Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Harmor 07-28-04, 08:56 AM	If I were to use say a cow or a bunch of sheep as 'trap detectors' is it an evil act? What if we eat the animals after they die?
Thorak 07-28-04, 09:01 AM	Yes. And Yes, but tasty. You're not killing the animals humanely, and you're forcing them to take risks so you don't have to. That's evil. Or at least the seedy side of neutral, if you had to get through and there were no other options.
rogue_lettuce 07-28-04, 09:03 AM	Originally posted by Harmor What if we eat the animals after they die? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Killing animals is always evil, that's why I'm a vegetarian. :teach: But, I don't know. From a Medieval point of view, probably not, as Animal Rights were'nt really recognised then except in religions like Buddhism, which don't exist in DnD..... Now let's see how long it takes the WizO_s to shu down this thread after my veggie comment;):D
Luminous Crayon 07-28-04, 09:16 AM	Perhaps you are right. Perhaps you are not. Either way, hilarity ensues. (http://www.cheapass.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=CAG&Product_Code=CAG032)
Mitchell 07-28-04, 09:21 AM	Using animals as trap detectors is evil. Eating them after the fact only lessens the "evilness" if you were actually needing food... Making gluttons of yourselves doesn't cut it, and even then it still isn't a good act. This doesn't even take into account traps that leave the animal unfit for ingestion, such as some poisons could do, or where they don't leave the animal there, such as a pit trap or some magical effects. Now, I'm going to go have some ham or bacon or something ;) .
Count Arioch the 28th 07-28-04, 09:22 AM	I'd say that it wouldn't quite count as evil, but definately not good, and a good aligned person would not do such an act unless it was absolutely needed. Killing nonsentients, especially nonsentients that are nothing more then a protein source, isn't evil, unless you're REALLY creative about it. (If eating meat was evil, why haven't we deployed troops in Africa to save the gazelles from those evil lions?)
Beamup 07-28-04, 09:51 AM	Well, using random commoners to detect traps is obviously Evil. The question is, is using random animals the same way any different. Clearly, you can do things to animals that would be Evil if they were done to people. Chopping off something's head, roasting it, and eating it is Neutral if the something is a chicken, but Evil if it's a Halfling. Where do you draw the line? Myself, I'd have to conclude it's not Evil so long as you go about it as humanely as possible. Eating the animals after they die is clearly Neutral in any case.
ajmastrean 07-28-04, 09:56 AM	I have to wonder if using canaries (is that the plural?) in mines to detect dangerous gases was evil then? The players are using resources (yes, animals are resources) to their advantage to save themselves (dont have to get trapped) and to save others (beat the bad guy, save the princess). I think cows are only good for two things, getting blasted by traps and smothering BBQ sauce on and munching. Now it seems the traps are necessary to properly prepare a cow.
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-28-04, 09:57 AM	Originally posted by rogue_lettuce :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Killing animals is always evil, that's why I'm a vegetarian. :teach: But, I don't know. From a Medieval point of view, probably not, as Animal Rights were'nt really recognised then except in religions like Buddhism, which don't exist in DnD..... And Islam and Judiasm. Under both Kashrut (Jewish dietary law) and Hallal (Islamic dietary law) an animal must be killed humanely. (Kosher slaughter requires the animal not witness the death of other animals, and that it be killed in a single action, traditionally by severing both the caratoid artery and windpipe in one action, IIRC.)
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-28-04, 10:00 AM	We used to use guinea pigs to test potions. (OK, we were quite young at the time.) If the guinea pig didn't die of poison, we would check to see if it could fly, breath water, etc. We gave this up when we suddenly found ourselves foraging for guinea pig food -- we had given one a swig of "potion of human control".
CzarGarrett 07-28-04, 10:23 AM	Maybe if you trained an animal or two to detect traps and all, like bomb-sniffing dogs, then no. Sending a stampede into a minefield probably isn't good. But using bums should be perfectly acceptable.
Arrowhen 07-28-04, 10:54 AM	If I were to use say a cow or a bunch of sheep as 'trap detectors' is it an evil act? Ten foot poles are cheaper *and* they smell better.
Impecunious_Mortal 07-28-04, 11:06 AM	Killing cows bad...well unless there is an anthro bulldog in the party. Killing sheep....perfectly acceptable ,they are after all sheep(darn stupid mindless followers) plus it saves them the humiliation the cowboys inflict later in life Ok seriously(or not i can't help myself) this is DnD not IRW......they are fodder.....open a BBQ kiosk
KangTheCallipygian 07-28-04, 11:14 AM	Ajmastrean, you stole my canary comment! OK, so maybe you just beat me to it... by quite a long while... Anyhow, lowering these birds into a mineshaft and then not entering yourself if the bird stopped singing was a widely accepted practice, and not considered evil at all. It may even be in use today in some places, though I have no idea whether that's so. You'd have to have been a fool not to use canaries though. Extreme vegetarianism aside, I don't think it's evil to value human (ie. sentient) life over livestock. Especially in D&D where good and evil are not subjective terms. Sheep as trap detectors at least have a chance to survive (ie. if no traps are present); sheep as food do not have such a chance, but I don't even think eating meat is inherently evil either. Even if you disagree, I could maybe see it being evil if you knew for a fact there was a trap there and sent a sheep to its doom anyhow. That's hardly "trap detection" though. Tossing a sheep onto a pressure plate intentionally is more like "trap springing". Using sheep or other animals as trap detectors implies letting them walk around somewhere where you are not aware of there being any traps; same as if you were herding them in a pasture while they graze. Not evil, IMO. And if you don't eat them after, you're wasting food that probably tastes a whole lot better than trail rations. Wasting food's not evil either though; just stupid. That said, would you really want to bring a flock of sheep into the dungeon with you? As Arrowhen said, 10' poles are cheaper and less smelly. Sheep are tastier though... Hmmm. Kang PS. Arbitrary Aardvaark, please tell that when you were young it was in fact your D&D characters who experimented on cute & fuzzy little helpless guinea pigs... :)
Iddig Ap Nil 07-28-04, 11:19 AM	Hmmmm, I think someone's been reading Knights of the Dinner Table...:bounce: Also, animals seem to be able to sense "evilness", or not want to go somewhere they don't find natural (such as a dungeon).
Callista 07-28-04, 11:19 AM	IMO it's evil to kill anything--sentient or not--if you don't have a good reason. The definition of "good reason" just changes depending on whether or not the creature is sentient. Using farm animals to detect traps as a matter of course when you have things like ten-foot poles and trap detection spells and decently-skilled rogues, with clerics to healt them if they get clumsy? That's evil. Using the farm animal when there's no other way and you have to get through that trapped corridor NOW? Not evil. Eating the animals wouldn't have anything to do with how you killed them... it'd be a neutral act. Trap-detecting dogs... Hm, I have got to try that one...
Count Arioch the 28th 07-28-04, 12:54 PM	I have a friend who was in a campaign, and they used a big log to detect traps. They even started referring to the log as their "rogue". Seriously, you might get better results from rolling a big log down the hallway. It's a lot more durable than a sheep, and since you can re-use it more often, it'll run you less money in the long run. Granted, you ruin your chance of stealth, but if you're sending sheep down a dungeon hallway anyway, I don't think stealth is on your minds anyway.
Arrowhen 07-28-04, 12:56 PM	Hmmmm, I think someone's been reading Knights of the Dinner Table... Nah, I think the KODT would figure it's cheaper to hire a torch bearer than to buy a sheep.
Super Guy 07-28-04, 01:31 PM	If there's no other way, it shouldn't really affect alignment (except maybe Paladin). I would do it to save my skin, but it doesn't make me evil. Eating them just makes it more funny, I wouldn't say it makes it any better, unless your primary motive was to have food and the secondary was to get rid of the traps.
DwarvinJedi 07-28-04, 01:47 PM	Originally posted by CzarGarrett But using bums should be perfectly acceptable. :heehee :rofl: :bounce: :rofl: :pile: :rofl: :tiphat: Ok, that was just funny.
