The legal ramifications of Baleful Polymorph

[Pielorinho]

I just ran across this thread on another site, wherein folks debate the legality of using Baleful Polymorph. One of the most interesting posters there is a superb lawyer who doesn't play D&D but who sets out a great argument for his point of view.

Just a heads up for those who might be interested! (If you decide to post in that thread, make sure you read the forum rules first: they're very different from the rules around here, but they're pretty strict about having folks follow them).

Daniel

 

[Nifft]

Interesting discussion.
Now we see why witches were burned -- too much paperwork!

Cheers, -- N

 

[phindar]

That's a great site. As I have always said ("always" meaning for about the past year or so) that the best interpretation of the Paladin's code is whether or not the cops on Law & Order can do it, I particularly liked this passage from another debate:

Paladin Miko Miyazaki is a law enforcement officer, a state actor with respect to the Fourth Amendment's prohibitions against search and seizure. The spell "Detect Evil," and other similar spells reveal the "alignment" of a person; such alignment is typically one of "Good," "Evil," or "Neutral," in combination with one of "Lawful," Chaotic," or "Neutral." Respondant Bitterleaf asked for and received a temporary restraining order barring any continued use of any such "Detect Evil" spell against him.

Here's the link.

 

[Rogue765]

Except that the spell Detect Evil isn't cast ON an evil person, it's cast on the caster and allows him to see auras of evil that creatures are putting out.

It's no different than if a Paladin with Darkvision sees someone commiting a crime in darkness. He's not violating the subject's rights because the spell isn't cast on the subject, anymore than modern police are violating a subject's rights by using nightvision goggles.

Of course, just because a person has an evil alignment doesn't mean that he's guilty of the current crime the Paladin is investigating. The paladin would still need other spells such as Zone of Truth.

And of course it all depends upon if your fantasy world has the same ideas of civil rights. Not every country in THIS world follows rules similar to the US Bill of Rights.

 

[phindar]

I disagree with specific points, but that's not the meeting we're having right now.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

...it all depends upon if your fantasy world has the same ideas of civil rights. Not every country in THIS world follows rules similar to the US Bill of Rights.

QFT

I personally prefer modeling worlds on the Bronze Age in which case I actually have some fairly decent models to work from. And Hammurabi's code only vaguely resembles modern law.

 

[hong]

I just ran across this thread on another site, wherein folks debate the legality of using Baleful Polymorph. One of the most interesting posters there is a superb lawyer who doesn't play D&D but who sets out a great argument for his point of view.

Just a heads up for those who might be interested! (If you decide to post in that thread, make sure you read the forum rules first: they're very different from the rules around here, but they're pretty strict about having folks follow them).

Daniel

Man. These guys do it better than Hypersmurf!

 

[Umbran]

It's no different than if a Paladin with Darkvision sees someone commiting a crime in darkness. He's not violating the subject's rights because the spell isn't cast on the subject, anymore than modern police are violating a subject's rights by using nightvision goggles.

Of course, just because a person has an evil alignment doesn't mean that he's guilty of the current crime the Paladin is investigating. The paladin would still need other spells such as Zone of Truth.

Well, if you are going to make an analogy with modern American police, you run into trouble. Modern police don't determine guilt or innocence - that's for the jury of your peers. The D&D paladin clearly doesn't follow our modern jurisprudence, so you can expect the rules concerning burden of proof to be much different.

 

[Celebrim]

And people wonder why they burned witches. Seriously, take a look at the 1st level spell list, and tell me you are comfortable with that. Charm Person? Disguise Self? Ray of Enfeeblement? Unseen Servant? And that's just the first level spells.

In my campaign world, using polymorph on an innocent carries the same penalties as kidnapping and unlawful imprisonment. The penalty for a crime like this varies by region, but includes such things as public imprisonment for twice the duration of the enchantment, being turned into something unpleasant for an equal duration, being sold into slavery and the proceeds being given to the injured party, to having your eyes burned out with hot coals, your tongue removed with an pincher, and your fingers smashed with mallets.

And that's in the civilized parts of the world.

But there is of course a couple complications. Anyone capable of turning someone into something else is a Wizard, and Wizards are in practice (if not in theory) and in some places in fact above the law. (Or at least they are every where that they aren't burned at a stake on sight.) A Wizard that pleads 'self defence' is almost certainly going to be excused, especially if the person in question is of no station or title, the enchantment can be removed, and the Wizard agrees to be moving along without further incident. No body wants to upset a Wizard.

And really, most people would rather have Wizards going around turning people into something unnatural than lobbing fireballs at people. By comparison, offending a wizard and spending some time as a rabbit is alot better than being burned to a crisp or slowly torn asunder by something from the lower planes.

But yet again, there is a complication. If anything happens to a person while they are spending time as a garden slug, its considered murder. This is a more serious charge and it might require some actual evidence that the Wizard was acting in self-defense, especially if the locals can get the upper hand by say binding and gagging said Wizard in his sleep.

Polymorph doesn't carry near the penalties of charm person. Using a charm person on an innocent almost universally carries a death sentence throughout the realm. Even a Wizard of demonstratable power is unlikely to be forgiven for trying to steal someone's free will, and will be lucky not to be murdered in his sleep with the blessing of the local authorities.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Polymorph doesn't carry near the penalties of charm person. Using a charm person on an innocent almost universally carries a death sentence throughout the realm. Even a Wizard of demonstratable power is unlikely to be forgiven for trying to steal someone's free will, and will be lucky not to be murdered in his sleep with the blessing of the local authorities.

What if someone fails their 24-hour Will Save on the Baleful Polymorph, and takes on the mind of a rabbit for the duration of the spell? Is that on a par with Charm Person as far as stealing someone's free will goes?

Is using Eagle's Splendor to ramp up one's Diplomacy check considered equivalent to charm magics?

-Hyp.