OOTS #595 - The Discussion Thread

[NakedCelt]

What I want to see:

A three-way confrontation in the afterlife between Roy, Therkla, and Kubota. You know it makes sense.

(Oh, sure, Evil characters probably can't go where Roy is right now, even though he's down at the foot of the mountain. We didn't see hobgoblins in the queue after the battle. But that little difficulty aside — you know it makes sense.)

[Sucrose]

Oooh, a promise from a politician. That's binding.

How do you know he wasn't basically taunting Elan?

And no, things won't go in a positive direction, because "les gens heureux n'ont pas d'histoire".

You keep thinking Hinjo is stupid and won't find out.

You still haven't addressed the simple fact that Kubota deserved death, and a trial likely wouldn't give it to him. Also, while I wouldn't trust the Joker in nearly anything, I'd believe him if he promised to get out of prison and gas my family. Same principle at work, if a less charismatic villain.

Lastly, I think nothing of the sort. I believe that Hinjo will find out, and might even eventually capture him. Regardless of what happens to V, though, the avoidance of a massive loss of time and public faith that Kubota's trial would have caused will make it still a net gain.

[EvilElitest]

...


I'm not talking about Elan here. V has the power to ensure that Kabuto will not commit evil again. Kabuto is in the middle of a monologue about how he's going to rig the trial and go free, and go right back to committing evil acts and trying to kill people (one of whom, Elan, is V's friend - don't underestimate how much that might influence V's decision-making).

So? That doesn't change the fact that he is still an unarmed defenseless prisoner. Let him talk, it comes to nothing, because talking isn't an evil action nor a threatening one. part of being good comes responsibility and that requires responsibility to treat your enemies in a humain manner. Murder is murder, excuses don't change that fact

When the bad guy himself is telling you exactly what he's done as is going to do, how much more evidence of guilt do you need before you realize that there isn't a good way of dealing with the situation?

This isn't about guilt this is about justice. Just because he is evil and guilty does not give me the right to murder him. I have a duty to prevent him from being a further threat and try to get him punished, but that does not give me a pass to resort to evil actions. I just need to fine a non evil solution to the problem, such as getting him convicted for being evil. Killing is not a solution, its a last resort

Also talking about commmiting evil isnt' an evil action nor a direct threat to me

But he's just gotten done explaining exactly how he's got the system rigged to make sure he goes free, and right back to what he was doing. With that information, it's absolutely evil to STILL let him go to a trial you know he's going to have rigged in his favor.

Oh and because he said so taht means its going to turn out that way. Didn't he also say taht Hinjo would be dead before the day was out. Just because Kaboto said things will work out, doesn't mean they will. A good person is obligated to get him convicted certainly, but that doesn't mean they are allowed to resort to evil means

Tell you what - find another way, aside from killing him, to guarantee Kabuto doesn't commit another evil act (setting aside, for a moment, the possibility of ressurrection in a D&D setting) in the future.

1) According to your solution, i'm commiting an evil act as well, so it makes trying Kabuto meaningless when i'm just as bad
2) Getting him convicted. ruining his reputation. Destroying his political power. My job isn't to become the ultimate judge of good and evil, just to try my best to keep him under control. And before you go off saying "well we wouldn't ahve been found guilty" i remind you that we don't know that, he just boasted taht, possible to goad elan. That doesn't prove anything, and your basically saying its ok to give up before trying just because an evil dude can brag
from
EE

[ArlEammon]

Hitler's assassination would have stopped the death of millions. It doesn't matter if someone catch'ed him in a defenseless position.

[Arameus]

Oh, for crying out loud. Every great strip just has to attract a thousand little Socrates' gumming up every ounce of enjoyment they could have had with pointless arguments about moral quandaries they will never come close to experiencing, spouting fancy debate terms they skinned from Wikipedia a month ago. You sweep floors at the Cinemark. You are not Faulkner's illegitimate descendant.

