No Wrong Choice

[Mikeavelli]

Many DM's are sadists, fond of putting their players in a situation where there is no right choice. Village full of plagued individuals with no cure, if you don't destroy the village, the plague will spread, so you have to choose between killing innocents or allowing more innocents to die through your inaction, that sort of stuff.

It's ridiculous.

The Ethical kick I'm on is one where there's no wrong decision! If a Paladin were in the group, having to make these choices, neither of them would have a chance of making him fall. They're bad choices, certainly, but they all come down to what the players think is right...

First Scenario:
This fascination came for me with The Deva Spark, an old Planescape adventure centered around A Deva that left its divine "spark" in what it thought was a good person, so it could go around without that spark trumpeting its existence to the forces of evil for some stealth mission. Before it finished that mission, the mortal died, and went to hell.

Eventually, its soul was turned into a Baatezu, but the spark still inside it started changing the Baatezu into something... Else. Something good-aligned.

After a long Adventure, essentially a huge glorified test of their character, the players are given the choice about how to resolve this situation, whether to restore the spark to the Deva ("killing" the good Baatezu by having it return to normal evil ways, but restoring the Deva fully) - Giving the Spark to the Baatezu (Allowing it to develop into a full-fledged good being, but demoting the Deva into just another every day petitioner on the upper planes..

Or they can split the Spark, allowing the Deva to eventually recover, and giving the Baatezu the ability to continue on the road towards good, with the Caveat that, with only half a spark, the Deva might not recover, and the Baatezu might just choose to go back to killing sods.

None of these choices are "wrong" - and in fact the only wrong choice is a player trying to keep the spark for themselves (which results in annihilation).

Second scenario


In one of my own games, the Players were after a wild beast that was terrorizing the countryside, typical fantasy stuff, but they got thrown for a loop.

After investigating some bodies, finding clues, and seeing things about trying to track the beast down, they find out that the Beast, whatever it is, hasn't been killing anyone. Enough skill points in heal allows them to determine that it wasn't a wild animal that killed the people that are ending up dead, and if they check the wounds of the hunter that led out search parties trying to capture the beast, he's also got sword and spear wounds, but no claw or bite marks...

This is explained by how the Goblins in the Valley, normally just pests that only survive because their home is a Tuckers Kobolds sorta've place that no-one has ever managed to fully clear out, are out in the open now. They've got some kind of crazy magic that allows them to stand toe-to-toe with the humans of the valley, and beat the snot out of them.

Eventually it comes down to the Beast, a Magical, evil thing that was brought to the valley in an attempt to destabilize it (Imperial troops were going to show up in another week, kill it, and replace the local noblemen for being incompetent) - but, it was smart enough to realize that it living through this was never part of the Bargain. It just wants to go home.

It changed the goblins of the Valley as part of a deal for them to Tunnel a way out (All the exits having been blocked off already) - and they used those gifts to go hunt humans instead. Not it's fault, or so it says.

It's also never killed a human. Ever. Various truth-confirming spells will verify this. In fact, it's never actually done anything to deserve being hunted down and killed! It just wants to leave, and if it does, it'll head home and not bother anyone that doesn't bother it first.

It is, however, still an evil beasty whose actions have caused, and will probably continue to cause, some amount of indirect nastiness in the future.

Do you let it go? Or kill it?


Last one



The Players are on the hunt for a mass-murderer, a sick, depraved individual who, if the townsfolk caught him, would be torn limb from limb. And he would deserve it too.

The Local sheriff, whose own son was killed by this guy, has made it known that if he's brought in, he's got a long, painful death ahead of him. He might even spring to have a cleric of St. Cuthbert around to heal the guy up so he doesn't die too quickly.

When, inevitably, the players track down the murderer, and capture them, he pleads with them. "Kill me, kill me now, please. I know I don't deserve to live, but nobody deserves to die like that!"

What do you do?


how would you, as a player, resolve these situations?

And, have you ever seen or run something like this? I love new ideas, as this sort of thing has proven to be wildly popular, my players want a little more of it.

