Is it evil to kill Drow on sight?


Lost Omens Campaign Setting General Discussion

51 to 100 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Set wrote:
So, yeah, anyone who has their character freak at the sight of a Drow and goes to kill it is either playing someone who psychotically attacks *any* elf (or humanoid, or living creature, or whatever) on sight, and is probably playing an evil and / or insane character, or is a meta-gamer, and should be shunned with great shunning.

Or they hate BLACK elves....which has its own set of troubling implications and possible reasons to shun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

This could turn abstract fast. Would someone kill any Golarion drow on sight and still be considered good? Very possibly. Not many people on the surface have ever met a drow, and the drow that do venture above ground are very likely to be evil.

It's like spotting a chromatic dragon. There could be a very slim chance it's actually a metallic dragon that cast alter self or something to look chromatic, or could have had it's alignment reversed in the past to some magical shenanigans. Will you take a chance? Probably not.

Granted, it's a biased, spiciest reaction - yet one that many would take unless presented with strong evidence that such an assumption may have been mistaken.

Note that I avoid whether or not such an act is evil, it's just logical and sensible. Best to ask your GM if it is "evil" in the GM's subjective eyes.

My personal two cents - if you believe a race evil and irredeemable (demons, green dragons, drow), kill on sight wouldn't lower a good person's alignment unless they cross some line to do it. It's far better to warn others about the threat or confront the evil before resorting to violence (giving your opponent an out - go home, surrender, etc. or else violence will be used). The later is clearly a good thing to do. The former can be viewed as a good person that may or may not have made a mistake, and killing is a mistake that takes a high level cleric to fix in Pathfinder. I consider it a "neutral" act to kill a member of a clearly evil race that is known for deception and such, unless the fanatic "good person" would kill innocents to accomplish the goal or something drastic.


Just to clarify - do good drow turn back in elfs?
And in Second Darkness, if I remember correctly, one of the sidebars stated, that good-inclined drows end fleswarped in driders or other monster.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Lemeres wrote wrote:
Or they hate BLACK elves

I thought Golarion drow were dark blue/purplish in skin tone?

Still, I think I get your point. My answer is still, the good act a person would do when they see a threat is to confront it, using violence only if the opponent doesn't take the "out" options.

A neutral act is to "get the clear evil before they get you" (battlefield morality).

An evil act is to eliminate the threat, no matter what collateral damage may be caused in doing so - or when confronted by clear evidence that your assumption may be false (the rare drow that may have a good alignment, and is a prisoner of other drow, slave, child, etc.)

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Now, while I'm not accusing anyone of intentional trolling, bob_the_monster (aka taldanrebe2187 aka willhob aka shadowlodgemember...the OP of this thread) has a long history of starting inflammatory and divisive threads. Often ones with contradictory information regarding what his own RL gaming group is doing, as well as a history of responding to said threads exclusively with different aliases than are used in the OP, and similar signs that seem to indicate the primary goal is not receiving useful advice or achieving consensus. To the point where noting this seems a public service. I advise people to examine carefully threads by this person, as they have an unusually high incidence of such things.

It's certainly possible this is entirely coincidental, and I've certainly seen useful threads from our OP as well...but speaking purely statistically, this trend seems worth noting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

To respond to Ashkar's question - for those who have not run Second Darkness, don't peek.

Second Darkness:
Some elves turn Drow due to extreme evil and demon worship, though most do not. Once Drow, they could have Drow children or revert their old alignment if they decide to become redeemed - this will not turn them back into an elf unless some the GM decided to do so (divine boon, or whatever storytelling reason). If a Drow does change their worldview, or grows up good aligned, such a being would likely be destroyed by their demon worshipping society. Driders are usually evil drow that just overstepped the bounds of their own society in other ways (failed coup, backstabbed the wrong person, decided to change clan allegiances when the going is tough, etc.)


Dustin Ashe wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
In Golarion, all drow are evil. If an elf get's too evil, they turn drow.

What! Really? How did I not know that?

Let's see if I understand this. If an elf turns evil, her skin becomes black/purplish? Well, I don't like that one bit. It makes me feel...icky.

Since when did an internal moral transformation change a person's skin pigment?

