Player Dilemma

[genshou]

A large part of the argument here stems from the question of whether or not the now-slain goblin children were irredeemably evil and whatnot. On the human scale of childhood development, how old were the goblin children in question?

 

[silentspace]

Let's see...
Step 1: kill the parents
Step 2: abduct the kids
Step 3: tell the kids that their parents were the bad guys

Sounds like a good plan!

 

[DevlinStormweaver]

I see a few peolple have metioned about human children can be evil. In the same village we found a pen of human children who have been corrupted by the goblins and were evil. Now the Dwawf has not attacked these yet he knows they are evil. THis means that he attacked the goblins because of his hatred for the race not because they are evil. Should this change the Paladins view of the situation.

 

[genshou]

I see a few peolple have metioned about human children can be evil. In the same village we found a pen of human children who have been corrupted by the goblins and were evil. Now the Dwawf has not attacked these yet he knows they are evil. THis means that he attacked the goblins because of his hatred for the race not because they are evil. Should this change the Paladins view of the situation.

I keep hearing mention of "evil children." At what age do children become accountable for their actions from a moral perspective? At what age should they even have an alignment at all?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No, because humans are not irredeemably Evil. Goblins may be, depending upon your DM.

 

[genshou]

No, because humans are not irredeemably Evil. Goblins may be, depending upon your DM.

I disagree. If the human children detected as evil and so did the goblin children, but the dwarf only killed the goblins, this lends a very slim amount of credence to the dwarf's side of the argument.

 

[Corben Willemne]

I have spoken at length to the Dwarf mentioned here and his replies make a lot of sense. He has fought Goblins for most of his life, foe hunter (check), and has seen first hand the depradations of their behaviour. He hates all goblins.
However he also believes after seeing sooo many goblins that they are irredeemable, despite what and DM may rule. Therefore he would never support re-education as he staunchly believes that it is impossible and a daft idea. Also however his decision to kill the goblin children was based on the idea that we have just wiped out their clan, so do we let them live and starve? He would never bring them out where, according to his philosophy, they would grow up to kill innocents. In this way he is serving the cause of good. Having the wrong assumptions should have no impact on the good evil axis.
Hopefully that explains and reasons the Dwarf's actions in a manner even a girly Paladin can follow!
The taunting comes from the fact that he believes that the only reason that the Paladin didn't do like wise is because he hasn't the stomach for it and is therefore a big girl's blouse!

 

[Kesh]

I think this gives us two issues, though:

1) It wasn't explained to the Paladin that those were the reasons for his actions.
2) That's a built-in conflict for the entire party. Something will have to change for the game to continue without causing further tension in the players. Tension within the party can be good for story, but within the players it's a disaster.

 

[Conaill]

In this way he is serving the cause of good. Having the wrong assumptions should have no impact on the good evil axis.

Sure it does. There have been plenty of figures through history who performed truly horrific acts in name of what they considered "Good". Racial cleansing, torture of those holding heretical views, ritual sacrifice to assuage the gods, you name it...

Just because the dwarf is prejudiced against goblins and *believes* he is doing Good, doesn't mean he actually *is*.

 

[Conaill]

2) That's a built-in conflict for the entire party. Something will have to change for the game to continue without causing further tension in the players. Tension within the party can be good for story, but within the players it's a disaster.

I agree.

I'm all for a judicious use of metagaming in cases like these. Roleplaying is often compared to a collaborative form of playwriting. So why not have the playwrights get together and figure out how the characters they are writing could resolve their differences while still being true to the character?