Alignment and a Prisoner...

[Rackhir]

I think this is the kind of situation that you really need to think through ahead of time as a DM. This is one of the classic "moral/alignment" dilemas and someone like a paladin really ought to know at least vaguely, what his beliefs/code of conduct would demand of him.

In many ways this is really is a cut and dried situation, Evil (noun) + helpless. It basically comes down to what the "Laws" are with regards to this sort of situation. Kill them because they are evil. Mercy because killing the helpless is never acceptible. Turn her over to the "Lawful" authority. Etc, etc...

I think iwatt put it described some of the posibilities well. It really doesn't matter what person X thinks is "Lawful" or "Good" those come in infinite varieties. You only need to decide what you wish to make them. Practically anything can be justified after all.

 

[Cerubus Dark]

The party is currently destroying the inhabitants of a temple of Kiaransalee, the drow goddess of the undead. While doing so they find a priestess of Lolth chained to a wall.

What do they do with her? What is within their alignment?

The party includes a paladin (LG of course), wizard (LN), monk (LN), rogue (CG), ranger (CN), and cleric (CG).

They are argueing that they know she is evil and if the tables were turned she would just kill one of them. The plan has been floated that they heal her up and allow her to duel for her freedom with one of the party's 'warriors'. I've not made any judgement calls on it, but I did say that if she wins she is liable to KILL whomever she is fighting. Their response is that if she loses she dies, but if she wins she has to spare whomever she is fighting (yeah, right).

Alternately they can leave her in chains.

My thought is that they should release her, not aid her in any way and turn her over to the drow master of the outpost (an Archmage with no love of priestesses). But this thought has not really occured to them.

Thoughts?

- Wraith

Sorry as the saying goes.
"Smite makes right"

If I were in the party I would leave the evil beast right where she belongs. Then on the way out of the temple think about getting her off the wall and turning her over to the archmage or using her as a target for a bow one or the other....

 

[eris404]

The party is currently destroying the inhabitants of a temple of Kiaransalee, the drow goddess of the undead. While doing so they find a priestess of Lolth chained to a wall.

What do they do with her? What is within their alignment?

The party includes a paladin (LG of course), wizard (LN), monk (LN), rogue (CG), ranger (CN), and cleric (CG).

They are argueing that they know she is evil and if the tables were turned she would just kill one of them. The plan has been floated that they heal her up and allow her to duel for her freedom with one of the party's 'warriors'. I've not made any judgement calls on it, but I did say that if she wins she is liable to KILL whomever she is fighting. Their response is that if she loses she dies, but if she wins she has to spare whomever she is fighting (yeah, right).

Alternately they can leave her in chains.

My thought is that they should release her, not aid her in any way and turn her over to the drow master of the outpost (an Archmage with no love of priestesses). But this thought has not really occured to them.

Thoughts?

- Wraith

Something the players in my group might do would be:

Cast a carefully worded Mark of Justice on her, then free her or
Polymorph her into a small animal, then free her or
Cast a carefully worded Geas/Quest on her, then free her

Knowing my friends, they'd like to use these kinds of spells, because they allowed the characters to "punish" or get rid of evil-doers without necessarily breaking the morals of the characters. Killing a helpless evil priestess outright seems evil. Turning her into a spider and letting her loose has a kind of poetic justice to it.

I personally don't think the duel is a great idea. I think it's too risky and I think sometimes that people equate the good alignment with being gullible or naive.

Let us know what they decide. This should be interesting.

 

[Nifft]

D&D world isn't modern America. Religion isn't a difference of opinion, it's allegence to the forces of Good or Evil. Unless redemption and atonement are going to play a vital role in your campaign, you shouldn't necessarily penalize the party for killing an Evil Cleric.

IMC, Evil Clerics are Evil, and the Gods empower Paladins to specifically go out and Smite Evil. Redemption and atonement are good, but so is smiting.

-- N

 

[Nifft]

Follow-up: if your party was in Hell, and they found a Demon who'd been captured and tortured by Devils, would they feel any guilt about slaying it?

-- N

 

[Elf Witch]

Whenever this kind of thing comes up the thread seems to split itself along the lines of paladins=smite or paladins=redemption. I think some of this depends on the player's concept of his paladin. If he sees himself as a destroyer of evil then it makes sense that he would not just let this evil loose on the world. In this case I think he would detect evil on her question her and if she is evil then I think he would kill her as cleanly as possiable.

If he plays the paladin as being more benlovent then I can see him healing her putting a mark of justice or geas on her and taking her and turning her over to the authorities. But not the evil archmage come on even making alliance with this evil mage is bending the rules of working with known evil.

Now I think just killing helpless prisoners without doing the above and really confirming that they are evil and have done evil and don't want to be redeemed is asking for having to attone.

As for the duel give me a break if she has to fight for her life and will die if she loses then it is unfair to tie her hands and say she has to use non lethal force. I think a duel could be a cool thing to do and something I see a paladin or cleric doing after all they should have the faith in thie diety to win over evil. Talking about wasting resources is more metagaming thinking than role playing.

