Our party had been inducted into the Order of the Sun Soul and tasked with infiltrating the rival Order of the Stone Hand (I may be misremembering the order names) and assassinating its leader. We were told we would have the opportunity to gain "great powers over air and sky" in return.
We managed to get ourselves similarly recruited by the Order of the Stone Hand. Through our paladin, it quickly became clear to us that every member of this order possessed an evil alignment--and the many duegar walking around their temple didn't help their case either.
In short, we snuck out of our rooms, and stabbed several acolytes in their sleep. Evil act? Or acceptible, as they are evil enemies in a rival order during possible war time?
In long, our party was split up into two groups and sent to bed in two different chambers filled with sleeping acolytes. My room also had a retinue of duegar guards, whereas the other room had only a pair of acolytes by the door. Our gnome fighter convinced the acolytes that he had to go to the bathroom and left the room to explore the temple, leaving his human druid and dragonborn paladin companions behind.
In our room, after a failed attempt at pretending to sleep (which resulted in my fellow, an elf ranger, getting an axe haft to the ribs by one of the taciturn duegar), my human abjurer created an illusion of footsteps outside the hall, hoping to lure the duegar from the room.
Three of them left to investigate. Two of them saw through the illusion, but the third one failed. What they found was a superior acolyte. Before the two could speak up, the third told their superior that noises had been heard in the hall. The other two, believing the noises to have been faked, nevertheless agreed that something suspicious was going on. The superior sent them on their way to continue their investigations before heading over to our room.
The gnome fighter exploring the halls subsequently encountered a mess hall full of duegar and monks, and the three duegar investigating the sounds. He lied both times, acting as though he was simply a lost new acolyte (which he was).
The superior monk entered our room, ordered the remaining three duegar to assist the previous three in their search of the grounds, and stood guard over the rest of us in their place.
I created another illusion of a blanket lifting off of one of the NPC acolytes, grabbing the superior's attention long enough for my ranger friend to jump him from behind. One does not grapple monks from behind.
In the surprise round, the ranger failed to hold his grip on the monk. My abjurer put a dagger in his back. At that point the human druid and the dragonborn paladin entered the room (their own guards apparently having been called away to investigate the noises as well). The ranger tossed the paladin a sword, which the paladin subsequently used to stab/smite the acolyte superior. The druid puffed a cloud of poison gas in the acolytes face to stifle any chance of screaming. The acolyte retaliated with a nasty left hook to the paladin's jaw. The ranger drew the short sword from the acolyte, and stabbed him with it a second time, dropping him.
To our amazement, we somehow managed to do all this whilst standing among four sleeping acolytes without waking any of them.
So one by one, we surrounded the sleeping acolytes, and stabbed them to death in their sleep.
We tore the bodies, splashed even more blood all over the place, and scraped fake claw marks into the walls.
Our game ended there, but the plan is to make it look like a vicious animal attack. We will be running around the temple creating chaos by acting as "surviving acolytes" of the "monster attack." The goal is to use illusory sounds to send enemy forces on wild goose chases, effectively dividing them into smaller groups which we can more easily dispatch ourselves.
Our GM made it quite clear that she disapproved of the massacre of the sleeping acolytes (giving us 25 XP each for the standing acolyte, and only 1 XP each for the sleeping acolytes) and asked us for our alignments, presumably with the intent of possibly changing some of them.
Dragonborn Paladin - Lawful Good
Elven Ranger - Chaotic Good
Gnome Fighter - Neutral Good
Human Abjurer - Lawful Neutral
Human Druid - Chaotic Neutral
I argued that it was war time between two rival factions, that we had confirmed that the acolytes were evil as well, and that we weren't doing anything that real life marines wouldn't do to terrorists.
Still, I wanted a broader set of opinions, so I thought I'd bring it up here. What do you guys think? Did any of us cross a line last night?
| 22 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a discussion to be had with your GM and your fellow players. Here, this discussion will only serve to enhance the consumption of popcorn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Slaying enemies in their sleep evil?
