71
72

...My players have started a war between nations... (self.DnD)

LouryWindurst[🍰] が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -21ポイント-20ポイント  (19子コメント)

Why are you blaming players? You're the one who decided to have slavery be a thing. That government is evil and must be destroyed.

[–]LouryWindurst[S,🍰] 6ポイント7ポイント  (5子コメント)

It's not true slavery. I purposely built this nation around money, and the servants are indentured servants paying off loans they haven't paid, or those with outstanding debts from gambling. Once the debt is paid, they are free to resume life as it was. Laws are in place protecting the servants from mistreatment. The marking is a tattoo, of henna, which the players knew from the conversation with an npc earlier

And I blame the players because they jumped the gun and assumed evil kingdom bent on death and destruction. Lol

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -5ポイント-4ポイント  (4子コメント)

Slavery is slavery. You can't sell yourself because you don't own yourself. You are yourself. There's a reason we have laws for bankruptcy and laws against debtors' prisons. Your players were right.

[–]LouryWindurst[S,🍰] 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

You may want to tell that to the age old profession of prostitution, as they literally sell themselves.

And you're essentially putting our worlds laws in a fantasy realm which destroys the game, in which case shame on you.

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Johns are all rapists. Prostitutes are rape victims. You cannot sell yourself. You don't own yourself. You are yourself.

[–]LouryWindurst[S,🍰] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

That is a very narrow view, but to reach their own. Everyone owns and has control of their own body. If they want to risk servitude for a loan, it's their choice

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

There's no choice where the threat of starvation pushes people into this, and men who pay for this, knowing this is a possibility, are intending rape. As rapists, they should all be arrested.

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]Pelmeen -1ポイント0ポイント  (11子コメント)

You are saying that just because there is slavery, everybody in there needs to be killed? Seems like you yourself are extremist and probably a lot greater threat than this government ever would be

[–]Big_Time_Rug_Dealer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

He said the government is evil, not the people are.

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -1ポイント0ポイント  (9子コメント)

Yep. I will kill every slave owner I meet.

[–]Pelmeen -1ポイント0ポイント  (8子コメント)

You would die so much in my games through the authorities hands. In fact, your alignment would probably be lawful evil after every session. Blindly and radically following your belief is what your posts tell me what you are. Paladins would hunt you.

You are the perfect example of an anti-villain. I might even make a campaign where you are the main villain :)

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -1ポイント0ポイント  (7子コメント)

Actually, I'd never play one of your games. Anyone who thinks slavery is compatible with good is an evil DM, and I don't play games with evil DMs.

[–]Pelmeen -1ポイント0ポイント  (6子コメント)

Thats funny, you are the first person saying that DM is not evil. DMs are always evil. It is known.

There have been very benevolent slave owners, under whom the slave lived a very good life.

Even still, I never said slavery is compatible with good, but simply because something is evil is not an excuse to kill it. Blindly killing everything thats slightly evil will most probably cause even more suffering and damage.

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

Your privilege is showing. There's no such thing as a benevolent slave owner. Slave ownership is incompatible with good intentions. The reason slavery is wrong is that all good derives from the moral status of the will. Slavery is a negation of the will, and therefore immoral. A slave-owner authorizes his own death because he has said, essentially, that the will does not have moral status. Only those who behave as if others' wills have moral status are members of the moral community worthy of moral consideration. It is not immoral to kill a slave owner.

[–]Pelmeen -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

It is funny how you keep misreading my posts. I never said slavery is moral. The fact that you say 'your privilege is showing' just shows how blind you are. I would have you know I'm not from rich country and I am from poor family, unlike you.

The fact that you say that anybody who is immoral deserves death is frightening. People like you are the reason dark ages existed. People like you are the reason genocides and mass killings have happened and still happen. I loathe people who think violence is the solution to problems and hope that when you grow up, you will get wiser. If not, I hope you will never reach in any position of power, for it will bring only pain and suffering.

I would rather live in a society where violence is shunned upon, but there exists inequality and immorality, than a society where anybody who doesn't follow rules set by authority is killed. You, Sir, are a tyrant.

[–]DnDefenderPaladin -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm the one misreading posts? I said anyone who takes away free will is immoral, yes, but I did not say that anyone who is immoral deserves death. There's more to morality than that. Free will is just the basis for all morality and, so, its negation is the ultimate evil.
Your assumption that I'm a "sir" is also telling. So I'm going to go ahead and guess you're a man. That's the privilege I was referring to.
As for genocides, every single one of them has stopped for one of two reasons: either the genocide succeeded to the point it was no longer necessary or the one committing the genocide was killed. I'm glad I'm on the right side of history.

[–]Pelmeen -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

I will kill every slave owner I meet.

It is not immoral to kill a slave owner.

As for genocides, every single one of them has stopped..\\.. the genocide succeeded to the point it was no longer necessary..\\.. I'm glad I'm on the right side of history.

Wow.. I have no words. I have never talked with anybody who is in favour of genocides before.

Furthermore there have been genocides that have stopped besides the 2 you mentioned.

Slavery is a negation of the will, and therefore immoral. A slave-owner authorizes his own death because he has said, essentially, that the will does not have moral status.

I did not say that anyone who is immoral deserves death.

Notice how you contradict yourself?

So I'm going to go ahead and guess you're a man. That's the privilege I was referring to.

I guess you are big feminist as well, thinking 'all the males should die because they are privileged'. I wouldn't be surprised if you also support genocide against men and you think most of them are slave owners.

What a hateful world you live in.