Can genocide be Lawful Good?
Yes.
No.
Even if it's Genocide of an evil race, the act itself is evil. Genocide can be done to Lawful Good ends, but in itself, will be Evil.
Maybe, but I'd guess it depends on numerous different factors in the setting.
Maybe.
>>48204366
I don't know
Seems like kind of a gray area. Could you rephrase the question?
>>48204366
If it's an Always Evil All The Time Seriously No Backsies Not Even Once race, I have to wonder if they're even actual people at that point, which, if negative, would turn the question from genocide to extermination.
Otherwise, the best 'war' is the war that never has to happen.
>>48204377
>>48204383
>>48204390
>>48204417
YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME NOW
YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME NOW
YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME NOW, DON'T LET THE GOBLINS GROW UP BIG
>>48204366
Depends on the setting:
1) Depends on laws - if government, society, culture or your set of principles allows you to murder everything because of their parents, ok.
2) Depends on who decides what Good is - if it's cosmic power, then we should count in its possible senility, insanity, and just not understanding ways of man. If Good is decided by mortal men, it's never defined because skub.
3) Depends #3 - is genocided race a lazy "always evil" universal antagonist? Will killing it tip universal balance and fuck up the cosmology?
>>48204383
Alright, guess I'm lawful evil now.
>>48204366
In DnD's retarded alignment system, genocide is absolutely lawful good, as long as the creatures are evil by nature. Creatures are born that are OBJECTIVELY evil, and killing evil creatures is defined as good.
>>48204584
Life is unfair.
>>48204366
Alignments are shit.
Yes. Good is not nice.
>>48204596
>killing evil creatures is defined as good.
Where?
>>48204366
Yes it can be.
"genocide" against non-human pests would probably be as good as it is now
I mean, it might not nice when you kill a bunch of rodents or insects, but ethically you're in the green, even when you're dumping poison into their dens.
>>48204366
No. If there's even the slightest, slimmest chance of co-habitation, redemption or other form of harmonious living then genocide will eliminate that.
Lawful good is more than just following the laws and being an okay person. It's about seeking to improve the world, even if it seems impossible.
>>48204366
There's a post on...I swear Enworld or some shit, that goes into this. The Socialnomicon, I think it was called. Pretty great read.
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Dungeonomicon_(DnD_Other)/Socionomicon
Seriously, it's gold for DMs.
DOMO
Only if it's jews
#GreenLivesMatter
Goblin Slayer is /tg/ the character
>autistically hunts down goblins so much that the Guild is forced to promote him to the level of adventurers that hunt dragons
>only lives to hunt gobbos
>never takes off his armor and helmet
>doesn't care about romance
>munchkinned his way to becoming a one man goblin genocide
A real hero and a real human bean.
>>48205028
>Human bean
>Bean
>BEANS
Damnit
Alfabusa got into my mind ''ALIEN BEANS!''
Can't play Dow II for that.
>>48204366
It can, but it really depends.
In Lord of the Rings, Aragorn did his best to wipe out all the orcs because they were fundamentally creatures of evil. They could not be rehabilitated, and every one was a monster. So the wisest king had no choice but to exterminate as many as possible.
It's like - If the good guys were up against a race of demons, it's not morally wrong to wipe them out. Would humanity be worse off if all the Mi-Go or the Deep Ones were wiped out?
I'll point out that in the opening comic, the girl's party members were raped by goblins and her love interest was killed. It was super hot.
>>48204366
I'd say no. Then again, I think D&D's whole approach to alignments is bull.
If you have a race of always evil creatures that simply can't stop being evil then I don't think they'd really count as living beings as such. The Blight and its creatures in Dragon Age are a representation of this category, barely self-aware and not independent beings as we'd define them. Things like the blight, demons etc. are defined by their evil nature, and are not able to function outside of fulfilling their function which is always an evil one. Creatures like that are a-okay to slaughter in my book.