No.
Or rather just as "evil" as running them through with your sword when they are awake. Or chopping them to pieces with a greataxe. Or burning them to death via Fireball.
Does your DM also make ALL Rogues "Evil" if they come to the idea to use Sneak Attack in any way besides flanking? Like, you know, sneaking up on someone and doing a surprise-dagger-to-the-kidney.
Imho yur DM confused "unhonorable" with "evil".
It's more a question of law vs. chaos than good vs. evil. Depending on your paladin's code, I could see there being an issue there. That said, destroying evil doesn't require you to be stupid.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside - what is a GM who sends the PCs on a stealthy assassination mission with the promise of "great powers" in return expecting the characters to do?
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins and Alignment
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would say that this might be a question of power scale.
A sleeping dragon that has ravaged the countryside? Yeah....much easier to write off.
4 sleeping bandits? More ambiguous, since you can easily tie them up or hold them at sword points, and then take them to be arrested.
Now, outnumbered in the middle of an enemy base, and taking the opportunity to take out some opponents before the rest might come back, creating a big fight? Yeah, that is less ambiguous.
I might still worry as a paladin, since it slightly edges toward chaos, and is not exactly honorable (it might depend on your god; I am sure there must be a god of snakes, cardboard boxes, and exclaimation points out there in the LG corner)... but everyone else is fine.
Now, reducing experience when there wasn't an actual fight? Well.... that is fair. You experienced less risk, you get less reward. I wouldn't reduce it that much, but down to 5 xp? Yeah, makes sense. I mean...how much combat experience can you get from stabbing sleeping people?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dishonorable but not evil. And "dishonorable" kind of depends on the circumstances.
Though you fought a dude to the death in a middle of a room full of sleeping people without waking them? And then stabbed the sleepers to death one by one without waking them?
*shrugs* The situation's weird to begin with. I'm baffled you somehow didn't wake them up.
Did the GM at least ask "are you sure?" before you started killing sleepers?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The situation's weird to begin with. I'm baffled you somehow didn't wake them up.
Definitely weird. I suspect the GM was..."letting us get away with murder."
*Puts on sunglasses*
Did the GM at least ask "are you sure?" before you started killing sleepers?
No. We were trying to find out what the 5E rules were for coup de grace (apparently they don't exist).
I'm not sure good v evil comes into this one, unless someone was turning someone else's skin into a festival hat. Or, you know, otherwise mutilating a corpse without reasonable purpose.
Law v chaos, maybe, since it's more of an issue of "honorable combat" versus "sound tactics". They aren't always mutually exclusive though.
It shouldn't be Evil. Dishonorable? Depends on the circumstances and your society's/military's honor code. It is probably Chaotic, but that also depends on the laws of your society/military. But definitely shouldn't be Evil. Here's why I say that:
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.
But hurting, oppressing, and killing who? Because if "others" meant "anyone" then every PC ever is an Evil murdering POS. All PCs hurt, oppress, and kill others. So there must be some other qualifier to make it an Evil act. There is:
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.
So the qualifier is innocent life. Hopefully we can all agree, and your GM can agree, that the Evil Acolytes your Party killed were not "innocent." So then, what have you actually done? Based on the information provided, without further detail, nothing Evil. Definitely Neutral, and probably Chaotic (depending entirely on the laws of the land and possibly your personal code). Who says that enemies have to be sparred? Did the law of the land hire you to capture these enemies and bring them back for judgment? Remember that the medieval fantasy world you're playing in doesn't necessarily adhere to the Laws and Regulations of modern civilized society.
|
It shouldn't be Evil. Dishonorable? Depends on the circumstances and your society's/military's honor code. It is probably Chaotic, but that also depends on the laws of your society/military. But definitely shouldn't be Evil. Here's why I say that:
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.But hurting, oppressing, and killing who? Because if "others" meant "anyone" then every PC ever is an Evil murdering POS. All PCs hurt, oppress, and kill others. So there must be some other qualifier to make it an Evil act. There is:
I don't think that my PCs oppress very often if ever. And considering the "and" in the quoted statement - the lack of one of the three disqualifies the categorization as 'evil'.
