LG and NG vs. prisoners, any guidelines? Help with situation [Archive] - Wizards Community

LG and NG vs. prisoners, any guidelines? Help with situation [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
KIDS
09-23-07, 06:25 PM Hi everyone,

my elf priestess (sorcerer with arcane disciple: healing) of Myhriss (goddess of beauty and love) had recently had a run in with a horde of goblins threathening a fairly large town and the farmlands around. After her party destroyed most of the goblins' complex a day's walk away and was about to leave, an argument came up over what to do with the remaining ones (some goblins, mostly females but also some warriors, didn't resist, or were hit with a sleep spell before they could and were left tied up for their comrades to find).

At this point, our LG elf scout argued that we should open the door where the (tied up) goblins were, sleep them again and kill all of them to "prevent them from raiding more". Now he does play his character as if he were more LN/LE, mentioning that in the past he had stalked and murdered some people over an insult. But still, might he have a point (from a LG point of view most likely)?

My character saw this as unnecessary cruel and something that goblins would do, arguing that these didn't oppose us in any way and we couldn't know what they would do and that "breeding more goblins" is not a valid reason to kill anyone, particularly a bound prisoner. Eventually the party voted on the subject and we decided not to kill them and departed.

While I'm not looking for confirmation or condemnation of my reasoning, I'd like to know how do you LG or good characters cope with prisoners? If the vote had gone the other way I would have still opposed it. Seeing how at least one player is unhappy with these moral dillemas, how can I soften the tensions? Is killing prisoners so bad or I'm overestimating it? If it isn't as bad, what excuse do I have? If it is bad, what can I do to not make the scout fume at me constantly while still opposing it? Should I change my stance and just kill all the future prisoners (why?)...? If I do, how will this fit the image of a priestess of deity of love? Or for that matter, it is not much different from a Paladin who is still a good person, how should he deal with surrendered goblins wives and warriors who threw down their weapons?

I'm asking this because we will be fighting more goblins and there will likely be more prisoners in the future that I don't want to cause a conflict. Note that the said LG scout is fairly new roleplayer and plays all his characters as "tough guys" who rarely show any emotions.

Thanks everyone!

p.s. I realize that this might also belong in what's a player to do but I was fairly uncertain so I posted it here. If it doesn't belong here sorry, but I hope to get some advice
CrimsonDeath
09-23-07, 07:28 PM Our party (mostly good) recently took some bandits prisoner. We tied them up and escorted (read "carried") them to the nearest town (where we were going anyway) to let the authorities there deal with them.
Ian0311
09-23-07, 08:49 PM Is there a nearby legal/prison system that can hold them?

If there isn't, then killing them may be all an LG can do; (s)he may not be doing the most good thing by killing them, but by letting them go free or putting them into a prison system that can't hold them, they are merely allowing them to continue their evil.

Well, unless we're talking Paladin LG, but I don't think we are.

Anyway, sometimes the 'good' thing to do is merely to stop evil. In the case of the goblins, it just depends. If they're weakened/reformed/surrendered, no Good should kill them. If they're just being held captive and are not willing to reform, go to jail, surrender, or are still a threat...well...it gets complicated.

Good guys aren't supposed to kill unarmed prisoners, but, then again, they aren't supposed to stand by and let bad people do bad things, either...
Sevash
09-23-07, 10:41 PM I have a vested interest in this very scenario--in fact, as part of my delving into military studies, I wrote an essay on this sort of situation.

What it boils down to are the extenuating circumstances. If they are restrained and pose no threat, deliver them to the authorities. Push for jail time and rehabilitative measures (the two are NOT the same, especially in a quasi-medieval setting). Do NOT allow torture. Also, take other measures into consideration. Do these captives have mates? Family? Ensuring that they are cared for despite the capture of the bread-winner is not only the right thing to do, but will also serve as a lesson to those cared for that the world is not so harsh as they were led to believe.

