D&D 5E Candlekeep Mysteries: Mazfroth’s Mighty Digressions ethics issues

[Oofta]

It's a crime, but a less serious crime than if someone dies, and carries a lesser penalty.

In this case though, it's more akin to selling defective second hand cars. In which case if the car's breaks fail, you can argue caveat emptor applies.

The shapechanger will eventually get hungry enough to eat someone. It has to in order to survive, it's not going to starve itself to death. You're minimizing what they did significantly.

It's more like selling cars that you guarantee will eventually explode while running, likely killing everyone inside and quite possibly a few bystanders. As far as punishment goes, there is absolutely no reason to believe this group will stop selling these disguised books. If they are not stopped, more innocent people will die because more shapechanger books will be sold.

Proper punishment is a separate issue and is going to vary depending on how the DM runs the justice system. I have no idea where you got the text for how the judiciary works, but if it's not a 5E source it's no longer canon. That, and of course people are going to run it with different assumptions. But crime and punishment in a D&D campaign world is a whole other topic.

 

[Oofta]

This is wrong.

Note, a Gingawazim does have to eat. Sure. So does everything else. But, there's no particular reason that it's eating people. It doesn't feed off fear or something like that. It just needs to eat something that's living. I imagine that in a normal (wealthy) household - one that is large enough to have a library with rare books in it - a gingawazim could live there for a considerable time simply feeding off rats and other vermin. It's not mindless, although it's not a lot smarter than an animal, it is pretty smart. There's no reason that a this thing could live in a household for years and no one would be the wiser. Just a lack of vermin around. Heck it can shapechange into a tiny beast - say a bat or something like that - fly off to hunt, come back before anyone knows. The only reason the one that attacks the party didn't do this is because it's been stuck in Candlekeep for a week and it was told to remain in book form. Heck if they sold the fake books but instructed the Gingawazim to only feed secretly, they wouldn't have gotten caught at all.

They aren't guilty so much as not terribly bright.

Saying that in theory it could eat Fido instead of an innocent child doesn't matter. It has no frame of reference, no reason to kill animals instead of people. It's like releasing a tiger into the middle of a city and hoping it never preys on people; why wouldn't it? It's already been proven once that this type of creature is more than willing to eat people, it was just sheer luck that the people it tried to eat could defend themselves. The vast majority of people won't be able to defend themselves.

Stupidity in the act of being an accomplice to murder is no excuse.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The shapechanger will eventually get hungry enough to eat someone.

As pointed out, it doesn't have to eat someone. It's not evil, and it's smart animal level intelligence. The only reason it attacks the PCs is Candlekeep is free of rats.

If I sell a car with defective breaks, eventually they are going to fail and kill someone - possibly several people.

As far as punishment goes, there is absolutely no reason to believe this group will stop selling these disguised books.

You haven't read the text. Given proper guidance there is every chance this group will stop selling the books, and are potential PC allies.

If they are not stopped, more innocent people will die because more shapechanger books will be sold.

So far no innocent people have died.

Proper punishment is a separate issue and is going to vary depending on how the DM runs the justice system. I have no idea where you got the text for how the judiciary works, but if it's not a 5E source it's no longer canon. That, and of course people are going to run it with different assumptions. But crime and punishment in a D&D campaign world is a whole other topic.

It's pretty unlikely the Flaming Fist are going to care either way. It's entirely up to the PCs to decide what to do.

 

[Hussar]

@Oofta, it's obvious that this is a pretty touchy topic for you. It's also obvious that you haven't actually read the module and you are making decisions based on very limited information. Please, if you want to actually contribute, take the time to read the module instead of constantly having to be corrected because you haven't.

The following things are true:

1. No one has died.
2. Gingawazim are a small aberration. While it is true they could kill someone, that's true of lots of things. If I sell you a horse and that horse kills someone, am I culpable? Obviously not. So, comments about "loaded guns" and the like are not really applicable here.
3. The ONLY reason that this particular Gingawazim attacks the PC's is that it was ordered to stay in book form and was thus starving. Had it been allowed to hunt, it likely would have fed on stuff smaller than itself - ie. tiny stuff. Not many things normally try to eat stuff that's bigger than it is.
4. No laws were broken in Candlekeep save the entrance law. In fact, Candlekeep does not have any real legal system. Anyone who breaks rules is just banished from Candlekeep. Full stop. Kill someone in Candlekeep? They just push you out the door, never to return.
5. Baldur's Gate has been detailed in the Avernus adventure, which, I presume, includes Baldur's Gate's approach to legal issues. So, claims about canon not applying anymore are false.
6. AFAIK, no laws were broken in Baldur's Gate. Maybe, maybe, you might get a fraud charge to stick and that's it. If Baldur's Gate even HAS a fraud statute. No one was injured or harmed in Baldur's Gate. So, any legal issues won't be resolvable in Baldur's Gate. Nor, unless the DM grants it, does the party have any legal standing. Candlekeep simply wants the books back. Other than that, they don't really care. No one in Baldur's Gate would care, frankly, that non-citizens got fleeced at a market.

