Help me rank the leaders from Goodest to Evilest (I know, I made those adjectives up, but at least the spellchecker doesn't complain about Evilest :p)

I'm doing it for my Broader Alignment mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6691068), but this can just be a fun exercise as well. :D

Good as they get
Basium
Sabathiel
Capria
Cardith
Varn
Einion
Ethne
Garrim
Beeri
Arendel
Arturus
Kandros
Dain
Rhoanna
Falamar
Amelanchier
Sandalphon
-----------
Cassiel
-----------
Thessa
Tasunke
Valledia
Hannah
Mahala
Auric
Keelyn
Sheelba
Charadon
Jonas
Perpentach
Faeryl
Flauros
Alexis
Os-Gabella
Tebryn
Hyborem
Eviler than Skeletor

My doubts here are mostly on the ranks of the Goods here, my intuition tells me that Cardith should be higher on my list than he is, and so should probably Ethne and Einion as well. Basium might even be lower on the list since he is feared by everyone because of his aggressiveness and his blunt methods.
I'm also unsure about pretty much all the neutrals. In this list above, I think I have too many above Cassiel.
As for the Evils, Auric should be correct I believe since Mulcarn is supposed to be the least evil of the evil gods. Sheelba and Mahala are both trying to civilize their barbarian civs. Keelyn and Perpentach don't strike me as evil by intent, but rather by disregard of good deeds and general immorality.
Charadon might be lower on the list, but his evil is mostly based on survival of the fittest. Cruel, yes, but possibly fair in his own wicked ways.
The last 5 before Hyborem I am unsure of where they should fit too.


Notes:
When you make your list, you can add a rank value to them as well if you like. Negative for evil.

Sabathiel
Capria
Varn
Ethne
Einion
Basium
Garrim
Beeri
Cardith
Arendel
Falamar
Rhoanna
Arturus
Kandros
Dain
Thessa
Sandalphon
-----------
Cassiel
-----------
Amelanchier
Tasunke
Valledia
Hannah
Auric
Mahala
Sheelba
Keelyn
Perpentach
Jonas
Flauros
Charadon
Faeryl
Alexis
Os-Gabella
Tebryn
Hyborem


Is what I'd say. Falamar and Rhoanna seem much less evil than you had them (especially Falamar) and Amelanchier is a pretty ruthless guy from his pedia entry. Sandalphon would seem passive towards the world and I'd move him to the "gooder" side of the chart. I'd drop Hannah and Valledia since Hannah is born of the Overlords and very chaotic while Valledia is the epitome of "the ends justify the means". I'd also drop Flauros a notch since even Jonas treats his people well.

One who I'm not moving but who I'm uncertain about is Faeryl. She is evil but I don't think she deserves to be so low on the list.

Umm... aren't leaders listed per evilness in the custom game selection screen?

There arent any evil or good... Only evil or neutral. :D

A lot of this depends on how you define Good. If good is really "good," then Einion and Ethne would be the top two and Basium would be much lower than Cassiel.

I guess the definition of "Anti-Evil" probably fits better. In that case I'd probably say:

Good as they get

Basium ~+400
Sabathiel ~+370
Capria ~ +330
Cardith ~ +320
Varn ~ +310
Einion ~+300
Ethne ~+290
Arendel ~+240
Garrim ~+175
Beeri ~+175

Arturus ~+150
Kandros ~+150
Dain ~+60
Rhoanna ~+50
Falamar ~+45
Amelanchier ~+20
Sandalphon ~+5
-----------
Cassiel ~0
-----------
Thessa ~-15
Tasunke ~-30
Valledia ~-60
Hannah ~-160


Mahala ~-175
Auric ~-180
Sheelba ~-200
Charadon ~-220
Jonas ~ -230
Faeryl ~-240
Keelyn ~-250
Perpentach ~-290
Flauros ~-310
Alexis ~-330
Os-Gabella ~-360
Tebryn ~ -360
Hyborem ~-400
Eviler than Skeletor




Hmm...I suppose you don't want to go even more extreme and create one scale for ethics and another scale for fanaticism, do you? Probably not.

Kael made a pretty good post about this, can someone find it?

Umm... aren't leaders listed per evilness in the custom game selection screen?

Kinda, but also not since they are sorted per civ as well.

I'd love Kael's input on this. Is there any old posts available? (As Ghandi says)

Your list makes alot of sense Magister, if we go by Anti-Evil (which I think Good is in this mod). I think Kael has said that quite often. Also, the Good and Evil labels (of the patron gods) have been set by the mortals in the world, same can be said about leaders in some sense.

