Topic: Legal Aspects of Resurrection

[markc]

  I hope my GM will not be mad about me posting about his game but this came up sometime ago. My PC was killed (yes hard to believe it was so) but do to the fact that I was resurrected there was no crime, except the group had to shell out a cart or two of gold.
 So what are your thoughts? What would you have ruled if my PC was unable to be resurrected?
MDC

[GrumpyOldFart]

I would say resurrecting him merely turns the crime into theft of a cart or two of gold instead of murder, rather than making it no crime at all. If the killer wants to claim "no crime was committed," he has to at the very least be the person to pony up the cash to get you brought back to life. And even then, the argument could still be made for assault.

[Thom @ ICE]

Reminds me of a Monty Python skit.

The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead.
Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one.
The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: What?
Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not.
The Dead Collector: He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better.
Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.
The Dead Collector: I can't take him.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor.
The Dead Collector: I can't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Which reminds me of the joke about the gravedigger who walks into town to the Sherriff's office.

"Sherriff, I got into a wreck a piece down the road with a carload of lawyers. Totalled my truck and their car. Thought you oughta know, but I went ahead and buried em so there's no real hurry."

"You buried them already? You shouldn't have done that, they might not have really been dead."

"Well, they said they wasn't, but you know how lawyers lie...."

[RandalThor]

Killing someone is killing someone, no matter what happens afterwards - unless it was preplanned with the resurrection in mind, I guess, particularly if the killie is in on it. (Like it is a scam, or something.)

But, if someone is killed, and through no action or agent of the killer, is later resurrected, the original murder-conviction should still be in place.

[jdale]

I would say the miracle of resurrection doesn't change the fact of murder. It's only if resurrection is a common and normal thing, and not a miracle, that the attacker can make the reasonable claim that by leaving you in a resurrectable state, they effectively did not kill you. In that case, treat it like assault with a deadly weapon, and perhaps fine them for the cost of the resurrection.

On the other hand, if there's no dead body, it's harder to prove a murder occurred. Are there credible witnesses who saw your dead body and who the court will trust are capable of distinguishing between actually dead and feigning death, illusion, etc? If resurrection is very rare, it's possible the judge won't even find the explanation of resurrection to be credible, and if there was a conviction for murder they might find your reappearance to be evidence of fraud.

[GrumpyOldFart]

I would say the miracle of resurrection doesn't change the fact of murder. It's only if resurrection is a common and normal thing, and not a miracle, that the attacker can make the reasonable claim that by leaving you in a resurrectable state, they effectively did not kill you. In that case, treat it like assault with a deadly weapon, and perhaps fine them for the cost of the resurrection.

Steven Brust's Vlad Taltos series has some good things to say on the subject.

[jdale]

I would say the miracle of resurrection doesn't change the fact of murder. It's only if resurrection is a common and normal thing, and not a miracle, that the attacker can make the reasonable claim that by leaving you in a resurrectable state, they effectively did not kill you. In that case, treat it like assault with a deadly weapon, and perhaps fine them for the cost of the resurrection.

Steven Brust's Vlad Taltos series has some good things to say on the subject.

I was thinking about that actually. In those books, resurrection is pretty common, but you can be permanently killed if your brain is damaged badly enough, and there are also weapons which destroy your soul. So people are sometimes killed to teach them a lesson, but if someone really has it out for you they will take extra measures (or pay for them) and that's seen very differently. There's also the interesting effect that if you draw a soul-destroying weapon, everyone in the area knows instantly, because it has a very distinct and obvious aura.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Exactly. It's common, it's just expensive, so if you leave someone "revivifiable," killing someone is treated more like a combination of armed robbery and assault and battery. You did violence to someone, and cost them a lot of money, but they aren't actually permanently dead.

And killing someone in such a way that they can't be resurrected ends up having possibly even more of a social stigma associated with it than regular murder in cultures without such resurrection.

[RandalThor]

Yeah, I agree that in a setting where resurrection is common, the laws would reflect this.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Well, note that while it's common, it's still expensive, so such legal niceties are in effect only available to the wealthy and powerful. If you're not well off enough to hire assassins, the theoretical availability of resurrection doesn't affect you any.

[Cory Magel]

Not really near enough info for me to say how I'd rule it.

How, why and possibly by whom was the PC killed?  Also, we don't know that the PC's didn't already have the gold... so where did the gold come from?  Lastly, how common is it and is it provable that the PC was resurrected?

[RandalThor]

Lastly, how common is it and is it provable that the PC was resurrected?

