would this be evil?

[Tsyr]

To say if it was evil or not I would need more info. Was confronting the politician a valid option? Why do they need to be on their way? What is the characters view on the politician?

Kidnapping the good politicians innocent daughter just because they need to hurry to another town so they can get good seats in the springplay would be evil.

On the other hand. If they are short on time for saving the nation, laking the power to free their "theif" and knows about the politicians reputation for cruelty. Then I would still call their action stupid and naive but not necessarily evil.

What part of "They kidnapped and killed an innocent person" is escaping you?

That's not a moral relativity question. There is no "Well, but in the circumstances...". I cannot concieve of a single situation which would put a GOOD light on this situation.

One more time.

They kidnapped an innocent child to use as a bargining chip in getting a theif who rightfully was convicted of breaking the law freed from his rightfull punishment, and in the process, killed her. How is this anything but an evil act? It's a stupid act, yes, but that doesn't make it less evil.

 

[Bonedagger]

What part of "They kidnapped and killed an innocent person" is escaping you?

That's not a moral relativity question. There is no "Well, but in the circumstances...". I cannot concieve of a single situation which would put a GOOD light on this situation.

One more time.

They kidnapped an innocent child to use as a bargining chip in getting a theif who rightfully was convicted of breaking the law freed from his rightfull punishment, and in the process, killed her. How is this anything but an evil act? It's a stupid act, yes, but that doesn't make it less evil.

So now you assume I didn't read the post. That's just great. Do you always metagame in such an omniscient way as to having your characters knowing every aspect of what goes on? They are allowed to make their own conclusions you know. Kidnapping and lying are in it self not evil (It might get you in a lot of truble though). It's all relative.

Let me turn it back at you Tsyr. What part of

Posted by Balgus
You hit her with the back of your sword to subdue her, but crits. the DM rules that you hit her so hard that she is bludgeopned to death.

did you think gave the impression that they intented to kill her?

 

[Tsyr]

So now you assume I didn't read the post. That's just great. Do you always metagame in such an omniscient way as to having your characters knowing every aspect of what goes on? They are allowed to make their own conclusions you know. Kidnapping and lying are in it self not evil (It might get you in a lot of truble though). It's all relative.

Let me turn it back at you Tsyr. What part of



did you think gave the impression that they intented to kill her?

First of all, if you don't think kidnapping an innocent child is evil, then I don't think we have a common basis for discussion.

But as I said, I don't care if they intended to kill her or not. They kidnapped her, and then by accident or design, she died. Since she would not have died if they hadn't kidnapped her in the first place (Which I assert is an evil act), her death is the same as -- in terms of moral weight -- murder.

Furthermore, I don't see how my metagaming or not has any relevance to this discussion.

 

[Friadoc]

Re: Re: Re: Re: would this be evil?

Maybe in your games, not in mine. My games aren't door > kill > loot > door > kill > loot > etc.

Nice assumption to make,

...but neither are my games.

However, even if you only loot an occassional dungeon, etc, it's still home invasion.

My Saturday game is a pretty good balance of character development, interaction, and adventuring - none are neglected for another.

I was just pointing out how, at it's root, adventuring, even with epic motivations, is still basically once group calling another group evil and then proceeding to kick their hind-ends, check the wallets for loose cash and/or ATM pin numbers, and calling the day 'well done for the forces of good'.

That's all.

 

[Sejs]

Just a nit to pick, here..

I agree. But as a DM I'm also against rewarding someone for the brilliant idea of hitting a defenceless child with a sword, even though it was just for subdual.

The idea is that the rules have no morals in and of themselves. The rules should be totally neutral, reguardless of who you're doing bad things to or why. There should be no difference in a crit to subdue against Little Sally the Orphan or Umgwalo, High Priest of the Lord of Sticking Sharp Things In Your Eye.

 

[Bonedagger]

First of all, if you don't think kidnapping an innocent child is evil, then I don't think we have a common basis for discussion.

