Damian Coldshadows's page

By this logic it is very beneficial to such a society to eliminate someone who would kill and steal from it's people. Hence, it is Good to eliminate such people.

Yes, because we're on side A, it's "good" to kill people on side "B". Again, this is exactly how we fail as humans, we think of our side as always good and the other side as bad. Killing is never a "good" action, it's neutral at best, even if it's something that has to be done.

I think the dispute stems from the dm actually being surprised. They obviously expected something else to be done, and then the pc suddenly killed off a captured opponent, wanting to take negotiations into the clear world of battle and blood, not murky negotiations.

I actually was partially surprised, so surprised as a matter of fact that the King didn't attack right away. He should have. More surprising is that the party didn't even use the son as a bargaining chip. They didn't really seem interested in bargaining period.

But in the US there is a death penalty.

Most people when they are executed are helpless.
I do not consider this evil.

I think the difference is that people who die to the death penalty are given some respect when they die. The kobold had his throat slit and then his body was thrown forward towards the King like a piece of trash and mocked. Big difference.

The act was done out of frustration/rage/pleasure only, he wasn't looking to gain anything from it except his own amusement and to hurt the King. It didn't help the negotiation either, it ended it.

Scenario
Imagine for a second if someone kidnapped your child (in real life) and was negotiating a ransom with you, and all of a sudden the kidnapper gets frustrated that you don't have 1 million dollars right now, and slits your child's throat and throws the body in front of you. Wouldn't you say they were a evil mother f*&*er. Yes, you would.

Now imagine for a second that the kidnapper was Islamic and considers you an evil American. Your culture is evil (from his perspective), I guess it's ok now? Is this person evil or is he justified, because he views you as evil? Because you guys are viewing the kobolds as evil because of their culture, without even knowing them (some of them were even LN and wanted peace). I'm sure terrorists view you the same way, without compassion, because of your culture, irrespective of who you are as an individual. You're evil, they're good, however they kill you doesn't matter, even if they have no respect for life. It's the same thing.

To the OP if you're the DM and you say it's an evil act. It's an evil act , explain your rationale to the player and move on. Unless the individual is a class that requires devout behaviour does it really matter? At this point it sounds like it's more about being right for the player that anything game related.

Well, it's a little bit more than that. This game was run using PFS, which is organized play, and evil alignments aren't allowed. If he commits enough evil acts, I'm forced to move him to evil and retire his PC. So it does matter.

Yes it is an evil act. Are there any other examples of what he has done to justify being CN?

Yes, he has done other CN things before, but the acts weren't evil. He's never done anything "good". Still not enough to justify an alignment shift, but he's getting close now. Honestly, if the player is having fun, that's the most important thing, I'd just prefer that they realize how they're playing and shift the alignment themselves.

While it definately seems like an evil act, I would like to have the complete context. For example, had the player decided that since negotiations were failing that they would need to kill all of the goblins, and just started with the one he held captive?

Nah, the PC was just being a dick since the King was being tough with negotiations. Purely vindictive. Killing the son served absolutely no purpose except to torment the King.

Debates like this are funny. It's ok to be evil as long as it's being done to the "enemy". I guess that's how atrocities are committed in history. Although most goblins, orcs, kobolds are evil, not all of them are. As a matter of fact, the goblin son (that was killed) was LN and just protecting his home from intruders. Oops? Does his alignment being non-evil change anything? Because it shouldn't. The party never asked him any questions and they never knew a single thing about him before they killed him.

Orcs and goblins are evil, period, end of story. The only right they have is the right to die at the hands of adventures for fun and profit.

Actually, they're not all evil. The son that was brutally killed in front of his father was actually LN. They're sentient beings, they can choose to be one way or the other. Alignment is taught, you're not born with alignment.

If it wasn't a goblin and instead it was a kobold or orc, does that change anything?

you were hired to clear out a horde of goblins.

No, they were hired to negotiate (of which they didn't work very hard at). Killing was supposed to be the last resort.

Clerics of Sarenrae
A more interesting question is, what do you think of the two Neutral Good clerics of Sarenrae (compassion, peace, and redemption) that didn't say a word (or raise a hand) about the killings?

Before anyone asks, I didn't punish them, because they're both new to Pathfinder and roleplaying.

Sorry guys, I'll try but I can't keep up with this thread.

Hi,

I feel that one of my players committed a slightly evil action this weekend and I'd just like to confirm (mostly for him), that it was an evil action.

He says his PC is CG. I say he's definitely not good, maybe CN or Neutral.

Scenario
We're sent into a dungeon where we have to negotiate (or wipe out) a group a goblins. They've been attacking our merchant caravans. The goblins are intelligent and "cultured".

We encounter and beat the son of the "King". I had no problem with the group killing the downed son (in the heat of the moment, even as a 'good' PC), but instead he choose to do the following.

We captured the son, carried him to the King, and then we he didn't like how the negotiation was going, he slit the son's neck and threw him violently in a heap on the ground.

Was that evil? I think it was slightly evil, and just because it was a goblin doesn't justify the complete lack of respect for sentient life and the cruelty involved. I know it wasn't good. What do you think?

Thanks.