A Paladin Shows Mercy to a Priestess of Orcus?

[Endur]

Taking someone prisoner has nothing to do with association.

Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

 

[Ravlek]

Taking someone prisoner has nothing to do with association.

From one of my earlier posts in the thread:

Again from the SRD: "Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters,..."

The RAW definition would apply if she was taken on an adventure, IMO.

From another of my posts (after the previous one):

The RAW gives a guideline for what is and isn't an associate. If the person is actively adventuring with the paladin, they are an associate. If the person is 'tanking' or casting spells for the party, I would rule it qualifies as associating. YDMMV. From Shark's initial post;
"Bronwyn grants her mercy, and demands as part of the bargain, the beautiful priestess must serve her and her party with the utmost loyalty and devotion, until she says otherwise, as her life is otherwise forfeit for her defeat at her hands.

The cleric of Orcus agrees, reluctantly. Bronwyn makes her swear to serve her loyally. Any treachery will bring her swift death by her sword. Bronwyn used her Sense Motive, and Drusilla seemed quite sincere."

That leads me to think that she is/will qualify as an associate. If that is not the case, then she isn't an associate, we really don't know yet.

If she helps the party on an adventure, she is an associate, not necessarily a trustworthy one. We still don't know yet.

"Drusilla seemed quite sincere." If true, she is an associate. If it was a failed sense motive check, she obviously is not an associate, and the party may be in for some bad times. We don't know about this either btw.

 

[Sammael]

And being a true devotee to say Bane or Shar isn't? Come on it's ORCUS for crying out loud!

Bane: a LAWFUL EVIL, cold, calculating deity, who wishes to rule over all other gods and wishes for his followers to rule over all mortals.

Shar: a NEUTRAL EVIL, cold, calculating deity, who wishes the destruction of all other gods and grants her followers awesome powers to command their unswerving loyalty.

Orcus: a CHAOTIC EVIL demon prince turned deity who hates everything and anything, including his most famed creation - the undead. Followers to him are nothing more than tools.

Hmmm. I wonder.

 

[Particle_Man]

*Just before the grand battle*

High Priest of Orcus: "Drusila, I think we should have a talk. It seems like your heart hasn't been in the last few human sacrifices we have been performing." (Other Priests gather round for this "intervention".

Drusila: "Well, I dunno, I have been feeling a bit...off. Maybe I am sick."

HPoO: "Well, we are all concerned. Perhaps you should take a few days off to think about your service to our Dark Master. Meditate. Eat an elf's heart or two. You know, food for the body and soul."

Drusila: "Thanks. Maybe that's what I need to get my head together and..."

Others: "We are UNDER ATTACK!"

Battle ensues.

Scenario 1:

Drusila thinks <Hmmm...if I bide my time and bluff out this paladin, I may be able to kill them all later and get in good with my Dark Master.> (Alignment likely CE)

or

Scenario 2:

Drusila thinks <Hmmm...my guys are losing badly. Maybe this "serving evil for the Dark Master" isn't all it is cracked up to me. Not sure I want to come back as something undead, either. I mean, I really only joined because my older sister did, and she's dead now. I could always go back to Quilting.> (Alignment likely now CN, maybe always was - hence no probs for the Paladin associating with her, btw)

time will tell...

 

[Vonlok The Bold]

What you or I call it is irrelevant. The DM running the campaign makes that ruling, based on his/her campaign. If the DM rules that's how the 'law' views it, then that is how they view it. It will vary, two sides to the coin. As I stated earlier, I can see it going both ways.

Once again from the SRD;

"Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."

The RAW gives a guideline for what is and isn't an associate. If the person is actively adventuring with the paladin, they are an associate. If the person is 'tanking' or casting spells for the party, I would rule it qualifies as associating. YDMMV. From Shark's initial post;
"Bronwyn grants her mercy, and demands as part of the bargain, the beautiful priestess must serve her and her party with the utmost loyalty and devotion, until she says otherwise, as her life is otherwise forfeit for her defeat at her hands.

The cleric of Orcus agrees, reluctantly. Bronwyn makes her swear to serve her loyally. Any treachery will bring her swift death by her sword. Bronwyn used her Sense Motive, and Drusilla seemed quite sincere."
That leads me to think that she is/will qualify as an associate. If that is not the case, then she isn't an associate, we really don't know yet.

I really hope Shark gives us an update on how all this turns out. ? ?

Edit: There really isn't any wrong or right answers to some of these questions/issues. It will vary.

I agree that it is totally up to the GM. I also agree that I will be here being a nuissance until we get an update on how it all turned out.

