Who was in the wrong here?

Who was in the wrong here?
>Traveler required potions to kill a dragon
>Shopkeeper may have underestimated said traveler and refused to sell
>Traveler becomes more insistent towards purchasing the potion due to the situation becoming so dire
>Shopkeeper becomes more aggressive in return

The dragon

The potion

Shopkeeper. Traveler probably wanted to kill himself and the shopkeeper should've respected that.

The shopkeeper has the right to refuse service.

The potion seller isn't a doctor and has no right to refuse service to the traveller, as potion seller has no idea of traveller's abilities to withstand potions.

>b-but the potion would kill him
As a direct result of refusal of service the traveller may die in battle because he was unable to obtain the strongest potions, either way the potion seller would be at fault for his death.

This is true, but just because he's allowed to do something doesn't make it right.

What the fuck does Andy Murray have to do with video games

>no right to refuse service to the traveller
Its his potion, he has every right. Not to mention the traveler became increasingly whiney and irate. Given, the potion seller was mocking him but I would be irritated to, desu

Customer is always right.

Exactly how new?

The battle

;)

>potion SELLER
>not wanting to make money and sell his product

Hmm...

The potion seller. His entire position was that the traveler couldn't handle the potions he sold, but at no point in the traveler specify that he was going to consume said potions.

doesn't want to be hit with the lawsuit when the dumbass traveler takes the strongest potions that the seller KNOWS he can't handle.

Traveler's herblore level wasn't high enough to handle the potions, then again you can't trade overloads so they are both dumbasses.

The merchant has the right to deny service, especially when the Knight is so weak.

The shopkeeper knows his own stock and he was technically trying to save the traveller's life by not giving him potions that would kill him. Stupid-ass knight paid him no heed. He owes his life to that potion seller.

Apologies, replace the word "right" with the word "reason"

How would he know that his stock is too strong for the knight? Or that the knight would himself use them?

If the knight wasn't going to drink them, you think he would have mentioned that when the potion seller refused to sell. And if the potions can kill a dragon, they can kill a man. I've never met a guy who could handle a potion that could kill dragons.

The Potion Seller has the right to refuse service at his discretion. He knew the knight was not strong enough for his potions and tried to keep him from hurting himself and the knight offered no evidence proving him wrong. It would reflect badly on him if someone hurt themselves with one of his own products.

>dark ages
>lawsuits

Unless the traveler was related to royalty, the seller should have sold it.

>I've never met a guy who could handle a potion that could kill dragons.