Question Don’t you ever feel bad for beasts that are killed by mc for protecting themselves?

Am I the only one that feels bad for beasts that are just following their natural instincts to protect their kids or magic herbs that will make them stronger and then mc comes along and kills them it’s just being mean like when humans want a baby beast and try to kill the parents to get them mc helps because a pretty girl he wants to fuck almost got killed by it like parents protecting their kids doesn’t matter when he wants to fuck a girl?!? Where do the mcs morals go then?!? Is it that only humanoid beings mc can fuck are worth saving or what

 

Sure, that's a way to see it, but what about all the raids they do to the nearby cities? What about when massacring mortals? If the monster eat the herbs -> the monster will get stronger -> will kill more innocent -> rinse and repeat. Usually the female lead picks a strong baby monster if it's left alone -> it will grow -> it will kill.

 

You realise it’s actually the weak monsters that attack cities in groups in beast waves the ones with low intelligence only do it powerful beasts usually live like kings in their own territories deep in forests and they only ever attack when they are provoked

 

Yeah its sad, in our world destruction of habitats can be just as terrible like arson causing a massive bushfire that kills so many coz they like seeing shit burn...

 

I do, you talked about their instincts to protect their kids or magic herbs, I assumed that since you talked about instincts it means that the monsters don't have intelligence, also, some monsters evolve / got stronger and gained intelligence, they are still guilty. Lastly don't forget in most novels the high ranking monster(with or without intelligence) have the capabilities to command those monsters, so they are guilty as the low - level monsters if not more because in some cases they command them to attack.

 

I think it very much depends on the story.
I care not at all when they are obviously aggressive or particularly dumb, but a mother wolf teaching her pups how to hunt, only to find that she picked a bad target, and now all her pups are dead... much more emotional. (early scene from 80K gold for retirement)

On the other hand, take a certain young dragon from In Another World with my Smartphone that decided to burn down a village just because it was bored... it gets no sympathy, even though it was intelligent.

 

So first off I misread the title of this thread as "Don't you ever feel bad for breasts that...."

But anyway this is probably one of the reasons they make the wilderness stupidly vast, and chaotic zones where it is eat or be eaten. If the forest you're exploring is large enough to fit several kingdoms, if the beasts there are so numerous they outnumber the humans on the outside a million to one, and if they're already slaughtering each other everyday. Well then what difference will it make if the protagonist goes on a killing spree or two.

 

Depends on context really, for example if the mc is hunting for survival I.e food or protection its generally not a sympathetic scene. However when the mc usually Hunts for the fun of it that's when I usually frown upon the novel.

Especially in some Japanese novels where they would kill whole packs or tribes of monsters because 'they are on a adventure' that's where I dislike it.

It's the same with Chinese novels however in most chinese novels the monsters provoke either the mc or nearby civilisation

 

Depends on the mc tho,

 

It's ultimately a matter of ethics.
Humans are hardwired to think for themselves and classify things between human and non-human. The more something resembles themselves, the more consideration a human will give it.
Demon King wants to conquer the world? Subjugation.
You find out the Demon King looks pretty much like a human? Perhaps it is capable of being reasoned with.
Demon King is actually a woman? This has to deal more with social/cultural norms, but in terms of an author's writing, they are like. 90% likely to be spared.
Could you make an argument that it is unfair we give rather unequal treatment based upon appearance? You could. But that's how humans have survived for so long. Without prioritization and classification, the human race would have died long ago.

Another point in question is "survival."
Is it ethical to kill another being for sustenance? Can you maim something that does not feel pain? Can you slaughter animals for antidotes?
Furthering this argument into novels, can you kill dumb beasts for an abstract concept called "EXP?" Is it ethical to kill a spirit beast, not for the means of eating, but for the means of using its skin and bones to prepare for the next tribulation? What about skinning for just monetary value and nothing else?

A third point is self-defense, but to what extent?
If a bear mauls you, can you justify killing it in "self-defense?" If a race of goblins is known for its "savagery" and "barbaric practices," is it ethical to commit genocide on the entire race before it launches any more raids on a border town? Are pre-emptive strikes justifiable?

These are questions everyone can answer. Everyone can complain that the bear "didn't deserve it because it was protecting its young." Everyone could make the argument that "not all goblins might be bad." Everyone can preach that "killing animals for EXP is a crime," and everyone can say that "killing any animal not for the sake of food should be punished." Then the next question they need to ask themselves is how many humans will die in the process.

Everyone can answer, but there isn't a correct answer. Accidents happen and you think of the worst under threatening situations. Everyone aims to survive; whether they live or die is completely different. A question in ethics will ultimately always be gray because humanity will never come to a consensus on a rigid, concise judgement.

 

Humans all the way. This is just you being overly sympathetic to a non human species.

However, I will agree "hero" only "rescues"( questionable part as well given their lives in plot are lot shittier than when they were wandering alone before meeting MC) women is a tired cliche of chinese authors. And many western ones. Why can't the shield of the weak be unisex like the hammer of justice or a nice Kazuma dropkick?

 

Thank goodness that I'm not the only one who misread that.

 

Sh*t me too lol. I feel like we both know what our search history looks like

 

Yup, all the time. Humans go into their territory to steal shit and get killed, and suddenly it's okay for MC to go massacre them because "they killed humans first". Wtf kind of shitty logic is that?

It's even worse when they go around killing beasts for their cores and waste the fur/meat. I'm sure authors can come up with better ways to "cultivate" than that overused trope.

 

It’s even worse when mc makes stupid reasons for not killing his enemies that try to kill him then just randomly killing a beast like how’s that make sense someone tries to kill you and you let them live because they are to weak to kill you or one of your harem sluts asks you to let them off cause they are family or friends