Ethics of Killing POWs

[Pelwrath]

What to do and what was done

Okay, as to the slaying of an incapactited being. What is the warlocks aligment? That should be the first concern, then yours, LG, why would you be with such a group if they act like that. No problem with you turning them in. No rumor mongering or false acusations, so you played your alignment.
Now, as to what is expected of you by local npcs. I've never held that adventureres are quasi-police/militia because they aren't, they are mercenaries pure and simple, at best bounty hunters. They acept a monetary award/reward to go kill things. From a RPG perspective, I'd consider making a new PC or as was mentioned talk to the DM about what is going on and what he, if anything, plans to do. Talking to the other players should aslo be done, perhaps before talking to the DM>

 

[Fenes]

I think a lot of the board discussions these days are bored discussions, because there's not much new coming out for 3.5, and 4.0 discussions are kinda played (at least for me) until we see what 4.0 actually is.

I view us like bored taxi drivers standing next to a taxi queue with insufficient customers, chatting and arguing about nothing in particular while we're wait. Boredom seems to led people to be cantankerous, just to have something to talk about.

Kinda like what they say about academia: "Academic politics are so vicious, because the stakes are so small."

I did not mean on ENWorld, I meant in the actual game.

 

[mmadsen]

Right or wrong, these guys did take a prisoner. At that point, those LG characters had a moral obligation to the welfare of the prisoner.

The prisoner also has an obligation to his captors. That's the only reason he's allowed to live. Once he breaks his word...

 

[Rykion]

huh? That statement applies to humans as well. Unlike goblinoids, lizardmen are not inherently evil per the RAW.

Humans as a whole are not known to kill and eat intelligent humanoids. The number of cannibalistic human societies is very small, and they tend to be shunned by everyone else. The Lizardfolk listing in the MM mentions that they are known to eat intelligent humanoids, although it is not as common as believed. The OP did mention they later did find out that these lizardfolk were torturing and eating their prisoners.

I would consider the entire episode to be a generally non-good act. From the irresponsible actions that set it up (ungagging the prisoner - what exactly did folks expect him to do) to the actions the warlock chose to take which resulted in the death of a prisoner. IMO when good characters assume the responsibility for the welfare of a prisoner by making them a prisoner, they have an obligation to do what they can to ensure the welfare of the prisoner. Again, that's what makes good guys the good guys.

The prisoner gave up his status as a POW and became an enemy combatant when he alerted the guards. By the RAW, a Lawful Good character can be the type that will not let the guilty go unpunished.

 

[prospero63]

The prisoner also has an obligation to his captors. That's the only reason he's allowed to live. Once he breaks his word...

No, he didn't. He's not bound to a LG alignment. I think that is another of the major points that's being overlooked. When a non-LG creature does non-LG things, that doesn't allow the LG characters to decide to follow suit.

 

[prospero63]

Humans as a whole are not known to kill and eat intelligent humanoids. The number of cannibalistic human societies is very small, and they tend to be shunned by everyone else. The Lizardfolk listing in the MM mentions that they are known to eat intelligent humanoids, although it is not as common as believed. The OP did mention they later did find out that these lizardfolk were torturing and eating their prisoners.

Future knowledge has no relevance on previous events.

The prisoner gave up his status as a POW and became an enemy combatant when he alerted the guards. By the RAW, a Lawful Good character can be the type that will not let the guilty go unpunished.

And he was incapacitated. By the OP description, there was absolutely no just cause in killing him. Someone referenced to BoED. I think that really sums up, nicely, the LG perspective.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Someone referenced to BoED. I think that really sums up, nicely, the LG perspective.

More like the Lawful Deranged position. They made a mistake taking a prisoner, but it was made. The party tried to deal reasonably, instead the prisoner attempted to run them into an ambush and get them killed. At that point he stopped being a prisoner and started being an active threat again. Killing him was not an Evil act at all. It could be argued as either Neutral or Good depending on how you define things. He's the enemy and he's become an active threat who if retaken by the enemy is capable of giving away the party. Their duty to their own prisoners by definition is more pressing their duty to an enemy. Killing the enemy who hindered their ability to discharge their duty to prisoners who will be tortured and eaten if not rescued promptly is Good. Furthermore killing the oathbreaker who turned stag on them after getting their word is also Good.

 

[Rykion]

Future knowledge has no relevance on previous events.

However, the MM points out that Lizardfolk are known for eating intelligent humanoids. That is likely to be the belief of the majority of the people in the adventuring party at the start of the adventure. It didn't take future knowledge.

And he was incapacitated. By the OP description, there was absolutely no just cause in killing him. Someone referenced to BoED. I think that really sums up, nicely, the LG perspective.

The Lizardman being incapcaitated is metagame knowledge. There is no way for the characters to know for sure if he is unconscious, dead, or faking it without taking a good deal of time to check. Time they woud be better served preparing for the coming attack. The CN warlock decided to kill the lizardman. We really don't know the warlock's motivation. He could just be mad and taking it out on the lizardman. He could fear that the lizardman is going to wake up and join in the fight making it a threat. He might have decided that the lizardman would just betray them again.

A LG paladin could easily have said "die treacherous cur," chopped off its head, and not broke his alignment by the PHB.

 

[roguerouge]

However, the MM points out that Lizardfolk are known for eating intelligent humanoids. That is likely to be the belief of the majority of the people in the adventuring party at the start of the adventure. It didn't take future knowledge.

Just to be clear, my character wouldn't know that, as he lacks most knowledge skills, and I as a player didn't know that. It came as quite a shock, actually.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

No, he didn't. He's not bound to a LG alignment. I think that is another of the major points that's being overlooked. When a non-LG creature does non-LG things, that doesn't allow the LG characters to decide to follow suit.

It's also not a done deal that full cooperation is a moral obligation of captives. If the situation was turned around and a PC was the captive, I really doubt anyone would be suggesting that continuing to work against their captures' goals was a non good action.

In Lawful terms, if a combatant makes a specific deal to surrender, that can be considered their obligation, but the idea that every captive is obligated to active cooperation in information and stealth? I'm not getting where this comes from.