Nah, you should have shaken them awake before slitting their throats. Doing otherwise is dishonourable. You fall. On the way out, feel free to pick up a pamphlet about our famous course - Becoming the Antisaint:A guide to Anti-Paladinhood, Primal Malevolent Chaos and You. It's all the rage this time of year.
Seriously, what else was your GM expecting you to do? You are at a massive strategic disadvantage, the enemy is at a temporary tactical disadvantage. The only way to rectify the former is to milk the latter for all it's worth. Otherwise you all probably die.
I wouldn't call it evil, though I would say it was dishonorable and there might be ramifications for the Paladin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Going against the grain here, definitely evil.
You know the saying two wrongs don't make a right? That's what this seems like to me. Were the people you killed evil? Sure, magic said they were evil. Is the "world" better off without them? Maybe, after all they are evil. Is murdering someone in their sleep wrong? Unquestionably.
Just remember: "For the greater good," is the rallying cry of evil people trying to justify their actions. What you did sounds exactly like the kind of thing the Operative from Serenity would do, and he's basically the paragon of Lawful Evil (he even makes a statement to that effect).
People here keep seemingly comparing acceptability to good. Would I have done things differently with any of my good characters? No, probably not (unless it was a Paladin), but that doesn't stop this from being an evil act.
Was this necessary? Maybe. Was this acceptable? If it was necessary then, yes it was acceptable. Was it "capital G" Good? Nope, not even at all.
The only kink I would consider is that they were acolytes, and maybe not fully on board with the cult yet. Without more info I couldn't say though. If they detected as evil it seems like a reasonable course of action.
Depending on the paladin's God, he might feel a bit "dirty," and want to repent somehow, but shouldn't have any mechanical repercussions unless it becomes a habit outside of this cult situation.
I don't think that my PCs oppress very often if ever. And considering the "and" in the quoted statement - the lack of one of the three disqualifies the categorization as 'evil'.It shouldn't be Evil. Dishonorable? Depends on the circumstances and your society's/military's honor code. It is probably Chaotic, but that also depends on the laws of your society/military. But definitely shouldn't be Evil. Here's why I say that:
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.But hurting, oppressing, and killing who? Because if "others" meant "anyone" then every PC ever is an Evil murdering POS. All PCs hurt, oppress, and kill others. So there must be some other qualifier to make it an Evil act. There is:
According to Google, the third definition of Oppression is:
mental pressure or distress.
If you're not oppressing somebody as a PC, you're doing it wrong.
It all depends on the context. In this case the party were invited into the base and tricked their hosts into believing them to be friendly. They then proceeded to kill several lower-level sleeping members of the order.
That's definitely not honourable, and probably somewhere south of Good on the alignment scale. It might be neutral, if there's a "greater good" angle, possibly evil if it was done purely motivated by greed for "powers over air and sky".
|
It shouldn't be Evil. Dishonorable? Depends on the circumstances and your society's/military's honor code. It is probably Chaotic, but that also depends on the laws of your society/military. But definitely shouldn't be Evil. Here's why I say that:
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.But hurting, oppressing, and killing who? Because if "others" meant "anyone" then every PC ever is an Evil murdering POS. All PCs hurt, oppress, and kill others. So there must be some other qualifier to make it an Evil act. There is:
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.So the qualifier is innocent life. Hopefully we can all agree, and your GM can agree, that the Evil Acolytes your Party killed were not "innocent." So then, what have you actually done? Based on the information provided, without further detail, nothing Evil. Definitely Neutral, and probably Chaotic (depending entirely on the laws of the land and possibly your personal code). Who says that enemies have to be sparred? Did the law of the land hire you to capture these enemies and bring them back for judgment? Remember that the medieval fantasy world you're playing in doesn't necessarily adhere to the Laws and Regulations of modern civilized society.
