Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HeavenShallBurn" data-source="post: 4028972" data-attributes="member: 39593">Fair Warning these are statements of a Lawful Evil individualHaving gone back over the OP and considered this the actions of the party were not unethical.  Harsh yes, but not unethical.  As the OP stated this is a time of war and the party are engaged in offensive operations inside enemy territory.  Under these circumstances it's taking prisoners at all that is exceptional most special forces units will not not prisoners in such circumstances unless that is the purpose of the mission.  When they took the prisoner the deal was essentially that in return for betraying his own unit they would not kill him (or torture him for the info as they presumably would have had he resisted).  Not very bright, prisoners like torture are generally not trustworthy sources.  Attempting to run them into an ambush is exactly the sort of thing you expect a prisoner to do they're the enemy after all.  But when he tried alerting his comrades with the screaming he was an active threat and once more a valid target.  No different than firing on an artillery spotter who may not be an appreciable threat himself, it's what they can call in that matters.  Having been in close contact with the party simply knocking him out and leaving him isn't sufficient.  If found he's too great an intelligence threat due to what he might reveal about the party to his chain of command.  Toting him along unconscious is just not practicable and produces a greater threat in itself.  About the only thing that can be done is kill him, to let him live is to endanger the party.  In fact they should crush the skull and jaw to prevent use of speak with dead by enemy clerics.</blockquote>

Verification