No matter what, nothing the Amberdune group have done would even remotely warrant a death sentence. In fact, if you set this in Waterdeep as @jasper did, then the party would actually be arrested and executed for killing within the walls of Waterdeep. Waterdeep doesn't have any self-defense or whatever defense. You kill someone in Waterdeep, you are going to the salt mines if they don't flat out execute you. There's no extenuating circumstances allowed at all.

 

[Oofta]

@Oofta, it's obvious that this is a pretty touchy topic for you. It's also obvious that you haven't actually read the module and you are making decisions based on very limited information. Please, if you want to actually contribute, take the time to read the module instead of constantly having to be corrected because you haven't.

The following things are true:

1. No one has died.
2. Gingawazim are a small aberration. While it is true they could kill someone, that's true of lots of things. If I sell you a horse and that horse kills someone, am I culpable? Obviously not. So, comments about "loaded guns" and the like are not really applicable here.
3. The ONLY reason that this particular Gingawazim attacks the PC's is that it was ordered to stay in book form and was thus starving. Had it been allowed to hunt, it likely would have fed on stuff smaller than itself - ie. tiny stuff. Not many things normally try to eat stuff that's bigger than it is.
4. No laws were broken in Candlekeep save the entrance law. In fact, Candlekeep does not have any real legal system. Anyone who breaks rules is just banished from Candlekeep. Full stop. Kill someone in Candlekeep? They just push you out the door, never to return.
5. Baldur's Gate has been detailed in the Avernus adventure, which, I presume, includes Baldur's Gate's approach to legal issues. So, claims about canon not applying anymore are false.
6. AFAIK, no laws were broken in Baldur's Gate. Maybe, maybe, you might get a fraud charge to stick and that's it. If Baldur's Gate even HAS a fraud statute. No one was injured or harmed in Baldur's Gate. So, any legal issues won't be resolvable in Baldur's Gate. Nor, unless the DM grants it, does the party have any legal standing. Candlekeep simply wants the books back. Other than that, they don't really care. No one in Baldur's Gate would care, frankly, that non-citizens got fleeced at a market.

No matter what, nothing the Amberdune group have done would even remotely warrant a death sentence. In fact, if you set this in Waterdeep as @jasper did, then the party would actually be arrested and executed for killing within the walls of Waterdeep. Waterdeep doesn't have any self-defense or whatever defense. You kill someone in Waterdeep, you are going to the salt mines if they don't flat out execute you. There's no extenuating circumstances allowed at all.

I did go back and read the module. It's not a touchy subject, I just disagree. They fraudulently sold a ticking time bomb, they committed a crime.

The creature in question does an average of 16 points of damage with a single hit. It will kill any commoner it feeds on. The group plans on making and selling many more of these things. It's CR puts it as more dangerous than a grizzly bear. People are going to put it on a shelf in their homes.

The fact that the first instance didn't kill anyone even though it attempted to do so was simple luck. It would have killed 99% of the people that it attacked. Maybe you think it's okay to fraudulently sell ticking time bombs with the full knowledge that barring highly unusual circumstances it will kill people. I'm not.

I'm done with the discussion though, the laws and how crime is dealt with is a whole separate topic.

 

[Mort]

@Oofta, it's obvious that this is a pretty touchy topic for you. It's also obvious that you haven't actually read the module and you are making decisions based on very limited information. Please, if you want to actually contribute, take the time to read the module instead of constantly having to be corrected because you haven't.

The following things are true:

1. No one has died.

Not for lack of trying.

2. Gingawazim are a small aberration. While it is true they could kill someone, that's true of lots of things. If I sell you a horse and that horse kills someone, am I culpable? Obviously not. So, comments about "loaded guns" and the like are not really applicable here.

This is flat wrong. If I sell a horse that I KNOW will kick without provocation and it does so - I'm likely liable.

But this is more akin to selling a dog as one that's harmless and friendly to everyone when, in fact, the dog is known to bite lethally at any moment. This creatures attack will down/kill any "normal" NPC in one attack - it's a lethal weapon. Yes, the seller would be liable if he sold it without disclosing that it's lethal.

3. The ONLY reason that this particular Gingawazim attacks the PC's is that it was ordered to stay in book form and was thus starving. Had it been allowed to hunt, it likely would have fed on stuff smaller than itself - ie. tiny stuff. Not many things normally try to eat stuff that's bigger than it is.

So the seller screwed up and left a live grenade for a random person -and you're argument is "meh, they didn't REALLY do anything wrong!"

4. No laws were broken in Candlekeep save the entrance law. In fact, Candlekeep does not have any real legal system. Anyone who breaks rules is just banished from Candlekeep. Full stop. Kill someone in Candlekeep? They just push you out the door, never to return.

The creature attempted to murder someone, you're reaction is "meh, it didn't succeed." Really, The Avowed of Candlekeep are concerned enough to offer a decent magic item to the group if they can track down the sellers - so obviously they are very interested in this issue.

