Is Domination Evil?

[Gez]

Domination is no more evil than a sword or a fireball is.

Yep. It's neutral, and it can be an evil act.

 

[Gothmog]

Never a good reason? One can always contrive a "good" reason for anything:

Someone is about to throw themselves off a cliff to his death because he is depressed. You, a wizard, have only dominate person in memory. Are you saying preventing that death with domination is not good? Free Will is more important than Life? If the depression is temporary, won't he thank the wizard for preventing him from taking a foolish action?

Domination is no more evil than a sword or a fireball is.

True, a reason can be contrived to justify most any action, but in the context of an adventure, mental domination abilities are seldom, if ever, used for something considered "good". Using dominate person to do something "evil" in order to accomplish something "good" in the long run doesn't still justify the action to a LG or NG character (CG might be an exception, but rarely). However, too many callous and evil uses of dominate would send even the purest soul down the slope towards evil, and using it for personal gain, power, or just because its "easier". In your example, its hard to tell if using domination would be good or evil- although probably more towards the good end of things. But the person could be very upset you prevented them from their intended action, even if it was self-destructive. And I would argue that yes, the illusion of free will is more important than life in many cases (although this is a rather modern mindset- neither life nor free will were given as much weight historically in medieval society). So while the spell itself isn't evil, most of the reasons it would be used could be considered evil.

 

[Trickstergod]

Using dominate person to do something "evil" in order to accomplish something "good" in the long run doesn't still justify the action to a LG or NG character (CG might be an exception, but rarely).

I'd say the only Good alignment that doesn't make exceptions (or the fewest) would be Neutral Good; both a Lawful and Chaotic Good individual have other agendas and beliefs outside of simply doing the right thing.

In this instance, I'd place the Lawful Good individual as the more likely to make the exception - sacrificing the individuals will for the good of others. Whereas the Chaotic Good individual would have a bigger problem in violating the individuals will.

Lawful Good is no more pure of thought and action than Chaotic Good.

 

[Thresher]

An emoticon of a giant red herring being waved about which could be used to cut down on the length of the silly posts in question? WHAT?

gggrrrrrrr......

Kahuna burger

Have a cry and a lie down pet, youve obviously dented something.

Applying contemporary morals and ethics to a fantasy setting with carved in stone behaviour patterns, is p*ssing up the same old dungeon wall is as old as the home invasion joke.

You-just-cant-do-it.

D&D is this
Hack & Burn someone to death when they dont deserve it.
Bad
Make someone jump to their death when they dont deserve it.
Bad

Hack & Burn someone to death when they have commited some evil deeds
Good
Make someone jump to their death because they commited some evil deeds
Good

Hack & Burn someone to death to prevent them doing something naughty
Ambiguous/Nuetral
Make some jump up and down naked covered in penut butter while throwing toast at them to stop them doing bad things.
...maybe Ambiguous... maybe Chaotic Nuetral...

Its that damn easy.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Domination is Always Evil.

Yep. That's why it has the [Evil] descriptor.

Oh, wait...

 

[kirinke]

D&D is this
Hack & Burn someone to death when they dont deserve it.
Bad
Make someone jump to their death when they dont deserve it.
Bad

Hack & Burn someone to death when they have commited some evil deeds
Good
Make someone jump to their death because they commited some evil deeds
Good

Hack & Burn someone to death to prevent them doing something naughty
Ambiguous/Nuetral
Make some jump up and down naked covered in penut butter while throwing toast at them to stop them doing bad things.
...maybe Ambiguous... maybe Chaotic Nuetral...

Its that damn easy.

make some one do the hula dance naked covered in peanut butter and jelly as a practical joke - Chaotic neutral and darn funny. unless of course, it happens to be you.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Have a cry and a lie down pet, youve obviously dented something.

wow, a troll, cool....

 

[Camarath]

A special code we can put in our sigs that indicates we have not played a game post teenaged years (or maybe never) where we 'invaded' any living area without an unequivicol agressive act drawing us in?

Are you saying that in your games players have not and will not kill a creature unless forced to by that creature's own unequivocal acts of aggression? Note that IMO the actions of other creatures of the same race, culture, social group, or geographic area do not constitute an unequivocal act of aggression on the part of an indivdual.

 

[Thresher]

So thats what we call people who we dont agree with?

Dont take the moral high ground here mate, its the last bastion of the damned and self rightous, especially after you've fired off the first shots. Im happy to walk away from this right here and let it die. But you better have a good hard look at yourself in the meantime because it isnt that serious cheif.

 

[Piratecat]

Deep breaths, guys. It's not worth getting angry about.