The Paladin killed someone...what to do?

[Truth Seeker]

You save me from saying the same thing...all these little catches will not stand in my book, when a dear member of the family is in danger, especially when a near to be-newborn cannot defend itself. Which will include the wife also.

So, enough of the clap-trap on good vs evil trip...someone comes your home, tricks you, and at the same time, you somehow become aware, that this distraction done, is bringing pain to someone else cannot defend their themselves...

"Coffin man, make me enough, until I tell you when"

Please...alignment has nothing to do that matter...not all at.

Sounds to me like the paladin's player is roleplaying love and passion for his wife. No penalty would come from me for that.

It sounds like you wanted the following response:

PALADIN: "Oh, my wife has been assaulted? (stifles yawn) Okay, you are in trouble. Participating in an assault is a crime. I'm taking you to the city jail."

What's the fun in that?

I'd go the opposite route. I'd make the paladin glow with holy light, giving him 20 extra hit points and +3 to hit and damage until his wife is rescued. You don't mess with a paladin's family in my world. And if you do, the gods will be on the paladin's side, not cackle with glee over the opportunity to screw him over in his moment of anxiety.

My 2 cp.

Tony M

 

[Peter Gibbons]

If all a paladin does is simply "not do evil", he's not a good character.

You make a good point, but you seem to be forgetting that we aren't evaluating everything the paladin in this particular example has ever done. We're looking at one specific event, and in that context, all that is required is that he "not do evil."

If, on the whole, the paladin is not Lawful and Good...you're right, he's not being Lawful Good. But we don't have any information about what he's doing on the whole, so we can't make that determination.

 

[Joonaibug]

Point taken, PoE, but watch out -- here comes my rebuttal.

A Paladin is required to be both Lawful and Good.

Exactly. And those two alignments (ethical and moral) make up the complete package. In terms of strict game mechanics, a character isn't simply "Lawful", (or Chaotic), nor are they simply "Good" (or Evil, or Neutral).

In your example, sacrificing babies may be Lawful in that particular land, but it is certainly not "Lawful Good", which is the moral and ethical code paladins (ideally) follow.

I see the point, though, and I was in fact coming up with certain examples myself:

A paladin, for example, travels to a town where the residents were required to tithe to the local lord. The paladin's order teaches that its holy warriors may only tithe to the Church. As in PoE's dilemma, is the paladin turning "chaotic" because he refuses to tithe to the nobility?
I personally wouldn't think so, since the Law of the Church, would supercede the Laws of the Locals.

 

[Hjorimir]

Let the paladin's god decide.

However, this is almost exactly how an NPC fell into Blackguard in my campaign. The attack on his wife and child was arranged by a Pit Fiend too. The paladin could have subdued the halfling (learned of any other plots and who ordered the attack) and then handed the halfling over to the courts to await hanging or a nice fifty-year stay in the local salt mines.

Now, if the country was a Theocracy and the paladin was awarded judge, jury, and executioner powers AND his god was okay with the action it would be excuseable.

 

[Numion]

I'm looking for advice / opinions on a paladin-related issue.

The paladin (married, with a pregnant wife) was called down to the street in the middle of the night by a messenger: a halfling who said he had a message but then hemmed and hawed about what it was -- then tried to scamper off. The paladin grabbed him -- and then learned that just after he left his room, someone had assaulted his wife. The paladin asked a couple more questions, at which point it became clear that the halfling was involved in the assault. The paladin then attempted to kill the halfling (and may have succeeded; I ended the session at that point, as it was a good cliffhanger).

Obviously this is not on the list of Approved Paladin Activities. What would you do to the paladin in question?

Maybe the Paladin deemed that a good butt-whipping or death is a suitable penalty for assaulting a pregnant woman. In any case, clearly the halfling was engaged in [Evil] activity, and use of force is surely justified.

 

[Stormborn]

This thread is an excellent example of why alignments don't get used in my campaigns, incidentally - clearly there are two circles of thought here:

1. Lawful infers adherance to the law as it exists in a given setting.
2. Lawful infers the duty to do what one personally considers just, laws be damned.

Actually there is a third:

3 (or possibly 1b.) Lawful infers adherance to the laws of YOUR ORDER, regardless of whether they be the laws of the land or not.

Thats the issue above. Everyone pointing out "adherance to authority" simply begs the question. Who is the authority the paladin is beholden to? His God? His Order? Civil Rulers? Civil Laws? All of which can be very different and defined by the setting.

I think ultimatelly the best advice is to work something out with the player based on what he or she thinks should happen next, explain it however you want, and move on.

 

[Alensande]

This really gets to the heart of how you and your player understand paladins, and which deity is involved.

