Death by Fire or Cyst--which is more evil to inflict?

[myancey]

The question is as the title poses: is it more evil to kill someone by fire* or infecting them with a cyst^?

*Fire, in this instance, should include any manner through which fire in the primary cause of death.

^Cysts are from LM--use of which is done through a spell progression given by a feat at first level.

Edit: I have also created a poll.


This is the polling page.
http://www.polljunkie.com/6aACA5/Poll12062.aspx

This is the results page.
http://www.polljunkie.com/Ad4AAP/View12062.aspx

[Analytica]

The cysts allow one of the few methods by which even Wish fails to restore someone to life. Just saying.

[myancey]

Check out my edit to the OP--I made a polling site where you can vote on the question! And thanks for responses.

As for this thread--please post your arguments as well. I'd hate to just have votes and no arguments presented.

[Undercroft]

Cyst gets my vote. Any idiot can burn somebody. it takes true evil to infect the target with a nercrotic bit of flesh to spy on and kill with.

[Ashram]

Fire isn't inherently evil; a necrotic cyst is super bombad evil.

[WinWin]

Depends on the person. Is it Hitler?

[Fouredged Sword]

Death by flameing cyst. There must be some way to get the necrotic destruction to deal fire damage as well.

[Alabenson]

Honestly, this could come down to how far you're willing to go for that extra bit of evil. For example, you could:

A: Infect someone with a cyst, scry on them, and kill them with it while their horrified friends and family watch.
Or
B: Kidnap someone and their family, make them watch as you butcher their family, and them burn them using their family's dismembered corpses as fuel.

The truly evil always go the extra mile.

[Remmirath]

Both would be rather nasty ways to die, truly, but the cyst just seems more horrific and evil to me.

[Lateral]

I may be just a bit biased, but I have to go with cyst.

[EagleWiz]

Cyst. Fire can spread, sure, but cysts can be used to create a undead plague.

[Cespenar]

I'll go with death by Snu-snu.

[OracleofSilence]

depends on the reason. a cyst can be no more evil then fire. motivation is what makes the action horrifying, not intrinsically the action itself.

[Hunter Killer]

If we're going off of what is basic evil schtick in most D&D settings, then I would have to say the cyst because it is pure corruption of healthy flesh and corruption is evil's 'thing' in D&D.

Still... Fire can be pretty evil. I think burning someone at the stake with a slow burning fuel is pretty darned cruel. The pain involved in that would just be unimaginable.

[olentu]

Cyst spells are for the most part as I recall evil subtype spells. Depending on ones interpretation of several passages the mere casting of these spells would be an evil act. If this is the case then their use is presumably more evil then accomplishing the same thing without using an evil spell.

[DeAnno]

A Cleric in my party once got revenge on a Solar by permanently enslaving it with Cyst spells, and it was quite a useful pet until it got disintegrated by something or other a few levels later.

The Solar would have probably rather burned to death (though that wasn't really an option for it, as fire only deals nonlethal damage through regeneration). We considered ourselves morally gray.

[Knaight]

I'm going to go with the Cyst. Assuming my interpretation of what it is is correct, there is absolutely no way that it would have any purpose when it came to killing someone quickly, and is no more effective than the methods that do that. It also has no use in self defense.

[JoshuaZ]

For what purposes?

From a strict RAW perspective, using necrotic cysts are evil.

However, a certain necromancer of mine was fond of arguing that just because the gods label some things as good and evil doesn't make it intrinsically so. He had a lot of fun arguing with the paladin in the party. However, even that character would agree that using the 9th level necrotic spell which destroys the soul really is evil.

[Gensh]

Gonna have to go with the old "They're just tools" argument. Using an effect which prevents the resurrection of a BBEG is a Good action, no?

[Psyren]

Gonna have to go with the old "They're just tools" argument. Using an effect which prevents the resurrection of a BBEG is a Good action, no?

Only if you don't believe in redemption. "Even the wise cannot see all ends."

[TheGeckoKing]

Only if you don't believe in redemption. "Even the wise cannot see all ends."

Considering nearly all the main mechanical forms "redemption" in D&D boils down to systematic brainwashing, and I can't speak for whatever non-mechanical methods people use, it might be nicer to just kill the guy and put their soul in a gem.

To answer the question, I'm going to go with Cyst, because I guess Fireballs are just fire, which has its more benevolent uses, while using Cysts would always involve something horrible.

[JoshuaZ]

Considering nearly all the main mechanical forms "redemption" in D&D boils down to systematic brainwashing, and I can't speak for whatever non-mechanical methods people use, it might be nicer to just kill the guy and put their soul in a gem.