Eeek, that is just way to similar to some of the 'rationalizations' real people used to 'justify' real-world racism.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Imbicatus wrote:

In Golarion, all drow are evil. If an elf get's too evil, they turn drow, and if a drow turns good, they become a normal elf.

However, indiscriminately killing evil beings is usually evil.

There is no lore support for a reverse transformation. When a drow becomes good.... they have problems. Which is better than spontaneously becoming an elf in the middle of Drow Capital Cave.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Set wrote:
bob_the_monster wrote:
Drow seem to be pretty much universally reviled in lore.

In Golarion, 99 out of 100 people don't even know that Drow exist, let alone that they are evil demon-worshippers who probably eat babies and kick puppies and grind up and snort rainbows. (And the 1 in 100 who do are high ranking elven leaders, are part of a secret society like the Lantern Bearers, or have just completed Second Darkness, and are 15th level or so.)

The elves have kept the existence of the Drow secret from all other surface races, and there are entire elven communities that don't even know that they exist (the forsaken elves in the Mwangi Expanse, for instance, are a continent away from the nearest Drow community, which is almost 1000 miles to the north, and across an ocean).

So, yeah, anyone who has their character freak at the sight of a Drow and goes to kill it is either playing someone who psychotically attacks *any* elf (or humanoid, or living creature, or whatever) on sight, and is probably playing an evil and / or insane character, or is a meta-gamer, and should be shunned with great shunning.

If you're not playing in Golarion, or in a version of Golarion in which Drow have invaded the surface world or something, and are widely known as bad mofos, then it's at least not meta-gaming any more, although it's still a bit squiffy to murder folk because other folk of that skin color once did something bad, under the assumption that some people, color-coded for your convenience, are only for killing.

It might be a good *idea* to kill them on sight. But it probably won't be a good *act.*

Morality and pragmatism aren't always comfortable bedfellows, which is one of the many reason that doing the good thing is rarely the same as doing the easiest thing or the safest thing.

Some courage may be required, to walk the moral road.

Yeah, pretty much this: "Why are you killing the funny looking elf?"

OTOH, if you are aware of what Drow are and don't want to take any chances: Attack first, kill if you can't take them alive. Then use Speak with Dead to find out what's going on and then Raise them and apologize if you made a mistake.
Magic makes ethics more complicated. Or simpler. I'm not sure which.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

More to the point, it's stupid. Not a stupid action per se, but a stupid way to play the game.

Whenever we have EVIL races, then there's no thought or choice involved. Since we're the good guys, we can attack them, and we don't have any pesky morality or conflicts to deal with.

There's also no story.

You've successfully turned a role-playing game into a dull button-mashing affair. Instead of pressing X fifty times to win, you instead say "I full attack" fifty times to win.

Is that fun? Not for me.

Look at Game of Thrones. You know why it's so good? Because you can relate to every side. That gives us drama, and great characters.

And a shout out to Quinn Murphy for showing me this problem so clearly.
www.thoughtcrimegames.net/new-rules-of-fantasy-1-evil-is-a-choice/


Anonymous Visitor 163 576 wrote:

More to the point, it's stupid. Not a stupid action per se, but a stupid way to play the game.

Whenever we have EVIL races, then there's no thought or choice involved. Since we're the good guys, we can attack them, and we don't have any pesky morality or conflicts to deal with.

There's also no story.

You've successfully turned a role-playing game into a dull button-mashing affair. Instead of pressing X fifty times to win, you instead say "I full attack" fifty times to win.

Is that fun? Not for me.

Look at Game of Thrones. You know why it's so good? Because you can relate to every side. That gives us drama, and great characters.

And a shout out to Quinn Murphy for showing me this problem so clearly.
www.thoughtcrimegames.net/new-rules-of-fantasy-1-evil-is-a-choice/

Meh. You can tell good stories either way. They're just different stories.

A war with a true innate evil race or force can still have interesting, even moral choices. Obviously, tactics and strategy, but how far are you willing to go to stop them? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Sure, if it's just an encounter with a bunch of orcs for you to kill, there's not much there. But the same thing is true, if it's just a bunch of human bandits. If they're still just there for you to kill, what does it matter whether they're innately evil or not?

