Title says it all. How would you place the Princes in terms of evilness. Considering it's not possible to have a scale, I have categories for each ''evil level''. Just place the Princes in one of each. Judge them according to the lore.

Very Good: Tendency to do mostly good acts. Very little history of evil actions.

Good: Tendency towards good acts, but has a known history of evil actions.

Neutral: Tendency to mostly do acts that aren't good or evil.

Aligned Neutral: Tendency to do good and evil acts that balance out each other in the end.

Evil: Tendency towards evil acts, but has a known history of good actions.

Very Evil: Tendency to do mostly evil acts. Very little history of good actions.


So, how would you place them?

What about Sheogorath, who doesn't tend to do anything predictable, and just acts completely on his whims?

Also, where would you place "makes it rain flaming dog corpses" on a good/evil scale?

Sheogorath in my opinion would be neutral. He does acts that aren't really good or evil. Scaring the crap out of a bunch of superstitious Khajiit just for the kicks is hardly evil. He just does crazy stuff from what I know. Neutral for him.

None at all. All Daedra Lords are beyond these "mortal" comprehension of "good or evil". They do what their sphere allow them to do.

Doesn't make much sense. We're judging them from a mortal perception, of course they can fit in categories such as good and evil. Having someone push a good man to do the unthinkable just because you don't like the fact that man is too good and honorable is evil. No arguments there.

All daedric princes are chaotic evil, as are the aedra and every mortal.

If that doesn't float your boat, stop trying to hammer antiquated notions of Manichean morality into a universe designed almost explicitly to be alien.

What makes someone(or something) such as Azura ''chaotic evil''?

Problem here is how mortals has a tendency to switch to what is good and what is bad to their own benefit. This include with the Divines. Their viewpoint would never match closely as to how the Daedra or the Divine simply because they are either too alien for the mortal to understand or they are the just a basic concept of live in Mundus. Pushing a man isn't a good example of that at all.

Azura is a sphere of dawn and dusk. It show its "good side" while manipulating anyone or anything to see fit to it own standard.

Pushing a man and forcing him to kill someone just because he is too good and honorable for your own taste isn't an example of an evil action? Sounds pretty evil to me. I agree that there are actions that cannot be categorized because of the motivations behind them, but enjoying yourself in the suffering is pretty evil by mortal standards, no matter your religion.

Because she follows her own whim and does so purely pragmatically. That is basically D&D's definition of chaotic evil (not stupid evil or chaotic stupid).



We haven't even agreed on what's good or evil from a secular standpoint in the real world. In fantasy, if it's at all realistic, all good is what benefits me and all evil is what doesn't. The Yokudan even have a word, "tobr'a," meaning "useless therefore evil."

Molag Bal, daedric prince of domination, and therefore, prince of conquest. Tiber Septim conquered the whole of Tamriel, was that evil? Boethiah engourages mortals to be strong and independent, is this evil? If one is weaving a web of murder and deceit for what he views as the greater good (something along the lines of overthrowing their opressors) is this evil? Mephala, anybody? Boethiah loves competition; the base of many governments economies, is this evil?

All of the princes spheres have potential 'evil' and potential 'good' applications, if we want to be that black and white about it.

Besides, the D&D template doesn't dictate all of humanities view of morality; what is pure evil to one may be an ultimate good to another.

That mortal to mortal point of view. This kind of stuff is a grain of salt in the view of these Daedria Lord. If ya have to kill that honorable man, its because it is to see if ya willing to show dominate over some guy that cry over his dead wife from a siege of Kvatch and just cry over it for the rest of his life.

And this is precisely what I am saying. All Daedric Princes do actions that benefit their own agenda. Mortals are nothing more than their plaything but in the end, to the things they do to mortal happen to be good or evil. Azura had you slay a group of vampires who were once her worshipers because she couldn't bear their suffering anymore and wanted them to rest in peace. Someone like Molag for example, likely wouldn't give a damn of mortals suffering, he'd probably even enjoy it. Azura wanting the best for her followers by giving them peace would be considered a good action whereas Molag telling you to go mess up someone's life would be considered an evil action. Azura was the quickest example I could give. A more simple thing would be, I offer you a gift because I want you to be happy, that's an act of goodwill.




