OOTS #595 - The Discussion Thread

[Hydro]

I don't think V was ever good-aligned (correct me if I'm wrong?), but that made me laugh.

[David Argall]

We seem to be setting some records here.

Now let us consider Roy here. In #11, he kills a large number of prisoner goblins, with no objection from from rest of the Good members of the party. We have him clearly accepted as Good despite this.
Now we can clearly conclude from this that there are situations where a Good character does not sin in the slightest by killing those who are prisoner or who surrendered. The absolute standard can not stand.
However, we can see other points. Roy didn't really have a choice. He had no way to keep that many goblins from attacking him in the future, which he had no reason to doubt they would do. His options were pretty much abandon the mission and flee, or kill them.
Now with V, we have to consider if we have the same situation. Kubota certainly says [and we do not doubt him] that he intends to go on killing people and causing trouble. But we do not know how likely this is. There is an operating powerful court in the area that might properly restrain and punish him. On the other hand, it might not, and we simply don't know the facts that well. We do know there should be a default deference to the court simply because we know our personal judgement has been wrong before, sometimes tremendously so. But we also know the courts have been wrong before, also sometime absurdly so. That default deference can be overcome fairly easily.
Neither Roy nor V has to worry about the motives of the victim. Both know these will do harm if they can. And both know there is a real chance they will get the chance. So there is a basic case for deeming both actions entirely acceptable. [Now a number of facts are not known to us and so a final decision can't be made, but that works both ways. We can't say definitely it was evil or good.]

[SmartAlec]

Now let us consider Roy here. In #11, he kills a large number of prisoner goblins, with no objection from from rest of the Good members of the party. We have him clearly accepted as Good despite this.

They're not prisoners, David. They're asleep, but otherwise unrestrained. They're not even magically asleep. They could potentially wake up at any moment.

[Muz]

Regardless of alignments, I want to buy Varsuvius a beer. Or whatever she drinks.

[Eric]

They're not prisoners, David. They're asleep, but otherwise unrestrained. They're not even magically asleep. They could potentially wake up at any moment.

How well do you defend yourself when asleep?

Roy could have tied them up.

It doesn't matter if they ARE magically asleep. If you're asleep you can't defend yourself (defenseless, remember!) and you can be killed without any risk (or with no chance of being persuaded they are no threat). They were, while asleep a POTENTIAL threat only.

Rather like Kabuto.

[Eric]

I agree. V has let her obsession with her goals begin to turn her. There is no doubt that she performed one evil act here. Also it is undeniable that her behavior has become decidedly less kind recently.

I can't wait to see how Durkon will react when he hears about this. Of course he will cause Elan can't keep secrets. (Does he even know what a secret is?)

I'll see if I can help end this thread by explaining.

You are absolutely within your right to say you think V's let his obsession turn her. You are absolutely wrong in saying there is no doubt this is an evil act here. There's plenty of doubt.

If you listen to it.

Which you don't.

And so the long thread wears on.

[Raging Gene Ray]

Now we can clearly conclude from this that there are situations where a Good character does not sin in the slightest by killing those who are prisoner or who surrendered.

That's only if they're goblins. The gods made them to be killed, it would be an insult to the game designers gods to pass up the opportunity to coup de gras a few gobbos.

Regardless of alignments, I want to buy Varsuvius a beer. Or whatever she drinks.

My massive intelectual capacities have far greater designs than accepting your paltry gift of that nectar of nitwits! Begone, insignificant whelp! (Nothing personal Muz, but that's how I see V reacting to being offered a beer).

[Murphoid]

Is it evil to kill another who killed your family in front of your face?

Only if you enjoyed it. Only if you do to them WORSE than they did to you.

If V'd danced for joy or said "Booyah, biatch!". Yes.

Feelings determine what is good or evil? Revenge does not constitute a just cause.

[dcviana]

Kabuto had not surrendered. He'd just avoided a fight. He's just fighting with finessing the rules, rather than poison weapons.

For a good character, that makes no diference. He surrendered and is not for the good guy to decide if his surrendering was legitimate or not. It IS for the good guy to NOT ALLOW the surrendered person to escape at a later time, and that was what Elan was doing when he said "I will testify against you".

And besides, even if Kubota (not Kabuto) just "avoided a fight", he is still unarmed and restrained, any good character knows that you don't kill an unarmed and restrained enemy.

[SmartAlec]

Roy could have tied them up.

