Humanoid units in human armies

[A_dark]

In the 2nd ed rulebook in page 63 it reads that mustering humanoid armies is considered an evil act. That is, if you are teh regent of Tailinie and conquer Thurazor and decide to muster goblin units, you are doing evil stuff....

Would the same apply for mages who summon goblin units with the Summoning Spell and use them for their purposes? Would it be more apropriate for a human good mage to research a spell summoning halflings or other humans or whatever? Or perhaps a spell summoning animals, if the mage feels a bit druidic or even summoning some sort of spirits non-evil undead?

[Osprey]

Ah, and everyone was saying how eveil it would be for a regent to kill off all the humanoids?

Yet fraternizing or sponsoring humanoids is also evil.

SO - who wants to be an evil regent in Anuire? Sounds like the way to go to me!

Would the same apply for mages who summon goblin units with the Summoning Spell and use them for their purposes? Would it be more apropriate for a human good mage to research a spell summoning halflings or other humans or whatever? Or perhaps a spell summoning animals, if the mage feels a bit druidic or even summoning some sort of spirits non-evil undead?

in the BRCS they addressed this and said mages can summon whatever creatures best suit them. I often include elementals as the more typical "troops" for non-evil, humanoid-averse source regents. Dire animals, giants, and yeah, even spirit warriors or something similar works well too. I'm a big fan of keeping it wide open and letting each mage specify according to his/her tastes.

Osprey

[graham anderson]

I don't see this as an evil act but it can have bad effect morale problems for your army reduced apinion of your people etc.

[The Jew]

It seems to me that how such an action should be viewed is based on the larger context. If your people have been raided or butchered by said humanoids for generations, then that would be considered bad, if not down right evil, by the regents populace and would have ramifications. But if this was also a while after the area had been conquered and the regent had made a real effort to either integrate the humanoids into the realm, so as to build their loyalty and so forever end the threat they pose, or to use the humanoids as a conquered people to exploit for gold, resources and now troops for the benefit of the realms human populace, then it would be viewed quite differently. It's all about context. I personally don't believe in absolutes.

[RaspK_FOG]

I generally think that putting such actions in tight ideals is wrong. For example, killing others is evil; moving them out of their homes is evil; but, there may well be justification and reasons enough for someone to do something. You cannot simply adjudicate based on only point of view.

[Osprey]

For example, killing others is evil

Does this really hold true for the typical D&D PC? Why are there any good-aligned PC's at all then? How many monsters killed can be justified contextually without forcing an alignment change?

While I agree with you IRL, D&D forces us to accept that there IS in fact a very different set of morals and ethics than in our world, otherwise no one could be called "good" after killing gods know how many monsters, villains, and what not. And just how many times do you think diplomacy was thrown to the wind, because "hey, it's a goblin" [or troll, or displacer beast, or whatever, and people know they're "evil"].

[RaspK_FOG]

That's exactly what I mean! While killing is evil by all means, saying that every person who has ever killed anything is evil is wrong. If that was the case, we should die of hunger and thirst or become abominations! since evil plant life is alive. Still, you cannot just kill any creature and say that the one who did it is not evil: the fine line here is that, while the act is ALWAYS evil, the person who did it might not be evil, since he did it on a specific set of criteria.

For example, while most goblins are just monsters, it would be monstrous indeed if you just killed one who asked of you to spare his life if you have not seen it do anything evil or thuggish. What if that goblin was a polymorphed person?

[Sthenelos]

It also would seem that while the basic image remains, goblins are, unlike the standard AD&D goblin, not presented as being universally evil in the BR material, with seemingly far more potential for establishing a civilization than the hyena-like social structure they are elsewhere presented as having. So while your subjects and soldiers could feel unhinged, it could also be possible to enroll some of the humanoid neighbour's dissidents without being necessarily considered as evil.

[tcharazazel]

This first part may seem off topic, however, im just hitting at what i believe to be the root of the problem here.

While killing is evil by all means, saying that every person who has ever killed anything is evil is wrong. If that was the case, we should die of hunger and thirst

Exactly!!! How else would you survive on a daily basis? Unless you're living off futuristic pills, you have to kill to survive! If you think the Christian god didn't want people to kill things then why the hell would he put them in a place that forced them to kill to live!?!?! Hell, the god even tested Abraham by asking him to kill his son, and when he proved he would, had him sacrifice a goat instead.

