Within the Decayed Laurels setup is the notion of Incarnation Rank. Incarnation Rank within this game is meant to portray the various strength levels that may interplay among species, and entities. For instance an Incarnation Rank (IR) 1 being would be considered to have recently come about on the cosmic scheme. As an individual they are unaware of the larger potentials that they may climb to, and are limited in scope to what they may affect in life.
At the other extreme is the IR 12 entity (Incarnation Rank is set up from 1 to 12 levels). This level of being would essentially be an omniscient, omnipotent being, in short God. In game mythos the only IR 12 entity to really be considered the “Star” is the Wandering God. He never manifests fully within creation, for that would essentially destroy/distort his created reality to the extreme (to come later in the article, notions of “Complete, or Inconsistent Sets” from Math). Therefore, in the written mythos a Creator is always exiled from their creation. This is for a sort of logical case that if they are within their creation, they can’t focus on the big/cosmic picture (they lose omniscience, and omnipotence).
In a sort of tongue in cheek manner, The Wandering God is my “Authorial Avatar”, or the avatar of the hosting Games Master (called Arbiter/Broker in my system). His morality is meant to represent “my morality”, or the Games Master morality. The Wandering God is considered N.C.T. within the setting, for he is just observing it all from “above”. He only influences entities within the system from within the system through the characters, or qualia (notions of experience, information…etc). He can’t fully “reach in” and do a “Hand of God” play, and change the system or waiver it to certain entities advantages (no miracles, or obvious Acts of God). He favors no side within (neutral), and acts intermittently and incidentally.
He is the “external truth” that characters within the system will aim for as a notion of truth, but being that said figure is an Authorial Avatar. His variant of Truth is set up to be subjective, and relativistic. That there may be no absolute/objective Truth. Mainly because I recognize that even now I am still learning/understanding Reality, and that my Dispositions/Understandings I have may change over time.
Anyways, onto the background theory that lead to IR development/implementation into the system. The whole system was loosely inspired, and derived from the following notions; Hierarchical Complexity (found here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_of_hierarchical_complexity#Stages_of_hierarchical_complexity ), notions of Transpersonal Psychology (Google it), and Postformal Logic (again Google).
Tying these thoughts into the mathematics alluded to earlier. There is a loose interpretation of Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems. They loosely imply that a set of Axioms (may be considered as beliefs) can’t both be internally consistent, or complete in their development. Ex; If a person considers themselves “Good”, they can’t be “Evil” (Good, and Evil being complete independent classes of thought). Thus a person as considered Good is inconsistent with being Evil. One is either one or the other, and not Both (Good & Evil). Although there may be a problem with this logic, it is a binary dialectic. An Either/Or from philosophy. Good, OR Evil… Taken a step back towards “Relativism” one can realize that one can be “Neutral” to both dispositions. Ex; Should I care, or act upon a notion of Aliens on the planet “Blatoo” killing each other? Yes/No? It depends upon how big my “empathetic sphere is”, but that’s another topic.
In essence, if one considers “Good” as a “thesis”, and “Evil” as its “anti-thesis”. Neutrality would by the synergistic results of those two dialectics colliding. Thus leading to another pairing, the results from the prior state into the adventures/misgivings that arise from the generated “answers”. Thus one ratchets up the complexity, and thought models they use to understand Reality (hierarchical complexity model above). Eventually one comes to a point where they can realize/think that if “I Am Reality/God” (an IR 12 being). They then must realize that they contain contradictory elements within themselves because how hard would it be to be consistent over an infinite time (no “Growth”, or “Change”)? Wouldn’t that imply “Death”? Are you comfortable with being the root of the “Problem of Evil” in Theology?
But this is a Relativistic Morality system…Good may be Evil, Evil does Good, and Neutral is just laughing…