Quote from: Haffrung;218957Orcs are monsters. Evil monsters. If they could, they would slay, enslave, or devour every human, dwarf, and elf in the world. Shit, if there were a dwarf in the party and he didn't kill all the orcs I would call out the player for shitty roleplaying.

Never played that anything was irredeemably evil. That's a big difference, true, but in combating "monsters" putting yourself at their level makes the PCs just as monstrous.

-clash

Quote from: Stuart;218932We also played with a "no evil PCs" rule -- so if your character became evil, they also became an NPC.

My players would be NPC's with in seconds of the start of your game. Over and over and over and over again.

Quote from: Serious Paul;219005My players would be NPC's with in seconds of the start of your game. Over and over and over and over again.

That was for our D&D games.  When we played games without a Good vs Evil alignment system it was a different situation.  That'd be Top Secret, Robotech, Beyond the Supernatural, Shadowrun, etc.

I think if you find yourself thinking about the relative morality of all these actions you probably don't want to be using an alignment system where characters are wholly "good" or "evil".  The Good/Neutral/Evil (or Law/Neutral/Chaos) system is good for very stylized heroes and villains.  In that context it's pretty easy to assign good / neutral / evil to actions -- what would you expect to see in some sort of PG rated adventure movie?  Luke Skywalker (or Flash Gordon) wouldn't shoot a stunned Storm Trooper.  Neutral?  That's Han Solo (or Voltan).  He might shoot first...  Bad guys? Yeah, they're evil.  Doing bad stuff.  All bad guy like.

Quote from: flyingmice;218986When I played D&D, that was the rule. Killing helpless anything was a chaotic evil act.

Wow. So if the PCs found a manticore sleeping in a cave, they'd have to wake it up before they attacked it?

The logistics of taking care of the dozens of prisoners dropped by Sleep spells in a dungeon like the Keep on the Borderlands must have been formidable. If you really believe killing helpless monsters is evil, you can't just leave goblins and orcs tied up in a dungeon where they're likely to just be killed by something else. That's no better than killing them yourself. So where do you take them after they're captured?

Quote from: Haffrung;219016Wow. So if the PCs found a manticore sleeping in a cave, they'd have to wake it up before they attacked it?

The logistics of taking care of the dozens of prisoners dropped by Sleep spells in a dungeon like the Keep on the Borderlands must have been formidable. If you really believe killing helpless monsters is evil, you can't just leave goblins and orcs tied up in a dungeon where they're likely to just be killed by something else. That's no better than killing them yourself. So where do you take them after they're captured?

When manticores are sentient and sapient, yes.
I never said it was easy being good, you know, that is why they call the DARK side the quick and easy way.

Quote from: flyingmice;218988Never played that anything was irredeemably evil. That's a big difference, true, but in combating "monsters" putting yourself at their level makes the PCs just as monstrous.

I've always subscribed to the mythic depiction of monsters as manifestations of primal evil, rather than their modern anthropological depiction as misunderstood outsiders. I don't recall Theseus wracked with doubt about putting himself at the level of the Minotaur, or Perseus tying up the Medusa rather than slaying it, or Beowulf's good name as a hero being sullied by ripping off Grendel's arm and then chasing the helpless monster back to its lair to finish the job.

Quote from: Haffrung;219016Wow. So if the PCs found a manticore sleeping in a cave, they'd have to wake it up before they attacked it?

The logistics of taking care of the dozens of prisoners dropped by Sleep spells in a dungeon like the Keep on the Borderlands must have been formidable. If you really believe killing helpless monsters is evil, you can't just leave goblins and orcs tied up in a dungeon where they're likely to just be killed by something else. That's no better than killing them yourself. So where do you take them after they're captured?

I don't think we played the same game, Haffrung, in spite of the name. I could count the times we went into a dungeon on one hand over twenty years of play, and we didn't use modules. AD&D was flexible enough that our games would have very little in common. As I see more and more responses, I can see that perhaps we were the exception, and most folks didn't care about such things. Personally, I would have lasted maybe 5 sessions playing the  more popular way and gone on to a bright future in Keypunch machine operating.