But then, I'm not really fond of Game of Thrones.


And you've proved my point. Monsters that are just there for you to kill aren't very interesting.

If you run into soldiers from an opposing nation, you can bribe them, insult them, cooperate against a common foe, or challenge them to a tug of war. There are options there.

Yes, you can still interact with other players and with NPC's. You're right. But see how that works? You're interacting with the non-automatically evil parts of the game....

Sovereign Court

There is a really easy way to figure this out. If drow appear and your GM says please roll initiative, then chances are you'll be fine with killing them. If dice aren't rolled, then perhaps talking to them might be in the cards.

Silver Crusade

If you don't have knowledge religion or dungonering you know nothing about drow. A paladin might know that they are evil if he used his detect evil on them and they were above 5th level.

Most people would think they were a dark skinned elf perhaps from Oserion or Gurundi.


Is it ok to kill Orcs on sight?
Gnolls?
Ogres?
How about Kobolds? They aren't even mammals.

The answer is really how much moral relativism is present in the game.

Golarion is a brutal, occasionally savage world where almost anything can and might kill you. PCs may well be loaded with preconceptions that alter their views on good qnd evil that are radically different than our own.

This was posted on the first page but it bears repeating:

"If I kill you, you will be awake, you will be armed and you will be facing me."
...Malcolm Reynolds...

Reynolds lives in a morally ambiguous universe where people double cross him and frequently try to kill him. He has rules though, even if he's the only one who follows them. There are criteria for him to kill someone. When those criteria are met, he's not one to second guess himself. Oddly he's one of the most clearly good people anywhere he goes, even though he's trying to be bad generally.

In a game where killing happens almost every session, frequently for profit, a code of conduct becomes the moral guideline that most characters seem to follow more than lofty discussions about the nature of good and evil. The only class that is solidly grounded in the GOOD end of the dynamic is the Paladin; and few things are as capable of killing efficiently as a paladin faced with a being that meets his criteria.


bob_the_monster wrote:
Drow seem to be pretty much universally reviled in lore.

I imagine that in the Underdark, where they are a dominant known force, killing them on sight *may* not be a bad idea. But at the same time most denizens there also know that there might consequences such as having a drow raiding party the following days razing your settlement.

FancyZergling wrote:

"Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.

Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is onvenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
KestrelZ wrote:
Some elves turn Drow due to extreme evil and demon worship, though most do not.

This is the sort of moral ambiguity situation that must drive elves nuts. It's their own racial version of turning to the Dark Side of the Force. To an elf, Drow are the literal example of falling from grace.

An elf archer sees a lone drow who hasn't spotted him and he has a chance of conveniently immediately slay him. But is killing him out of the blue without warning any different than what a drow would do? If I do it, am I becoming more drow?

I now see the elf-drow relation as something like the paladin/anti-paladin relation. Most are natural drows, but some are elves that just went to far and snapped.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anonymous Visitor 163 576 wrote:

And you've proved my point. Monsters that are just there for you to kill aren't very interesting.

If you run into soldiers from an opposing nation, you can bribe them, insult them, cooperate against a common foe, or challenge them to a tug of war. There are options there.

Yes, you can still interact with other players and with NPC's. You're right. But see how that works? You're interacting with the non-automatically evil parts of the game....

Hell, you can do the same with the automatically evil ones too. Maybe not the tug of war, but you probably can't do that with a patrol from a nation you're at war with either.

You may be justified in automatically killing them because they're evil, that doesn't mean it's always the best strategic or tactical choice. Maybe you want to question them. Maybe you want to disguise yourselves and infiltrate. Maybe you want to follow them back. Maybe they can be bribed - evil certainly isn't immune to corruption. Maybe they can be tricked into fighting another group.
And of course all that is the same whether they're evil because they're racially evil or evil because these particular ones are evil.

If you think the only thing possible to do with evil monsters is just kill them on sight, you're sorely limited.


Dustin Ashe wrote:
I think killing anything sentient on sight is evil. Kneecaps, however, is another story.

Firefly references are always appreciated.

