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="Fundin Strongarm" data-source="post: 1290964" data-attributes="member: 11383">I'm sorry, but whatever excuse the enemy uses to invade is not the fault of the one being invaded.  If a heretofore peaceful horde that was content to live in the desert suddenly sweeps in, the correct action of a free country is to defend itself.Let's break that down further.  If your neighbour tries to annex (steal) your car are you going to argue that you've provoked it because you have a nicer car than him (or that you have a car and he doesn't)?  Is your neighbour's theft justified?  This is why the Aikido philosophy proposed by barsoomcore (assuming he has laid it out correctly) can often be silly.  I do not agree with his definition of who starts a war (or perhaps the problem is the definition of war itself).Actually, looking at the world, there has not been a war between free countries.  They have been between collectivist countries amoungst themselves or between collectivist countries and free countries.I would be saddened that the madman would/did not follow reason.  However, while not taking particular pleasure in the act, one could feel pride in knowing that one has acted properly.I think one ought to distinguish between murder and killing.  Premeditated killing is murder and is indeed wrong.  Killing in self-defence is not.  See Elaer's posts on Just Wars.  Context is everything.I believe Lord Pendragon and Elder Basilisk have answered fairly well Dogbrain's original (flawed) premise about how it would apply in game terms.</blockquote>

Verification