Ethical question: blue dragon plate?

Remove all ads!

OK, so I might have missed this, but I've never seen the ethics of making and wearing blue dragon plate discussed.

Why is this an issue, you might ask?

By way of contrast, the Imoen romance mod has generated alot of discussion/controversy over the issue of shared Bhaal parentage; ie, is the Imoen romance incest?

If the Bhaalspawn are technically all half-siblings, then Abizigal is charname's half-brother. So, the use of blue dragon plate requires: 1) killing one's half-brother; 2) skinning his corpse; 3) paying some imp in hell to fashion the skin into armor; and 4) wearing the skin of one's half-brother as armor.

If you had the option, say, to flay Saravok to make human skin armor, would that be any different?

I guess there are two issues here: the sibling issue, and the issue of wearing the skin of a sentient creature. Leaving aside the sibling issue for a moment, the ethics of BG2 sees the tanner human armor and the nymph cloak as being inherently evil, while the white and shadow dragon armors are value-neutral (though the item descriptions say that dragons might get a little upset at your choice of attire, I wonder why?).

Is it simply because the white and shadow dragons are generally evil? We actually don't know about the white dragon because we just find the scales; what if this particular dragon had been atypical; ie, good or neutral? What if you found silver dragon scale in Watcher's Keep and could make that into armor? Would that be an evil thing to do?

In the case of the Saravok skin armor (made, say, much like the tanner armor but with the blood of an evil dragon), I think most players would still consider this to be evil. Like canibalism, the idea of wearing human skin is inherently repellant. Of course, there have been cultures where both of the above practices have had ritual significance, but in our post-enlightenment, Westernized ethical worldview (which is of course unavoidably translated into the fictional worldview of the forgotten realms) such things are completely taboo.

Dragons are fully sentient in the DnD worlds; perhaps even more sentient on average than humans. Yet it's not at all a problem to wear dragon. Is this a kind of species-ism?

The Abizigal issue only complicates this by adding the half-sibling relationship.

Thoughts?

 

I agree that making armour out of your half-brother's skin(scales) is immoral, but one must consider what a bad-a&* this Abizigal fellow is. I presume you could bring up that Sarevok is evil too, but he could at least be redeemed. As for the white dragon scales, that's just a matter of finding something and putting it to good use, anyways, white dragons are evil. As for silver dragon scales, that would be evil, and the game shows that because the human flesh armor, made with silver dragon blood, is the most pure evil armor you can get. I guess you need to judge morality dragon species by dragon species, because almost all dragons of a given species are a predetermined alignment.

 

Well it depends on how you're looking at it. If you're seriously going into this thinking D&D is supposed to be realistic in some sense, you should take note Dragons exist . Dragons scales, (not necessarily skin), are used to fashion a kind of plate armor, not hide or leather armor. The reason for this is because their scales are incredibly strong. No dragon of Chromatic color, (red/blue/green/white/black), can be considered good at all. In the Bg2/D&D world, they are 'inherently' evil, just like any other monster is. Dragons btw, are easily higher thinkers than humans. They are the most powerful non-god beings on the face of BG2/D&D. They have on average stats = to 3X that of any commoner except for dex, (their dex is always 10). Sarevok being human makes it a whole different issue. But doing things ie: skinning, monsters isn't so bad. The reason is because they're monsters, and your purpose in D&D is to kill them and mess with them anyway you like!

Keep in mind it IS, JUST a game, and you can't bring in modern/civilized idea's into it unless you're running a campaign and setting ground rules.

The half Sibling thing is a bit of a thing to overcome, but in the end, it's basically just saying, everyone of baals essence is just half monster, making it easier for you to do such things to them. Imoen would in other words not be your half sister, but your half-human/monster friend

 

Wow... Okay, that would be high on the ick factor. But if you look at the description, it does not mention the fact that the scales came from your half-brother.

I'd have a problem wearing the scales or fur or leather of anything that could tell me not to wear it. So, my characters never wear dragon scale armor. At least a deer can't tell me it doesn't want to be my new set of leather armor.

 

I wonder what the case would be if the dragon in question was found dead? For example, a vicous, pissed off dwarf on fire with his friends, among them an axe, takes down a dragon and leaves him there. Later, our character strolls along and comes across a dead dragon. Is there a difference here that you didn't kill the dragon? Maybe, maybe not. Probably not, but it's a thought anyway.

In any case, I think there's a difference between hide and scales, as omnigodly sort of said. Don't ask me why, there just is.

Btw, the same goes for Ankhegs. Although in BG1, when you come across a lost set of Ankheg armor, sitting there, free for the taking, nobody gave a crap about morality.

