Here Comes the Jury!

[Darklone]

Pcat: I don't see Enworld reaching a consensus

What about the mentioned compromise? No loss of class abilities but roleplaying because of the breach of honor?

 

[Orryn Emrys]

It's worth pointing out that even though I disagree with the DM call, I'm not a big fan of "DMing by commitee." Letting strangers settle a disputed DM call gives away part of the DM's authority and sets a very bad precedent.

This position most accurately reflected my own thoughts upon first encountering the discussion. Although I certainly favor large-scale discussion concerning such questionable subject matter, I would never allow my players to feel that such discourse could alter an in-game judgment I had already pronounced... right or wrong, if the DMs calls are allowed to be questioned in such a gratuitous manner, it will only set a precedent for distrust of any complex judgments required by the referee during the course of the campaign. I, for one, would be unable to effectively run my game if I thought I might have to argue any serious call I made with my players.

That said, I, too, would have voted no.

 

[Thanee]

I think the paladin would deserve some kind of notice, that while the act of stopping the man, was of course good, the way it was done, was... a bit too much (altho, I think a man like this deserves at least death and no lesser punishment).

Any of my characters would have killed the man without thinking twice and with no remorse, but then again, I usually play chaotic good characters.

There are still laws to uphold and the paladin didn't follow them (I suppose) by taking justice into his own hands.

So, I abstained from voting, since it's somewhere in the middle (closer towards no, though, as I would rate it as a minor failure by the paladin only).

Bye
Thanee

 

[FireLance]

Yes/no is too simple for me and most of the guys who tend to yes. Nearly noone proposed to take the powers away, most asked for a minor atonement for the honorless act.

I agree, but I'll vote no by default.

 

[derelictjay]

I'd say no, but that paladin's on the slippery slope, and next time wouldn't be so lenient

 

[Crass]

Updated to post #158


For GM Ruling (Paladin BAD, lose them): 16
Patman21967, Crothian, Herremann the Wise, MrFilthyIke, jgbrowning, Zimri, the Jester, Agemegos, SirEuain, epochrpg, dvvega, The Gryphon, Brilbadr, diaglo, Chronosome, monboesen

Against GM Ruling (Paladin GOOD, no loss): 34
Dark Jezter, WayneLigon, Sejs, D+1, Stereofm, Anabstercorian, ThoughtBubble, Firzair, Sammael, d4, dead, Nuclear Platypus, Celtavian, Alzrius, Trickstergod, dren, argo, Alynnalizza, Ogre Mage, Khaalis, Toras, TheAuldGrump, Herpes Cineplex, Plane Sailing, Ulorian, ruemere, FireLance, Kem, glass, Numion, twwtww, Klaus, jeffers, 2WS-Steve

The Fence… (comments but no definitive choice): 15
res, talinthas, Elephant, kolvar, Quirthanon, bodhi, frankthedm, robberbaron, sellars, Creamsteak, Li Shenron, Hemlock Stones, Al, Crass, Zappo

Sorry, Khaalis, but I voted to keep the paladinhood in post #142:

Unlawful, yes. Good, definitely. I personally see paladins as champions of good, and therefore think your DM should concentrate more on the Good/Evil axis than the Lawful/Chaotic one. That doesn't mean that you become a rebel with a cause, though...

Was the stripping permanent? If so, your DM should rethink his attitude. I'd say, an atonement spell for the chaotic act, followed by a quest to redeem yourself would be in order, but you should have retained the paladin status.

But please let us know once the issue is resolved, what your DM has decided.

 

[Darklone]

Crass, I think voting for a necessary atonement would be yes to stripping him of his powers (though not permanently).

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I think some kind of a penalty is in order, but not a total loss of paladinhood. Where he erred was not in killing the vile creature, but by attacking from behind like some petty rogue. He should have warned the guy, tried him, and executed him on the spot. Executions are not done by surprise attack.

As for wether it was a lawful good act, had he followed the above recommendations, it definitely would have been. Murder is evil. Execution, however, is not.

 

[DragonLancer]

I voted no.

Normally I am very strict on Paladins, but what he did was right. He didn't break any tenants of his faith (I'm guessing) and he did what he did to save the child.

 

[4everdm]

I voted No, however a power or two should be put on hold ie Detect Evil, Aura of Courage.