@Grey Fox: thank you, you're right.

So I went into the leaders' XML, looking to find actual data on their stance. And to interpret them, I had to create a formula.
First, I thought, alignment. I decided to give good leaders a 5, neutrals a 0, evil folks -5.
Then, on religion, I decided that I was to judge them on the effect they had on leaders' alignment - which is, after all, how good/bad it makes them. Being that the AV is enough to make a leader bad, and the Order is the opposite, I gave them respectively a -5 and a 5. Empyrean and RoK, that change evil to neutral, I gave a 2,5, and conversely I assigned the CoE and OO a -2,5. The FoL I gave a 0.
But leaders also have varying attitudes towards them, which I decided to quantify as the specified value divided per ten, added to the basic value of that religion, both values positive for "good" religions, negative for "evil" religions. The FoL values I considered when positive a +, because it nonetheless could steer a leader away from the evil cults, when negative a -, for the opposite reason.

Example: Arturus is neutral (0), has a -20 for the CoE (2,5+2=4,5) and the AV (5+2=7). It sums to 16,5 on the side of good.

All clear? So, here's my ordered list:

28,5
Sabathiel
Capria

26
Varn

20
Basium

17,5
Ethne
Einion

16,5
Arturus
Kandros

11
Cardith

8,5
Garrim
Beeri

7,5
Arendel

2,5
Amelanchier
Thessa

1
Valledia
Dain

0
Cassiel
Tasunke
Rhoanna

-3,5
Sandalphon
Falamar

-5
Charadon
Mahala
Jonas
Sheelba
Auric

-8,5
Flauros

-11
Keelyn
Alexis

-16,5
Hannah

-21,5
Perpentach

-25
Faeryl

-28,5
Tebryn
Os-Gabella

-30
Hyborem

Of course this is much arbitrary, and liable to be improved upon by the more knowledgeable (things like BaseAttitude, AttitudeCompassionHigh/Low). Still, I offer you this as at least a starting formula.

(Note: agnostic leaders' opinion on the FoL I considered ininfluential).

Actually that is a good approach. If you toss in some modifiers for their flavors (military = evil, science = good? Dunno), and for the Diplomacy Levels which they require to declare war that might help break some of the ties.

I'd do it gladly tomorrow... but I'd need a reference on the diplomatic modifier, because I'm not solid about which ones come into play. I'm no modder, alas. (You, or anyone could give it a try!)

The military/scientific modifiers I'd say aren't really part of this specific equation: good leaders would research to finally build the Mercurian gate, evil leaders to bring Hyborem into Erebus. Same for military: the good to defend themselves/wipe out the evil, and vice versa.

EDIT: found good data in the Modders' guide. Now I only need an explanation to the explanation of iBadAttitude... :P

It is so hard to pin down who is good and who is evil in this world.

I don't think Cassiel makes a good "True Nuetral" litmus test. To me, he seems to be very much on the Good side of the line. Just because he or his people don't worship Gods does not make him just as prone to do evil things as he is to do good ones. Perhaps the Hippus would be better for the middle of the road?

While it is true that Keelyn and Perpentach do not pursue evil for evil's sake, we do know that they often inflict pain and humiliation upon people for no other reason than because it makes them happy.

Hyborem is more evil than Basium is good. They are not direct opposites.

The "Goodest" leader should be Ethne, and the "Evilest" leader should be Tebryn.

Cassiel is True Neutral in Erebus because good/evil is based on the Compact, with the gods opposing it being evil and the gods supporting it being good, as I understand. The odd thing is that Cassiel himself supports the Compact, but that the Grigori have no god...

Basically the Good angels wants to fight the evil angels, the compact was to stop the fighting through direct means. Cassiel thought this was too little so he rebelled to teach men to stay away from the gods fighting. Basium thought this was too much and rebelled to keep fighting. Mulcarn broke the compact when Bhaal fell, seeing as he had no opposition anymore.

Thewyrm, you're right. My calculation so far has taken into consideration only alignment and religion... and Cassiel is absolutely neutral there.

I'm gathering data like BaseAttitude, MaxWarRand and DogpileWarRand now, as well as AttitudeCompassionHigh/Low. Will see how to refine the thing (also favorite civics and their eventual relation to the compassion system will be factored).

Cassiel is True Neutral in Erebus because good/evil is based on the Compact, with the gods opposing it being evil and the gods supporting it being good, as I understand. The odd thing is that Cassiel himself supports the Compact, but that the Grigori have no god...

