Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arkhandus" data-source="post: 3669237" data-attributes="member: 13966">No.&nbsp; Killing other living creatures in D&amp;D is only evil if those other living creatures are not evil themselves and are not perpetuating evil at the time.&nbsp; If you kill an enemy that was about to slay a hostage, you haven't committed evil, even if that enemy was good or neutral beforehand; they were preparing to do evil, and you stopped them.&nbsp; It was not exactly a good act, as it would have been better to subdue them instead, but it was not evil.Current circumstances matter too, but it's the action that matters most.&nbsp; WarlockLord's example of throwing an orphan at the villain to stop him from destroying the orphanage would be evil.&nbsp; Not as evil, perhaps, as letting the villain destroy the orphanage while you just run up to him to beat him down yourself, but it certainly wasn't not-evil to use that one orphan as a deadly projectile (?! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused&nbsp; &nbsp; :confused:"&nbsp; data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /> ).If you do evil so that, sometime much later on, worse evil will be averted, it's still more evil than just trying to avert the later evil without perpetrating an evil act right now to do so.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Arkhandus, post: 3669237, member: 13966"] No. Killing other living creatures in D&D is only evil if those other living creatures are not evil themselves and are not perpetuating evil at the time. If you kill an enemy that was about to slay a hostage, you haven't committed evil, even if that enemy was good or neutral beforehand; they were preparing to do evil, and you stopped them. It was not exactly a [I]good[/I] act, as it would have been better to [I]subdue[/I] them instead, but it was [I]not evil[/I]. Current circumstances matter too, but it's the action that matters most. WarlockLord's example of throwing an orphan at the villain to stop him from destroying the orphanage would be evil. Not as evil, perhaps, as letting the villain destroy the orphanage while you just run up to him to beat him down yourself, but it [I]certainly wasn't not-evil [/I] to use that one orphan as a deadly projectile (?! :confused: ). If you do evil so that, sometime much later on, worse evil will be averted, it's still more evil than just trying to avert the later evil without perpetrating an evil act right now to do so. [/QUOTE]

Verification