[Ethical Dilemma] Indiscriminate Use Of Chemical Weapons

[ThirdWizard]

I'd say that if the Exalted Paladin knew about this, he should not be happy about it. I would say this is a case of ends justifying the means. The Drow could have been evil, and might have attacked them later, and someone might have gotten injured at that ponit, so he should be killed preemptively? It shouldn't matter that most anyone in the world would kill a Drow on sight, we're talking about an Exalted character here.

 

[AnthonyJ]

The morality of the act really depends on what there was reason to believe might be behind the wall. If you're in a dungeon (or other 'site-based adventure') the odds are that anything hanging out near a Retriever is not particularly friendly, so it's a bit reckless but probably no worse. On the other hand, if the Retrievers attacked you in the middle of a city, his actions were inexcusable.

As a practical matter, lobbing a cloudkill into an area from which nothing had been bothering you, and which might not contain anything of significance at the moment anyway, seems a bit of a waste of materials.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

The Drow could have been evil...

Important point: we don't know how drow are perceived in the campaign world. It's quite possible that there was no "could have been" about it. In many campaigns, the drow are evil. Period.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Important point: we don't know how drow are perceived in the campaign world. It's quite possible that there was no "could have been" about it. In many campaigns, the drow are evil. Period.

That is a very broad statement to make, and while it could very well be true, an Exalted character believes noone is beyond salvation, so he would not believe that every drow is evil by merely being drow.

 

[ciaran00]

That is a very broad statement to make, and while it could very well be true, an Exalted character believes noone is beyond salvation, so he would not believe that every drow is evil by merely being drow.

What in Jehannum is an Exalted? Is that something ported over from White Wolf??

ciaran

 

[Lord Pendragon]

an Exalted character believes noone is beyond salvation,

Re-reading the BoED, I couldn't find any passage that states this. Perhaps you are interjecting your perception of Exalted characters and what is required of them, and perhaps you are correct. But it's important to note that it is a projection on your part. For my part, there are evils in my world that are, indeed, beyond redemption, and I wouldn't penalize an Exalted character for recognizing that fact.

 

[Norfleet]

I'm with Jhamin on this: Suppressive fire is a perfectly legal and valid military tactic. Drow lurking behind illusionary walls is very much similar to an enemy soldier lurking in a foxhole. Sure, it's theoretically possible that the drow might have wanted to surrender, but in reality, a lot of people are often killed while attempting to surrender, simply because the opposition is not aware of the intent behind their sudden appearance, and must react at reflexive speeds.

While the possibility for collateral damage existed, the exalted character was neither aware of, nor involved in, the decision to launch the cloudkill, which was, in and of itself, not an evil act either. Using chemical weapons isn't even outlawed in the D&D timeperiod, since the Geneva Convention hasn't been signed yet. Furthermore, while an exalted character may believe that nothing is beyond redemption, it is still accepted that the middle of a hostile confrontation is not exactly the best time to attempt this redemption....and in any case, redemption can be attained posthumously.

 

[Al]

I disagree.

If you were playing any other character, even a 'regular' paladin, I would agree with the other posters here. But you're playing an exalted character.

The way I read it, the exalted character is the aasimar rogue. The wizard is a sun elf, and is not exalted.

In any case, this is a perfectly legitimate and reasonable tactic, depending on campaign assumptions. If it is reasonable to assume in your campaign that drow are evil, probably aligned with the retrievers and out to get the party, then that is legitimate. Jhamin's example is good because you don't *know* that the enemy soldier is an opponent- he could just be dressed in an enemy uniform, and be an innocent trying to flee, or a double-agent...right? But it's reasonable to assume he's an enemy based on his 'uniform' and his strategic actions (poking head through foxhole). Likewise, if drow are generally considered to be evil, his 'uniform' (i.e. drow skin) is likely to indicate that he is an enemy- he could be a friend or innocent polymorphed or disguised, but this is analagous to the innocent dressed as an enemy soldier.

 

[daTim]

Well, if we are using the geneva convention to say you cant use chemical weapons, then the drow (or drow impersonator, or double agent, or innocent in drow clothing) is still guilty of treason for impersonating an enemy solider, and most likely will be executed.
Also, since cloud kill is a poision, wouldnt it be biological warfare, not chemical?

 

[silentspace]

I never said the rogue was a paladin. I compared the exalted character (in this case a rogue) to a regular paladin.

Alignment and conduct issues are notoriously tricky issues. However, the BoED goes to much greater length than the other books in defining these issues. There are lots of references to behavior in the book. Specifically, the section on 'The Straight and Narrow' starting on page 9 seems to be applicable. Within that, 'Ends and Means', 'Violence', and 'Being Ahead of Your Time' seem relevant.

I don't think the examples of enemy soldiers in uniform peeking out of foxholes are too valid. A better example might be what US and international troops are experiencing in Iraq, where the identity of the enemy is not clear. Look at the rules of engagement in 'Blackhawk Down', and the difficulty those rules placed on the soldiers. And yet, by sticking to those rules, the soldiers are even more heroic, even more exalted.

Of course, everyone's free to define evil, neutral, good, and exalted good behavior as they see fit. I'll stand by my reading and interpretation though.

If exalted characters are just like everyone else, then everyone should get access to all that crunchy goodness!