who/what do you think a “just” death is determined upon? who defines the games’s standards of justice (as in, to some a life for a life is just but not to all)? do you think the game punishes deviating from neutrality?

For me, a Just Death has always seemed to represent that which is well deserved and fair. ‘Heroic’ and ‘Just’ look in my eyes like “They died trying to protect their convictions” vs “They objectively deserved that Death”. Rose dying while she was trying to avenge Kanaya, Jake protecting Jane, Dave trying to recover Jade to save her and bring her back to life, all of these things were them fighting for a cause, and dying for it. John, thus, didn’t die a Heroic Death when he faced Bec Noir because he Backstabbed him before their combat even started, before John could even charge at him, and was deemed to not have even been fighting for his Father yet.

Just, on the contrary? Vriska, who died because she stubbornly tried to make herself the Heroine even though Terezi told her she would lead everyone to their Deaths. Aranea, who had good intentions by changing the Alpha Timeline but absolutely destroyed everything in her path to get it, Jane, who had been corrupted by an outside force. The game considered all three of them to be Just, because given the circumstances of the Timeline, they deserved to Die. They tried to follow a cause as well, their ideals (Except for Jane, who had her ‘ideals’ replaced through Mind Control), but opposed to Rose, Dave or Jake, they were stepping over other people, killing others and disregarding feelings and agency of others for their purpose.

It’s likely that issues of Grey Morality would fall in the neither Heroic nor Just category, and bring them back to life.