KestrelZ wrote:
It's like spotting a chromatic dragon. There could be a very slim chance it's actually a metallic dragon that cast alter self or something to look chromatic, or could have had it's alignment reversed in the past to some magical shenanigans.

Dragons are color coded for convenience

Now back to the main topic -
Since there is an example in canon lore of a good demon then a non-evil drow is not completely out of the question


Is it practical to attempt to parlay with every monster you meet, on the 1/1000 that it might be good?

Really, shouldn't the onus be on the good-monster to provide some indication it is different from its fellows? If you are the 1 in a 1000 of your species who is not evil, you might want to take some precautions, because they will see you and just assume you are what you appear to be.
Others would be stupid to do otherwise if they have any sort of survival instinct. If something is predominately evil, are you going to really stand by and wait until they run you through with a sword just to get confirmation that they are what they appear to be?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's a drow! Kill it!
<murders the drow>

It's a drow! Kill it!
I'm not evil! Don't kill me!
It's lying! Kill it
<murders the drow>

Saying the onus should be on the "good monster" is kinda bogus in my opinion. Unless a creature has the 'evil' subtype, it is not required by law to be evil (And we're not getting into redeemed demons or fallen angels).

When hobgoblins come into a town to loot and pillage, that's 'evil'
But when humans go into an hobgoblin village to loot and pillage, that's 'heroic'

I'm sure the hobgoblins might disagree with that philosophical outlook.

I know this is a fantasy game, and morality is subjective from table to table. BUT I don't think that carte blanche permission to kill anything that isn't a "PC Race" from the core rulebook seems to be problematic (For a variety of reasons)

Very Respectfully,
--Bacon


taldanrebel2187 wrote:
CrabSage wrote:


I don't get why you keep posting in your own threads using another alias. If you have your own views and don't want to change them don't make a thread about it. As for your original question, I think killing on site even if something is evil is probably evil. I would say its a GM call.
No, it isn't. It's defined in the alignment section of the SRD. Drow are a monstrous race, and they are universally reviled even by other races in the underdark. Read the lore.

It will vary by GM and campaign world. As an example, in Eberron goblins and drow, who have no legal rights in Forgotten Realms, have a decent to good chance of being non-evil.

In Golarion they are not universally evil, but about 99% of them will be evil. They don't have the evil subtype however, it just happens that a large portion of them will likely be evil. However being evil is not a crime, so you should ask the GM how he runs his monsters.

There are a few threads on this forum about paladins firing first and then losing their powers. Now sometimes they were setup for failure by the GM, but that is another topic. :)


it isn't evil to kill Drow on sight..... if its Drizzt Do'Urden that guy's time has gotta be up right?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Better_with_Bacon wrote:


When hobgoblins come into a town to loot and pillage, that's 'evil'
But when humans go into an hobgoblin village to loot and pillage, that's 'heroic'

I'm sure the hobgoblins might disagree with that philosophical outlook.

When humans go into an hobgoblin village to loot and pillage, that's 'evil'.

When humans go into an hobgoblin village to stop the hobgoblins who've attacked the human village , that's 'heroic'. If they loot and pillage while they're there, that's part of the game.

I can't remember the last time I played a game that involved sacking humanoid villages for the fun of it. Probably something like Keep on the Borderlands, back in middle school. The vast majority of modules I see today make sure there's a suitably heroic motivation to back up the desire for loot and xp.

Hell, I even played one homebrew game awhile back where we rescued the lizardman village from the evil elven slavers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
it isn't evil to kill Drow on sight..... if its Drizzt Do'Urden that guy's time has gotta be up right?

That's the best argument yet. Actually, Drizzt's alright, but it's worth killing any other ones just on the off chance they're Drizzt clones.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Jeven wrote:
Is it practical to attempt to parlay with every monster you meet, on the 1/1000 that it might be good?

No, but it's "Good".

Being "Good" is harder than being "Evil", as it should be. (Total side note: This is why I utterly despise classes such as the antipaladin that try to provide a 'mirror image' of paladins, but with permission to do whatever the heck they want. Being good is hard work, and I like to see it rewarded.)