On the other hand, most fantasy races, even traditionally evil ones, are considered actual thinking, sentient beings. Orcs and goblins in D&D are pretty nasty yes, but they are so because their culture has been shaped by enslavement to the dark lord of the day and constant warfare. If given the choice, goblins and orcs (in my interpretation) would be able to make the choice of being good just as well as any elf, human, dwarf or other sentient being could.
>>48205117
Demons are intelligent, however. So are devils. Those things are clearly sentient and capable of making their own choices, their choices are just inimical to us. It only makes sense for us to wipe them out, because their nature is opposed to humanity.
>>48204366
No. Murder is never 'good'.
>>48205153
Killing Evil beings is an objectively Good act, however.
>>48205176
How do you define Evil beings. In a sense, aren't you their Evil being if you consider wholesale slaughter of their species fair game?
>>48205153
Doesn't the old go back and kill Hitler at art school scenario disprove this that would be a "good" murder.
Murder can be good, but only retroactively and it's still murder if the destined monster hadn't yet committed a crime.
>>48205153
sorry, >>48205176 is right by the rules.
I agree with you bruh, but the rules are setup such that a paladin can murder a lot of people and be considered and a swell, upstanding guy.
Genocide is a lil more arguable. Depends on the edition and whether or not orcs/gobs are considered "always evil" races. If not, a good character can't wipe out the whole race on principle. They're at best neutral.
>>48204366
The genocide of demons of course
>>48205194
I cast Detect Evil, and I pray to God. I ask my God, who regularly grants me spells and can be reached by Commune:
"God, we are constantly assaulted by <insert evil race>. They have rebuffed all our attempts to make peace. I fear that in this final crusade, annihilation is the only solution."
KILL THEM ALL, MY SON.
"Your wisdom moves my heart, Lord. We shall give them no quarter."
>>48205194
In D&D Good and Evil are as quantifiable as sieverts and voltage.
>>48204445
I chuckled.
>>48205176
evil is not innate.
trial before murder.
>>48205196
>you can correct the path hitler chose
>instead you kill him
thats not the LG way.
>>48205197
well kill with no trial can still be NG so it shouldn't make paladins fall.
>>48205197
A Paladin is meant to be a crusading knight. His job is to fucking kill shit. His very first power is SMITE EVIL.
>>48205208
>KILL THEM ALL, MY SON
This does not sound like a Lawful Good God.
>>48205051
Calm down and go make some supper.
excuse me fa/tg/entlemen. what is the source of OP?
>>48205243
You're trying to argue against a force as fundamental as gravity. I checked, and nope, still Good.
All of you guye who say genocide is a bad thing, just look at bugs for example.
They're fucking vicious creatures who tear shit up and can even take down spaceships with their shit. They only want to kill us and nothing will change that. What good is there in letting them live aside from designing a biological weapons system that can be easily controlled
>>48205260
Goblin Slayer. It starts with rape AND genocide.
>>48205235
Paladins should spread good. There is a reason why their raw combat is lower than a warrior or barbarians. Paladins are to protect and uphold, and their skills are for that as well.
>>48205266
Light Novel. I see. Thx, will give it a try.
>>48205264
Oh it's absolutely the sensible decision to wipe out Orcs, Goblins, Bugs, Demons, Devils, Mindflayers, and the Jews. But it isn't a Good or Virtuous act. That's why morality as a philosophical subject is so contrived.
>>48205264
"if all insects on Earth disappeared, within 50 years all life on Earth would end. If all human beings disappeared from the Earth, within 50 years all forms of life would flourish.”
>>48205279
>>48205287
I should have clarified
Starship troopers bugs
>>48205235
Riiiight. But you still need to A) confirm it is evil and B) be reasonably certain that they have committed serious evil or intend to.
A paladin cannot execute the evil inkeeper in the middle of nowhere who never gave to charity in his life, rips off travelers with nowhere else to go, and kicks his dog. It's gotta be, you know, EVIL evil, not just a lil evil.