5. Baldur's Gate has been detailed in the Avernus adventure, which, I presume, includes Baldur's Gate's approach to legal issues. So, claims about canon not applying anymore are false.
6. AFAIK, no laws were broken in Baldur's Gate. Maybe, maybe, you might get a fraud charge to stick and that's it. If Baldur's Gate even HAS a fraud statute. No one was injured or harmed in Baldur's Gate. So, any legal issues won't be resolvable in Baldur's Gate. Nor, unless the DM grants it, does the party have any legal standing. Candlekeep simply wants the books back. Other than that, they don't really care. No one in Baldur's Gate would care, frankly, that non-citizens got fleeced at a market.

The Balder's Gate watch isn't said to care for the villains (one way or the other - the villains are not that connected). If legitimate authority from Candlekeep wants them (and frankly the Watch is likely to accept the PCs as legitimate with even moderate persuasion - considering the circumstances)? They'll certainly be fine with that as long as no Balder's Gate laws are broken.

No matter what, nothing the Amberdune group have done would even remotely warrant a death sentence. In fact, if you set this in Waterdeep as @jasper did, then the party would actually be arrested and executed for killing within the walls of Waterdeep. Waterdeep doesn't have any self-defense or whatever defense. You kill someone in Waterdeep, you are going to the salt mines if they don't flat out execute you. There's no extenuating circumstances allowed at all.

Death sentence, no, but that doesn't mean the Villains didn't do anything wrong!

Frankly there actually is a REALLY easy solution here. Since no one has died and the PCs are ok with the no harm no foul route (they may not be), they can show the villains that these creatures would make amazing guard animals for the wealthy. Seriously, an animal that can look like any small object the noble wants AND will (with proper care) protect their property? They'll pay thousands, not hundreds per creature!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's CR puts it as more dangerous than a grizzly bear.

An automobile is more deadly than a grizzly bear. How dangerous something is has more to do with how likely to attack you. The Gingwazim is smart enough to know attacking humans is a bad idea unless it has no choice.

they committed a crime

Whether or not a crime has been committed depends on the code of laws being followed.

Their actions are clearly morally wrong (not the same as criminal at all), but are they wrong enough that they deserve to die, with no opportunity for repentance or restitution?

 

[Mort]

An automobile is more deadly than a grizzly bear. How dangerous something is has more to do with how likely to attack you. The Gingwazim is smart enough to know attacking humans is a bad idea unless it has no choice.

And yet it attacks the PCs, yes, because it's hungry (And is rather disturbing about it!). There is NO QUESTION that the villains have put the Gingwazim in a situation where it will attack someone. The fact that, so far, no one died is pure luck.

Whether or not a crime has been committed depends on the code of laws being followed.

Their actions are clearly morally wrong (not the same as criminal at all), but are they wrong enough that they deserve to die, with no opportunity for repentance or restitution?

Depends on the law in place, here - death is likely not on the table - but restitution, absolutely.

 

[Oofta]

An automobile is more deadly than a grizzly bear. How dangerous something is has more to do with how likely to attack you. The Gingwazim is smart enough to know attacking humans is a bad idea unless it has no choice.

Whether or not a crime has been committed depends on the code of laws being followed.

Their actions are clearly morally wrong (not the same as criminal at all), but are they wrong enough that they deserve to die, with no opportunity for repentance or restitution?

I never said they all deserve to die, that's not my call. To say that they won't or shouldn't be punished because of sheer coincidence that no one died is what I disagree with.

Being liable for reckless endangerment is hardly a new concept. Heck, in the bible's old testament there's a section that talks about if you have an ox that you know is dangerous and you don't take proper precautions to ensure it doesn't escape you are personally liable for the damage it causes up to and including death. Right in the chapter where it calls for an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life.

As a DM you can decide what the judicial system should be. Maybe they could be turned over to the people that run Candlekeep. But to say they did nothing wrong, I think, is blatantly false.

 

[Hussar]

No one is saying they did nothing wrong.

What's being asked here is WHAT LAWS DID THEY BREAK?

Those are two very, very different issues.

Candlekeep authorities only want the originals of their books, that's why they offer a minor magic item. They could care less about the fraud. They simply don't care, AND, no laws of Candlekeep have been broken by the Amberdune Pack.

At worst, you could probably make a fraud charge stick, since, well, they did fraudulently sell copies. But, again, notions of reckless endangerment and whatnot don't really apply in Baldur's Gate since no one in Baldur's Gate was threatened. This notion that the PC's are well within their rights to kill the Amberdune Group, which is what some people were pointing to, is a lot more fuzzy.

And, @Oofta, I suggest you go back and reread the module. This isn't the first attempt. This is the third book they sold because this is the third one that showed up in Candlekeep. The first two were easily dealt with and the folks who brought the books into Candlekeep had to work off their debt for breaking the entrance fee rules. I mean, by the way people are talking here, why aren't the the ones that brought a dangerous weapon and sold it to Candlekeep at all culpable?

If I buy a loaded gun and then sell that loaded gun to someone else, I'm culpable as well, no? After all, I didn't bother checking that it was real before I sold it. Yet, there is no sense whatsoever that those that brought the books into Candlekeep are being held to any sort of responsiblity other than the fact that the book they used to gain entrance isn't there anymore.