Is cannibalism (or rather, eating the flesh of sentient beings) inherently evil?

[coyote6]

You may have a good idea with Commune, but Speak with Dead wouldn't work. That spell uses the knowledge the body had when it was still alive. You aren't actually talking to the dead spirit.

Is there any reason to believe that the person's opinion about being eaten after his death would change after he actually died? In other words, how likely would the spirit be to give a different answer after death than he would before death?

That seems unlikely; I imagine most people would likely keep the same opinion, barring some divine revelation in the afterlife (e.g., the solar says, "By the way, Jack, cannibalism is good for you!"). So speak with dead ought to give a fairly reliable answer.

As for the larger question, it really does depend on how the GM rules; "evil" is a definable, palpable thing in D&D. If the GM says cannibalism is evil, it's evil. If he says it isn't, it isn't.

Me, I'd probably say it tends towards evil for the D&D campaigns I run (which are set in Greyhawk); I think that would fit the general milieu best. Exceptions for symbolic cannibalism, of course, and possibly minor ritual cannibalism.

 

[Mallus]

One of my favorite characters...

...was a bit of a cannibal; Rakim the portly 2nd Ed. mongrelman fighter/mage. He was a very good cook and wore a wok as helmet [which I believe is faithful to origin of the wok; dual-use cookpot/protective headgear].

He often promised to honor his fallen comrades by making a fabulous feast for/out of them. And he often played Good Cop/Hungry Cop during interogations.

He was good-aligned, university educated and fancied himself a gentleman. He would never kill a sentient being for the express purpose of eating them, but once their souls were in the hands of their respective Gods, well, waste not, want not.

Its amazing how much of the Monster Manual tastes like chicken...

 

[randcortin]

They understand that not everyone believes the way they do, but they think it is out of simple ignorance of what the dead really want. They believe that when you die, you gain the knowledge of Kord and how it applies to death, and then you want to have your body used for a good purpose, and seeing that most bodies are wasted is a thing of great sadness for the dead. The Tribe seeks to right this wrong wherever possible, eating the bodies of the dead, and pleasing the people in the afterlife.

So to them, asking the corpse what the soul wants is pointless, because they would say that the soul's spiritual eyes have been opened, but the corpse doesn't know that.

 

[coyote6]

They understand that not everyone believes the way they do, but they think it is out of simple ignorance of what the dead really want.

Ah, gotcha. Well, commune and get The Definitive Answer, one way or the other.

Do all Kord's followers believe that? If not, why not? One set of worshippers is in for a bit of a shock...

 

[DMScott]

You may have a good idea with Commune, but Speak with Dead wouldn't work. That spell uses the knowledge the body had when it was still alive. You aren't actually talking to the dead spirit.

Then why are you asking the Paladin about it before she dies? She can only answer with the knowledge she has while still alive. If you know better and are doing the right thing, steal the body and chow down.

You seem to be assuming a religious ambiguity that simply doesn't exist in a relatively average D&D campaign. There isn't any "they believe" for a culture that has any number of 9th level clerics, so you don't have to guess at what your god wants or figure out how to please him/her/it. They'll tell you what's OK and what's not. If we were talking about some obscure little deity that only your tribe worships, I could see being coy about the beliefs (i.e. if your tribe isn't big enough to have any 9th clerics in its history), but this is Kord we're talking about - a well established and popular religion, and not a particularly mysterious god. If Kord wants you to eat people, he won't be shy about proclaiming that to the world.

 

[Particle_Man]

However, they have no problems eating those slain by non-tribal party members, as long as they do not do so with the intent of feeding the cannibal.

And there goes my second possible loophole -- the cohort from outside the tribe that "provides food" for you.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

It really depends on the sentient dead person who is being eaten.

I would assume that by default the more cultured humanoid would want to be buried and mourned like their ancestors before them.

Eating those that think the above would be a desecration and generally be an evil act.

Humanoids without such culture may not care what happens to them when they die and "cannibalism" would not really be an issue.

The actual reason for the cannibalism would also play a role. If it was to cause distress to the spirit or family then yes that would be evil. Then again if it was an accepted form of immortalizing someone held in high regard, that could be a good act. If it was done due to player silliness then that would surely give them the runs for a week.

 

[Umbran]

In the D&D game, I'd think it'd mostly depend on the cosmology of the world in question, and the deities in that world.

Do the gods say it's evil? Then it is. Does being cannibalized have untoward effects on the soul of the departed? Then it is evil.

Real-world cannibalism taboos have a couple of sources -

1) Cannibalism tends to promote murder, which isn't exactly healthy for social structure. You want something keeping folks tilling the fields instead of hopping over the hill to munch on their neighbor Fred when they get hungry.

2) Cannibalism isn't particularly healthy. There are a couple of odd and unpleasant medical conditions one can pick up from the practice. Also, in general it isn't terribly bright to eat the meat of an animal that is subject to many of the same diseases as you are. Remember that those viruses and bacteria don't magically vanish when the guy dies.

I mean, let's say you just offed a pretty skanky looking pirate. You'd certainly not want to have French-kissed him, 'cause you don't know where he's been, and what he's been doing with whom, right? So why on Earth would you want to eat him? Yuck!

 

[Pants]

I mean, let's say you just offed a pretty skanky looking pirate.

Mmmmm... skanky pirate... *drool*

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

It's one of those things that really depends on intent. After a Goblin raid, my CG character cut up the Worgs for food-- and checked our food supplies before disposing of the Goblin dead, because he anticipated a siege. He figured that tasty, tasty Goblin flesh was a better alternative than slow starvation. Once he saw that we had enough food to live for a few weeks, he settled for posting the goblins' heads on pikes-- which the town's Paladin promptly removed, leading to an argument over what constituted moral and/or necessary behavior. (In-character.)

Another of my characters, a Neutral Lizardfolk (Ranger/Rogue type stealth killer) performs the Zithsala ritual on any competent foe he slays-- it prevents the creature from becoming undead, and honors their spirit. He does not consume sentient flesh for any other reason-- and has a stated preference for beef and mice-- but has no real aversion to cannibalism in a starvation scenario. It's a part of his calculating approach to morality and survival.

Eating sentient dead is usually considered more of a barbaric trait than an evil one-- it's something uncivilized people do. While orcs and some tribes of barbarians may do it, you'd never imagine the Drow would, unless for ritual purposes. It's even fairly easy to imagine a tribe of more or less Good barbarians who eat their dead-- and their dead enemies. Killing someone just to eat them, however, is pretty easy to define as evil-- it's akin to killing them to steal their gold to buy food with.