Another Paladin Thread: Throw Rocks!

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

That's not RAW, but it would make a fine house rule.

Cheers,
Liam

Since the SRD is a constantly changing entity, why don't we petition to MAKE it RAW?

 

[nerfherder]

Since the SRD is a constantly changing entity, why don't we petition to MAKE it RAW?

I don't think WotC will be very receptive to removing alignment...

Cheers,
Liam

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yup, because running down an unarmed, fleeing opponent is honorable and righteous, right? It's not like stabbing an opponent in the back and...

If the paladin had already judged the orc's life forfeit before surrender, its no different than tracking down and killing an escaped death-row inmate.

Alhandra, a paladin who fights evil without mercy and protects the innocent without hesitation, is lawful good.

There were no innocents around and she wasn't fighting evil without mercy. Fighting implies two or more people engaged in assault. What we have here is one sided murder.

and

Although mercy is an important component of a paladin, the amount of mercy is the paladin-player's call, generally. A paladin can be virtually mericless to monsters and still be a paladin, or a paladin can be so merciful that he becomes a major pain to the rest of the party by not killing things.

The term "Mercy" could just as easily apply to the method of execution- in other words, a merciful and quick execution at sword-point as opposed to poisoning drawing & quartering, drowning, burning at the stake, or pressing.

murder[mur-der]
–noun
1. Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
2. Slang. something extremely difficult or perilous: That final exam was murder!
3. a group or flock of crows.
–verb (used with object) 4. Law. to kill by an act constituting murder.
5. to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.

Emphasis mine. I do believe running down a helpless opponent and stabbing them in the back is pretty much considered a barbaric act in civilized society - even an idealized fantasy society like the Realms.

Except you hinge your argument on the 5th definition of the word- one which could encompass sate-sanctioned execution (see pressing, etc., above). Before we get to THAT point, we have to ask about how the parties involved in the killing (the orc and the paladin) are viewed in the law of that region.

If Paladins are given broad legal authority in the region- if, say, the region is a theocracy controlled by the Paladin's faith- he and his peers may be considered to be judge/jury/executioners/ without fear of reprisal- virtually incapable of "murder" in the legal sense unless they obviously violate the tenets of their faith (evidenced by losing their status as paladins).

OTOH, if Orcs are the scourge of the land, they may not have any real rights in the eyes of the law- killing them would be analogous to stepping on ants.

Further, if as I stated above, the Paladin had adjudicated the Orc's fate before the surrender, and had deemed the orc worthy of a merciful fate- execution by sword- but had to run him down and kill him because the orc ran, its not murder- he's killing an escaped prisoner fleeing a death sentence.

Because, y'know, there's only one way to play a paladin and only one 'proper' way to react to them.

My point of a few posts ago was that there are several ways to play a paladin, and the "avenging angel" archetype (like the one we apparently have here) is one of them , as is the "merciful protector of the downtrodden." Your refusal to accept that a paladin can be ruthless and merciless in his struggle against evil is every bit as close-minded and non-RAW as those who can't accept Paladins who let evil creatures live.

Paladins have a sliding scale of acceptible behaviors, just like other PCs (its just not as big and broad)...which is why I repeatedly suggest that the DM and would-be-Pally-player need to talk about the PC and associated issues before a single dice is rolled.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

I don't think WotC will be very receptive to removing alignment...

Cheers,
Liam

That's because they're Lawful Evil.

They don't immediately do what everyone wants them to do, which makes them evil, didn't you know?

Perhaps we should gather up some Paladins and assualt them.

Oh, wait, all the Paladins can do is stand there and go "Tsk tsk tsk" while waving a finger. Unless it hurts someone's feelings, in which case, he looses his Paladinhood.

So I guess we're stuck.

 

[Crothian]

I don't think WotC will be very receptive to removing alignment...

But you never really know till you try

 

[Thurbane]

Wow, just wow. I waded through all of this, and one thing kept occurring to me.

Everyone is slapping modern thought on the actions of a medieval situation.

Ever heard the phrase: "get medieval on their asses!"

Yeah, that's because certian things were acceptable back then that aren't now.

Which would be all fine and well, except we aren't talking about d20 Historical.

D&D campaign settings are inspired by real world medieval settings, but are FAR from a true reflection of medieval society. Magic, non-human sentients, interventionist Gods etc etc mean that a person in the average campaign setting is almost as far removed from a historical medieval outlook as we are in the modern world. And lets not even get into settings like Athas or Spelljammer.

On top of which I would also point out that trying to liken the D&D alignment system to real world morality is all but impossible - the two are almost mutually incompatible.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

Which would be all fine and well, except we aren't talking about d20 Historical.

