Heart of cruelty = Sadist?

[Persell]

Just wondering everyones opinion, do you picture heart of cruelty as a sadist, or someone who has no scruples and will do whatever needed without regard to feeling?


In other words, will the exalt who is underoing the limit break go out of his / her way to cause pain? Or, if under the influence, but not confronted with any challenges, will do nothing?

 

[Vanman]

Just wondering everyones opinion, do you picture heart of cruelty as a sadist, or someone who has no scruples and will do whatever needed without regard to feeling?

Do you mean Deliberate Cruelty? Or Heart of Flint?


To me - and this is just my take on this, obviously - Deliberate cruelty doesn't necessarily mean sadist. You don't have to be a sadist to be cruel. There are other ways of being cruel - vicious mocking, deliberate and unrelenting ridicule, and so on. That being said, causing pain is definitely an avenue to cruelty, and a character suffering from this limit break would not, in my eyes, hesitate to cause a little - or, for that matter, a lot - of pain. As the book says, someone under this limit break would torture and mutilate prisoners simply to sow terror, and fear is more important than respect.


Heart of Flint, on the other hand, is more the no scruples, do whatever it takes to get the job done sort of break. This character wouldn't go out of his way to sow pain, but if breaking a leg or two - or twenty - will facilitate his mission, he'll do it, with no regard to the pain that causes. As long as it gets the job done, it's the course of action he will take.

In other words, will the exalt who is underoing the limit break go out of his / her way to cause pain? Or, if under the influence, but not confronted with any challenges, will do nothing?

Under Deliberate Cruelty, I think the character would be more apt to cause pain - particularly if it sowed terror and caused the masses to huddle, pissing in their pants. If he wasn't confronted with any challenges, he would look for ways to inflict cruelty on those around him. Under Heart of Flint, he would be more apt to do nothing, as it doesn't affect his mission or what he's trying to accomplish.


Just my two cents....

 

[Flagg]

To me - and this is just my take on this, obviously - Deliberate cruelty doesn't necessarily mean sadist. You don't have to be a sadist to be cruel.

I think you're splitting hairs here. Any person who is deliberately cruel could reasonably be called sadistic.


-S

 

[Vanman]

I think you're splitting hairs here. Any person who is deliberately cruel could reasonably be called sadistic.

You're right. I'm wrong. I should have looked up the definition of sadism before I answered the question. Thanks for putting me straight.


VeRyk, what Still said.