I think the real question is: Could the PC reasonably expect the target to be resurrected? In many cases, that is what determines if and how someone is charged, like the difference between manslaughter and murder. (If I remember right: manslaughter is when someone dies because of your actions, but was not the intent of your actions (so long as these actions weren't felonious in nature themselves, then it is felony murder), and murder is when you intend to kill someone and do.)

So, if you know your target has access to resurrection, then the argument could be made that their "killing" was more like tying them up, just a way to delay them. (For whatever reason, of course that reason could be a crime in itself that you would have to deal with.)

[Cory Magel]

If resurrection is not extremely rare I can see it not being seen a bad as if resurrection were common.  However, I would probably never base laws on the distinction.  The intent was still to kill and unless resurrection is free you can't treat a poor man getting killed differently than a rich man being killed... well, assuming you're dealing with just laws.

As far as provable... what I mean is, if you were resurrected how do you prove you were killed in the first place?  Unless those who enforce law or pass judgement witnessed the death or resurrection then it's just he-said-she-said.  Divination spells could come into play, but even that could be suspect (maybe the murder was masked by the proper spells, or maybe the one trying to prove murder has the resources to give a false 'reading').

[RandalThor]

If resurrection is not extremely rare I can see it not being seen a bad as if resurrection were common.  However, I would probably never base laws on the distinction.  The intent was still to kill and unless resurrection is free you can't treat a poor man getting killed differently than a rich man being killed... well, assuming you're dealing with just laws.

Of course it is that last bit that keeps you from getting completely pounced on.  (Though I will still comment on it.  )

But, yeah, rich and poor people have been being treated differently in the eyes of the law since law was invented - and even in "equality-minded" America, they do. Just understand that if you are talking about a nation that is "normal" (i.e., not one with an uber-idealized concept of equality), then the laws would be different for the rich and the poor; generally a poor person will be punished much more severely than a rich person (barring the crime isn't treason, which might be considered to be more of a problem coming from a rich person) especially if the crime was against a rich person. That always has to be taken into consideration when dealing with a legal system.

[markc]

 I can provide some of the back story if it will help. First the PC was mine. The setting was we were exiting a gamboling joint when we were ambushed by another party of 7 (our same number). After I was killed the others managed to beat off the rest of the ambushers except for the one who killed me. In which case he surrendered.
 Our group had a voucher of gold for 20,000 gp which all went to my res cost. My killer was just sentenced to jail and nothing more.


MDC 

[RandalThor]

I can provide some of the back story if it will help. First the PC was mine. The setting was we were exiting a gamboling joint when we were ambushed by another party of 7 (our same number). After I was killed the others managed to beat off the rest of the ambushers except for the one who killed me. In which case he surrendered.
 Our group had a voucher of gold for 20,000 gp which all went to my res cost. My killer was just sentenced to jail and nothing more.

Well, lets give it some context (without resurrection): If that had happened here in America (and many other nations I assume), then that individual would be charged with a variety of minor offenses, such as: tresspassing, assault, assault with intent, some sort of illegal weapons carrying charge, right along with the murder charge. This is done, so the cops and DA have room to maneuver for plea deals - especially since they will want him to name his co-horts so they can be charged. But, lets say we use modern medicine and revive the individual, then it would not be murder, but attempted murder (along with the other charges), which does carry a lesser sentence but often not by much because the authorities might feel that this individual will only try again when released.

So, I guess the easiest way of dealing with it, is treating it like the individual died, for a short while, but was revived by the doctors in the emergency room, so instead of murder it is attempted murder. That sounds like the fantasy equivalent of modern-day legalities.

Does that help. (Probably not, because you want the individual who killed your character to get the MAX - which is what just about every victim of a crime wants.)

[Cory Magel]

Does that help. (Probably not, because you want the individual who killed your character to get the MAX - which is what just about every victim of a crime wants.)

That could be remedied... how 'good' is the party?

[RandalThor]

Does that help. (Probably not, because you want the individual who killed your character to get the MAX - which is what just about every victim of a crime wants.)

That could be remedied... how 'good' is the party?

Which is exactly the mind-set I was referring to. Thanks Cory. 

[Cory Magel]

The first thought that came to mind was hide the resurrected PC, claim he was cremated, and let the law take it's own course (or, if you can find an already body to use present it as the cremated body).

Then there is the "We don't want to press any charges, I'm just happy be alive... all's well that ends well..." and follow him down a blind alley...

Then there is the paid of jail guard and poison food route...

In an effort to be more law-biding, I think attempted murder and the requirement that the attacker works off the cost of the resurrection (which might mean basically being a slave the rest his life) is actually entirely reasonable.