 

Ok, well the difference between the Scales and the Hide, is difficult to explain, but it comes down to the fact that scales are meant to be armor, (ie: it's called scale mail armor), Hide that happens to be thick works... but truthfully, an animal, (even if it did have inch thick skin, which it doesn't because it takes a few deer hides to make leather armor), still feels pain when you strike it, whether or not it had an effect. dragons on the otherhand, if you don't penetrate a scale, they don't get hurt, not even pain. Scales may be organic, but they're not living, hide is

 

Hmm... strange question. Is it ethical to wear the armour forged from a dead dragon?

(As I type this I'm eating a chicken leg but that'sn neither here nor there for the moment.)

On the whole moral issue: if this is from a dragon who's just done his best to kill you, then I see no moral problem with it at all. If it's from a dragon that *hasn't* tried to kill you... well, I still don't see a problem with it. I really can't see any fighter with half a brain turning down a suit of +2 full plate armour just because it happened to be forged from the hide of a dead creature.

People have no problem killing animals and eating them for dinner; why would using their skins as armour be any different?

 

An armor is an armor; who cares where it came from, as long as it's not at least human skin. Plus, would you really consider Abizigal to be your brother? Don't think so...

 

There are reasons why the Over-God created creatures such as Dragons. Firstly, they like to horde all the gold to themselves thus making them a source of income for brave adventurers. Secondly, the dragons are a cruel bunch of guys, even if there are a group of good or neutral ones, generally, dragons are considered evil. They plunder, they scheme, intefere withe the lives of others for no apparent reason. And then again, a definite reason to be smited. Thank God.

So, skinning them, a beast of virtually evil blood, even if it was your brother, is not a barrier. More of a war trophy.

Well, on skinning humans, I have no comments. I think it is sick, but how the heck could someone make an armour out of skins that have virtually no defensive property?
And Serevok was evil. I don't mind hanging his body for the birds if need be.

 

I dont think that using evil dragon scales ( if you are good alligned of course ) is evil thing to do.. Even if I found Silver dragon scales, i would use it ( but i wouldnt kill any "good" dragon, if i am good alligned )

And Dragon Scales are there, to be used, not to be dumped...
Anywayz, I created a custom item of mine...
Full Plate.. -2 AC + some bonuses...
What do you think, what history i gave to item... DRAGON, DRAGON, DRACO, DRACONIC... hehe

 

Human is human, nymph is nymph and dragon is dragon. Sure, it wouldn't feel all right to wear Adalon, but why not Abazigal? Plus, it's not really skinning. Some scales, that's all. And it's not like the dragon is charname's real sibling. It's impossible to impregnate a human/elf/dwarf/whatever_playable_in_BG2 and a dragon using one and same body for the purpose.

 

Racism aside, its completely, faultlessly immoral. But nobody wants to think like that.

As for me, I rarely wear Dragon Scales, so I've never put much thought on it either.
IMO alignment, for the most part, has almost nothing to do with it.

As for wearing a sibling, I wouldn't wear Sarevok or Immy even if my life depended on it. Situations can change, though.

[ March 07, 2004, 18:08: Message edited by: Scythesong Immortal ]

 

Just for the sake of argument, I'll try to address a few of the above points:

- I still assume that one has to carve up the dragon carcass to get the scales. Why? As someone who has had the pleasure (??) of scaling fish and dissecting a snake and a lizard, I view scales as being rather intimately connected to the animal's skin. Removing this skin is as messy of a process as removing the skin from any other animal. Think about it: if you've ever seen items made from snake, crocodile, or lizard skin, it's basically like a kind of leather. Of course, snakes etc. shed their skin (so do we, for that matter), but the resulting shed skin is practically useless. So if a dragon were to shed it's skin, I would imagine the shed skin to be absolutely useless as well (except perhaps as a spell component, remember those?) Plus, if shed skin could make armor, one wouldn't need to kill a dragon to gather it (and enterprising dragons in the forgotten realms would most likely set up a lucrative side business selling off their old skins to adventurers for profit, and the entire sword coast would be inundated with high quality magic dragon armor!) If armor could be made out of shed scales, dragons wouldn't be so offended by adventurers wearing dragon scale armor (as it says in the item description); they might even be flattered.

- In addition, I assume that much of the power of the dragon scale armor comes from its retention of the life force of the dragon. This is perhaps why out of a huge dragon one is only able to produce one suit of armor. Again, keep in mind that on has to *kill* a dragon for its scales.

- As to whether the evil of chromatic dragons justifies turning them into adventurewear, it still seems to me that this relies on a species-ist distinction between different kinds of highly sentient creatures in the forgotten realms. As to whether these dragons are always evil, I seem to recall several occasions in both DnD modules and literature featuring an atypical chromatic dragon (white, etc.) that was good or neutral, and allied with the 'good guys.' Nearly all drow are evil, but that doesn't justify Solaufein or Viccy skin armor (probably with drow MR bonuses!) So what is it about the shape, appearance, etc of a dragon that makes it acceptable for carving, where a humanoid form is not?