[holywhippet]

Not sure about the first one.

Second one, the beast can't exactly be evil if it never kills anyone. Set it free.

Third one, hand him over to someone else higher up than the sheriff - like whoever he works for. Or hand him over to the local clerics/paladins of a lawful good God. If neither option is available, kill him.

[Rockphed]

The first one, I would choose door three. Between them, it seems like the best choice. Sure, the demon might not actually make it back, and the Deva might die, but where is the fun in sure things.

The second, well, I don't know. Knowing that there is no wrong choice, I would probably talk it over with the group. It might depend on what it looked like and whether I had known anybody who got killed, but I would probably kill the thing if it couldn't come up with a better sob story. It may be telling the truth, but it also did nothing(or at least not enough) to stop the goblins.

The third is simpler. I would run him through on the spot and give him a deep grave. Then I would return to town, and, if questioned, make a vague remark about how some cowards give up when they have no other ways out and some fight to the death.

With that aside, I approve of this idea of No Wrong Choice. Sometimes the test isn't what we do, but how we value justice and mercy(which are inherent in these situations.)

[Setra]

First: I would try to split it
Second: Let it go free
Third: Just kill him

Edit: Actually on the third it depends.. How did he kill others? If he tortured others or raped anyone I would torture him myself before handing him off... but I'm not nice.

[Winged One]

For number 1, I'd ask the Deva, unless losing it's spark of goodness has made it any less good-aligned. If deprived of the opportunity to do so(either because the Deva is now capable of being selfish enough to demand it's power back without a second thought or simple inability), I'd go with the split option unless my character is a pessimist. I personally would make the decision based on the power of both the Baatezu and the expected power of what it was becoming, and decide between options 1 and 2 based on the greater benefit to the forces of Good.

For number 2, it's done absolutely nothing wrong and I'd be inclined to think that someone who chose to kill it just wants it's treasure. Okay re-read the part about it empowering the goblins. I'd think it would depend on the character. My own personal morality would be to let it go if I knew that it was a No Wrong Choice scenario, but would probably kill it if not since that seems the least likely to go wrong spectacularly.

For number 3, any good-aligned character of mine would either kill him or take holywhippet's option, depending on mental ability scores and ethical alignment.

And I also like this idea. It lets a player explore the morals of their character without feeling screwed over.

[mikeejimbo]

First Scenario:

Split the spark. Kill them both while they're in a weakened state.


Second scenario

Kill the beast. Kill the goblins. Demand a reward. Kill anything else we feel like.


Last one

Beat him to negative hit points and then make a heal check to stabilize. Take him back to the town. Ask to help torture him, or at least let us watch.

Or, if he offers to lead us to a big pile of treasure if we'll let him go, kill him. Speak with dead.

OK, so this is how my group would deal with things. And want to know why? If we tried to be GOOD, here's what would happen:

First Scenario: Choice 1 ) Give the Deva back the spark. The Baatezu kills us.
Choice 2 ) Let the Baatezu have the spark. We're smote by divine wrath for not letting the Deva have the spark.
Choice 3 ) Split it. The Deva never recovers and the Baatezu goes back to being evil. The Baatezu kills us, and then we're smote by divine wrath

Second Scenario: Choice 1 ) Kill the beast. We're punished by the Imperials for usurping their rule, then we're killed by the goblins.
Choice 2 ) Don't kill the beast. We're punished by the people for not killing the beast. Then we're killed by the beast.

Third Scenario: Choice 1 ) Kill him quickly. We're punished by the sheriff for killing him.
Choice 2 ) Bring him in. He turns into some sort of super-demon-type-thing and kills us on the way back.

We can't win, unless we're evil. :smallfrown:

[Winged One]

Split the spark. Kill them both while they're in a weakened state.



Kill the beast. Kill the goblins. Demand a reward. Kill anything else we feel like.



Beat him to negative hit points and then make a heal check to stabilize. Take him back to the town. Ask to help torture him, or at least let us watch.

Or, if he offers to lead us to a big pile of treasure if we'll let him go, kill him. Speak with dead.

