OOC: No, because if zero reinforcements are required, doing nothing fulfills the requirement.
Daarwyrth wrote:Imperium Anglorum wrote:A volcano erupts in AD 79 and the pyroclastic flow incinerates a town of 16 thousand people, burning all of the inhabitants alive. I would call that a 'bad' thing. Sure, there probably isn't anyone who is specifically responsible, but a 'bad' thing nevertheless.
Of course, that is a bad thing, but it doesn't make nature inherently bad. In 1912 a ship was sunk by an iceberg that it collided with, drowning 1517 in the Atlantic as a result. Does that make the iceberg itself 'bad'? No, I'd argue that it's doesn't. The iceberg caused a bad thing, but it isn't bad itself. The same can be applied to volcanoes, or any other natural phenomenon that causes the deaths, I'd say.
OOC: Perhaps the natural phenomenon itself (i.e. volcano or iceberg) is neither good nor bad, but its effects on