Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
Kahuna Burger said:
Of course, Detect Evil doesn't help you ferret out those nasty neutral mercenary types.
That's what Bless, Bane, and Detect Magic are for
-Hyp.
Using Poison Evil?
- Thread starter Philip
- Start date
Of course, Detect Evil doesn't help you ferret out those nasty neutral mercenary types.
That's what Bless, Bane, and Detect Magic are for
-Hyp.
Kahuna Burger
First Post
jgsugden said:
A) one doesn't negate the other, us shade of greyers like both but the pure evil in moderation - it gets boring.
B) We don't "profess" to like it, we like it and say so. Don't call our honesty into question just because you don't enjoy the same things.
Kahuna burger
Last edited:
Is poison Evil
Take a look at the deepwood sniper.They are not an evil prestige class but they have the ability to use poisons.Its what u do with a spell or ability not what u hit.Is a gun evil(no) its the person who wields it who is the evil one. You have to be able to make decisions in choosing to do an evil act and oviviously a poison does not have the ability to choose whether something is good or bad. I reckon the shady assissan/theif class which might use poisons alot have cast a opinion on poisons. So when other classes uses to kill Evil mobs its classed as Evil. If u shot a new born baby in the street with an arrow with no poison on it its evil. If u shoot a new born baby in the street with a poison arrow its still evil the poison does not change the act at all. The only difference between poison and other spells/abilities that its a DOT(damage over Time) and it might drain a few stats but you are going to die from it straight away usually.
Take a look at the deepwood sniper.They are not an evil prestige class but they have the ability to use poisons.Its what u do with a spell or ability not what u hit.Is a gun evil(no) its the person who wields it who is the evil one. You have to be able to make decisions in choosing to do an evil act and oviviously a poison does not have the ability to choose whether something is good or bad. I reckon the shady assissan/theif class which might use poisons alot have cast a opinion on poisons. So when other classes uses to kill Evil mobs its classed as Evil. If u shot a new born baby in the street with an arrow with no poison on it its evil. If u shoot a new born baby in the street with a poison arrow its still evil the poison does not change the act at all. The only difference between poison and other spells/abilities that its a DOT(damage over Time) and it might drain a few stats but you are going to die from it straight away usually.
Hand of Vecna
First Post
If I'm remembering correctly, the BoVD did tack the [Evil] descriptor onto the Poison spell (and on the Contagion spell, but not Cloudkill).
I believe the reason poisons are treated as Not Nice Things is b/c poisons can only be used to kill (or at the very least severely harm) living creatures -- a Burning Hands spell could be used to cook food or quick-set concrete, a Shocking Grasp spell could be used in creating etched metal artwork, etc. (though this doesn't excuse Magic Missile; I'm guessing Cloudkill's not evil [evil enough?] b/c it can be used to kill moles in their nest or ant colonies [and who's going to mourn them?])
I believe the reason poisons are treated as Not Nice Things is b/c poisons can only be used to kill (or at the very least severely harm) living creatures -- a Burning Hands spell could be used to cook food or quick-set concrete, a Shocking Grasp spell could be used in creating etched metal artwork, etc. (though this doesn't excuse Magic Missile; I'm guessing Cloudkill's not evil [evil enough?] b/c it can be used to kill moles in their nest or ant colonies [and who's going to mourn them?])
Last edited:
Viktyr Gehrig
First Post
Can't use a longsword for much more than killing people, either. Don't have to be evil to use one of those.
Hand of Vecna
First Post
You can use the flat of the longsword blade and do only subdual/nonlethal damage -- a sword can be used for things other than killing.
Last edited:
Sejs
First Post
~
Just pitching my dime into the pot.
Poison Use: dishonorable yes, evil no. Paladins are barred from using poison because it's mentioned that they're expected to act honorably, which in turn speciffically mentions poison. As for Ravages, etc or whatever the BoED says - sorry, I've not read it yet so I can't say.
A good-aligned person shouldn't be at risk of their alignment shifting for using poison, and in my oppinion a paladin shouldn't suffer immediate paladin-status loss for using poison. More along the lines of dad giving you a stern look of reproof and shaking his head disappointedly. Intentionally non-lethal stuff like knockout gas or sleeping potion shouldn't even get that, heck. Far as I can see it, a paladin would probably get a thumbs up for knocking out the guards with amnesia dust rather than gutting them lifeless or whalloping them upside the head.
