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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 7066257" data-attributes="member: 48965">"There's a big difference between killing wantonly and killing as a last resort... with plenty of in-between space there.  Now I'm going to assume we are speaking to the D&D genre (where violence of all types is pretty common) as opposed to real life  and with that said... there is nothing in the descriptions of the good alignments that necessitate killing as a last resort.  In fact if it will expediently save lives, stop the bad guy, etc. with minimal risk and loss of innocents it should probably be the go to for the good guys in a D&D world... but not the redemption paladin, he needs to be sure that this person or monster is irredeemable in order to use death as his first response.   Now I also don't see how Killing in more-or-less consensual situations is somehow more "good" than fighting dirty.  Is the chaotic good rogue less good because he used a sneaky move to finish the cultist off before he could murder his prepared sacrifices to a dark god.  I would think not.  Being honorable and being good are not the same thing. So you're assertion is that enough good characters in the D&D genre use violence as a last resort that it's the most common method of dealing with threats?  Huh?  This certainly doesn't match up with the source material (novels, supplements, etc) or how I've seen it played by most people...  In fact I would argue the opposite is true. It doesn't imply anything of the sort.  The paladin has devoted his life to said calling (and let's be honest for a minute, you are focusing on a small piece of the oath not it's entirety), that's the point of the oath giving him supernatural power, most characters who may decide to use violence as a last resort... haven't devoted themselves to it in the same way.  I mean this is a silly argument because it can be applied to nearly anything if worded right.  Why can't anyone who is literate (as most D&D characters are) learn to read and cast spells without taking a spellcasting class?  Why can't anyone who prays to a god and shows devotion get some magic without taking the cleric class?  This argument doesn;t make much sense in the context of D&D.</blockquote>

Verification