Originally Posted by StraightFacedChicken
I don't know about you guys, but when we had the option to kill Danny, I actually took my time with this one. I was thinking, this guy was sick and disturbed and he should die for what he did to Mark, and if I left him he may be able to get free and go after Clem. AND if I left him he might die of blood-loss, turn into a dead and trap Clem and Lilly in the meat locker, so after this decision, i knew something would go wrong, but i decided to kill him. Of course, Clem screamed and she looked afraid.
Later on she says "Did you have to kill the brothers?" So obviously it doesn't matter if you don't kill Andy, but if you kill either one she thinks of you differently. I'm just wondering if she will be afraid of me next time I get a weapon in my hands or something, or if she will go to Lilly/Carley for protection instead of me..
That was very smart of TTG, and I applaud them for it!
You left out the most important reason to kill the St. Johns. They were unrepentant murderers and cannibals who presumably would continue to torture (remember our legless friend?) and murder as long as they were alive. They had to be executed in order to save innocent lives, probably many, many innocent lives.
I doubt in the "real" zombie apocalypse if you couldn't have had one of your group lead Clem an appropriate distance away before executing the St. Johns. The game took a thoroughly contrived approach to the situation (though it would not have been difficult to construct a scenario where you either must kill them in front of Clem, or they escape--another example of poor design by TTG) in order to create an unrealistic but controversial scenario.
In any case, executing the St. Johns was a moral obligation. If that needed to be done in front of Clem, so be it. They could not be allowed to escape.