If you'd like to be a party of murderhobos that declares, "There's an 'E' by that creature's name in the bestiary! We get to kill it! Yay!" then don't go around calling yourself "Good". I'm perfectly OK with an all-neutral party of murderhobos, as long as they're justifying their killing spree (at least to themselves).

I bristle at attempts to justify genocidal tendencies as "doing good" with the (very lame) excuse "But they're *almost* all evil."

I can cite Golarion canon as written in the APs: There are neutral drow. In the APs. There is a redeemed demon. In the APs. There are good or neutral giants who have been forced to participate in evil armies. In the APs. The APs are chock full of intelligent NPCs who violate their Bestiary entries on alignment.

If you would like to have an unambiguous, "I kill every 'evil' creature I see" paradigm, talk about it with your GM. It's a perfectly valid house rule for some groups. My *opinion* is that it horrifically limits the game and destroys roleplaying possibilities, but I am not your GM.

But killing 'evil' creatures on sight sure as heck isn't Golarion canon, considering the sheer number of encounters in the APs described with a final note of, "If the PCs redeem xxx instead of killing it, grant them XP as if they killed it".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
it isn't evil to kill Drow on sight..... if its Drizzt Do'Urden that guy's time has gotta be up right?
That's the best argument yet. Actually, Drizzt's alright, but it's worth killing any other ones just on the off chance they're Drizzt clones.

Bruenor was always my favorite, also Artemis Entreri and Dwahvel Tigerlillies


2 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
thejeff wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
it isn't evil to kill Drow on sight..... if its Drizzt Do'Urden that guy's time has gotta be up right?
That's the best argument yet. Actually, Drizzt's alright, but it's worth killing any other ones just on the off chance they're Drizzt clones.
Bruenor was always my favorite, also Artemis Entreri and Dwahvel Tigerlillies

You know if you change your darned avatar every 2 weeks like that I'm NEVER going to know who I'm talking to...

Sovereign Court

NobodysHome wrote:
Jeven wrote:
Is it practical to attempt to parlay with every monster you meet, on the 1/1000 that it might be good?

No, but it's "Good".

No, it isn't. Good is not stupid. Good heroes would not sit there and look at a Red Dragon flying above their town. They would shoot it down and kill it.

BUT WAIT GUYS IT MIGHT BE GOOD. JUST WAIT. LETS TALK TO IT. Sorry, don't make me laugh.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
taldanrebel2187 wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:
Jeven wrote:
Is it practical to attempt to parlay with every monster you meet, on the 1/1000 that it might be good?

No, but it's "Good".

No, it isn't. Good is not stupid. Good heroes would not sit there and look at a Red Dragon flying above their town. They would shoot it down and kill it.

BUT WAIT GUYS IT MIGHT BE GOOD. JUST WAIT. LETS TALK TO IT. Sorry, don't make me laugh.

Actually, what Good heroes do is nothing to attract it's attention while it's flying above their town. If it attacks, kill it. If it flies by, track it and get a force ready to deal with it, outside of town, away from civilians and property damage. Send for help, if you can. If it's willing to talk, talk, unless you're sure it's a threat (even to others) and sure you can handle it.

That's because Good isn't stupid.


If you have a bad back and I shovel your driveway, did I not do you a favor?

How is eradicating the special snowflakes from your campaign any different?


taldanrebel2187 wrote:

No, it isn't. Good is not stupid. Good heroes would not sit there and look at a Red Dragon flying above their town. They would shoot it down and kill it.

BUT WAIT GUYS IT MIGHT BE GOOD. JUST WAIT. LETS TALK TO IT. Sorry, don't make me laugh.

Yes, let's ignore the bit where the dragon will go through a raging rampage that will destroy half the town after we bring attention to ourselves for shooting an arrow at it.

Why wait to plan a dragon hunt that is safely away from civilization?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
taldanrebel2187 wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:
Jeven wrote:
Is it practical to attempt to parlay with every monster you meet, on the 1/1000 that it might be good?
No, but it's "Good".

No, it isn't. Good is not stupid. Good heroes would not sit there and look at a Red Dragon flying above their town. They would shoot it down and kill it.

BUT WAIT GUYS IT MIGHT BE GOOD. JUST WAIT. LETS TALK TO IT. Sorry, don't make me laugh.

