Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Viktyr Gehrig" data-source="post: 5526789" data-attributes="member: 9249">At that point, showing the villain mercy is neither "noble" nor "practical", it's downright irresponsible. You're not weighing a human life against a 0th level spell, you're weighing her life against the possibility that something like this-- the scores of innocent lives-- could happen again. I accept that my moral perspective doesn't line up with yours, but I simply cannot wrap my head around the idea that a Good person, no matter how saintly, could accept taking that kind of risk with that many innocent lives.Combine that with the kind of "justice" the "good" people of the town would have given her, and the decision your "Chaotic Evil" PC made-- regardless of his motivation-- wasn't just the most practical course of action, it was the only moral option available.If there'd been some means of permanently stripping her of her magical abilities and protecting her from the townsfolk, then I could see leaving her alive to try to redeem her; I wouldn't choose to do so myself, but I can see where a Good person might, if he had that option available to him. Given the situation as it occurred in game, it would have been entirely out of the question.I have close friends I would consider to be of Good alignment, two of whom I think might qualify as Paladins. I'm capable of playing nice for their sakes, up to the point they need to protect someone else from me or I need to protect them from their own good natures. As long as they're around, they act as a moderating influence on me.Strangely, in this regard I suspect I'm less forgiving than you. A Neutral character will go out of his way to save someone's life as long as it poses little risk to him to do so. Hell, for that matter, I'd go out of my way to save someone's life-- even taking risks to do so-- just to benefit my reputation.I wouldn't say that Neutral is a matter of being sometimes Good and sometimes Evil, just like Evil isn't a matter of actively opposing Good. Neutral is a matter of putting other concerns above Good, while still avoiding Evil where possible. Evil is pursuing one's agenda, whatever it is, at the expense of Good.I could be charitably described as Neutral, mostly because falling too far into Evil would cause me to fail at most of my objectives-- especially preserving the loyalty and well-being of my Good friends.Honestly? Give them more redeemable enemies, enemies that they could reasonably save, and if they behave in the same bloodthirsty fashion have the gods intervene then. Send them up against villains who aren't complete monsters, people willing to negotiate when the tables start to turn against them. If the players are still bloodthirsty, then have a talk with them; if they show mercy, reward them.A lot of the reason that players are bloodthirsty is that they have learned, from gaming experience, that leaving enemies behind them is dangerous. Have mercy and redemption pay off a time or two and show them how their world is improved by it, and they'll usually be more inclined to consider it in the future. (Though, to be honest, some groups find that anti-climactic. Your mileage may vary.) I'd say the best games are the ones where the players are actually torn-- the ones where they're forced to wonder whether or not sparing the villains is the best course of action, and the DM keeps them guessing.</blockquote>

Verification