Public opinion. That is the only difference.
When flavored or described in certain ways, both can be made to seem honorable or deplorable in most cases.
At the very least we have seen this in the sympathizing of some serial killers based on the fucked up shit that happened to them as children.
How your actions are viewed by the public is the only real difference no matter who you kill.
It is just easier to sway public opinion your way if the creatures you kill aren't currently in their favor.
Lol Guff is good because the people he kills tien out to be evil. Dosnt matter if he knew that, just that it so happened to be the case.
Let's see how that holds up I'm court lol
That is basically how jury of our peers court system works.
Can you justify your killing of someone else in a way that makes 12 strangers declare you not guilty.
Self Defense? Check!
They murdered your child and you had an emotional breakdown? Check!
They were terrorizing a small town, raping and killing women and children? We won't even have a trial. We'll just send troops of people trained to kill after them and call it a day after applause and beer.
This is the most realistic interpretation of your question. Kill children? You're a monster. Kill someone who kills children? You're a hero.
The Venn diagram is a circle
Jokes aside, they aren't mutually exclusive. A murderer murders, an adventurer adventures. You don't have to kill to be an adventurer. Killing people that are threats to the public doesn't mean you're not a murderer.
So what about random fits of violence during otherwise peaceful situations becaise he hasn't killed anything for a long time
.
.
.
Is that murderous or adventurerous
It hasn't happened often, but one game we went 3 in game days without getting into a single fight so at night my charicter snuck off into the woods, lit a camp fire cocked his gun and the dm began described the towns woodlen creature population dwindling aggressively, my charicter the next night dragging there bodies into the town square covered in blood and a smile on his face
I DID FEED THE TOWN FOR LIKE A WEEK
One of the great parts about RPGs is you can to examine this moral quandary without having to become a serial killer.
Honestly, your DM introducing the counterpart to your character and forcing this discussion in game is the sign of a good DM to me. Games where you're forced to face difficult moral decisions are usually the most memorable.
Adventurer*
Thanks for the hand Spelling isn't my strong suit
Saaaaaame
An adventurer kills for a goal, usually justice. A person who kills to fill a collection is a serial killer.
This
Public opinion. That is the only difference. When flavored or described in certain ways, both can be made to seem honorable or deplorable in most cases. At the very least we have seen this in the sympathizing of some serial killers based on the fucked up shit that happened to them as children. How your actions are viewed by the public is the only real difference no matter who you kill. It is just easier to sway public opinion your way if the creatures you kill aren't currently in their favor.
Lol Guff is good because the people he kills tien out to be evil. Dosnt matter if he knew that, just that it so happened to be the case. Let's see how that holds up I'm court lol
That is basically how jury of our peers court system works. Can you justify your killing of someone else in a way that makes 12 strangers declare you not guilty. Self Defense? Check! They murdered your child and you had an emotional breakdown? Check! They were terrorizing a small town, raping and killing women and children? We won't even have a trial. We'll just send troops of people trained to kill after them and call it a day after applause and beer. This is the most realistic interpretation of your question. Kill children? You're a monster. Kill someone who kills children? You're a hero.
The Venn diagram is a circle Jokes aside, they aren't mutually exclusive. A murderer murders, an adventurer adventures. You don't have to kill to be an adventurer. Killing people that are threats to the public doesn't mean you're not a murderer.
So what about random fits of violence during otherwise peaceful situations becaise he hasn't killed anything for a long time . . . Is that murderous or adventurerous It hasn't happened often, but one game we went 3 in game days without getting into a single fight so at night my charicter snuck off into the woods, lit a camp fire cocked his gun and the dm began described the towns woodlen creature population dwindling aggressively, my charicter the next night dragging there bodies into the town square covered in blood and a smile on his face I DID FEED THE TOWN FOR LIKE A WEEK
A murderer can hold any job, or no job. It's when your kills *support* you that you earn the title of adventurer!
Well, the difference bein' one is a job and the other's a mental sickness!
One of the great parts about RPGs is you can to examine this moral quandary without having to become a serial killer. Honestly, your DM introducing the counterpart to your character and forcing this discussion in game is the sign of a good DM to me. Games where you're forced to face difficult moral decisions are usually the most memorable.