OK, so this is how my group would deal with things. And want to know why? If we tried to be GOOD, here's what would happen:

First Scenario: Choice 1 ) Give the Deva back the spark. The Baatezu kills us.
Choice 2 ) Let the Baatezu have the spark. We're smote by divine wrath for not letting the Deva have the spark.
Choice 3 ) Split it. The Deva never recovers and the Baatezu goes back to being evil. The Baatezu kills us, and then we're smote by divine wrath

Second Scenario: Choice 1 ) Kill the beast. We're punished by the Imperials for usurping their rule, then we're killed by the goblins.
Choice 2 ) Don't kill the beast. We're punished by the people for not killing the beast. Then we're killed by the beast.

Third Scenario: Choice 1 ) Kill him quickly. We're punished by the sheriff for killing him.
Choice 2 ) Bring him in. He turns into some sort of super-demon-type-thing and kills us on the way back.

We can't win, unless we're evil. :smallfrown:

Okay, what would you do if your DM wasn't a douchebag?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I love things like this. Scenarios that would make a Paladin fall by RAW, but really are just there to make the players question themselves.

1:Give it to the Baatezu. It has possession of it now, and removing it without B's permission would be wrong. Granted, if he's willing to give part of it up, then do so, but not without his permission.

2: The monster's been neutral, not evil. It's just avoiding an untimely death any way it can. Let it go, and meanwhile, ask it to take back the gob's powers. Of course, that assumes it didn't cause any crimes before it found out it was going to die, and that the Destabilization it was a part of was either Legal or Good. I'd definitely want more information as a player.

3: Execute him. Assisted Suicide is not a crime, IMHO, but no one deserves torture, not even a torturer. Then use Illusions/Conjurations so the Sheriff can get his "play", and tell him a week later after he realizes what it did to his soul.

[Winged One]

3: Execute him. Assisted Suicide is not a crime, IMHO, but no one deserves torture, not even a torturer. Then use Illusions/Conjurations so the Sheriff can get his "play", and tell him a week later after he realizes what it did to his soul.

I honestly don't know what it says about me that the word that springs to mind from the underlined passage is "elegant."

[SurlySeraph]

On the first one? All of the options really seem equally valid. I'd roll 1d3.

On the second one? I, personally, would let it go. But most of the characters I roleplay wouldn't.

On the third, I'd just kill the guy. He's going to hell anyway, might as well send him there faster.

[LibraryOgre]

First situation: Give the Baatezu the spark. There are several reasons. First, the Deva got itself into this situation; it's the result of its bad choices that the evil person was given the spark in the first place. Secondly, the end result is a net gain for good; while the Deva will diminish and go into the West, the Baatezu will be good. The Deva can increase in goodly power with the passage of time; a fallen Baatezu will not. It is, in essence, a bird in the hand that will one day call to the other in the bush.

Second Situation: Since I cannot create a new exit for it (I am assuming), then I would suggest that it either unchange the goblins, or, if that can't happen, then it needs to rectify the problem it has caused. It has two choices: I can kill it, or it can kill the goblins, driving them into their caves. If it kills the goblins, it can hide until the passes are open.

Third situation: Kill him, assuming I am legally empowered to do so. Letting the sheriff torture him will taint the sheriff, who is consumed by grief and rage. Killing someone who is legally bound to die doesn't stain my soul... especially if I give him a chance to repent his crimes, first. Letting the sheriff have his "fun" will damage him in ways I do not wish to allow.

I actually came up with a series of campaigns like this... neither side was wrong, both sides were kinda right, and evil was incidental.

[Mewtarthio]

First dilemma: Let the devil keep the spark. The deva is already Good and will remain so, but as Mark Hall said it was his mistake that led to the situation. He deserves the consequences; the baatezu does not need to sacrifice himself. Besides, look at the tradeoff, really: Make one guy more powerful vs saving another guy's soul. It's a no-brainer, honestly.