An orc child can, by most rulesets, grow up to be a productive member of society. So the paladin's job is to take him to a tolerantish orphanage. Killing them because its safe, easy, and pragmatic is not LG; they punish evildoers, not maybe-someday-might-be-evildoers.
>>48205296
hives are a single creature, eliminating one is not genocide. eliminating one during war isn't murder.
>>48205306
You kill all the bugs in the galaxy
>>48204366
I dunno OP you tell me
>>48205334
Yeah, no, that's 100% evil. Keyword there being INDOCTORNATED.
>>48205331
if there is a single creature left and you kill that creature for the right reasons than its ok even if its technicly a genocide since it isn't a mass murder.
>>48205196
Murder by definition anon is the illegal killing of a being. You cannot murder goblins, or any other non-human entity.
Yes.
If dragons are dangerous we'll kill them all
If Demons are dangerous we'll kill them all
If Necromancers are dangerous we'll kill them all
Genocide is extremely common in fantasy setting's, and it's often the good guys who do it.
>>48205382
dangerous != evil
humans are dangerous, lets go on a killing spree.
>>48205334
I have played with this guy or someone inspired by him, and I did not fucking realize that we were doing this until it was all over.
>>48205176
>Killing Evil beings is an objectively Good act
Still waiting on that source.
>>48205392
Then you must be the world's dumbest group.
>>48205382
Killing something because it's a danger to you does not make you good. To orcs, a sect of paladins may be dangerous to them. That doesn't mean they're good if they annihilate them.
>>48204366
In the context of this setting all goblins need to die.
If we were talking about that one webcomic about goblins then some all goblins are actually good guys and humans are evil unless you're a retarded barbarian.
>>48205397
AD&D, back when certain evil beings (orcs and hobgoblins, especially) were always evil and not just aligned evilly.
There were no and could be no good orcs - they were literally always evil.
>>48205445
Evil in AD&D isn't always what a normal person (Without detect evil) would call evil though.
Merchants are evil in AD&D, becasue they're selfish and greedy. In the same way an orc could be desperate and have no choice but to follow the will on the tribe. When given the option it will do good in order to survive, even if it is evil.
>>48205459
Merchants are neutral, though. Being selfish and greedy is being neutral. Evil means you're a right bastard.
>>48205445
But I wasn't talking about the evil races. I was talking about the claim that killing evil beings is a good act in all context. If you can find a source for that, I'll believe you.
>>48205464
Most merchants are if we're being honest.
>>48205468
The thing is that in a D&D setting evil is a real thing. Changing from evil to god is such a dramatic shift that it can kill people and level drain you.
If something is objectively, inherently evil then killing it is a good act.
You have to remember that D&D alignments and rules have no place in the real world. But that setting is designed to be simpler in a sense.
>>48205459
selfishness is not evil as long as it doesn't come on the expense of others.
>>48205492
>If something is objectively, inherently evil then killing it is a good act.
SOURCE
O
U
R
C
E
Also, so when an orc stabs another orc in the throat for a scrap of meat, that's a good act?
>>48205498
Selfishness inherently harms someone other than yourself.
>>48205503
An orc killing another orc is a selfish act, therefore evil.
>>48205511
>An orc killing another orc is a selfish act, therefore evil.
So you admit that in some cases where the motives are selfish, killing an evil creature is not a good act?
>>48205511
>Selfishness inherently harms someone other than yourself.
no it doesn't. it just prevents benefits from thhem, its not the same.
>>48205522
Killing an evil creature for a selfish reason because you have a good goal at the end is CG so it can also be good.
A paladin is the most selfless thing in existence though, so none of their acts are selfish. Unless you aren't playing a paladin correctly.
>>48205544
>Killing an evil creature for a selfish reason because you have a good goal at the end is CG so it can also be good.