As for the idea of poison being evil because it's indescriminate and can cause harm if stumbled across by the ignorant: a fork or a cliff can kill someone if mishandled by the ignorant. But just because little Jonny Stumblebum plummets off the cliff into the sea, trips and winds up with the ol' fork-in-the-eye, falls over a rusty rake and gets tetnis, or decides to see what the contents of the wierd brown bottle with the skull on the label tastes like.. doesn't mean any of them are evil.
^_^
Just pitching my dime into the pot.
Poison Use: dishonorable yes, evil no. Paladins are barred from using poison because it's mentioned that they're expected to act honorably, which in turn speciffically mentions poison. As for Ravages, etc or whatever the BoED says - sorry, I've not read it yet so I can't say.
A good-aligned person shouldn't be at risk of their alignment shifting for using poison, and in my oppinion a paladin shouldn't suffer immediate paladin-status loss for using poison. More along the lines of dad giving you a stern look of reproof and shaking his head disappointedly. Intentionally non-lethal stuff like knockout gas or sleeping potion shouldn't even get that, heck. Far as I can see it, a paladin would probably get a thumbs up for knocking out the guards with amnesia dust rather than gutting them lifeless or whalloping them upside the head.
As for the idea of poison being evil because it's indescriminate and can cause harm if stumbled across by the ignorant: a fork or a cliff can kill someone if mishandled by the ignorant. But just because little Jonny Stumblebum plummets off the cliff into the sea, trips and winds up with the ol' fork-in-the-eye, falls over a rusty rake and gets tetnis, or decides to see what the contents of the wierd brown bottle with the skull on the label tastes like.. doesn't mean any of them are evil.
^_^
Interesting discussion. The thing I have found about morality is that it is often difficult to define. D&D divides good and evil along pretty clear cut lines, but even in this game there is a Neutral gray area.
My take on it? Poison, as anything else, is not inherently good or evil. To say otherwise would be to say that every animal or plant which is poisonous is evil by nature. On the contrary, that is simply one out of many defense mechanisms nature employs. What would make poison evil? Some might say that it causes harm, suffering, or death. Others would say that those who use it are often unsrcupulous opponents. That may be true, but that does not make it evil.
Scissors can be used to inflict harm, kill, or induce suffering. Does that make scissors evil? Is every animal that has claws or every bush that has thorns evil? Why not? Those things can suase harm. Indeed, anything can be used for evil. That does not make everything evil. It is the individual and how he chooses to use it that makes that decision. Yes, poison can hurt you, kill you. But so can a Paladin's battleaxe! Every lawful good fighter who goes out and inflicts a bloody beatdown on the forces of evil is causing an awful lot of pain, suffering, and death. But that does not make him evil.
Poison even has many medicinal benefits. So I would definately say that poison is not itself evil, even though many will use it for such ends. But it can be fairly said by some that it is dishonorable (which is why paladins can't use it). But even that is a matter of perspective.
My take on it? Poison, as anything else, is not inherently good or evil. To say otherwise would be to say that every animal or plant which is poisonous is evil by nature. On the contrary, that is simply one out of many defense mechanisms nature employs. What would make poison evil? Some might say that it causes harm, suffering, or death. Others would say that those who use it are often unsrcupulous opponents. That may be true, but that does not make it evil.
Scissors can be used to inflict harm, kill, or induce suffering. Does that make scissors evil? Is every animal that has claws or every bush that has thorns evil? Why not? Those things can suase harm. Indeed, anything can be used for evil. That does not make everything evil. It is the individual and how he chooses to use it that makes that decision. Yes, poison can hurt you, kill you. But so can a Paladin's battleaxe! Every lawful good fighter who goes out and inflicts a bloody beatdown on the forces of evil is causing an awful lot of pain, suffering, and death. But that does not make him evil.
Poison even has many medicinal benefits. So I would definately say that poison is not itself evil, even though many will use it for such ends. But it can be fairly said by some that it is dishonorable (which is why paladins can't use it). But even that is a matter of perspective.
Similar Threads