Second dilemma: Kill the Beast! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uejygM27Skc) Like you said, it's an Evil monster. Just because it technically doesn't kill anyone directly doesn't make it any less of a threat. It has demonstrated the ability to make evil creatures dramatically stronger, and it is willing to do so whenever such an action benefits it.

Third dilemma: Not really a dilemma at all. Maybe the right thing would be to keep him hidden from the sheriff to convert him to the side of Good, but that's taking the Exalted route. For most normal people, putting the guy out of his misery is fine. Turning him over to be tortured is not: To put an end to his actions, you only need to kill or permanently incarcerate him, plus the torture will have a deleterious impact on the morals of that society as a whole (they've justified it once, so it's easier to use again, and the sheriff has that black mark on his conscience).

[Mr.Bookworm]

Assuming Paladin-ship:

1st - I split the spark. The Deva, as an inherently good creature, will probably be okay with this, as one of the goodest things you can do is redeeming an evil creature. Redeeming a devil, no less, is something incredibly rare, and a chance that shouldn't be passed up. Furthermore, I invite the Baatezu along on the adventures, so it can have the opportunity to do good, and so I can keep an eye on it to ensure it sticks to the path. Hopefully, the Deva will recover, but as above, I think an inherently good being would be ok with that.

2nd - I kill the Beast. No matter what it has or hasn't done, the fact remains that letting it live will probably cause death and suffering in the future, which is unacceptable. However, I would probably try to give it a chance at redemption first.

3rd - I take him to town, and make damn sure he gets a fair trial. If the sheriff tries to take him anyway, I explain the need for a fair trial, and knock out the sheriff and lock him up until the trial is over with if he resorts to violence.

[caden_varn]

Hmmm. For the first one, I'd either split the spark or leave in the demon. As other posters have said, the Deva really only has itself to blame.

On the second, I'd probably want to know more about the creature. I wouldn't want to kill it just because all its kind were evil (assuming I could get a reasonable chance to determine its own morality), but the fact is does not kill people doesn't necessarily mean it is non-evil. What other forms of evil does it do? As a base, I'd probably kill it though.

On the third, I'd kill him, both to stop him being tortured and also to make sure he cannot escape.

I don't generally give these sorts of choices (although I do something a little bit like this at times), but I do always try to make sure that I always can think of at least two ways out of any situation in the main quest - to stop railroading apart from anything else). Not necessarily always all good or ideal choices, but viable ones none-the-less :smallsmile:

[Tormsskull]

I think the most interesting part of this thread is that the OP asked what you would do as a player. Wouldn't that really depend on what character you were playing? Unless you RP every character as the same, there should not be a default 'I would do x' answer.

[arguskos]

1. The Spark. I would actually see if I couldn't combine the Deva and the Baatezu into one creature, and give IT the spark. See, the Deva might die without it's essence, and the Baatezu now has a need for goodness, so shouldn't I combine them into one creature, and give it the spark, so they can both survive (sorta)?

2. I would talk to the beast, see what IT wants. If it gives a compelling argument as to why I shouldn't kill it for the evil that it brings in it's wake, I'll help return it home. If it just begs me to be nice, then sorry pal, you bring evil. *smites*

3. Torture can't be condoned, but neither can mercy for the truly wicked. I'd kill him, but in a humane way, since death need not be degrading nor dirty. A simple execution would be best, followed with a unmarked grave and the proper burial rites (if I could).

[metagaia]

I think the most interesting part of this thread is that the OP asked what you would do as a player. Wouldn't that really depend on what character you were playing? Unless you RP every character as the same, there should not be a default 'I would do x' answer.

Quite, so I will roughtly divide my characters into my lawful good side and my chaotic good side.

LG:
1. Give the spark to the Deva. Any verbal agreement that was reached will be null and void since the agreement was based on the original mortal neing good. Therefore the spark still belongs to the Deva and should be returned to it.
2. Do not kill the beast, but do not help it either, merely deal with the goblins. It's actions in itself do not warrent the death sentence, but it is clear that the imperials want it dead and have good reason to, so let them deal with it.
3. Turn the guy in. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and the townsfolk need to see this guy serve justice.