Evil does not mean guilty.
An Evil creature that has not hurt anyone yet is innocent.
Detect Evil can be tricked.
Kind of a goblin babies case on the GM's part though.
BTW : if the Paladin killed the sleeping acolytes, that is not acting with honor = not respecting the code = fall.
In the end, what matters is how the gods (aka the GM) view the alignments. And this here is yet another case where the GM should have told the players before the game began what her take on the alignments are. And the Paladin player especially should have been told what his character really should know by heart, ie what his deity considers as grounds for falling.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's evil. You're behaving like the worst murderers that ever lived. You're adding insult to injury by desecrating their dead bodies and trying to pass this as animals. Further, you self-admit that you are sowing chaos everywhere you go. To fight evil doesn't mean you have to act evil. The paladin should put his pants on and capture them instead of murdering them in their sleep. Once the dungeon has been secured (which doesn't mean "all life forms have been destroyed"), he returns to the captives and drags them back home to give them a chance to repent or at least face justice. That way politicians get to shake hands and make election promises and thank the heroes profusely. If they're sentenced to death, then that's the King's decision not the paladin's.
It is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.
RD mentioned it's a 5E game; alignment's pretty much an optional rule there (and paladins can be any alignment). 5E paladins take an oath at 3rd level that gives them a code of conduct, but the worst that can happen from breaking the Oath is the GM telling you can't take paladin levels anymore. (You don't actually lose the powers, no matter what.)
It is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.
I don't think there are any circumstances where murdering someone in their sleep isn't evil.
I'd say its an evil act.
Based on the fact that they were just acolytes and were quite helpless. It would have been just as easy to knock them out and bind them in some fashion.
Detecting Evil doesn't mean murder is okay.
The Paladin should fall based on the letter of the code of conduct (assuming the base paladin code).
Finally tearing apart their bodies afterward, even for strategic gain, is arguably an evil act as well.
If i was the DM and this was a regular occurrence i would shift alignment from good to neutral and neutral to evil. Assuming this is common practice among the party.
An Evil creature that has not hurt anyone yet is innocent.
Innocent in the way you are defining it has to do with being innocent of a crime. Which is an adjective. That's Law vs. Chaos, that's not what I quoted. I quoted Good vs. Evil. The way the language of that section is, and the way the Paladin Code reads, innocent life is referring a noun, the third definition of the word (according to Google):
an innocent person, in particular.
Free of guilt.
Kind of a goblin babies case on the GM's part though.
Goblin babies do NOT detect as Evil. They are under 4th level and not Clerics, Paladins or outsiders. Per the Detect Evil spell.
Per the Alignment rules and common sense, it would be ridiculous to think that a creature which lacks the mental ability to make moral decisions would be considered Evil. They have also never taken actions that would make them either Good or Evil. They are by definition, innocent life. Any PC or party who kills them is in fact committing an Evil act.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.I don't think there are any circumstances where murdering someone in their sleep isn't evil.
War
It is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.I don't think there are any circumstances where murdering someone in their sleep isn't evil.
Well, the Alignment rules don't say anything about it. Nor do the CDG specific rules. Those would probably be excellent places to say killing a helpless foe is an inherently Evil act. Much in the same way that inherently Evil spells mention this in the description.
There are no rules to support it being Evil. Now, it's definitely not Good, but Neutral is a very large territory. It's also probably not Lawful, but that doesn't make it Evil, just not Lawful. You can be Chaotic and not Evil.
As for the desecrating bodies thing. There is nothing about that which is harming innocent life. Or life at all. The only thing that does is violate societal norms, which is again more on the Law vs Chaos spectrum. So, what these characters did was Chaotic, and most certainly not honorable, in regard to the Paladin. However, not Evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In short, we snuck out of our rooms, and stabbed several acolytes in their sleep. Evil act? Or acceptible, as they are evil enemies in a rival order during possible war time?