D&D campaign settings are inspired by real world medieval settings, but are FAR from a true reflection of medieval society. Magic, non-human sentients, interventionist Gods etc etc mean that a person in the average campaign setting is almost as far removed from a historical medieval outlook as we are in the modern world. And lets not even get into settings like Athas or Spelljammer.

On top of which I would also point out that trying to liken the D&D alignment system to real world morality is all but impossible - the two are almost mutually incompatible.

If we ever meet, that nice and concise summation of the problem at hand has earned you a whiskey shooter and a mug of beer. Not cheapo US domestic beer either, a nice Weissen.

 

[Thurbane]

If we ever meet, that nice and concise summation of the problem at hand has earned you a whiskey shooter and a mug of beer. Not cheapo US domestic beer either, a nice Weissen.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

After reading all of this, I've figured something else out. A lot of our games would be incompatible with one another, even though we're using the basic rules together.

My Paladin of Torm, armed with a writ of execution, having already recieved absolution for what he would have to do, spotted the Barking Bishop, a man who had defamed and twisted the church, who had led his congregation into demon worship and cannibalism. He was across the market square, speaking with some of the poor and destitute, laying his hands upon them. Even across the square I could feel the foullness of his "blessings" upon the poorest of the poor.

I looked around and spotted a piece of wire wrapped around a hitching post, unwound it, walked up, yanked the Bishop off of his feet by wrapping it around his neck and leaning back. While he was strangling, my Paladin told him "Torm awaits thee for judgement, suck***." and strangled a high ranking ex-member of the church, right there in the streets of Waterdeep, in few view of witnesses.

When the guard arrived, I showed them the writ of execution, the writ of absolution, and requested the both the strangled body and myself be escorted to the Church of Torm so they could ensure that it was indeed a church sanctioned killing.

I didn't lose my Paladinhood, it wasn't even brought up. The Barking Bishop could very well had used spells on me, he'd killed eight others sent after him, he engaged in vile acts most foul, and was considered "outside the realm of goodly folk." which made him a "wolf's head" who had every man's hand raised against him.

To us, that did nothing to voilate my alignment (Lawful Evil) and I did the usual after taking life: Confession, performing good acts for the lowest of the low, and attending mass.



As far as my GM is concerned, I'm still Lawful Good, but after the discussion over Saduul Cortez, I'm pretty sure our style of play is a lot more lax than everyone else's here. Many here would pull my Palidanhood, while others would shrug and go "So." about it.

Sure, we all use the same base rules, but there's a lot of room to move around, and while we may all be using the same base, the statues on top are all different from one another.

 

[Rystil Arden]

After reading all of this, I've figured something else out. A lot of our games would be incompatible with one another, even though we're using the basic rules together.

My Paladin of Torm, armed with a writ of execution, having already recieved absolution for what he would have to do, spotted the Barking Bishop, a man who had defamed and twisted the church, who had led his congregation into demon worship and cannibalism. He was across the market square, speaking with some of the poor and destitute, laying his hands upon them. Even across the square I could feel the foullness of his "blessings" upon the poorest of the poor.

I looked around and spotted a piece of wire wrapped around a hitching post, unwound it, walked up, yanked the Bishop off of his feet by wrapping it around his neck and leaning back. While he was strangling, my Paladin told him "Torm awaits thee for judgement, suck***." and strangled a high ranking ex-member of the church, right there in the streets of Waterdeep, in few view of witnesses.

When the guard arrived, I showed them the writ of execution, the writ of absolution, and requested the both the strangled body and myself be escorted to the Church of Torm so they could ensure that it was indeed a church sanctioned killing.

I didn't lose my Paladinhood, it wasn't even brought up. The Barking Bishop could very well had used spells on me, he'd killed eight others sent after him, he engaged in vile acts most foul, and was considered "outside the realm of goodly folk." which made him a "wolf's head" who had every man's hand raised against him.

To us, that did nothing to voilate my alignment (Lawful Evil) and I did the usual after taking life: Confession, performing good acts for the lowest of the low, and attending mass.



As far as my GM is concerned, I'm still Lawful Good, but after the discussion over Saduul Cortez, I'm pretty sure our style of play is a lot more lax than everyone else's here.

Well, I'm one of the people who did not like the Paladin's actions in the OP, but all I can say to the example of your Paladin is Rock On! There was nothing unlawful or ungood about your act--the only thing you might maybe have come close to infringing was the fight with honour thing, and I would say not really on that either. Though you strangled him, you carried yourself honourably and stood to wait for the guards rather than running off.