@KidCarnival - We've discussed how Ajantis is not what I consider Lawful good. Sans your agreement with that, we have nothing to discuss further. Thanks for the debate.
It is just a few bad apples that give the rest of us evil folk a bad name. I mean, I do intend to build a giant laser on the moon and enslave you all, but I'm not going to kill many people to do it. And you'll probably learn to like the whipping after a while.
The comic book justification; whenever heroes from different series meet, they have to throw down at some point. It's the law.
Except rarely do they Kill each other.
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.
I disagree: intention (or lack thereof) and state of mind make a big difference. That's why criminal law distinguishes between murder and manslaughter, and why mental disorders, addictions etc. make for lower sentences. Because it's less evil to kill someone when provoked by the victim's malicious behavior, or to kill someone when one isn't in control of oneself than to do so in cold blood.
You are arguing the difference between knowing the law and the CAPACITY to be able to know the law through mental disability. They are different.
someone with an IQ of 86 would be tried the same way as someone with an IQ of 130 provided that neither one was deemed incompetent through mental illness or other impairment.
To put it another way, any lawyer who uses the plea "He didn't know it was illegal to kill that guy." isn't going to win the case (unless he can prove mental incapacity).
Ok, I get what you're saying now, and you are right that ignorance of the law doesn't free a "normal" person of guilt. We were both right I think, but arguing different things.
It is just a few bad apples that give the rest of us evil folk a bad name. I mean, I do intend to build a giant laser on the moon and enslave you all, but I'm not going to kill many people to do it. And you'll probably learn to like the whipping after a while.
Plus, think of all the people you are putting back to work what with the moon construction and the whip making. That stimulates the economy.
It is just a few bad apples that give the rest of us evil folk a bad name. I mean, I do intend to build a giant laser on the moon and enslave you all, but I'm not going to kill many people to do it. And you'll probably learn to like the whipping after a while.
Plus, think of all the people you are putting back to work what with the moon construction and the whip making. That stimulates the economy.
Not only stimulates, but opens up even more work places to maintain the new world order. People are generally not going to whip themselves you know - you need paid professionals to do that.
Yes, sorry but it's evil. 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.
Or Lawful Hypocritical ... go fireshielded and burn him while chasing butterflies.
It's funny, but I had this thought as well. The second series of Dragonlance told the tale of the Kingpriest of Ishtar and how he grew arrogant enough to challenge The Gods, thus causing them to throw down a continent on his head (or some such, I forget the details). Where the relevance is, he started out being (purportedly and regardless of what his alignment is ACTUALLY listed as in reference material) a Lawful Good type, only his arrogance subverted it. I thought that was a really good story for how good people, with good intentions can become "lost" in their total devotion through the justification of evil acts, to such a degree that they don't realize how far they have fallen.
Lord Soth's tale was similar as well (or near as I can recall), in that he started out as more or less a good man, but became corrupt and decadent to such a degree that he was turned into the heart of darkness. There may have been something about a love lost in there as well, it's been 20 years or so since I read it.
The Paladin in NWN1 was kind of the same.
All on the nature of sliding Alignments and how 'justifications' of otherwise evil acts to make them 'Good' will ultimately lead to evil. Tangentially associated with the thread topic (he grasped).
Yes, sorry but it's evil. 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.
Or Lawful Hypocritical ... go fireshielded and burn him while chasing butterflies.
Hahaha, yeah, you 'help' him by killing the gnolls while he commits suicide with your Fireshields :P I've done this more than once.
A chaotic neutral bard shouldn't worry too much about whether or not his actions are evil, Keldorn should though. And I agree: Xan is actually looking forward to it.
In a more serious tone, I'd say killing Viconia could be construed as a "necessary evil" by a Lawful Good Inquisitor. I wouldn't personally play such a character, but I could almost buy into the whole prosecution of heretics and unbelievers, with the added bonus the fact that she is EVIL.
