Alignment Question

[Lord Ben]

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

Not lying, cheating, poison, etc. I didn't lie or cheat. I merely used tactics. Ambushing isn't "cheating", it's a valid military tactic used to defeat an opponent.

 

[kreynolds]

Maybe I should've explained more clearly, because it looks like I didn't get my point across.

I don't think I got the point you intended.

If the DM judges a certain act to be evil, then as far as the game world is concerned, it really is evil.

Correct. Although, as this thread proves, sometimes a DM makes a snap decision that doesn't make any sense, so that doesn't really further along this argument at all.

 

[Artoomis]

Not lying, cheating, poison, etc. I didn't lie or cheat. I merely used tactics. Ambushing isn't "cheating", it's a valid military tactic used to defeat an opponent.

There is a not-so-fine line between "ambush" as a military tactic and "murder." See my post above on this topic.

 

[Lord Ben]

Yeah, I saw it. We were in a frontier river town with goblins, orcs, humans, etc. If I'd have attacked him there 90% of people in town would have sided with him.

At any rate, we disagree. I have a different view of paladins then you do. I don't see all of them (definately some though) them as shining beacons of truth and goodness. I see them as holy slayers of evil who are out to make the world a better place, sometimes by force and violence.

Those full plate glad warriors atop their celestial mounts with gold and platnium holy symbols shining in the sun are very impressive in a parade. In the field though they're warriors who are fighting to make the world a better place. Their armor is covered in blood stained travel cloaks, their holy symbols aren't tied with fine silver chains, they're secured with leather cords. And those celesial warhorses propel the paladin and his mount at frieghtening speeds so they can bury their lances deep into the bowels of their enemy. It's not a gentlemans game with fairplay rules IMC.

 

[KarinsDad]

Not lying, cheating, poison, etc. I didn't lie or cheat. I merely used tactics. Ambushing isn't "cheating", it's a valid military tactic used to defeat an opponent.

I think the problem is that inappropriate tactics such as ambushing do not jump out at all people as being inherently non-LG.

But, Paladins cannot use poison.

Why?

What is inherently evil about using poison?

........

Nothing.

How is poison burning in the gut any different than a dagger thrust burning in the gut?

Dead is dead according to the "LG Fighters should be allowed to ambush their opponents philosophy".

So, you might as well ambush your opponent by slipping poison into his drink.

Or waiting outside the tavern with a huge rock and dropping it on his head as he steps out the door.

Or kidnap his wife, drop a ransom note, and ambush him with 500 archers as he comes to rescue her.

What's the difference?

You didn't cheat. You didn't lie.


If you do not understand the difference, you probably never will.


One other note: The marines teach duty and honor, not right and wrong. It is a LN philosophy designed to get the soldier to perform certain expedient actions. Soldiers are ordered to do the wrong thing all of the time. But, they are trained to obey orders and follow through, not analyze the moral implications. Ambush is a valid military tactic. But, it is not a morally valid tactic. Otherwise, the marines would be taught the difference between right and wrong.

 

[Lord Ben]

I understand the difference, I just choose to believe both are LG. I disagree about the poison part too if you ask.

You can say I'm wrong, but don't tell me I don't understand.

 

[kreynolds]

You can say I'm wrong, but don't tell me I don't understand.

Don't take it personal. He's always like that.

 

[Lord Ben]

Don't take it personal. He's always like that.

Damn people with their strong opinions, right?

 

[kreynolds]

Damn people with their strong opinions, right?

Something like that.

 

[Artoomis]

How is poison burning in the gut any different than a dagger thrust burning in the gut?

Dead is dead according to the "LG Fighters should be allowed to ambush their opponents philosophy".

So, you might as well ambush your opponent by slipping poison into his drink.

Or waiting outside the tavern with a huge rock and dropping it on his head as he steps out the door.

Or kidnap his wife, drop a ransom note, and ambush him with 500 archers as he comes to rescue her.

What's the difference?

Precisely. LG believes that combat has rules. CG/NG might not think so. In fact, CG probabaly strongly believes that the outcome is all-important, not how you got there.

This is not entirely a matter of opinion. This is how the D&D rules for alignments work as they are written in th PHB and the SRD.