OOTS #595 - The Discussion Thread

[hamishspence]

Nothing wrong with a little moral absolutism, as long as you don't let it dictate your actions. "Murder is Evil" is a pretty absolute rule, but a lot of people would say that sometime, an evil act is justifiable, or appropiate for the situation: an evil deed to prevent a greater evil.

Its when people say that the justifying reasons turn a normally evil act into a good one that we have trouble.

To quote introduction to Penguin Classics version of The Discourses by Machiavelli:

"There are times when it is necessary to do admittedly evil things for the preservation and welfare of the political community.....But if one is willing, then, he seems to say, for God and man's sake, recognize that what for the moment you are doing is evil, and do not fall into calling it good"

[synnerman]

Single most awesome moment so far.

We know there's an afterlife, and his little ghost floating around invisible, right now? Man he is going to be angry.

"No! No! You can't do that! That's not FAIR! Hells! Can't anyone hear me?"

It would be funny if some of the Sapphire Guard had come to the holding area to meet him.

"Kubota, we would have words with thee."

(Yes, I'm mangling Marvel Comics god-speak)

[Kaytara]

But think about Elan. I'm sure he'll try and cover for V. Sure, he's horrified that V zapped Kubota into oblivion, but no matter what, they're both Chaotic Good, and Elan's one of V's comrades.

Would you try and turn your back against a friend...who's a wizard with a much higher level than you? Elan's not THAT stupid.

Actually, I'm afraid Elan trying to cover up for V could screw things up even further. He's accidentally revealed sensitive information to enemies on many occasions. His dimwitted attempts to disguise the truth here could ultimately condemn V.

And now I'm also wishing Belkar could see this... His reaction would've been hilarious. xD

[H. Zee]

This reminded me why V is the best character in the whole damn comic.

[dcviana]

Hadn't surrendered. Definitely not to V.

It isn't for THE LAWFUL GOOD guy to decide. NG? Not a problem (law is irrelevant). CG? Law is bad. TN? Pff. CN? Law REAL BAD. Just because LG shouldn't do it without authority, doesn't make it CE.

PS So I'm dyslexic or I don't CARE about how you spell Kabuto's name. Rissoles to you.

I'm not speaking about law at all. A good character (no matter how he fells about law) try to avoid killing. He will kill if it's necessary, but he will try to avoid it.

You could argue that V saw it was necessary to kill Kubota because he already has established a plan to escape. Well, it was necessary to AVOID Kubota to escape, but he was already tied up so an intelligent person like V surely could come up with a much better plan to stop Kubota's plans than just kill Kubota in cold blood.

[Scarlet Knight]

Gandalf: "Many that live deserve death and many that die deserves life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too quick to deal out death in judgement for, even the very wise cannot see all ends."

And Vaarsuvius has very low wisdom...

[DBear]

Gandalf: "Many that live deserve death and many that die deserves life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too quick to deal out death in judgement for, even the very wise cannot see all ends."

As has been pointed out several pages ago, this is D&D, not LotR, so the answer is yes, you can give it to them.

[Llelldorin]

It would be funny if some of the Sapphire Guard had come to the holding area to meet him.

"Kubota, we would have words with thee."

(Yes, I'm mangling Marvel Comics god-speak)

Nah--gloating isn't really the Sapphire Guard's style.

Shojo, petting Mr. Scruffy's late mother, though? That I could see.

[chiasaur11]

Wow.

Leave for a day, and the thread passes twenty pages.

Ethics discussions, eh?

[hamishspence]

Or just D&D rules discussions: some people just do not accept any sourcebook that contradicts that notion that an act is always OK if its for the wellbeing of others.

The "murder is Always evil" rule that is being contradicted here is in multiple sourcebooks.

[Sanctu]

'Disintegrate.' 'Gust of Wind.' That's four words. Perhaps this is the path to ultimate power?

For what's it's worth 28+ pages down into the thread... I thought the same thing.

