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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6160680" data-attributes="member: 6681948">Depending on the prevalence of magic, I question whether people in a D&D milieu would perceive any difference.  And those Raise spells are granted by a deity - who are we mortals to claim their use is immoral?First, if it cannot make moral judgements, then how does it possess a soul?  Second, cats still hunt even when their sustenance is provided by pet owners.Just like animals, plants can be awakened to "humanlike sentience" by the Awaken spell, and we can speak with them - that spell even notes some might be friendly.  Equal rights for plants!They are nothing like real druids (of whom we know very little, really).  I see no reason they would be hippies.  As you note, nature is violent.  One cannot revere nature and ignore that violence, can one?Perhaps he needs to take those "merciful" feats, and strike only to subdue.  Or perhaps we accept the spirit of the game, that violence for its own sake is wrong, but that violence can be applied to even Good purposes.  The Paladin does not love violence, but might well perceive the need.  Can he communicate before the sacrifice takes place?  If not, the death occurs for no purpose.  Is a willing sacrifice somehow better?  It's OK as long as it's suicide rather than homicide?  On the other hand, will the Good character refuse to take the opportunity to flee when another takes heroic, and ultimately suicidal, action to save the rest of the party?  Will he insist on dying too rather than accept that sacrifice?I think we agree there are no easy right answers here, anyway.</blockquote>

Verification