Coup de grace - Evil act?

[Trellian]

Thanx for all the replies guys (and girls?)

I was the one posting this subject, but it wasn't my character (I'm the DM).

As for the munchkin-part.. well.. we call him a bonus-hunter (a nicer version of munchkin), but maybe I will show a mean streak and send him the link of this subject to see all munchkin-related comments... hirr hirr...

He has a background story for his classes though (being caught and trained by barbarians, escaped, lived in the wilderness for a time as a ranger, had fighter training as a base, and picked up some rogue skills thereafter). The Holy Liberator class is something he picked up to help out with some healing and divine spellcasting (which is lacking in the group).

Something I forgot to tell you was that he planned on leading the evil group to the battle with the trolls in the end, and letting them die, barely saving their wizard so he could help him out of there. (It was a demiplane after all). So the alliance was a ruse, so to speak, just in order to retrieve his fellows bodies and magical items. Unfortunately, they all retreated from the battle, and the evil group took all the elven magical items, and the dead characters items as well, ending up with about 50 magical items!

Now that's what I call munchkin-NPCs!

Thanx again for all the helpful info!

 

[Darkness]

Originally posted by Mal Malenkirk
To me, a good character should never kill unless necessary (AKA self defense). And that usually means no CDG.

What about letting a downed foe bleed to death, then? Finishing off the foe with a clean blow can't be, IMO, more even evil than letting him die slowly and messily.

Some compare the morality of CDG to an execution. Is the death penalty evil? Some would say yes. But at least a death penalty sentence is only handed down by a judge after a trial before jury. You can't compare this to driving a sword through the throat of a sleeping man.

That depends, now, doesn't it? An execution can be the lawful punishment of a convicted mass murderer, or it can be the abuse of power to silence those who disagree with you. Meanwhile, the sleeping man could be an innocent - or he could be a tyrant oppressing an entire nation (or even several nations).

 

[nharwell]

To me, a good character should never kill unless necessary (AKA self defense). And that usually means no CDG.

<cut>

Can good characters only strike after they have been attacked? Are sneak attacks or surprise attacks allowed? Do good PCs have to deal subdual damage (if possible) in combat -- I don't see how they could not always attempt to subdue opponents first, given the above stricture. And do they attempt to bind the wounds of their fallen opponents after a battle? If not, then they are surely killing them "unnecessarily."

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

No one said it was supposed to be easy to be "good".

The problem is that the more mayhem a good character is allowed to do while maintaining his aligment, the more cartoony an evil character has to be to justify his own aligment.

In a world where good PCs can kill sleeping opponents, what does one have to do in order to be neutral or evil?

Must all neutral PCs be violent psychotic anti hero?

And should all evil PCs be comic book super villain?

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

IMPORTANT: Keep in mind that I'm answering based on my own interpretation of alignment.

Can good characters only strike after they have been attacked?

They don't start fight. But of course I mean fight in the broadest possible sense. If they have been fighting with a group for a long time, the fight is always on, if you see what I mean.

That doesn't mean they don't strike first though. If you succeed your spot/listen/sense motive check and win initiative, go ahead and strike first.

Also, if the bad guy are endangering innocents you will have to get involved.

Are sneak attacks or surprise attacks allowed?

Of course. During a surprise attack, remember that a sap and poisons that affect strenght and dex are just as efficient as a dagger and a lethal poison.

During a fight to the death you don't have time to finesse and if you get a chance to sneak attack, then by all mean do so. A sneak attack during a fight is just a very efficient attack, no different than a critical hit.

Do good PCs have to deal subdual damage (if possible) in combat

If possible, yes. But don't use your sword with a -4 penalty just to deal subdual damage. You'll get killed with that kind of excessive pacifism. For the most part, use spell that can subdue whenever they are as efficient as a spell that would kill, don't CDG helpless opponent and also offer a chance to surrender to the enemies when your victory seems assured.

And do they attempt to bind the wounds of their fallen opponents after a battle?

It depends. It depends on how "Good" the PC is. In most case they have neither the time nor the ressource to see to the gravely wounded. A good PC should probably finish off the severely wounded that he won't be able to attend to. This is actually the true meaning of coup de grâce. It is a french expression that translate litterraly to "mercy strike", it doesn't mean sliting the throat of a paralyzed enemy.

In a lot of case it is very convenient to simply let those who surrendered see to their fallen comrades and move on (after having taken their weapons, or course).

When it is not convenient you get into moral dilemnas so typical of good aligned characters and which are good roleplaying opportunities. There are no easy answer for a good character.

Before answering any of these point, remember that this is all IMO.

 

[Neverwinter Knight]

I feel that he in any case should receive an Atonement spell or lose his divine powers. Maybe som XP penalty? Any thoughts?

Take one big power away from him. After all, he could have dealt subdual damage to capture the elves, rather than kill. And Tymora sure does not like the company he now keeps !!!

 

[chilibean]

I just love how everyone applies modern western ethics to fantasy role playing ...

I wonder if anyone here can define the word ethnocentric?

The simple fact is that it's up to the DM to decide what the moral boundaries are in his particular campaign. There is no real correct answer. Just advise on inventing the culture you wish to play in, IMHO.

 

[KDLadage]

Just how cheezey can you get?

Hi. My current character is a Fighter-4 / Ranger-1 / Rogue-4 / Cleric-5 / Sorcerer-3 / Arcane Archer-3.

Am I a munchkin cheezeball, too?

 

[Artoomis]

Re: Just how cheezey can you get?

Hi. My current character is a Fighter-4 / Ranger-1 / Rogue-4 / Cleric-5 / Sorcerer-3 / Arcane Archer-3.

Am I a munchkin cheezeball, too?

This would require more analysis for a proper answer, but, generally, yes.

The additional info needed: Stats and the reasons why you have so many classes.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

I wonder if anyone here can define the word ethnocentric?

Hey, sorry if we seem condescending to the fantasy people who live in our fantasy world. Perhaps we should ask them what their moral values are instead of making them up, eh?

The very nature of the alignment system suppose that there is a unique definition of Good and Evil and that it doesn't change from one culture to another. Of course, whatever definition the DM chooses should have been explained clearly to the PC so that they don't break it unknowingly. To allow for cultural diversity I personnaly don't pack too much stricture in the alignment definitions.

That being said, the prohibition against murder is one of the very few universal rule so it is not a bad idea to include it in the kind of thing that will make a good character fall from grace. The rules against killing another human being are usually lifted only for self-defense, war and in some other very specific circumstances for some culture during some period (Duels, Vendetta etc.). Even then it is usually illegal and it is more the kind of thing that a neutral character could do without becoming evil than the kind of thing a good character could do without becoming neutral.

The only taboo that is more widespread in human culture is the prohibition against incest AFAIK.