If there was one sleeping goblin, then yes, that would have worked. Assuming that the party had rope to spare. A single helpless goblin would have been a situation very similar to Kubota. But there was more than one - and unless someone is sleeping really deeply, there's a good chance you'll wake them up in the process of binding them. And the noise that one could potentially make might wake up the others - not to mention that there's still a goblin awake in there!

[Werewindlefr]

Feelings determine what is good or evil? Revenge does not constitute a just cause.

No, it doesn't.
The point is, it's not the case here. Kubota was killed to protect the fleet, not because of feelings. Think of it as similar to the beheading the kings during european revolutions, even when they were physically defenseless, because they still posed a threat to the newly formed republic.

[Leo_Forestclaw]

I don't see how anyone could argue that that wasn't an evil act. I mean he was tied up, he posed no immediate bodily threat to anyone. There were a number of other spells she could have used to say, relocate him halfway around the world, perhaps addle his mind, or some such.

Some who live deserve death and some who die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not so quick to deal out death either.

Gandalf quotes aside, I'm not ready to label this an evil act. Having typed that I do not maintain it was a good act. But this is a D&D satire/parody. "Good" characters kill "evil" characters all the time with far less justification than V's dispatching of Kubota. The fact that Kubota was in custody and no longer actively resisting can't cover the fact he was still fighting. Perhaps not with physical blows or spells but he was mapping out a strategy that was as valid any of Nale's stratagems. Well, more original and better plotted than Nale's, but still...

What V did was circumvent Azure City's trial process not necessarily its laws. Kubota had just murdered Therkla; this was witnessed by two nobles and at least one foreigner. From what has been implied in the past, murder is punishable by death in Azure City.

More so, I'm not convinced Kubota's death isn't what Elan was after. Elan outright stated he wanted Kubota to "go down with his ship," noting he wasn't wearing armor. If Elan had let Kubota sink to the bottom of sea and drown to death, would you consider that a good act simply because they were engaged in active combat?

I was shocked and disturbed by V's action, but still not ready to call it "evil."

[TheNovak]

I just want to say one thing:

**** YEAH!

[Nerdanel]

I finally managed to get through this thread.

1) is awesome! Go V!

2) What he did was definitely an evil (and chaotic) deed. (And I'm cheering anyway because it was awesome...)

3) Kubota would not have gotten scott free, no matter what he thought. Not only there are a bunch of witnesses, some living and others just one Speak With The Dead away, I notice that no one has remembered the little fact that Therkla had a diary and Kubota didn't get a chance to destroy it or other evidence on his ship. Also, Kubota was a total idiot to confess to Elan that he was immune to lie detection. Elan would have passed it on.

4) Sword of Truth is a lousy place to get morals from. It's full of Broken Aesop and also incidentally sucks.

[Verderben]

V is a dalek?

[Hydro]

I think others have well established that Kubota was far from helpless. If a powerful psychic threw down his staff, but remained capable of crushing every mind in a 200-foot radius with a standard action, would he count as a "helpless captive"? Especially if he blatantly stated that he intended to do so.

People are getting caught up on the trappings of the situation. Kubota remained a very, very dangerous man

Not that killing a helpless, evil captive is necessarially wrong, mind you. Hell, Hinjo would have probably done the exact same thing (given time to do things legaly and lawfully, he would have had Kubota executed).

V knew that Kubota was guilty. The ambiguity of the act lies not on the axis of altruism-vs-selfishness, but of impulse-vs-due-process. Chaotic? Maybe. Evil? No.

[LavenderIsGreen]

A bit late here, mostly because I couldn't remember my password last night, but this comic sort of made me want to hide under my desk. Maybe it's because the page froze as I was scrolling down and so I ended up focused for several minutes on the dead, blank expression V was wearing while reducing someone to a pile of dust, and Elan's horrified reaction... Man, if I were him, I'd be backing away slowly and trying my hardest not to look like a hindrance to the Cause.

But from a reader's standpoint, like, plot- and character-wise, this is gonna be awesome. ^_^ (I wonder how it reflects on me that it's always my favorite characters who snap.)

[zach12376]

That has to be the quickest trial EVER!

[AratanAenor]

Kudos to V!

Personally, I think Kubota deserved this (last panel) instead.

[Murphoid]

I'll see if I can help end this thread by explaining.

You are absolutely within your right to say you think V's let his obsession turn her. You are absolutely wrong in saying there is no doubt this is an evil act here. There's plenty of doubt.

If you listen to it.

Which you don't.

And so the long thread wears on.

[joke]
*Covers Ear*
Deny Deny Deny the opposing argument
[/joke]

There is no doubt that killing someone who is tied up because they present a mild inconvenience to you is evil.

