A Pally might not smite evil babies, but I will
WIZARD SMITE (maximized empowered Fireball) *BLAM!!!*!*!*!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What about evil baby clerics?"So, Goo-Goo, what do you do this round?"
"I cast Spiritual Pacifier then suck it as my move action."
I think the only thing we have concluded in this thread is Paladins are required to be vegetarians because animals aren't Evil.I really hope you're being facetious, but on the off chance you're not...
Chrissake.
Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior. Dogs may be obedient and cats free-spirited, but they do not have the moral capacity to be truly lawful or chaotic.This would be because they are not sapient. That is the core of this moral quandry. Animals are always neutral because as non-sapient creatures they cannot, by definition, be moral actors. A creature must be a moral actor before it can truly be considered within the alignment spectrum, which for purposes of mechanics defaults non-sapience to the neutral alignment.
That same rule applies itself across the board to mindless creatures with the sole exception of mindless undead. They register as evil by merit of being negative energy creatures, created through acts of evil, and their general hostiliy towards the living. Though, because they are not sapient, are not of themselves moral actors; they are forced by their very nature and creation to be susceptible to good-aligned weapons and effects.
Kobolds are sapient creatures, therefore their eggs should be treated with the same consideration as any pregnant female demi-human. Hence my own facetious comment regarding kicking an evil pregnant woman in the stomach. Would that be permissible by a paladin's code of conduct? If not, then smashing kobold eggs would be morally impermissible as well.
Then either Kobold babies are evil or Paladins can't eat meat.
Facetiousness is the only way to respond to such a patently absurd moral quandary in a fictional universe with different rules and moral absolutes.
Cartigan, you've made it clear that you think this is a stupid thread. Why not leave it alone instead of repeatedly telling everybody how stupid it is? Apparently not everybody plays the game exactly the same way you do, and that's OK.
And clearly you are making a point of singling me out amongst a number of other equally silly responses from non-serious people not contributing to the thread. You don't like me. I got it. Don't care.
Then either Kobold babies are evil or Paladins can't eat meat.You're really missing the boat on this whole sapience thing aren't you.
Animals are not sapient. Barring outside influence (divine intervention, druids) they never will be. Animals cannot be taught morality; they can be trained to act in a manner that is a facsimile of moral behavior (as rescue, guardian, or assistance animals, or to only attack upon command which precludes predatorial instinct), but that is not understood as moral in and of itself being rather behavioral conditioning.
It is also true that while races such as kobolds (or humans for that matter) may not necessarily be sapient at birth, and generally must reach adolescence before being considered fully accountable for their actions, they are sapient by their own nature. Sapient races can be taught the difference between good and evil, right and wrong, and have the free will to act morally, immorally, or even amorally. With free will comes accountability, and it is the notion of accountability a paladin acts upon when fighting evil: they are holding evil creatures accountable for their own actions.
There are exceptions. Hatchling chromatic dragons are sapient and accountable. Lesser undead, though mindless and not moral actors themselves, are still evil by merit of their nature and creation. Half-fiends, though still sapient and accountable are still tainted by evil by blood and have a vastly more difficult time betraying their nature to choose the path of good and may require constant guidance and supervision.
Fulfilling a biological necessity is outside the moral spectrum. Barring outside magical influence (such as a ring of sustenance), paladins still have to eat, and not all races are herbivorous or omnivorous. You're making an assertion that would cause someone like a lizardfolk paladin (they're not inherently evil and are not class-restricted, and are carnivorous) to choose between starving to death or violating their code of...
Another excellent yet wholly irrelevant assessment of human psychology in our world. No one bothered to answer me "What if Kobolds had genetic memory and thus all Kobolds every born are Evil because the race is 'Always Evil'?"
How do you know Kobolds are different from Dragons? Or Goblins? Or Gnolls?
It amuses me how upset people get over completely fictional things.
It works however the DM say's it works. Pally, "If I do _____ is it evil?" Dm, "yes" or "no."
That's the only way this can go down. "True evil" doesn't exist in the real world. "Really evil" does (see Hitler), but i doubt he was born that way.
Lesson of the day: Ask the DM and get over it.
Senior Software Developer
|
And clearly you are making a point of singling me out amongst a number of other equally silly responses from non-serious people not contributing to the thread. You don't like me. I got it. Don't care.
You're right, it was early, I've been frustrated with derails recently and took it out on you personally. I apologize. Next time I'll send an email instead of cluttering the thread.
In the meantime, I'm not sure what point remains for this thread.