Tony Vargas 07-28-04, 02:27 PM	No, it's not 'evil' - not any more evil than the canary in the coal mine or riding a warhorse into battle without barding. It's not exactly nice, either, though. Good characters would probably feel about it the way they would when they had to kill an unintelligent or otherwise non-evil creature in self defense. It might not be a great idea as a general practice for a variety of reasons, though. Animals like that are noisy, and smell (bad to you, good to predators), so you're completely blowing even the slightest chance of surprise. They can be dificult to work with in dungeon circumstances - narrow corridors, slippery wet stone floors. The traps may not be foiled by them, either - they may be the wrong weight or hieght to trigger some, others might catch you in the area, anyway, others might stampede some of the animals back at you, etc... And, IIRC, sheep /have/ been used to clear mine fields IRL, and relatively recently. FWIW.
Lokiyn 07-28-04, 02:31 PM	*cough* *mount* Wand of mount made by a wizard. its a calling spell so no actual animals are hurt in the process;)
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-28-04, 02:42 PM	For what it's worth, Cheapass games has a board game based on the following premise: 1. England has mad cows. 2. France has unexploded mines left over from World War II. 3. You (and your friends) have decided to use #1 to solve #2 by taking herds of mad cows over to France to detonate the mines. The game is called "Unexploded Cow" and is a hoot.
Thorak 07-28-04, 03:00 PM	Originally posted by Arrowhen Nah, I think the KODT would figure it's cheaper to hire a torch bearer than to buy a sheep. Especially if you insist on only paying once they've done their job. :angel:
tarkin 07-28-04, 04:09 PM	It is not evil, anymore than eating the animals is. In real life, peopl have occasionally used the "herd animal across the mine field" technique that a previous poster mentioned. ---------------------------------------------------- <rant for pet personal peeve on> Also, the vegetarian could be in for a BIG surprise one day. Imagine this. After you die, you end up in heaven and find out that God is a tree, and he wants to know why he only ate his kind instead of the animals. Not that unlikely, or do you insist that God could only be in human form? Animals kill for food. Plants rarely if ever kill for food, so could be considered ethically superior. Why do you kill and eat the one creature that does not kill others, but refuse to kill the evil, murderous eating creatures? Because the animals are "cuter"? Because they look and act closer to the way humans do? Would it NOT be OK to eat a plant if it appeared humanoid (But was still photosynthetic and could not move so it was still a plant?) What if they could talk? Because I got news for you kid, Animals can't talk. Some Plants could easily be considered smarter than fish, a fish will not do better if you sing to it, but a plant will. Ethical Vegetarianism is at the heart, an evil, prejudiced viewpoint, with NO basis in fact. It is based solely on the appearance of creatures, not on any sound philosophy. </rant for pet personal peeve off>
Cymraegmorgan 07-28-04, 04:16 PM	Good historical point, Tarkin. Using sheep to run across an area to detect traps saves your soldiers. How can saving those who follow you be evil. It would be evil to mistreat the poor sheep through bad living conditions and poor quality food. If the sheep are treated properly, then given a healer's attention if wounded, then it is not evil.
Elrana 07-28-04, 04:23 PM	Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th (If eating meat was evil, why haven't we deployed troops in Africa to save the gazelles from those evil lions?) Because the gazelles being eaten by lions doesn't force up the price of oil. Oops, was that a little cynicism creeping in... Hey, someone is beating my door down, what are these men in black suits and sunglasses doing here? What do they mean divulging national secrets? Aah, help, they've got past the do
Elrana 07-28-04, 04:25 PM	Originally posted by Arbitrary Aardvark We used to use guinea pigs to test potions. (OK, we were quite young at the time.) If the guinea pig didn't die of poison, we would check to see if it could fly, breath water, etc. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Dunbar 07-28-04, 04:34 PM	tarkin: I love that point about vegetarians. I've used a similar argument...about how people can be so concerned about animals simply because they are similar to us. Don't plants bleed? (well, leak sap and other vital fluids) However, it can be argued that they don't feel pain (no nervous system) like animals do. My counterpoint to that is that they certainly react to damage, acting to repair it or whatever. So it seems they sense damage and so feel pain on some level. And remember what Troy McClure said: Don't kid yourself, Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd eat you and everyone you care about! However, back on topic: I think this is a difficult call. I remember reading a story about some jerk (I'd use stronger terms, but that isn't allowed) who had a friend of his hold a neighbor's dog while he punted it. Poor dog died upon hitting the pavement. I think we'd all agree that is an evil act, right? Non-sentient creature or no, simly inflicting pain on an animal for no reason is wrong. If we can't agree on that...well, I know of no argument to sway you. However, I think we'd all agree that consuming animals for food isn't evil (well, unless there are PETA members here), and you have to kill them to do that. So it is ok to kill animals under certain circumstances. The question is when is it ok and when is it not? Using them to blow up land mines? Testing cosmetics on them? Hitting them with your car when they don't get out of the way fast enough? I think on this question we would all draw the line somewhere differently. For example, I think using canaries in mine shafts is ok. Herding cows over landmines just seems wrong though. Same with herding sheep down a dungeon passage. This is more a gut feeling than a rational argument, though. After all, I'd rather a herd of cattle get blown up by land mines than a single human (well, most humans...maybe they could have used captured Nazis instead). But that doesn't mean it isn't evil. Killing all the orcs on your fantasy world of choice would mean greater peace for the goodly races, but genocide is evil even if your ends seem good. Seeing as the traps would likely inflict undue pain and suffering on the animals, I'd say DnD would classify what you are suggesting as evil. I'm not saying it's not a good idea if you want to save your own hides, but I do think a paladin would certainly object.
Elrana 07-28-04, 04:36 PM	Originally posted by tarkin <rant for pet personal peeve on> <Snip content> </rant for pet personal peeve off> I agree. There is only one legitimate reason for chopping down trees. Although the green brigade say that we shouldn't chop down trees as they create oxygen, which we need, they are totally ignoring the fact that currently the algae which accounts for 90% of the total oxygen production on this planet is under a threat far, far greater than that which we humans pose to rain-forests. Everyday millions - if not billions - of valuable oxygen producing algae are mercilessly slaughtered by evil creatures, quite literally, thousands of times their size and devoured by the ton. This must be stopped before the world slowly suffocates due to the lack of oxygen production, overwhelming levels of carbon-dioxide accelerating global warming and excessive use of deoderant due to a hotter climate exacerbating the increasing size of the hole in the ozone layer. For all these reasons and many more I propose that the only legitimate reason for chopping down trees is to make harpoons with which to kill whales and so halt the de-algaefication of our oceans! :)
Turin 07-28-04, 04:45 PM	Originally posted by tarkin Ethical Vegetarianism is at the heart, an evil, prejudiced viewpoint, with NO basis in fact. It is based solely on the appearance of creatures, not on any sound philosophy. </rant for pet personal peeve off> Hey Tarkin, normally I respect a lot of what you've got to say on these boards, but this is just an obnoxious post. You had to know when you wrote this that is would peeve someone off. I'm not an ethical vegetarian (although I eat little meat for health reason), but I don't go around telling people who are they're idiots any more than I go around telling religious people that they are idiots just because I'm an atheist. If I sat down and said "Chrisitianity is, at it's heart, an evil, prejudiced viewpoint, with NO basis in fact," how long do you think it would be before I had the whole group of WizO's breathing down my neck, not to mention half the posters on the boards? Edit: nevermind, it seems the entire thread has been killed by this nonsense.
Tony Vargas 07-28-04, 06:19 PM	Originally posted by Dunbar I think this is a difficult call. ... Non-sentient creature or no, simly inflicting pain on an animal for no reason is wrong. If we can't agree on that...well, I know of no argument to sway you. However, I think we'd all agree that consuming animals for food isn't evil, and you have to kill them to do that. So it is ok to kill animals under certain circumstances. The question is when is it ok and when is it not? I think there isn't a fine line between D&D 'good' & 'evil,' but a big fuzzy grey area called 'neutrality.' Neutral acts are, really, pragmatic. If you kill something because you need to to survive, that's probably not evil or good, you're just doing what you need to do. When you start doing things for less pragmatic, more abstract moral and ethical reasons, you get into other alignments. Evils do things that cause pain and suffering because they revel in the pain and suffering of others. Animals can at least act like they're suffering - bleeding and bleating in pain and so forth - so evil characters might well be enclined to use an animal to set off a trap, even if they knew about it, and were pretty confident they could set it off with a rock. Of course, they'd only use an animal if an innocent sentient creature wasn't available, and they couldn't trick or bully one of thier buddies into it. If the animal died a slow, horrible death in the trap, that'd be a bonus. A good character wouldn't use animals to set off traps unless the only other alternative were using other people to set off traps. Even then, if he was confident his sacrifice wouldn't have grave consequences for the greater good, he might well prefer to set the traps off himself. It's the heroic thing to do. I could easily see a group of good character arguing over who was going to set off the traps for the good of the party. Anything between those two extremes is probably neutral. A neutral character's attitude is more personal. He wouldn't send his beloved pet through a corridor to set off traps, for instance. OTOH, if a flock of stolen sheep just happens to be in an upper level of the orc's dungeon, why not? They're just low-value loot. Though, if the sheep is dieing a horrible death in the jaws of some fiendish trap, for crying out loud, put a crossbow bolt in it, OK?
