In 3rd Succubi are demons (CE), Erynes (fallen angels) are devils (LE).
Whoaboy.
Wonder what the husband and kids will think of THAT?
(And is that minotaur-dragon a reference to the half-dragon, half-gelatinous cube someone referred to earlier?)
(And is it possible to create Familicide using the 3E Epic Handbook rules for spell creation?)
(And for the first time in three comics, the OOTS forum is NOT down! Woo!)
(Hi, Opal!)
Thanks.
That point wasn’t countering the “evil” part, just the “because he was upset” part.
In the *real *world, yes, I agree. But this is D’nD, ferGary’sSake - the whole name of the freaking game comes from the idea that evil dragons (and their hoards) are fair game for “our heroes”.
I did not know that. But like you said, not relevant.
I know. I was just trying to say that things change. Certainly, by her actions, I’d say Sabine was CE - the Linear Guild aren’t known for keeping their word, for instance.
Only if you have a really bad DM who lets the players get away with alignment violations left and right. Taking out a goblin warcamp that’s preparing to attack a village is a good act, but taking out a goblin village just because they’re goblins is evil.
how about taking out a goblin village because of the phat lewt?
Unless you’re a non-evil divine spellcaster, it really shouldn’t matter. As long as you don’t give anyone a reason to ping you with Detect Evil and don’t have a deity with a weak stomach looking over your shoulder, noone needs to know you slaughter innocent goblins for a living, as long as you don’t act like a genocidal loonie when you get back to town.
Well then, it’s perfectly justifiable… as long as you do it in a section of the rules where you’re not talking about alignment. 
But they’re loyal to each other, within limits. And Nale is definitely LE - after all, he’s Elan’s Opposite.
Something that came into my mind… Vaarsuvius is right now in his home town in the Elven lands, which (according to the globe we can see in the strip) appear to be located on the northern part of the Western continent.
The Western continent… And Tiamat is part of the Western pantheon. If I am not mistaken, the gods of the OotS-verse are allowed to intervene directly regarding things that happen in the areas under their immediate jurisdiction.
So, Vaarsuvius has killed/familicided/genocided a big bunch of black dragons while in the home turf of the Mother Goddess of Chromatic Dragons… :smack:
…for some reason I have a feeling of foreboding.
None of this is true, nor does it make sense.
Just because something has a tendency toward evil does not mean that it deserves to die. Therefore, rampant destruction of creatures (even if evil) without a clear case warranting their deaths is a chaotic act, and also evil because of the extraordinary extent of the vile, vengeful motivation behind the “familicide.” V’s actions are undoubtedly Chaotic Evil, regardless of the specificity of the alignments of V’s victims.
That’s not true, unless the “heroes” are not lawful at least. A lawful character needs a clear sense of justice to be fulfilled by killing something. Wanton destruction of evil creatures who had basically been minding their own business is NOT a lawful act.
Oh thank you! I get so sick of the “Always Chaotic Evil justifies anything bad that anyone else does to the creature” argument. Here’s a novel thought: judge individuals on what they do, not on what some manual says they are. I should add the disclaimer that I approach this from the POV of someone who’s reading OotS for the plot. I couldn’t care less about the game mechanics aspect of it. As convenient as the alignment chart is for gaming purposes, when it comes to dealing with how sentient beings actually act, its utility is limited.
Traditional dragons in D’nD don’t have a “tendency” towards evil, they live and breath it. Black dragons are described as the cruelest and most vicious type, too. D’nD alignments aren’t just suggestions.
And once again, V. isn’t (or at least isn’t admitting) doing the spell out of vengeance, but out of defence for his family (As he sees it).
Personally, I’m totally siding with the Elf, here.
Oh, for fuck’s sake. They’re monsters, people. They need killing. Moral relativism is all very well, but we’re talking about black dragons, here. Vicious critters who ambush people, eat them and sit on mounds of their treasure.
I blame too many years of antiheroes.
Like slowly torturing overpowered, defenceless juvenile elves before killing them and trapping their souls for eternity? or are we talking about the other dragons? There, V’s being pre-emptive, but again - dragons! Alien reptiles. They’re not people. They* eat *people.
This may come as a surprise, but many folks don’t subscribe to an “as long as you get away with it” system of morality. And many DMs flat out don’t allow any evil PCs in their campaigns. The players are supposed to be the heroes, after all.
Sure, but that has nothing to do with telling people off for alignment violations.
I think it has more to do with bad players who can’t play an evil character without using it as an excuse to betray the party.
Here’s a question. The female magic user who knew the spell. Whose minion was she?
Purple. I think that’s CEdrick.
You apparently have reading comprehension issues.
Annihilating every dragon related to the ancient one who threatened his family isn’t vengeance? You’re a very confused person.
I’m very, VERY glad I never played D&D with you. Unless, that is, you are emphatically roll-playing a Chaotic Neutral persona right now.