While I won't argue that Good and Evil are absolutes, I do suggest that the assessment of good vs. evil should be based on what you do, not what others may have done to "deserve" it.
Sleeping creatures are by RAW helpless. You slew helpless creatures in their sleep, so yeah, I'd say you definitely committed an evil (small "e") act. Specifically, murder. I mean, you can try redefining, re-evaluating, or even respelling it but you did straight up murder those acolytes.
Now, that said, if they outnumbered/outpowered you or could quickly summon others that would, it may have been smart to take them in their sleep, but smart =/= good.
If it can be legitimately justified as "necessary; we're at war" but you still feel bad about it, then it needn't be an Evil (capital "E") act that all by itself threatens to change your characters' alignment or whatever. Good people sometimes do bad things. It usually only makes them bad people if they keep doing them, and/or feel no remorse.
WarIt is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.I don't think there are any circumstances where murdering someone in their sleep isn't evil.
You're confusing not evil and understandable. Just because someone has a reason for doing something doesn't stop it from being evil.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
WarIt is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.I don't think there are any circumstances where murdering someone in their sleep isn't evil.
The umbrella of War does not make evil acts non-evil. Killing during wartime isn't justified because it's wartime, it's justified because killing in self-defense or to save the life of another isn't an evil act.
Murdering someone -- as distinct from some other form of killing -- during wartime is just as evil as it would be in peacetime; but in war there is very often no "good" option. This is why we have terms like "necessary evil" and "lesser of two evils." If your only choice is which evil act to commit, that sucks for you, but it doesn't make the act you choose Good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sleeping creatures are by RAW helpless. You slew helpless creatures in their sleep, so yeah, I'd say you definitely committed an evil (small "e") act.
You mention that by RAW they are helpless. But, where are the rules to support that killing helpless enemies is an Evil act?
WarIt is not necessarily evil; it just depends on the circumstances. It is definitely not chivalrous.I don't think there are any circumstances where murdering someone in their sleep isn't evil.The umbrella of War does not make evil acts non-evil. Killing during wartime isn't justified because it's wartime, it's justified because killing in self-defense or to save the life of another isn't an evil act.
Murdering someone -- as distinct from some other form of killing -- during wartime is just as evil as it would be in peacetime; but in war there is very often no "good" option. This is why we have terms like "necessary evil" and "lesser of two evils." If your only choice is which evil act to commit, that sucks for you, but it doesn't make the act you choose Good.
Time to invoke Godwin's law:
Is killing Hitler in his sleep evil?
Further, you self-admit that you are sowing chaos everywhere you go.
We're not doing it for chaos' sake. It's a divide and conquer strategy against a superior force on their own home turf.
RD mentioned it's a 5E game; alignment's pretty much an optional rule there (and paladins can be any alignment). 5E paladins take an oath at 3rd level that gives them a code of conduct, but the worst that can happen from breaking the Oath is the GM telling you can't take paladin levels anymore. (You don't actually lose the powers, no matter what.)
It was my understanding that 5E paladins still needed to be Good, though not necessarily Lawful Good.
Based on the fact that they were just acolytes and were quite helpless. It would have been just as easy to knock them out and bind them in some fashion.
The "acolytes" were helpless, but when awake, are likely as powerful as any one of us.
Knocking them out and binding them strikes me as, well, strategically unsound in this situation, as well as a complete detriment to the "divide and conquer" plan. We didn't exactly have lockers nearby to hide the unconscious bodies in either. It was a meager room with a few pallets to sleep on. We had to cover it up somehow, lest the alarm sound much too early (and in regards to us rather than a goose chase).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Time to invoke Godwin's law:
Is killing Hitler in his sleep evil?
Yes, so is torturing him. Doing evil things to evil people does not change the act to be "non-evil". As human beings we feel its more justifiable to do evil to evil people as that is a way for us to appease our anger at them and guilt for doing horrible things to them, but that still doesn't make it right.
