
Originally Posted by
Bolivar
To stop this great thread from falling into oblivion, I wanna suggest a new issue, about Matsuno's "code of ethics" on Ivalice's code of ethics.
Spoilers!
In the Ivalice gams so far, it has been the intention that none of the characters are entirely good nor wholly evil. In FFT, characters who do horrible things (Funeral, Wiegraf in Ch. 1, Delita) believe that they are really doing what's best for society. In FFXII, you see this, and the protagonists aren't necessarily good, as most of them are motivated by revenge.
But I gotta say, in both games, there are indeed characters who are purely evil. Vormav for example. He just wants to resurrect demons and unleash all hell upon the world (to put it bluntly). Vayne has killed his 2 older brothers, his father, and has screwed over kingdoms for the sole purpose of his power-hungry egoism. In lierature/stories (and in real life, to me atleast) doing harm to one's brothers (or sisters) is an indicator that the person cannot be trusted/is in fact evil. Bergan is also a prime example in that he (for no reason, not even ordered to) starts massacring (sp?) the Kiltias of Mt. Bur-Omisace, even slaying the Gran Kiltias. I mean wtf. The dude does it for the sole fact of allowing Vayne to have his ascendancy so they can have "power".
And I would have to say in FFT (although i've not seen the creators explicitly state that FFXII's morality aim was the same goal for this) Ramza is completely good. He only believes in doing good to people, and goes as far as to stop those who have those same intentions but to do so with less than noble means. There couldn't be a holier character.
So I guess that's my rant, that although the world of Ivalice's morality is intended to be ambiguous, it doesn't live up to that 100%. But it does a damn good job of it for the most part.