Sword soul 07-28-04, 07:09 PM	a few qualifying questions 1.what kind of trap(and did you know it was there)? 2.where did you get it from? 3.how many do you have for this purpose 4.did you cook it to a point of well done or simply medium, and what condiments were included?
WizO_Catoblepas 07-28-04, 07:44 PM	Ok, let's leave out the politica comments or else I'm going to have to close the thread. On topic, I wouldn't say that it is evil. However, I wouldn't do it. The cattle "mooing" and the sheep "bleeting" is going to alert the entire dungeon complex ... roll "move silently" at minus 40 ....
Lokiyn 07-28-04, 07:57 PM	Whats really evil is the necromancer with Craft(taxidermy) up to about 15 ranks. Why you ask Lets take a herd of sheep. Kill them all Cast animate dead and make skeletons (then pack up your deboned mean in the freezer:D ) Take the skins and carefull place them back on the sheep. First of course fill the sheep with smokepoweder, oil, alchemist fire, and shards of glass. cast ghost sound to make the sheep sound normal and sen them back to town with a slowburning fuse hidden under thier pelt. hmm i feel like i'm playing worms ;)
Nick Soapdish 07-28-04, 08:45 PM	Two things. First, the guinea-pig-potion-testers bit is hilarious! Thanks for sharing, AA. And second, I'm also reminded of Knights of the Dinner Table, but it's a specific strip. It's when Dave takes over as mapper from Bob (who's suffering from marker fumes) and does a horrible job. They re-tread the same territory so often ... and hit the same pit trap ... that Chelsea, the "Magic" Cow figures out where the pit is and refuses to step there, after which the Knights begin to suspect she can detect traps. The strip was also redone as an issue of KoDT Illustrated.
FreeTheSlaves 07-28-04, 09:47 PM	Why not use common adventurers instead? I mean they are extremely plentiful and are always replaced when they die, no matter how illogical it is to meet a dwarf fighter in the Abyss (for example). Further more you can loot their corpses afterwards to recover the cool loot they always seem to possess. Farm animals are highly inconvenient; you have to find a farmer; haggle with or kill him (zip XP); herd the wayward mammals and the meal you get afterwards might kill you because those trap darts were poisoned! Much easier to go into the local tavern and declare you've got an adventure. Heck you could probably charge all those adventurers a fee to sign up.
bitnine 07-28-04, 10:14 PM	Depending on things, it's probably neutral. It's possible that the party always searches for traps and avoids them when possible, but one keeps a "pet" that scampers ahead of them just in case. That's a bit different than using an animal to set off traps and clear a room because its quicker and easier. Also, never forget that in certain regions of the world, people eat clay. Sweet delicious clay. So rich in nutrients that pregnant women are traditionally given it... Mmmm.
Dragonspirit 07-28-04, 10:23 PM	Chopping off something's head, roasting it, and eating it is Neutral if the something is a chicken, but Evil if it's a Halfling. Depends on the Halfling :angel: Oh, and, what if you used Summon Monster I to trigger the traps? They aren't "real" animals, right?
masterofmayhem 07-28-04, 10:45 PM	Originally posted by ajmastrean I have to wonder if using canaries (is that the plural?) in mines to detect dangerous gases was evil then? If it is, then Tordek, Mialee, Lidda, and Jozan are all evil bacause of the canary they packed in the picture on page 161 of the 3.5 PHB. :angel: Originally posted by Dragonspirit Oh, and, what if you used Summon Monster I to trigger the traps? They aren't "real" animals, right? Well, if it is, then Commander of Chaos is now evil. If he wasn't already before :angel: Anyway, those animals don't die when they . . . die. they just get sent back to their native plane. Although they would still feel pain, I would guess.
Thomar_of_Uointer 07-28-04, 10:56 PM	Using animals as described by Harmor is an evil act.
Egres 07-28-04, 11:03 PM	Well,if killing an animal is evil,using oxes to plough is slavery..... Absurd.
bitnine 07-29-04, 12:53 AM	Originally posted by Dragonspirit Oh, and, what if you used Summon Monster I to trigger the traps? They aren't "real" animals, right? Summoned creatures that die reform one day later on their plane.
Iddig Ap Nil 07-29-04, 01:24 AM	Originally posted by Arrowhen Nah, I think the KODT would figure it's cheaper to hire a torch bearer than to buy a sheep. Nope, they actually did this...in...which I can't find to save my life...It's in one of the strips though in either Tales from the Vault Vol.2 or 3....I have it somewhere....
Dunbar 07-29-04, 02:00 AM	Originally posted by Egres Well,if killing an animal is evil,using oxes to plough is slavery..... Absurd. The question isn't merely killing the animal, but how it is killed. Quickly slaughtering a cow to put meat on the table isn't evil. Slowly torturing the cow so that it dies slowly and in unbearable pain over the course of a day is certainly evil. Considering that most traps aren't likely to be a quick and painless death, using an animal to trip them is not much different than torturing them. To kill an animal quickly for food is not evil, nor would I say it is good. It is a neutral act. But you are abusing other living creatures, using them as living shields as it were. Uncaring of the torture and pain they will endure from the traps. No, there is no doubt in my mind that this is evil. A good or neutral character could resort to this if there is no other option (it'd have to be a pretty contrived situation), but to make a habit of it would certainly be evil.
Daybreaker 07-29-04, 04:29 AM	My character uses bowling balls. :D
Egres 07-29-04, 06:15 AM	Originally posted by Dunbar The question isn't merely killing the animal, but how it is killed. Quickly slaughtering a cow to put meat on the table isn't evil. Slowly torturing the cow so that it dies slowly and in unbearable pain over the course of a day is certainly evil. Considering that most traps aren't likely to be a quick and painless death, using an animal to trip them is not much different than torturing them. To kill an animal quickly for food is not evil, nor would I say it is good. It is a neutral act. But you are abusing other living creatures, using them as living shields as it were. Uncaring of the torture and pain they will endure from the traps. No, there is no doubt in my mind that this is evil. A good or neutral character could resort to this if there is no other option (it'd have to be a pretty contrived situation), but to make a habit of it would certainly be evil. Killing them to save my life is evil? The poster talked about using animals to avoid the danger of traps. Well,i eat animal's meat,and i could avoid it without problems,and i don't consider myself evil at all. Just imagine what i could do if my life was in danger! I'm not sure that you in the same situation would save the animal and risk your life......
Harmor 07-29-04, 06:17 AM	I think that the majority agrees that using an animal to 'detect traps' where there is no other option is at best Neutral.
Callista 07-29-04, 07:52 AM	re. Those who say causing animal suffering being an evil act, though killing them is not: Animals have few hit points, usually, (depending--I'm assuming you're using dogs and such); so you can heal them in the first round. Six seconds of pain isn't that much, no more than it takes to brand a cow... your characters end up in worse situations more often than I care to count. If it isn't possible to heal an animal (like maybe a blade trap took a leg off or something), a Sleep/Hold/whatever spell + coup de grace (or just a well-place sword or arrow) would do fine. For a summoned animial, just dismiss the spell. I don't consider either option an evil act. No more than you'd consider it evil to euthanize a dog trained as a rescue-team worker and severely injured on the job.
