Age old question: Handling of prisoners

[Greenfield]

A group of predominantly Goof PCs just captured a couple of enemy soldiers.

The soldiers are Human, and aren't evil, but represent a country more or less at war with the Empire the PC's nominally represent. (One PC has a bronze armband proclaiming him to be in the service of the Imperial Governor.)

The PCs could haul the prisoners along while they complete their mission, but won't want to.

The PCs could kill the prisoners, but then there's that whole Good alignment thing.

The PCs could let them go with a promise to behave. Yeah, like that's going to happen <snort-giggle>

That's the specific case in my game, but variations on this theme have come up more than a few times, I'm sure.

How does your groups handle this sort of thing?

 

[airwalkrr]

PCs in my current campaign tend to let them go, and they are all neutral (no good and no evil alignments). Of course, usually I use the hook that the "bad guys" offer information in exchange for their lives. This is a trade off that my players are usually willing to accept.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

The PCs could let them go with a promise to behave. Yeah, like that's going to happen <snort-giggle>

Why not? The giving of parole is a pretty old tradition, and it was held to up until fairly recently, as well.

Disarm them, leave them with their daggers, enough food and water to make it to "X", and turn them loose. If you must, restrain them in such a way that it would take them a while to get loose to give you a head start, or require the prisoners give oath to the same. Arcane mark them for good measure.

Generally, my groups try to avoid getting into situations where taking prisoners is an option (e.g., if you're fighting the scouting elements of an army while trying to sneak around it, you've already messed up).

The whole taking prisoners thing, IME, tends to almost always serve as a way for DMs to mess over their players, rather than a real roleplaying option / experience.

 

[Greenfield]

We've done that. In this case the prisoners really don't have much in terms of information. Encountering them was more of a side issue in the story line, and they really aren't involved in the big picture.

The read I get from my players is that they have a blind spot of sorts. They won't see that the NPC "bad guys" who escaped the battle will try to rescue their companions, even though it's exactly what the players themselves would do.

Of course, that only works if the players keep the prisoners around. I doubt that they'll execute them, but you never know.

 

[airwalkrr]

Well even if the NPCs generally have no good information, they might still have something to offer. In a recent encounter with sahuagin, the final surviving sahuagin offered to tell the PCs how to find his hidden treasure if they allowed him and his young to flee. The PCs accepted this proposal and made the sahuagin promise not to attack the city again, with the vow that if they encountered the sahuagin again they wouldn't receive mercy.

I don't punish my players for such actions usually. I generally consider killing prisoners an evil act with very few exceptions so I don't want to encourage the PCs to be evil by punishing them with vengeful villains every time they let a prisoner go. Every once in a while a villain will plead for his life and vow to exact revenge upon the PCs if they let him go because they foiled his nefarious plan. But this is the exception, and not the rule.

 

[Pergentile]

Flesh to Stone, when you get where you're going, Stone to Flesh.
Flesh to Ice, Ice to Flesh.
Hibernate.
If they are Lawful, killing a few to save many would be fine IMO.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

What I do with prisoners as a player generally depends on what kind of class that I'm playing.

Paladins, Clerics, and Wizards tend to execute prisoners.
Sorcerer, Bards, and Monks tend to release prisoners.
Druids and Barbarians tend to eat the prisoners.
Rangers, Fighters, and Rogues tend to go along with whatever the rest of the party wants to do with them.

As a DM, I generally try to accommodate whatever plan the players have for their prisoners. If they want to drag them along, I make it so that they can do that. If they want to let them go, I make it so that they can do that. Generally, I make their treatment of prisoners be beneficial to them (a freed prisoner that they encounter later helps them out in some way) about two to three times as often as it comes back to bite them in the butt (a prisoner that they've brought along with them finds a way to alert its compatriots to the players' disposition).

 

[shadyizok]

I'dd say it depends on circumstances.

If the PC's are in friendly country then they find a town with guards/a prison and dump em.
If the PC's are in enemy country then finding a prison won't work so they have to either let em loose or take em with. Which brings us to the question why are the PC''s there?
If they are just goofing off, take em with you to friendly country and dump em.
If they are on an important mission it would probably fail to take em a long. So the only option is releasing or executing.
How does te general public view the army of this country? Are they asses? Leave em in the hands of villagers.
Can the mission make it if the captives talk? No? Execution or bound and gagged are the only option. (they could send a message to the enemy army''s local commanding officer where the captives are. Should only take a few days. They could well survive.

For an example that a friend of mine once did in a similar situation:
my friend was playing a knight (lawfull neutral) and he gave the prisoners a choice: quick execution or a chance for freedom. If one of them could defeat him in single combat they were free to go. The prisoners would be provided with their own weapon and armour and then be swiftly dispatched by the knight.

 

[Greenfield]

In the specific game, they're several days from the nearest friendly town, and headed away, probably for at least another day, and perhaps for as much as a few weeks.

The landscape here is blasted wasteland, hard packed alkali desert turning to sand, and getting more hostile the closer they get to the volcano.

Their specific goal is to load up several wagons with dirt. Seriously, just dirt. A particular type of dirt, mind you, but dirt.

If they choose to divert to the volcano things will get a lot more interesting.

In the general case, I see this conflict most of the time when out and away from civilized lands.

"Prisoners", in this case, doesn't necessarily mean that the enemy surrendered, or the PCs subdued them. In the specific game the party knocked the enemy spell caster down to exactly zero hit points. One of the Warriors managed to stabilize before he died. Three others didn't.

They could have left them there to live or die on their own, but like I said, the party is predominantly Good. I don't think we have a Lawful in the bunch though.

 

[rgard]

One way ticket to Gitmo.