|
Post by Culpepper on May 31, 2009 2:43:48 GMT -5
I know I'm late to the game here, but...
I think there's a difference between "honorable" and "good." A lawful neutral character might be less inclined than a chaotic good to use poison, because it's not seen as an honorable thing to do. Basically poisoning a weapon is stigmatized as a dishonorable act, because it's a sneaky trick and one that a society would like to discourage. It's kind of the same reason we have the Geneva convention in real life, and why the use of chemical weapons is shamed by the rest of the world. Rules of engagement and fair fights and all that.
So I don't think even a neutral good druid would have the same qualms here that a civilized character would. Poison's just one more tool in nature, and a snake or spider or plant isn't "evil" because they poison their victims instead of breaking their necks. (Most prey tend to die in painful and grizzly ways in the animal kingdom, after all.)
So basically I'd say the more "civilized", "noble" and "honorable" the character is, the more they'd detest poison. That often means "good" as well, but it could encompass "neutral" and evil "evil" as well. Whereas a tribal CG Wild Elf might see nothing wrong with it at all.
|
|
fanslayer
New Member
Evil Triumphs while Good people do Nothing.
Posts: 21
|
Post by fanslayer on Jun 2, 2009 11:37:41 GMT -5
I've seen a great number of comments that imply that people often confuse Good with Lawful.
Good people tend to follow the 7 Virtues Patience, Humility Chastity/Purity Generosity Fortitude/Diligence Kindness Temperance/Self Control
Evil tend to revel in the 7 Vices Wrath Pride Lust Greed Cowardice/Sloth Envy Gluttony
Then there is what many call the 8th virtue or Vice.that being Justice/Integrity vs Injustice/dishonesty. Now this is a Law vs Chaos question in my not so humble opinion.
The question of whether or not to kill someone that has been "held" with a coup de grace is a Law or Chaos question. I'd say we need to define WHY someone kills another. Is the knife going in to satisfy Pride, Greed, Gluttony, Envy, Cowardice, Wrath? Or is the Knife going in for other reasons. The thing to realize...just because ONE of the Vices is the reason doesn't necesarily make it an evil act.....Is it Pride AND desire for Justice to counter the injustice done by the person that did the deed?
There are shades of Good and Shades of Evil. A person could be for Justice and be Evil....His Justice. A person could be Prideful, and still be Good...the question is can the person moderate his Pride with Temperance, Humility, Patience, etc?
Motivation is the defining factor of a Good or Evil act.
Killing a rat that has done nothing to the paladin is not necesarily an evil act....However, if the rat poses a threat to local residents for disease or other matters....it's a good act. Killing a rat that runs away just simply to acquire his hide because someone is willing to pay gold for the rat hide......could be an evil act....not an evil act if the person needs the gold to feed/clothe himself or another....evil act if the gold is used to fund a vice.
|
|
|
Post by EDM Neo on Jun 2, 2009 11:49:51 GMT -5
Just a side note... motivation is clearly one of the defining factors of whether an act is good or not, but it's not the -only- defining factor.
For example: a paladin may be misled, and tricked into killing an innocent child, thinking it a demon. The paladin's motivation was to do good, but the act itself is clearly evil; not evil enough to change the paladin's alignment on it's own, and whether it would make him fall is debatable, but the act in itself is evil, despite the paladin's good intents.
To quote the BoED... for violence to be considered a good act, it must not only be commited with good intent, but it also must use good (or at least non-evil, meaning no torture, evil spells, etc) means, and the end result must be good.
|
|