Elrana 07-29-04, 07:57 AM	Hmm. How about the means to an end aspect? Is it evil to clear a mine field using a flock of sheep so that you may cross the field in order to save the twelve virgins awaiting sacrifice to Hextor? At the end of the day what you will sometimes be looking for is the quickest way, not the best or most moral. It is not inherently evil to use animals to check for traps in my opinion, but there are occasions where it might be: Well, that's the trap design done, let's just check to see how it works. Here Flossie, walk down the path. BaaaPOP! Ah yes. That seems to be fine... That might be considered evil! :)
The GOP Dragon 07-29-04, 11:19 AM	Well, my group has never used animals before, but one time we found someone who was cursed to never die. The first thing DaTedinator said to him was, "We are callling you Meatsheild now." Anyway, it probably is evil to do so. Not to mention expensive. You would have to buy the cows from a farmer without letting him know whats going to happen to Betsy, his prized cow. And her siblings. Then you would have to feed the little meatsheilds. Then you would have to keep them from eating your equipment. Then you would have to clean up after them... ... ... The list goes on and on.
Harmor 07-29-04, 02:25 PM	The reason I asked originally was trying to see what our party did was evil. We found the tomb, or what we thought was the tomb of a famous gnome trapmaker. Apparently during his lifetime he created an item that we needed (forgot what it was but it was important). Anyhow the tomb happened to be next to a farm. So we paid for an entire flock of cows and sheep and herded them into the tomb. A day later we went though the tomb and found about 5 sheep and 2 cows still alive. Some cooridors were unexplored because of pit traps, but all the proximity traps and blade/arrow traps were pretty much sprung. There were two rooms that were very suspecious since the bodies of the animals were along the sides of a circuluar room and another room the body was stuck to the ceiling... Anyway our GM didn't give us XP for the traps since we didn't specifically beat them, but at least we got to the false tomb faster. Apparently this gnome trapmaker has several tombs...wherever his body is we don't know.
Harmor 07-29-04, 02:27 PM	The reason I asked originally was trying to see what our party did was evil. We found the tomb, or what we thought was the tomb of a famous gnome trapmaker. Apparently during his lifetime he created an item that we needed (forgot what it was but it was important). Anyhow the tomb happened to be next to a farm. So we paid for an entire flock of cows and sheep and herded them into the tomb. A day later we went though the tomb and found about 5 sheep and 2 cows still alive. Some cooridors were unexplored because of pit traps, but all the proximity traps and blade/arrow traps were pretty much sprung. There were two rooms that were very suspecious since the bodies of the animals were along the sides of a circuluar room and another room the body was stuck to the ceiling... Anyway our GM didn't give us XP for the traps since we didn't specifically beat them, but at least we got to the false tomb faster. Apparently this gnome trapmaker has several tombs...wherever his body is we don't know. Oh...we collected all the bodies that we could (there was one at the bottom of a 80-foot pit that we didn't get), for slaughter, well food and sold them back to the farmer for a small fraction of the cost we bought them for. Our druid also helped purify some of the poisoned ones.
Dunbar 07-29-04, 03:02 PM	Originally posted by Egres Killing them to save my life is evil? The poster talked about using animals to avoid the danger of traps. Well,i eat animal's meat,and i could avoid it without problems,and i don't consider myself evil at all. Just imagine what i could do if my life was in danger! I'm not sure that you in the same situation would save the animal and risk your life...... But I probably wouldn't call myself good in the DnD sense. In fact, the vast majority of people would probaly be neutral. Take your first statement...asking whether killing them to save your life is evil. In DnD, the ends NEVER justify the means. If a certain act (in this case, torturing animals) is evil, it is always evil, no matter your intentions. And again, slaughting an animal for food is not evil, provided you are doing your best to kill the animal quickly. But torturing another living being IS evil. And submitting an animal to a multitude of traps is torturous and cruel. If you had to kill an animal to save your life or the life of another, I would class that as a neutral act if you killed the animal quickly and as painlessly as possible. Sentient life in DnD is more important than non-sentient life. However, putting an animal through undue pain and suffering is evil. Being good in DnD is a hard road to take. The moment you feel you can do what you want because the ends justify the means, you are moving away from a good alignment. Causing animals to suffer undue pain is certainly evil. Torture is an evil act even when used on evil creatures...it is certainly evil when used on neutral animals. Callista Even if you heal them after, it's still evil. If I buy myself a cow, then whenever I get angry I go and beat it to near death with a club, then heal it back up, isn't that evil? You are still causing those animals to suffer. Using their lives to protect your own. If they were sentient, if they could choose to spend their lives defending you, it would be different. But they aren't, and they can't. Harmor I'd say what your party did was evil. Not that your alignments should shift immediately; but you are abusing those animals. And it sounds like many of them died horribly. You sent a bunch of helpless animals in to be tortured and maimed, and you want to know if that is evil? Buy a cow, slaughter it for dinner, then toss the remains in a bag that you can toss around the dungeon ahead of you to spring traps. That would be ok. But torturing living beings is just wrong...
Lincoln Hills 07-29-04, 03:04 PM	Sounds like that gnome fellow should have spent the extra $ to give his traps an automatic-reset feature. (Except those that CAN'T reset, of course, such as the Adorable Exploding Bunny Rabbit Trap.) As far as the topic of the thread - I'd have to say that this action shows a lack of "respect for life" (a Good hallmark) and a willingness to "exploit others for your own benefit (an Evil hallmark). However, on the scale of evil it's pretty low. You'd slip into the Neutrals fairly quickly with this kind of action, but unless it became habit, it'd take a while to actually fall to Evil. (Also - if it DOES become habit - don't forget to take a few ranks in Profession (shepherd), Profession (chicken thief), or Profession (duck rustler).)
PhaedrusXY 07-29-04, 03:37 PM	This is why (practically) every character I make nowadays has a Bag of Tricks. They make great trap detectors/bait, they are summoned and so don't "really" die, and you have an almost unlimited supply of them for a cheap price. Some of the ones from the Tan Bag of Tricks are also decent fighters at low-mid levels. As far as the morality of the issue under discussion, I'd say that it is neutral. It isn't good, but it isn't bad enough to affect anyone's alignment either, unless they were one of the most pious and pristine palladins who ever lived. And even then, it would only lower their "goodness" a bit, not ever take them into neutral territory.
Phrennzy 07-29-04, 08:24 PM	My friend's brother's character would douse a pigeon in oil, light it on fire, and throw it into any room that had any kind of yellow mold (this was 1st & 2nd ed - seemed like there was yellow mold EVERYWHERE). We thought it was cruel. So is using animals to set off traps. Smart, and good tactics, but cruel. It's like training dolphins to find torpedoes. I wouldn't think it evil though.
Arcuna 07-29-04, 08:34 PM	:bigeyes: Yes it's evil! I can't imagine HOW you can want to use little Jimmy :turkey: to set off traps! That's just cruel! :weep: Seriously though, I'd have to say it's an evil act by far. :w:
autolycus 07-30-04, 09:12 AM	Most definately not evil. Using canaries in a mine is not evil. Using animals for drug testing is not evil. Using herds of animals to clear a mine field is not evil. Heck, sacrificing animals to fortell the future is not evil. They're just animals. In the medieval mindset, they are put there for the use of humans. Any purpose they serve that is useful, is also acceptable. -autolycus
Paladin2004 07-30-04, 09:34 AM	LOL WHAT HAPPENDS IF YOU HAVE A DRUID IN YOUR PARTY :)
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-30-04, 10:45 AM	Originally posted by Phrennzy My friend's brother's character would douse a pigeon in oil, light it on fire, and throw it into any room that had any kind of yellow mold (this was 1st & 2nd ed - seemed like there was yellow mold EVERYWHERE). We thought it was cruel. So is using animals to set off traps. Smart, and good tactics, but cruel. It's like training dolphins to find torpedoes. I wouldn't think it evil though. But Bullwinkle, that trick never works... Historically, the Romans tried using flaming pigs (pigs coated in pitch and then set alight) to frighten elephants. It didn't work all that well. In the Middle Ages, one technique during mining operations (when you try to tunnel under an opponents walls -- and the other beseiged guys were trying to tunnel into your tunnels to chase you back) was to release a bear into the tunnels, followed by either a beehive or a hornet nest. The idea would be that the insects would enrage the bear, which would then attack the miners. Often the bear would get confused and take off after the wrong side. In the Battle of Val Verde (American Civil War), the Union had captured some Confederate mules. An engineering officer had the bright idea of attaching explosives with slow fuses to the mules, and then releasing them. The plan was that the mules would rejoin the rest of the Confederate's supply mules and blow up the Confederate supply train. Unfortunately, the mules followed the Union engineers, who had to scurry away, pursued by the mules, until the mules exploded. In the Great Patriotic War (WW II), the Soviet Army trained dogs to carry magnetic mines under tanks. (The mines would cling to the tanks and blow up.) Unfortunately, in the first field test they went toward the nearest Soviet tanks (since those were the ones they had been trained on.) The USAAF (United States Army Air Force) tried using incendiary bats against the Japanese in WWII. The idea was that since bats nest in attics and under the eaves of buildings, and most buildings in Japan were made of bamboo and paper, this would be a great way of burning them down. In the first operational test, the bats were dropped from a fairly high altitude, and they all plummetted to their deaths, since the cold had induced them into hibernation. The second time (using a heated bomb bay) found the bats avoiding the model Japanese village and instead heading towards the barracks building where their cages were -- it burned to the ground. The project was abandoned soon after. In the 1960s, under project "Accoustic Kitty", the CIA surgically implanted microphones and a radio in a cat (the tail was modified to contain an antenna). They also implanted electrodes to override the cat's natural instincts upon command to keep it from wandering away from its target. During the first field test, the cat got run over by a taxi cab. On the more successful side -- the US Navy uses dolphins and sea lions for a variety of purposes: to detect and mark mines, as aquatic sentrys, and to recover objects (such as practice targets).