Basically, just do your best to capture them, but don't presume to pass judgement unless you have the capacity as granted by the controlling authority in the area or there is no other option. Even if the option to kill them is the most convenient route, if there's another method by which they can be taken care of then their deaths are by no means accomplishing a good act.

The NG were in the right here. I find that most often, NG characters are the most steadfast indicators of what is the right thing to do in any given situation.
Fithero
09-23-07, 10:41 PM I usually try and reform the captured bad guys and turn them to atleast neutral, though good if my party and I have the time. There's rules for it in BoED which are pretty reasonable, making the whole process easy and rewarding.

Nothing like having a clan of Fire Giants backing you and a small mountain village up because you showed them the right way :P

Peace
Ell
09-23-07, 11:25 PM Killing unarmed and helpless prisoners is not a good thing to do, as it's already been said. If they're humanoid there's always an option to turn them up to authorities, but in case of goblins... Well, imagine tied up goblins in a human town... Probably a best thing is to kill them on the spot, at least they won't suffer for long. If we're talking medieval society here, the only options they have if they're in a human settlement is whether they are beat with stones or burned to death.

In case the tribe is weak and shattered, you could probably let them go, but this would be neutral more than good.
A truly Good (in Exalted way) is to make goblins fit in this particular society, organize some trading between the tribe and a human village, for example. Problems you'll encounter on the way is obvious xenophobia and the fact that both sides lost their friends and family to the attacks and won't be too cooperative.

But then again, it's all about how your DM describes them. They can be so close to wild animals they'll never learn to fit in, then it's perfectly normal to kill them - after all, you kill the wolves attacking villagers, you don't make difference between males and females.
The fact that goblins in your campaign actually HAD women makes me think that your DM views goblins as feral but intelligent beings, so they can be negotiated with.

One of my characters actually organized the first human-goblin alliance in our campaign world (I don't know what DM thought about it when I suggested it, but he allowed it, so it's a viable option ;) )
Fithero
09-23-07, 11:44 PM I think something that needs to be pointed out is that while an raiding tribe of goblins is most often evil, this alone doesnt make the town they raid from good.

If an alliance or trade agreement of sorts were to begin, i think negoiations would be needed on both sides. While its more likely that the majority of the goblims would need to be redeemed (ie: turned to good) im sure there would still be a minority in the human village that would need to be redeemed aswell.
KIDS
09-24-07, 09:10 AM Thanks everyone for the responses!

I was actually thinking of the exalted way but Sorcerers sadly don't have diplomacy as a class skill (won't discuss underpowerdness/suckage of classes right now ok). Still I was thinking of it, though I suppose it would have brought even more frowning from the group (the group as whole is LG/NG/NG (not me, but speaks goblin)/CG/CG) for wasting time or something.

Anyways, it's really a hard decision at least seeing the posts here... and my DM is enthusiastic and good hearted, while his goblins sometimes surrender, encounters with them are always random encounters, without much strategy on defending the land involved.

But presuming that not killing and instead trying to redeem (or at very least bringing the prisoners to local authorities, which don't know anything more than us - a ping pong of responsibility if you will) the prisoners is the better and more good way, do you have any advice on how to avoid gripes with the said party member who would rather just kill them? From that time over he seems really ****** off, putting remarks like "seeing how she always goes against the logic" or "because our weak-hearted companion don't want killing" into almost every post. I am of a mind to simply suggest to him to change his alignment to LN but I feel that he would be even more non-cooperative then.

btw, the current consensus as I see it is that not taking or killing (willingly surrendered or harmless) prisoners might sometimes be necessary, it is generally expected to either try to show them the error of their ways of turn them to local authorities or let them go. It might be just me of course, though note that I didn't start this thread only for seeing who's right, more for means of seeing how to lessen the party tensions.

p.s. Nothing like having a clan of Fire Giants backing you and a small mountain village up because you showed them the right way I love this one :)
Fithero
09-24-07, 09:31 AM If the LG character is walking around sayin you should kill goblins for just being goblins, call him a racist.... that usually straightens people out.

