Is a coup de grace an evil act?

[DonTadow]

Depends on by whose standards. I play a very loose alignment system where players have allignment but they are murky at best. i have a couple of players whom enjoy severing the heads of their difficult opponents or keeping abone or tooth as a trophy. I wouldn't say they are evil in the least bit, but their beliefs define their actions.

 

[reveal]

Taking this outside the scope of your group, since I agree wholeheartedly with Crothian, a coup de grace is not evil. If I'm being attacked by multiple bad guys who want only to kill me and one of them falls on the ground asleep, why is it evil to kill him? Why is killing in D&D considered "good" but killing a helpless person "evil?" That doesn't make sense to me. It is dishonorable? Yes. Does that make it evil? No.

It's same with poisons. Is using poison an evil act? Some say yes; some say no. Some say it depends on how they use it. I think using poison is not an inherently evil act. Use it to kill children, then it becomes evil. Use it to bring down the BBEG, not evil.

Which brings me back around to my original point. Why is using it on children but not on BBEG's evil? Because the BBEG is an enemy and you're trying to stop him from... See what I'm getting at?

 

[Kirin'Tor]

First of all, *any* DM who won't allow a player to follow through on an intended act that is not in violation of published/house rules is to be avoided like the plague. Especially if it's for something like alignment- a horrible concept anyway that I generally ignore.
...
Why did you Coup De Grace him? To punish him for his crimes? To make sure that he didn't seek revenge on you? Because it's easier than killing him while he's awake? To watch the pretty blood spray? To save him the ignoble fate of capture?...

I'm with Belbaird 100% here...it isn't the act that's evil, it's the intent that _can_ be. Would a paladin have done in, no...I'd say no matter the justification it was taking the law into your own hands, which is about half the definition of Chaos, so it was a chaotic act.

Now, as to evil, that's really, in part, up to your character. If it was for the pretty blood spatter, or pruely vengance, or love of killing, then it was evil (CE, to be exact).

If it was to prevent him from awaking during battle and killing you/your allies, because you felt he was a criminal and you went vigalante on him, or prevent later vengance, then it was probably neutral (CN - at a strech even CG if he was a horrible criminal and you were purely motivated by vigilante justice.)

 

[Klaus]

By the RAW, it's not evil. If it were, it'd be named Coup De Grace [Evil].

The evil is not in how you kill, but in who you kill. Coup de Grace on a vampire? Not Evil! Coup de Grace on a newborn faerie? Evil!

For those of you asking why he was coup de gracing, the op mentioned that he affected one bandit with a sleep spell, and the battle was still raging on. So, to avoid a stray kick rousing up a new combatant, he was going to coup de grace him. For a Paladin that's a no-no ("must behave honorably" and all that). But for anyone else, even a non-Paladin LG person, it's entirely acceptable.

That being said, if it's Evil in your group, then it's evil.

 

[Bastoche]

I think I have a perfect counter argument for anyone who doesn't want to nuance their "It's absolutely evil" opinions:

Do you let the trolls live? The only way to disable them is by (not technically as per RAW, but a similar act) slaying them while they're down. And is it still dishonorable?

If the action is to be judge relative to on whom it is performed, than the acting itself is not inherently evil. And since the action itself is not inherently evil, it is subjective. If it's subjective for the players, it may only be even more subjective for their characters. Where the line are drawn is only up to the character in the end.

 

[DonTadow]

By the RAW, it's not evil. If it were, it'd be named Coup De Grace [Evil].

The evil is not in how you kill, but in who you kill. Coup de Grace on a vampire? Not Evil! Coup de Grace on a newborn faerie? Evil!

For those of you asking why he was coup de gracing, the op mentioned that he affected one bandit with a sleep spell, and the battle was still raging on. So, to avoid a stray kick rousing up a new combatant, he was going to coup de grace him. For a Paladin that's a no-no ("must behave honorably" and all that). But for anyone else, even a non-Paladin LG person, it's entirely acceptable.

That being said, if it's Evil in your group, then it's evil.

My question is does it matter if they think what you did is evil or not. I think it adds an extra layer to a campaign when players do things other players don't agree with (so long as everyone knows its in game.). It's pretty fake for a party to agree on methods all the time. I like the layero f realism that COULD have happened in your game. You kill some one coup de grace and everyone looks at you with disdain ...heck if iwas dm'n and i noticed the players comments I'd even have the bandits take notice of you. perhaps to show how horrible the act is to them I'd give negative mods to the bandits to display the fear they now have.

 

[danzig138]

I'm with Crothian. It seems like it's evil in your group and you might just have to live with that. Being Good is sometimes just hard to do. IMC, I would say it's evil, but I tend to view things in degrees. In this case, it's not a hugely evil thing and it would take many such occurrence to sway your alignment.

Yep. I have a graph with a bunch of little squares I use to track people's alignments. This incident would shift the character one square, but that's about it. It would take numerous instances to actually cause an alignment change.

 

[Jacen]

If there is a possibility that spell expires before fight is over I think that it is stupid not to CDG enemies if you can't do nothing else. good != stupid and getting killed because of not CDG is stupid.

I think it depends on the flavor of D&D you play. Typically, killing an evil dude/monster/whatever is a good act in a D&D context.

It depends more on DM. That is the reason why I would usually like to know what DM considers to be evil or good. It is just annoying to play lawfull or neutral good and after couple of gaming sessions you are told that your character is now chaotic neutral or even evil. How in the hell my character managed to live more or less 20 years being lawfull good and then in one day changes to chaotic evil. And if have changed to evil there are no way you are going to get good again. Lost for ever. How in the h*** there even are good people then? everyone stumbles sometimes...

Alignments just sucks most of time and even more if you don't know how they work in a campaign you are playing.

Besides how there can be evil enemy within some good curch or something and still he gets spells, just happened to change evil god, but if you stumble they are lost for meny sessions. And you are the one paladins keeps cheking for evil but not members of their own order.

 

[interwyrm]

I think I have a perfect counter argument for anyone who doesn't want to nuance their "It's absolutely evil" opinions:

Do you let the trolls live? The only way to disable them is by (not technically as per RAW, but a similar act) slaying them while they're down. And is it still dishonorable?

If the action is to be judge relative to on whom it is performed, than the acting itself is not inherently evil. And since the action itself is not inherently evil, it is subjective. If it's subjective for the players, it may only be even more subjective for their characters. Where the line are drawn is only up to the character in the end.

It's only evil if you kill members of your own race... Human Power!

 

[darthkilmor]

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

Would your group have even had this conversation if it was goblins that immediately attacked you? Trolls? Hags? Nightmares? Treants? Bullettes? I'd guess your groups hangup is that the bandit is human. Which shouldnt really matter, if he's robbing your party that should be enough qualifier to be evil. Even if he isnt , tough luck.

edit: yeah what interwyrm said!