D&D General Was the court Wizard right to Polymorph The heir from A Teenager into A Baby because she knew the villain would kill A Teenager but not A Baby?

[Bill Zebub]

On the matter of how to get The XP if you don't kill them I'd suggest that you change the XP rules from only getting it for foes they kill to getting it for foes you defeat

As for how to get their stuff if you don't kill them I'd suggest ransom. 1 example is that if you kill and loot A 4th level Thief you may only get 700 Gold worth of valuables, 220 Gold Coins in cash, 3 dose's of magic potion and 1 Magic Shortsword but if you ransom him/her you could get 4,400 Gold worth of valuables, 1,180 Gold Coins in cash, 5 dose's of magic potion, 2 magic items and 1 Magic Shortsword

I was thinking I could help in their redemption by convincing them to commit to meditating in a monastery for a few years. The sort where you have to forsake your wordly possessions. And who better to watch over those possessions than the guy who looked into your soul, saw some good, and instead of killing you and taking your stuff, convinced you to find redemption in the monastery?

And, unlike the spineless villain, my morals are flexible.

Why go through all the uncertainty and danger of a messy combat, when one solid Persuasion check (perhaps boosted by +10 with a well-timed Channel Divinity) can net you the same loot in a single roll?

 

[JMISBEST]

…why? If the villain won’t hurt an infant anyway, what does putting someone else in the princess’ place even achieve, except the unnecessary death of the decoy?

My thinking was the villain would never kill a baby but its possible that 1 of their followers is loyal enough that they will kill a baby if they think its in their lords best interest and if needed they'll deal with the consequences afterwards

The inspiration for that idea was the working relationship between Edelgard and Hubert in Fire Emblem Three House's, Edelgard would never kill A Baby but Huberts loyalty and devotion to Edelgard are high enough that if killing A Baby were in Edelgards best interests he'd do it without a seconds thought or hesitation and he'd deal with the consequences afterwards

 

[FrozenNorth]

I don’t know, I think it’s more interesting for villains to have points of vulnerability, same as it’s more interesting for heroes to have flaws. Being unwilling to harm babies is an interesting trait for an otherwise completely ruthless villain to have.

It’s not a baby. It’s a person that the villain would otherwise have no qualms about killing polymorphed into the form of a baby.

I generally don’t kill kittens. I would have no qualms about killing a hostile black dragon polymorphed into a kitten’s form before it undid the polymorph.

 

[James Gasik]

I've seen people not want to kill make believe monsters in D&D because they "look cute". There's all kinds, I suppose.

In the 2e game I play in on and off, my character found a Wand of Polymorphing that, instead of turning someone into a helpless small animal, turns them into a 5 year old human girl. I was immediately reminded of this thread.

Also 2e Polymorph Other is particularly nasty since there's a chance you forget your former life and believe you've always been the thing you got turned into.