>>94661931
>there are undead in the city RIGHT NOW
When Arthas made the choice, Stratholme was still at peace. No undead, no fighting, no smoke could be seen.
>and people are turning into zombies while you are killing them off
Also only happens after he made the call to purge, not before.

Again, he made the choice to slay everyone before setting a single foot inside the city walls.

>but is there any reason to believe the surrounding territories could survive anyway?
Why not? The Scourge at Andorhal and Hearthglen was repelled and we have no indication that the other major city in eastern Lordaeron, Tyrs Hand, was badly affected.>>94662324
Well, every single citizen I encountered turned into a zombie, 1//% of them were infected. This means that without means to cure them and very little time the only good thing to do was to stop the evil from spreading>>94633727
IIRC the dreadlord mentioned something to that effect. I remember back then that I understood that it wasn't just about dying but that dying as a zombie wast the worse fate.>>94662351
Arthas did not know 100% of the people would turn before he started the purge. He gambled while missing crucial information and got lucky.

The outcome of an action does not determine whether it was a Lawful Good action or not.

Arthas purging the entire city, and just happening to not see anyone that was not infected is functionally not different from me going out on the street to shoot a random person in the head and finding out that they were a serial kid rapist/murderer that ate his victims.

In both cases the outcome did not change the fact that a non-Lawful Good action was taken that lead to a positive outcome.>>94634085
It's the most expedient thing to do when time was of the essence. He saw a job that needed doing and needed doing fast, Uther and Jaina's opinion of him was clearly less essential to him than the safety of his kingdom.>>94662387
Still not a Lawful Good action.>>94662380
Well, he did see that in the cinematic that's at the beginning of the mission and Uther didnt say a thing about that, he just said that there must be other way. Not a word about healthy citizens>>94662394
>Well, he did see that in the cinematic that's at the beginning of the mission and Uther didnt say a thing about
He didn't see the entire population of Stratholme you moron.>>94662380
Question for you, a person that rationalizes a curse with a 100% mechanical effect as dumb luck, what do you believe the odds are of someone in a fantasy medieval town not eating or having contact with grain in any way shape or form INCLUDING processed grains such as bread, any people who have had contact with any grain, any animals who have had contact with said grain?

You're doing the equivalent of saying "Nuclear bombs don't kill 100% of people in the area that they detonate therefore they don't kill anyone.">>94662410
His most trustded mans name was Captain and other friends all were called Footmen.

You need to realise it was a videogame and it had simplified ways of communication.
Plus if you destroyed citizens house, every single unit would turn into a zombie, none of them were clean. If there was a hint they could be cured, obviously quarantaine would be the good option, however that was not the case.>>94662415
You brainlets fail to understand that me refusing to accept that what Arthas did was Lawful Good is not me saying that what he did was the right thing to do.

Lawful Good is an almost impossibly high standard to achieve, and trying to lower the bar because you are lazy or stretched thin on resources or time cheapens the meaning of what Lawful Good.

Just because you stan Arthas, doesn't mean that you get to redefine what Lawful Good is.>>94662434
>not me saying that what he did was NOT the right thing to do.*>>94662434
Lawful good people also commit neutral or even evil decisions. One deed will almost never change your entire alignment unless it's a very soulshaking thing to do and you realise you are doing something against yourself.>>94662434
>Arthas purging the entire city, and just happening to not see anyone that was not infected is functionally not different from me going out on the street to shoot a random person in the head and finding out that they were a serial kid rapist/murderer that ate his victims.
No, we're pointing out that you're retarded and don't know how math works. It has nothing to do with liking Arthas and everything with you being dumb.>>94662464
>Lawful good people also commit neutral or even evil decisions.
They don't. This is just a cope by losers who wish they could be as cool as Lawful Good people, but don't have the spine to actually make the sacrifices that being Lawful Good requires.>>94662469
So what is the acceptable probability of killing innocent civilians that you could have potentially saved to retain Lawful Good status? 1%? 10%? 50%?>>94662483
Again, you're misunderstanding the problem.

The plague had exponential growth, I get you don't know that word so I'll explain it as if I was talking to a child: it means that the number gets bigger faster as more time passes. For a zombie apocalypse this is a bad thing.