I have played paladins on several occasions, and each has come close to breaking strictures/tenets. Just getting close is a dangerous thing for a paladin; actually breaking a stricture is, as someone noted, high drama ...and can be lots of fun for player and GM if played correctly. We had a paladin who got a little bloodthirsty and tried to run down an unarmed opponent with his lance. Our cleric stepped in and took the lance to protect the unarmed guy, then walked over to the (shocked out of battlefrenzy) paladin and wiped a bloody hand print on his face with an open hand slap, saying, "This blood is on you." Talk about high emotion...and a great game.

I'd say let there be consequences - legal (since there is law and authority in the land...there must be or a paladin wouldn't have his family there) and divine. Let the authorities deal with the paladin as they would anyone else in this case - a warning if he doesn't kill the halfling, and maybe a fine, and the full legal process if he does kill the messenger, with mitigating circumstances and all. Then let the church step in and offer to mitigate the situation by having the paladin perform a quest to pay his debt to society...and have him wear a ring from the halfling on his swordbelt, or something like it, to remind him of his trials. Make the quest appropriate to the deity, and have fun with it. Paladins are drama, and situations like this let it flow freely.

 

[Arravis]

Sounds biblical to me.
Now, are we talking about some halfling villager who was forced into doing this against his will, or are we talking about some halfling sneak who is involved in a plot to kill the paladins wife? Lawful Good (and ESPECIALLY paladins) is ALL about righteous vengeance. If youre looking for ALL GOOD, ALL THE TIME... thats Neutral Good. Lawful Good and paladins isnt Superman. Its Heironeous and Moradin and Tyr. Smite the evil so that it doesnt spread.

Biblical doesn't mean it has anything to do with either good or law... there are many specific instances of parts of it having neither. And when did Lawful Good become about "all about" righteous vengence? That's not in the description of good (not even close) nor in the description of the paladin class.

Was the halfling a innocent forced into the situation or was he a guilty collaborator? That's the real question at hand... and one that the paladin had no way of knowing in that moment. He chose to not do good, by not bothering to find out. And bothering about such "boring" details is the very core of paladinhood. It's not meant to be an easy class to play, nor is it meant to be a blood-thirsty avenger who cares little for the details of truth, right or wrong.

 

[Acid_crash]

I didn't read the entire thread so I dont' know if this point was brought up, but if a Paladin comes from a society in which it is just and okay to have vengeance upon a person who attacked his wife (especially pregnant wife) and therefore this situation was okay. If this same paladin traveled to a different region, and the laws were different, and he reacted through is passion, you are going to strip him of his paladin abilities because the 'laws' of this society are different than the ones he grew up knowing and believing in?

Now, just cuz we have a lawful good character doesn't mean he's gonna go to each individual society, learn their laws, and uphold ALL of them. Just not gonna happen. He's going to treat everything as he knows and understands it, which is usually the society in which he grew up.

All of this is just example, not saying it happened this way in the game, but just an example of how looking at the class mechanics or the alignment alone can strip away the meat of a character. A paladin from one society with it's own laws will be different than a paladin from a totally different society. They are both paladin's, both lawful good, but with two very different methods of upholding the paladin code.

 

[Galfridus]

What are the Paladins legal powers in this setting? Is he a full knight with the High Justice and the Low? An agent of the Church? If so the simple fact that this is an assault on his wife could make this a church matter and once again within his perview. Is he in his own country or a foreign one and which set of laws is primary? Modern jurisdictional disputes are childs play compared to the kind of stuff that crops up under the feudal system.

The paladin (who worships Hieroneous) is effectively a noble of the kingdom he is in (he is actually a noble from another kingdom who has been granted noble status and has accepted associated responsibilities). He has the legal powers of a nobleman -- but he is in the capital city of a kingdom which is (simplifying here of course) Lawful Good. He does not have the right to order execution as a punishment (as opposed to killing in self-defense or to protect others). He is in the royal capital, so there are higher nobles who would be expected to pass judgment and to whom he would be expected to defer in any other than the most immediately pressing circumstances.

What does the relevant legal system say is the appropriate punishment for accessory to assault? What are the guidelines the Paladins order has for dealing with evil prisoners when you can't afford to be slowed down by them?

Legal guidelines would involve incarceration followed by trial, with imprisonment as the likely penalty. The situation was not one where the paladin was slowed down (other people were just arriving on the scene); his full attention was directed at the prisoner.

It's not at all clear yet if the paladin has actually done something wrong.

In my opinion, the act was excessive, with elements of chaotic and evil behavior. Chaotic: abandoning the laws one has sworn to uphold for personal vengeance. Evil: unnecessary death. (The intent to kill was clearly stated, no question there.) Passion due to the personal nature of the attack is both a mitigating factor (clouded judgment) and not an excuse -- if you can't uphold the law for yourself, what kind of example do you set?