No, Evil are the gods who rebel against the One and seek to harm humanity. Good are the ones who fight Evil and try to protect humanity. Neutral are the ones who stay out of the conflict and stick to their original purpose. Still, the line between good and neutral is mostly man made, and can be unclear at times.


All the Evil gods willingly signed the compact. Although Mulcarn broke the compact (as did Basium and Hyborem later), most Evil gods are still supportive of it. They managed to get enough provisions in it that they can violate the spirit of the agreement but not the letter of the law, and so can use it to defend their actions.

Cassiel was opposed to such provisions. Although the compact was his idea, he did not think it went far enough and so chose to fall.

In FfH Good is mostly defined by being opposed to evil, not by the ethics of the leader. While Cassiel is one of the most ethical leaders, he is the least fanatical or partisan one. My good-evil spectrum was really an anti-evil-evil spectrum, in which case Cassiel should be neutral; in his view, either extreme is really evil and balance is good.

Actually Agares is probably one of the strongest supporters of the Compact. He doesn't want an open conflict. He wants to turn all the other angels to his side so they can restore the connection between creation and the One.

I don't think he minds that Hyborem is breaking the compact however. I think he is eagerly watching to see how that all turns out.

So I went into the leaders' XML, looking to find actual data on their stance. And to interpret them, I had to create a formula.
First, I thought, alignment. I decided to give good leaders a 5, neutrals a 0, evil folks -5.
Then, on religion, I decided that I was to judge them on the effect they had on leaders' alignment - which is, after all, how good/bad it makes them. Being that the AV is enough to make a leader bad, and the Order is the opposite, I gave them respectively a -5 and a 5. Empyrean and RoK, that change evil to neutral, I gave a 2,5, and conversely I assigned the CoE and OO a -2,5. The FoL I gave a 0.
But leaders also have varying attitudes towards them, which I decided to quantify as the specified value divided per ten, added to the basic value of that religion, both values positive for "good" religions, negative for "evil" religions. The FoL values I considered when positive a +, because it nonetheless could steer a leader away from the evil cults, when negative a -, for the opposite reason.

Example: Arturus is neutral (0), has a -20 for the CoE (2,5+2=4,5) and the AV (5+2=7). It sums to 16,5 on the side of good.

2 big problems with that:

1) I don't buy the connections between the alignment changes and how good the religions actually are being that strong. Off the top of my head I'd certainly call Empyrean more "good" than Order, for instance. And CoE, while kinda evil, is less so that Overlords.

2) The religion weights often don't make a lot of sense.

A list compiled this way gives an okay ballpark but some of the details are off. I mean, Varn and Basium that high? Above the Elohim leaders even?

In FFH I'm fairly sure that ''good'' basically means, ''is fighting evil'' and so I guess the amount of effort they put into, and how much they go out of their way, o crusade against the demons is just *how* good they are. It does say somewhere that although basium is ''good'', common people have trouble telling him apart from hyborem.

Well, "apathy is the greatest evil" could be said to apply in that case. The Elohim will offer shelter and whatnot, but don't much go out and proactively counter Evil. Thus they aren't nearly as good as Basium or Varn, who are both quite known to go on a rampage and demolish things which seem even slightly evil. So I would personally see them as more Good than the Elohim, in a FfH kinda way.

EDIT: @Sofista: iBadAttitude is multiplied by iAttitudeBadBonus to decide what the leader thinks of anyone who uses Death or Entropy Mana.

2 big problems with that:

1) I don't buy the connections between the alignment changes and how good the religions actually are being that strong. Off the top of my head I'd certainly call Empyrean more "good" than Order, for instance. And CoE, while kinda evil, is less so that Overlords.

We are talking FfH here. It's not Moral or Ethical goodness. It's who are fighting the Evil the most. Basically. And there we got Order on top.

Well, "apathy is the greatest evil" could be said to apply in that case. The Elohim will offer shelter and whatnot, but don't much go out and proactively counter Evil. Thus they aren't nearly as good as Basium or Varn, who are both quite known to go on a rampage and demolish things which seem even slightly evil. So I would personally see them as more Good than the Elohim, in a FfH kinda way.

EDIT: @Sofista: iBadAttitude is multiplied by iAttitudeBadBonus to decide what the leader thinks of anyone who uses Death or Entropy Mana.