- Come to think of it, is the ghoul skin armor weird as well? As undead, the ghouls who supplied the skin must have been humans at one point of time, making the ghoul skin armor a human skin armor at one level of remove.

- Finally, as to whether Abizigal is or is not your half-brother: sure Bhaal must have used a different avatar with charname's mother than with Abizagal's (tho it's amuzing to imagine the scene if Bhaal used the same human-sized avatar in all cases, propositioning the mothers of Abizigal and Yaga Shura, or even that chinchilla, and, well, uh, lets not follow this line of thought any further, shall we?) But the different avatars were all technically Bhaal. Probably different avatars spawned Imoen and charname, yet Imoen is still considered your sister in the game, and there is still the incest question around the Immy romance mod. (Tho then again, one could treat that as though they were raised like adopted siblings, who don't share the same genetics, but for whom the incest taboo still applies...)

Maybe this is making too much of a game, but hey, what are we all here reading these boards for anyway?

 

Alignment doesn't matter at all, the way I see it. But the thing is, that creature, whatever it is, is dead. I really don't think it's going to care. I would have no second thoughts about putting deer antlers or demon horns on my helm, because, the fact is, that deer is in deer heaven, it doesn't give a crap about its horns.

Same with scales or hide. Or a leather jacket. The only way it could be wrong is if you specifically killed that creature for it's contribution to your jacket. But what about if it is killed for another reason, like food? And dragons are intelligent, good/evil creatures. I don't think there's anything wrong at all with wearing scales.

 

So there's no problem with the tanner human skin armor, save for the fact that you have to kill a silver dragon for its blood? So if you, say, found some silver dragon blood lying around, just like you find the human skin leather lying around, then it would be totally fine for a good character to make and wear the armor?

 

To the victor goes the spoils. If you are evil, why not kill the silver dragon for the blood. Only makes sense and is well within the limits of role-playing.

For that matter, evil characters killing any dragon for the horde and scales does not seem far from the realm of possibilites either.

As for good characters, if they kill an evil dragon, why not take the scales and put them to good use. Good characters should not however, go around whacking good dragons. That is not role-playing at all (of course, who really role plays this game).

Overall opinion, if it fits the ethos of the character, then do it.

Forgot the human skin thing. Once again, for a evil character, why not. Flay them beggars. The more the merrier. If you are good, hell no. Find the one doing it and put a stop to it. Seems simple really.

 

Bion's question was whether or not killing your half-brother and using his skin for armor is unethical. Many people use this argument against romancing Imoen (dude, that's your sister!), and Bion's question was directed along those lines.

The ethics of killing and/or finding a dead creature and wearing its skin as armor is another debate entirely.

 

On scales, IMHO it's more appropriate to think of them like hair (which, IIRC, are evolved scales). Sure, the dragon died in the game, but it could have just as easily shed them normally. The very forgettable movie "Dragonslayer" had the protagonist with a shield made of shed dragon scales.

 

Nothing wrong with it. I hardly consider the big blue winged freak to be the PC's brother anyway. Crying out loud he's trying to _kill me_! What makes someone family anyway? I don't think it's blood. I know a few adopted children who couldn't give a damn about their genetic parents yet call their adoptive parents mother and father and love them.

Abizigal is only your 'genetic' brother. You owe him no brotherly love, respect or dignity in death. He's been part of a cabal leading a crusade of destruction an mayhem seeking the blood of his 'genetic' siblings. What do you honestly think he is going to do once he's killed you? Bury you? Hell he's a DRAGON. He's going to eat you in some kind of sick victory dance and think nothing of it.

Romancing Imoen is wrong though because she is both your 'genetic' sister and your 'true' sister. She has been brought up as your sister and loves you as a sister would.

 

I see nothing wrong with killing an evil creature because they plan to end the world, or gain incredibly power... brother or not... that's why Sarevok is dead... twice, thrice? over!

Making armor from shed dragon scales is almost impossible btw, because to make a full set of armor for a human, you need the amount of materials from a dragon equivelant to the size of a Horse. Now from a Gargantuan Dragon, (about 40 feet(tall) by 60 feet(long) by 20 feet), you can fashion usually a set of armor and have plenty left over to sell for a few thousand gold.

The fact also remains that these moralities are still being based on western ideas, rather than D&D adventuring Ideals. Basically when it comes down to it, aligment determines what's morally acceptable or not... If you're Nuetral/Chaotic Evil... you could slice your moms throat and... (the word necro and philiac comes to mind), I won't go into detail, and morally, you'd have no trouble... on the other hand, if you were let's say... any nuetral... you'd do things that benefit you, in this case, I would kill the evil character just to make myself better about... well... he was sick... and almost made me puke