( No Title )
Two heroes who, despite previously having cut a swath through dozens of nameless minions, always refuse to kill the downed big-bad at the end of the fight because it would be “dishonorable-” except that one of them views it as “dishonorable” in the sense that killing a non-lethally incapacitated foe who poses no immediate threat to you is a violation of his ethical obligation to use violence only in self-defense, and the other views it as “dishonorable” because killing a subdued foe is like shooting fish in a barrel, there’s no sport or artifice or demonstration of technical skill involved, and since they both arrive at “don’t kill this guy” with the same one-word justification they get decades into their heroic partnership without noticing that their counterpart is operating on a completely different ethical framework than they are.
Discussion ¬