I don't agree with that.As Basium can be seen as the opposite of Hyborem so is assumed to be the most "anti-evil" civ, Elohim can be seen as the opposite of the Sheaim which can be assumed to be less evil only compared to Hyborem.Elohim have the Hallowing of he Elohim which decreases the AC and at least from the lore is the civ which protects the holy places...they can be seen as some sort of guardians of Erebus.They are associated with Pacifism which certainly makes them less prone to fight evil civs than Bannor but as the intro says it seems to be the "most selfless" good civ paired with Mercurians.
Bannor instead is good becuase it is the bearer of a good ideology and for its fanatical fight against chaos; in the beginning of the mod Bannor had Clan of Embers and Doviello as worst enemies, so their theme is mostly directed against chaos than evil and their ideology is more based on the concept of order than goodwill

I think the Order of the first three is most likely

Basium - Came to Erebus just to fight Hyborem
Capria - Been through hell, hates demons (also better in game for random crusades with the spiritual trait)
Sabathiel - Angel of Order, leader of the bannor

For the last three:

Hyborem - trying to unite Erebus and Agares hell iirc
Os-gabella - Trying to end the world out of malice and hatred.
Tebryn - trying to end the world to save himself.

Everyone else slots in in between.

I believe Os-Gabella is actually trying to end the world because that is the only way to end her own, immortal, life.

True....but if she didn't hate her life she wouldn't try to end it :p

EDIT: @Sofista: iBadAttitude is multiplied by iAttitudeBadBonus to decide what the leader thinks of anyone who uses Death or Entropy Mana.

Thank you! Much appreciated.
Suggestion: you may wish to add the civics' compassion modifier to your manual.

2 big problems with that:

1) I don't buy the connections between the alignment changes and how good the religions actually are being that strong. Off the top of my head I'd certainly call Empyrean more "good" than Order, for instance. And CoE, while kinda evil, is less so that Overlords.

2) The religion weights often don't make a lot of sense.

A list compiled this way gives an okay ballpark but some of the details are off. I mean, Varn and Basium that high? Above the Elohim leaders even?

1)Alignment differences being given a 5, 0, -5 scale comes in handy with the evaluation of BasePeaceWeight as I describe below. I mean, an explicit "good" or "evil" label should actually matter when trying to calculate a leader's true alignment. Cardith's BasePeace 10 (top of the scale) yields him as much as his being "good", which, to me, makes sense. Symmetrically, Hyborem's 0 (bottom) mirrors his evilness.
On religion, eh, I'd also take Empyrean over the Order, but it's a personal matter really, and I had to stick to the FFH universe as closely as I could. The XML shows only the Elohim and Varn as having any preference for the Empyrean, by the way, Varn's being the more pronounced. However, it might be interesting to try out different values for religion: would tweaking the formula to, say, Order +2, Empyrean/RoK +1, FoL 0, CoE/OO -1, AV -2 work? (I know you pointed out that CoE is a lesser evil compared to the Overlords, and Empyrean also has been said to represent a more advanced ethic compared with the Runes, but I'd like to stick to their alignment effects, and also those numbers would be quite the nerfing of the religious aspect in the game, to the point that it doesn't request the pairings being further differentiated).

2) In the XML you mean? Lol, I had to stick to that. All stuff likely to be further modified by the team as they tackle the AI, and yet, if not what I found there, what should I have based on? (Or if you mean my own values, see above).

Varn and Basium shot higher than the Elohim on my first list because:
- Varn loves the Empyrean more than them, dislikes the OO more, plus the CoE. He even dislikes the AV more.
- Basium just hates the AV with every fiber of his. But as you'll read, once other factors come into play he's readily overtaken by the wise ones.

@Mario: his 'pedia entry clearly states that Basium cares little for people, and I think this should be taken into consideration when discussing his morality.

And now for my little calculation 1.1, for which I took into consideration BaseAttitude (imported as it was), BasePeaceWeight (since it ranged from 0 to 10, I called 5 a "0" and added/subtracted considering how much a leader detached from it in a direction), AttitudeBadBonus (again, imported as it was), AttitudeCompassionHigh/Low, the latter reversed. Finally I took into consideration a ruler's governing style, that is his/her favorite civic when it had a compassion modifier, and added/subtracted accordingly. And added the results to 1.0

Example: Cardith, the Erebus Mahatma, has BaseAttitude of 3, BasePeaceWeight 10 (thus, +5), AttitudeBadBonus 1, AttitudeCompassionHigh 4, AttitudeCompassionLow -2 (+2). Plus, his favorite civic is Public Healers, granting him an additional 1. 3+5+1+4+2+1=16, which summed with his 11 from yesterday takes him to 27.