If he keeps trying to kill npcs who are offering surrender, because its the easier option, i dont really think he is LG anymore.

Sounds like there is alot of room for inter-party talks here, could be interesting.

Hope it goes well.

Peace
Ell
09-24-07, 12:33 PM Talk to your DM. The player obviously is not taking you seriously and won't listen to any reasoning, all you can achieve by yourself is make enemies with him.
Tell your DM your concerns, I'm sure he'll do something. I know I'd treasure a player like you ;) Hell, I'm ready to run an online adventure for you anytime, if you don't mind my sometimes awkward English :D
JosephKell
09-24-07, 01:02 PM It is evil to execute prisoners that surrendered without a fight. There are alternatives to killing them.

Personally I was always bothered by how one sided non-PC races are in D&D. How can goblins survive if they don't have a sustainable system of agriculture?

Well some of D&D novels fill in those holes. I think Goblins were described as mushroom harvesters or something.

So basically the DM should have had a reason for goblins to be a threat (even good old expansionism/imperialism) and that reason is what needs to be dealt with. If the reason is expansionism, killing the ones that want to conquer everything solves the problem.
Orchomenos
09-24-07, 01:15 PM At this point, our LG elf scout argued that we should open the door where the (tied up) goblins were, sleep them again and kill all of them to "prevent them from raiding more". Now he does play his character as if he were more LN/LE, mentioning that in the past he had stalked and murdered some people over an insult. But still, might he have a point (from a LG point of view most likely)?
IMHO, this is not LN or LE, this is Chaotic Good. Favoring your Honnor above any Law is not really Lawful. A LE character would have found any legal way to get revenge, including forging some evidence for a crime its nemesis didn't commit. One thing is sure, this is not LG.

Our party (mostly good) recently took some bandits prisoner. We tied them up and escorted (read "carried") them to the nearest town (where we were going anyway) to let the authorities there deal with them.

Human are expected to follow Human laws. The lone law for a goblin is kill or get killed, or kill or get beaten. Showing mercy to a goblin would be seen as a sign of weakness.

