[3.5] In harsh environments, would eating a fallen ally be an alignment shift?

[Pika...]

Just wondering.

Since I might end up reverting to my Frostburn stone age campaign idea now that my current campaign is dead in the water, I am planning for it to get pretty gritty if the PCs/players do not plan well and/or far enough ahead.

[shadzar]

Well....you don't need the entire ally to rez them later.

[Yukitsu]

I'd say no. Cannibalizing a body as evil is culture dependant, and I frankly don't think those sorts of considerations match well with an absolutest system of morals, where you can't really argue that doing this is harmful to anyone.

Then again, we're zombies, so obviously eating people is a bit more natural to us.

[Foryn Gilnith]

It depends on how your character feels about it. The ally is already dead, so no alignment shift for killing him. The only axis that might change is law/chaos. If you subscribed to any sort of code that involved a prohibition on cannibalism, resorting to it is going to give you a few chaotic points. You might shift a bit towards chaos if you do it despite party members' protests.

[Mongoose87]

As a zombie, I have to rule not eating him to be an evil act.

[Lycan 01]

Would the dead PC have wanted his body to serve as food in order to keep his friends alive? More than likely, yes. I'd say no, it wouldn't cause an Alignment shift, unless it was for more... bloodthirsty reasons...

[Yukitsu]

Does bloodthirsty reasons include drinking his blood, because it's rich in iron?

[Drakyn]

Going by your stone age campaign context, you could go it one further and have it be a highly respectful act. You're making sure your pal's a part of your group forever now! Plus, this way you don't either (a) waste time and effort burying him (when you're starving), (b) cremate him (VERY difficult with that level of tech available, unless you've got some good magic), or (c) let him rot/get eaten by wildlife (which is probably disrespectful).

[Zeta Kai]

I'd allow it, but clerics & paladins should ask their diety for atonement, if their god has a problem with that sort of thing. Desperate times call for desperate measures, but some gods would view it as a test of faith. For some reason, I'd expect druids & rangers to be able to do this without issue, but that's just me. Barbarians, as with most things, get a free pass, morally speaking.

[Irreverent Fool]

It's opinion.

Now, if one of your allies falls in battle and you are all starving, I don't really see how this can be construed as evil.

If your party is starving and they realize only by eating one person can they survive, then decide on some sort of lottery (e.g.: drawing straws), as long as nobody was coerced into the lottery or cheats in some fashion, I don't think it's evil.

If someone up and kills another for the express purpose of eating them without consent, that's definitely evil.

If one sacrifices oneself willingly to be eaten by the party, I'd say that's a good act and partaking in the cannibalism at that point is not evil.

Historical cannibalism trials tend to mirror the above. Look some up. They're quite a read.

Oh and if you're a human? Eat an elf!

obnoxious
sig

[Pika...]

Oh, and two more related questions please:

1. Would you require a fort save or something for the person to be able to stomach it? (Just thinking about it made me taste my breakfast)

2. How do you figure out how many day's worth of rations you can get out of a person?

I imagine it also would be helpful information if they will be doing a lot of hunting and rations preparing as well.

[Typewriter]

You do have the possibilities of a character 'feeling' a certain way about the act which could influence them. Like someone said if they felt it was unlawful to do so, then they would 'feel' chaotic. If they thought it was 'evil' then they would 'feel' evil.

More than anything I'd say those 'feelings' would affect their roleplaying to see if they succumb than an actual 'change your alignment effect'.

The two things that I say really matter though are:
1. Do the gods care? If the gods of good look at it as an evil act, then it is one. The gods determine everything. If a dead body is nothing special, then what's the problem?

2. What is a body by your definition? I think, that as far as the books are concerned a dead body is considered an object. I thought I remembered reading that somewhere, but am unsure. If that's the case, then no - I don't think there should be any penalty for eating an object, as theres no reason to.



Short answer:
Roleplay wise should be up to the player
System wise should be up to the DM based off of his/her interpretation of the gods feeling on it in addition to 'what is a body?'.