Where I would not do it myself is in that you don't actively SEE her do anything evil, at least not at the time you encounter her. "If", however, said inquisitor is in the vein of The Spanish Inquisition, they didn't care very much if you got caught, merely that you were accused. And since that appears to be the genesis of that character class, I suppose it would probably be acceptable.
Viconia is a Priestess of Shar. Priestess of Shar are required to murder innocent's for their goddess's rituals. Killing a Priestess of Shar would not be a blip on Keldorn's raider: that's perfectly morally alright.
The problem is, Keldorn seems to be specifically killing her because she's drow. That's... not alright.
However, Viconia is evil. And, you know, a Priestess of Shar. So he wouldn't fall from it. But if he decided to kill Drizzt just because Drizzt was a drow, he would probably fall.
Killing Xan is an evil act, as Xan fights back. Xan believes he is going to die. That does not mean he wants to die this very moment- in fact, considering his mission, I think he very much doesn't want to.
@Twani - the Xan comment was intended as sarcasm. But thanks for your input just the same. Gotta work on that sarcasm face. it trips me up every time. Apparently when I am being sarcastic, my lips move. It's kind of a give away.
I'm never sold on "Killing someone without concrete proof that they are doing evil" as not being a blip on anyone's radar; at least not anyone of the Lawful Good persuasion. I agree that he would do it, but short of seeing her perform the ritual itself (and I am not sure how common knowledge the inner workings of the ritual are to a guy like Keldorn), I can't see him not at least fretting over the decision to take a life. Soldiers are soldiers, but that doesn't mean they don't feel.
@the_spyder@twani Interesting point: I agree with the_spyder that such a supposedly "necessary evil" act goes against the honour of the lawful good. I could understand it better from a NG or CG character, though only slightly. Sentencing Viconia to death without trial and without even having seen her commit any crimes is frontier justice. Anomen flunks his knighthood test for taking matters into his own hands. And he at least had a body: his sister's. Keldorn hasn't.
Comments
... go fireshielded and burn him while chasing butterflies.
Lord Soth's tale was similar as well (or near as I can recall), in that he started out as more or less a good man, but became corrupt and decadent to such a degree that he was turned into the heart of darkness. There may have been something about a love lost in there as well, it's been 20 years or so since I read it.
The Paladin in NWN1 was kind of the same.
All on the nature of sliding Alignments and how 'justifications' of otherwise evil acts to make them 'Good' will ultimately lead to evil. Tangentially associated with the thread topic (he grasped).
And I agree: Xan is actually looking forward to it.
Where I would not do it myself is in that you don't actively SEE her do anything evil, at least not at the time you encounter her. "If", however, said inquisitor is in the vein of The Spanish Inquisition, they didn't care very much if you got caught, merely that you were accused. And since that appears to be the genesis of that character class, I suppose it would probably be acceptable.
The problem is, Keldorn seems to be specifically killing her because she's drow. That's... not alright.
However, Viconia is evil. And, you know, a Priestess of Shar. So he wouldn't fall from it. But if he decided to kill Drizzt just because Drizzt was a drow, he would probably fall.
Killing Xan is an evil act, as Xan fights back. Xan believes he is going to die. That does not mean he wants to die this very moment- in fact, considering his mission, I think he very much doesn't want to.
I'm never sold on "Killing someone without concrete proof that they are doing evil" as not being a blip on anyone's radar; at least not anyone of the Lawful Good persuasion. I agree that he would do it, but short of seeing her perform the ritual itself (and I am not sure how common knowledge the inner workings of the ritual are to a guy like Keldorn), I can't see him not at least fretting over the decision to take a life. Soldiers are soldiers, but that doesn't mean they don't feel.
Interesting point: I agree with the_spyder that such a supposedly "necessary evil" act goes against the honour of the lawful good. I could understand it better from a NG or CG character, though only slightly. Sentencing Viconia to death without trial and without even having seen her commit any crimes is frontier justice. Anomen flunks his knighthood test for taking matters into his own hands. And he at least had a body: his sister's. Keldorn hasn't.