Questionable morals - PC's killing children

[Shard O'Glase]

Killing the hobgoblns: totally depends on the campaign world, and what usually evil means, and if they still are usually evil etc. Problem is this isn't a discussion you should be ahving now, this is something that should of happened from the begining. If you have the discussion now it isn't a what should I do with the elf discussion, but a here everyone and mr elf are my ground rules, killing kids is always evil. Sorry for not telling you before, but this is how it should be played from now on.

Killing the Druid, was totally wrong from multiple standpoints. One protecting the rear, is a valid tactic especially when you are fighting something the party can handle. Two while druids are decent fighters, never expect a spellcaster to contribute directly in every fight. They have limited resources, saving those resources for a real fight is a smart thing to do. Three virtually all player killing wrecks the game, though some campaigns vary.

To the guy with the kobold example. So what. Seriously you as the DM knew the kobolds didn't know about the trap. But the players didn't. In fact the kobolds not knowing about a trap for a secret passage they did know about is somewhat counter intuitive though not impossible. Me I would assume they did know about the trap, and were trying to kill us. Now that the trap failed they are wimpering and crying, "I didn't know" Yeah right, time to die.


This happens a lot when people come here to complain about players. They give the story from their point of view as if that was the only way to see it, and then we all are supposed to agree gee your right they are terrible. This especially sucks when it comes from the DM who knows a lot of background stuff that the players don't know, and yet we get to learn so we can better decide how much player X sucks.

 

[reapersaurus]

This happens a lot when people come here to complain about players. They give the story from their point of view as if that was the only way to see it, and then we all are supposed to agree gee your right they are terrible. This especially sucks when it comes from the DM who knows a lot of background stuff that the players don't know, and yet we get to learn so we can better decide how much player X sucks.

Holy crap!
A player advocate on the boards!
Let's stone him and string him up!
I follow Rule 0 like a way of life!
The DM is always right - in fact, by definition, he can't be wrong.

Good point, Shard, and one which is seldom realized in discussions.

 

[Tiefling]

Killing the children wasn't evil, it was stupid. A bunch of hobgoblin children would fetch a good slave price, especially if they're healthy. Just sell 'em into bondage. You get money, they get spared.

Killing the druid wasn't evil, although the PC definitely needs to attend an anger-management class. I would have just told him to leave, and that the group would kill him if he came back. If he ends up killing a few monsters on his way out, that's a few less that the group has to face. It's not likely that he'll get the big treasure at the end if he's alone, anyway.

Killing the kobolds was perfectly justified. The PCs didn't know that they didn't know about the trap. It's not worth wasting a "Detect Lies" spell on them, just kill 'em and be done with it. Although personally I would have enslaved them.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

Re: Re: IMHO:

You are taking this out of context. Remember; I was asking about my campaign; in mine, there were and are whimpering, huddling, crying hobgoblin children.

Dude, you just took that out of context. First line of my post:

"Okay, this is how I handle the situation:"

I did not say: this is how you should handle the situation, or this is how all of us should deal with the situation. I said "this is how I handle" the situation. With that being said:

If you are not happy with your PCs reactions to killing off hobgoblin "children", then it's not completely the PCs fault. You stuck the PCs in an unwinnable situation and were unhappy when they didn't win. That's not generally the PCs fault, IMHO.

If taking prisoners and captives is common in their culture, then the PCs should have known this before setting out. Why? Because they just spent years growing up in a town/castle/village where captive orcs, hobgoblins, goblins and kobolds are regularly brought in as captives by other adventurers and the military.

If taking monster prisoners is not allowed in the PCs culture, then:

1) That culture is evil.
2) PCs have no place to take these "children".
3) Leaving the "children" would be evil.
4) Killing the "children" would be evil.

The above means that the PCs would turn into "monster babysitters". If that is fun for you and your group, neat. I call that an unwinnable situation.
.
.
.

The alignment of a society does not dictate the alignment of it's members even in the most restrictive of societies. ---arcady

The alignment of a society does not dictate the alignment of it's members even in the most restrictive of human societies. Since hobgoblins are a completely different species, why can the opposite not be true?

I could put forth a case of Japan being a LN society. I could just as easily find individuals within Japan who were as far from LN as one could get. I could do this even if limited to the Samurai era during it's heyday.

I could do the same with Nazi Germany as a LE example and find even in that society those who were CG. Some of them might even be individuals working within the power structure on one level or another, I would not have to restrict my search to outcasts. --arcady

1) In a society where detect good and detect chaos are a given, a CG character cannot survive to adulthood in a LE society (except in bizarre circumstances).