If you're hung up on the morality thing, you're just thick. A far better issue is alignment. I'm pretty sure V's neutral, maybe neutral good, so that covers his actions pretty well, but Elan's chaotic good. Serving the greater good with acts some might find questionable in and of themselves, ie, killing an unarmed, surrendering Kubota to avenge his vile actions and prevent any possible future perversions? That sounds exactly like CG to me, and it seems like dragging him to trial and going through all that BS for no other reason than to treat with honor some slimeball who will turn around and use it against you is something only the most unflinchingly lawfully-inclined of characters would do. It seems like Elan really acted out of character there, especially since he's essentially taking levels in the 'Antihero' prestige class.

Any D&D veterans care to arbitrate that?

Edit: I take back anything negative I ever thought about V. No, no, not for those reasons; can you imagine ANOTHER trial sequence?

[Ryusacerdos]

Hitler's assassination would have stopped the death of millions. It doesn't matter if someone catch'ed him in a defenseless position.

Thats going into territory you don't want to tread...

Then again I love Chronospheres.

[EvilElitest]

You still haven't addressed the simple fact that Kubota deserved death, and a trial likely wouldn't give it to him. Also, while I wouldn't trust the Joker in nearly anything, I'd believe him if he promised to get out of prison and gas my family. Same principle at work, if a less charismatic villain.

deserves Death? Really? Considering killing is not a good value, while forgiveness, mercy and compassion are that a little odd. or that Kubato, who is generally just a human being acting in his own best interest, can only be met with killing. Murder is not the solution to everything.

Well, thanks. I'll be sure to call up my old platoon sergeant and tell him that we're all evil. Those people we shot at in our engagement zone were wearing body armor and headscarves and carrying RPGs and rifles, and there were no friendlies but us operating in that area, and they were setting up a mortar position to drop fire in our firebase...but they hadn't actually done anything yet, so it was CLEARLY evil for us to shoot them. The fact we found documentation on them showing that they had put fire on us on previous occasions clearly means nothing, does it?

How does a military record somehow prove a point. I honestly don't care about real world morality, because we aren't basing this off real world morality, through in the US justice system V would be guilty of murder anyways. This is about D&d morality.
And killing enemies in self defense isn't evil in D&D, killing prisoners is so your in the clear

If you're stuck on the morality thing, you're just thick. The real issue is alignment. I'm pretty sure V's neutral, maybe neutral good, so that covers his actions pretty well, but Elan's chaotic good. Serving the greater good with acts some might find questionable in and of themselves, ie, killing an unarmed, surrendering Kubota to avenge his vile actions and prevent any possible future perversions? That sounds exactly like CG to me, and it seems like dragging him to trial and going through all that BS for no other reason than to treat with honor some slimeball who will turn around and use it against you is something only the most unflinchingly lawfully-inclined of characters would do. It seems like Elan really acted out of character there, especially since he's essentially taking levels in the 'Antihero' prestige class.

Your wrong. In BoED, tis made clear that ends/great good argument doesn't hold up, because good and evil are absolute forces. Murder is always evil, regardless of circumstances, just as rape and torture are always evil. What your saying is that killing an unarmed defencless man who gave up is now ok. Wow, what are the implications of that


from
EE

[Llelldorin]

The problem with a lot of these justifications is that they're fundamentally build on false dichotomies. You're carefully presenting arguments that tacitly assume V had two choices--turn Kubata over for trial or set phasers to flambe and fire.That's simply not the situation here. V had lots of options here, depending upon which spells (s)he had prepped. (S)he could have Polymorphed him into a mouse and kept him as a pet until the world was safe. They could have put Kubata into the hold and held him prisoner themselves. (S)he could have transported Kubata back to the island (by Teleport, or by other means) and dumped him.

So why did (s)he reach directly for disintegrate? From the looks of things (and from the tone of the last sentence), because (s)he was tired and irritated. Killing bound prisoners out of irritation is unambiguously evil.
Doesn't mean that V is evil, merely increasingly capable of evil acts.