CG.
1. Give the devil the spark. The idea that one soul can be redeemed is worth a life in itself, and it is a tremendous burst of hope and detriment to evil.
2. Relase the beast on the condition that it deals with the goblins. It saves the townspeople and stops the corrupt government
3. Kill the guy, killing him is the kind thing to do and also saves the souls of those who would torture him.

There are other ways I would RP a character but 80% fit into one of those two philosophies.

[caden_varn]

I think the most interesting part of this thread is that the OP asked what you would do as a player. Wouldn't that really depend on what character you were playing? Unless you RP every character as the same, there should not be a default 'I would do x' answer.

Well, I would say a default answer is reasonable, while bearing in mind that the specific character may choose differently due to his background.

I'd also say that I wouldn't necessarily view the differences by alignment (otherwise we are getting back into the alignment-as-personality debate), although that would make a difference.
For example, in case 2, if you are playing a character with a background of being misunderstood and persecuted, you are more likely to empathise with the beast and hence let it go. If your family had been massacred by a creature of this type (or similar) you are probably going to be more likely to kill it, regardless of your alignment.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

LG:
1. Give the spark to the Deva. Any verbal agreement that was reached will be null and void since the agreement was based on the original mortal neing good. Therefore the spark still belongs to the Deva and should be returned to it.I have to wonder about this. As far as I can tell, it didn't have any sort of agreement. The Deva essentially shoved a ball of light into some bum while he slept. Now the Deva wants it back. I don't think it's LG to take the only thing making someone good away from them without permission just to help someone deal with their own mistake.

[Telonius]

Third situation: Give the guy a sword. "You have a choice. Fight me now, with honor, and die like a man; or go back to face your justice. Either choice is better than you deserve. I will have no part in condemning a brave man to death by torture, but I will also have no qualms about sending a coward to his fate."

[LibraryOgre]

I think the most interesting part of this thread is that the OP asked what you would do as a player. Wouldn't that really depend on what character you were playing? Unless you RP every character as the same, there should not be a default 'I would do x' answer.

I default to Paladin when answering moral quesitons.

[mikeejimbo]

Hmm, I had a thought about the Baatezu. It's only good because it has the spark, so isn't it being forced to be good beyond its own free will? And isn't that evil?

[LibraryOgre]

Hmm, I had a thought about the Baatezu. It's only good because it has the spark, so isn't it being forced to be good beyond its own free will? And isn't that evil?

It's not being forced to be good because of the spark; it is able to be good because of the spark.

[UserClone]

Third situation: Give the guy a sword. "You have a choice. Fight me now, with honor, and die like a man; or go back to face your justice. Either choice is better than you deserve. I will have no part in condemning a brave man to death by torture, but I will also have no qualms about sending a coward to his fate."

This. That is pimperrifically Paladintastic!

[AslanCross]

1. My answer to the first situation makes some assumptions, so it might not be entirely valid.

How much does the Deva want/need its spark back? Knowing that the spark is preventing one more full-fledged baatezu from corrupting and/or attacking the mortal world, would the Deva be willing to sacrifice his own status in Celestia for giving a normally fiendish soul the ability to go against its evil nature? If the Deva sees the value in this, I'm pretty sure the celestial hierarchy would still reward the Deva for the sacrifice he makes in order to redeem a fiend.

Of course, a paladin I play would ask the Deva first. However, an unwilling sacrifice doesn't count. If the Deva wants it back, I think the best would be to take the spark instead of splitting it. The multiverse retains its ratio of celestial to fiendish outsiders. Nothing really lost. The splitting option, however, makes for a far more interesting follow-up adventure.

2. Second is a lot more gray, IMO. A paladin I play would let the creature go, finding a way for it to escape, as long as it agrees to never come back. Just because it's evil and has caused evil down the line (don't we all?) doesn't mean I have to bash its face in. I'd then seek out the goblin tribes and try to make them cut out the raids. If diplomacy fails, that's the only time I draw the sword.