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-30-04, 10:47 AM	Originally posted by Phrennzy My friend's brother's character would douse a pigeon in oil, light it on fire, and throw it into any room that had any kind of yellow mold (this was 1st & 2nd ed - seemed like there was yellow mold EVERYWHERE). We thought it was cruel. So is using animals to set off traps. Smart, and good tactics, but cruel. It's like training dolphins to find torpedoes. I wouldn't think it evil though. Actually, the USN uses them to find and mark mines, and the dolphins are not harmed. (And, apparently, think its just a fun game.)
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-30-04, 10:50 AM	Originally posted by Phrennzy My friend's brother's character would douse a pigeon in oil, light it on fire, and throw it into any room that had any kind of yellow mold (this was 1st & 2nd ed - seemed like there was yellow mold EVERYWHERE). We thought it was cruel. So is using animals to set off traps. Smart, and good tactics, but cruel. It's like training dolphins to find torpedoes. I wouldn't think it evil though. But Bullwinkle, that trick never works... Historically, the Romans tried using flaming pigs (pigs coated in pitch and then set alight) to frighten elephants. It didn't work all that well. In the Middle Ages, one technique during mining operations (when you try to tunnel under an opponents walls -- and the other beseiged guys were trying to tunnel into your tunnels to chase you back) was to release a bear into the tunnels, followed by either a beehive or a hornet nest. The idea would be that the insects would enrage the bear, which would then attack the miners. Often the bear would get confused and take off after the wrong side. In the Battle of Val Verde (American Civil War), the Union had captured some Confederate mules. An engineering officer had the bright idea of attaching explosives with slow fuses to the mules, and then releasing them. The plan was that the mules would rejoin the rest of the Confederate's supply mules and blow up the Confederate supply train. Unfortunately, the mules followed the Union engineers, who had to scurry away, pursued by the mules, until the mules exploded. In the Great Patriotic War (WW II), the Soviet Army trained dogs to carry magnetic mines under tanks. (The mines would cling to the tanks and blow up.) Unfortunately, in the first field test they went toward the nearest Soviet tanks (since those were the ones they had been trained on.) The USAAF (United States Army Air Force) tried using incendiary bats against the Japanese in WWII. The idea was that since bats nest in attics and under the eaves of buildings, and most buildings in Japan were made of bamboo and paper, this would be a great way of burning them down. In the first operational test, the bats were dropped from a fairly high altitude, and they all plummetted to their deaths, since the cold had induced them into hibernation. The second time (using a heated bomb bay) found the bats avoiding the model Japanese village and instead heading towards the barracks building where their cages were -- it burned to the ground. The project was abandoned soon after. In the 1960s, under project "Accoustic Kitty", the CIA surgically implanted microphones and a radio in a cat (the tail was modified to contain an antenna). They also implanted electrodes to override the cat's natural instincts upon command to keep it from wandering away from its target. During the first field test, the cat got run over by a taxi cab. On the more successful side -- the US Navy uses dolphins and sea lions for a variety of purposes: to detect and mark mines, as aquatic sentrys, and to recover objects (such as practice targets).
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-30-04, 10:54 AM	Originally posted by autolycus Most definately not evil. Using canaries in a mine is not evil. Using animals for drug testing is not evil. Using herds of animals to clear a mine field is not evil. Heck, sacrificing animals to fortell the future is not evil. They're just animals. In the medieval mindset, they are put there for the use of humans. Any purpose they serve that is useful, is also acceptable. -autolycus In a medieval Christian mindset. Other religions (including other Western religions) had different views as to what was allowable, and some Eastern religions did not think that they were put there to serve humans. I can certainy envision the Elven pantheon, for example, prohibiting the exploitation of animals in a a cruel manner.
Paladin2004 07-30-04, 10:57 AM	lol i love this thread. Why not just hire a rogue for like 1gp a day? Just need a nieve level 1, who will try and disarm anything, even if its to hard for him , lol On better thoughts, maybe hire 2
Arbitrary Aardvark 07-30-04, 02:48 PM	Originally posted by Paladin 2004 lol i love this thread. Why not just hire a rogue for like 1gp a day? Just need a nieve level 1, who will try and disarm anything, even if its to hard for him , lol On better thoughts, maybe hire 2 Just remember, "sense motive" is an in class skill. I can just see it ... I've just graduated from Vril Matharo's school of Deportment and Locksmithing, and found a job that pays a whole gp per day. My employers keep talking about the trolls they've killed, and one of them collects ogre ears. This looks like a nice, easy job. Still, I wonder how come they keep getting themselves locked out of their own dungeons...
Callista 07-30-04, 10:01 PM	So, maybe the issue here is exactly what an animal life is worth. I don't see any difference between killing an animal by asking it to walk through a possibly trapped corridor (when you have a rogue who might die when s/he fails at disarming a trap), and killing it because you want food (which is necessary for life). Actually, when you look at it that way, since it's possible to be a vegetarian (my last Druid was), then if either one is considered evil, it ought to be killing an animal for food since it's more "preventable". Either way, it means taking a (low-intelligence) life in order to maintain your own life; either way, it's possible to do humanely; and in either situation there are other options. There's no outright answer in the RAW on the morality of humanely killing animals, so you and your group will have to decide for yourselves...
Lokiyn 07-31-04, 12:32 AM	well you could try our parties solution that kept everyone happy but the dm. (Was a fan of kalemvor and seemed to feel that everyone else should be even went as far as slaughtering off all the gods higher ranked than kalemvor(s?) with some stupidly contrived artifact) So animating a rat to power a fan for the wizard on those hot days condemed him to the nine hells and prevented him from being resurrected...... (we had an 0 level cantip for necromancers(only) that let them animate tiny animals) go to the local butcher and ask him when the next time they are bringin in a sheep for slaughter. wait for it and then after the butcher kills it and has it skinned(fleece jackets are warm:) ) animate it (all the flesh falls of the bones saving the butcher some work). now go to the local smith and have him install an iron drum in the ribcage of the sheep. Rather sturdy drum at that. Run a tube to its head and install a bullseye lantern in its skull. Fill with oil. Have the barbarian or someone carry it around in a box when not in use. When in dungeon fill lit the lamps and send it ahead. So now you have a moving spotlight/trap detector. may not be very fast but still better safe than sorry right? if something happens to it recover the drum (you did order a strong one right?) and look for another sheep.
Simetrical 08-01-04, 03:10 AM	I vote neutral.
