Quote Originally Posted by Gusion View Post
Indeed, which was really my point. "Reasonable" is used by society to determine sanity vs insanity. "Moral" and "Legal" are different constructs.
In English, "reasonable" is also used to mean "not excessive". Killing someone for lying is unreasonable in that it is excessive. Killing someone simply for being powered by negative energy is similarly excessive.

Quote Originally Posted by Gusion View Post
You're generalizing a bit what I said. I don't lump all evil aligned creatures together, nor does D&D. I said vampires specifically, you generalized that to imply I'm talking about all evil. All vampires are evil but not all evil creatures are vampires.
Anything true of all Evil creatures is still true of Evil vampires. All Evil creatures, vampires included, need a reason to kill.

Quote Originally Posted by Gusion View Post
I don't understand how you can make a sweeping statement like that. Perhaps he thinks that specific individual is a threat. Or looks funny. Or hates the football jersey he's wearing. Vampires attack based on an individualized priority set, neither of us can apply one general set to their target list.
A human could attack anyone on those same criteria. If living in a D&D world, would you also kill all humans on sight?

Quote Originally Posted by Gusion View Post
(Or, to bring this to OOTS, maybe Durkula would attack V first as the biggest threat. Or maybe Roy because he believes taking out the leader will cause the rest to run. Or maybe he will be so full of himself that he kills Belkar first just out of spite.)
There is no indication that Durkula intends to directly attack the members of the Order at any point. We know that he intends to bring the world to ruin, which is something the Order will doubtlessly try to stop if they discover it, but it is possible that his plans involve separating from the Order before making any overt moves towards that intention.