Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Al" data-source="post: 242779" data-attributes="member: 2486">The perennial favourite resurfaces: this is the third time I've seen this thread (I started one once) but I still feel obliged to post.Poison is not evil.  It is not lawful.  It is not good.  It is not chaotic.  It is neutral.  It is not even dishonourable.  It is a tool.  Asking whether poison is evil is likely asking 'is a sword evil?' or 'is a fireball evil?'Okay...for those of you whom think poison should be evil/illegal/dishonourable/unlawful.da chicken: Well, what about hitting him with an axe, or launching a magic missile?  Surely the intent of chopping a guy's head off is to 'maim or kill your opponent'?  And as for no quarter being given, this is a ludicrous notion.  For the vast majority of poison, which do not do Con damage, you are MORE likely to capture your opponent and to spare him from dying vis-a-vis a sword or lightning bolt.  Is a Finger of Death evil? Utter assertion.  The 'dirty atomic weapons' would be large-scale blast spells.  Non-Con poisons are effective in making your opponent cease fighting, and Con poisons can be ranked alongside any damaging weapon or spell.  Attacking civilians with poison is evil (but so would shooting him with a crossbow), but attacking an opposing combatant is no more evil than hacking him with a sword or blasting him with a fireball. How is poison nondiscretionary?  Unless you're talking about poison gas released over a civilian population, poison is very discretionary.  You target an enemy and then use poison against him.  How discretionary does one need to be?  The terrorist comparison is pure assertion, btw.Celebrim: Let me see...you can wander in to a weapon shop and buy a sword.  You can probably saunter into a magic shop and buy a Fireball scroll.  But you can't buy poison without arouses suspicion.  It seems hypocritical.  Either the purchase of ANY weapon causes suspicion, or the purchase of NO weapon causes suspicion: poison is just like any other weapon of war.  With regard to 'no quarter is to be given', again I disagree.  For one, poison in DnD is about the most effective way of defeating a high-level enemy by non-lethal means short of disabling magic (subdual damage really doesn't have the same impact).  Secondly, and more significantly, the 'no quarter' argument is more appropriate to magic.  Is the use of death magics evil?  The PHB certainly doesn't list as either [Evil] or [Chaotic], so by this token neither is poison.  Poison is no more 'dishonourable' than any other weapon inherently - but if the society terms it as 'dishonourable', then so be it.Ealli: Illegal?  Depends on the campaign world (I freely choose to ignore the DMG's ruling).  Necessary of premeditation?  Is preparing a Fireball not premeditation of doing someone grievous harm?  Dangerous without requiring training?  Alchemist's Fire anyone?  (besides, I disagree with the third being strictly neither lawful nor good- any weapon can be dangerous, even without training)Ultimately, poison is like any other weapon: perhaps non-Con poison can be seen even to be more merciful.  If a Fireball is evil, if a sword is evil, if a crossbow is evil- then so is poison.  But if they are not, then why is poison.  Tools cannot be inherently evil: the alignment is what it is used for, just as any other tool or weapon.  Foul murder is evil, using poison or steel; defeating an evil orcish champion is (usually) good, no matter which weapon is used.</blockquote>

Verification