Player Dilemma

[reveal]

The ranger's Favoured Enemy ability doesn't have anything to do with having a maniacal desire to slay creatures of that type... does it?

It doesn't, but most people play Favored Enemy as a kind of creature that typically have such a hatred for they usually kill them on sight. Foe Hunter, from it's description, doesn't sound like that.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I think these kinds of questions have to be considered in the game by the DM before they set this kind of situation up.

I agree. I made sure I was crystal clear on my DM's views of paladins, paladin authority, the morality of killing goblins, orcs, etc., and various other things before our first session.

I think that using standard D&D and its preposterously simplistic good/evil dynamic this was an evil act no matter what the circumstances.

Actually, I believe that using the not-so-preposterously simplistic good/evil dynamic, this could very well have been a perfectly Good act. Destroying Evil is a Good act, and in many D&D campaigns, goblins are evil, irredeemably evil, even. Under such circumstances eliminating future goblin raiders is to be praised. It's the same as smashing demon larvae, or destroying a giant ant nest that will inevitably swarm a nearby town in the near future.

However in some settings, like Dark Sun, Conan, etc. there are different sensibilities and different assumptions. In a given setting, the killing of the goblin children may have well been the only option wandering adventurers could tale because in grittier settings these is no such thing as goblin orphanages and humans would rather kill the critters than take them into their home.

This is much closer to the standard. Unless your campaign is set up with modern sensibilities, where young goblins/orcs/kobolds are fostered with human families and raised to be good, killing goblin children is no evil. It's a necessity.

In most fantasy settings such as FR or Krynn I have never seen any resources for the systematic rehabilitation of humanoid children. In fact, when the human and elven armies strike back against orc and goblin hordes they defacto leave thousands of humanoid orphans who will die of exposure, disease, starvation, or predators or in other manners far worse than a quick sword thrust.

Exactly. Killing the goblin children may be the most merciful thing an adventuring party can do, having killed the adults. Otherwise you're just leaving them defenseless to wait for the next wandering troll/dragon/ankheg/umber hulk/owlbear/etc. to eat them alive.

I would say that this needs to be adjudicated based on the grittiness of the setting. If its a core campaign where D&D assumptions are assumed regularly fine the dwarf is a murderer but if the setting is more complex than that then he may have committed an act of mercy or at least did nothing worse than is always done to such creatures once their parents have been dispatched.

I think that the standard setting is far closer to the "complex setting" you describe. It's the "murderer" scenario that requires House Rules and a modern outlook on morality.

 

[Sundragon2012]

I think that the standard setting is far closer to the "complex setting" you describe. It's the "murderer" scenario that requires House Rules and a modern outlook on morality.

I really never considered that the simplistic standard view of good and evil does make the dwarf, not only merciful, but the righteous slayer of creatures born and bred to darkness who will certainly rise to kill and maim the innocent.

One of the main problems with D&D and its view of good and evil, its thoroughly modern world sensitivities and the expectations placed on characters saddled with a good alignment is that they seem to be asked to participate in the most bloodthirsty acts of violence for the sake of some gold (If the critter detects as evil) but cannot deal with the consequences of said violence in a manner consistant with mindset of those capable of such consistant violence.

Very good points.

Chris

 

[Ellie_the_Elf]

*sighs* Believe me I *want* to kick him out. But the rest of the traitorous bunch threw a fit about it last time I tried to discuss it with them. Either they opposed it, or they sat on the fence, and refused to get involved or offer an opinion (our resident dwarf was not present for these discussions, I hasten to add). Then they complain about him again, I suggest kicking him out again, and once more they're up in arms about it and insist he should be given a chance. I will never understand men!!

Ellie.

 

[Rackhir]

Why is it always assumed that Child = Helpless and innocent? Human children are perfectly capable of being quite monsterous to each other as is. Perhaps orc and goblin babies are nasty little killing machines that delight in torturing anything smaller and weaker than they are and would attempt to swarm you the moment you turned your back on them. Perhaps it's only the larger size and viciousness of the adults that keeps the children from attacking them and the parents have to sleep in shifts to make sure that the ankle-biters don't kill them in an unguarded moment. Maybe the children have to be separated to keep the older ones from killing the younger ones.

 

[Sundragon2012]

Please can i have some advice.

Happy to give it....read my profoundly wise posts.

I recommend you rename the thread something like "Good Dwarf slaughters goblin children. What should I do?"

You will get plenty of notice this way. People love debating this stuff.


Chris

 

[reveal]

Happy to give it....read my profoundly wise posts.

I recommend you rename the thread something like "Good Dwarf slaughters goblin children. What should I do?"

You will get plenty of notice this way. People love debating this stuff.


Chris

Don't forget to add "Party Paladin disagrees with Good Dwarf's motives." They will flock here en masse.

 

[Crothian]

*sighs* Believe me I *want* to kick him out. But the rest of the traitorous bunch threw a fit about it last time I tried to discuss it with them. Either they opposed it, or they sat on the fence, and refused to get involved or offer an opinion (our resident dwarf was not present for these discussions, I hasten to add). Then they complain about him again, I suggest kicking him out again, and once more they're up in arms about it and insist he should be given a chance. I will never understand men!!

Ellie.

Don't ask them to kick him out, kick him out yourself.

 

[reveal]

*sighs* Believe me I *want* to kick him out. But the rest of the traitorous bunch threw a fit about it last time I tried to discuss it with them. Either they opposed it, or they sat on the fence, and refused to get involved or offer an opinion (our resident dwarf was not present for these discussions, I hasten to add). Then they complain about him again, I suggest kicking him out again, and once more they're up in arms about it and insist he should be given a chance. I will never understand men!!

Ellie.

It has nothing to do with "understanding men." It has to do with you as a DM having as much fun as everyone else. Put your foot down. Tell them you won't DM if he keeps playing. Tell them if they're to chicken to kick him out, you'll do it yourself. They sound like spoiled kids who like to gossip behind peoples back but never say anything to their face. Tell them to act like adults.

Oh, and when you kick him out and you tell him why, let me give you my impression of his first words.

"But I was only playing my character!"

 

[reveal]

Don't ask them to kick him out, kick him out yourself.

That was much more concise than my response.