Next we need address your object permanence problem; as in you can't understand or remember things that aren't immediately inside your field of vision. You need to learn that there are things exist and continue to exist in places you can't see yourself. This relates to the problem the plague was going to spread to an entire continent which is important to the story you're confused about.

We have to talk about your inability to understand percentages. 99% means that something happens 99 times out of 100, it's something that's very likely to happen. It's unlikely that everyone you meet is a pedophile rapist cannibal so that's something very unlikely to happen, though it speaks more about your mindset than anything that happens in reality.

There's the problem with you not understanding that people tend to eat bread, which is made from grain and the chances are that someone would have eaten bread over the course of a month is very high.

Then there's transmissibility of a new disease, if animals also catch it then it's a very transmissible one. That means that it's easy to catch and it's impossible to contain if allowed to spread.

So yeah. It's hard to explain morality and ethics to someone like you because you don't understand the problems that underpin such concepts.>>94662541
Again, I'm not saying that what Arthas did was wrong. Get that through your abnormally thick skull.

I'm saying that it was not Lawful Good.

Nuking Japan twice was necessary to end the war, but the action of nuking Japan twice was not Lawful Good.>>94633012
When you are royalty you do not explain your position to those that are by oath bound to serve you and be the vehicle of your will. But you are a liberal who cannot imagine other times and other value systems other than your idealised one.>>94662590
Uther literally outranked Arthas you dipshit.>>94662560
Yes it was. The nukes we're absolutely the LG course of action. What precisely do you think was the morally superior alternative?>>94662590
Royalty did have to explain things to, and appease, their vassals or else they didn't stay Royalty for long you historically illiterate idiot.>>94662794
>Yes it was. The nukes we're absolutely the LG course of action.
Lmao you truly are retarded.

>What precisely do you think was the morally superior alternative?
To continue getting hundreds of thousands of fighting men on each side maimed and killed for months or years.

The world needs evil and neutral people to do the pragmatic things for the rest of the society to continue existing, but that doesn't make the evil things done by those people suddenly Lawful Good.>>94663032
You're psychotic.>>94663046
But am I wrong?>>94663105
Yes. Yes you are.>>94662233
>Trying to purify the citizenry with holy magic before they turn
This doesn't work.
>and destroying them once they turn undead
Too hard, they're way stronger than humans.>>94632664
To not play Blizzslop.

Merry Christmas, OP.>>94663115
Then answer my question:>>94662483

What is the acceptable collateral damage percentage threshold of innocent civilians for a military action for the action to still count as Lawful Good?>>94663136
>Too hard, they're way stronger than humans.
Congratulations. You failed at being Lawful Good.>>94663162
And you failed to save the kingdom, now everyone's dead. Nice work, retard.>>94663170
>And you failed to save the kingdom, now everyone's dead. Nice work, retard.
Literally not part of the equation of whether the action of culling everyone in Stratholme was Lawful Good or not, retard.>>94663176
Doing shit you know doesn't work isn't Lawful Good, it's Lawful Retarded.>>94663181
When will you understand that Lawful Good =\= the desired outcome?>>94663201
Nothing Good about doing something you know isn't going to work. It's Lawful Retarded.>>94663205
Then answer my question already: what is the acceptable innocent civilian casualty percentage for a military action to still be considered Lawful Good? Give me a solid number.>>94663208
No.>>94663211
Why not? Can't do it because it would make defending your argument too hard?

That's the problem with you non-LG subhumans. You have no spine.>>94663223
Because it's a solved problem. The Lawful Good solution is what Arthas did. What you're suggesting is spitting at the sky to stop the rain. It's just complete nonsense.>>94663032
nta, but without the nukes the other immediate options were:

>send more Allied troops to die because Japan had a larp-samurai death>surrender idea going
>and the japanese will fight even harder on home turf

OR

>Cordon Nippon with what's left of the allied Navies and starve them to surrender
>arguably worse than nukex2 because there will be more dead

If nukex2 wasn't LG, the other immediate options aren't much better.

And the allies couldn't drag things out much longer either: Stalin was in the game. If he ever saw the chance to push the Bolshevic Revolution across an exhausted Europe, he would. England has been bled white, USA and Aus are on completely separate continents; not wrapping the War up costs more casualties, more famine, longer recovery.