[Irreverent Fool]

Oh, and two more related questions please:

1. Would you require a fort save or something for the person to be able to stomach it? (Just thinking about it made me taste my breakfast)

2. How do you figure out how many day's worth of rations you can get out of a person?

I imagine it also would be helpful information if they will be doing a lot of hunting and rations preparing as well.

1. If you're starving, this becomes less of an issue. I think this would be unfair to force on a player and more a matter of willing RP.

2. That's not as difficult as it seems. I believe there is an entry for dried meat in the PHB.

obnoxious
sig

[Yukitsu]

Probably half a person by weight is useable, depending on how good the players are at getting the most out of things.

[LibraryOgre]

I would not class it an evil act in most cases, though I would look askance at a paladin who didn't want to atone afterwards.

[Nai_Calus]

Just get Regeneration/a ring thereof, and hack the nice juicy fighter's leg off. Repeatedly.

Then no one has to starve to death.

[Myou]

If doing so will prevent them being raised, yes.

If not, no. Though it may cause some player's lunches to shift.

[Foryn Gilnith]

1. Would you require a fort save or something for the person to be able to stomach it? (Just thinking about it made me taste my breakfast)

Some people are disgusted by cannibalism. Others aren't. Ironically, a trace of nausea afflicted me at the thought of you being nauseous (sort of like a yawn), but I don't find much disgust in cannibalism. Sadness about death and disgust at eating raw meat, possibly, but I'm not an adventurer.

2. How do you figure out how many day's worth of rations you can get out of a person?

Medium characters need "a pound of decent food" per day. I'd allow human meat, if properly prepared, to serve as about 1/2 or maybe, maybe 3/4 of that requirement. If you're just eating meat, maybe 2-4 pounds/day would be needed to stave off damage, and then malnutrition may ensue.

[Grumman]

It's threads like this that make me appreciate the Flux Adept.

"Hey, guys. While you were arguing about whether to eat Bob's corpse or starve, I found some nice, nutritious gravel.

Mmm, gravel."

[Ormur]

There's probably something in the rules that disagrees with me but since eating your dead friend not to starve has no bad consequences I wouldn't rule it as being evil. It could even be good if you shared him with other starving people. But since cannibalism is a taboo in most cultures it could conceivably be considered chaotic. I wouldn't switch someones alignment either way for it though.

[kjones]

2. How do you figure out how many day's worth of rations you can get out of a person?

I imagine it also would be helpful information if they will be doing a lot of hunting and rations preparing as well.

Hackmaster has rules for this! Let's see if I can find them...

[shadzar]

amount of rations?

I guess you mean in terms of a single person eating a whole ration. Well is all the edible parts were eaten, then figuring standard rations weight about a pound, you would have 20% of the weight in rations.

100 lb ally = 20 units of rations....you might get an extra pound out of the marrow in the bones of the ally.

Anything more than 20% would just be water anyway and not really provide any substance other than to make you feel full.

So for every 100 lbs of ally, you can get 20 simple rations, and for each ally you can squeeze another ration out of the marrow bones.

So enough to last a party of 4 surviving members a week under normal circumstances per 100lbs of ally.



If only you had a nice Chianti and some fava beans to go with the liver.

[quick_comment]

I would not have alignment change, but paladins would fall.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Would it displease you to elaborate on that a bit? You don't need to, since the OP didn't strictly request more than such a simple answer, but the reasoning might be interesting.

[The Mentalist]

Why would a paladin fall?

[shadzar]

Why would a paladin fall?

Desecrating a corpse?

[Project_Mayhem]

Seems to me like it entirely depends on your DMs personal prejudice/bias.

I'd say 'it's fine but try not make a habit of it', but then I can see why someone might say the opposite.

[quick_comment]

Would it displease you to elaborate on that a bit? You don't need to, since the OP didn't strictly request more than such a simple answer, but the reasoning might be interesting.

A single evil act does not cause an alignment shift. A single evil act does cause a paladin to fall.

[Zeta Kai]

It's funny, I'm a vegetarian, but I would have no qualms with eating someone in dire circumstances. Just cover their face, so I don't have to look at them.

[awa]

I think one book book of exalted deeds maby? specified that eating a sentient was an evil act i don't know if it made any exception if you were starving.