Killing people to save more

[Zepheri]

I want to ask a question. I've read in several posts that a person, even a paladin, would be willing to sacrifice one person if it's to save 10, 100, 1000 or more. Now I want to ask if a person of good alignment who performs this act receives any kind of retribution. Additionally, if the person to be sacrificed is someone close to a member of the group, what are the consequences? Finally, If the person to be sacrificed is a player character, would you kill them?

[Azothath]

Zepheri wrote:

I want to ask a question. ... a paladin, would be willing to sacrifice one person if it's to save {lives}. ... if a person of good alignment ... performs this act receives any kind of retribution. Additionally, if the person to be sacrificed is someone close to a member of the group, what are the consequences? Finally, If the person to be sacrificed is a player character, would you kill them?

this is a question of morality, ethics, and the local 'in game' law.

For Paladins and divine casters with a patron the consequences are more immediate and severe. It is also going to depend on the paladin's written code. If he didn't write one - shame on him as now it is totally up to the GM. There are sample codes under the AoN Deity descriptions for some deities. A codeless paladin cannot assume that code but the GM will use it as a guideline to adjudicate the behavior.

All in all it is very campaign(GM) and group specific as different cultures have different ideas about the details of morality.

For Game Play - if the character as run by the player thinks it is a worthy effort then he should do it and suffer the consequences. The GM should issue a warning of an alignment infraction before the PC does the act. In a game/story it is simply an act of drama with consequences.
Retribution? There are defined consequences for Evil Acts. Clearly a decent GM is going to work this dramatic turn of events into the story and future plot events.

[Pizza Lord]

This is such a weird question. Especially when opened in such a way that sounds like there's some empirical evidence. Of course in a fantasy game, or even the real world, you can find a person willing to sacrifice someone to save 10 or more people. You can find a person willing to sacrifice someone to save one person. There are people that would kill one, ten, a hundred, or more to save one person.

It might matter who the person being saved is or who the person being killed is. Would you kill 'an orc' to save your daughter? Would you kill 10 orcs to save her? If they're 'evil'? If one is just the old smith who never harmed anyone? Maybe because "Well... he makes weapons they use to rob people?"

If you bring a paladin into it, we will only discuss an actual paladin. Not the mealy-mouth watered-down paladin variants that are just to get the cool powers without the actual effort where you can lie and cheat and murder as long as you can rationalize it. The only actual paladin I am discussing is that one. You didnt mention variants, so dont bother bringing them into this. Be a beacon, exemplify justice, law, honor, and good. We aren't delving into variants with their own twisted versions of it.

No, an [actual] paladin will not trade one person's life for another. The only life a paladin can sacrifice is their own. A paladin shouldn't even retreat before every other member of their party does so (barring other paladins). They might accept someone choosing to make a sacrifice, but they dont play the 'for the greater good' game and find ways to circumvent being good, honorable, and being held to a higher standard. It is not a burden, it is an honor and it is a privilege to them. A player even trying to rationalize a way around it shouldn't be a paladin. Go play one of the other dozen classes that have cool abilities.

As for consequences... Yes, there should always be consequences. That's the point, dont make a no-win situation just to screw with the paladin, but don't bother making it seem important if there's no real consequences. A paladin willingly committing an act loses their abilities. Period. For any reason. A paladin unwillingly committing such an act loses their abilities. Period. Charmed, dominated, tricked, playing stupid. Doesnt matter. Right, wrong, accidentally, or on purpose. The only difference is whether they can atone easily or not. But... Yes. You could find a paladin willing to do all of that. They just wouldn't be a paladin afterwards.

As for anyone else, the consequences depend on the situation. There's no way to cover every situation or victim or sacrifice. If you kill someone, it doesnt matter if you're good or evil, the consequences should be the same. Whether you can avoid them might depend on a dozen factors: social standing, bribery and friends on high places, or just outrunning them.

[Taja the Barbarian]

For anyone interested, this is just the infamous TROLLEY PROBLEM.