Would this be evil?

[Thornir Alekeg]

The act itself is neither good nor evil, what matters is the motivation behind it.

Now comes the questionable part. Party members decide to humiliate the thugs/nobles by making them do degrading chores-forcing them at sword's point to muck out the stables, clean out the garbage midden, mop up the vomit, and wash the dishes- for no better reason than to further their punishment by humiliating them, before finally bodily throwing them out and into the dung-infested streets.

I would say in this case, with the part I emphasized, they probably committed an evil act. If the party had no reason to do it, then the only thing they thought of was the degradation of another.

Part of the advantage of this, of course, is that the nobles or thugs will be so enraged at the PCs that they'll focus their wrath on them, instead of the innocent bar owner.

If there is some level of conscious thought about this, or if the party hoped that by humiliating the thugs/nobles they might become more empathetic and change their behavior to something better, then it would be a good act.

From this I would contend that there are few acts that are good or evil on their own. The intent is what matters.

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

Very unconventional (and far from the Law side), and good at its core. CG.

 

[buzz]

My question, therefore: Would humiliating your opponents like this, by taking them down several pegs, be considered an Evil act at all?

Quick SRD reference:

Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life...

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.​

Since what you describe doesn't really touch upon any of this, the [Evil] alignment descriptor doesn't figure into things.

 

[Slife]

Definitely not.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Quick SRD reference:

Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life...

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.​

Since what you describe doesn't really touch upon any of this, the [Evil] alignment descriptor doesn't figure into things.

You don't feel that forcing someone to do menial tasks for no other reason but to humilate them is a form of oppression?

 

[Slife]

You don't feel that forcing someone to do menial tasks for no other reason but to humilate them is a form of oppression?

Which isn't the case of the OP.

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

You don't feel that forcing someone to do menial tasks for no other reason but to humilate them is a form of oppression?

The OP's case has to do with forced reparations (at least in part). That actually helps the community, and therefore stays Good. Chaotic in the unconventional, extra-legal sense, but good. Edit 3:36 pm: (Even if the goal is to make them the bitch, it still helps the community directly), hence the maintenance of Good, albeit less so (leaning towards neutral).

 

[phindar]

I'll vote with the consensus that this isn't Evil. It might be a little under the Lawful standard, but not enough to really matter. I wouldn't go as far to classify it as Chaotic; giving bullies their comeuppance is well within the Paladin's purview.

But killing robbers who have already surrendered, that is a bit murkier. There's all sorts of extenuating circumstances that could factor into this, but as a general rule I'd have to say it isn't honorable (read: Lawful) and it isn't merciful (read: Good).

 

[Sol.Dragonheart]

The act is actually a Good act, and forcing the culprits in this case to hard labor, that other people routinely engage in to serve them, is righteous, just, and poetic. As for killing those who have already surrendered, I actually do not consider that an Evil act whatsoever if those surrendering had just been attempting to kill or rob you.

They have already forfeited their rights as innocent beings by attempting to do so, and anyone is well within the moral bounds of decency to finish what they started.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

The OP's case has to do with forced reparations (at least in part). That actually helps the community, and therefore stays Good. Chaotic in the unconventional, extra-legal sense, but good.

OK, I guess I read the original post a little differently. I'll emphasize the part again...

Now comes the questionable part. Party members decide to humiliate the thugs/nobles by making them do degrading chores-forcing them at sword's point to muck out the stables, clean out the garbage midden, mop up the vomit, and wash the dishes- for no better reason than to further their punishment by humiliating them, before finally bodily throwing them out and into the dung-infested streets.

There is no mention that this is being done as part of reparations, the OP specifically says there is no reason but to further their punishment. Many people here are implying that the humilation is being done with the intent to teach a lesson, in that case I agree that it is clearly not evil, but I don't agree with the implied intent as the scenario is written.