Now arguing for the nukes: Lawful because there were no laws against nukes, and Good because the target cities were selected (by committee; an admittedly schizophrenic process) for comparatively low population and military purpose. And, America knew the direct damage the Bomb could do, but not the physiological effects; that was why GIs were treated to nuke-viewings. The possessors of the Bomb didn't know about radiation (and the Bomb by extension) causing all kinds of cancer; this understanding was only established post WWII.

>if they didn't know they shouldnt use it
>that's the only morally appropriate approach
Some discoveries can only be made through large and continuous use. We'd be living in a morally pristine Mud Age.

If absolutely no harm must be done to qualify for Good, only Ghandi's proposal seems possible: lay down and let the enemy bayonet you.

If not, can you propose a solution that is LG by your own metrics please?>>94663245
>"it's a solved problem because... BECAUSE IT JUST IS OKAY?"
What the fuck are you talking about?

Arthas was willing to kill everyone in Stratholme indiscriminately without trying any other solutions. He was willing to kill innocent people to stop all the infected from turning undead.

You are just coping that what he did was LG because you have the luxury of having access to the meta knowledge, as a player, that the citizens are all infected. Arthas did not have that knowledge prior to initiating the purge.>>94663357
Arthas thought they were all infected. All my meta knowledge shows is that he was right.>>94663333
I already proposed the LG solution to the Japan problem. It's not pragmatic in the slightest and would have gotten many more men killed, but it would have been LG.

And again, why are brainlets so adamant that every action needs to be justified as LG? I'm happy the US nuked Japan. Hell, I wish the US nuked Russia today in a pre-emptive first strike, and I believe it would have a net positive effect on the world, but it would not be LG in the slightest.

I have no problems with what Arthas did. His actions probably saved the Eastern Kingdoms from total undead dominion, and I would probably have done the exact same thing if I was in his shoes...

...but it doesn't make what he did Lawful Good.>>94663363
Not the point, moron.>>94663389
We don't sign our posts here.>>94663245
>the LG solution is what Arthas did
I disagree respectfully: the fact that Arthas Fall started exactly here means that he started turning Evil according to whatever metaphysics governed that universe.

The stress of limited time and an immediate threat are valid considerations - outside of the soul.

Behind a decision are tactical considerations and moral assumptions. Tactically, Arthas made the best move. Morally, he held little regard for individual human life. That's the start of Evil.

>but if he didn't kill them the plague would spread
>Through the whole country!
Arthas didn't know that; rather he supposes that The Light (whatever that is) would have no solution, and that no cure would ever be found. With the first he shows his faith in The Light is lacking or neglected; with the second, he shows he has no hope in human Good (his teacher, his ex fiance). He wears paladin colors, but he acts like a Neutral.>>94663417
Arthas' fall started when he burned down the boats, not at Stratholm.>>94663431
>Arthas' fall started when he burned down the boats, not at Stratholm.
No. That's where he shows he is already irredeemably fallen.>>94663431
I propose that Arthas' machiavellism came to maturity there; the slippery slope to arrive there began long before.

The flavor texts for Arthas and Jaina calling off their much-hyped royal marriage was "research/career" and "duties". This might be perfectly true, or diplomatic-speak to stifle scandal: Jaina called it off because she sensed something _unlikeable_ in her fiance, which she couldn't put her finger on but knew was there. To be perfectly sexist, women's intuition is real.>>94663417
>Morally, he held little regard for individual human life.
The people in the city were already dead, wasting time trying to sort who's infected or not was not a simple matter.
Is the doctor immoral because when in a triage situation he chooses to save those who can be saved or those he can reasonably save and not wasting resources on those that are already dead?

>Arthas didn't know that; rather he supposes that The Light (whatever that is) would have no solution, and that no cure would ever be found.
He was right though. No cure could be found for the scourge plague.>>94663504
>Is the doctor immoral because when in a triage situation he chooses to save those who can be saved or those he can reasonably save and not wasting resources on those that are already dead?
Yes, and we need him to be.>>94663536
>saving people is immoral
Kek. Really twisting yourself into knots over this.

< Go back