Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 1282393" data-attributes="member: 8863">I'll add that overall alignment considerations apply here.As people said above, lawful armies are less likely to rape, loot, and pillage because they're better supplied and organized.&nbsp; That includes rape, because some of the better equipped armies will bring along camp followers to take care of the soldiers' urges.Also lawful armies may be less likely to loot and pillage, because rich farmland, cities, and stuff like that would be considered valuable resources to be captured, rather than destroyed.&nbsp; If the lawful army is likely trying to expand the dominion of its parent nation, capturing and using resources over the long run has more strategic value than taking what you can and destroying what you can't.&nbsp; Even lawful evil armies will do that, but of course, they're more likely to enslave the native population or otherwise subjugate them.&nbsp; A lawful army may also crack down on rapes, because that sort of thing tends to outrage the conquered, and cause uprisings.&nbsp;&nbsp; Disipline is also an issue, because some soldiers might end up fighting over women and loot, and a lawful army will likely try to avoid that.&nbsp; Now if the lawful army is out there to destroy the enemy instead of simply conquering it, yes there will be plenty of raping, looting and pillaging, but there's probbly going to be more organization of it.Good and evil to some extent play a role as well.&nbsp; An evil army isn't going to have any moral compunctions about their actions, whereas a good army would.&nbsp; But I would say most armies would likely fall into a largly neutral area with lots of shades of grey, especially in wars that involves political cuases and such.&nbsp; Of course we're talking D&amp;D here, so yeah, there's confrontaions of good versus evil as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Orius, post: 1282393, member: 8863"] I'll add that overall alignment considerations apply here. As people said above, lawful armies are less likely to rape, loot, and pillage because they're better supplied and organized. That includes rape, because some of the better equipped armies will bring along camp followers to take care of the soldiers' urges. Also lawful armies may be less likely to loot and pillage, because rich farmland, cities, and stuff like that would be considered valuable resources to be captured, rather than destroyed. If the lawful army is likely trying to expand the dominion of its parent nation, capturing and using resources over the long run has more strategic value than taking what you can and destroying what you can't. Even lawful evil armies will do that, but of course, they're more likely to enslave the native population or otherwise subjugate them. A lawful army may also crack down on rapes, because that sort of thing tends to outrage the conquered, and cause uprisings. Disipline is also an issue, because some soldiers might end up fighting over women and loot, and a lawful army will likely try to avoid that. Now if the lawful army is out there to destroy the enemy instead of simply conquering it, yes there will be plenty of raping, looting and pillaging, but there's probbly going to be more organization of it. Good and evil to some extent play a role as well. An evil army isn't going to have any moral compunctions about their actions, whereas a good army would. But I would say most armies would likely fall into a largly neutral area with lots of shades of grey, especially in wars that involves political cuases and such. Of course we're talking D&D here, so yeah, there's confrontaions of good versus evil as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification