Morality Consistency

[LightNovelNovice]

I've had some ideas for "Dungeon Core" type narratives, but one issue that I keep running into is wanting to have both the violent intensity of man versus monster *and* the more peaceful diplomacy between sentient monsters and human kind.

My question isn't how to mesh the two, the question is if it should be done?

Plenty of readers seem to prefer only one of kind of moral compass in a story, and I worry somehow blending (or even having rival protagonists) could turn away readers who are pickier.
Anyone have experience with handling morally opposed characters in an elegant way?

 

[J_Chemist]

If they're in a party together and are moral polar opposites, you need to have a good reason why they continue to put up with one another. Nothing flimsy but something concrete that can hold up after multiple rounds of headbutting.

Then, you want to have the balance. A win here, a win there. A conversation here or there. A couple arguments over what is right, but nothing excessive. Then your boiling point or a serious confliction where the two sides need to make a serious decision that one must give ground on. That moment will be your window to bond the characters and develop the "understanding" between them. That "understanding" in essence is the "I don't agree with you, but I'll fight with you".

After that, it's just a matter of banter, the back and forth, occasional tension, and the slow development of the characters growing on each other and becoming pals despite their differences.

Or you do the opposite and make them absolutely loathe each other the entire time and fight about it non-stop. There's that too.

Edit: If you want to think about it in a different way, consider DND/tabletop games. You get people of all types at a table but they have to accomplish an objective. The party is typically all sorts of fucked but they figure it out and it's generally pretty fun along the way. Don't over complicate it.

 

[LightNovelNovice]

If they're in a party together and are moral polar opposites, you need to have a good reason why they continue to put up with one another. Nothing flimsy but something concrete that can hold up after multiple rounds of headbutting.

Then, you want to have the balance. A win here, a win there. A conversation here or there. A couple arguments over what is right, but nothing excessive. Then your boiling point or a serious confliction where the two sides need to make a serious decision that one must give ground on. That moment will be your window to bond the characters and develop the "understanding" between them. That "understanding" in essence is the "I don't agree with you, but I'll fight with you".

After that, it's just a matter of banter, the back and forth, occasional tension, and the slow development of the characters growing on each other and becoming pals despite their differences.

Or you do the opposite and make them absolutely loathe each other the entire time and fight about it non-stop. There's that too.

To be honest the two protagonists are very distant (think across a few portals worth of distance) so they don't interact directly for a good while in the story. I basically have two protagonists with similar abilities but different morals and motives.

 

[J_Chemist]

Then you're going to have a singular moment when they come together that's going to be your "breaking point". I have a similar ordeal going to happen multiple times in my own story and the meeting moment is where you make your money.

How you define that moment will set the future of your book. You can either do it gently by having them sit in the same room and have a conversation, have them be introduced to one another in some fashion by a higher "entity" (king, god, etc), or you rip off the bandaid and put a problem in front of them. There's a couple different ways you can do it beyond those as well but it's honestly up to you, the theme and situations within your novel, and how flashy you want to be with it.

Just, again, don't get too over complicated with it. We want to see them clash and butt heads. Not kill each other over it or ruin the plot because someone can't get their shit together.

 

[Chaos_Sinner777]

I'm sure it can work. The relationship ideal for Dungeons and Adventurers is a symbiotic one. They can grow stronger from battling each other, but no need to be rude about it, or only have hostility. Challenging Adventurers seriously when they run the Dungeon is not only okay, but basically necessary for their own growth. That does not mean that there is no ground for the two to stand side by side on. Working together against greater outside threats, diplomacy to determine the rules of engagement or what counts as "fair play", even just beneficial trade agreements to gain special resources both groups can use to their own advantage. Lotta options.

 

[Vnator]

I've had some ideas for "Dungeon Core" type narratives, but one issue that I keep running into is wanting to have both the violent intensity of man versus monster *and* the more peaceful diplomacy between sentient monsters and human kind.

My question isn't how to mesh the two, the question is if it should be done?

Plenty of readers seem to prefer only one of kind of moral compass in a story, and I worry somehow blending (or even having rival protagonists) could turn away readers who are pickier.
Anyone have experience with handling morally opposed characters in an elegant way?

Depends on how the two groups interact. It could be that some monsters or some dungeon cores are just murderous and have no concept of diplomacy, while others do and humans try to determine which a core/monster falls under before jumping to fighting.

Or if they're teamed up, it could be out of necessity and the human has to teach diplomacy as being a viable option instead of kill everything that disagrees with you.

Either way, good luck!

 

[BlackKnightX]

Thematically, this is a nice exploration of theme. You consider the topic from many sides, and that can be really interesting if done well. The keyword is done well. It comes to the execution in the end. I often don't like Tsundere characters as much—I find them quite annoying—but some stories handle the Tsundere so well I can't help but love them. That goes to show that it doesn't matter what you do, as long as you do it well.

