Me and the player are both lawful good. He's a cleric and I'm a fighter. We find a plant and the DM says it can be used to make a powerful poison. I decide to take some, and the cleric speaks up, saying it's an inherently evil/chaotic act to use poison on a weapon. I point out that he uses his goddess to make killing things with his sword easier, so why can't I use a plant to kill things with my sword easier? He pulls out the book to show me that poison = bad, and I tell him to shove the book up his ass because that makes no fucking sense.
Just tell the cleric to go screw himself and do waht you want?
Luke Thompson
He's entitled to his belief but as long as he doesn't rule over you then you can make that poison for days. Alignments are silly anyway.
Justin Thompson
The right move is clearly to not only make the poison, but to kill the cleric with it.
That'll show him your lawful good is stronger.
James Moore
Doesn't matter. Alignments are whatever characters want them to be, and every in-game conflict about them stays in-game.
This is the only non autistic way to play with alignments, period.
Wyatt Mitchell
>2017 >Using Alignments
Jonathan Williams
You sound like a Neutral Evil person to me, OP.
Jordan Richardson
>lawful good characters will always agree about everything no >poison is inherently evil/chaotic no, but it has those associations >a specific religion or deity could reasonably have rules about not using poison yes >those rules apply should apply to all LG characters no
He's right that poison use isn't traditionally in the scope of LG characters, but if you can make it work it's fine.
Luis Cruz
The only hard rule regarding poison and Alignments is Paladins can't use them. Considering neither of you are Paladins, it's a pretty moot argument. That said since he /is/ a Cleric it makes sense he'd have similar beliefs.
Ultimately this is a pretty standard kind of disagreement between people of the same Alignment. If it means anything OP, if you were one of my players I'd only broach your Alignment if you were planning on making an incredibly painful and slow-acting poison for the purposes of taking petty revenge on someone.
Aiden Peterson
The next time Aspie the Cleric of St. Sperglord starts mumbling about poisons being evil, remind him that the medicines he uses to heal people with are poisons which effect certain diseases.
Then tell him to shower, shave, and use deodorant before the next session.
James Brown
It depends on the effect of the poison. If it causes severe pain, it's evil. If it just makes you die faster, and you use it on a weapon, then it's not evil.
Hunter Morris
Poison on your weapon is not evil
Poison on your targets cutlery is evil
Samuel Anderson
If a weapon does more damage for whatever reason, doesn't it *necessarily* hurt more?
Michael Harris
Make the poison. Mix it with opium. It kills them and their pain! Its not murder, its violently assisted suicide!
Connor Brown
Depends on how you're flavoring hitpoints. In 5e there is no real distinction made by Wizards of actual meat points vs 'fighting spirit'. theangrygm.com/fighting-spirit/
Jose Robinson
Paladins should not lie or use poison because they should be a visible example of how to live. Such methods decrease visibility, but are not inherently chaotic or evil. As long as your character has not made an oath to avoid poison, there should be no issue. Your DM should have final say on how alignments work, and shifting over to TN isn't that big a deal.
Jonathan Thompson
>what are neurotoxins
James Gonzalez
>2017 >Using the 'current year' argument
Alexander Green
If you're using Pathfinder, then look at the poison spells. CONTAGION: School necromancy [evil]; POISON: School necromancy; So weaponizing diseases is evil, and weaponizing poisons is neutral.
Leo Rivera
Your fighter can do whatever the fuck he wants, if it will cause an alignment shift than that's something to discuss with your dm. What kind of faggots think alignment dictates what you can and can't do?
Carter Cook
No, and him putting it in such general terms shows a distinct lack of imagination. What if the use of poison is an accepted way of removing a rival in someone's culture? Could adhering to the unwritten laws their culture be perceived as Chaotic? What if using that poison will allow a warrior to remove something that could, if left unchecked, cause suffering that warrior could easily prevent? Is the act then evil?
tl;dr - No, because there are so many scenarios in which using poison is both lawful and good.
Zachary Scott
Addendum: Using poison that causes UNNECESSARY suffering is indisputably evil, but still possibly lawful. Again, SHIT DEPENDS.
Ayden Turner
This isn't nam, this is Roleplaying, there are rules.
Joseph James
I think the REAL question here is whether or not the poison has purely stat effects, or if it also effects how the targets act.
>inb4 "not in muh rules"
The book states that roleplaying is the core definition of the game, thusly, a poisoned entity should react properly.
P.S. You could always say that "snakes use venom, are you going to tell me that snakes are inherently evil?" And if he says yes, show him in the book how they aren't.
Isaac Butler
It's up to the DM to decide. Alignments may be objective in the world of D&D, but they're subjective IRL, and that's what you both need to understand.
Are far as poisons being always evil, I've read that in some books too. Again it's up to DM to decide. Sometimes using poison, necromancy and/or drugs is evil no matter the situation. Sometimes casting a spell of an alignment is an act of that alignment.
Michael Martinez
>You could always say that "snakes use venom, are you going to tell me that snakes are inherently evil?" And if he says yes, show him in the book how they aren't. You already should know that's not how alignments work, and you have no point.
Sebastian Brooks
>that's not how alignments work
He said that it's "inherently" evil, so a snake that has an inherently evil defense mechanism should like-wise be inherently evil.
Not my fault if the Cleric is using broken logic.
Liam Smith
Saying "using poison is evil" is completely fucking retarded, and you should hit your friend in the face with the book for it. But it can make sense for a lawful good character to refuse to use poison. It can be argued that it is chaotic, because it's a dishonorable way of fighting. But honor is subjective, you can have a lawful good knight who would refuse to use ranged weapons, and a lawful good gunslinger and they're both lawful good. Your friend is just acting like his particular flavor of lawful good is the only valid one, tell him to fuck off.
Kevin Powell
It doesn't matter if poison is inherently evil or not. Snakes aren't intelligent enough to be evil, they're animals. It's one thing to knowingly do something evil, and it's other thing to not have the ability to comprehend morality.
Jacob Clark
>Your friend is just acting like his particular flavor of lawful good is the only valid one
This is a recurring problem with LG players and why I think it's an even bigger That Guy Alignment than even CN or any of the Evil ones.
Jaxson Gutierrez
>Not using poison to assasinate the tyrant ruling over the city by sprinkling some cyanide into his salad
Git lawful gud
Landon Sanchez
If something is "inherently" evil, it's irrelevant if they're intelligent enough to comprehend morality, because it transcends choice.