 

[iwatt]

As for the duel give me a break if she has to fight for her life and will die if she loses then it is unfair to tie her hands and say she has to use non lethal force. I think a duel could be a cool thing to do and something I see a paladin or cleric doing after all they should have the faith in thie diety to win over evil. Talking about wasting resources is more metagaming thinking than role playing.

I agree, the duel will work only if both combatants go for the same rules.

BEGIN RANT: And I find that players have become obsessive about the time and resources at their dispossal. It's not like the DM's got a Clock ticking away, counting down (I hope ). It's medieval (or renaissance) times for most races in DnD. You shouldn't expect lightning reaction times, or cordianted informations from the bad guys all the time. There is something called the FOG OF WAR, and it works for both sides. END RANT

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Duels=dumb
Trial=silly (since she's probably chained up for resisting the new order of Kirianselie or something else that the PCs shouldn't consider a crime--she's probably done plenty of things they would consider capital crimes but odds are that those didn't get her chained to a wall in the dungeons of the drow).

As far as I'm concerned, the paladins in the party would have four workable options:

1. Kill her. Drow priests of Lolth are the common enemies of all good people and anyone who comes across one ought to mete out summary execution if they can manage the killing the drow priestess bit. (This takes the ancient concept of an outlaw and applies it to the drow or applies the historical laws governing pirates and bandits to drow).

2. Offer her the chance to repent and send her off polymorphed and/or with a Quest and/or a Mark of Justice. A quest to find some kind of mystical celestial chapel where the positive energies would either purify or kill her would be perfect.

3. Offer her a deal and cut her lose. She may not be a good person and she's likely to do bad things in the future but she's also an enemy of the drow the PCs are fighting and could potentially be a helpful ally if they keep an eye (and maybe a mark of justice) on her. If she dies in the battles, they don't lose anything. If she survives and the PCs win, they may be able to extract (magically enforced) concessions (like never attack the surface) from her and leave her in a position of power. Evil people can do good things if properly motivated (for a literary example, see the ending of CS Lewis's _The Horse and His Boy_ on why Rabadash the Ridiculous became Rabadash the Peacemaker).

4. Let her go with no strings attached. Given that she's a drow and vengeful by nature, she'll probably eventually attack the PCs' enemies and either kill them or be killed so it's not likely to result in any net harm. Of course, if she gets the idea that sacrificing a paladin is just what she needs to let Lolth's spells pierce the barrier of her prison and come to her, the PCs could be in for some bad times.

My preference for the smart paladin is probably number three. As long as the group can keep her from betraying them, no harm is likely to come from it and they might be able to turn her to good. (Especially since her desire for power (guessing about typical drow priestess motivation here) can't be fulfilled by Lolth and only the good PCs offer any hope of her attaining power in the immediate future.)

 

[Norfleet]

Hmm. I'd say that, given my views of how Paladins work, this is a pretty clearcut case of an Evil Person, rather than simply an ordinary evil person. The paladin should offer a quick prayer for the soul of the soon to be deceased, then administer CDG. After all, when a Paladin encounters a heretic, the instructions are often along the lines of "Kill them all, and God will recognize his own."

 

[Clueless]

My Planescape group has run into this *repeatedly*... for alignment issues, here's the members of the group:

TN bladesinger indep, TN archmage, TN fallen celestial cipher (used to be NG), CG tiefling rogue, CG half celestial brute, and NG cleric...
We have rescued the following prisoners:

fire genasii who screwed us all over in the plot
in exchange for the loot he was paid in order to screw us
2 different insane people - left them in the Gatehouse for healing
a githyanki, a githzeri, a illithid all from ancient times (illithid in order to kill him)
a doppleganger
a deep spawn
a gereleth - in exchange for information
a faerie dragon - adopted and took him home with us to our inn
an entire bevy of Athar, no protest from the cleric of the party either on this one
and the list continues...

As you can see we have a *wide* range here. So far we have yet to leave *anyone* behind. It's not really what you would expect out of a majority N group is it? Especially considering that the N's are more the leaders of the party than the G's.

Why do we not leave people? Even evil people? Because *none* of us are into torture - which is what leaving a guy chained to a wall in the middle of a dungeon really is. I mean who's gonna come by and rescue them? You might as well kill them faster than slower at that point. So the view the party has settled on by now is a very simple one, you wither kill them, or you let them go - none of this leaving them behind. Not only does it mean they'll be pissed at you if they *do* get free, but it leaves them to a slow painful death of thirst or starvation.

So, given that: Evil people have friends too - and a sense of self preservation. Given that situation, if I were in it, evil I may be - stupid I am not. I wouldn't be anything but grateful to the people who freed me. Especially if I couldn't *take* them down in a fight. (But then why would I need to be rescued?) Given some good RP the party stands to gain material wealth from the rescued guy, an ally, or even convert them to the side of good (or at least nuetral). The evil guy may have the chance to play them as well - convert, or even just make "friends".