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

Firzair · May 27, 2004

That's what a paladin is for...

You just gave him the justice he deserved. A paladin should defend the innocents (what's more innocent than a child) and punish them for their crimes. Deaths the only just punishment for a criminal effectively "caught in the act" without any doubt doing such a crime and you dealt it hard and quick.
So I say, your paladinhood shouldn't be taken from you. In fact it was a nice clean execution, a mob lynching the man would have been "nastier" and probably more painful for the man.

These are my 2 cents.

Greetings
Firzair

Agemegos · May 27, 2004

Sejs said:
It also notes that clerics of tyr (and one would assume this would extend equally to tyr's paladins) 'bring law to lawless lands, often serving as judge, jury and executioner.'

If you want to bring law to a lawless land you have to demonstrate in public that the people that you punish have done something clearly wrong or forbidden in advance, that you are acting in an impersonal capacity, dispassionately, and without personal malice. This persuades the malefactor's relatives that they would be doing wrong to avenge him or her, and allows them to feel that the law, not its agents personally, are responsible for (for instance) the execution. It also reassures everyone else that the agents of the law are not abusing their powers. On the other hand, summmary executions (or worse, police bush-whackings) make the victim's family understandably angry and nervous, and lead everyone else to wonder what the 'perpetrator' knew that the police would not let him live to say.

The law must not only be served. It must be seen to be served. And thus the pomp of due process is as important to establishing the law in a lawless land as it is to acquit the innocent and punish the guilty. That's why Tyr was "Tyr Thincsus": the god of the judicial assemly.

Being judge, jury, and executioner is one thing. Skipping the trial is another.

Sammael · May 27, 2004

IMO, this was clearly a Chaotic act. I wouldn't have stripped the paladin of his abilities, although I would have had him stand a trial and then perform some service for the city.

Of course, if this happened in a place where raping 10-year-old children is not a crime (and I can think of several such places in FR), handing the guy to the authorities wouldn't have been an option. But killing from behind without any sort of prior warning, in front of a small child, is not a honorable act by any stretch of imagination.

Kem · May 27, 2004

jgbrowning said:
IMHO, yes. Societies have methods of dealing with criminals/evil/abberations. Usually Orcs are considered "outsiders" to those societies and are therefore subject to less "lawful" restrictions in a paladin's actions.

And if the person the Paladin Killed in the original example was an Orc?

To me, you are saying that what a Human does is less evil then what an orc does, even for the same act, by virtue of the punishment that a paladin is allowed to enforce.

Elephant · May 27, 2004

Proclaim him as a paragon of Paladinhood for defending the weak, or tear him down in shame for striking dishonorably?

The DM has a great adventure hook here: Arrest the Paladin and put him on trial. If he's sentenced to punishment in the trial, he is stripped of his Paladinhood. If he is exonerated of any wrongdoing, he keeps his powers.

What is his code of conduct? Does it prohibit executions? What about stealth?

d4 · May 27, 2004

jgbrowning said:
In other words, if a human commits a crime the paladin should try to behave lawfully and support the currently legal processes before becoming "judge, jury, and executioner." He's obligated to support the order of the society, as long as that society isn't evil, for he is also obligated to support good.

i must have a different view of paladins than others.

in every campaign i've run, paladins (and clerics of lawful gods) are considered "judges, juries, and executioners." it's the role they play in society. i've always GMed it that paladins have the right to mete out justice themselves when they witness a crime. they are not required to turn over criminals to some other "legitimate authority" because the paladin himself is a legitimate authority.

so, if this paladin were playing in my campaign, not only would he not lose his paladinhood, he'd get a hearty "Well done!" from me, both as GM and through the NPC leadership of the town.

Dark Jezter · May 27, 2004

Elephant said:
What is his code of conduct? Does it prohibit executions? What about stealth?

IIRC, the Book of Exalted Deeds has an ex-thief who saw the light and became a paladin. He has a few levels in rogue, and is still allowed to use sneak-attack in combat despite being a palaidn. He also had ranks in skills like Hide and Move Silently.

So yes, I think it's okay for paladins to use stealth and surprise attacks.

jgbrowning · May 27, 2004

Kem said:
And if the person the Paladin Killed in the original example was an Orc?

To me, you are saying that what a Human does is less evil then what an orc does, even for the same act, by virtue of the punishment that a paladin is allowed to enforce.

I'm not speaking as much of good or evil as I'm speaking of law and chaos.

It is more chaotic to not apply the laws to a human than it is to not apply the laws (because there aren't any) to an orc. When possible a paladin should support the local law system. Usually under D&D tropes, Orcs are outside that system and usually violently outside.

If there were other viable actions that supported dealing with an Orc that fit with how the society deals with Orcs, the paladin should try and support those first rather than create his own concept of justice on the spot.

I don't like the paladin class because of this reason. I don't think a class concept should, effectively, force conflict between players and GMs and I think the paladin concept does that in spades. Unlike every other core class where powers aren't tied to RL interpretation of morality.

joe b.

res · May 27, 2004

Kem said:
Everyone that is saying its was unjust and he should lose paladinhood.

Would it have been different if it was an Orc in the same situation with a human girl in a dungeon?

yes it would.

There are a few things.

a) It is an orc. Usually the laws of a city/country etc don't extend to marauding monsters that are found on the land. This would put the orc outside of the law.

b) This depends on where the dungeon is. If its the typical cave type place outside of the citys authority then again, it woudl be outside the law and the Paladin would be required to bring the law to the area.

This was a human, who in a human city would be considered much more important than some orc, where, it is assumed, there is a local authority that enforces the law. The Paladin should have gone through them if required by his code and dogma.

Sejs · May 27, 2004

Being judge, jury, and executioner is one thing. Skipping the trial is another.

Not at all; there was a trial, you see. It was a very, very brief one in which the child rapist confessed to his misdeeds when he advanced on the notedly sexually violated, restrained girl, pants open and said "Now let's teach you another lesson, missy." Open and shut case. Didn't even have to pay the stenographer.

What would his possible defense be? He had a text book printed on his wang and was just trying to teach her how to read?