Posts like this make me sad. Because it makes it clear the OP apparently prefers conflict and argumentation rather than consensus.

- "Let's escalate from drow to red dragons to provide more extreme examples."
- "Let's call the opposing poster's attitude stupid!"

Honestly, I would certainly HOPE that a group of Good heroes would ask, "Why is a red dragon flying above our town in broad daylight, knowing darned well that we're most likely to shoot it down?"
The behavior fundamentally makes no sense for a red dragon. Is it a polymorphed person? A dragonblood sorcerer? A real red dragon on a scouting mission? I guess we'll never know, since we're obeying shoot-on-sight rules.

A red dragon flying over a populated town in broad daylight screams, "Get more information."

Shooting it down with no further information is indeed stupid, as it's guaranteed to bring retribution down on the innocent townsfolk if nothing else. And it doesn't explain the dragon's bizarre behavior...


To expand on Nobodyshome dragon argument there is a certain AP where if you do shoot at the Red Dragon flying overhead you totally screw yourself for later on and an awesome role playing experience. i've GM'd for both shoot first types and talk it out types recently and the latter is my favorite by far:)

Sovereign Court

Drow are a race of chaotic evil demon worshipers. Anyone that knows what they are will probably draw their weapons or kill them on sight. Those that don't will still get a creepy vibe, and probably deny them entrance. It's a case of BUT I WANT TO PLAY DRIZZT.

The "get more information" attitude gets the town burned down. Red dragons are chaotic evil. You don't negotiate with chaotic evil in fantasy games. You kill it.

Reacting as the player, rather than the character, is meta-gaming. And referencing out of game mechanics just smacks of that.

Sovereign Court

BUT BUT BURDEN OF PROOF

Doesn't work either. In fantasy world, racism exists. Good and evil are game mechanics referenced by players. In the 'real' fantasy world, people will kill first and ask questions later. Especially adventuring types, where humming and hawing or being quizzical idiots can get you killed in a matter of seconds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Huh. Book 4 of Wrath of the Righteous would kill your group pretty hard.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
thejeff wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
it isn't evil to kill Drow on sight..... if its Drizzt Do'Urden that guy's time has gotta be up right?
That's the best argument yet. Actually, Drizzt's alright, but it's worth killing any other ones just on the off chance they're Drizzt clones.
Bruenor was always my favorite, also Artemis Entreri and Dwahvel Tigerlillies
You know if you change your darned avatar every 2 weeks like that I'm NEVER going to know who I'm talking to...

sorry, a combination of my kids finding out how and myself trying to find one that looks even slightly like me (you would think it would be easy finding a male avatar with long curly hair and a goatee that doesn't look like a pompous a&#&#+#, alas it is not:) maybe i should go back to animals or plants:)


Zhangar wrote:
Huh. Book 4 of Wrath of the Righteous would kill your group pretty hard.

hopefully not at first, gotta enjoy the sights first ya know;)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
taldanrebel2187 wrote:

Drow are a race of chaotic evil demon worshipers. Anyone that knows what they are will probably draw their weapons or kill them on sight. Those that don't will still get a creepy vibe, and probably deny them entrance. It's a case of BUT I WANT TO PLAY DRIZZT.

The "get more information" attitude gets the town burned down. Red dragons are chaotic evil. You don't negotiate with chaotic evil in fantasy games. You kill it.

Reacting as the player, rather than the character, is meta-gaming. And referencing out of game mechanics just smacks of that.

You asked a question. If you already had your mind made up there was no reason to ask.

For those on the fence about this:

There are quiet a few AP's where fire first, ask never works against you. As for the idea of talking to evil creatures is a good idea it varies by table. Some bad guys are not fanatical to whoever they serve. Sometimes you can talk to demons, and they are a lot worse than drow.

The "get more information" attitude can let you know about a bigger threat that is coming. It does not mean "talk to everyone". I don't know too many people who kill everything or talk to everyone. There is normally some middle ground depending on the situation.

Your way of handling thing may mean may work against you, and that applies whether you deal with drow, bugbears, evil giants and so on simply because you missed out on something.