[Lowkey]

Only Belkar's killed out of anything but immediate survival. What alignment is Belkar again?

And Roy coup de gracing the sleeping goblins. And the entire party killing the passed out Roc. And

Spoiler

Show

paladins massacring a village of women and children for the unforgivable crime of being goblins

It is dark ages morality. Life is cheap.

[Swordguy]

deserves Death? Really? Considering killing is not a good value, while forgiveness, mercy and compassion are that a little odd. or that Kubato, who is generally just a human being acting in his own best interest, can only be met with killing. Murder is not the solution to everything.

Not everything, true. But that doesn't mean it can't be the best solution sometimes.

How does a military record somehow prove a point. I honestly don't care about real world morality, because we aren't basing this off real world morality, through in the US justice system V would be guilty of murder anyways.

Look. At. What. I. Was. Responding. To.

Specifically, someone asking if someone had ever shot or stabbed someone, in the real world in a calm state of mind. That's what I responded to. Therefore, real world examples are in order.

[Sucrose]

deserves Death? Really? Considering killing is not a good value, while forgiveness, mercy and compassion are that a little odd. or that Kubato, who is generally just a human being acting in his own best interest, can only be met with killing. Murder is not the solution to everything.

Justice, however, is a good value. And Kubota's death would most assuredly be Justice, as he has betrayed his own nation at multiple points, resulting in the deaths of many. Treason is a death penalty crime for a reason.

[Commander Hayes]

Exactly. And I don't think V cares what chaos the assassination will cause.

Reminds me of when Haley was chastised for thinking war wasn't that big a deal, just because she had a good chance of survival. (In wars, people die.)

I'm sorry for the stupid question, but which strip was that again, exactly? I can't seem to locate it.

[Cywar]

(V)anakin !! (i refuse to add a third one)

Was (s)he evil? No , but (s)he was so powerful it ditdn't make any difference.

[nowiwantmydmg]

Hurray! If only that had happened 50 strips ago............

But V was awesome.... attagirl.

[LiteYear]

I'm sorry for the stupid question, but which strip was that again, exactly? I can't seem to locate it.

I believe the strip in question is #417

[EvilElitest]

Not everything, true. But that doesn't mean it can't be the best solution sometimes.

No, evil is only the best solution when you deliberately avoid considering all the options. The good way is often the hardest one, but that is the nature of good

Look. At. What. I. Was. Responding. To.

Specifically, someone asking if someone had ever shot or stabbed someone, in the real world in a calm state of mind. That's what I responded to. Therefore, real world examples are in order.

I can't speak for the poster, but as he mentioned cold blooded murder i assume that he is referring to the killing of prisoners. Which as a service man, i doubt you'd be doing. Killing enemies in battle is not evil in D&D wars, but i don't want to get further into modern day conflict/morality

Justice, however, is a good value. And Kubota's death would most assuredly be Justice, as he has betrayed his own nation at multiple points, resulting in the deaths of many. Treason is a death penalty crime for a reason.

1) By D&D good standards, killing is not justice. ITs a last resort, when nothing else can easily work, and even then its a fine line between killing and murder. Killing is not justice.
2) treason is not a crime by D&D standards, that is a societal thing, entirely different
from
EE

[Lowkey]

Well, thanks. I'll be sure to call up my old platoon sergeant and tell him that we're all evil. Those people we shot at in our engagement zone were wearing body armor and headscarves and carrying RPGs and rifles, and there were no friendlies but us operating in that area, and they were setting up a mortar position to drop fire in our firebase...but they hadn't actually done anything yet, so it was CLEARLY evil for us to shoot them. The fact we found documentation on them showing that they had put fire on us on previous occasions clearly means nothing, does it?

I was gonna burn him for the same thing, but you did it much better than I. The flexible morality and bizarre scales of some here are kinda... off. I've been putting most of it down to people arguing from cultural relativity stand points, with either the Medieval morality of life being cheap, the absurd DnD arguments, or some kind of heroic fantasy trope substituting in for culture. And I really hope that is the case, otherwise there are some rather scary folks on this forum.

