Alignment and a Prisoner...

[Natural20]

huh?

"...Because alignment is a set of guidelines and not an absolute restriction?..."
----
OH I thought Lawful was a pretty restrictive alignment, and the Paladin class was the epitome of the very restrictive alignment Lawful Good, living lives dictated by religious doctorine (read that word as RULES).

I also thought if a Paladin broke the rules, they lost their position as a Paladin. Aparently not. Aparently I have been playing D&D wrong for twenty one years. Thank you for clearing that up.

 

[Valiantheart]

"...Because alignment is a set of guidelines and not an absolute restriction?..."
----
OH I thought Lawful was a pretty restrictive alignment, and the Paladin class was the epitome of the very restrictive alignment Lawful Good, living lives dictated by religious doctorine (read that word as RULES).

I also thought if a Paladin broke the rules, they lost their position as a Paladin. Aparently not. Aparently I have been playing D&D wrong for twenty one years. Thank you for clearing that up.

Well since my comment was in respone to the actions of a LG ROGUE I hope your playing skills are better than your reading comprehension or maybe you have been doing it wrong all these years.

 

[Mercule]

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 respectfully, but completely, disagree.

To use my own character again -- the Rogue that the rest of the group viewed as the stand-in for a Paladin (which is to say not just LG, but "Cripes! How can anyone endure the level of honor you subject yourself to?" and that I wouldn't have played him differently if he had been a Paladin) -- I did just that.

One of the Earth priests managed to put up a flag of truce where he would only negotiate with one of us. I was the logical choice because I was well versed in negotiation and my honor guaranteed that I wouldn't attack someone under a flage of parlay. During the parlay, the priest talked for almost an hour about all the politics and weaknesses of the Temples and asked us to attack elsewhere in exchange. I also agreed that our truce would continue until and unless we notified him otherwise.

Well, we eventually did want to pass through his area again. He'd gotten new recruits who were specifically told that we were not allowed to pass. So we wrote a message to the priest letting him know that we were reopening hostilities because he was not allowing us to pass.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Yes. Lawful people follow rules.

Yes. Good people do good things.

Clerics of Lolth have the same evil aura that demons and other fiends do. Letting one go is not OK. Letting one live is not OK. No paladin is going to stand there and let a Cleric of Lolth live - not if she's chained up. Not if she's sleeping. Not under any circumstances.

Clerics of Evil gods are fiends. There is no question of whether it is right to kill them or not. We aren't tlaking about Orc babies here. Orc culture often makes them evil, but Orcs don't have to be bad. Heck, the evil of most Orcs barely registers on the Paladin scan. But someone who has dedicated their life, not just to the performance of wickd acts, but to the direct channeling of the essence of villainy into the world does not get treated with the same respect as a normal person.

Look it up - Clerics of Lolth are more dispicable than are vampires. If you see one, you kill it. If it's chained up at the time that only makes the killing easier.

-Frank

 

[Mercule]

"...Not necessarily. In RtToEE, my LG Rogue (who was dubbed the "pseudopaladin" for a variety of reasons) executed a prisoner we took. Cut his head clean off while he was bound. No alignment issues there..."

How could their *NOT* have been alignment issues there? Good people don't murder, they kill. Wouldn't that have been murder?

Didn't even notice this until I saw VH's response.

No, it wasn't murder. It was a just execution. There were no official authorities (discounting the Temple hierarchy itself) within 100+ miles. We'd essentially been envested with what little authority existed by the local dwarven elder. This guy was a follower of a god that had been ruled anathema for all the other gods, even the evil ones.

Aside from any crimes he may have committed, he'd made it quite clear that he'd do what he could to weaken us if given the chance. He was bound, but not securely enough to hold him for long.

Even it we had a way of holding him for a duration, we were on the move and would not have been able to give him food or water. He would have died a slow, painful death.

This whole discussion really makes me hope that BoED is truly well written.

 

[Wraithdrit]

For those who are concerned about the NPC and have advocate I change her to be more 'friendly' toward the party... uh no. There have been other NPCs that they have been able to deal with (even evil ones). But this one is interested in only one thing. Being freed. After that she is going to look out for herself only. The module describes her as being unable to stomach the thought of working with surface dwellers to long, and will thus turn on them given an opportunity. My only alteration to that would be to turn on them given opportunity and the right odds, otherwise she is going to get the heck out of dodge given half the chance.

She has no interest in fighting the PCs unless they try to keep her prisoner or some such. Of course a good one on one fight (like they are suggesting) would be right up her raging alley, so she would go for that, especially if a bunch of lawful types swore to release her if she won.

- Wraith

 

[S'mon]

Look it up - Clerics of Lolth are more dispicable than are vampires. If you see one, you kill it. If it's chained up at the time that only makes the killing easier.

By the one-step rule a cleric of Lolth could be CN, right?

So if they can be CN or CE, they can be any shade in-between: a surly CN with evil tendencies, or a weak CE with N tendencies.

Ergo, not all clerics of Lolth are more evil than vampires. If anything I'd tend to think that living in a chaotic-evil society would tend to inculcate a neutral, survivalist-selfish sort of attitude. The drow in Salvatore's books barely seemed more evil than the inhabitants of a typical Italian Renaissance city-state. Less debauched, if anything.

 

[S'mon]

For those who are concerned about the NPC and have advocate I change her to be more 'friendly' toward the party... uh no. There have been other NPCs that they have been able to deal with (even evil ones). But this one is interested in only one thing. Being freed. After that she is going to look out for herself only. The module describes her as being unable to stomach the thought of working with surface dwellers to long, and will thus turn on them given an opportunity. My only alteration to that would be to turn on them given opportunity and the right odds, otherwise she is going to get the heck out of dodge given half the chance.

She has no interest in fighting the PCs unless they try to keep her prisoner or some such. Of course a good one on one fight (like they are suggesting) would be right up her raging alley, so she would go for that, especially if a bunch of lawful types swore to release her if she won.

- Wraith

Well I hope they give her what she wants (and deserves), then.

 

[hong]

"...Because alignment is a set of guidelines and not an absolute restriction?..."
----
OH I thought Lawful was a pretty restrictive alignment, and the Paladin class was the epitome of the very restrictive alignment Lawful Good, living lives dictated by religious doctorine (read that word as RULES).

It's good that you cleared up that doctorine means RULES. I would never have figured out what doctorine means otherwise. Possibly some kind of doctor urine. I mean, that's just GROSS, mang.

I also thought if a Paladin broke the rules, they lost their position as a Paladin. Aparently not. Aparently I have been playing D&D wrong for twenty one years. Thank you for clearing that up.

Which part of "the DM is the final arbiter of what principles and guidelines govern the operation of alignment in his game" did you have trouble understanding?

 

[LuYangShih]

Wraithdrit asked for opinions on the situation presented. Most operate from the standpoint is playing by the standard rules of the game, and point out what actions should be taken based on that. If the DM is just going to ignore those rules, and doesn't really care what anyone else thinks, why is he on this board in the first place? Tell me, Hong, what part of messageboard discussion do you not understand?