Elrana 08-01-04, 06:38 AM	Originally posted by Simetrical I vote neutral. Dammit Simetrical this isn't a vote! This is one of the most important ethical and philosophical debates since Diogenes decided to stop shooting tortoises and live in a barrel! We aren't discussing which gear to leave a car in when you park here, we're discussing whether it is morally acceptable to see our animal friends die in a thousand different nasty ways so that we may save our own hides, which in many cases aren't nearly as useful as theirs and wouldn't even produce a decent pair of gloves, nevermind a fleece lined jacket or an effective suit of armour. Some people just really can't see the gravity of a situation but come blundering in, eyes closed, arms outstretched and start throwing votes around like morality is some kind of democratically determined contrivance rather than the intangible and immutable universal constant that millions of enlightened beings live their lives by. Or deliberately ignore, whichever the case may be. I don't know. You try to hold a sensible debate on whether or not one may herd a flock of sheep down a subterranean, monster filled, booby trapped passageway and there's always that one bad apple who comes along, clumsily stumbling in, and ruins it for everyone. :nonono: :)
archcomponent 08-01-04, 08:05 AM	Just keep this in mind: Despite what personal views you mave have in real life, remember that in D&D human(oid) life is more important that animal life.
WizO_Catoblepas 08-01-04, 09:41 AM	I'm not sure whether leading a flock of animals to set off traps is evil, but I probably wouldn't reward them for it either. As DM, what I would do is say, "Thoughout the night, outside of the cave the smell of burnt meat and porks starts to fill the air." *Multiply the wandering monster percentage chance by a factor of 10* After going through about 4 or 5 encounters in a row, I'm figuring that the party is going to regret making the first "McDonalds" for wandering monsters and steer clear of that strategy.
Elrana 08-01-04, 10:08 AM	Originally posted by WizO_Catoblepas I'm not sure whether leading a flock of animals to set off traps is evil, but I probably wouldn't reward them for it either. As DM, what I would do is say, "Thoughout the night, outside of the cave the smell of burnt meat and porks starts to fill the air." *Multiply the wandering monster percentage chance by a factor of 10* After going through about 4 or 5 encounters in a row, I'm figuring that the party is going to regret making the first "McDonalds" for wandering monsters and steer clear of that strategy. :D That'll learn the buggers! (I wonder if you could use smouldering wool as fuel and chainmail as a grill for burger buns?) :)
Lokiyn 08-01-04, 01:44 PM	Originally posted by WizO_Catoblepas I'm not sure whether leading a flock of animals to set off traps is evil, but I probably wouldn't reward them for it either. As DM, what I would do is say, "Thoughout the night, outside of the cave the smell of burnt meat and porks starts to fill the air." *Multiply the wandering monster percentage chance by a factor of 10* After going through about 4 or 5 encounters in a row, I'm figuring that the party is going to regret making the first "McDonalds" for wandering monsters and steer clear of that strategy. Ah but our bard is from the new tyr section of sigil (in the hive) all the sheep have a 24 hour time delayed poison in them.:D
bitnine 08-01-04, 03:02 PM	Next we'll have the pressing question: Is it evil to kill a tree to make a set of large poles for setting off traps? ;)
fruits and vegetables 08-01-04, 07:01 PM	only read the first couple posts. my input is, It is not evil. It is not very virtuous either. We did not begin sending people into space by using humans. We used dogs, monkeys, and other lesser creatures. most testing of products are done on lab rats. Would we not all be evil? So, maybe a paladin would not use small animals to test for traps. Anyone else could do it and i would not allow it to affect their alignment. I bet all of what i have said has already been said. I just want to put my vote on the "not evil" side.
Simetrical 08-01-04, 07:03 PM	We aren't discussing which gear to leave a car in when you park here, we're discussing whether it is morally acceptable to see our animal friends die in a thousand different nasty ways so that we may save our own hides, which in many cases aren't nearly as useful as theirs and wouldn't even produce a decent pair of gloves, nevermind a fleece lined jacket or an effective suit of armour. ~Elrana Clearly you've never tried making a decent pair of gloves out of human hide, or you wouldn't be speaking such nonsense. Edit: So, maybe a paladin would not use small animals to test for traps. ~fruits and vegetables No one who passes a Wisdom check would use small animals to test for traps. They probably wouldn't set off most pressure plates. (And come to think of it, the same applies to using a ten-foot pole—most traps aren't going to be on hair triggers, surely. It's going to be pretty darn hard to apply fifty pounds of force to a pressure plate ten feet away.)
Elrana 08-01-04, 07:10 PM	Originally posted by Simetrical Clearly you've never tried making a decent pair of gloves out of human hide, or you wouldn't be speaking such nonsense. They leak. Which is exactly my point. That being said I'm better with hats. I'm willing to accept that it may be my glovetry that is at fault. :)
fruits and vegetables 08-01-04, 07:18 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Simetrical ...whether it is morally acceptable to see our animal friends die in a thousand different nasty ways so that we may save our own hides, which in many cases aren't nearly as useful as theirs .... ~Elrana Well, if given the choice. Whether to let the most worthless, old, disabled man live or letting an animal live that otherwise would be the extiction of the animals species if left to die......i would save the old man without hesitation. Those traps can possibly KILL you. It might be fantasy but put yourself in the situation. It would not be virtuous to do such a thing. It is far from evil though.
fruits and vegetables 08-01-04, 07:30 PM	another thought. Now if players always did release sheep or other animals in a dungeon to spring traps i would take measures to prevent them from sticking to that idea. I would probably refrain from just stopping them from doing it. I would begin by not giving full XP for the trap. Maybe give them 1/4 XP. I would tell them of this too. That way they have a choice of continuing their little cheesy trap springing plan but not getting much XP, or forgoing that to receive full XP for the traps. Another option might be that a druid circle finds out about it and seeks justice from them. Not death or anything mind you. Perhaps insisting that they put money in and develop a wild-life preserve. That way if they refuse then they are definitely doing an evil act. That is a couple options.
fruits and vegetables 08-01-04, 07:58 PM	semetrical, Just read your edited post. Your response is true. Notice i said sheep in my last post. Now, fifty pounds is a bit much though. I am sure there are many halflings that weigh under than. I would think anything as large or larger than a good sized dog could set off any pressure/motion traps. If i were protecting my goods i would make sure someone could not just cast a reduce spell to bypass all my traps.
Elrana 08-02-04, 03:40 AM	Originally posted by fruits and vegetables Well, if given the choice. Whether to let the most worthless, old, disabled man live or letting an animal live that otherwise would be the extiction of the animals species if left to die......i would save the old man without hesitation. Those traps can possibly KILL you. It might be fantasy but put yourself in the situation. It would not be virtuous to do such a thing. It is far from evil though. Hmm. How about allowing the worthless, old, disabled man to have one more moment of altruistic heroism by letting him go down the potentially trapped passageway, thus saving the animals and triggering any traps? At least it might curtail his apparent worthlessness and bring meaning to his barren life once more! How noble a gesture that would be! :bow: Originally written by Mr. Dickens 'Tis a far, far better thing I do today... ...and all that! :)
fruits and vegetables 08-02-04, 04:17 AM	*double*
fruits and vegetables 08-02-04, 04:23 AM	Well, i suppose that would be his choice then. I spoke of another decision. Now, if the worthless old man decided not to take that action you spoke of, it would not make him evil. If playing a good character and in that situation you spoke of i would not let the old man do it while knowing that i am more capable of the task. Knowing all this i would not want to risk death either. I would release the animal. That would not be evil. It would only be evil if you consider all life as important as any other life. If you consider animals as important as humans then i guess in your game these acts are evil. In mine while not virtuous, they are not evil either. It would be what i consider, normal. Now, in game i would not let players get away with this forever. Because of their actions I would throw them in situations that they would have to make good/evil choices like the druid scenario i mentioned earlier. It would end up costing them GP, XP or both if they wanted to continue this. off topic, Guess you caught my "Kain speak" there.:) Oh and P.S. By worthless i meant he could be a bum, mentally, or physically disabled. By saying worthless was only to imply that he was worthless in some way either by his own actions or by actions beyond his control.
RogerWilco 08-02-04, 11:04 AM	Hmmm, a CN summoner wizard might find this an interesting idea.