3. I'd turn him in, but volunteer to be his legal counsel to ensure that the law is dealt fairly. If he's sentenced to death, I would stand by to make sure that he is executed humanely and not tortured. I would stand by his side and volunteer to offer the prayers for the man during the procedure. If I'm good enough at diplomacy and the sheriff is foaming at the mouth, I'd try to convince whoever is presiding the trial that the Sheriff is in no condition to dispense justice with the impartiality required. I'd probably make an enemy, sure, but my paladin would not err against his code by doing this.

EDIT: I have to agree that Thelonius's solution is the badass paladin solution.

[horseboy]

I think the most interesting part of this thread is that the OP asked what you would do as a player. Wouldn't that really depend on what character you were playing? Unless you RP every character as the same, there should not be a default 'I would do x' answer.QFT. #3, for instance would matter which character I was playing. My t'skrang Nethermancer would probably bone dance march him straight into town square then use rebel limb (yay multi-disciplining) to force him to watch as his own hand flayes himself alive. Oh OH! Or even better, summons an earth elemental to dig a big pit, throw him in there and animate the bodies of all those he's killed so they can decide his fate. He's EXTREMELY paternal, the surest way to invoke his full ire is to mess with kids.
My falaris Sociologist would hand him over to the crowd as such punishments are not seen as excessive in falar culture and would eventually use the whole incident as a basis for a paper on the mob psychology of race X.
My tulgarian marine, as a corpsman, he's used to having to do mercy killings of people he likes. People he doesn't like wouldn't be that hard for him, if it wasn't for his species. Since they have such a high birth rate they hold life with very little respect. They value ideals far more. His honour would not be able to let him kill an unarmed captive even if they both wanted him dead. The guy, in essence would have condemned himself by surrendering.

[alchemyprime]

Many DM's are sadists, fond of putting their players in a situation where there is no right choice. Village full of plagued individuals with no cure, if you don't destroy the village, the plague will spread, so you have to choose between killing innocents or allowing more innocents to die through your inaction, that sort of stuff.

It's ridiculous.

The Ethical kick I'm on is one where there's no wrong decision! If a Paladin were in the group, having to make these choices, neither of them would have a chance of making him fall. They're bad choices, certainly, but they all come down to what the players think is right...

First Scenario:
This fascination came for me with The Deva Spark, an old Planescape adventure centered around A Deva that left its divine "spark" in what it thought was a good person, so it could go around without that spark trumpeting its existence to the forces of evil for some stealth mission. Before it finished that mission, the mortal died, and went to hell.

Eventually, its soul was turned into a Baatezu, but the spark still inside it started changing the Baatezu into something... Else. Something good-aligned.

After a long Adventure, essentially a huge glorified test of their character, the players are given the choice about how to resolve this situation, whether to restore the spark to the Deva ("killing" the good Baatezu by having it return to normal evil ways, but restoring the Deva fully) - Giving the Spark to the Baatezu (Allowing it to develop into a full-fledged good being, but demoting the Deva into just another every day petitioner on the upper planes..

Or they can split the Spark, allowing the Deva to eventually recover, and giving the Baatezu the ability to continue on the road towards good, with the Caveat that, with only half a spark, the Deva might not recover, and the Baatezu might just choose to go back to killing sods.

None of these choices are "wrong" - and in fact the only wrong choice is a player trying to keep the spark for themselves (which results in annihilation).

I would look to the deva and explain that "You were good. It is not. I prefer to give the universe one less evil creature than to return to it one good one who can't see that as the greater good." I would then leave the spark in the Baatezu and find it refuge in the NG or LG city around Sigil (can't remember the name.)

Second scenario


In one of my own games, the Players were after a wild beast that was terrorizing the countryside, typical fantasy stuff, but they got thrown for a loop.

After investigating some bodies, finding clues, and seeing things about trying to track the beast down, they find out that the Beast, whatever it is, hasn't been killing anyone. Enough skill points in heal allows them to determine that it wasn't a wild animal that killed the people that are ending up dead, and if they check the wounds of the hunter that led out search parties trying to capture the beast, he's also got sword and spear wounds, but no claw or bite marks...