Wrong yes. Evil... I don't know. When the authorities remove a child from it's parents are they then evil? We DON'T know if the charaters did this wrong act in the light of some greater good. Or they think they did. (See my post above for clarification)

But as I said, I don't care if they intended to kill her or not. They kidnapped her, and then by accident or design, she died. Since she would not have died if they hadn't kidnapped her in the first place (Which I assert is an evil act), her death is the same as -- in terms of moral weight -- murder.

I still think you are confusing incompetence and 'being a danger for ones surroundings because of it' with being evil. BTW Ending up in a situation where they knew that people would get killed (maybe the childs father) would be worse. Maybe their action was an attempt to avoid that?

Furthermore, I don't see how my metagaming or not has any relevance to this discussion.

How did they know it was "rightfully" (Edit: As opposed to lawfully )? Stealing has something to do with 'law'. Being evil has something to do with 'why' actions are taken. Philosophy/Motivation. (Robin Hood?, Sinbad?, Aladin? They where all thiefs)

 

[hammymchamham]

Now I really wonder if the Chechen kidnapping those theater goers in Moscow a week ago where evil or just chaotic

 

[Apok]

Yet another reason why I lay awake at night seriously considering throwing out the D&D alignment system altogether.


Hmmm... so much to discuss. Let's start with what I believe is the major issue as it relates to the game. The DM and his "call" about the subdual damage. It's been repeaded here already, several times, but the fact is that the DM made a bad call possibly motivated by selfish reasons. A critical strike on a subdual attack does NOT mean you accidentaly do lethal damage to your target. The d20 system of Task Resolution is set up so that the higher the roll, the more favorable the result is to the person who rolled. This BS call by the DM, quite frankly, makes me sick. If he honestly didn't understand the rules, then he should apologize to the players. If he did this deliberately to turn an already bad situation into a complete SNAFU then he shouldn't be DMing. The rules exist for a reason, so if you choose to meddle in them this way you'd better have a damn good reason why.

Now, onto the character's actions. There are at least two scenarios that are possibly relevant. Scenario one; the PC's decide on this course of action immediately after hearing about their comerade's imprisonment. If this is the case, then the alignments of the PC's should definitely shift away from the "good" and "lawful" axis unless they were already mostly neutral or evil to begin with (which could be the case). They didn't even consider any other alternatives that may have worked, so they are totally responsible for their own stupid actions.

Scenario two; the PC's had already tried several means of releasing their theifly friend and none of them worked. Therefore, they devise this hairbrained scheme to force the Rogues release from prison. Now, if for some reason the heroes were about to embark on a quest of Immense Importance for the Good of the Realm (TM), I might be able to see them doing this because of the "Needs of the Many" argument but it would still have an adverse effect on their alignment. Even if this was the case, they would have been better off just trying to break their friend out of jail the old fashioned way.

So you see there are a few things about this situation where clarification is called for. Based on the rather limited description given of the scenario, I'd say that the PC's just came up with this "brilliant" plan on the fly and hoped it would work. If that's the case, then you bet their alignments (if lawful and/or good) should shift. Granted, this is hardly what I'd consider to be the Paragon of Evil Acts but it's still very un-kosher unless the PC's were an unscrupulous lot to begin with. The game is still very salvageable and I think that it will make for some great rp-fodder in the future.

I also see that some of the discussion has touched on the "Evil for Greater Good" idea and the concept of the "Road to Hell being paved with good intentions." Well, let me ask all of you this.

If the Supreme Being of the Universe (God, Allah, whatever) came to you and said, "I hereby give you the moral authority to make this decision. You can put a stop to the violence and hatred that permeates mankind, virtually ending all warfare, but you must kill one innocent man to do it."

Would you? Just curious.

 

[hammymchamham]

If the Supreme Being of the Universe (God, Allah, whatever) came to you and said, "I hereby give you the moral authority to make this decision. You can put a stop to the violence and hatred that permeates mankind, virtually ending all warfare, but you must kill one innocent man to do it."

Would you? Just curious.

Already happened

 

[Bonedagger]

Now I really wonder if the Chechen kidnapping those theater goers in Moscow a week ago where evil or just chaotic

Does concepts like good and evil apply to the real world?

Depends on who you ask.

BTW. If we start to talk about politics we'll probably get kicked over to Nutkinland