Cannibal_Kender said:
Sir Prendergast, Paladin of St. Cuthbert, LG
He should keep his paladinhood. The foul villain would have hung anyway.
With respect, that is very far from being the only point.
One other point is that a paladin is required to act with honour, and many of us doubt that stiking and unarmed man from behind without warning is honourable.
A second point is that a paladin is required to respect legitimate authority. By taking the law into his own hands, Sir Vindicator showed disrespect to the established authorities. And if there were no legitimate authorities, then he treated his own authority with contempt and disrespect by a shabby, disorderly, secretive, hasty proceeding in a back room.
A third point is that a paladin is under some circumstances required to act as judge, jury and executioner, but Sir Vindicator shirked the duties of judge and jury. viz, the duty of judge to demonstrate for all to see that agents of justice are serving justice and not some private end, the duty of a jury to hear and impartially consider any defence. A paladin is required to bring law to lawless lands: Sir Vindicator did not. His actions brought the law into disrepute, and will tend to promote suspicion and feud. As a result of his conduct, some people will turn to private vengeance instead of to the law, and innocent people who find themselves in suspicious circumstances will fear the law as their persecutor instead of loving it as their protector.
A fourth point is that only a person of Lawful alignment is capable of being a paladin. A person of lawful alignment feels in his bones the importance of the law being administered openly and with demonstrated impartiality. He feels in his bones that the exerecise of authority and judgment must not be undertaken lightly, unadvisedly, or wantonly, but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God, with due attention to the reasons that authority are established. The reckless, intemperate, disorderly way in which Sir Vindicator carried out his back-room slaughter, and the fact that even in the aftermath he
saw nothing wrong in what he had done raises a grave suspicion that he is not of lawful alignment.
Finally: by the grace of God Sir Vindicator turned out in this case to be correct in his hasty judgment. But if he keeps on as he is, failing to consider any possible defnce, one day he will stumble across circumstance in which the superficial appearances are gravely misleading. And if on that occasion he executes a sentence of death without allowing for the possibility of a defence, an innocent man will die at his hand. And yet he shows no sign of recognising that his haste was wrong.
You judge the case in isolation, with regard only to the outcome on the individual. That is a Chaotic standard. As paladins, we must apply a Lawful standard. We must consider the means as well as the ends. We must consider the wider effects, in for example promoting Law or Chaos in the community. We must have an eye of what may reasonably be expected if the actions we judge are followed as a rule.
I did consider those issues. And I did apply such a standard. And as it happens I voted as you did: for acquital on any charge that could result in Sir Vindicator ceasing to be a paladin. But it alarms me, my lord, that you seem not to have considered all the points, and seem not to have applied a Lawful standard.
