Re: [DL] what if you think it's self-defence

[john tfs <johntfs1@yahoo.com>]

> >Sinnin' depends on the point of view of the
> Blessed, not the facts of the 
> >situation.  If a Black Magician mind-controls a
> child, covers that child 
> >with an illusion and sends her out to "attack" a
> Blessed who then kills her 
> >in "self-defense", no Sin has been committed
> (though the Blessed in 
> >question will surely be buggered in the head over
> the situation).  The 
> >Blessed was acting in what he thought in good faith
> to be self-defense.  If 
> >humans are dressing as monsters to attack a
> Blessed, he can kill them in 
> >self-defense (especially if he has no reason to
> suspect them of being 
> >humans to begin with).
> 
> This I think, could be subject to a lot of debate. 
> "Thou shalt not 
> kill/murder" doesn't have the caveat, "unless you
> were tricked into it"
> 
> In my opinion, at least
> 

I figure that it's a situation where role (not ROLL)
playing is especially important.  If the Blessed is
convincingly torn up about the situation, no Sinnin'
roll.  If he's indifferent except to point out "I was
tricked, no Sinnin' roll for me" I'd be inclined to
apply the Sinnin' roll (for the hardness of heart
instead of the killing itself).


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/