I suggest to release them on the promise they will leave to some Marchland area; if they ever come back, they will be painfully dealt with, period.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
KIDS 09-23-07, 06:25 PM	Hi everyone, my elf priestess (sorcerer with arcane disciple: healing) of Myhriss (goddess of beauty and love) had recently had a run in with a horde of goblins threathening a fairly large town and the farmlands around. After her party destroyed most of the goblins' complex a day's walk away and was about to leave, an argument came up over what to do with the remaining ones (some goblins, mostly females but also some warriors, didn't resist, or were hit with a sleep spell before they could and were left tied up for their comrades to find). At this point, our LG elf scout argued that we should open the door where the (tied up) goblins were, sleep them again and kill all of them to "prevent them from raiding more". Now he does play his character as if he were more LN/LE, mentioning that in the past he had stalked and murdered some people over an insult. But still, might he have a point (from a LG point of view most likely)? My character saw this as unnecessary cruel and something that goblins would do, arguing that these didn't oppose us in any way and we couldn't know what they would do and that "breeding more goblins" is not a valid reason to kill anyone, particularly a bound prisoner. Eventually the party voted on the subject and we decided not to kill them and departed. While I'm not looking for confirmation or condemnation of my reasoning, I'd like to know how do you LG or good characters cope with prisoners? If the vote had gone the other way I would have still opposed it. Seeing how at least one player is unhappy with these moral dillemas, how can I soften the tensions? Is killing prisoners so bad or I'm overestimating it? If it isn't as bad, what excuse do I have? If it is bad, what can I do to not make the scout fume at me constantly while still opposing it? Should I change my stance and just kill all the future prisoners (why?)...? If I do, how will this fit the image of a priestess of deity of love? Or for that matter, it is not much different from a Paladin who is still a good person, how should he deal with surrendered goblins wives and warriors who threw down their weapons? I'm asking this because we will be fighting more goblins and there will likely be more prisoners in the future that I don't want to cause a conflict. Note that the said LG scout is fairly new roleplayer and plays all his characters as "tough guys" who rarely show any emotions. Thanks everyone! p.s. I realize that this might also belong in what's a player to do but I was fairly uncertain so I posted it here. If it doesn't belong here sorry, but I hope to get some advice
CrimsonDeath 09-23-07, 07:28 PM	Our party (mostly good) recently took some bandits prisoner. We tied them up and escorted (read "carried") them to the nearest town (where we were going anyway) to let the authorities there deal with them.
Ian0311 09-23-07, 08:49 PM	Is there a nearby legal/prison system that can hold them? If there isn't, then killing them may be all an LG can do; (s)he may not be doing the most good thing by killing them, but by letting them go free or putting them into a prison system that can't hold them, they are merely allowing them to continue their evil. Well, unless we're talking Paladin LG, but I don't think we are. Anyway, sometimes the 'good' thing to do is merely to stop evil. In the case of the goblins, it just depends. If they're weakened/reformed/surrendered, no Good should kill them. If they're just being held captive and are not willing to reform, go to jail, surrender, or are still a threat...well...it gets complicated. Good guys aren't supposed to kill unarmed prisoners, but, then again, they aren't supposed to stand by and let bad people do bad things, either...
Sevash 09-23-07, 10:41 PM	I have a vested interest in this very scenario--in fact, as part of my delving into military studies, I wrote an essay on this sort of situation. What it boils down to are the extenuating circumstances. If they are restrained and pose no threat, deliver them to the authorities. Push for jail time and rehabilitative measures (the two are NOT the same, especially in a quasi-medieval setting). Do NOT allow torture. Also, take other measures into consideration. Do these captives have mates? Family? Ensuring that they are cared for despite the capture of the bread-winner is not only the right thing to do, but will also serve as a lesson to those cared for that the world is not so harsh as they were led to believe. Basically, just do your best to capture them, but don't presume to pass judgement unless you have the capacity as granted by the controlling authority in the area or there is no other option. Even if the option to kill them is the most convenient route, if there's another method by which they can be taken care of then their deaths are by no means accomplishing a good act. The NG were in the right here. I find that most often, NG characters are the most steadfast indicators of what is the right thing to do in any given situation.
Fithero 09-23-07, 10:41 PM	I usually try and reform the captured bad guys and turn them to atleast neutral, though good if my party and I have the time. There's rules for it in BoED which are pretty reasonable, making the whole process easy and rewarding. Nothing like having a clan of Fire Giants backing you and a small mountain village up because you showed them the right way :P Peace
