Five person team working for the Outward-Looking Faction of the Dwarfs of Glon' had found an important site that might be used to reconcile at least the less fanatical members of the factions. On the way home, they were ambushed by a group of fanatical members of the Inward-Looking Faction, all Dwarfs of course. The fight was short but fierce and fairly soon all of the fanatics were down ands some of the team members were being healed.

Hobson Buttons, a Hobbit, found that one of the enemy still breathed, far from where his teammates were at the time, and he finished the guy off. The other player-characters and the allied NPC all found out about it but they aren't all that upset. The other enemies were all dead.

Buttons is all bent out of shape. He is a very "Dwarf-ized" Hobbit and has tried very hard to overcome his early life in a criminal gang in the slums of Iron Town. While we don't use alignments, it is clear that he is trying to be very lawful. His player and I have talked about the situation. He feels that he has three options when they are back in Iron Town:

1: He can turn himself in. This will incriminate the others, since they knew about it. He probably won't get the death penalty but he might. The Inward-Looking Faction has great influence. This will rebound against his companions and the Faction to which he has devoted years.

2: He can convince the others to turn him in. This will get them off the hook but it will have the other bad results.

3: He can wait until their find leads to the hoped-for reconciliation and then reveal his misdeed.

He knows I won't tell him what to do but he wanted to talk about it. I wonder what more I should say.

---

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/218159/Glory-Road-Roleplay-Core-Rules

Through 99.9% of human history, finishing off a downed enemy that just attacked you wasn't murder. Offering quarter then killing those who surrender might be murder. When I was in the Territorial Army about half the basic training seemed to be about finishing off possibly dead enemies who might still threaten.

Why does he think it's murder? You told him so? Why do the other guys regard it as murder? It seems quite an unusual norm to me.

Can't even begin to answer. What are the laws where this happened? Usually murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one elf/hobbit/dwarf by another elf/hobbit/dwarf. Was this unlawful and premeditated?

He put a fatally wounded enemy out of his misery. This isn't murder, it's a courtesy.

Quote from: S'mon;981354Why does he think it's murder? You told him so? Why do the other guys regard it as murder? It seems quite an unusual norm to me.

I agree.  There are a lot of good reasons you might need to finish off a downed foe.  It might not be feasible to safely bring him to justice, for instance.  He might have information that you can't afford to let him pass on.

And even if you didn't need to, I think he's taking it a bit too far.  If you would find his solutions disruptive and the player insists on roleplaying his PC's angst, you might suggest he do something to atone, like pay a weregeld.  Maybe he needs to talk to a priest or divine being and seek penance, and they will give him a quest.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;981353I wonder what more I should say.

Tell him or her to put on big boy pants and make a fucking decision, ie, roleplay the gawdamn character.

What kind of mewling asshole needs help with this shit?

Addendum: And why the fuck is this being handled out-of-character? Why isn't the character talking with the other adventurers? With a priest? With a lawyer? In-fucking-character?

I kerb stomp enemies all the time... But then I tend not to play lawful characters.

I don't see anything too wrong with a lawful character finishing off a legitimate enemy. Lawful characters can be bastards just look at any Witchfinder of paladin zealot.

But if Buttons has 'character guilt' (for some bizarre reason) then he just hands himself in and rolls up a new character. That said, who he actually hands himself into is another can of worms (does anyone actually care?). Or just plays it as character guilt and let him atone through good deeds.

I'll mirror what others have said here.

Why is the character and/or player upset?

Finishing off an enemy you were trying to kill anyhow is somehow bad?

What were the alternatives?

Healing the villain - so they can try and kill the PCs or other people later?
Leaving them to die - so you just stood there and watched, or walked away doing nothing? To some that is WORSE!

Putting the enemy out of their misery was probably the best move possible in that situation.(unless the minion/villain was known to be just misguided. Then there might be regrets, or not. Stupid is its own reward and that reward is sometimes death.)

As a DM Id point out the above.

Also why would any local law get in an uproar over finishing off an enemy when you've just killed how many who just attacked you? That doesnt make any sense.

Quote from: S'mon;981354Through 99.9% of human history, finishing off a downed enemy that just attacked you wasn't murder. Offering quarter then killing those who surrender might be murder. When I was in the Territorial Army about half the basic training seemed to be about finishing off possibly dead enemies who might still threaten.

Why does he think it's murder? You told him so? Why do the other guys regard it as murder? It seems quite an unusual norm to me.

