Creepy Paladin

joeandsteve · Dec 10, 2005

I was watching the movie Frailty for the first time, and it seems to me that the 'powers' manifested both by Bill Paxton's and Matthew McConaghy's(sp?) characters are similar to the Paladin's detect evil ability, and their quest to 'destroy demons' is a familiar one in the world of D&D Paladins. And that lead to My question: Would a character concept similar to Bill Paxton as the "Demon Slayer" be allowed to be a Paladin? If a paladin who accepts a list from his deity(Most likely a LN St. Cuthbert or Wee Jass) of Evil People to be killed and then follows that unquestioningly, does he cease to be LG and become LN/E? Or is this perfectly compatible with the Paladin Code as is because of the clear divisions between Good and Evil in D&D? I would appreciate input from anyone who has seen the movie or at least knows the premise.

SteelDraco · Dec 10, 2005

IMO, the problem with that kind of paladin still being Good is that they've lost any trace of mercy. Mercy is, as far as I'm concerned, essential for someone to be Good. The Detect Evil ability of a paladin is fallible, and so that's not enough to go around killing people (as the characters in Frailty do). It's not a writ of execution, it's a guide. Someone who used it as such would, IMO, be pretty evil, and would lose his granted paladin powers fairly quickly.

That said, I do have entities in my games that will sometimes step in and continue granting a fallen paladin similar powers, often without their knowledge. I'll drop hints that something isn't right, but it's possible for evil deities or fiends to lead a paladin astray in this manner.

BryonD · Dec 10, 2005

It really depends on how you interpret the movie.
If you take it as I think it is intended, then I'd say no.
But you could probably get there.

Cool thought and interesting idea though!

Thanks

Nightfall · Dec 10, 2005

It might be more of a Pr-class that's LIKE paladins but not true paladin like abilities. And probably yeah not TRUE good, as much as "doing the will of the god that MIGHT be good intentioned."

Gold Roger · Dec 10, 2005

Sounds like Shadowbane Inquisitors from the Complete Adventurer. A PrC taken mostly by Rogue/Paladins that are described to often use this modus opperandy. Further it say that this arrogant self rightousness often leads them to lose their paladinhood, but they keep their inquisitor abilities, including a variant smite.

Peter Gibbons · Dec 10, 2005

SteelDraco said:
IMO, the problem with that kind of paladin still being Good is that they've lost any trace of mercy. Mercy is, as far as I'm concerned, essential for someone to be Good.

The rulebooks disagree with you.

"Alhandra, a paladin who fights evil without mercy and protects the innocent without hesitation, is lawful good." (PHB, p.105.)

I would say yes, a Frailty-style paladin is permissible -- but only because in D&D, "Good and evil are not philosophical concepts...[t]hey are the forces that define the cosmos." (PHB, p.103.)

And by the way, anyone who hasn't seen Frailty should. Great movie!

Eluvan · Dec 10, 2005

I guess it mostly just depends on the take your DM has on alignment. If they subscribe to a by-the-book moral absolutism then yes, I can see that a ruthless paladin who unquestioningly kills the bad guys that his superiors point him at might well be a possibility.

To me, though, that doesn't wash. Despite the tone of a lot of D&D material, I just can't bring myself to look upon the world in such black and white terms. The moral relativist in me just has to go and muddy the waters. So in one of my games, such a character would be on a one-way trip to fighterdom.

Alratan · Dec 10, 2005

It depends on a couple of things. The first is, is the death penalty evil within D&D morality? If the ansswer to this is no, then it isperfectly acceptable to have a paladin like that. They are acting in a manner identical to that of an executioner - those he slays have been judged and found guilty by the highest authority, and duly sentanced to death. The fact this didn't happen within the context of a fallible mortal court only makes things even more clear cut.

Edit: One of the themes I like is the conflict between the shades of grey approach of ordinary mortals and the absolutist approach of cosmological good.

marshaldwm · Dec 10, 2005

Peter Gibbons said:
The rulebooks disagree with you.

"Alhandra, a paladin who fights evil without mercy and protects the innocent without hesitation, is lawful good." (PHB, p.105.)QUOTE]

I am not sure I would say that the flavor text is the rules in D&D. In fact, I would definitely draw a line between the two.

To get onto the topic, I jsut do not see paladins in that light at all. Or gods for that matter. Having a god take such a direct hand as to write out a list seems to me to be a once-in-a-lifetime thing not a common occurance. And even ifthe god did, a paladin would not be the right person to hand that list to, paladins are the visible arm of the church, notthe nasty backdoor boys.

Nightfall · Dec 10, 2005

Mercy is hard to define SINCE in the face of pure evil (IE demons, devils and most undead), it's not a helpful aspect. BUT mercy to those that are redeemable, humaniods and some non-immortal beings, seems to me a quality that most paladins DO try to uphold.

So while killing a possessed person might not be evil IF the option to save that person isn't viable (IE it's an accepted possession or fusing of evil outsider with mortals), it can be if you can't get rid of that person.