[Yendor]

Hitler's assassination would have stopped the death of millions. It doesn't matter if someone catch'ed him in a defenseless position.

If you had done it while he was in lawful custody, it'd still be a war crime.

[Sucrose]

The problem with a lot of these justifications is that they're fundamentally build on false dichotomies. You're carefully presenting arguments that tacitly assume V had two choices--turn Kubata over for trial or set phasers to flambe and fire.That's simply not the situation here. V had lots of options here, depending upon which spells (s)he had prepped. (S)he could have Polymorphed him into a mouse and kept him as a pet until the world was safe. They could have put Kubata into the hold and held him prisoner themselves. (S)he could have transported Kubata back to the island (by Teleport, or by other means) and dumped him.

So why did (s)he reach directly for disintegrate? From the looks of things (and from the tone of the last sentence), because (s)he was tired and irritated. Killing bound prisoners out of irritation is unambiguously evil.
Doesn't mean that V is evil, merely increasingly capable of evil acts.

While there may have been other options available to V, we don't know that, as we don't know what spells V had prepped. Also, your example solutions are unfeasible, and all are less absolute in solving the problem than V's method.

Polymorphing is arguably more evil than just killing him, and can be undone if someone ever figures out what that sea rat is, while bringing up the same questions as his current method. Trying to hold Kubota prisoner assumes that he doesn't have associates who could bust him out while his erstwhile captors are busy, and V doesn't know Teleport, and is too weak to carry Kubota under the effects of fly.

[Arameus]

Actually, I wasn't saying any of that. I was asking a question about D&D alignment, which is a concept I don't understand because I don't play D&D, which means quoting 'BOeD' is pretty purposeless. That's why I asked for a D&D vet.

Have you ever tried, you know, not living up to your name?

[Tilian]

What I want to see:

A three-way confrontation in the afterlife between Roy, Therkla, and Kubota. You know it makes sense.

I'm thinking more along the lines of Roy, Therkla, and Miko.

[Ryusacerdos]

I hope I'm not the only one who considers it neutral. You know, that gray area? You can see it, right?

[Sucrose]

1) By D&D good standards, killing is not justice. ITs a last resort, when nothing else can easily work, and even then its a fine line between killing and murder. Killing is not justice.
2) treason is not a crime by D&D standards, that is a societal thing, entirely different
from
EE

1) Yes, yes it is. Paladins have Smite Evil for a reason, and that reason is to deadify those who are evil. Since it is granted to them by good gods, it is clearly a good power, and thus its purpose, deadifying evil types who would otherwise escape justice (you know, like Kubota), is also good.

2) And every friggin' society to ever exist has held betrayal to be one of the worst possible crimes. It's fair to extrapolate that that would be the case in any D&D society, including Mount Celestia.

Lastly, by D&D standards, mass murder of innocents is a crime, and Kubota's actions have resulted in that.

[EvilElitest]

Actually, I wasn't saying any of that. I was asking a question about D&D alignment, which is a concept I don't understand because I don't play D&D, which means quoting 'BOeD' is pretty purposeless. That's why I asked for a D&D vet.

Have you ever tried, you know, not living up to your name?

1) cute, personal implications I don't see the need to pretend to be something else other than an elitist, so why be dishonest
2) Alright, fair enough, if that is the case, then let me explain. In D&D, Good and Evil are absolute. So certain actions will always be evil, like torture, rape, murder ect, no matter that the situation is. BoED is the Book of Exalted Deeds, which covers this
from
EE

[Swordguy]

No, evil is only the best solution when you deliberately avoid considering all the options. The good way is often the hardest one, but that is the nature of good

How many chances must good give evil to give up and reform before they're justified in saying "it's not gonna happen" and ending the threat permanently? What you're saying is that they're never justified in saying so. This is a valid viewpoint, to be sure (I disagree, if you hadn't noticed)...but you'd better be prepared in living around a lot of evil people since they can't be permanently dissuaded.