Nazi germany is not a good example of a LE culture because to relate that to hobgoblins is to disregard magic, species, and the fact that the entire culture is seeped in LE (by the gods, nonetheless).

Magic plays a crucial part in this. I honestly think that hobgoblin clerics scan the populace for good and chaotic offspring and then slay those they find. Maybe this is what Nazi germany was headed towards in the long run... (genetic testing)

I see hobgoblin culture as taking all extreme Nazis, putting them on another planet with the best technology to date, and coming back in 3000 years. Then you *might* have an accurate picture of the vileness of hobgoblin culture.
.
.
2) Nazis are still human. To make hobgoblins just ugly humans is to do them a disservice. They are a distinct and powerful species. They treat humans (and all other races) as cattle, and they should be played as such.
.
.
3) I don't know where you are getting your "exactly 51%". It's my understanding that the book says "The majority (more than 50%) of these creatures have the given alignment." ---MM pg 12

As in anywhere from 51-99% of the creaures have that alignment. And if you want, here would be the breakdown in my specific hobgoblin culture:

70% LE
15% NE
10% LN
5% N

Any good or chaotic creatures are an extremely rare occurance, completely obvious to my players and a plot thread that I put in the game, not a side effect of slaying a tribe.

I do not like the idea of little hobgoblins being weak and whimpering, and then all of a sudden they hate humans fanatically. Same thing goes for orcs, goblins and kobolds.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Damn, where is my soap box!

This is why it is important for the DM to DEFINE what evil is and if a race has a manifest destiny. It builds the world myth, it keeps issues like this from running amok.

Example of evil:
Slavery
Cannabism
Worship of god X, Y, or Z
Worship of domains X, Y, or Z
Orcs
Hobgoblins
Cold blooded murder
so on...

 

[Rhialto]

Well, I don't view this as a good action, I don't view as quite an evil one either...

Hell, these are Hobgoblins. A lot of adults would kill their children themselves if they cried and whimpered for being weaklings. We're talking about a warrior culture of vicious killers, trained from birth to view everbody else as chattel and opponents. (And yes, you could say your hobgoblins are different. But then you should tell your players that...)

 

[Aaron L]

First, forget the fact that these are hobgoblins. Good and Evil are not teams that compete with each other. If killing helpless wimpering human children is evil, then killing helpless wimpering children of any race is equally evil. Evil is Evil, applied evenly and with a broad brush, to all races equally.

Now, on to the alignment question. Elves are usually Chaotic Good. So the possibility that one of those hobgoblin children wasn't Evil is the same as the possibility that the elf that killed him was not Good (which he, in fact, wasn't.) How many Evil elves have you heard of? Not common, but not exactly rare. The occurance of Good hobgoblins will be as common as Evil elves, think of that.

 

[Rhialto]

First, forget the fact that these are hobgoblins. Good and Evil are not teams that compete with each other. If killing helpless wimpering human children is evil, then killing helpless wimpering children of any race is equally evil. Evil is Evil, applied evenly and with a broad brush, to all races equally.

Okay, then, let's take this to it's logical conclusion.

It is evil to kill grubs.

They're children...

They're helpless...

Ergo, it's evil to kill them...

No, wait, this doesn't quite work...

 

[Aaron L]

Grubs are not a race, they are vermin. Eating the grubs to stay alive is morally Neutral. Killing the grubs out of pure malice is something an Evil creature would do. If your paladin habitually went out of his way to destroy helpless creatures, ie: burning kittens, would you not view this as something he shouldn't do? Killing nonsentient creatures over matters of survival is not Good, but neither is it Evil, it is simply necessary. Killing nonsentient creatures for entertainment is Evil.

Race implies sentience. Stated simply:

It is Evil to kill sentient beings who are physically immature, are cowering, are offering no resistance, and pose no threat to you.

Is it clearer that way?

 

[Rhialto]

Grubs are not a race, they are vermin. Eating the grubs to stay alive is morally Neutral. Killing the grubs out of pure malice is something an Evil creature would do. If your paladin habitually went out of his way to destroy helpless creatures, such as burning cats, would you not view this as something he shouldn't do? Killing nonsentient creatures over matters of survival is not Good, but neither is it Evil, it is simply necessary.

Race implies sentience. Stated simply:

It is Evil to kill sentient beings who are physically immature, are cowering, are offering no resistance, and pose no threat to you.

Is it clearer that way?

You say that, but there are people who would disagree with you. Let's be honest, you've already demonstrated an arbitrary condition for a race being counted as a race.