In regards to the original post though, I would say the actions of your party were dishonorable and evil (murder [and possible murder of innocents, being evil is not a crime nor does it mean you have committed any evil at all, just that you are more likely to], deception leading to injury and death of others, mutilating corpses, pre-meditated murder [of the rest of the temple]).
However context is king and if I was the GM I would not call for alignment changes for it, the characters did not commit the evil for its own sake (i.e. they didn't murder them because it was just more fun that way) and they only acted dishonorably because doing otherwise could have easily (and probably) lead to their deaths.
The Paladin however is a sticky case and it depends on exactly what he did and why, and how literal the God he follows is with the code.
RD mentioned it's a 5E game; alignment's pretty much an optional rule there (and paladins can be any alignment). 5E paladins take an oath at 3rd level that gives them a code of conduct, but the worst that can happen from breaking the Oath is the GM telling you can't take paladin levels anymore. (You don't actually lose the powers, no matter what.)It was my understanding that 5E paladins still needed to be Good, though not necessarily Lawful Good.
Nope. 5E paladins are normally good, but they can be of any alignment. The Player's Handbook points out that evil paladins are rare, since the class is largely about fighting evil.
So in a particular adventure path a particular fort was taken over by some Ogres. The party was tasked with retaking the fort. They were able to sneak in, and in the process of re-taking the fort they were able to take out some of the ogres while they were sleeping. I can't see how this was evil. What if sleeping ogres (as well as ones that are awake) were killed by a fireball in a surprise round? Is that evil too?
Not evil in the slightest. You were sent to kill them all. Whether they die sleeping or standing or unarmed or armed and armored or any other way you set up the scenario...they still die. Killing them in their sleep is arguably more "good" than just killing them while they fight. You slit their throats, quick and painless, and they never know what happened.
Killing is and always has been a Neutral aligned act in D&D and its derivatives. You didn't torture them, you didn't kill anyone innocent, and you didn't kill them just for the sake of killing them.
You had a mission. You fulfilled said mission in an efficient manner. Good job.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So - why isn't the Sleep spell evil? Virtually the only way I've seen it used is to set up coup de graces.
Simply casting a sleep spell isn't evil because in and of itself it does no harm.
The plan to use a sleep spell (or any other means) to set up the murder of a helpless creature is evil, as is the actual murder. If you don't carry it out, however, the unused plan merely represents evil thoughts, not an evil act.
You were sent to kill them all.
No we weren't. We were sent to assassinate their leader. Just one person.
Sneaking in and killing him without bringing down the entire temple's occupants down on our heads didn't seem like something we could pull off though, so we're going to rile things up a bit, divide and conquer, and hopefully get close enough to strike at the leader at some point and, failing that, at least make it so we have a much smaller and less organized force to cut through to get to him.
So - why isn't the Sleep spell evil? Virtually the only way I've seen it used is to set up coup de graces.What if sleeping ogres (as well as ones that are awake) were killed by a fireball in a surprise round? Is that evil too?Generally speaking, yes.
Just because the people you play with are unimaginative murder-hobos doesn't make Sleep an evil spell. Their are plenty of uses for Sleep other than using it to slaughter helpless opponents.
-ninjad-
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Time to invoke Godwin's law:
Is killing Hitler in his sleep evil?
Of course it is. This shouldn't even be a question.
Presumably the background to the question is that the person being asked has an opporunity to kill Hitler before WWII or before the Holocaust or whatever, so the justification is that millions of lives will be saved? Still evil.
This is one of those times when there is no Good option, and you have to decide whether:
(a) it's less evil to personally murder one helpless individual than to take no action and allow millions to suffer, or;
(b) it's more evil to kill Hitler because you are only responsible for what you personally do, and not for what thousands of other people did to millions of victims.
I'm pretty sure most people, including me, end up killing Hitler. It's an evil act I could live with given the alternative, but it would still an evil act, don't kid yourself otherwise.
Nothing an Arthurian Knight wouldn't do and be praised for. Not evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am sure there must be a god of snakes, cardboard boxes, and exclaimation points out there in the LG corner...