I can't speak for the poster, but as he mentioned cold blooded murder i assume that he is referring to the killing of prisoners. Which as a service man, i doubt you'd be doing. Killing enemies in battle is not evil in D&D wars, but i don't want to get further into modern day conflict/morality

Fair enough - I interpreted that comment a completely different way (shooting a person who isn't actually doing anything to you at the moment but clearly means to in the future vs. shooting a prisoner whom you caught doing something...they overlap, but are also different). Judging by other reactions (like Lowkey's, I don't think I'm unjustified in my interpretation.

If you had done it while he was in lawful custody, it'd still be a war crime.

That doesn't mean it's not still the right thing to do.

[Resist77]

ahhh satisfying

[LiteYear]

I hope I'm not the only one who considers it neutral. You know, that gray area? You can see it, right?

I think if it was a different character and handled differently, I could see it not being an evil act. But V's "explanation" and style which he committed the act puts it into evil with the information available at this time.

[EvilElitest]

1) Yes, yes it is. Paladins have Smite Evil for a reason, and that reason is to deadify those who are evil. Since it is granted to them by good gods, it is clearly a good power, and thus its purpose, deadifying evil types, is also good.

2) And every friggin' society to ever exist has held betrayal to be one of the worst possible crimes. It's fair to extrapolate that that would be the case in any D&D society, including Mount Celestia.

Lastly, by D&D standards, mass murder of innocents is a crime, and Kubota's actions have resulted in that.

1) Smite evil is an effective combat tool, that is not justice. Good's main values are mercy, forgiveness, compassion, understanding, love, which killing has nothing to do with. Killing is never good, it is at best neutral, but never a good act. Killing is used to protect the good values, not as justice, and so murder is never right. Kubota was unarmed, defenceless and had given himself up, and as of such, the killing of him is murder, not justice
2) No, what about rebelling against a tryant. Or fighting against in justice. Or disagreeing with your lord. these can all be considered treason, and are no inherently evil acts. Treason is a crime relative to a society, it is neather good nor evil in terms of the alignment
3) so? Kubota is evil, i dont' deny that. taht doesn't mean that murder is the solution or the proper justice, just that he is evil.
from
EE

[Ryusacerdos]

2) Alright, fair enough, if that is the case, then let me explain. In D&D, Good and Evil are absolute. So certain actions will always be evil, like torture, rape, murder ect, no matter that the situation is. BoED is the Book of Exalted Deeds, which covers this
from
EE

Not arguing with you directly, but the BoED, like all sourcebooks, is optional. Now PHB or DMG would be more appropriate.

[Lord_Drayakir]

People seem to be hung up on the fact that killed someone in cold blood. If I am not mistaken, D&D rules say that killing something/someone evil is if not a good act, then a neutral act. From this, we can make a logical assumption that has just committed a good or neutral act- and probably leaning towards good, because Kubota was a Lawful Evil villain who could've done great harm had he risen to power.

The second argument is that is a wizard. Most wizards are neutral, and did not show up as evil when Miko scanned him. Therefore, s/he can be NG, LN, TN, or CN. Considering that s/he just killed somebody who was a prisoner, instead of letting him go to trial, speaks strongly against him/her being LN, and the sheer fact that did this without feelings of obvious remorse, AND has not been willing to work with the others to help a person in need rules out him being NG. So, s/he's either TN or CN, and by his/hers behavior in the past, it seems more likely that is TN.

And it is perfectly fine for TN characters to kill somebody, if they are obstructing the greater good. On one hand, had the fate of the world, on the other, legal procedure. It's fairly obvious that the correct choice would be the former, not latter.

And finally, why are you people getting so hung up about this in the first place? It's a fantasy comic, based on a fantasy game, based on fantasy powers. I mean, really? Really?