Order of the Stick 596!

[Wonka]

And this is considered a good act by some of you?

Yes. This just goes to show just how subjective the whole alignment system is in the first place. One person's good is another's evil, and the definition is usually done by someone with a certain "alignment" and such views on what constitutes good and evil. Im not saying EVERYTHING is subjective, certainly some acts will naturally fall into more good and evil, but its the shades of grey in between, and the justifications and intentions behind them, that cause the whole subjectiveness.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Now, I'm not sayning that V is actually evil here. He might be. But, this is, in my mind at least, a blatantly evil act. Killing someone, very permanently, simply because it's expedient is evil. The problem with the idea of "capital punishment" is that private citizens are incapable of carrying that out. Particularly when the legal leader of the land is about ten steps away. Capital punishment has a very narrow definition and, "vigilante justice" isn't one of them.

"The last time you captured someone, it turned out to be your brother and he was evil, so, this time, I preemptively permanently killed your prisoner to forestall any such nonsense." is V's entire justification.

And this is considered a good act by some of you?

I agree, V did a evil act but is not yet evil aligned. One evil act does not a evil person make.

Plus, really, every one should use Belkar as their moral compass: if Belkar is okay with the moral action then don't do it.

 

[arcanaman]

doesnot anyone find it the least bit creepy

 

[Nifft]

"The last time you captured someone, it turned out to be your brother and he was evil, so, this time, I preemptively permanently killed your prisoner to forestall any such nonsense." is V's entire justification.

And this is considered a good act by some of you?

It is not an act of good.

It is an act of awesome.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Staffan]

A "C" for "cool". In 4e, alignments are less important. Ze game is still ze same, it's about killing enemies.

OOTS is still 3e, not 4e

 

[Imp]

Compare to Miko's behavior (lawful-good but intolerant) early in the strip's history.

 

[WarlockLord]

Well, Miko was attacked...paralysis IS a serious threat, which could have left her open to free shots from dominate person, suggestion, or whatnot...if not a cdg...

 

[MichaelSomething]

If V didn't kill Kubota; there would be a 20 to 30 strips trail. Would you all perfer that V didn't kill him and a 30 strip trail happening?

 

[Staffan]

No, I agree that the Trial of Kubota would be a bore (well, I'm sure Rich could do something good with it, but I'd rather see the gang get back together). That doesn't make V's actions any less evil however.

 

[Hussar]

Really, Elan nails it pretty well in the end. If it wasn't a good act, why wouldn't you tell the paladins about it? I mean, if it was a good act, then the paladins should be right on board. The fact that Rich uses Belkar as the moralizer pretty much tells you what's what. If there were any shades of grey here, he would have used Roy. The fact that Belkar is right on board with this action and it's something that you have to lie to paladins about pretty much shows it to be evil.

But, I do agree this is why having a discussion with your group about alignment BEFORE you start a campaign is a very, very good idea.