-clash

The minotaur is a shunned outsider who got into his situation through no fault of his own to be honest.

For D&D, I'm fine with "sleep then slaughter". If anything the rigid alignment system reinforces it in my mind. Not that I can't see your point, Clash, but I'd reserve the "serious" grappling with morality to games that didn't have such a stark system. Which is exactly the opposite of Stuart's idea--interesting, huh?

And Stuart's idea is fine--the idea of the cinematically good white-hat shining-teeth hero--except if you're going to enforce that, then as a GM IMO you're also obliged not to challenge the cinematic cliches by putting the PC into situations where he has to worry about whether a prisoner or knocked-out enemy is going to pose problems later.  I've said it before: making a big deal out of "What is Good?" by forcing the Paladin to ask himself what to do with the Orc women and children after he's slaughtered the males is almost always a bad idea.

Quote from: Serious Paul;219005My players would be NPC's with in seconds of the start of your game. Over and over and over and over again.

Same. I'm playing an undead master swordsman cum assassin / serial killer right now. He's lawful evil and awesome. My buddy plays his employer, a craven but ambitious undead nobleman who murdered, kidnapped and lied his way to being one of the most influential men in the kingdom.

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=9983
http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=9986
http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=9989

Evil PCs can actually be pretty awesome so long as you're willing to let them run around the sandbox getting up to trouble.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;219034For D&D, I'm fine with "sleep then slaughter". If anything the rigid alignment system reinforces it in my mind. Not that I can't see your point, Clash, but I'd reserve the "serious" grappling with morality to games that didn't have such a stark system. Which is exactly the opposite of Stuart's idea--interesting, huh?

I didn't have a choice - or I thought I didn't. My old group only was interested in playing D&D - period. So I gave them a D&D I could live with. When I couldn't live with it any more, I started playing - and writing - games with less "stark" morality with a new group.

From the "When DMing Goes Wrong" thread:

Quote from: mhensley;219076Why did the orc continue fighting at zero hit points instead of running away?

Because running away or surrendering will get it killed anyway, so it might as well fight to the end and take a few enemies with it. When you corner a creature and allow no escape, it fights to the death.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;219161From the "When DMing Goes Wrong" thread:



Because running away or surrendering will get it killed anyway, so it might as well fight to the end and take a few enemies with it. When you corner a creature and allow no escape, it fights to the death.

-clash

But what would your military leaders of yore think about leaving a capable enemy behind them as they advance? Wise or foolish?

Bill

Quote from: Haffrung;219016The logistics of taking care of the dozens of prisoners dropped by Sleep spells in a dungeon like the Keep on the Borderlands must have been formidable. If you really believe killing helpless monsters is evil, you can't just leave goblins and orcs tied up in a dungeon where they're likely to just be killed by something else. That's no better than killing them yourself. So where do you take them after they're captured?

I remember an AD&D game I ran for my (then 12 year old, now 21) son and a friend of his, the last time I ran D&D. They were exploring a huge island that had just been invaded by an army of humanoids. Every time they made an orc or hobgoblin or goblin surrender, they persuaded it to join them with better pay and food and medical treatment. By the end of the game, they had an army with which to beat the bad guy's army - mano a mano, their humanoids were healthier, better fed, and better armed. A couple of 12 year olds figured that out.

I just remembered that, and thought I should share.

-clash

Quote from: HinterWelt;219168But what would your military leaders of yore think about leaving a capable enemy behind them as they advance? Wise or foolish?

Bill

Military leaders in the medieval times took prisoners all the time. The lower class soldiers were mostly stripped of their equipment and wealth and allowed to depart. As for the wealthy prisoners, the military loved to take prisoners - they could always ransom them. In ancient times, prisoners were sold into slavery, from which they could possibly buy their way out - ancient slavery was not like American chattel slavery.

-clash