The list (I added this calculation's points in parenthesis):
34,5
Sabathiel
Capria (+6 both)

34
Varn (+8)

27,5
Ethne
Einion (+10 both)

27
Cardith (+16)

22
Basium (+2)

14,5
Garrim
Beeri (+6 both)

13,5
Arturus
Kandros (+3 both)

10,5
Arendel (+3)

3
Cassiel (+3)

2,5
Amelanchier
Thessa (unchanged)

1
Valledia
Dain (unchanged)

-2,5
Sandalphon (+1)

-5
Tasunke
Rhoanna (-5 both)

-5,5
Falamar (-2)

-9
Auric (-4)

-11
Charadon
Mahala
Jonas
Sheelba (-6 all)

-14
Keelyn (-3)

-15,5
Flauros (-7)

-17
Alexis (-6)

-22,5
Hannah (-6)

-24,5
Perpentach (-3)

-29
Faeryl (-4)

-32,5
Os-Gabella (-4)

-33,5
Tebryn (-5)

-37
Hyborem (-7)

I also stored MaxWarRand, DogpileWarRand and MakePeaceRand, but didn't use them, because I'm not sure they should be factored here.

I'd say that list looks fairly decent, at the least it can be used to decide on relative positioning on any other list when no easy distinction is available for the person who is deciding on the orders.

As for the side note: What precisely do you mean by Civics' Compassion Modifiers? Haven't looked into Civics too much as yet, only added in the religious or Civ specific ones thus far.

They deal with the "you treat your people well" and "you treat your people poorly" diplomatic modifiers. Most civs have a better view of those who treat people well, but the Calabim leaders are the opposite (I think Hyborem is too)

@Mario: his 'pedia entry clearly states that Basium cares little for people, and I think this should be taken into consideration when discussing his morality.

Kael also mentioned somewhere that Basium almost wiped out the Sidar because of some trivial matter. His twin sister stopped him however. (I'm guessing she is about the only one who can calm him down)

Well, unless it is universally the same modifier (with 1 or 2 exceptions who simply reverse it), it will probably get placed in the Calculations appendix when I finally make one. Could be a bit too bulky otherwise. But I will look into it.

For everyone's use, here's the list I made (I have all on an Excel file) of the:

AttitudeCompassionHigh:

4
Cardith

2
Varn
Ethne
Einion

1
Sabathiel
Capria
Garrim
Beeri
Amelanchier
Arendel
Thessa
Cassiel
Valledia
Dain

everyone else is at 0, except the Calabim, as MagisterCultuum said.

AttitudeCompassionLow:

1
Alexis
Flauros (for clarity, this means the worthy pair is happy to hear there are other tyrants on Erebus)

-1
Sabathiel
Capria
Varn
Ethne
Einion
Garrim
Beeri

-2
Cardith

Everyone else at 0.

Yeah I probably won't include that directly. Can't think of how to fit it in there in a manner which seems clear, but brief.

Nah, what leaders think of it is a game mechanic falling a bit out of the scope. But a simple "- compassionate/- uncompassionate" label for the relevant civics could do.

Yeah, something like that will probably be in there. Though in truth for most of them it is going to be fairly obvious :) But it is nice to know that your choices will alter your relationships.

The (un/)compassionate civics already modify alignment appropriately in Broader Alignments modmod, although the tags themselves are unrelated.

I think Hanah is eviler than Tasunke, And Amelanchier is more evil as he listed now.

Don't comment on my list, that one is already outdated :p

EDIT: Updated the list

You know, it might be screwing up the readings a little that Auric has -100 to every religion. He's not like that because he's a misotheist: He's like that because he worships/is possessed by Mulcarn (who, granted, is the least evil of the Evil gods, but still is the only guy to ever outright violate the Compact).

Sure he is Misotheistic--towards his rivals. This is probably true of all the gods/angels.

Nah, they'd balance each other out for Auric since he is -100 to EVERY religion, and there are Good + Bad religions that are weighted opposite each other.

Yeah, something like that will probably be in there. Though in truth for most of them it is going to be fairly obvious :)

Ah, but there are less un/compassionate civics than one may think. Compassionate are only Crusade and Public Healers, uncompassionate Sacrifice the Weak and Fend for Themselves.

Crusade is compassionate? That's hilarious!

Shouldn't Protect the Meek, Republic and Liberty also be compassionate?

