Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dissenter" data-source="post: 435904" data-attributes="member: 8343">I didn't realize I would recieve such a vehement, and utterly ridiculous reply.You obviously haven't thought about the situation at all.  Here are examples to back my position.  With our current system of laws do we endorse assassination? No. Do we endorse vigilantism? No.  Even when they seem utterly and completely warrented, it is still illegal to assassinate someone.  If someone were to approach the police and say they had shot the 'serial killer of the era' would they be given a medal?  Heck no, they would be thrown in jail and prosecuted.I realize that a fantasy situation is different then the current one, but the moral questions remain the same.  Who gives you the right to pronounce someone a 'bad guy' without witnessing their actions, or giving them a fair trial?  And by what you wrote, it seems you are still playing the black and white 'good guy' 'bad guy' dnd that so many of us left behind.  If you want to make it that concrete, fine.  Personally I like to add a little...make that a lot of depth to my games.  Actions that may be justified still don't make them ethically correct.  If you want to play a character without ethics, fine...I would say you are embracing societal chaos ( i.e. chaotic ).  If you want to play a character with ethics then such a character would seriously think twice about stabbing the black and white 'bad guy' while he is in the privy.  Frankly its unprofessional.  How can you call yourself a combatant/adventurer/archmage or whatever when all you have really become is a glorified assassin.   And where do you draw the line about which 'bad guy's' throat you are going to cut in their sleep?  This guy killed and robbed a merchant, does this mean hes dead? This guy robbed a tavern does he get the strike team gack?  This guy cheated on his taxes, does he get it?  Children who might have skipped school that day will tremble in their sleep thinking the self justified strike team is scrying on them right now.  Even without the ethical dilemia of becoming the judge jury and executioner, it is still about fair play, and what is considered professional.  Lawful characters would presumably fight with some kind of code of honor, whatever that might be.  The same guy who would let a disarmed opponent pick up his sword is the same guy who would recoil in horror at the mages mention of the buffscrytel attack.  Apparently you have never heard of the term honor before, so this is probably not making any sense to you.That aside, its also about opening pandoras box.  If this becomes common practice your PC's should be dead within 3-4 buffscrytels.  Every 'bad guy' on the face of the planet will fear the strike teams imminent arrival, find the nearest wizard and buffscrytel gack you in the shower.  However I would bet that you are playing the type of dnd where the PC's never take off their clothes, and even go to public functions armed and armored.simple ethics 101. Even after all of this I see a place for your black and white style of play.  I'm not saying it wrong, and I can see why after dealing with the necessary complexities of the world you would want to sit down and play a in black and white world.  However if you ever find yourself looking for something more, try throwing some real life issues into your game.</blockquote>

Verification