There are actions that cannot be categorized, that is true. That's why I have a ''neutral'' section. Actions that cannot be considered really good or evil. Vengeance, for example, wouldn't really be considered ''evil''. Even the in-game loading screens have something saying ''Azura is one of the few Princes not considered evil''.

A pathological serial killer may think his murders are good, or a rapist may think that the victim deserved it. These two likely would view Molag Bal as an ultimate force of good. I may disagree with this, but that doesn't make me right.

She says she wants you to kill these vampires to end their suffering. Anyone can say anything, and Azura's honeyed words belie her true nature.

In all honesty, would you consider the acts of the serial killer good or evil? I mean, hell, John Wayne Gacy murdered and [censored] people because it made him feel powerful and gave him a sense of domination over his victims. Would you not consider that evil?

Edit: The reason I made this thread this thread was because I wanted to know where most people would categorize the Princes in terms of morality. If you guys don't have an opinion on the matter, it's okay. I'm looking for people who do have an opinion. This thread wasn't made for a debate over the inherent nature of human morality.

I'll probably later regret getting into this, but it's Molag Bal's desire to corrupt and enslave that makes him seen as evil. Yes, Tiber Septim was a prime example of the Dragon's and Dragonborn's drive to dominate others, but unlike Alduin, he didn't brutally enslave or oppress those whom he gained power over. His empire, in fact, banned the practice of enslaving others. Yes, some of them do seem to have alien moralities, but some are less alien than others.

It could be argued that Sheogorath and Peryite also corrupt, but they view madness and disease, respectively, not as curses, but as blessings. Molag Bal, on the other hand, seems to be much more insistent that he's not trying to do anything that he'd consider "good" even if we are going by the idea that he may think of it differently than mortals. He's not trying to make some philosophical statement of how horrible the world is, he's not trying to give people his idea of "help". Whatever his own idea of morality is, it can be classified in mortal terms as "evil". In fact, I imagine most beings that would be considered evil didn't consider themselves to be evil.

In TES it's good because it's either freeing the soul from the material prison or freeing the soul from a middle-class body to reincarnate as something potentially better.

No, I wouldn't.

But if you want my opinion on the matter...

All chaotic evil. The Daedra, as well as Aedra, act only out of their own interest. Nirn was created because they felt like creating it, not because they wanted to create the Elfonhoy and their descendants.

Which is why I made this thread. I want you to class them according to YOUR point of view. Morality is highly subjective and something good for someone, might be considered evil for the other. I want your input on the matter. I want to know where most people would categorize the Princes according to their actions. I don't want to put an objective definition to good and evil, in most cases(but not all), it's entirely subjective. If you don't want to put them under any category or if you don't have an opinion on the matter, that's fine. I'm not here to discuss whether your view of good and evil is wrong or right. Mostly there are two things that matter. Your opinion, and the general opinion. IE: What is considered good and evil by your standards and by people's standards according to you.

Well, then, do you consider the deed Azura made you perform good or evil?

That's what I mean. They don't consider any action they do to be evil. My problem is saying in 'mortal' terms, because there isn't a single opinion on morality common on Nirn or Earth, so saying one is good and another is evil is subjective. Molag Bal, in and of himself is evil in my book. But his sphere is not, and he is his sphere.

Mmmh.. I don't have the chaotic evil option. I wanted to avoid these D&D things. Guess the closest is Neutral.

The problem is that you can't assign the good/evil concept to a being without either first defining good or evil, which is still a hotly debated philosophical snafu, or defining these as what or not what said being would do. Most Tamrielans considering Azura good is simply their not having too much a beef with Azura's sphere being twilight and their not caring how badly she [censored] the Dunmer.

And for the 3rd time, I want you to judge them according to your opinion. Not according to some objective philosophical standpoint that doesn't exist. I want to know where you would place the Princes according to the lore.

Thing about this is that this is basically pigeonholing concept and self interest to fit into what mortal consider "good" and "evil".

Like Azura for example. In all, Azura does have the power to cure the vampirism for the worshiper but Azura choose to kill them off; maybe because they fail Azura for becoming monster or Azura know it can get more worshiper and the one that became of vampire is not worth its time. That doesn't make Azura good or evil; that just make Azura look like an ass.

Concept wise, is domination good or bad? How about love? Or Order? Or time itself?