Balseraph version of Liberty isn't

I would think that, more than the literal "you treat your people well", really a "hey, you really go out of your way for the good cause!!" (or, in the negative version: "did you ever know that you're my hero? You're mass murderer I always wanted to be") is meant. :p

I vote Cassiel as the top good person.

He makes the most sense and seems to be the logical to me in terms of ethics.

I vote Cassiel as the top good person.

He makes the most sense and seems to be the logical to me in terms of ethics.

I do think Cas is on the "good" side of neutral, but as for calling him the most good leader in the game? He is too willing to make hard decisions a truly good leader never could. I remain convinced as far as pure goodness goes, no one can top Ethne.

It was kinda sarcastic as him being the top good leader but I do think his logic makes the most sense and ethics are the closest to my own.

It was kinda sarcastic as him being the top good leader but I do think his logic makes the most sense and ethics are the closest to my own.

That may be so, but that does not mean YOU are good. :)

That may be so, but that does not mean YOU are good. :)

Well it is hard to make a linear system of good and bad. It is all just ethics and it is hard to discern the people that are "good" from many who are more "neutral". Even with many "Evil" nations they have there own reasons for doing what they do, they think it may better the world, then there are those who are just sadistic.

I do think Cas is on the "good" side of neutral, but as for calling him the most good leader in the game? He is too willing to make hard decisions a truly good leader never could. I remain convinced as far as pure goodness goes, no one can top Ethne.

New player here but I am also throwing in my vote for Cassiel as the most good of the lot.

The rest want to control and dominate mankind for whatever purpose, good or bad. Only Cassiel wants mankind to be truly free, so he is the true hero to me. Even if some of the angels are trying to be kind, they are still trying to dominate mankind, really you have to decide if you value benovlence or freedom more, which is a value judgment and subjective person to person.

I'd say that Cassiel ties with the Elohim leaders as the most good (unless we are talking about good as anti-evil, in which case neither is especially good)

Sirona also doesn't really try to dominate. She is the least active of the god(desses), except of course for Arawn who refuses to intervene in Creation at all. The Spirit/Wisdom sphere is all about putting others before oneself, not compelling others to do so. (It is often in conflict with the law sphere (I don't consider Law/Junil to be all that good) and especially unquestioning obediance.)

Sirona was pleased when Immanuel Logos chose to leave her service in order to care for the orphans of the Godswar, regardless of their religious beliefs. Although she continued to fight against Aeron, she recognized that mankind needed this type of help more than gods warring in their name. The Order of the Elohim was founded by those who joined him in helping these orphans, many of whom were among the orphans themselves. I consider Immanuel to be the most good character in FfH. I suspect that Cassiel might agree. I've always considered the Elohim and Grigori to be natural allies.

IMO Cassiel wants free will in the theological sense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will), rather than an Utopia, even though his personal inclinations are good.

IMO Cassiel wants free will in the theological sense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will), rather than an Utopia, even though his personal inclinations are good.

Agreed. He supports free will, for better or for worse. If mankind's will is to be evil, Cassiel would accept that, although not happily.

IMO Cassiel wants free will in the theological sense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will), rather than an Utopia, even though his personal inclinations are good.

What do you mean in a theological sense? He clearly thinks worshiping gods is a bad idea, even if he will not activley try to purge those that do, he wants no theology to exist.

This really depends on how you define good, what is "good"-what do you want? Do you value altruism or free will more? They are distinct concepts, which is the supreme virtue? I think free will is more important then altruism.

This is what I mean it is ethics. I see no linear progression of good to evil, you can't say one leader is better than another or slightly eviler than another one. It's complex... one leader may be more ethical(good) in one area than in another compared to a different leader, or a leader may feel that they are the ethical(good) one where the other leader thinks they are the good one.

@Euthorcize: Erebus isn't a world like ours, and Cassiel knows - first-hand! - that the Gods can't be expected to play by the rules they laid down (the Compact, I mean). His beef against Erebus religions is, the way I see it, that they reduce their worshipers to pawns of the higher beings, even when those are enlightened. So, like the intellectuals leading a revolution, he took it upon himself to champion a view where religion is separated from te state (religions can spread in his empire, but can't influence the direction it will take).
He's a realist, and a rationalist: religion is there already, best he can do, he thinks, is to render it a mere private thing.

Yay disestablishmentarianists!!!

Crusade is compassionate? That's hilarious!

That depends entirely on the target.
(War is sometimes the answer)

(War is sometimes the answer)

True. "War is not the answer" always begs the question: "What is the question?" What if the question is "what is not the answer?"?

yeah, that's kinda not what I meant.