D&D 5E Is he evil?

[Krachek]

Was this an evil act? Certainly if we consider evil/good to have abolute defintion above law, tradition, culture.
Is he evil. We dont know yet. It takes more than one evil act to make you an evil character.
Was this a reprehensible act? Maybe, because now it depends on law, culture, tradition and society.

 

[Imaculata]

A question then, do you find police executions of unarmed non combatants to be justified? Did they have it coming to them anyway?

Lets not make this political.

I'm surprised as well that many people defend this action. But I make no assumptions regarding the real life morals of those that do. We are talking about a fictional action in a game here. We're not discussing something that actually happened. And how people rule an in-game action could easily be different from how they would judge a similar real life event.

 

[Ahrimon]

To me a bouncer pulling a short sword is not a bouncer doing their job. They just transitioned from bouncer to attempted murderer. A short sword is not a weapon of subdual. If he pulled out a club or baton sure, but not a short sword. That's the modern equivalent of a bouncer pulling out a 9mm pistol and shooting at the PCs. Only instead of being outmatched he runs out of bullets and then surrenders.

Now the campaign comes into play. Is this an old west style where if someone tries to kill you it's ok to kill them? Is the law of the land such that trying to kill someone is punishible by death? Are the PCs allowed to meet out justice? Depending on personal, religious, and social laws a paladin or cleric of a god of justice may be well within their rights and religious tenants or oaths of justice to execute the person. What happens when next time the bouncer pulls his sword in a brawl but doesn't face a highly skilled opponent and kills a couple of people? Do the PCs rest easy knowing that they took the moral high ground even though little Timmy doesn't have a dad anymore and his family is going to be out on the streets where they'll starve and die because they can't farm the land? Is one of the PCs a noble and required to uphold the social order by executing someone who dared raise a weapon against nobility?

There are so many pieces of information that we don't have that can easily make this not "cold blooded murder" that so many are jumping to.

NPC: "You slaughtered everyone in the wordworkers guild!"
PC: "Yeah, but they were all bad."
NPC: "Oh, that's ok then. Here is your reward."

vs

NPC: "You killed the bouncer at the tavern!"
PC: He drew his sword and tried to kill me."
NPC: "We don't care! It's cold blooded murder!!11one Sick the entire world on him!!"

edit:
I had to add this (warning, language)
http://terminallance.com/2011/08/12/terminal-lance-140-escalation-of-force/

 

[Umbran]

To me a bouncer pulling a short sword is not a bouncer doing their job.

I would amend that to, "A bouncer being the *first* to draw steel is not doing their job." If the fight already includes assault with deadly weapons, then the gloves are off - the bouncer shouldn't be expected to bring fists to a swordfight.

 

[Ahrimon]

I would amend that to, "A bouncer being the *first* to draw steel is not doing their job." If the fight already includes assault with deadly weapons, then the gloves are off - the bouncer shouldn't be expected to bring fists to a swordfight.

For the most part I can agree with that but I think it comes back to the campaign itself. Medieval/wild west/loose justice then the bouncer would be well within their rights and could even be expected to draw steel. More modern sensibilities maybe not so much. But I think that borders too close to politics so I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole.

 

[Greg Benage]

To me a bouncer pulling a short sword is not a bouncer doing their job. They just transitioned from bouncer to attempted murderer. A short sword is not a weapon of subdual. If he pulled out a club or baton sure, but not a short sword. That's the modern equivalent of a bouncer pulling out a 9mm pistol and shooting at the PCs. Only instead of being outmatched he runs out of bullets and then surrenders.

That's all fine. At the point he lays down his weapon, surrenders, and is no longer a threat, his execution by a civilian in a bar is murder. In every moral philosophy and ethical system of which I'm aware -- and to the point, certainly in D&D -- murder is an evil act. Moral dilemmas and "gray areas" in the game can be fun and engaging. But this isn't one. It really isn't any more complicated than that.

 

[jasper]

hmmm...That's the modern equivalent of a bouncer pulling out a 9mm pistol and shooting .. the PCs... IN THE LEG. Since 5E allows take backs of damage to subdual on the final blow. Evil yes the act was. Instant alignment change no.

 

[Ahrimon]

That's all fine. At the point he lays down his weapon, surrenders, and is no longer a threat, his execution by a civilian in a bar is murder. In every moral philosophy and ethical system of which I'm aware -- and to the point, certainly in D&D -- murder is an evil act. Moral dilemmas and "gray areas" in the game can be fun and engaging. But this isn't one. It really isn't any more complicated than that.

Once he surrenders he may be considered a captive attempted murderer. He could even still be considered a threat. Depending on the law of the land, the PCs may be completely justified and social charged with executing him. They may not be committing murder but instead upholding law, order, and/or peace in the land. A great deal depends on the campaign in this situation.

 

[Greg Benage]

Once he surrenders he may be considered a captive attempted murderer. He could even still be considered a threat. Depending on the law of the land, the PCs may be completely justified and social charged with executing him. They may not be committing murder but instead upholding law, order, and/or peace in the land. A great deal depends on the campaign in this situation.

Really? Have you ever played in or even heard of a setting where an adventuring fighter is "completely justified and socially charged" with executing a defenseless bouncer, who just surrendered, in a bar, after a bar fight? The Hollywood mythos of the "wild west" is often invoked, but even in that kind of setting this would be murder (or a "wrongful killing," if you prefer). Even if the killer were not an adventuring fighter but a lawman or political/religious authority of some kind, there would still be a formal process for any rightful execution of the man, and cutting his throat where he kneels on the tavern floor is not such a process.

And notwithstanding all that, we're getting into questions of what is lawful in a particular society rather than what constitutes an evil act. Cutting a defenseless person's throat after he's surrendered to you and is no longer a threat is an evil act. This is not a morally ambiguous case. Even in a society where, by virtue of the circumstances and/or the caste of the people involved, such a killing would be lawful, or unlawful but only mildly punished (e.g. weregild), it's still an evil act.

 

[Umbran]

Depending on the law of the land, the PCs may be completely justified and social charged with executing him. They may not be committing murder but instead upholding law, order, and/or peace in the land.

Since Law is on the *other axis*, whether they are upholding the law is literally orthogonal to the question of whether it was evil.

I mean, you can have Lawful Evil, right? So, the law of the land is not really part of the question, as that law may be morally bankrupt. Characters cannot say, "It was legal," to justify whether something was not evil, as "by the law" is not a measure of goodness.