Alignment and a Prisoner...

[LuYangShih]

Sune is a special, noted exception to the normal rules. The reason for this is to allow the classic chivalrous knight who fights for his ladies honor, in the name of beauty and grace. Whether or not that is a valid reason to grant an official exception is up for debate.

 

[Wraithdrit]

No he should have fallen. So if for instance if Mordred beat Galahad to submission and then said lets parley, "I spare you and you never bother me again." if Galahad said sure he would lose his Paladin status. He made a bargain with a being who he knew would most likely commit more evil acts. It doesnt matter if its a no win situation and Paladin NEVER knowingly associates or deals with a known evil being. NEVER. Death before Dishonor.

Oh and though I cant really see the Drow goddess with Paladins, Sune also has Paladins and shes CG.

Wow. I am so glad I don't play a paladin in your game...

From the SRD:
"Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

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."

Associate to me means 'adventure with', not 'parlay with to save the lives of many'.

So if your friendly neighborhood paladin is leading a group of starving freed slaves through the wilderness toward a safe haven, and a red dragon drops down from the skys and demands their surrender, and the paladin as a captive in exchange for the release of the slaves said paladin must draw his sword and valiantly charge said dragon, though he knows that his own death and the death of all those that stand behind him rests on his decision?

Alignments aren't cut and dry. Neither should be strictures. Making a stricture set in stone is tieing the hands of a player, and run poorly will doom the player to being stripped of his paladin abilities or death in a horrible situation. Mitigating circumstances have to be allowed, in my opinion.

 

[Valiantheart]

Essentially that is what a Paladin would do. He either thinks of a clever way to trick the beast or he uses his life to buy the captives time to escape. What he does not do is bargain with the Red. Paladins do not parley with evil.

The classic FR example is Scyllua Darkhope. She was a Paladin intent on destroying the Zhents. She confronted Lord Orgauth. And this I quote,"but Orgauth, in reality was a pit fiend of great power and cunning, surrendered to her wrath and offered humbly to help put right what he had marred. Scyllua listened to his honeyed words, and so she fell from grace." Scyllua didnt even know he was a pit fiend, at the time, but by listening to him and forming a bargain she fell from grace and switched sides. Its as cut and dry as that.

 

[hong]

Essentially that is what a Paladin would do. He either thinks of a clever way to trick the beast or he uses his life to buy the captives time to escape. What he does not do is bargain with the Red. Paladins do not parley with evil.

I don't think you really get this whole "game" thing.

Wraithdrit is the DM in his campaign. That means he's the final arbiter of what principles and guidelines govern the operation of alignment in his game, and clearly, he's using a less tight-arsed interpretation of things than you are.

If you want to provide commentary on such matters so that it would actually be meaningful and applicable to his game, it would be good to take into account this fact. Otherwise, your bald-faced statements on what a paladin would and wouldn't do are kinda like nipples on a guy: interesting, but useless.

Except for attaching the NIPPLE CLAMPS OF EXQUISITE PAIN, of course. There is always that use.

 

[Wraithdrit]

Hong, you crack me up. Valiantheart and I obviously disagree. I have my opinion, and he has his 'statements'. He is allowed to have them. Just not in my game (insert ego trip here).

And nipple clamps of exquisite pain... heh.

 

[Zerovoid]

I'm playing a CG elven cleric in a campaign right now. I say the drow are an abomination, and must repent or be destroyed. If they sincerely want to change their ways, and can prove that under Zone of Truth or something, then they would be bound and gagged. Later, I would cast atonement on them, or else deliver them to a cleric of Eliastrae, who might do a better job of helping them transition from evil to good. I haven't had any takers on this offer however.

And while I was absent from a gaming session, my party let a captured drow wizard go, naked of course. Now, because of this, he knows he we all are, and is trying to scry on us, and is working with his old allies to kill us. They even captured the monk!!!

 

[Valiantheart]

Whatever guys. He asked for help on a Paladin situation.

What I was going to say before we got sidetracked into the "what is a Paladin" situation is I provide my Paladin players with a nice page outlining the tennents of their code before the game begins. I outline what is expected of the Paladin from their god and outline their general rules of behavior. It will save you a LOT of trouble later down the line when situations like this inevitable creep up.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

The text of the adventure actually states (peers around to make sure his players aren't looking) that she will turn on them if freed if she gets half the chance.

ok, here comes a rant of a different color... In these conversations, everyone has to grab the line "lawful good doesn't equal lawful stupid" as an excuse to ignore the paladin's code and play a smite machine. Yet WAY too many game writers and DMs are willing to play any stripe of evil as suicidally moronic. Evil is not automatically the friend of other evil, and evil does not go out of its way to harm good - good just gets in the way of evil being, well, evil and has to be dealt with. You have a senient being who has been at the complete mercy of her enemies for an unspecified length of time. A group of her enemy's enemies show up and offer to free her if she aids them. They are doing exactly what she want's to do! There is NO reason for her to "turn on them" unless she has a serious compuslive disorder to kill people at random intervals. Its a dumb way to play the NPC and takes as bizare a veiw of evil as some people do of good....

So, if you want your players to roleplay instead of racking up kill points, you have to do the same with the NPCs. Ignore what the module says and play the priestess like a rational being based on how the PCs treat her. Think about what her goals should be right now and play them out, don't buy into the silly "all Evil npcs are the enemies of the PCs and attack them without thought" mindset.

End that rant.

Kahuna burger

 

[S'mon]

So, if you want your players to roleplay instead of racking up kill points, you have to do the same with the NPCs. Ignore what the module says and play the priestess like a rational being based on how the PCs treat her. Think about what her goals should be right now and play them out, don't buy into the silly "all Evil npcs are the enemies of the PCs and attack them without thought" mindset.

I agree with Kahuna - it's possible the priestess is insane/deranged, so consumed with evil she's like the scorpion in the scorpion/frog parable, but I'd tend to think even among clerics of Lolth such would be a minority. If she is like that it should be pretty obvious either to observation (does she froth at the mouth?) or magical detection ("her aura is solid black"); and it should be easy to work out that putting her down like a mad dog is the only sensible thing to do.

 

[tonym]

...As to what someone said about the paladin making a deal with the archmage and needing to atone... why? If that were the case it was a no win situation. The archmage was invisible, had the drop on the party, and was flying out of reach of many party members. It was parlay or die (when you are 11-12 level and someone introduces themselves as ARCHMAGE Solom... in the FR... you listen).

Whoa. My paladin would likely be dead in your world right now. :-O

I would require a TON of evidence before my paladin would cower in fear and comply with an evil NPC's demands. In other words, an NPC would have to PROVE he could kill us all.

WAIT! On second thought, my paladin would NEVER cower in fear and comply with an evil NPC's demands!!! NEVER! He's not a mere LG Fighter! He's a PALADIN!

Okay. Confession-time. On one occasion my paladin and the rest of his party DID surrender to a Mind Flayer and the Mind Flayer's small army. But we only did it because it was one of those situations where the DM made it pretty obvious that he wants the party to follow down a certain path--that is, he said good things about the specific idea he wanted to see happen while frowning at or criticising the other ideas tossed out.

Anyhow, I'm guessing the PCs in this thread will turn the evil priestess over to the mage...

PS: The following is a private message to the Player who is running the paladin being discussed in this thread, just in case he is reading: Paladin, slowly pull out your sword, make sure no one is standing too close, then KILL THE EVIL PRIESTESS!!! QUICK!!!"



Tony