Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cbas10" data-source="post: 1284638" data-attributes="member: 6459">The reason I brought that up was because I have admittedly not heard of the author or book and was thinking (read: hoping) that you were quoting something game-related (since this is a gaming-related thread on a gaming-related forum).I admit, I have been thinking about this more than most posts; even talking to the gaming buddies about it.  We are still unclear as to whether you are truly buying this yourself or are posting all of this to screw with the heads of the other forum members.Okay, when placed into context, "he" is certainly the player character.  So let me get this straight...you agree with me that having a King who views defense of the land as an act of war would be crazy or had "lost his marbles?"  What is the difference between viewing the King as such and what you have been saying?  I'm confused.Let's try not to bring real-world politics into this.  Rarely on a forum like this is it ever productive.Never said your post was not welcome; I merely asked what your point was.  My earlier proposed situation was stated to you because the topic was about good/evil issues in a "vanilla" campaign setting.  I know your setting is different than mine and that of the "core game" so I was using the "core game" as a common point of reference to get you to illustrate your points.  When questions were dodged and "not in my game" disclaimers were put up instead, it merely confused me even more...wondering what your point was.Okay....NOW I finally get it.  The whole "defender starts the war" is just a clever twist on somantics and a crazy play on words.  If a horde of orcs takes over a village and demands to have all of the food and money in the village, the villagers technically are starting the war if they resist orc-occupation (after attempts at diplomacy, etc); however, the orcs are still the "bad guys" morally responsible for the bad stuff going on.  I'm guessing that if an outside group (neighboring village) viewed war in any form as evil, only the most closed-minded or shallowest of intellect would see the villagers as anything close to "evil."  Cultures, who did view any sort of war as evil and viewed the invaded villagers as evil, would quickly isolate themselves under banners of self-righteousness.  If they were to ever be invaded themselves, the culture would self-destruct as various factions faught over how to deal with said invasion.  In my opinion, they'd already be self-destructing, as such pacifist ideas would make it difficult to combat internal crime and corruption; especially if said culture had pride in itself being religious and devout.</blockquote>

Verification