My Paladin killed a child molester (and now my DM wants to take away my powers!)

Numion

First Post
Darklone said:
I ambush another group of soldiers whose government declared war upon my king (or the other way round).

I kill an unarmed person from behind in his own house.

If you see no difference here... your problem. The DM in question saw one.

It's no different from if a judge had found him guilty and had him executed. The man would've been helpless when executed then, too. Thats what defines execution - murders are called execution-style when the victims have had no chance to defend themselves.

The Paladin did not murder anyone. He executed a criminal.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Darklone

Registered User
Numion said:
The Paladin did not murder anyone. He executed a criminal.
Once again for the third time now: HOW did he do that? Without honor. Nothing against execution. Nothing against killing. But he did it not like a paladin should.
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
I've read the original post several times and can't figure out why everyone thinks the paladin "snuck up" on the bad guy.

He simply followed him.

The guy's back happened to be turned when the paladin struck without hesitation.

That hardly describes an "ambush."


Wulf
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
In general, the paladin did right. He stopped the man in the middle of perpetrating evil.
As far as his methods, the paladin shouldn't be given any more punishment than having to say a few prayers of penance for rash action and not putting the fear of divine retribution into the molester. And even if that means kneeling for a couple of hours in front of the alter saying the prayers or wearing a hair shirt for a day, the paladin should be happy to do it. No loss of paladin powers.
I'm constantly amazed at how often people are so strict about paladin powers even when it's clear that the paladin stopped evil from being committed (in this case, committed again). The paladin should be lawful and yes, that does mean having respect for the legal system and legal authority as well as having discipline, but let's not be ridiculous. Not every infraction has to be met with stripping of powers. Minor offenses should be met with relatively minor atonements like extra work at the temple, extra prayers, extra tithing, or minor corporal punishment.
Actually, I'm reminded of a book called Biting at the Grave by many of these sorts of debates. In it, the author, Padraig O'Malley, talked about the trouble in Northern Ireland within the context of the H-Block hunger strikes. While often called a specifically political conflict rather than religious, he takes it right back to religious. Because of their respective educations, mostly parochial, the two communities can't communicate on moral issues. For the Protestants, it's all black and white, sin or no sin. For Cathoics, it's shades of gray, venal sin and mortal sin. Protestants think that Catholics are too morally ambiguous and Catholics think Protestants are too rigid. And so they can't communicate on moral issues.
What I'm seeing here, and in most paladin debates, is too much Protestantism, binary sin vs no sin, too much absolute rigidity. What you need is more gradations of violations for a paladin and appropriate penance for those gradations. It fits a more medieval-based fantasy religion anyway. Make the paladin take a half day out for penance and leave it at that. Don't strip his powers for doing his job, make him work off using non-paladinesque methods.
 

Darklone

Registered User
Though I do like this kind of arguing, Wulf... with my chaotic good characters...

Did the DM agree on your interpretation ;)?
 

Numion

First Post
Darklone said:
Once again for the third time now: HOW did he do that? Without honor. Nothing against execution. Nothing against killing. But he did it not like a paladin should.

Once again for the third time now: he did in a manner most protective of, and most safe for, the child. Do you think it is a serious breach of his code that he put the childs safety (and perhaps the childs honor?) above his own honor?

Add to this the fact that confrontin her abuser again in a courtroom is harmful in real world and supposedly in fantasy world too.
 


Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Darklone said:
Though I do like this kind of arguing, Wulf... with my chaotic good characters...

Did the DM agree on your interpretation ;)?

Heh... I dunno. I don't play good characters.

I played what I thought was a chaotic neutral sociopath-- but since I pretty much confined my slaughter to evil-doers, he decided I was chaotic good.

So I guess that means, yeah, he did agree with that interpretation. My intent didn't matter (kill people-- just the bad people-- and take their stuff) but the net effect was a victory for good.

So "good" I was. (See the Story Hour in the sig...)


Wulf
 

Darklone

Registered User
Numion said:
Once again for the third time now: he did in a manner most protective of, and most safe for, the child. Do you think it is a serious breach of his code that he put the childs safety (and perhaps the childs honor?) above his own honor?

Add to this the fact that confrontin her abuser again in a courtroom is harmful in real world and supposedly in fantasy world too.
Putting the swordblade on the shoulder of the guy and telling him to pull up his pants would have been so bad? It's what I would expect the good hero in a book to do. Old-fashioned, it seems.

And the child would probably not have been witness in medieval courts.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top