is this an evil act?

[Nifft]

I gotta agree: Tempus would favor Trial-by-Combat. Possibly to the death, but at least to "first blood to touch the ground".

-- Nifft

 

[ShadowMaster]

I just sent an email to my DM asking him to redo that scene. I'll challenge that guy in a duel to death.

Maybe, personnaly, I would like to kill everybody that do evil act, that's why I'm just doing my best trying to figure out for each given situation, what would be the reaction of my dwarven fighter of Tempus.

thank you guyz.

 

[SylverFlame]

Just to put in my two bits:

The fact that you told him to leave and then blasted him in the back makes it an evil act. If you had of told him you were going to mete out justice, then your butt's covered.

However, nice end-run around the "won't endanger their life" bit in the Charm Person spell. Gotta remember that one.

 

[jgbrowning]

No.

gotta agree.

joe b.

 

[Umbran]

Magically ensorcel a guy to believe you are a great friend of his. Finish your busines, tell him to leave and stab him in the back? Yeah, that's evil. Killing helpless folks isn't good for your karma, dude. Had you forgotten?

The fact that he had been the member of an evil cult may (or may not) give you reason to try to deal with him somehow. But you had already rendered him relatively harmless for the moment. You could have dealt with him in manyh other ways. There was no need to kill him except for expediency. Killing people for expediency is bad.

 

[jdavis]

A trial by combat would be much better, stabbing a helpless person in the back is pretty iffy. Of course being Chaotic you really wouldn't have to fight your duels by any rules, stab him in the front next time, then call it a holy duel.

 

[Zerovoid]

I'm not so sure that this should be evil.

Why is it ok to cast hold person on an enemy, and kill them while they're helpless, but not ok to cast charm person on an enemy, and kill them while they're helpless. And how is either of these different from a fighter just stabbing the guy with a sword?

The important thing in any case is whether they deserve to be killed. The method doesn't matter.

In this case though, I have to agree that Tempus particuliarly would look down on your character's attacking from behind, but Tempus isn't known for being particuliarly Good or pragmatic.

 

[Sejs]

Chaotic Good, and a worshiper of Tempus? Nope, you did just dandy.


Loot at it this way. He was a slaver, someone who kidnapped people, and turned them into property.. chattel.. with no remorse or regret. He did wrong unto others for personal gain and/or enjoyment. He was Evil, and while not necessarily lawful.. he did things that also would rankle the Chaotic portion of your alignment as well.

As for religeon.. Tempus is the god of war. You know the old saying 'God helps those who help themselves."? Well that's Tempus in a nutshell. The Lord of Battles doesn't care who is right, only who is left.. he doesn't care what your cause is.. what he DOES care about is that you fight valiantly, and FOR YOURSELF. Tempurians distain ranged weapons because they distance ones self from the reality of the fight.. they take away a chance for the other guy to get a shot in for himself while you remain all safe and happy. People who would use slaves are much.. much worse. They tend not to even be firing the bow themselves.. they fight by proxy. Tempurians would hate that.

 

[LostSoul]

Another no vote.

I'd say Neutral.

 

[Apok]

As for religeon.. Tempus is the god of war. You know the old saying 'God helps those who help themselves."? Well that's Tempus in a nutshell. The Lord of Battles doesn't care who is right, only who is left.. he doesn't care what your cause is.. what he DOES care about is that you fight valiantly, and FOR YOURSELF. Tempurians distain ranged weapons because they distance ones self from the reality of the fight.. they take away a chance for the other guy to get a shot in for himself while you remain all safe and happy. People who would use slaves are much.. much worse. They tend not to even be firing the bow themselves.. they fight by proxy. Tempurians would hate that.

This is probably the best description of the edicts of Tempus I've ever heard. Hear, hear!

However, I'm not too sure about that bow thing. Tempus is the god of battles and war, not just personal combat, and in war you do what you must to win. The only way I could see Tempus dissapproving of someone winning a war is if they did it using diplomacy or treachery rather than battle prowess and tactics. Weather a warrior uses a bow or a sword probably doesn't mean much to Tempus if you're fighting valiantly.