Prisoners

[JohnSnow]

Personally, I tend to run my games mindful of this piece of advice I read in the WEG d6 "Star Wars: The Roleplaying Game" (not sure it's a direct quote, 'cuz the book's in storage)...

"Villains do bad things, yes. But it's not necessary to be graphic. Star Wars shows the Empire blowing up planets, but it doesn't show Auschwitz."

YMMV.

 

[pemerton]

So what’s the Baron doing with the Torog cultist?

I don't know. It's never come up. But from the actual play report that I linked to:

Derrik (and Derrik's player, at least somewhat) was upset that a prisoner had been spared whom he thought ought to be tried and justly punished - because the interrogators had been careless in making promises that they shouldn't have. The drow was upset that Derrik had instructed him to lead an interrogation, and then come in and mucked it up before it had reached its conclusion (which I think the drow envisaged being a swift execution so that Derrik need never know of the duplicitous means used to extract the information). The paladin was upset that someone who deserved death, and who had brough death to so many undeserving, was being spared. I'm not sure what the wizard thinks of the situation.

As GM, I felt obliged to compound the situation by reminding the players that Torog is also the god of jailers, and hence that the prisoner was likely to have a reasonably good time in prison, or even a good prospect of getting herself out of prison. This just made everyone even more upset!

 

[Jd Smith1]

Personally, I tend to run my games mindful of this piece of advice I read in the WEG d6 "Star Wars: The Roleplaying Game" (not sure it's a direct quote, 'cuz the book's in storage)...

"Villains do bad things, yes. But it's not necessary to be graphic. Star Wars shows the Empire blowing up planets, but it doesn't show Auschwitz."

YMMV.

Depends on your table. My guys are less inclined to accept a simple label as to the motivations of a group, race, or faction. They're going to need details.

I'm glad you used Star Wars, because upon seeing the first movie when it came out, I came away unconvinced that the Empire was bad.

 

[Eric V]

Depends on your table. My guys are less inclined to accept a simple label as to the motivations of a group, race, or faction. They're going to need details.

I'm glad you used Star Wars, because upon seeing the first movie when it came out, I came away unconvinced that the Empire was bad.

...after the aforementioned Alderaan scene?

Yeesh.

 

[Lanefan]

My lot will often keep one foe out of a bunch alive for questioning; and if said foe a) is halfway co-operative and b) doesn't ring too many bells on the Evil-detection front they'll frequently end up taking it into the party as a rescuee or even quasi-hench. It's not hard to convince some poor schlub that it's liable to stand a much better chance of survival if it stays with the party and doesn't do anything stupid as opposed to going it alone.

But over the years I've also seen parties kill prisoners (be it accidentally or on purpose), sell them into slavery (yes, not kidding!), let them go, and a bunch of other outcomes. Most of it depends on a) the makeup of that particular party and b) how many prisoners they've taken, as one prisoner is far easier to deal with than 25.

 

[Jd Smith1]

...after the aforementioned Alderaan scene?

Yeesh.

Just more efficient than the strategic bombing campaigns the USA has used in three wars and one intervention, which overall killed several million non-combatants, often for little return.

Collateral damage, in other words. I've seen it in person, and so have my players.

 

[Khelon Testudo]

Just more efficient than the strategic bombing campaigns the USA has used in three wars and one intervention, which overall killed several million non-combatants, often for little return.

Collateral damage, in other words. I've seen it in person, and so have my players.

Which does not address whether or not it's evil. But that is politics, which is verboten.

 

[Eric V]

Just more efficient than the strategic bombing campaigns the USA has used in three wars and one intervention, which overall killed several million non-combatants, often for little return.

Collateral damage, in other words. I've seen it in person, and so have my players.

Alderaan was full of non-combatants!

Just because you and your players have seen it in person, doesn't mean it wasn't evil.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Alderaan was full of non-combatants!

Just because you and your players have seen it in person, doesn't mean it wasn't evil.

In WW2 the Allies incinerated entire cities full of non-combatants, and it is still considered a 'good war'. Collateral damage is no more evil than car accidents.

But to the point, Lucas didn't exactly make a case for Alderaan; for all a viewer knows it could have been rife with degenerate cultures who routinely victimized the innocent when not working at biowar production facilities. Let's be frank, Leia got over the sight of her homeworld being blasted extremely fast; not a tear shed, and little or no reflection on it. That would support the theory that the locals were not great people. Or it could mean that Leia was a heartless monster out to bring war and ruin to an entire galaxy for no good reason, while her brother listened to voices in his head while he murdered hundreds of thousands of people...

Watched with an unbiased viewpoint, the movies do not deliver concrete evidence of either side holding a moral high ground. The Rebels do not seem to hold a broad base of popular support, and the Empire doesn't do anything particularly radical, particularly for a nation on a galactic scale. There isn't even any commentary on why the Rebels are in fact rebelling.

The closest thing to a moral guide in the movies is the background music. Take that away, and you have criminals and terrorists fighting a First World power with loose RoE.

 

[Khelon Testudo]

Whether or not the Rebels were good does nothing to detract from the fact that mass murder is Evil, even if it is in a good cause.