What is "a good goal at the end", and how is it compatible with killing for a selfish reason? You said yourself that Good and Evil are objective truths in D&D. So how can the ends possibly justify the means?
>>48205587
That's the thing man, you're looking too far into something that paints the world black and white.
For what it's worth I agree with you, things aren't that way when you think about them.
But it's a fantasy world, and part of that is shrugging off the morality questions of the real world and saying 'good is good and evil is evil'.
Not that there isn't a place at the game table for these questions, the rules are a guideline and you can play however you want and rule what is good and evil as each action happens.
But by the book good and evil are laid out as binary.
>>48204366
If they are always evil race like goblins, killing them is no worse than killing your natural predators who hunt and eat you. It's fine.
>>48205051
>Make them supper!
>>48204366
I think it can only be Lawful Neutral even at its best.
This is international law for the most part, that pic related is talking about
>>48205628
>But by the book good and evil are laid out as binary.
I agree wholeheartedly. I just disagree with where you drew the line. You said that killing an evil creature is a good act. I forced you to concede that this is not always the case. Sometimes killing an evil creature is simply an act of selfishness and not justified. So when can genocide be justified? It's not an act of justice at all, it's an act of prevention. It's utilitarian morality for a system of morality where the rules are set in stone, and as such, makes no sense at all.
>>48204366
Of course, but the genocided would need to have no redeeming quality or potential at all.
Your pic related is not good; genocide of unthinking and exclusively destructive beings like, say, giant radioactively explosive bacteria from hell could be seen as good.
But in the end morality is relative.
>>48205028
You can tell he gamed with one of those guys who forced "m-muh green shortstacks" nonstop.
>>48205680
To be fair you did cause me to trip up. And you are right that it isn't justifiable in any moral way. But then you get into dubious territory, what if your LG god commands you to kill every Orc because they're evil and an insult to creation. That's a good act because the god that defines good said it right? Are you evil for disobeying that which defines us as good? I generally try not to pull the thread since I like the sweater, but I've seen campaigns go there and listening to 4 characters who all have different world views, all of which are different from their real world views gets old after a couple of sessions.
>>48205724
>what if your LG god commands you to kill every Orc because they're evil and an insult to creation.
It's clearly a glabrezu trying to lure you onto the path of wickedness. Detect evil, cleave and smite.
>>48205028
YES
>>48205745
The problem is that the DM dictates what is evil and what isn't, so two different tables would have two different outcomes from the same event.
>>48205757
Good thing I'm a DM then :)
>>48205761
Good thing I'm going to kill all the orcs then.
>>48205761
Well then you're always going to be right about the morality of your setting aren't you?
As someone who doesn't have the imagination to DM I salute you for your efforts.
>>48205051
Stand back Ill show you how its done!
Over the Proverbial ridge!
>WHORAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGH
>GHRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
LET THE PROMETHIUM BURN IT TO A CINDER.
>>48204366
Yes.
Not that there are actual rules defining alignments, and thus no reason to even use them in the first place.
>>48204366
Sure it is. If you want a comparison, white in MtG is capable of terrible things to maintain order, law, and whatever they believe is good.
>>48205144
In my interpretation Demons may be intelligent, but their choices are limited because their nature as inherently magical beings makes them incapable of making 'good' choices. A half-demon, like Hellboy whose mother was human, would be able to make a choice and are therefore sentient beings as we normally interpret that.
>>48204366
Do unto others what you would have done unto you.
That depends, how jewish are the targets?
>>48206011
I'm pretty sure jesus would understand the necessity of killing all goblins.
>>48206033
>You asked:
>"Is it OK to kill all Goblins?"
>Jesus Answers:
>"Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."
>- Matthew 5:10
I think Jesus just said you're a fucking idiot.http://askjesus.com/jc/jc.answer?qa=53019
>>48206102
>persecuted for righteousness' sake
Goblins are persecuted because they're a violent pest.
