Quote Originally Posted by EvilElitest View Post
1) Killing a serial murderer as he is being an active threat (IE coming at you with a knife) isn't murder, but killing him as he sits in jail is. There are other solutions, particurally when insanity is curable in D&D
2) What you do care about is irrelevant in terms of personal morality. Personal/real world morality are not the issue here, because this isnt' a discussion of real life morals, its a discussion of D&D morals where murder is always evil
3) There are two things in the BOED i disagree with, mind control and poison. That doens't make the book any worst, i just disagree. It means that morals are different from mine and i disagree, but it doesn't make ether the book's purpose irrelevant, nor does it make the fact that it actually adressed these moral question any less admirable

Its a monarchy. The nature of the treason depends on how it is carried out, technically a bunch of people demanding the 12gods no longer be part of the goverening system is treason

Not when you have to commit murder in order to pull it off. He was still an unarmed prisoner and thus killing him is evil. that isn't execution, which requires a trial, thats taking the law into your own hands, which is hubris
Points 1-3: The fact that I don't care means that I'm not going to debate this with you further, because D&D morality, despite your assertions to the contrary, has very little to do with what's in the texts. In practice, D&D alignments are determined by what the players and DM find appropriate; informed by the rules, yes, but hardly dictated by them. Thus, D&D morality is exactly equivalent to real-world morality, just with more obvious heroes and villains.

If you disagree with something in a text, then the rest of the text becomes suspect. If you feel it's okay to disagree with the mind control bit, then who are you to claim that I cannot disagree with the alleged "killing is always bad" part? Ergo, drop the damned BoED already.

Demands =/= disagreement, and again, calls for reform ARE NOT TREASON. They would only become treason if the reformers, upon failing to convince the king, began a campaign to bring him down.

If taking someone to trial would be dangerous or unnecessarily complicated in cases where the fate of the world is at stake, then it is fine to kill him, much like unsurrendered, unconscious enemies in the middle of the wilderness in a different campaign. You can't drag them back to civilization, because the lost Orb of Phantasmagoria is going to be used by the Black Moon cultists in a fortnight, and you can just barely get to them on time. Tying them up either invites death or them escaping, and continuing to prey on travelers.

I argue that Kubota has pointed out both danger and unnecessary complication in giving him due process of law, and thus extralegal actions are justified.