Is Killing Drizzt Do'Urden as a Ranger "Evil?"
Arndas
Member Posts: 42
I suppose the main question comes down to asking whether or not a Ranger killing a Ranger is wrong, but I always looked for justification for killing Drizzt. Obviously, he carries very strong weapons and armour, however I do not believe that would be a realistic reason for a Chaotic Good Ranger and friends to kill Drizzt.
Indiscriminate killing goes against the Ranger honor system (AD&D ED 1 rules), although what is the chance that the protagonist would know Drizzt was not an evil Drow?
If anyone has any ideas, I would love to hear them!
Indiscriminate killing goes against the Ranger honor system (AD&D ED 1 rules), although what is the chance that the protagonist would know Drizzt was not an evil Drow?
If anyone has any ideas, I would love to hear them!
0
Comments
Unless you are roleplaying Lawful Stupid
You can go Invisible and wait for the gnolls to kill him, this is going to get fixed in 1.3 anyway.
Otherwise I see no legit ways for a ranger to kill Drizzt. Maybe self-defense? You could roleplay that one of your companions tries to pickpocket Drizzt of his/her own accord. For example Chaotic Neutral Garrick or Safana. Drizzt will not only kill the wannabe thief but turn all aggro on your ranger and the other companions as well, completely ignoring your ranger's pleas of innocence... I say defend yourselves.
edit: -Thanks for the feedback!
edit: -Thanks for the feedback!
edit: -Thanks for the feedback!
-Thanks for the feedback!
You are killing a renowned hero of Faerun, which is an evil act no matter what class you are or what your character's attitude to Order vs Anarchy.
That said in my first playthough, I used KidCarnival's solution, or a variant of it.
"Oh sorry I had no idea it was Drizzt! I thought it was just an evil Drow! I feel so terrible!"
He's a drow, has high MR, surrounded by Gnolls. A quick fireball will take out all the Gnolls and leave the drow unsinged. I cast fireball.
Drizzt argos because he thinks you are attacking him
Gotta defend yourself now and you weren't the aggressor. It was just a misunderstanding.
Winning the fight with Drizzt is under the circumstances presented by the game absolutely cheesy.
If the OP's ranger is Chaotic good, they aren't going to strike unless they know (not Believe, but actually confirm) that this Drow is evil. Racial prejudices do not have a 'get out of jail free' card when it comes to alignment. Even if said ranger had never heard of Drizzt (highly unlikely given the time), the fact of the matter is, to strike based on an assumption (or racial prejudice) instead of facts or confirmations is outright EVIL.
And even IF it is an EVIL drow that they are facing, better to prove it before striking. And better still to take out the Gnolls, capture the Drow and bring them to a court for justice. Because striking without cause is the hallmark of EVIL, not good.
Hehe again we seem to differ on the details of an alignment issue, though we generally seem to share a similar framework for looking at issues. Whereas I am extremely strict on theft in comparison to you. I am less so about racism in a Fantasy context.
The views you have described are very modern, liberal and enlightened. I would say that in a Medieval setting like the FR, particularly with races that are explicitly evil, being a racist against evil races does not make you evil.
Frankly given that there are many thousands of Drow, and only one is known to be Good, then common sense would be to attack on sight unless given a good reason not to.
I wonder if people are overly sympathetic to Drow due to Viconia's charms and the metagame knowledge that she can be redeemed... I mean would everyone we so concerned about 'racism' if this character was less human-like and was ... a Good Mindflayer or Beholder?
In this instance, here is the way I see it. People who bow to racial prejudice are evil. They merely think that they aren't evil and say "Well the 'evil' that i do is justified because I am prejudiced against them due to their race (or whatever prejudice they hold)." it isn't "Less Evil" because they are prejudiced, it's merely an excuse that allows them to continue to think that they are good.
all in my humble opinion, and in no way intended to offend anyone.
Also, attacking and slaughtering the Gnolls without even hearing their side of the story is clearly an EVIL act in itself. It's also common knowledge that Drow are far worse than Gnolls. For all CHARNAME knows, it could have been that drow who forcefully entered *their* territory, slaughtered *their* families and ransacked *their* homes just for the hell of it. Come to think of it, this reminds me of what happened to a certain Xvart village... pfeh, damn bloodthirsty *heroes*!
Nor is it a 'Trait' of a given class. You get to play any class any way you want. That's role playing. Not so good Authors may write certain stereotypes that way in books, but saying 'All rangers tend to be bigots' is a form of bigotry.
And the Gnolls attack first in all cases in BG save one. If they attack first, it is very easy to defend a good alignment.
Plus, the truth of the matter is that Charname and their group are all mass murderers dozens of times over. If truth be told, they should all end up as Chaotic Evil, considering all of the deaths on their hands. It's the nature of video games to be such.
For contrast, see Keldorn (and redeemed Anomen) and Korgan - no-one attacks the other and there is even a certain level of respect for the skills of the other.
Ajantis is prejudiced and he is lawful good, so apparently, he got a "pass".
According to websters dictionary, 'prejudice' means - "an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason." It goes on to say "unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group."
Ajantis has a reason to hate evil creatures, i.e they are EVIL. This is based on knowledge of evil people doing evil things. And it isn't a blind label against a group or race that may encompass non-evil beings (regardless of if you know about them or not). Therefore it isn't prejudice.
True racial prejudice or bigotry is when you hate all Xvarts because you believe (right or wrong) that all Xvarts are lesser, evil (usually, though not always), creatures regardless of the facts of the matter.
Ajantis doesn't hate Kagain because he is a Dwarf. He hates him because he is evil. and living in close quarters with someone for months on end, you get more of a sense of them than is represented in a few off hand comments.
Killing a good ranger of the woods is probably an act that should realistically by D&D rules cause your ranger to fall, no matter how you try to roleplay it (Drizzt does nothing aggressive to you, doesn't turn on you unless you attack him or steal from him, and is a generally good and decent person, if a bit of a windbag prone to writing about his tortured soul too often). I can see no way you could justify killing him as a ranger: he hails you, is polite to you, and deciding that all people are evil because of their race doesn't excuse you from the consequences of killing just because of that.
Also, remember. Just because you are not smart enough or wise enough to know what you are doing is evil, doesn't mean it is any less evil. It just makes you an evil fool.
So, it is prejudice to attack based on nothing but "shows up when casting Detect Evil". Viconia does, too, but if you get to know her, she's not that evil anymore (and can be redeemed to prove the point). Unless someone actually does something evil, the paladin can't know if that person is on a way to redemption or simply not a problem for anyone even if they are "evil", like Kagain.