As for the metagaming aspect, your character may not believe that all of a race or evil because often not all of them are. They may know it is better to avoid a certain race. You get to decide how open-minded your character is. Reacting as the player is what would make you think all of race ___ is evil especially if it is something with an evil subtype.

Example:
Drow: Hello sir.
Player: <Attacks and kills drow>

Result: The dead drow was evil, but he had heard of the PC's and he wanted them to kill another drow who was planning a raid on the town. The dead drow had double crossed the invader, and wanted him dead for personal reasons. This would have allowed the PC's to avoid an ambush on a town, and the dead drow would have revealed that a bigger force was coming later. However by not talking they are ambushed and many in the town die. Even if they repel the invasion they have no way to know that a larger force will be coming later on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
taldanrebel2187 wrote:

Drow are a race of chaotic evil demon worshipers. Anyone that knows what they are will probably draw their weapons or kill them on sight. Those that don't will still get a creepy vibe, and probably deny them entrance. It's a case of BUT I WANT TO PLAY DRIZZT.

The "get more information" attitude gets the town burned down. Red dragons are chaotic evil. You don't negotiate with chaotic evil in fantasy games. You kill it...

Shooting at the dragon that might just be passing by also gets the town burned down.

Even if it is evil, it's probably worth trying to avoid a fight. Or try to set the fight up on your terms. Probably worth casting defensive buffs while you wait to see if it's going to attack the town, though. And start getting the non-combatants undercover. And bucket teams.


wraithstrike wrote:


Example:
Drow: Hello sir.
Player: <Attacks and kills drow>

Result: The dead drow was evil, but he had heard of the PC's and he wanted them to kill another drow who was planning a raid on the town. The dead drow had double...

Alternate result:

Player: Hmmm. He seemed politer than normal, maybe something was up? Better safe than sorry, though.
Cleric Player: Speak with Dead Why were you here?

Death is not the end.

Sovereign Court

Dustin Ashe wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
In Golarion, all drow are evil. If an elf get's too evil, they turn drow.

What! Really? How did I not know that?

Let's see if I understand this. If an elf turns evil, her skin becomes black/purplish? Well, I don't like that one bit. It makes me feel...icky.

Since when did an internal moral transformation change a person's skin pigment?

LOL, since Second Darkness Adventure Path i.e. many years ago! you've been playing Pathfinder for how long? if you've been happy all along in your ignorance of these facts, methinks the devs have done a good job not saturating the setting with drow; I recommend you read the Second Darkness AP or other related campaign setting publications on the subject before you judge it... in Golarion the drow and their transformation etc. are all related to demon-worship

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Result: The dead drow was evil, but he had heard of the PC's and he wanted them to kill another drow who was planning a raid on the town. The dead drow had double crossed the invader, and wanted him dead for personal reasons. This would have allowed the PC's to avoid an ambush on a town, and the dead drow would have revealed that a bigger force was coming later. However by not talking they are ambushed and many in the town die. Even if they repel the invasion they have no way to know that a larger force will be coming later on.

Indeed. And this, from a good perspective, is one of the best ever things about evil bad-guys, is how ready and willing they are to betray one another for reasons that might seem petty and counter-productive to better-adjusted folk who do not have murderdeathkill impulses overriding their good judgment.

Sometimes, all good has to do is stall evil (particularly chaotic evil) long enough for it to fall apart into squabbling factions of it's own volition. Kill the warlord (or reveal him to have never been an orc at all...), and the orc tribes will turn on each other and go back to being more of a threat to each other, than to neighboring nations.

Sovereign Court

to the OP: no, it's not evil, and it's more related to the established war between certain species, as per this previous post from this thread:

Dave Justus wrote:

I think it is fair to say that a general state of war is assumed to be in place between the civilized world and the various evil races in most settings. As such, they are the enemy and should be considered an active threat and justified target for an attack unless/until they have been deemed to no longer be a threat.

So all things being equal, if you surprise a group of drow it isn't evil to take them out with lethal force.

Now if you have reason to believe that a particular drow or drow group are not villains, then things change a bit.

51 to 100 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / General Discussion / Is it evil to kill Drow on sight? All Messageboards