D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

[reelo]

Ah yes, so it is murder then if you kill the scientist who is developing a chemical agent to turn the water to poison. After all, he is not trying to kill anyone IMMEDIATELY. One must wait till hes literally pouring it in the well in order to kill him.

Cmon thats nonsense.

By that logic, killing Oppenheimer would have been a good, non-murderous act?

 

[HJFudge]

Of course it is.

Do it and see what you get charged with.

Yeah but getting charged with something and getting convicted? Two different things. Being charged with a crime does not make you guilty of said crime.

And again, goodness of an act is not subject to the lawfulness of said act. Thats why you can have lawful good and also have chaotic good.

 

[HJFudge]

By that logic, killing Oppenheimer would have been a good, non-murderous act?

Hard to say.

I guess it depends on how you view the nuking of two major cities in Japan.

After all, the argument has been made (whether you agree with it or not is another matter, I personally do not) that the nukes ended the war much earlier than it would have and spared many more lives than were lost.

So, if you view those acts as evil then yes, it would be good. If you view it as a good act, then no, killing Opp's would be evil.

Then one must contend with whether the existence of nukes constitute good or evil. After all, nukes may or may not have prevented an all out war between Russia and the U.S. Then again, before nukes there really wasn't any way to end ALL LIFE on earth through warfare, and now there is. Stakes have risen.

 

[MGibster]

From a glance at the wiki, looks like over a hundred.

Most of them aren't playable (many aren't intelligent) and some of them are even extinct. Though to give Games Workshop credit where it's due, each of their playable factions are full of interesting differences. Even the boring old Space Marines have many chapters that are unique in both looks at how they play that it keeps things rather exciting.

 

[MGibster]

By that logic, killing Oppenheimer would have been a good, non-murderous act?

I think we're veering a little close to real-life politics here. But Oppenheimer and Los Alamos would have been legitimate targets during WWII.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Exactly.

And it's also worth noting that Orks evolved into their fluff rather than staying static. They dropped and changed things over times; a great example of this are Stormboyz.

It's not like D&D has wargame roots as well.

Wouldn't the fact that it has "roots" as a wargame imply that change is necessary to reach your full potential, given that it is moved well past those origins?

 

[Justice and Rule]

Most of them aren't playable (many aren't intelligent) and some of them are even extinct. Though to give Games Workshop credit where it's due, each of their playable factions are full of interesting differences. Even the boring old Space Marines have many chapters that are unique in both looks at how they play that it keeps things rather exciting.

The evolution of Space Marines and even individual chapters over the years is stunning. Blood Angels are a great example of a chapter that had a small gimmick that turned into a whole-on organizational shift.

I think we're veering a little close to real-life politics here. But Oppenheimer and Los Alamos would have been legitimate targets during WWII.

We're also veering way off topic, which seems to be par for the course in this thread.

 

[Oofta]

Wouldn't the fact that it has "roots" as a wargame imply that change is necessary to reach your full potential, given that it is moved well past those origins?

Meh. For many people it's just one step away from a wargame. Not my style, but I think D&D can and should support a wide variety of styles and preferences.

 

[Mind of tempest]

have we made any conclusions at all?

 

[HJFudge]

have we made any conclusions at all?

Certainly! A lot of different people have arrived at a lot of different conclusions But a consensus? Hardly.