Scion of Coldshard 08-02-04, 12:01 PM	Originally posted by WizO_Catoblepas I'm not sure whether leading a flock of animals to set off traps is evil, but I probably wouldn't reward them for it either. As DM, what I would do is say, "Thoughout the night, outside of the cave the smell of burnt meat and porks starts to fill the air." *Multiply the wandering monster percentage chance by a factor of 10* After going through about 4 or 5 encounters in a row, I'm figuring that the party is going to regret making the first "McDonalds" for wandering monsters and steer clear of that strategy. So not only are you going to go easy on the animal part but you are also going to reward them for their animal use with lots of exp? wow! nice! ;)
Lokiyn 08-02-04, 12:27 PM	Originally posted by fruits and vegetables Another option might be that a druid circle finds out about it and seeks justice from them. Not death or anything mind you. Perhaps insisting that they put money in and develop a wild-life preserve. That way if they refuse then they are definitely doing an evil act. Nah druids don't care about those filthy domestic animals much.;) My druids would be fine with it. Of course i prefer to play druids along the lines of athas druids with the slightly militant bent but thats just me.
Elrana 08-02-04, 12:54 PM	Originally posted by fruits and vegetables Guess you caught my "Kain speak" there.:) Oh and P.S. By worthless i meant he could be a bum, mentally, or physically disabled. By saying worthless was only to imply that he was worthless in some way either by his own actions or by actions beyond his control. I don't know who Kain is. Please elucidate. Oh and P.S. Only he can deem himself worthless. If, having done so, he suddenly finds a way in which he can reestablish a value within himself then that is his decision. Your definitions of worthlessness surely can be only by your standards of 'valuable'. As can mine, mine do not, however, correspond with yours. :)
fruits and vegetables 08-02-04, 03:01 PM	right! Anyway, The "kain speak" was when i said "if given the choice, whether to ...." Your next response had the word "altruistic". I thought you played the Legacy of Kain games because that games dialogue uses those kind of words. My mistake. You should play them though. In my opinion the LoK series is the best video game series there is for story and depth and Kain is the coolest console character there is. On topic, I guess you consider it evil then? Okay by me. My world says it is not evil though. My world also says the players would not do that forever without some form of punishment.
Dravenous 08-02-04, 04:07 PM	I don't think that it would be evil as long as you used all other tools at your disposal to see if there is no trap five feet ahead of you. If you found a trap and you do send that animal to trip it I would say it most likely would be evil. I might do this with one of my characters though. I would want to bump up the animal's Reflex saves though, so I would make it intelligent and have it take levels in Rogue, Ranger, and Bard. Of course then I would have to make it a Cohort. Also, since it would be intelligent it would want to have a share of the loot and...
E-Arkham 08-02-04, 05:50 PM	As a DM, you could always discourage it with a little metagaming by saying, "Hah! Some of the sheep actually MADE their saving throws." Then smile and ask who's walking down the corridor first to fetch the sheep. Kep
Elrana 08-02-04, 08:26 PM	I'm not a great fan of computer games to be honest, I thought IWDII was okay but don't go out of my way to play them. Meanwhile, back on the topic... Originally posted by fruits and vegetables I guess you consider it evil then? Okay by me. My world says it is not evil though. My world also says the players would not do that forever without some form of punishment. I don't consider it evil, neither would it be in my world, neutral generally, potentially evil in certain circumstances. I would definitely revoke exalted status for it, as that relies specifically on a respect for all life but probably not good status just for a one off. Possibly repetitive examples might cause a slide into neutral, and coming to enjoy watching the beasties die would start a slide toward evil. But that is down to the character, the act itself I would definitely place firmly in the neutral box. If it is not evil in your world then why would the players be punished for it? ;)
Paladin2004 08-02-04, 08:29 PM	ROFL, People are saying its neutrual, but what would a Druid have to say about it. You all mention Paladins , but no one seems to have taken a blind notice of DRUIDS! Anyway, the dm could acidently slip in, oh , i bet your pleaseing the druid community by doing this (saurcastically). Then have the who, party attacked by angry high level druid, accompanied by ents, wolves and 100 of the type of animal they killed. Maybe not kill the whole party. Make the party have to talk there way out of it lols, or make them pay a big fine, or put that spell quest or gease or what ever its called, and force them to really care for the animal they were killing in useing to set of traps, and treat it like a human or something lol, something anoying and comical. hehe
fruits and vegetables 08-02-04, 08:47 PM	i can agree there. I would revoke exalted status as well. I said it was not evil. I did not say it was not cheesy. I would punish the players if they attempted to keep using that as a get out of trap free card. paladin, I did mention druids as a possible problem the PCs would run into if they kept using animals as trap springers. It's on page 2.
Paladin2004 08-02-04, 08:51 PM	ok, lol, do your players really do that?
fruits and vegetables 08-02-04, 09:13 PM	Nah, but i am sure if anyone of my buddies stumbles into this post you can bet they will see how long they can get away with it. I was just responding to the thread topic's questions. I do not consider evil. From what i had read of the first couple posts they considered it evil. My thought was that most people will do a lot of things when their life is on the line. If I as a person were in this situation you can bet i would send the animals out first. It would not make me evil to do that. I only want to survive. I do not then want to rape, pillage, plunder, burn, rob everyone i see afterwards. Funny thought after i typed the last line in above paragraph. If the DM decided that to evil and changed you alignment to evil. Would'nt that be the most pitiful excuse for an evil person ever? Player: I'm bad! i send unwitting livestock to their DOOM! bwahahaha....*cough*..haha..*cough*cough *....ehh.
Zilred 08-03-04, 02:38 AM	I've actually used a summoned animal to set off a trap once. My Ranger had a chest before him that he knew was trapped, so he summoned a monkey to do it for him. Needless to say the ranger was evil, so he could care less to see the monkey get electrocuted. Still, sending animals into traps can have someone interesting effects. I can see it now: PC: Send in the cows! Those darn kobolds probably laced the whole area and we need to get in there fast! DM: The cows go in. You wait fifteen minutes and you start to see smoke rising from the cave entrance. The smell of roasting beef greets you. PC: Hah! That did it, let's go. **Later...** PC: See, no traps at all! It worked! Now what's in here? DM: You enter into a large cavern, filled with kobolds munching on cooked cow. They look up as you enter... PC: I cast... DM: ...Hold it! They wave at you and go back to eating. Three of them rush at you, apparently trying to hug you. PC: What in Baator is this? DM: A +20 on Diplomacy. Good job on that peace offering. PC: :uh-huh:
Lokiyn 08-03-04, 04:27 AM	Originally posted by fruits and vegetables paladin, I did mention druids as a possible problem the PCs would run into if they kept using animals as trap springers. It's on page 2. Aye, and i responded most druids could care less about those pathetic domesticated animals. Now herding in a deer herd is another thing. Though i would like to see a hoard of 100 awakened, enlarged, magic fanged sheep attack the party :D
Grox 08-03-04, 03:23 PM	Originally posted by Arbitrary Aardvark Historically, the Romans tried using flaming pigs (pigs coated in pitch and then set alight) to frighten elephants. It didn't work all that well. Historically, war elephants weren't really *frightened* of very much at all, except maybe fire. The point of fielding elephants was to frighten the enemy soldiers (which worked out okay) and the enemy horses (which worked out beautifully). The stories about pigs being used to "frighten" elephants came from a siege at Edessa. Apparently, elephant ears are very sensitive and certain high-pitched noises, like the squeals of a pig frightened in the midst of a battle, simply bother them (the way you or I might be bothered by the sound of fingernails on a blackboard, or music we don't like). If the elephant heard the sound, it simply left in the most direct manner available to it --- leading witnesses to believe that it had been "frightened". This is probably why some commanders had the elephants wear bells --- to provide them with some form of sonic "armor" against high-pitched noises. It's also almost certainly the ultimate source of the old wives' tale about elephants being frightened of mice.
Grox 08-03-04, 03:28 PM	Originally posted by WizO_Catoblepas After going through about 4 or 5 encounters in a row, I'm figuring that the party is going to regret making the first "McDonalds" for wandering monsters and steer clear of that strategy. Maybe not . . . IMC's most of the rogues I play with would look into starting a franchise. They'd hire out the rest of the party for "security" and start opening fast-food joints in the farthest reaches of the medieval fantasy wilderness. The scary thing is, the gnomes would actually find a way to make it WORK . . . :D
Bacon and Eggs 08-03-04, 03:33 PM	How did I miss this thread?! Here it is from a my perspective. Nope it's not evil to use animals in the case of springing traps. If anyone can train them to do that then all the power to them. If the carcass is salvageable afterwards then it's BBQ time. After seeing this quote above... Is it evil to kill a tree to make a set of large poles for setting off traps? I'm more thinking that the next debate would be that using animals on a farm for unpaid slave labour is evil. How dare the farmer use the horse to pull the plow when the horse is not even being paid! Fun debate though.
