Ethics of Killing POWs

[roguerouge]

Sounds like you need to have a mature conversation with the other players and the GM about how the campaign is progressing and the direction you all intend to take. And frankly, your character's actions don't sound too LG either - more LN.

Uh... why not LG?

 

[roguerouge]

When he became your POW, this was an assumed risk. That's why I was trained to keep them well behind the lines of combat and to separate the officers from the enlisted.

Ideally, yes, I agree with you. But we were WAY behind enemy lines at the time as strike force to free prisoners. We were trying to use him to finish our mission, then we would have let him go, albeit unconscious and to be found by his people.

 

[roguerouge]

Personally I would have never argued with any POW. You just don't argue with POWs, they can either be a source of information and intelligence, good or bad depending on what you think their reliability to be, and how motivated. But you just have to realistically expect disinformation, misinformation, and craftiness out of any POW and so degree of cooperation is always circumstance-dependent. I would have instead employed a simple head nod or shake (or some other very basic means of communication) to verify anything I wanted to know and addressed all information in the form of simplistic, "yes or no" questions.

Agreed. Pretty much everyone realized that the PC scout had a brain fart when he did that. Oh well, mid-level PCs make mistakes too....

 

[roguerouge]

He's Lawful and Good -- concealing acts of overt evil or transgressions against the law would not befit either of those alignments. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

He's been a cop by training and prior job experience, albeit an adventurer by vocation right now. Pretty much his stance has been that he's not your judge. Whatever his personal feelings towards you, the consequences of your actions are for the legitimate authorities to decide.

 

[jdrakeh]

He's been a cop by training and prior job experience, albeit an adventurer by vocation right now. Pretty much his stance has been that he's not your judge. Whatever his personal feelings towards you, the consequences of your actions are for the legitimate authorities to decide.

What I meant was that, choosing to ignore acts of evil or crimes perpetrated by his party members would be niether lawful or good. In essence, doing nothing (i.e., not reporting said crimes) would seem to be straying pretty far from both alignments.

 

[Tiberius]

Killing a POW, in a modern sense, is wrong in every example. In my military training, killing someone who has been captured was never an option(then again, I wasn't trained as an officer.) You've healed the guy, accepted his surrender, and in doing so made him your responsibility. He was resisting you, but not with his own body, he was trying to get his buddies to free him. When he became your POW, this was an assumed risk. That's why I was trained to keep them well behind the lines of combat and to separate the officers from the enlisted. So I'd say that it would be against the conscience of any LG character to kill a POW.

When it comes to real-world people, I'd agree with you. Killing a POW is bad ju-ju (save when they've committed a capital crime and have been fairly judged, etc.). However, remember that a) this is a band of adventurers, not military personnel and b) we're talking about lizardmen here. They're inhuman monsters. They're likely not afforded protections by treaty or law by the nation of the OP. As such, it wouldn't be unlawful to dispose of the prisoner. Morally speaking, I stand by my assertion that his proving himself to be a threat he brought it on himself.

 

[roguerouge]

What I meant was that, choosing to ignore acts of evil or crimes perpetrated by his party members would be niether lawful or good. In essence, doing nothing (i.e., not reporting said crimes) would seem to be straying pretty far from both alignments.

Yeah. I'm with you that something has to be done. I'm just really not sure what to do.

 

[Innocent Bystander]

Wait until your mission is complete, then deal with the character, whether that means just confronting them yourself or turning them in or whatever. When you're behind enemy lines, you stick together even if you don't agree with what someone has done.

 

[darthkilmor]

As such, it wouldn't be unlawful to dispose of the prisoner. Morally speaking, I stand by my assertion that his proving himself to be a threat he brought it on himself.

So, its ok to murder a helpless prisoner because his skin is green and scaly, and you don't want to haul him around? That falls right on Neutral Evil, imho.

How would you feel if the DM had a bunch of good npc's do that to your character?
<after a brief struggle, party is surrounded and outnumbered>
"We didn't kill the prince, to prove it, We surrender!"
<weapons taken, knocked out>
<coup de gras all party members>

 

[Tiberius]

So, its ok to murder a helpless prisoner because his skin is green and scaly, and you don't want to haul him around? That falls right on Neutral Evil, imho.

How would you feel if the DM had a bunch of good npc's do that to your character?
<after a brief struggle, party is surrounded and outnumbered>
"We didn't kill the prince, to prove it, We surrender!"
<weapons taken, knocked out>
<coup de gras all party members>

Just fine. My PC's a lich. I'd just pay those NPCs a visit in 1d10 days.

But, more to the point, your scenario does not conform to my claims. I would expect that the NPCs would take issue with their prisoners causing them trouble to the extent that I wouldn't do it unless I was sure of success.