D&D General The Problem with Evil or what if we don't use alignments?

[Vaalingrade]

While I do agree that calling poison itself "evil" is ridiculous, I feel like people don't really think about why it has that connotation to begin with.

Because medieval nobles were cowards and didn't want peasants to off them while bypassing their money shield expensive armor?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Doesn't that assume that they had water to begin with? It's funny how the concept of morality only matter when you're with other people.

Whether or not the Paladin's action is bad or not depends on whether or not he's just making excuses for his actions.

Beside, one bad act doesn't automatically make someone evil. I just hate the idea that it's better ask for forgiveness than ask for permission.

And what about asking for neither?

And yes, morality by neccessity involves other people. There is pretty much nothing that a Paladin could do while alone in a desert that could qualify on a moral spectrum without involving another person. And, additionally, what is the difference between "excuses" and "reasons"? Just what the DM judges in the moment?

This ties directly into the point. Why are setting things up for DMs to become judges of morality? Sure, somethings are blatantly obvious, but morality is a quagmire on the best of days, and it seems poorly thought out to try and have someone judge the morality of their friends in a game, especially when you start involving those grey areas and matters of opinion.

You can argue about whether or not killing someone is bad but it's generally accepted that torture is unambiguously bad. That's one of the reasons why poison is frowned upon. It might be "cleaner" then chopping off their head, but it's just as torturous.

If you do it when your target isn't aware, then it robs them of the chance to surrender or argue their case.

While I do agree that calling poison itself "evil" is ridiculous, I feel like people don't really think about why it has that connotation to begin with.

And some poisons are completely peaceful ways to die, especially compared to the terror of a man in armor running you through with a length of sharpened steel, perforating your organs and feeling your life blood drain to the ground.

Additionally... some people might not deserve the chance to argue their case or surrender. A king with the power to kill everyone in a room, who has tortured and murdered thousands of people to fuel a demonic portal in hopes of ruling the world doesn't seem like the type of person to confront head on and demand their surrender. They aren't going to say or do anything to change the point that they need to be stopped.

I also fully agree with @Vaalingrade . The reason poison is considered evil and a "cowards weapon" is because it was the most effective tool of the weak against the strong. Yes, killing someone is wrong, but we give special connotations to those who do so in ways that are subtle or harder to "defend against" without considering that a knight in full armor running down commoners in normal clothes is just as untouchable and unstoppable as the courtier with the poisoned wine. The difference is, who has the money and the power.

 

[d24454_modern]

And what about asking for neither?

And yes, morality by neccessity involves other people. There is pretty much nothing that a Paladin could do while alone in a desert that could qualify on a moral spectrum without involving another person. And, additionally, what is the difference between "excuses" and "reasons"? Just what the DM judges in the moment?

This ties directly into the point. Why are setting things up for DMs to become judges of morality? Sure, somethings are blatantly obvious, but morality is a quagmire on the best of days, and it seems poorly thought out to try and have someone judge the morality of their friends in a game, especially when you start involving those grey areas and matters of opinion.




And some poisons are completely peaceful ways to die, especially compared to the terror of a man in armor running you through with a length of sharpened steel, perforating your organs and feeling your life blood drain to the ground.

Additionally... some people might not deserve the chance to argue their case or surrender. A king with the power to kill everyone in a room, who has tortured and murdered thousands of people to fuel a demonic portal in hopes of ruling the world doesn't seem like the type of person to confront head on and demand their surrender. They aren't going to say or do anything to change the point that they need to be stopped.

I also fully agree with @Vaalingrade . The reason poison is considered evil and a "cowards weapon" is because it was the most effective tool of the weak against the strong. Yes, killing someone is wrong, but we give special connotations to those who do so in ways that are subtle or harder to "defend against" without considering that a knight in full armor running down commoners in normal clothes is just as untouchable and unstoppable as the courtier with the poisoned wine. The difference is, who has the money and the power.

So it's not so that you can keep your hands clean and no one would even know that you got away with murder. Ok, let's go with that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So it's not so that you can keep your hands clean and no one would even know that you got away with murder. Ok, let's go with that.

A scalpel can perform surgery or torture. The use of a scalpel itself tells you nothing about the one using it, you need to know how and why they used it.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

I'd much rather be poisoned than attacked with a sword. A simple Lesser Restoration deals with most poisons, but getting that Regenerate for your limbs chopped off is always a pain.