Grox 08-03-04, 04:05 PM	To me, the thing that makes this act (using sheep as trap-detectors and trap-springers) incompatible with D&D "goodness" is the lack of choice on the part of the sheep. People have brought up the idea of forcing peasants to walk across a field and check for traps as evil --- or tricking a rogue into doing it as evil, or "shady" at best. But what if the people know what they're getting into? If you sincerely approach a commoner, explain the danger, give him the option to cooperate or refuse, and offer him a real benefit --- especially if you promise that said benefit will go to his family if he doesn't make it --- well, from a moral viewpoint isn't that basically the same offer you are making to your fellow adventuring-party members in any case?
Callista 08-03-04, 04:07 PM	It's evil if you know he probably won't make it, are hiring him in order to save money, and could just as easily hire someone who would survive, if you wanted to spend enough.
Lokiyn 08-03-04, 05:00 PM	Originally posted by Callista It's evil if you know he probably won't make it, are hiring him in order to save money, and could just as easily hire someone who would survive, if you wanted to spend enough. if i walk up to a man and offer him a months (for a commoner) wages to walk down a hallway and come back and i tell him he has a 10% chance of making it and regardless of sucess or failure his family gets paid, and he takes the offer my concious is clear.
fruits and vegetables 08-03-04, 05:02 PM	i do not think that is evil either. You tell them the their job and how much you pay and stuff. It is their choice to accept the job or not. Again though i find this even further from virtuous than using animals if you are using people that you know will surely die. I do not think i would allow paladins to do this without needing atonement. Otherwise as long as it did not become common place i would not force an alignment change. To add to this the characters would not be received as heroes in many areas they traveled that knew of their policy. Think about it, they get some poor commoner that needs the money to do most of the dirty work and stick their neck out. They then complete whatever the task is and want full credit. I think if they are ever doing a task for a reward and fame that they may just get little of both. It would seem appropriate that the family of the trapspringers should get a share of the reward and fame.
Dunbar 08-03-04, 07:21 PM	Just because we kill animals for food and other reasons (putting down a lame horse, for example) doesn't mean that we can treat them any way we want and not be evil. If I have pets that I regularly beat and abuse, that's evil. Why? Because torturing these innocent animals is evil. Submitting them to the explosions/poisons/falls/etc. of traps is torturing them. Thus it is evil. It's not big time evil. It's not stealing babies so I can cook them and eat them evil. It's more of a vanilla evil, perhaps, but it's still wrong. I find it amusing that some feel that it is neutral to use animals in this way, but if the players do it repeatedly they could shift to evil...you can't have it both ways. Yes, human life is more important than animal life in a DnD universe, but torture is wrong no matter who you are torturing. And as for the comments like this one: My thought was that most people will do a lot of things when their life is on the line. If I as a person were in this situation you can bet i would send the animals out first. It would not make me evil to do that. I only want to survive. Just doing what you have to do to survive may well be evil. If my wife and I were on a sinking ship and there weren't enough life boats for everyone, you better bet I'd do what I had to so that my wife could get on one. And myself as well. If that means climbing over people, beating people out of the way, or even injuring or killing some of them, I'd do it. I wouldn't be proud of it later, but you do what you have to do to save your own life and the lives of those you care about. I'd like to think of myself as a good person, but in the end the drive to survive is strong, and in life-or-death situations we'll to almost anything to survive. However, what I would do is still evil. It is selfish. Selfishness is a hallmark of evil. Truly good characters, exalted characters, would not compromise their values in such a way. They would give up their places on the lifeboats so that others may live. Condeming others to die in your place is an evil act...but no one said being good was easy. In this case, we are talking about animals and not people. Even so, it's evil to submit these creatures to torture, even if it is to save your own hide. Again, it's not big time evil. And it is forgiveable...desperate times call for desperate measures. But that doesn't mean those measures aren't necessarily evil. But I think one thing we are forgetting is the difference between something that is forgiveable (torturing these animals by sending them into the traps to save your life or the lives of others) and unforgiveable (torturing animals for the fun of it), and confusing it with something that is evil (torturing animals for any reason) and not evil. Good characters (though not exalted characters) may resort to evil measures in desperate situations; such actions can be forgiven, and they retain their good alignment. Resorting to such actions on a regular basis is going to force an alignment shift, however.
PseudoYorimoto 08-03-04, 07:47 PM	Dunbar's statement is exactly my thoughts on the situation, so I don't need to reiterate.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-03-04, 09:48 PM	Reminds me of a certain unfortunate golem. In a one shot, the party had aquired a golem servator who was more or less a bi pedal dog. They bring him to a needlessly over trapped kobold lair, pull out a rubber ball, toss it into the entrance and tell the golem to fetch. He barrels down the mine shaft, after the ball. A pair of kobolds pass difficult INT checks, grab the ball and lead the golem around the trap, then striaght into a deep shaft that ended in an underground river. The PCs followed the golem's clanking foot steps to the world's most deadly waterslide.
Chronos 08-03-04, 09:50 PM	Heres the way I see it: if the animals don't die, than you do. Sacrificing animals to save the lives of others is clearly not evil.
TheDarkLord 08-03-04, 10:08 PM	No, absolutely not. Animals are not people, animals are here only for our benefit. Killing any animal is not evil in the DnD medievil sense. Animals are nothing more than food and tools for the people. Is it evil to break your hammer? I think not.
Lokiyn 08-04-04, 02:16 AM	Dnd Alignments are not quite the same as rw morals. If you are using the sheep as a tool to save the life of others thats neutral maybe a 45 on a scale of 1-100 with 1 being good. Now sending animals through traps for your own amusment is definetly evil.(unless of course its one of those little yipping dogs with the bulgy eyes)
fruits and vegetables 08-04-04, 02:40 AM	Originally posted by Lokiyn ....(unless of course its one of those little yipping dogs with the bulgy eyes).... I hate chihwawha'a (spelling???)!!!! I have a scar on my leg because one of those things charged me jumped up and clung to my leg......it hurt much. I had to kick it in the face 3 times to make it stop attacking me. They are posessed by the devil. :mad: For that matter i hate deer too. Do they serve any purpose at all besides running in front of cars? I think i remeber somewhere that it stated how many millions of dollars in damage they do to cars. I do not think the balance of nature would be jeopardized if those little dogs and deer were gone. seriously. I hate them. They serve no purpose. okay, i vented about those things. on topic, killing the animals for fun and amusement is surely evil. Sending them in to spring traps so that you may not die is not evil. I can see a couple people disagree on that. Oh well, we view it differently. As said before, it may be evil in your world. It is not evil in mine. You can type a novel's length explanation on why it is evil and i will not see it as evil. I will not bother listing points. I just do not see it as evil. I just don't see it. anyway, i hate those dogs.
CaoSlayer 08-04-04, 05:58 AM	(maybe too late) eeer, and why not to use a cart or a chopped tree isntead? you cant kill it twice.
Exomnium 08-04-04, 11:13 AM	I just thought of the best magical item ever. Bag of Detect Traps Its a bag of holding IV with a bottle of air in it and lots and lots of thoes 2 cp chickens.
Arbitrary Aardvark 08-04-04, 12:59 PM	Originally posted by Grox Historically, war elephants weren't really *frightened* of very much at all, except maybe fire. The point of fielding elephants was to frighten the enemy soldiers (which worked out okay) and the enemy horses (which worked out beautifully). Yup, most of the Roman's anti-elephant techniques didn't work out. Like the carts with sharpened stakes on top. (The elephants went around.) Or the trumpets. (The elephants ignored it.) The basic technique to beating elephants was to shoot at them until they panicked. (Wounded elephants have a tendency to rampage off in random directions.) As late as the 4th century, the Sassanids were using elephants as shock troops, sometimes fairly effectively.
archcomponent 08-06-04, 05:41 PM	I've got the perfect solution to this problem, actually. Just use kobold babies to set off the traps. Problem solved all around!