Alignment discussion

>Party clears one room of a cave, scouts find that captured villagers are in one room, another room of sleeping goblins are in the other
>Bard is sneaky, suggests that he and the other sneaky types sneak into the sleeping quarters and kill the goblins in their sleep
>Ranger protests "They're just sleeping, I don't feel like just murdering them."
>Bard replies "How do you feel about being attacked from behind by them when they wake up?"
>Party decides to efficiently slay the sleeping goblins and sides with the bard instead of trying to sneak the prisoners out quietly

What alignment best describes this course of action? What scenarios has your party been split on based on individual character morals and alignment?

>using allignements in the year of our Lord, the current

An eye for an an eye, and the world goes blind.

Two eyes for an eye is a much better exchange rate as only half of you will go blind compared to one of yours.

If it was a bandit camp that had enslaved an entire village, they'd still be too dangerous to leave alive.

The only thing bad is that you should try to make sure the villagers are safe first.

Alignment wise it's a Chaotic act. The Goblins are obviously enemies and evil so killing them is justified even if the means a bit dishonorable.

Counterarguement, you cannot be dishonorable to goblins because they are not people, they are vermin.

They are sapient.

Chaotic retarded

wake the up and kill them if you're such a puss, but you cant just leave a bunch of fucking goblins behind you waiting to realize they've been had and chasing you down the cave, or getting even more goblins to come fuck your shit up.

what you ought to do is set them on fire and be done with it

This is clearly the best course of action

Lets say you leave them alive. Three possibilities:
- They are unable to care for themselves. So they die. Probably from starvation.
- They can care for themselves. They will remember waking up to find everyone else dead. They will want revenge. When they grow up, they will be a problem.
- A third party decides to raise them for his own purposes.

In the first case, killing them before they wake is mercy. In the second, you're protecting whoever they will attack. Likely the nearby village.

The third is the least likely possibility. So ignore it unless you already have someone willing to raise them. Then think about why that person would want to raise goblins.

They are still not people though. They are creatures that follow and evil purpose. When you are literally 'made' of evil, your sapience is just another tool for wrongdoings rather than something that should count on your merit.

>he's so used to the goblin baby murder question he inserts it even when it isn't there
this is your brain on Veeky Forums.

>adult goblins cant care for themselves and will starve if left alone
>grow up?
>raise them?

Did you actually read the OP? Why are you imagining they're children

>What alignment best describes this course of action?

True Neutral. The goblins are proven to be hostile against you and the villagers you are trying to rescue, and your priority is rescuing the villagers in a way that won't endanger said villagers.

The action doesn't enter into the Lawful/Chaotic scale, so it defaults to Neutral there.

Why didn't these goblins post a watch?

In most settings, goblins are not literally made of evil.

I'm just going to skip ahead a bit and post this now.

So are Mongols, and if we started burning them alive in cages a hundred a day from now until the heat death of the universe we would be committing no sin.

They're animals. Worse than animals, animals are useful. They deserve extinction and sleeping or awake makes no difference in the equation.

>current character is a dwarf druid hermit who entered seclusion because he grew tired of the unnecessary violence of his family name
>''I suggest that we act quickly to free the prisoners, no harm need come to these goblins if they don't attack us lads''

>goblins have been kidnapping and presumably raping/eating villagers
>leave them alive so they can continue to do the same

ITT: pussies who can't sack up and do what's necessary

Unironically LG. But not enough to cause shift for other alignment.

obviously you are going to have to capture them to stand trial.

Canonical examples of non-evil goblins from the Forgotten Realms:
- The 27 goblins of the Horseshoe Temple Oasis in the Quoya Desert (Kara-Tur)
- Sheemzher (The Nether Scrolls, book 4)
- Nojheim, a slave in the human village of Pengallen, who wished no harm on anyone, and was hanged by his master before Drizzt Do'Urden could free him from slavery.

Dubs of wisdom. Not the guy you were replying to, but I think anyone with the gears in their head turning properly can see
>cave full of captured villagers
indicates these specific goblins probably aren't on the up and up.

Sure, which is why I said this, However, THESE GOBLINS kidnapping villagers doesn't mean that ALL GOBLINS do, particularly not since D&D - and as this is an alignment debate we can reasonably assume D&D - has presented and always presumed that goblins are not "innately" evil or made of evil.

Y'know what is evil? Suggesting that burning Mongols alive in cages is an okay thing to do. Mongolia has enough problems these days, it doesn't need some fat neckbeard causing conflagrations across Ulaan Baator.