The wrong reason _could_ be because V just want to get back to research and all that... and not because of justice or the guy deserved it (legally, even), was going to prove to continue his activities and would totally circumvent the laws of his own people. I think this is a stretch, but then the Oracle does tend to see things obtusely in the future.

[Milanius]

**** yeah. That was long overdue and sweet, some brutality in this comic [Belkar is currently out of action, so someone has to do some leverage].

I like vindication more than justice. I LOVE vindication, in fact. Doest that makes me Neutral or Chaotic. Don't care either.

*returns to shadows, dragging the sword and his depressed feet*

[hamishspence]

Well, in Forgotten realms, it says LG Tyr is god of Justice, not Fairness, and his followers may end up having to support some very unfair laws that are, however, just.

I'm guessing some people take the opposite tack.

[marc]

I'm a long time reader of OOTS, but I've never been on the forum pages before and I just HAD to comment on #595. In a nutshell: Thank you for not putting us through a trial and just zapping the "/$&?&?% bad guy.

That felt good.

[hamishspence]

I's say, from a storytelling point of view, it could be a Good Thing. It is even consoistant with V's personality. I dispute arguments that it was A Good, or Non-Evil, act.

[Eric]

I'm not speaking about law at all. A good character (no matter how he fells about law) try to avoid killing. He will kill if it's necessary, but he will try to avoid it.

And this single death was

a) inevitable unless the court system was rigged
b) reducing the suffering and death of hundreds

so this death was not avoidable.

And so not evil.

[Eric]

Or just D&D rules discussions: some people just do not accept any sourcebook that contradicts that notion that an act is always OK if its for the wellbeing of others.

The "murder is Always evil" rule that is being contradicted here is in multiple sourcebooks.

And this wasn't murder, it was killing.

Same result, different reason.

[Eric]

In order to be of that class, you can only hunt and kill immediate threats. And if a target never surrendered, it isn't granted immunity. basically, they are only allowed to commit "good" assissinations, like sniping out a high priest of bbane. they can't kill prisoners.
from
EE

The target never surrendered to V.

If you sneak attack you don't get a chance to surrender. Whether you would or not.

So killing someone before they can say "I surrender" is Evil too (see Miranda rights and "stop or I'll say stop again" for real world examples). So assasination IS murder and IS evil by your lights. Except it's in the BoED that you cite to say what is evil and what is good *as a good act*.

[Eric]

He is harmless. You try claiming self defense after having shot someone handcuffed in the back of a police car sometime, and see how far that gets you.

No, he's not harmless. He could say "Ninja! Sneak attack!" and get Elan killed.

You claimed that the only difference between a mass murderer and a good cop is how they feel about killing, thereby implying that all police officers are professional killers.

They are trained to shoot guns. They are allowed to kill in the line of duty. They are paid.

What part of that ISN'T "paid killers"?

[hamishspence]

I Think that is a stretch. The target was obviously in someones custody (Elan) It would be like soldiers bringing a prisoner to their commanding officer: he cannot shoot them and say: "Well, they didn't surrender to me"

In any case, BoED expicitly states Sneak attack is not automatically evil in the section on Rogues. Now, circumstances where you can Sneak attack, and it not be murder, do exist: Wartime, armed enemy soldiers: ambush.

[Eric]

No it isn't. Good people contrary to popular belief, don't simply kill evil monsters for their loot (the exception being always evil creatures), they do it to protect themselves and innocents

from
EE

Yes they do.

Good people *in real life* may not, but this is not real life. It's AD&D. Fantasy RPG setting.

[Eric]

Note that "Protagonist" doesn't always equal "Good-Aligned",
especially when you're talking about anti-heroes like
Remo Williams, Mack Bolan or the Punisher. Also note
that even good-aligned characters can have bad days
and do things that are less-than-good.

--
Walt

Remo Williams is authorised by the US government to use extreme sanction against anyone posing a threat to national security.

Just like the executioner in the case that finds Kabuto guilty.

