Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thia Halmades" data-source="post: 2715971" data-attributes="member: 35863">Hrm.&nbsp; Always evil because the book says they're always evil, or always evil because of the general interpretation of your 'good' kingdom/empire/democracy?&nbsp; This chains back to the whole Crusade/Saracen argument.They're not us!&nbsp; They're evil!&nbsp; Whole books were written that proposed that argument.&nbsp; We know they weren't evil - but that didn't stop the righteous smiting at the time.&nbsp; If I have a group of Gnolls (which I do) and they're &quot;evil&quot; (which they are, by alignment) does that make them a threat, and worth smiting?What if I wrote a module where their &quot;evil&quot; was simply a function of how their society is forced to operate because of the depredations of the Empire, instead of a moral decision?&nbsp; According to them, they're doing fine.&nbsp; They don't eat babies.&nbsp; They aren't marauding villages.&nbsp; You CAN Smite them, and Smite WILL work.&nbsp; But would you be in the right?&nbsp; In other words:- Would it be Lawful to kill someone, because Detect Evil tells you they're evil?- Would it be Good to remove a Warchief because of his title, even if he's the one preaching tolerance?Your question, &quot;Living next to Mordor&quot; is a valid one.&nbsp; Then the Paladin (IMO) isn't going to go in single-handedly and start mowing them down.&nbsp; He'll gather an army, get the blessing of everyone involved, and lead the dramatic charge where he can get gloriously skewered on round one.&nbsp; Pro-Active can get you killed.&nbsp; Policing Mordor's borders while you assemble that army makes far more sense, and to me, is the more Paladin like behavior.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thia Halmades, post: 2715971, member: 35863"] Hrm. Always evil because the book says they're always evil, or always evil because of the general interpretation of your 'good' kingdom/empire/democracy? This chains back to the whole Crusade/Saracen argument. They're not us! They're evil! Whole books were written that proposed that argument. We know they weren't evil - but that didn't stop the righteous smiting at the time. If I have a group of Gnolls (which I do) and they're "evil" (which they are, by alignment) does that make them a threat, and worth smiting? What if I wrote a module where their "evil" was simply a function of how their society is forced to operate because of the depredations of the Empire, instead of a moral decision? According to them, they're doing fine. They don't eat babies. They aren't marauding villages. You CAN Smite them, and Smite WILL work. But would you be in the right? In other words: - Would it be Lawful to kill someone, because Detect Evil tells you they're evil? - Would it be Good to remove a Warchief because of his title, even if he's the one preaching tolerance? Your question, "Living next to Mordor" is a valid one. Then the Paladin (IMO) isn't going to go in single-handedly and start mowing them down. He'll gather an army, get the blessing of everyone involved, and lead the dramatic charge where he can get gloriously skewered on round one. Pro-Active can get you killed. Policing Mordor's borders while you assemble that army makes far more sense, and to me, is the more Paladin like behavior. [/QUOTE]

Verification