>>48204366
Sometimes Genocide IS the correct answer
>>48205028
Too bad the series is complete and total dogshit
>>48206144
Are you arguing with Jesus?
>>48206182
fuck that kike motherfuckeror spic motherfucker, depending on which jesus you're talking about
>>48204383
What about races like the Tyranids? Replicators? Chaos? They are either mindless, want to consume everything, or are absolute evil.
>>48204366
No, genocide is evil, no matter it's intentions or logic. There is no reason good enough to justify the death of innocents.
>>48206279
Well, good thing none of them are innocent.
>>48206279
>No genocide is evil, no matter it's intentions or logic. There is always some reason good enough to justify the death of innocents.
FTFY
>>48206011
What I would do unto others is kill them if they are an orc. As I am not an orc then I would have others not kill me but instead join me in killing Orcs.
>>48206279
What if there are no innocents in that race?
What if there are MORE innocents in your race and the only alternative for their genocide is to let your innocents die?
>>48206182
Jesus is concerned with the treatment of your fellow man.
Goblins aren't people.
>>48205334
Is it wrong though the orcs no longer pillage and kill and rape, Is it wrong to wipe out a hostile nation or race to save your own? If you could would you have wiped out the Huns to save all those people they murdered.
If Given the choice I would find it difficult to make a choice if I had that power. Save your own or allow a race to choose weather or not they are going to rape pillage and murder your people.
>>48206352
It's still not an act of good nor can it be justified, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be the right choice or the best choice.
>>48205051
>STAND BACK I'LL SHOW YOU HOW IT'S DONE!
>BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHH
>>48205287
Looks like Earth needs to step up its game
>>48205935
But White isn't good just like Black isn't evil. Every color has the potential to sit anywhere on the moral spectrum depending on how it's expressed.
>>48206462
>>48205287
This is now a Humanity: Fuck Yeah! thread
>>48205287
This is because the purpose of the Human race is to weed out the weak and press natural selection further.
>>48206374
Doing the littlest of evils still doesn't doesn't make the act good.
Sometimes all you can do is the least amount of evil.
>>48206491
Black is pretty shifty.
Around blacks, never relax.
>>48206519
>Around blacks, never relax.
Around a nigger, finger on the trigger
>>48206383
It might not be good but in this case is not evil either therefore it's acceptable.
>>48206499
NO! NONE OF THAT! SHAME ON YOU!
>>48206509
THAT IS NOT HOW NATURAL SELECTION WORKS
THERE IS NO END GOAL FOR NATURAL SELECTION
IT IS A PROCESS NOT A DIRECTIVE
HUMANS BRED CATTLE TO BE NICE AND EDIBLE AND WEAK, NOT TO BE THOUGHTFUL WARRIOR POETS
>>48205088
> Would humanity be worse off if all the Mi-Go or the Deep Ones were wiped out?
Bad examples, mate. The Mi-Go and the Deep Ones are actually the closest things we have to friends in the Mythos.
The Mi-Go are all too willing to show you the universe the the truth behind the lie as long as you are smart enough to figure out how to contact them. Yes, they put your brain in a jar, but that's because you can't survive in space in a human body. They are horrifying to look at, and kind of secretive, but not outright malevolent outside of Cthulutech.
And the Deep Ones trade and form alliances with humans. Yes, interbreeding with people to create a hybrid race of fish monsters is horrifying on the surface, but you know who is actually going to survive the awakening of Cthulhu? Those fish monsters. From their perspective, they are doing us a favor and the people of Innsmouth were willingly on board for it.
>>48206565
You are just a cultist-wannabe and a gribbly-apologist.
>>48204366
It's kind of a necessary evil, what the dude in OP's pic does.
If he let's the children live, they'll grow up with a vendetta against humans. They'll be worse than the threat that put him there in the first place. And even if he could spare them, they'd be abandoned. Nobody would raise them, they're fucking goblins. And if one turns out malevolent he's enabled it spreading further chaos.
