cheddar

And there's more I see every now and then, but haven't really tried.

>>15651286
I... Its like I'm kind of repulsed, but on the other hand I really must know what they taste like. This feels so wrong it is right.

>>15651272
>>15651281
Yeah, I like banofee pie as well.

>>15651280
DAMNIT BILLY, THAT'S JUST DARK CARBONATED WATER.

I BROUGHT DEEP DISH
BRO 1 BOUGHT LIQUOR
AND THE DM IS LETTING US USE HIS APT

QUIT JERKING US AROUND

>>15651323
banana+coffee > banana+toffee.

But really, either.

B. Moral fags are wrong, the world is rather grimdark and I'd rather wring what enjoyment out of it that I can than sacrifice myself with A or go full retard with an option C.

A real man never accepts A or B as an option. Not when there are innocent lives on the line! You can talk about fate all day long. You can tell me some of these people are going to die because the powers that be have ruled it so. But I'll take that, crumple it up, and throw it back in your face. A real man fights fate when it turns on him! A real man doesn't take your pre-written responses! A real man takes your destiny and he shoves his fist right up its ass!

Just who the hell do you think we are!?

http://xkcd.com/895/
teaching physics = discussing hypotheticals in /tg

>>15648474
>>15650059
OP here, and i still approve of this and this and a couple others, but jesus christ. I leave for a few hours and this becomes a debate on whether or not binary choices even exist What the fuck?

>>15652000
see
>>15649551

Not that aggressive, but yeah. This is /tg/, foregone conclusion.

>>15651721
Hotblood will not save you from the inevitable end of all things.

>>15652067

Bring it on, then. Bring me the end of all things! You would say we can accept it and do nothing, or try to escape it. I say we fight! Stand our ground! You call it the end of all things, I say I'm not quite done yet. So just try and end me. I welcome it!

>>15652067
I have yet to see this ever be true.

>>15652205
Because the end is yet to come. You will most likely not see it, but if you do you will only see it once.

>>15652255

Yeah. Because when it gets a load of us, it turns tail and hits the ground running.

>>15652291
It cannot turn, it does not move it is merely a destination that everything cannot help but approach.

>>15652393
Monopoles don't exist, brah. Even gravitons exist on a spectrum.

>>15652439
Everything decays, the arrow of time points only towards oblivion.

>>15652519
Are you brain-saging the thread with GOTH POETRY?

You...you scoundrel! Cad! Bounder!

>>15652552
Moralfag threads are not exempt from the rot. BEAR WITNESS TO THIS THREAD, THIS BOARD, THIS SITE OF SHIT POSTS AND KNOW DESPAIR. But then know true tranquillity as you become nothing.

>>15648440
>I pull a batman and save both ferries.
I pull a Punisher and shoot the Joker in the skull from a quarter mile away with a sniper rifle. Fuck Batman, he plays with problems. Frank Castle solves them.

this is why we can't have nice threads

>>15652798
I don't know about you, but this thread made me laugh until my sides hurt. I'm using at least 1/3 of this as derpfodder in my running campaign.