Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice

[Storyteller01]

In the real world, it depends.

In the campaign, wouldn't touch the subject with a ten foot pole. Too many 'creepy' factors to make it worth the effort...

Scary thought: MGP actually published rules for self mutilation and cannibalism for Psionic Warriors. Some things just shouldn't be approached for the sake of a good time...

FFG had a blurb for lizard Men. If they ate a portion of a recently dead being during a ritual, said being could not be raised as undead. Just a feat, but ....creepy.

 

[frankthedm]

I tend to see the gallows as the Sacrificial alter to Justice/ retribution gods like 3.E's Cuthbert.

The magority of 'live' sacrifices to good gods get are of evil creatures too dangerous to be allowed to live.

Canabilism?
Killed a creature of sentience for food? evil

Killed a creture for some other reason, and not letting carcass go to waste [rather it goes to your waist] neutral for the act of eating, plus whatever normally fitting for ther act of killing. & Chaotic Unheatlhy if your body is not used to such fare.

When it's a matter of "do we jump this stranger who happens to be travelling nearby or do we let our children die?" things get a little complex.

Not really, still evil since they are killing sentients to benefit themselves {which their children are extensions of].

 

[Ace]

SNIP

However, eating the dead is non a good idea for practical reasons. After all, they might have died from something that can kill you too. For example, there was a tribe of people somewhere in southeast asia who used to eat the brains of their dead ancestors. This eventually led to the development of a disease--unique to the region--that resembled mad cow disease. Their brains housed prions similar to those that cause mad cow, and by eating the brains of the dead (who usually died from this disease), they passed it on. Some anthropologists noticed and told them that it would be a good idea to stop eating the dead, but it took a hell of a lot of convincing to get them to break with tradition.

Yep. That disease is called Kuru or Laughing Sickness -- very nasty

For my game I consider human sacrifice to be Evil except under extrordinary circumstances. To avoid autoevil the sacrifice must be Willing and used to save lives

Canibalism-- is a pretty universal taboo except among the "mandatory fantasy tribes of headhunters (or Skin Hunters in this case) TM" . Its generally considered Evil by everyone. Canibalism is risky though -- Ghoulism is a magic prion based disease spread by eating human flesh -

Survival Canibalism happens from time to time and is regarded about the same way it is in our world -- with horror but not as "utterly irredemably evil" Most folks who have had to do it usually want an Atonement spell or a Purification ritual afterwords

Also I don't really have a Heaven/Hell Cosmology so stuff like Eat member of the other party who died not by your hand and go straight to the abyss to roast and be devoured forever doesn't happen--

 

[Krieg]

Canabilism?
Killed a creature of sentience for food? evil.

See A. Regina v. Dudley and Stephens - 1884.

Canibalism-- is a pretty universal taboo except among the "mandatory fantasy tribes of headhunters (or Skin Hunters in this case) TM" . Its generally considered Evil by everyone.

I would hardly call the Fore of Papau New Guinea a "fantasy tribe" (or headhunters for that matter).


Like it or not cannibalism as a universal taboo is a relatively recent development.
The reality is that we are all very likely descended from cannibals. If that were not the case we wouldn't all be carrying around genes who's sole purpose is to provide immunity to diseases that can only be transmitted via the ingestion of human brains.

Oops...dinner's ready, gotta go.

 

[John Morrow]

Reading through some of these "Is This Evil?" threads -- most recently about slavery -- has made me wonder how far EnWorlders are willing to push moral relativism. For example, is there anyone here who would be willing to argue that cannibalism and human sacrifice are not evil?

FYI, my arguement that slavery may be Neutral as well as Evil are based on the moral elements of particular forms of slavery and the D&D alignment system as an absolute moral system, not moral relativism. Moral relativism tries to change the definition of Good and Evil to fit the culture and I'm not trying to do that. What I'm doing is looking at the moral elements of various practices in the context of the D&D alignment system.

That said, I'd argue that cannibalism (of an already dead sentient) for practical purposes (e.g., survival) could also be Neutral in D&D terms. See the movie Alive for an illustration, though "yi zi er shi" probably pushed the concept of survival cannibalism well into Evil and something like Soylent Green certainly crosses the line, too. I think the dividing line is whether the source of meat is already dead and whether survival is at stake. Again, I'm not arguing that it is Good, simply that it may be Not Evil.

Off hand, I'd say that in D&D human sacrifice is generally Evil and would most likely be requested by an evil deity in D&D. There are, however, some contexts where I could imagine it being Netural, though probably never Good in a D&D alignment sense. The key differentiation there would be whether the sacrifice was simply an innocent victim or somehow did something to warrant their fate. The Neutral alignment description talks about having compunctions about killing the innocent and does not totally prohibit homicide.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Not really, still evil since they are killing sentients to benefit themselves {which their children are extensions of].

I wouldn't go throwing the evil stick at that too hastily. In survival situations people are often forced to do things that they wouldn't normally do, and to which we would consider extending leniency. Now I know that if I had to choose between the death by starvation of not just my own children, but also everyone I know, or the killing of some poor stranger who just happened to be coming past, I would have to choose the latter. I wouldn't like it, and I'd feel badly about it, but I would also feel like my hand is forced. I can no more will that my family die in order to protect a stranger than I can magically create food out of nothing.

Now, the act in question is not good, but it's not evil either, since there's no element of choice in the matter. If they had another option, sending someone over to the next tribe to humiliatingly beg for some meat, and chose to kill and eat someone in order to avoid the loss of face, then it would be evil. No one ought to be held accountable for choosing life over death. When the choice is between death and something else, there's really no choice being offered.

 

[Sejs]

Cannibalism - no. Eatting something (or in this case, someone) isn't evil. 'Course killing 'em may be, but that all boils down to the hows and whys of their death.

Human Sacrifice - willing on the part of the sacrifice? Not evil. Unwilling sacrifice? Evil.

 

[Mark Plemmons]

Cannibalism: Cannibalism was usually not practiced by hunting other humans for meat. The tribes that lent their name to the practice ate the warriors of enemy tribes after the fight. Actually, this was considered an honour. The strength of the enemy was supposed to pass over to into the eater (a concept very similar to the holy communion nowadays). A cowardly enemy was not considered worth to be eaten.

Yeah, we've got a human jungle tribe (available for PC characters) that's in the upcoming Svimhozia region supplement. Very similar.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Interesting.

In my campaign setting, the Chalakos Nomads eat the hearts of their enemies. I had considered this an evil practice of a neutral society, but I am swayed. In the D&D alignment system, cannibalism is a neutral act unless the subject is alive.

As far as human sacrifice goes, though, I am not at all convinced. Yes, volunteering to be the sacrifice may be a good act, but performing the sacrifice is not. I would say that this is an evil act, though it has been frequently used in neutral societies in the past, and could conceivably be a part of a good society, or a good religion.


RC

 

[fusangite]

Human Sacrifice - willing on the part of the sacrifice? Not evil. Unwilling sacrifice? Evil.

But what if the characters are objectively residing in the Mexica universe where if the sacrifice does not take place, the world will be devoured by the Earth Monster and wholly destroyed? Is this not a mitigating factor? (I acknowledge the Mexica example is not ideal because they may not have had to resort to wholly unwilling victims.)