 

[Nightfall]

Sammael,

Point is this: Both Bane and Shar don't always treat their followers with much respect. I mean look at 2nd edition Bane before his demise. The guy BARELY tolerates failure and all he does is blame others. Shar is nearly the same way.

Orcus might "hate" undead but the fact is, he prefers them as mockery of life as opposed to actual LIVING things. (Well other than demons maybe.) So yeah being a true devotee of Orcus MIGHT be paradoxical but it's only that way IF you think of yourself as more important than Orcus. Being a devotee means some times laying it on the line for a principle, even if it's evil.

PM,

I think it's more of "Ooh I think I can renege and Orcus won't care!" kind of thing...At least in my book. Obviously not.

 

[Harmon]

"Mercy!"

If the Paladin had taken the woman's head after she asked for mercyhe would lose his paladin-ness. Hands down. Ages ago you took a persons word as gospal, evil, or good, no matter. Where the Player screwed up was that he made her vow to be a person the group would drag along with them and work with. This would be the lose of his paladin-ness as well in my book.

Had he simply said- "you will have mercy this day," well then the following day she is turned over to the authorities for her crimes and assocation. The Paladin should step forward and say- "she asked for mercy, I granted it. I do not deny her crimes, however I ask that her life be spared for keeping of her word."

The authorites can then nod and take the woman's head or place her in prison, the Paladin showed mercy and did what he could to spare her.

To the Player- well done! You did well to show your enemy mercy in the face of what sounds like a good battle.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

"Mercy!"

If the Paladin had taken the woman's head after she asked for mercyhe would lose his paladin-ness. Hands down.

I completely disagree. A paladin isn't required to stay his hand just because his foe cries out for Mercy. If he were, the villains would figure it out in no time and he'd never kill anyone. He'd be the most ineffectual warrior against evil the world has ever known.

Paladin: "Now, foul priest of bane, prepare to..."

Cleric: "Mercy!"

Paladin: "Oh, all right, I guess I need to parlay."

Cleric: "Destruction!"

Dead Paladin: *Hrm, perhaps that wasn't such a good idea...*

No, a Paladinc can choose to grant mercy to those he deems can be redeemed from the darkness. But he certainly isn't required to spare every villain who begs him not to kill them.

Now then, as far as what I'd do as a DM, the first and most important question is, "Is the Priestess of Orcus sincere?" SHARK wrote that she seemed sincere after a Sense Motive check, but what happens afterward depends entirely on whether this is true or not.

If the priestess isn't sincere, things are straightforward. She must have some means of concealing her alignment from the paladin's Detect Evil. So she bides her time until she can escape or kill the party and then escape.

If she's sincere, I think the best way to handle it would be to look to Master Sepulchrave, who faced a similar dilemma with a repenting succubus. I believe (if memory serves) that he immediately changed her alignment to neutral when she renounced Evil, then had her work towards a Good alignment by learning, bit by bit, what Good truly is. I wish I had a link to the thread where this was all discussed, since I think it would help you greatly, but alas I don't have the search function available.

Again, if memory serves, the succubus immediately lost certain demonic powers and qualities that were granted by Evil, and later gained abilities from another power to replace them. I figure the repentant priestess would be the same, immediately losing any powers granted by Orcus, and later possibly finding faith (and power) in another god(dess).

If you go this way, you not only have the RP opportunites of the repentant priestess, but also several plot-hooks built into the concept. For not only will Orcus be upset and want his revenge on the traitor, but the priestess will likely not receive a warm welcome from the paladin's church, either. Indeed, granting mercy to a priestess of Orcus may get him into trouble politically within his own organization, and other clerics and paladins frown upon his decision not to punish the wicked priestess, and question his ability to remain pure in the constant presence of one who served the Demon Prince.

 

[Particle_Man]

Another bizarre idea:

If Drusila's domains do not include Evil, then maybe find a God with the same domains as she has. Perhaps her doubts about Orcus meant that she was unwittingly worshipping the other god the whole time (the other god would have the power to pull the wool over Orcus's eyes, particularly if a prankster/rogue god). Drusila could slowly come to realize this (dreams, etc.). Thus the whole thing could have been planned by this other God to create a tool vs. Orcus. Or something like that.

 

[Nightfall]

In which case, Orcus will STILL be pissed just not entirely at the cleric. But I still see a painful death in this traitoress future. But that's just me.

Pendragon,

Pretty much nailed the "good side" of the coin for me. But evil side, Orcus is pissed and thus I see a very bad end for this little traitor.