To answer the question, I'm going to go with Cyst, because I guess Fireballs are just fire, which has its more benevolent uses, while using Cysts would always involve something horrible.

But this is just an argument that because something looks icky and involves decaying flesh it must somehow be evil. Moreover, have you ever smelled seared hair? It smells and looks wretched. A body killed by necrotic bloat probably looks about as bad as a body charred to bits by by an empowered fireball.

[TheGeckoKing]

But this is just an argument that because something looks icky and involves decaying flesh it must somehow be evil. Moreover, have you ever smelled seared hair? It smells and looks wretched. A body killed by necrotic bloat probably looks about as bad as a body charred to bits by by an empowered fireball.

We're not talking about a necromancer too lazy to scrub the flesh off his servant's bones. We're talking about summoning a horrible cyst inside someone, of which has the potential to devour someone's soul so thoroughly that not even a Wish can get it back. Somehow, it doesn't compare to a Fireball for me.

[Psyren]

Considering nearly all the main mechanical forms "redemption" in D&D boils down to systematic brainwashing, and I can't speak for whatever non-mechanical methods people use, it might be nicer to just kill the guy and put their soul in a gem.

Mechanical redemption isn't really redemption in my eyes. If you're forced to use Sanctify the Wicked on somebody, they never really wanted to mend their ways to begin with; otherwise you could have just used Atonement on them and saved yourself a rather large diamond.

[Gensh]

Considering nearly all the main mechanical forms "redemption" in D&D boils down to systematic brainwashing, and I can't speak for whatever non-mechanical methods people use, it might be nicer to just kill the guy and put their soul in a gem.

This, basically. There's no way short of violating someone's free will to ensure that they don't just make use of some method or another to ping as good at the end of rehab. Even then, that's assuming that good has the time and money to commit towards such a project in the first place, especially since the typical fantasy government is run solely by the corrupt or incompetent (or both if you're lucky). While yes, a group of violent hobos is likely to acquire vast amounts of wealth, they simply don't have the infrastructure to allow for any program beyond locking the BBEG in a room with the paladin. Best to eliminate a threat altogether than risk a second attempt at world domination.

[Psyren]

What you're both forgetting is that we were discussing the impossibility of the target being resurrected as a reason why the cyst is more evil.

Well, if you're resurrecting a villain, guess where they were? The-Land-of-Infinite-Suck, aka the Lower Planes.

Fiendish Codex II points out that even the most dyed-in-the-wool asshat can change their tune after seeing that no, they aren't the lucky lottery winner #3096785B who will actually get to skip Dretch phase and just become an Archdevil because they were Oh So Badass in life. If anything would provoke a change of heart, it would be that.

[Gensh]

What you're both forgetting is that we were discussing the impossibility of the target being resurrected as a reason why the cyst is more evil.

Well, if you're resurrecting a villain, guess where they were? The-Land-of-Infinite-Suck, aka the Lower Planes.

Fiendish Codex II points out that even the most dyed-in-the-wool asshat can change their tune after seeing that no, they aren't the lucky lottery winner #3096785B who will actually get to skip Dretch phase and just become an Archdevil because they were Oh So Badass in life. If anything would provoke a change of heart, it would be that.

As a philosophical note, that's not a true change of heart but rather an enforced fear. More relevant to the discussion is that anyone who's resurrected loses all memories of the afterlife. Ultimately, the villain would die, head to the lower plane of his choice, be horrifically tortured for something like twenty minutes, then be resurrected, subsequently forgetting everything that happened during that brief period. Better to wipe them off the face of the cosmos when you have the chance.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Death by flameing cyst. There must be some way to get the necrotic destruction to deal fire damage as well.

I agree. I'm sure you can do both, somehow. Though, does that then make it more evil?


Honestly, this could come down to how far you're willing to go for that extra bit of evil. For example, you could:

A: Infect someone with a cyst, scry on them, and kill them with it while their horrified friends and family watch.
Or
B: Kidnap someone and their family, make them watch as you butcher their family, and them burn them using their family's dismembered corpses as fuel.

The truly evil always go the extra mile.

True enough. How the two are implemented is probably a better indication of the evilness of the act.

If it's bare-bone basics and it's burn someone alive or cyst, I'm a little torn, because burning to death would horrifyingly painful, but the cysts from LM are just full of such evily goodness (oxymoronic?).

[Dragonsoul]

Then There's a couple of extra factors
-To cast the spells you need to have a "mother" cyst in your own body,ick.
-When you kill someone with the cyst they a) Explode
b) Leave behind an undead creature
-Compare to fireball,ow,ow,ow,ow<Cure light wounds> ahhhhh, Cyst owowowowowow<Cure light wounds><fizzle because its vile damage taht can't be healed>owowowowow