Is a coup de grace an evil act?

[Plane Sailing]

Anybody else here play OD&D? The major party modus operandi at low level was

1) sleep the orcs
2) slit their throats and take their goods!

This was the LG parties too

 

[Ranger REG]

Here's the situation:
My party (all good-aligned) sees a wounded traveler on the roadside. He tells us that he was beset by bandits. A short time later, we encounter the same said bandits. The bandits get the drop on us and basically tell us to "stand and deliver" i.e. surrender and give up your gold. My neutral good level 1 wizard starts to cast a spell and gets a crossbow bolt in the side for his troubles from the spokeman/leader of the bandits. So I get tagged with the first blood.

Next round, combat begins in earnest. I get off a sleep spell which KO's one bad guys who has wounded one of my comrades.

Next round (still in the middle of combat) I go up to the sleeping bad guy and I declare a coup de grace. The DM as well as half of the players at the party say that this is an evil act: killing a defenseless opponent instead of taking him prisoner. Am I missing something?
The guy's buddy just shot me in the lungs and the guy himself just tagged my companion in the head with an axe and now I have to take him prisoner just because I managed to put him to sleep?

So what's your thought? Is a coup de grace an evil act? Sometimes? Never? All the time? Lemme know.

It depends on your motive for committing coup de grace, despite what your companions may think. If you did it as self-defense, then so be it. You simply eliminated the threat on you and your injured comrade.

If you went against any code of conduct you live by, as with most knights and paladins and those who live in a more civilized society rather than a barbaric one, then you may have overdone it since the foe have already been incapacitated and is no longer a threat.

In any case, it would be interesting if you and your companions roleplayed a discussion or dialogue on what you just did. It would further flesh your character's persona, making him more than just a set of stats on paper.

 

[DonTadow]

This example seems to be a clear reason why following the alligment rules to the T can counteractive good role playing.

Characters are way more complex than, he comited an evil act kill him.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The DM as well as half of the players at the party say that this is an evil act: killing a defenseless opponent instead of taking him prisoner.

It makes me wonder whether the DM keeps track of which enemies are at -ve hp and bleeding to death, and thus insists that the party binds their wounds and stops them from dying from the injuries inflicted upon them.

Your player didn't intend to kill a defenceless opponent, he intended to kill an aggressive and dangerous opponent and took two rounds to do it, just like they did. He simply chose a more humane method than their attempts to disembowel living and aware targets.

 

[Coredump]

Headline: Mugger killed in Indy

At the GenCon festival of nerds, a man was attacked by a knife weilding mugger. The mugger stabbed his victim and was going in for the kill when the victim got in a lucky punch and knocked the mugger out cold.
The victim then bashed in the muggers skull with a rock. Luckily, his jury was made up of EnWorld subscribers and they said "the mugger started it.... who cares if he was helpless, kill kill kill ......"


Okay, the "there was 12 of them" *does* change things. (actually it is just like the example I gave earlier.) But otherwise lets look at the question.
Is it okay to kill a helpless person?
And we are debating this?

It is no longer 'self defense' when you are no longer defending yourself. If they are helpless, you are NOT defending yourself. (again, the outnumbered thing may change this.) But I am amazed at the number of people saying it is okay to kill a helpless person.

Are there certain situations....sure. Certain characters...maybe. But in general, I would hope we could agree that killing a helpless person is generally considered a no-no.

 

[reveal]

Headline: Mugger killed in Indy

At the GenCon festival of nerds, a man was attacked by a knife weilding mugger. The mugger stabbed his victim and was going in for the kill when the victim got in a lucky punch and knocked the mugger out cold.
The victim then bashed in the muggers skull with a rock. Luckily, his jury was made up of EnWorld subscribers and they said "the mugger started it.... who cares if he was helpless, kill kill kill ......"


Okay, the "there was 12 of them" *does* change things. (actually it is just like the example I gave earlier.) But otherwise lets look at the question.
Is it okay to kill a helpless person?
And we are debating this?

It is no longer 'self defense' when you are no longer defending yourself. If they are helpless, you are NOT defending yourself. (again, the outnumbered thing may change this.) But I am amazed at the number of people saying it is okay to kill a helpless person.

Are there certain situations....sure. Certain characters...maybe. But in general, I would hope we could agree that killing a helpless person is generally considered a no-no.

But we're not talking about real life. We're talking about a game in which it's ok to slaughter creatures right and left. IRL, it's never ok to kill anyone, unless in self-defense and even then it's a huge grey area. In a game where it's ok to kill dragons because "they have them some treasure" real-life morals usually take a back seat.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

If you were LG, I would say this would be a problem. Dishonorable and certainly frowned upon, but evil? I don't see a problem with a good person performing a coup de grace. Typically, when people talk about 'killing an unarmed and defenseless prisoner', this is in reference to a code of conduct or personal code of honor. Much like a Paladin, for example.

He wasn't a prisoner. He was a downed combatant. He's only a prisoner if he surrenders before you get the knife in him.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

It's not an evil act and it is utterly ridiculous to say that it is.
Is using phatasmal killer or a disentegrate spells that utterly destroy your foe evil? Not in most games.
How about using a vorpal weapon?
Or what about when I use fireball on a group of bad guys who happen to have some fallen allies around them who are in the negatives?
The list goes on and on.

If coup de grace a downed foe is evil I recommend your party stop using lethal spells (yep looks like you're going to be only preparing sleep now) and everyone should buy saps next session.

It is an entirely different matter of weather or not it's dishonoralbe or acceptable in society.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Not necessarily evil. Nor is killing those that ask to surrender. Even for a paladin. Of course, all this is only true if you're trying to play with a medieval-ish mindset, rather than 21st-century morality in 13th-century clothes.

What are you supposed to do with sleeping opponents? Tie them up? Quarter is a privilege, not a right. If the enemy has not proved himself worthy of that privilege, you do not have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Drowbane]

Coup d Grace evil? Alighment is always a bit sticky.

Personally, depending on what happened... and your motives... I'd rule it as Evil. However this was combat, and the bastard (or his friends) tried to rob and murder you. So whether or not it is an Evil action is very debatable. It diffinately would get you punished if you were trying to play Exalted though.

Some DMs just don't get the difference between Good and Exalted Good.