This is explained by how the Goblins in the Valley, normally just pests that only survive because their home is a Tuckers Kobolds sorta've place that no-one has ever managed to fully clear out, are out in the open now. They've got some kind of crazy magic that allows them to stand toe-to-toe with the humans of the valley, and beat the snot out of them.

Eventually it comes down to the Beast, a Magical, evil thing that was brought to the valley in an attempt to destabilize it (Imperial troops were going to show up in another week, kill it, and replace the local noblemen for being incompetent) - but, it was smart enough to realize that it living through this was never part of the Bargain. It just wants to go home.

It changed the goblins of the Valley as part of a deal for them to Tunnel a way out (All the exits having been blocked off already) - and they used those gifts to go hunt humans instead. Not it's fault, or so it says.

It's also never killed a human. Ever. Various truth-confirming spells will verify this. In fact, it's never actually done anything to deserve being hunted down and killed! It just wants to leave, and if it does, it'll head home and not bother anyone that doesn't bother it first.

It is, however, still an evil beasty whose actions have caused, and will probably continue to cause, some amount of indirect nastiness in the future.

Do you let it go? Or kill it?


I'd let the beast go and let it know that if it doesn't think out its actions in the future, I'd be forced to punish it. Then I'd find the goblins and tell them they have one chance to leave the humans alone and cease theis destruction. If they do not comply, I will kill them all off. Then I'd leave as mysterious as I came.

Last one



The Players are on the hunt for a mass-murderer, a sick, depraved individual who, if the townsfolk caught him, would be torn limb from limb. And he would deserve it too.

The Local sheriff, whose own son was killed by this guy, has made it known that if he's brought in, he's got a long, painful death ahead of him. He might even spring to have a cleric of St. Cuthbert around to heal the guy up so he doesn't die too quickly.

When, inevitably, the players track down the murderer, and capture them, he pleads with them. "Kill me, kill me now, please. I know I don't deserve to live, but nobody deserves to die like that!"

What do you do?


I look to him and find another way rather than killing him. I tell him to run into the woods. I (assuming I'm a cleric and have access to these spells) would place a Mark of Justice on him and use some appearance mucking spell to change him into another humanoid. If he fails to stop his ways, he will suffer an immense drop in health (-6 to Constitution). Then his choice will be a life being close to death or finding a way to die.

That is... how I'd handle it in 3.5 at least...

how would you, as a player, resolve these situations?

And, have you ever seen or run something like this? I love new ideas, as this sort of thing has proven to be wildly popular, my players want a little more of it.

Well, that's how I'd do it anyway...

[ZeroNumerous]

1. A Bearded devil is a devil. Devils only go up in ranks by selling souls(otherwise being Evil). This, a 'good' Bearded Devil is useless as it will never get any stronger. So kill the Bearded Devil and then sell the Spark in Dis. The Deva screwed itself by giving it away.

2. Tame the beast and ride it into battle against the goblins. If they surrender, you got a new goblin clan!

3. Kill the murderer for being bad enough to get caught. Kill the Sheriff because he's annoying. Needless to say, but you should take their stuff afterwards.

[Rockphed]

I default to Paladin when answering moral quesitons.

Same here. Besides, the OP was pretty much posting in response to all the "Make Class X fall" threads that have been in the forum this last week. Since Paladins are historically the class that has to face such things most often, I answered as a Paladin.

[kopout]

1
2. Tame the beast and ride it into battle against the goblins. If they surrender, you got a new goblin clan!


and then take over the town, militarizes it and when the government sends in there noble kill him the currant noble and and you have your self a nice little army and fiefdom:smallsmile:

[Yahzi]

They're bad choices...
But great scenarios!

1. Split - it's what the Deva would want, after all, if the Deva were good.

2. Cut a deal - if the Beast testifies against the Imperial officials who concocted this evil plan, we'll let it go. Just like they do on Law & Order. :smallbiggrin:

3. Turn him in - but enforce the law. If the law offends you, then it should be changed, but the murderer certainly doesn't deserve special mercy.