 

[ReadLight]

In wilds beyond they speak your name with reverence and regret,
For none could tame our savage souls yet you the challenge met,
Under palest watch, you taught, we changed, base instincts were redeemed,
A world you gave to bug and beast as they had never dreamed.

Elegy for Hallownest

Copy and pasted that cuz I think Hollow Knight presents an interesting way of meeting your requirements.

There are bugs. Bugs are wild beasts that act on instincts.

There's a Wrym, a higher being that build a kingdom called Hallownest. Bugs who live in there will gain higher intelligence and establish society.

Outside Hallownest, the savagery persists.

Opposing forces can even rob the citizens in Hallownest of their higher thoughts, and trun them back to beasts.

To have both sides of the moral compass, one way is to establish zones in your world where each compass would reside.

That sounds pretty elegant to me.

 

[RepresentingDesire]

I've had some ideas for "Dungeon Core" type narratives, but one issue that I keep running into is wanting to have both the violent intensity of man versus monster *and* the more peaceful diplomacy between sentient monsters and human kind.

My question isn't how to mesh the two, the question is if it should be done?

Plenty of readers seem to prefer only one of kind of moral compass in a story, and I worry somehow blending (or even having rival protagonists) could turn away readers who are pickier.
Anyone have experience with handling morally opposed characters in an elegant way?

Maybe just use factions, one could be hostile another one isn`t, because I personally don't know reason why monsters should be at peace or war with all of mankind at once, you have either a scenario were all human kingdoms are in a alliance, they could even then still betray each other, or you just have different kingdom. Not every organisation, religion and nation have the same views or the same policies.
Now I wonder about what moral compass you are talking, it's just if they want to conquer the humans ,for whatever reason, or don't want to and just live in peace with them. Of course what is with the other factions? They still could wage war for some reason ,there's no reason that couldn't start a war.
I feel like you should just make a world and decide the tone -You know what a tone is, right?- you desire.
Most people want simple stories where they don’t need to think, I personally prefer more complex stories because they don't feel as samey or boring than simplific stories.

 

[LightNovelNovice]

Maybe just use factions, one could be hostile another one isn`t, because I personally don't know reason why monsters should be at peace or war with all of mankind at once, you have either a scenario were all human kingdoms are in a alliance, they could even then still betray each other, or you just have different kingdom. Not every organisation, religion and nation have the same views or the same policies.
Now I wonder about what moral compass you are talking, it's just if they want to conquer the humans ,for whatever reason, or don't want to and just live in peace with them. Of course what is with the other factions? They still could wage war for some reason ,there's no reason that couldn't start a war.
I feel like you should just make a world and decide the tone -You know what a tone is, right?- you desire.
Most people want simple stories where they don’t need to think, I personally prefer more complex stories because they don't feel as samey or boring than simplific stories.

For full transparency, I have two creatures with the same abilities that enable them to really change the way the world works around them, but one of them is going to be born from evil/greed/malice, and the other is born from hope/generosity/love.

 

[RepresentingDesire]

For full transparency, I have two creatures with the same abilities that enable them to really change the way the world works around them, but one of them is going to be born from evil/greed/malice, and the other is born from hope/generosity/love.

Well the both are unquestionably enemies of the world, that one with generosity makes a world where someone always gives something away and the other world where everybody tries to take something, if we consider that most things are profit based and they both resemble a absolute, I literally don't know how one of them could be considered "good" in the ways of morality I know.

 

[ThrillingHuman]

I've had some ideas for "Dungeon Core" type narratives, but one issue that I keep running into is wanting to have both the violent intensity of man versus monster *and* the more peaceful diplomacy between sentient monsters and human kind.

My question isn't how to mesh the two, the question is if it should be done?

Plenty of readers seem to prefer only one of kind of moral compass in a story, and I worry somehow blending (or even having rival protagonists) could turn away readers who are pickier.
Anyone have experience with handling morally opposed characters in an elegant way?

War is extension of diplomacy. Irl this happens all the time. What's the problem?

Well the both are unquestionably enemies of the world, that one with generosity makes a world where someone always gives something away and the other world where everybody tries to take something, if we consider that most things are profit based and they both resemble a absolute, I literally don't know how one of them could be considered "good" in the ways of morality I know.

Their existence ends the moment one wins. There cannot be generocity without greed, hope without despair, love without malice.

 

[CupcakeNinja]

I've had some ideas for "Dungeon Core" type narratives, but one issue that I keep running into is wanting to have both the violent intensity of man versus monster *and* the more peaceful diplomacy between sentient monsters and human kind.

My question isn't how to mesh the two, the question is if it should be done?

Plenty of readers seem to prefer only one of kind of moral compass in a story, and I worry somehow blending (or even having rival protagonists) could turn away readers who are pickier.
Anyone have experience with handling morally opposed characters in an elegant way?

I mean yeah that would totally work. Pick one species of monster that cant be redeemed or reasoned with and make them the man v monster plot point. The others, make them grey areas. Think Witcher, in a way. Not all monsters deserve to die, just like how not all humans deserve to live.

But one race is just full of assholes. Think Frieren and the demons.