It is an unusual norm. It has to do with his being so heavily influenced by Dwarf society. The enemy was in their power and the normal thing to do, in that place at that time, would be to turn him in. The humans and Elf on the team think he's being silly to sweat it. The two Dwarfs are less blasé but neither one wants to turn him in or have him turn himself in.

-----------------
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/home/05-the-black-mountain

Quote from: Black Vulmea;981364Tell him or her to put on big boy pants and make a fucking decision, ie, roleplay the gawdamn character.

What kind of mewling asshole needs help with this shit?

Addendum: And why the fuck is this being handled out-of-character? Why isn't the character talking with the other adventurers? With a priest? With a lawyer? In-fucking-character?

He was and is talking to the other characters. The Human and the Elf think he did the right thing. The Dwarfs are still talking to him about it. One of them is temporarily an NPC because her player can't play on Thursday nights. The characters talk "around the campfire" between gaming sessions. I handed my part of the conversation off to Willa's player this evening because she has time to talk to him. I will be interested to see the result.

Murder is too strong a term, even under Glon' law. The Dwarfs are very legalistic and the lesser charge would be very serious.

-------------------------
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/home/05-the-black-mountain

"Misericorde" is the dagger a knight carried on his right hip, used among other things to finish off wounded opponents who are too badly hurt to recover.

"Misericorde" means "mercy."

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;981395"Misericorde" is the dagger a knight carried on his right hip, used among other things to finish off wounded opponents who are too badly hurt to recover.

Did I miss where the OP said that the opponent was too badly hurt to recover? Or were you thinking this was that other thing that Misericorde were used for?

Seems to me he should do what most guilt ridden men and drink himself stupid.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;981394He was and is talking to the other characters. . . .  

Perhaps there's a tiny glimmer of hope after all.

Here's why this is important to me: for me,* roleplaying is an exercise in thinking as my character. That can be in moments as superficial as deciding on which trail to take at a fork, or as involved as reacting to the character's evolving morality.

Eladio is my longest-played character in our Boot Hill campaign, and the only one of the original three characters still alive, and he's progressed from a somewhat reserved cowhand to a steely-eyed gunfighter and gambler to a fledgling cattle baron, and I've done my best to roleplay changes in my conception of who Eladio is, of who Eladio sees himself to be, and where his moral and ethical limits lie. That process happens in-game, in actual play, through interactions with other characters, player and non-, such as a local priest who's become his 'spiritual advisor' - Padre Tomás' advice has been invaluable in shaping how I perceive Eladio's actions and the choices he's made, and it's been one of the more consistently entertaining† on-going roleplaying interactions in the campaign.

Just bullshitting about it out-of-game wouldn't be the same to me* - like playing tennis with the net down.

* Hey haters, "for me" and "to me" means exactly that, for me and not necessarily for thee, so if you're going to take this as an opportunity to chew on my ass about 'badwrongfun' or some other nonsense, well, fuck straight off.

† Ask me about the 'Pope-O-Matic!'

Quote from: Black Vulmea;981422Perhaps there's a tiny glimmer of hope after all.

Here's why this is important to me: for me,* roleplaying is an exercise in thinking as my character. That can be in moments as superficial as deciding on which trail to take at a fork, or as involved as reacting to the character's evolving morality.

Eladio is my longest-played character in our Boot Hill campaign, and the only one of the original three characters still alive, and he's progressed from a somewhat reserved cowhand to a steely-eyed gunfighter and gambler to a fledgling cattle baron, and I've done my best to roleplay changes in my conception of who Eladio is, of who Eladio sees himself to be, and where his moral and ethical limits lie. That process happens in-game, in actual play, through interactions with other characters, player and non-, such as a local priest who's become his 'spiritual advisor' - Padre Tomás' advice has been invaluable in shaping how I perceive Eladio's actions and the choices he's made, and it's been one of the more consistently entertaining† on-going roleplaying interactions in the campaign.

Just bullshitting about it out-of-game wouldn't be the same to me* - like playing tennis with the net down.

* Hey haters, "for me" and "to me" means exactly that, for me and not necessarily for thee, so if you're going to take this as an opportunity to chew on my ass about 'badwrongfun' or some other nonsense, well, fuck straight off.

† Ask me about the 'Pope-O-Matic!'

Actually, I  agree with you. I don't know if they are through talking about it now and I don't mind being out of the loop. Willa's usual player is talking to him in character, or was, and I will see whatever decisions he and the rest of them reach on Thursday. She wasn't available immediately after the end of play, so he messaged me to ask what Willa would say.

-------------
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son and remember the great DiMaggio" Ernest Hemingway "The Old Man and the Sea"