Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6272338" data-attributes="member: 7006">Look, the paladin killing someone = the wizard animating the dead because they're both &quot;neutral&quot; actions doesn't hold water, because the theory behind the paladin killing someone is that it was either in self-defense, or the target was evil monstrosity.&nbsp; It's NEVER been okay in the game for the paladin (or anyone for that matter) to just go around killing random people around town for absolutely no reason because &quot;killing things is neutral&quot;.&nbsp; There are still laws in all these fantasy worlds.&nbsp; The paladin in theory is smiting evil, and that *is* the default stance of D&amp;D.&nbsp; So in the worlds of Dungeons &amp; Dragons, the paladin &quot;killing someone&quot; is all right (because it is supposed to be against the proper target.)Now if in your own games you don't play that way... if your paladins can kill willy-nilly and no one cares, that's fine.&nbsp; More power to you.&nbsp; But you can't claim to that to being the default.&nbsp; In the default of the game... killing evil monsters is fine.&nbsp; It's black and white.&nbsp; That's the way the game has always treated it.&nbsp; Now in Eberron it would obviously be more gray (and indeed that's a particular feature of the setting)... but let's not attribute that &quot;Anyone/thing can be good, anyone/thing can be evil, and thus nothing can be killed outright&quot; outlook to the base idea of the D&amp;D game.&nbsp; That sort of &quot;shades of grey&quot; *is* a modern outlook to Dungeons &amp; Dragons in general (which is I'm sure the reason it became a focus of the newest campaign setting off Eberron), but I do not see that concept having been added to the game in general with this 5th edition.Murder for murder's sake is considered evil in the &quot;World of D&amp;D&quot;... but the smiting of evil is not.&nbsp; And until the game decides to change that otherwise... that's the way it is.Then in terms of Animate Dead... if all necromancers did was use corpses that were voluntarily donated to him for his work, or he only used the bodies of evil creatures... perhaps animating the dead would not be seen as an evil act.&nbsp; But that *never* happens.&nbsp; Necromancers (traditionally) have used ANY bodies they could get their hands on.&nbsp; They just went down to the local cemetery and raised up the corpses buried there.&nbsp; People who could have been friends, family, or acquaintances.&nbsp; Or at the very least, fellow humans.&nbsp; Completely disturbing these gravesites for their own ends, not caring one whit of the feelings of the friends or family of the people buried there.&nbsp; THAT'S why it's traditionally been seen as &quot;evil&quot;.&nbsp; And until the game puts in the default game settings that you're ONLY allowed to raise the bodies of your enemies... it will never been seen as a good act (unless in your particular game world you decide to change it, which is entirely the point.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6272338, member: 7006"] Look, the paladin killing someone = the wizard animating the dead because they're both "neutral" actions doesn't hold water, because [I]the theory[/I] behind the paladin killing someone is that it was either in self-defense, or the target was evil monstrosity. It's NEVER been okay in the game for the paladin (or anyone for that matter) to just go around killing random people around town for absolutely no reason because "killing things is neutral". There are still laws in all these fantasy worlds. The paladin in theory is smiting evil, and that *is* the default stance of D&D. So in the worlds of Dungeons & Dragons, the paladin "killing someone" is all right (because it is supposed to be against the proper target.) Now if in your own games you don't play that way... if your paladins can kill willy-nilly and no one cares, that's fine. More power to you. But you can't claim to that to being the default. In the default of the game... killing evil monsters is fine. It's black and white. That's the way the game has always treated it. Now in [I]Eberron[/I] it would obviously be more gray (and indeed that's a particular feature of the setting)... but let's not attribute that "Anyone/thing can be good, anyone/thing can be evil, and thus nothing can be killed outright" outlook to the base idea of the D&D game. That sort of "shades of grey" *is* a modern outlook to Dungeons & Dragons in general (which is I'm sure the reason it became a focus of the newest campaign setting off Eberron), but I do not see that concept having been added to the game in general with this 5th edition. Murder for murder's sake is considered evil in the "World of D&D"... but the smiting of evil is not. And until the game decides to change that otherwise... that's the way it is. Then in terms of Animate Dead... if all necromancers did was use corpses that were voluntarily donated to him for his work, or he only used the bodies of evil creatures... perhaps animating the dead would not be seen as an evil act. But that *never* happens. Necromancers (traditionally) have used ANY bodies they could get their hands on. They just went down to the local cemetery and raised up the corpses buried there. People who could have been friends, family, or acquaintances. Or at the very least, fellow humans. Completely disturbing these gravesites for their own ends, not caring one whit of the feelings of the friends or family of the people buried there. THAT'S why it's traditionally been seen as "evil". And until the game puts in the default game settings that you're ONLY allowed to raise the bodies of your enemies... it will never been seen as a good act (unless in your particular game world you decide to change it, which is entirely the point.) [/QUOTE]

Verification