Ell 09-23-07, 11:25 PM	Killing unarmed and helpless prisoners is not a good thing to do, as it's already been said. If they're humanoid there's always an option to turn them up to authorities, but in case of goblins... Well, imagine tied up goblins in a human town... Probably a best thing is to kill them on the spot, at least they won't suffer for long. If we're talking medieval society here, the only options they have if they're in a human settlement is whether they are beat with stones or burned to death. In case the tribe is weak and shattered, you could probably let them go, but this would be neutral more than good. A truly Good (in Exalted way) is to make goblins fit in this particular society, organize some trading between the tribe and a human village, for example. Problems you'll encounter on the way is obvious xenophobia and the fact that both sides lost their friends and family to the attacks and won't be too cooperative. But then again, it's all about how your DM describes them. They can be so close to wild animals they'll never learn to fit in, then it's perfectly normal to kill them - after all, you kill the wolves attacking villagers, you don't make difference between males and females. The fact that goblins in your campaign actually HAD women makes me think that your DM views goblins as feral but intelligent beings, so they can be negotiated with. One of my characters actually organized the first human-goblin alliance in our campaign world (I don't know what DM thought about it when I suggested it, but he allowed it, so it's a viable option ;) )
Fithero 09-23-07, 11:44 PM	I think something that needs to be pointed out is that while an raiding tribe of goblins is most often evil, this alone doesnt make the town they raid from good. If an alliance or trade agreement of sorts were to begin, i think negoiations would be needed on both sides. While its more likely that the majority of the goblims would need to be redeemed (ie: turned to good) im sure there would still be a minority in the human village that would need to be redeemed aswell.
KIDS 09-24-07, 09:10 AM	Thanks everyone for the responses! I was actually thinking of the exalted way but Sorcerers sadly don't have diplomacy as a class skill (won't discuss underpowerdness/suckage of classes right now ok). Still I was thinking of it, though I suppose it would have brought even more frowning from the group (the group as whole is LG/NG/NG (not me, but speaks goblin)/CG/CG) for wasting time or something. Anyways, it's really a hard decision at least seeing the posts here... and my DM is enthusiastic and good hearted, while his goblins sometimes surrender, encounters with them are always random encounters, without much strategy on defending the land involved. But presuming that not killing and instead trying to redeem (or at very least bringing the prisoners to local authorities, which don't know anything more than us - a ping pong of responsibility if you will) the prisoners is the better and more good way, do you have any advice on how to avoid gripes with the said party member who would rather just kill them? From that time over he seems really ****** off, putting remarks like "seeing how she always goes against the logic" or "because our weak-hearted companion don't want killing" into almost every post. I am of a mind to simply suggest to him to change his alignment to LN but I feel that he would be even more non-cooperative then. btw, the current consensus as I see it is that not taking or killing (willingly surrendered or harmless) prisoners might sometimes be necessary, it is generally expected to either try to show them the error of their ways of turn them to local authorities or let them go. It might be just me of course, though note that I didn't start this thread only for seeing who's right, more for means of seeing how to lessen the party tensions. p.s. Nothing like having a clan of Fire Giants backing you and a small mountain village up because you showed them the right way I love this one :)
Fithero 09-24-07, 09:31 AM	If the LG character is walking around sayin you should kill goblins for just being goblins, call him a racist.... that usually straightens people out. If he keeps trying to kill npcs who are offering surrender, because its the easier option, i dont really think he is LG anymore. Sounds like there is alot of room for inter-party talks here, could be interesting. Hope it goes well. Peace
Ell 09-24-07, 12:33 PM	Talk to your DM. The player obviously is not taking you seriously and won't listen to any reasoning, all you can achieve by yourself is make enemies with him. Tell your DM your concerns, I'm sure he'll do something. I know I'd treasure a player like you ;) Hell, I'm ready to run an online adventure for you anytime, if you don't mind my sometimes awkward English :D
JosephKell 09-24-07, 01:02 PM	It is evil to execute prisoners that surrendered without a fight. There are alternatives to killing them. Personally I was always bothered by how one sided non-PC races are in D&D. How can goblins survive if they don't have a sustainable system of agriculture? Well some of D&D novels fill in those holes. I think Goblins were described as mushroom harvesters or something. So basically the DM should have had a reason for goblins to be a threat (even good old expansionism/imperialism) and that reason is what needs to be dealt with. If the reason is expansionism, killing the ones that want to conquer everything solves the problem.
Orchomenos 09-24-07, 01:15 PM	At this point, our LG elf scout argued that we should open the door where the (tied up) goblins were, sleep them again and kill all of them to "prevent them from raiding more". Now he does play his character as if he were more LN/LE, mentioning that in the past he had stalked and murdered some people over an insult. But still, might he have a point (from a LG point of view most likely)? IMHO, this is not LN or LE, this is Chaotic Good. Favoring your Honnor above any Law is not really Lawful. A LE character would have found any legal way to get revenge, including forging some evidence for a crime its nemesis didn't commit. One thing is sure, this is not LG. Our party (mostly good) recently took some bandits prisoner. We tied them up and escorted (read "carried") them to the nearest town (where we were going anyway) to let the authorities there deal with them. Human are expected to follow Human laws. The lone law for a goblin is kill or get killed, or kill or get beaten. Showing mercy to a goblin would be seen as a sign of weakness. I suggest to release them on the promise they will leave to some Marchland area; if they ever come back, they will be painfully dealt with, period.