Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 6190203" data-attributes="member: 13107">I'm finding the quoted text to be amusing.&nbsp; I would consider a paladin who kicked a sack of puppies to have violated their code and to immediately lose their powers.&nbsp; Intentionally causing harm to a helpless innocent is a strong violation!&nbsp; A person doesn't need to have a string of bank robberies to go to jail.&nbsp; Just one is sufficient.&nbsp; (More means a stronger punishment, not none at all.)What should happen if a paladin, after a very stressful discussion with a city official, turned and struck a servant out of rage?&nbsp; More interesting would be if the paladin unfairly scolded the servant, or failed to leave a customary tip.Generally, I've found players to be strongly opposed to any sorts of restrictions.&nbsp; The quoted text is an example, where the tone diminishes the extent of consequence, and generally allowing singular or infrequent deviations.&nbsp; The opposition seems quite strong.Thx!TomB</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tomBitonti, post: 6190203, member: 13107"] I'm finding the quoted text to be amusing. I would consider a paladin who kicked a sack of puppies to have violated their code and to immediately lose their powers. Intentionally causing harm to a helpless innocent is a strong violation! A person doesn't need to have a string of bank robberies to go to jail. Just one is sufficient. (More means a stronger punishment, not none at all.) What should happen if a paladin, after a very stressful discussion with a city official, turned and struck a servant out of rage? More interesting would be if the paladin unfairly scolded the servant, or failed to leave a customary tip. Generally, I've found players to be strongly opposed to any sorts of restrictions. The quoted text is an example, where the tone diminishes the extent of consequence, and generally allowing singular or infrequent deviations. The opposition seems quite strong. Thx! TomB [/QUOTE]

Verification