D&D 5E Charm, the evil spells

[Fanaelialae]

Accelerated clone doesn’t really necessarily equate to child, and the Republic and Count Dooku are responsible for the clone army, not the Jedi.

I can see where he's coming from though. While Dooku commissioned the clones, it was the Jedi that ended up using them. And whether or not the clones were (in terms of maturation) children, they were effectively raised as soldiers, never having been given a choice in the matter. In essence, they're a an army enslaved from "birth". Which certainly makes the morality of the actions of the Jedi, regarding the clones, questionable at best.

 

[Remathilis]

The older I get, the more I realize almost ALL D&D magic is basically evil. You might carve out an exception for healing and abjuration magic and a few utility spells (prestidigitation) but the rest, very ethically dicey.

Necromancy, including magic that animates the dead is obvious. So is magic that summons monsters to fight for you (conjuration) and controls them (enchantment). You can by extension argue magic that is meant to deceive others (illusion) or pry secrets against their will (divination) is equally harmful. Of course, any magic used to harm others (evocation or other attack spells) serve the same function as any weapon, while it can be justified in certain circumstances it isn't ever considered to be a good or moral act in and of itself.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Necromancy, including magic that animates the dead is obvious.

Nah. That's just recycling.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

I don't have much to say on this topic other than wanting to mention that Jester (a Trickery Domain Cleric) in Campaign 2 of Critical Role made liberal use of spells such as Charm Person, Dominate Person, and even Modify Memory.

• On one occassion a nobleman was making unwelcome advances on another member of the group. Jester used Charm Person to convince him to retrive a supposed glove from a balcony, at which point another member of the group used a magic item to seal the door leading back in.
• In one of her most iconic moments, Jester tricked a hag into eating a cupcake whose "dust of deliciousness" causes the ingester to have disadvantage on Wisdom saving throws before casting Modify Memory to convince the hag to lift a curse on another party member. However, another member of the party had it as part of his backstory that he was tricked into doing something terrible due to the influence of a modify memory spell, and Jester promises to only use it if it's absolutely necessary.
• That said, the group did at one point kidnap a gnome with the intention to cast Modify Memory on him to cover their own tracks, though Jester was out of spells for the day and they kept him with them out in the wilderness for the night (she ended up not getting the chance to cast it, though).
• In the final episode of the campaign Jester uses Dominate Person on an assassin to help fight an archmage, but thankfully the assassin had been wanting revenge on the archmage all along but had previously been too afraid to oppose him and continues fighting on the party's side even after the spell wears off.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Nah. That's just recycling.

I take it you're from Hollowfaust?

 

[Hexmage-EN]

It only boils down to that if you accept that influencing/overriding another's will is defacto evil.

Is Obi Wan Kenobi's "these are not the droids you are looking for" a horrific act the violates the will of the stormtrooper? Or, could it be a pacifistic solution that actually causes less (which might equate to zero) harm than the alternative of cutting his way through them with his light saber?

Early in my current campaign I introduced a pacificistic cleric NPC who is 100% against physical violence and at one point was willing to die rather than defend herself against an assassin. However, she also once cast Calm Emotions to make a gang of thieves indifferent to her and the party and convinced the group to escape with her instead of fighting. Her mindset is that so long as someone is alive they have the chance to change for the better, and killing deprives them of the chance of redemption.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I believe the movie shows the clones specifically at the physically a child stage going through training/learning/indoctrination(?) to prep for being adult soldiers in the army. Throughout their entire accelerated life cycle they seem to be part of the army.

Also the jedi fully use the clones as their army with the jedi as the commanders up until order 66 or whatever the number was.

It has been a while since I saw it though.

You’ve got the army commanders part backwards. The Jedi serve as generals in the Republic’s army. The Republic uses a clone army. They are not the Jedi’s army.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I can see where he's coming from though. While Dooku commissioned the clones, it was the Jedi that ended up using them. And whether or not the clones were (in terms of maturation) children, they were effectively raised as soldiers, never having been given a choice in the matter. In essence, they're a an army enslaved from "birth". Which certainly makes the morality of the actions of the Jedi, regarding the clones, questionable at best.

Again, the Jedi don’t “use” them, they serve in the same army. Besides which, the fact the movies fail to deal with the morality of cloned servants, doesn’t mean the Jedi are evil. It just means the story fails to address a moral issue.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Again, the Jedi don’t “use” them, they serve in the same army. Besides which, the fact the movies fail to deal with the morality of cloned servants, doesn’t mean the Jedi are evil. It just means the story fails to address a moral issue.

I believe at least some of the Jedi were generals in the army. Leading a slave army into battle vs owning that slave army strikes me as a morally suspect distinction.

It seems to me that by that reasoning, enchanters aren't any more evil than the Jedi. The stories D&D tells simply fail to address the moral issue of mind control.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I believe at least some of the Jedi were generals in the army. Leading a slave army into battle vs owning that slave army strikes me as a morally suspect distinction.

Okay.

It seems to me that by that reasoning, enchanters aren't any more evil than the Jedi. The stories D&D tells simply fail to address the moral issue of mind control.

We are the ones telling the stories, in D&D.

If you want to criticize Lucas for ignoring the moral implications of a slave army, go ahead.