What's he going to do, let the unskilled idealist raise them? She'll be a mutilated corpse in a week. Raise them himself? Do you honestly think a homeless sellsword is a good parent?
Killing them is a mercy they're too alive to understand.
>>48206547
Yes, but the point of the thread is "is it good" and you can never justify it as good, only as "necessary" or "better choice" and even then with a heavy overhanging presence of "Is it?".
I don't think Genocide is ever good but it is necessary some times. If your enemy refuses to stop fighting it has to be done.
How the hell do you people read LNs?
I've always avoided them but with only one chapter of the manga up I need my fix.
>>48206374
>If you could would you have wiped out the Huns to save all those people they murdered.
Bad example as the Huns got utterly exterminated once their main armies were broken, by the Romans and Germans they pissed off, to the extent that the only surviving word of their language is 'horde'.
>>48204366
>>48206565
Both of these results are horrific, and no sane person would consider them acceptable outcomes.
>>48206643
>Liking this terribly written pointlessly-GRRRRIM shit
Even for an /a/non you have shit taste.
It depends on which edition of D&D you are talking about (and you are talking about D&D, as you call it Lawful Good).
In old school D&D, genocide can be Lawful Good. Gary Gygax expressly said so.
In 3.5, genocide is explicitly NOT Good. The Book of Exalted Deeds goes into detail on what Good is in 3.5, and genocide certainly is not. You have to spare noncombatants and anyone who surrenders.
In 4e, genocide can be Lawful Good. In 4e alignment does nothing and gets only a passing mention, so you can safely not worry about it.
>>48206693
>In old school D&D, genocide can be Lawful Good. Gary Gygax expressly said so.
I have never trusted Gyagx's judgement on anything since he was too stuck in the romanticized christian crusader mindset for LG anything.
>>48206675
>cg
>using slavery
kek
>>48206565
Elder Things were even better. Just people, after all.
>>48206676
No sane person knows anything about the Mythos at all.
But for those that have been exposed to it, in both stories where the Mi Go and the Deep Ones are introduced, the humans who suffered these fates willingly signed up for it.
The guy who got his brain put into a jar was downright excited that we was going to be shown more of the universe than any human had ever seen, and seemed to believe that the Mi Go would give him a new body after his field trip.
>>48206253
Totally acceptable, shit like the forerunners killing all the flood, but deciding to keep some in stasis because "cant kill them all! that would be wrong"
Shit fuck stupid idea
In a coherent setting, yes. You could write a setting in which the universe functions in such a way that certain creatures lack free will and always result in a net negative on their sphere of influence. "Lawful Good," however, implies D&&D and none of the D&D settings are written that way.
>>48206675
Of course alignments are dumb.
But they're incredibly amusing for the sake of causing a ruckus at the table.
>>48205677
What's that from? Is the source called Genocide Man?
>>48204366
>Can genocide be Lawful Good?
Depends what you mean by it.
>>48206253
> Tyranids
Non-Sapient. Not anymore than destroying a nest of wasps.
> Replicators
Googled it, gives me a wiki link about Stargate. Doesn't look sentient, let alone sapient. Technically not a genocide as they have no genes.
> Chaos
Get a Psyker powerful enough and a CSM could be torn away from the grasp of the Choas Gods, I say. Mainly because everything is possible with the Immaterium, even stabbing oneself in the back because you like your own hat. Furthermore, the genocide part has to do with the gene-seed part, which amuses me.
Bonus:
> Undead nation / civ
Not a Genocide, might be morally questionable, depending on whether sentience/sapience has been reached. Full Zombie Apocalypse? Go ahead.
> Necrons
I would entertain capturing / reprogramming and reverse-engineering. Maybe there's a way to redeem an individual? Worth a shot.
I mean, either you get Necrons on your side or wonderful insight on an enemy.
>>48208474
That's not why they kept them alive, or at least not the only reason. Flood came from outside the milky way, so they figured another outbreak was inevitable and the benefits of leaving samples for their AI and future races to study outweighed the risk of an early outbreak.