Heheh, damn, reminds me of the story of Buddha, you innocent people really need to go out and see the real world, with its pain, sufferring and death. After you've seen the horror of life, I seriously doubt you'll maintain that childish belief that killing is evil.

One simple example comes to mind, what if you and your friend are out backpacking several days from anything and he gets attacked by a very hungry moutain lion. Would you try to kill the mountain lion? If you do manage to either kill or scare away the mountain lion, your friend lies there bleading to death from several bites and claw rakes, to his legs, chest and face. Its obvious that he will die without immediate medical assistance, however, you both know that he won't be able to get any... As he lies there screamin in pain, he asks you to kill him... would you? Would you put you friend out of his misery, or would you lie to him and give him the false hope that help will come, or just say to him sorry that's against my beliefs, so suck up your chest, well, what's left of it, quit your whining and take it like a man.

Another example is if a friend/family member dying slowly from a disease that is incurable. would you help them to die sooner, or have them suffer through treatment after failed treatment just so you can selfishly spend more time with them, even though the person has asked you repeatedly to let them die...

To try and follow the rules of a diety interpreted by man is just foolish... better to follow the rules of nature as it skips the middle man, who will likely throw in some things for his own gain. Because if you follow the Christian faith, or just about any for that matter, who do you think made the laws of nature? Your god that's who. The rules of nature are quite simple, and one of the primary rules is that you have to kill to survive, whether it's to eat or in self defense, it is a part of life. If you want to be respectful towards your kills the pick up some of the traditions of the Native Americans who give thanks to their kills that they plan to eat for giving their lives so the Native Americans can live.

So, if you want to be like a sheep, then expect to get fleeced repeatedly and then killed when you no longer are of any use.


Ok, with that said then. To tie this back into the topic, these types of beliefs DO NOT BELONG in the D&D world. If you cannot read the alignment descriptions and accept them as the moral rules for the D&D reality that has been created for our gaming pleasure, then you need to learn to let go of the beliefs you cling to in this reality, when you are playing games in a different reality. This will help you to appreciate your reality more actually, and if you wanted to create a new set of alignments for you games, then by all means go for it! Just remember that they will just be for your house rules.

For example, while most goblins are just monsters, it would be monstrous indeed if you just killed one who asked of you to spare his life if you have not seen it do anything evil or thuggish. What if that goblin was a polymorphed person?

Hahaha, that's a great example, however, who the hell wouldn't ask you to spare his life if you happened upon him and caught him? You would be follish to trust the word of that person/monster/whatever, as he will say anything to save his life. That's what the zone of truth and discern lies is all about, heheh. Then you could believe him, otherwise... whos to say that when you turn your back to leave he doesnt put a dagger in it?

[A_dark]

Erm... euthanasia is a more complicated matter than what you present it as.... This is not relevant to the question I asked, but I am tempted to make some points.

The person who suffers from incurable diseases or who has a post-traumatic shock, is he in the right state of mind to make a decision on his own life? Would you trust a person with depression, possibly suicidal, to make such a decision? There are psychiatric syndromes associated with the Intensive Care Unit (it is called ICUitis and you can probably find info about it on the net) and there are psychiatric syndromes associated with incurable disesases. Would you trust these people to make choices regarding their lives?

I am personally not decided on the matter (even though I need to make up my mind eventually, cos I am a medical student)

Back to our matter....

The problem with this question is that the rulebook explicitly classifies mustering humanoids as an evil act! It is not applying modern-day morality to medieval society, but rather applying the rules/guidelines of the book... Unless we accept that the game designers applied the modern day morality....

Wouldn't a good person give the benefit of a doubt to the goblin in the example with the instructions? I think I agree with Raspkfog's approach that killing for no reason, but simply because of mistrust is a sign of someone being evil, rather than just being smart as you suggested tchar...

Also, about killing animals to feed yourself.... in christianity, this was never forbidden. Senseless killing was forbidden though, because man is supposed to co-exist with nature, not destroy it outright. So, the question would be wether goblins are animals or people and wether the concept of killing people is evil or not in medieval societies....