[Hydro]

Quoting sourcebooks outside the three core rules is always shaky ground; keep in mind that there's a lot of wiggle room within the alignment rules found in the PHB, and different writers have interpreted them in different ways.

I think that goes as much for the BoEM (which has been referenced here) as anything else; but then again, there are those who regard it as THE alignment sourcebook (even when it seems to contradict the vague definitions in the PHB).

Just another reminder that we aren't always playing <i>quite</i> the same game.

[Hydro]

There is no doubt that killing someone who is tied up because they present a mild inconvenience to you is evil.

I'm afraid there is, actually. You're reading the same thread that I am right?

Phrasing your opinion reasonably doesn't make it true. You need points, counterpoints, reference, -something-. Otherwise we're just beating our heads against opposite sides of a brick wall.

[Eric]

Feelings determine what is good or evil? Revenge does not constitute a just cause.

Yes.

If you enjoy killing, you're a bad soldier and dangerous. And you should be kicked out of the army.

If you WILL kill, but don't like it, you're a good soldier.

The only difference between a mass murderer and a good cop is how they feel about killing.

[Eric]

[joke]
*Covers Ear*
Deny Deny Deny the opposing argument
[/joke]

There is no doubt that killing someone who is tied up because they present a mild inconvenience to you is evil.

MILD inconvenience? Did you see that gurt big statue on the island? The risk taken by V? The dead innocents?

Mild my wobbly butt!

[Eric]

any good character knows that you don't kill an unarmed and restrained enemy.

Nope.

Sam Vimes.

Esmie Weatherwax.

Han Solo.

Mal Reynolds.

Wolverine.

Batman.

The Punisher.

Richard Cypher.

Mack Bolan.

Remo Williams.

Jean Luc Picard.

Winston Churchill.

Captain John Sheridan.

Max Headroom (If you can't kick a man when he's down, when can you kick 'em?).

Want more? I'll look 'em up in the other books I have.

[Eric]

(I wonder how it reflects on me that it's always my favorite characters who snap.)

Because THAT is fantasy.

Someone on another thread quoted from Babylon 5. Something like:

There were no shades of grey. We were the good guys, they were the bad guys. And they made a very satisfying thump when they hit the ground.

It is why there is, to some extent, an absolute Good/Evil in fantasy and more especially in fantasy RPG's.

[Ego]

HAHA... forom this day forward, I consider V as cool as Belkar

[Shady_halfling]

am i the only person in this forum who didn't like this strip?(also fun fact: why did the rope and the armor not disintigrate when thats wut thats wut the beam hit?)

[Eric]

For a good character, that makes no diference. He surrendered and is not for the good guy to decide if his surrendering was legitimate or not. It IS for the good guy to NOT ALLOW the surrendered person to escape at a later time, and that was what Elan was doing when he said "I will testify against you".

And besides, even if Kubota (not Kabuto) just "avoided a fight", he is still unarmed and restrained, any good character knows that you don't kill an unarmed and restrained enemy.

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.

[Shatteredtower]

I think others have well established that Kubota was far from helpless.

No one has done anything of the sort.

If a powerful psychic threw down his staff, but remained capable of crushing every mind in a 200-foot radius with a standard action, would he count as a "helpless captive"?

That's a dishonest comparison. Kubota is incapable of harming anyone in his current position. Killing him does not prevent his agents from doing so in his name. If anything, his death merely frees a certain outsider up to get truly creative.

Especially if he blatantly stated that he intended to do so.

It seems a lot of people are taking everything said by a man who claims he can lie his way free of any legal or political consequences as though it was entirely true.

V knew that Kubota was guilty.

V. Doesn't. Care. Kubota was a nuisance only in the sense of being a distraction to the elf's allies, not because he posed a threat to Hinjo or anyone else. For all it mattered to V, he might as well have been guilty of nothing more than singing too loudly while the wizard was trying to concentrate.

Despite what some have claimed, there was nothing pragmatic about V's actions in this strip. For some reason, they've got it in their heads that pragmatic means you knock things over when they get in your way, even when it's more practical to walk around them.

V's final statement has nothing to do with Kubota. The nobleman never stood in the path of V's stated objective -- saving the world -- here. The party -- or even just the elf -- could have packed up at any time and physically gone searching for Haley, or tried to gather a new team for the expedition to the next gate.

Don't argue that they couldn't abandon Hinjo, as though he and his society are completely helpless without these three. It's not like he's any safer now that one of his political enemies is dead.