Either the just execution is Evil or this act by Remo (and therefore the argument good people don't do that) is good.

[hamishspence]

EE is forgetting something: Exalted good people act act EE described: but not all, or even many, D&D characters are Exalted. Many are what you maight call borderline good: they live good lives, mostly, but that does not mean they have not ever done evil, just that they have done little, or rarely, or atoned for it in the past.

and Eric is forgetting something: this isn't second ed era. Most D&D sourcebooks suggest that humanoid monsters like Orcs, goblins even drow, cannot be slaughtered just for gain. The players may kill monsters for XP, but the characters the players are playing typically have higher motivations.

[hamishspence]

"execution" is not a very good word in this context: its not clear if the writers of this fictional character were intenting his acts to be considered Good, anyway.

[Eric]

If I had to guess what EvilElitest was referring to I'd imagine the three living witnesses to exactly what happened along with the bodies of K's employees, and a possible speak with dead for Therkla.

The Therkla that Kabuto said he was going to say he killed in the defense of Kasumi and Diago? The Therkla who was a ninja consorting with demons and assorted northerners? The Therkla Kabuto would say (and be proven right by the Zone of Truth and any other truth seeking magic) was the instigator?

By that calumny, the OOtS team cannot be taken as telling the truth because

a) they are northerners
b) they are not nobles
c) he's just said were working FOR Therkla

So it comes down to the two other nobles, both of whom are staunch allies of Hinjo who has already cast baseless accusations against Kabuto before and therefore has a grudge against this Noble.

They count as telling the truth too.

As is Kabuto.

So the verdict comes in:

Unproven.

And Kabuto goes away to plot again.

THAT Therkla?

EDIT: Oh, and if Kabuto were alive to cross-examine Therkla:

"Do you love Elan?"
"Yes"
"Would you do ANYTHING to get him to love you?"
"Yes"
"So you see, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this Half-Orc Ninja would do anything for Elan. Even make out that I was the instigator because Elan, as you have seen before, accused me without any proof of attempting to kill Hinjo. An accusation this naive young ardent man may have taken as truth and be willing to believe even if untrue".

[Eric]

I Think that is a stretch. The target was obviously in someones custody (Elan) It would be like soldiers bringing a prisoner to their commanding officer: he cannot shoot them and say: "Well, they didn't surrender to me"

This is Elan.

It would be like a 250lb karate champ having surrendered to a granny.

If the champ had ANY idea about leaving custody he could.

[Eric]

and Eric is forgetting something: this isn't second ed era. Most D&D sourcebooks suggest that humanoid monsters like Orcs, goblins even drow, cannot be slaughtered just for gain. The players may kill monsters for XP, but the characters the players are playing typically have higher motivations.

That isn't a rule.

If the DM makes a dungeon just to hack and slash, hack and slash is acceptable.

[hamishspence]

Yes, but in game universe, hacking and slashing of citizens of a city is considered Evil. At lest, by most DMs.

and: Tied up, remember.

[MagicPrime]

I agree with V's actions, my Elven Wizard/Elemental Savant would have done the same thing. And has on a few occasions.

Orc troop setting around a campfire at night, party discussing sneaking around them, my elf throws a maximized fireball and kills all of them because they were taking too long formulating a plan.

Then again, I was Chaotic Neutral.

[Eric]

Yes, but in game universe, hacking and slashing of citizens of a city is considered Evil. At lest, by most DMs.

and: Tied up, remember.

Which means naff all.

Goes to court.

Gets away scott free.

Why NOT surrender when you will NEVER face justice through the courts?

EDIT: Maybe a real-life example will help.

It's wrong to kick a man when he's down and lying on the floor.

So I kick you as hard as I can then drop to the floor.

"You can't hit me!"

I do it again some time later.

I do it many more times.

Forever, in fact.

Also, given I didn't attack you later, you can't kick ME without provocation because that is assault and evil.

Your requirements of V slot him into the "Stupid Good" category.