Re: Corruption of power
Power corrupts is a cliche, but like most cliches it is based upon a general truth. Apologies to the more sensitive types out there whose feelings may be hurt by this, but the cold hard fact is that many people are only altruistic for selfish reasons.
If you are powerless, behaving virtuously gives you a sense of empowerment. On the flip side, if you are powerful, you are less likely to face consequences for your moral lapses. Furthermore, once you begin to accrue power, you show up on the "radar" of other power-seekers...may of whom are unscrupulous and aggressive. Clinging to principles can often lead to a loss of power...so congrats, you got just enough power to be angerous, and then were promptly quashed by a truly ruthless bastard because you cling to your ethics.
Therefore, otherwise scrupulous people allow themselves small, pragmatic lapses to benefit their advancement...making the next lapse easier..etcetera.
Equally often, morality and ethics are themselves used as a means to power. Rhetorically and politically, to attract like minds to your banner, and restrict the actions of your rivals.
There is a pretty good argument to be made that any truly ethical person would eschew wordly power .If superhuman powers were thrust upon such a man, he may very well simply use them to remain secluded from worldly matters.
Of course, these are exactly the sorts of people who can end up having huge impact on worldy affairs by virtue of the example their code of ethics can set for others. Which, of course, makes them a threat to the powerful....round and round.
A lawful evil general finds his kingdom under attack, while a weak boy king holds the throne. The general usurps power, imprisoning the lad, and ruling by decree. Dissidents , including those whose race or religion matches the warring neigbour, are imprisoned or banished. Spies go out to watch the populace, and young men are drafted against their will.The treasury is depleted to finance mercenaries .What do you call this man? Well, in his mind , he is probably a PATRIOT.He is protecting his nation for the greater good, as he sees it.
Now, take this moral relativism one more step. What if the general saw the weak young king as a handicap, but did not wish to wait for an enemy to attack? What if the general hired foreign assassins to stage an attack and blame it on the kingdom next door? His motivations could well be the same...
Frankly, when dealing with powerful characters, any moral dilemmas you can throw in their path are a win-win situation. It forces the players and the GM to examine the roleplaying motivations of the group, and can restrain to mighty .I applaud your thoughtful posts on the subject, one and all.
