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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 243413" data-attributes="member: 4937">Al: Thank you for putting words in my mouth. You know, I like how you have to set up straw man arguements based on things I didn't say in order to put down my words however casual I may have been using them.  Makes me feel like I have a pretty strong argument. So let's see:"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."Now first of all, I didn't say that wandering into a weapon shop and buying a sword wouldn't arouse certain suspicions.  And I certainly didn't say that you could just wander into a magic shop and buy a fireball scroll.  In point of fact, in my campaigns there are laws governing who can own swords (weapons with a blade above a certain length) or wear armor, and if you want to walk around the country side (and particularly cross into another desmanse) in either then you either need noble rank or a script with permission of someone (like the King) OR ELSE you are considered bandits and are subject to justice.  And, not that there are alot of magic shops selling fireball scrolls to begin with, but where there are the purchase of such a weapon of mass destruction certainly causes note.  However, even this aside, the purchase of a lethal poison causes even MORE notice and is probably illegal unless you have membership in a particular guild with the right to possess poison (the rat catcher's guild for instance).  Poison is certainly not any other weapon of war.  It is concealable, difficult to defend against, and as someone else pointed out resistance to it doesn't 'scale up' as quickly as other damage because saves (and abilities I should add) don't improve as rapidly as hit points (read combat ability).  Finally, I think I can justify this difference in attitude toward poison vs. other weapons historically.  Consider the story Romeo and Juliet (late 16th century).  In it we find the following lines:Romeo: ....'What, ho! Apothecary!'Apothecary: 'Who calls so loud?'Romeo: 'Come hither man, I see that thou art poor: Hold here is 40 ducats: let me have a dram of poison, such soon speeding gear as will disperse itself through all the veins, that the life weary taker may fall dead...'Apothecary: 'Such mortal drugs I have; but Mantua's law is death to any he who utters him.'Romeo: 'Art thou so bare and full of wretchedness, and fearst to die? Famine is in thy cheeks...the world affords no law to make thee rich; then be not poor, but break it, and take this.'Apothecary: 'My poverty, but not my will, consents.'Romeo: 'I pay thy poverty and not thy will.'Apothecary: 'Put this in any liquid thing thy will, and drink it off; and, if you had the strength of twenty men, it will dispatch you straight.'Romeo: 'There is gold, worse poison to men's souls, doing more murders in this loathsome world than these poor compounds that thou mayst not sell...'Now consider, all throughout the story, Romeo and company have been going around with lethal weapons hanging from their sides, AND YET, the society they are in clearly treats poison as a more controlled substance and not merely any other 'weapon of war'.  (For one thing, prior to the 20th century, it wasn't really a weapon of war, and in the 20th century it largely wasn't seen as 'just another weapon of war' anyway.)  I would like to think that the above sort of conversation could occur in alot of places in my campaign world, if not so elegant, then at least in substance. Actually, come to think of it, it has.  And I've made similar plees as PC's in others campaigns."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)."Note the critical phrase 'in D&D'.  You are making an argument based off game rules, not reality.  I have said that one reason I modify the rules as frequently as I do (falling rules, poison rules, ect.) is I dislike players making 'game decisions' that differ significantly from the sort of decisions they would make if the world was real.  Players shouldn't jump off 4 story buildings because they know the damage will be 'trivial'.  Players shouldn't use poisons as if poison use was pacifistic.  Have I not in this thread argued that every poison ought to have some small chance of killing its subject, especially if that subject is injured already?  There are in reality very few strong poisons that are not risky to use, however differently the movies may portray this. Besides, rendering a person helpless is not necessarily proof of good and honorable motives."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],"No, the no quarter argument is just as appropriate to magic, and those that go tossing fireballs in town or attempting to charm its citizens better have unimpeachable justification.  Is the use of death magics evil?  Not necessarily, but societies are likely to see practisioners of death magic as evil whether they are or not.  Fear is not a rational motivator, and necromancers shouldn't expect not to recieve distrust if thier trade becomes known.  In some areas it may be flat out illegal."...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."Good.  We agree on that part.  I'm just suggesting that historically societies have seen poison as different than steel, and that there are reasons why they have done so.  Of course, this is fantasy, and we are free to invent societies where they don't but we do so thoughtfully if we expect to be taken seriously.</blockquote>

Verification