Was V's act evil? (Probable spoilers!)

[Wulf Ratbane]

You can't apply D&D reasoning to the real world. In D&D, everyone's moral code and values falls into one of nine basic categories. The real world is infinitely more complex than that.

What I find interesting is that I think if V had killed every one of those dragons individually, during the course of adventuring (and remember that "adventuring" means "invading their home for the express purpose of killing them for XP and taking their treasure"), no one here would be saying that was an evil act. So I guess the fact that V did it more efficiently than most others is what makes the act evil?

I guess the message here is "kill all the dragons you want, just don't be too good at it."

Exactly.

Some folks are clearly uncomfortable with the use of power.

V had godlike powers and acted in a godlike fashion (capricious? certainly). No matter how ultimately good the outcome, some folks just can't help but get squirrely about that kind of thing.

Old Testament God? Evil.

 

[Maggan]

some folks just can't help but get squirrely about that kind of thing.

IMO you are drawing way too far-reaching conclusions as to how people view this world and how power is and should be used in it, based on how people view a web comic character wielding true ultimate power to kill imaginary dragons.

Again, IMO what V did is evil in the context of D&D.

Whether or not this reflects my view on what evil is in our own world, is in all probability not something which can be divined from that.

/M

 

[Burrito Al Pastor]

Lawl alignment debates.

 

[BryonD]

This thread has taught me that most folks think there is a greater moral imperative to preserve the sanctity of your own soul than to save the lives of countless people.

Put one soul on one side of the balance, and an infinite number of lives on the other, and most folks here choose the soul.

1 soul > countless lives

1 innocent life > countless innocent lives

Makes for some interesting moral calculus.

Given the power (from whatever source) to kill all those evil black dragons, you guys are arguing that is it more good to use that power for the sole selfish purpose of just saving one's own family.

I disagree with this assessment.
I'm not gonna try to blanket defend the whole thread. I haven't even read every single post in it. But I've read a good bit.

Saying that killing one innocent is an evil act period full stop does not state that this 1 innocent life is greater than countless others. It simply states that taking the one innocent life is evil. I believe that is pretty hard to refute.

Frankly, I find the idea that we can turn a blind eye to vast evil so long as it helps us convince ourselves that we have stopped some minimal evil that is thrust into our face to be one of the horrid flaws with society today. It is a very arrogant and narcissistic moral short cut. The refusal to embrace and accept hard choices is itself an evil.

What V did was evil. End of discussion to me.
But if someone had the choice to push that same button and commit that evil act, and choose not to, despite the vast amount of evil it would prevent, simply because it made them feel more comfortable with their own self, then that person is weak and selfish and harmful to society.

It is not 1 innocent soul > countless innocent souls.
It is 1 innocents soul + self delusion of own morality > countless innocent souls.

The idea that all evil may be avoided is a bad starting point. Making tough, correct choices that may not be fun but have the best overall expected result is as close to good as it comes.

 

[Grog]

Again, IMO what V did is evil in the context of D&D.

So, killing to safeguard your family = evil.

Killing to increase your personal power and wealth = not evil.

Gotta love D&D morality.

 

[Grog]

I would say invading a creature's home for the express purpose of killing them and taking their treasure (XP is a metagame concept and could not motivate a PC to act, IMO) is Evil, no doubt about it.

First, XP is not a metagame concept in Order of the Stick. They know about XP; they talk about it all the time.

Second, I can't comment on you specifically, but way back when the OotS invaded the first black dragon's lair and killed him in order to get the starmetal to reforge Roy's sword, I don't remember anyone saying that that was an evil act on their part.

 

[Relique du Madde]

So, killing to safeguard your family = evil.

Killing to increase your personal power and wealth = not evil.

Gotta love D&D morality.

Let me throw out a curve ball..

Would it have been evil to have used an epic spell to completely retroactively wipe that dragon out of existance*? That is, to make it so that that specific dragon never existed, and as a result to make it's children to never be born?


* I'm well aware of the temporal paradox that it would create, and would most likely do more damage to the multiverse than the snarl itself.

 

[Nightson]

Wandering into something evil's lair and killing it for XP and treasure isn't evil in D&D. I mean seriously, that's pretty core D&D experience.

 

[Miyaa]

If its morally acceptable to kill one dragon just 'cause its evil, its morally acceptable to kill lots.

That's why I'm not a big fan of alignment by species. The idea of inherent evil gets screwy really fast. And you can't make exceptions, even though they do, because if your exceptions exist because of anything other than divine intervention, the original version of the monster must not have been inherently evil in the first place.

Quoted for Truth, mostly. I would add that some races can be as close to "inherently" an alignment as possible, but if they change alignments, they change races, i.e. angels, demons, & devils.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Again, I have to ask - how many people in their games come across dragons that just sit in their lair and don't do anything? Orcs that don't raid other villiages, but just live in theirs peacefully?

Saying "It's not evil to find something to kill and take their stuff" is a misnomer, because in just about every case I've seen, that's not how it goes. First the thing does something evil, THEN adventurers come to kill it and take their stuff. I don't know of many situations in which the players just stumble on a dragon lair, and the dragon tells them to leave it alone because it hasn't done anything. And yes, if the players then decided to kill it anyways, it would be an evil act.