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="Nivenus" data-source="post: 4720047" data-attributes="member: 71756">Evil, RAW. Arguing by any other moral philosophy is pointless, since that's not the question that was asked, which was, "in D&D terms was V's act evil?" The answer is yes, unambiguously.Vengeance, as defined by the official rules, is not necessarily evil, but is definitely on the slippery slope and is nongood. After all, the gods of vengeance are often evil or neutral. Retribution is not justice. Retribution, is about feeling good about something you shouldn't feel good about (which is, namely, killing or other forms of cruelty).Let's also not forget here that V was being deliberately cruel which is, most definitely, RAW, E-VEEL (as another put it). Deliberately inflicting pain upon others who are helpless to resist lacks in mercy, which is a quality of good, RAW. As such, the very least that can be said about V's act was that it was not good. But a detailed look at the act will define it as evil as well.For those indicating that black dragons are all evil, the alignment rules, as placed in D&D (particularly since 3e) do not make this a universal truth. Rather, it's a strong tendency. This tendency breaks down further in settings such as Eberron, where alignment archetypes are played fast and loose. While OotS does not seem to be as radical as Eberron, it should be noted that Burlew has already played with alignment stereotypes in the past (note the goblins from StoD or Miko acting in the way a stereotypically Lawful Stupid paladin would act and as a result becoming un-paladinified). It's also pretty clear that this is supposed to be a further demonstration of V falling down the slippery slope (I mean, what good's a Faustian deal if you don't get the slippery slope)?For those more concerned about intentions than acts (even though, RAW, acts are more important by far) - V's intentions are not good either. It's crystal clear that V's intent is not justice, nor the safety of the world but pure sadistic vengeance. V wants to make the dragon suffer in a way that it is beyond even what the dragon was going to do to his/her family. It is not his/her intention even to keep her family safe. After all, surely, somewhere down the line, there's a friend or ally who will be rather displeased at V's act? No - it's about getting back at the dragon and doing it a way that demonstrates V's superiority of power better than the dragon could ever hope to match.Let's phrase it differently shall we... "was it evil for the dragon to threaten to kill and trap the souls of V's family, due to the fact that V had killed her son?" The answer, of course, is no. Vengeance, RAW, isn't good. Likewise, V's act, which goes beyond even what the dragon intended to do, is most definitely evil.</blockquote>

Verification