The stupid part was keeping those samples near enough biomass for another fucking gravemind, and thinking no alien smart enough to reach those samples could possibly be retarded enough to pop the lock.
>>48209880
>Non-Sapient. Not anymore than destroying a nest of wasps
The hivemind is incredibly sapient, its intelligent and supposedly feels hatred to other life, its not a mindless beast
>>48210056
Except that's retconned cause the flood are actually precursor
Lawful good=/=Lawful nice
>>48210164
The precursor stuff didn't retcon that part. Powder ships still floated in from outside the galaxy. And IIRC, they didn't realize the full extent of the flood-precursor relation until shortly before the halos fired and it was too late to make any major adjustments to the plan.
If pest control is genocide, then lock me up for all the lesser species I have poisoned just for being on my property.
>>48206762
> romanticized christian crusader mindset
No, Gygax was the opposite of romantic - he went for the hardcore medieval Anglo-Saxon laws.
Nits != lice is a modern thing.
>>48210584
"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is by no means anything but Lawful and Good. Prisoners guilty of murder or similar capital crimes can be executed without violating any precept of the alignment. Hanging is likely the usual method of such execution, although it might be beheading, strangulation, etc. A paladin is likely a figure that would be considered a fair judge of criminal conduct.
The Anglo-Saxon punishment for rape and/or murder of a woman was as follows: tearing off of the scalp, cutting off of the ears and nose, blinding, chopping off of the feet and hands, and leaving the criminal beside the road for all bypassers to see. I don't know if they cauterized the limb stumps or not before doing that. It was said that a woman and child could walk the length and breadth of England without fear of molestation then.
Chivington might have been quoted as saying "nits make lice," but he is certainly not the first one to make such an observation as it is an observable fact. If you have read the account of wooden Leg, a warrior of the Cheyenne tribe that fought against Custer et al., he dispassionately noted killing an enemy squaw for the reason in question.
I am not going to waste my time and yours debating ethics and philosophy. I will state unequivocally that in the alignment system as presented in OAD&D, an eye for an eye is lawful and just, Lawful Good, as misconduct is to be punished under just laws.
Mercy is to be displayed for the lawbreaker that does so by accident. Benevolence is for the harmless. Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves. They have no place in determining general alignment, albeit justice tempered by mercy is a NG manifestation, whilst well-considered benevolence is generally a mark of Good."
>>48204366
>>48204867
>>48205153
>>48205677
>>48206011
>>48206279
>>48206279
>Dark Eldar. There you go.
>I am pretty sure there are more examples from other settings, I cant name any others right away though.
Similar question:
Can rape be a Good act? Can righteous dick exorcise evil?
>>48204366
Yes but only against actually evil and destructive life forms. Viruses, tyranids, orks etc
>>48204366
Does anyone have the rest of chapter 2?
>>48204366
According to the creator of the chart the answer is yes. Lawful good is basically Crusade Christianity tier.
>>48210287
Is it Lawful Rascal?
>>48209880
>Tyranids
The Hive Mind is incredibly sapient and intelligent, even if the Pyrovore's current use and existence, plus notable idiocies like making the exocrine (and a lot of other creatures') main weapon more intelligent than the exocrine itself would say otherwise.
>replicators
Yes, the Stargate ones. You are right. The humanoid ones are quite intelligent, however.
>Chaos
You'd need an Emperor-level psyker to do that, the Chaos Gods are *gods* after all.
>even stabbing oneself in the back because you like your own hat.
Happened when the Ork Warboss known as Grigutz accidentally a Warp and ended up a few weeks in the past, then decided to kill his past self so he could have a spare of his favourite gun. He was preparing a WAAAGH!, but his own assassination confused his subjects so much that the WAAAGH! stopped dead in its tracks before it could even begin.I'm quite sure you already knew all of this, but whatever.
