Another "second-guess the paladin" thread

[tonym]

...Later, after the game, it was discussed that my paladin's actions on the swordsman were harsh. Some said they thought it "unpaladin-like". The words "torture" and "maiming" were bandied about...

Like your fellow Players, I think the paladin's actions were harsh and brutal, but I also think the actions were appropriate in that situation and not outside the realm of what a Paladin can do to thugs of that ilk. Harsh, but not too harsh. Brutal, but not too brutal.

Having flexibilty in how you want to run your Paladin is a good thing, and I'm glad your DM didn't 'punish' your PC for doing what he did. If every action your Paladin took was 100% predictable, why bother running him? You may as well make a flow-chart of his responses to various stimuli, staple it to your character sheet, leave on the gaming table and go home.

Your Paladin sounds like an interesting guy. Not at all the cookie-cutter, wimpy, lacking-in-foresight, boohoo-I-hurt-the evil-cleric kind-of-Paladin that drives me bonkers.



Tony M

 

[Storminator]

Sounds like perfectly reasonable paladin behavior to me.


If it were me, I would have "held court," with my paladin as judge and jury, listed his crimes, declared local laws in abeyance for inadequecy, and passed sentence. And a broken sword hand is quite reasonable. Had you been a paladin of Tyr, cutting off his hand would have been acceptable.

PS

 

[Asmor]

I don't really have a problem with what you did for two reasons...

First and foremost, you didn't do it until after the interrogation, so it doesn't really qualify as torture. Secondly, you knocked him unconscious before you broke his hand, so you didn't cause him any more pain and suffering than was necessary.

 

[KenM]

Question, is this a new group of players/ DM? How long has group been playing together?

 

[Quasqueton]

Question, is this a new group of players/ DM? How long has group been playing together?

We have been playing together for over half a year (8-9 months?). But this is the first time anyone has played a paladin in this group.

Quasqueton

 

[babomb]

What I wouldn't have accepted was leaving the pair of the tied up in an alley where anyone could happen by and then do what they wanted with the helpless thug and wizard. Especially the wizard should have been handled better, because a stabilized character is not out of trouble yet. If he had negative hitpoints, then he can still die without ever waking up.

Well, Quasqueton didn't say they were left tied up, just unconscious. Also, the cleric stabilized the mage, which means he does not have a chance of dying. Otherwise, I agree. Leaving them in an alley is still a little thoughtless or careless, but it's not that bad.

Quasqueton, settle on a code of conduct with your DM ASAP.

 

[Agemegos]

A paladin is supposed to follow and uphold whatever local laws abide in any given area, and therefore "respect legitimate authority". If, however, the paladin sees the law / legitimate authority itself as Evil, then he cannot follow the standards, because he would be breaking other parts of the Code of Conduct. If this sort of a case comes up it is the duty of a paladin to dispence justice in a place where there is no existing law, or fight against a system that isn't just from his point of view.

I concur. And I would add that where the legitimate local authority is weak, lax, negligent, or otherwise ineffective a paladin is duty-bound to impose order to the same extent.

Now, if your paladin were a Christian, he might be bound by the words of the Christ (eg. Matthew 5:38-47). But then God would not have given him the power to Smite Evil. Freeport is not the real world, Torm is not the Christ nor even the Buddha, and your carping fellow-players are applying inappropriate standards.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

I concur. And I would add that where the legitimate local authority is weak, lax, negligent, or otherwise ineffective a paladin is duty-bound to impose order to the same extent.

I would argue that this is a slippery slope that should be avoided in most campaigns. Duty bound to impose whose order? Who decides what rules should be enforced? To whom can others appeal if they feel the paladin is not acting appropriately? How do we keep the paladin from becoming judge, jury, and executioner? Given how readily players resort to violence (in-game) to solve problems (and how many players get a charge out of being the baddest guy in town) I can easily see a paladin character who takes this path essentially changing from lawful good to lawful evil, dedicated to imposing his/her version of "good" on others.

OTOH, in a campaign with a lot of gray areas, this could be an excellent role-playing hook for the paladin character. When should he step in and enforce order? How does he deal with unintended consequences? What if he makes a mistake and an innocent person is hurt? How does he avoid being corrupted by the power to bend others to his will? Within that context, I think this could be an interesting addition to a campaign.

 

[Selvarin]

There's a difference between harsh (but fair) and cruel, just as there's a difference between bad and worse. The hired thugs got off easy, with no permanent debilitating effects. there was no cruelty involved on your character's part. Personally I think the others in your group are suffering from Dudley Do-Rightism. Your character is human (or demihuman, as the case may be), he cannot live up to everyone's preconcieved notion of a paladin 100%. These preconceptions are a little unfair, but unfortunately as a paladin that is par for the course. You will be held to a higher standard and anything even edging towards something that strays from the stereotype will bring wrinkled brows in your direction. As long as you try to do right by the tenets of your character's god, you will be in good standing. Where there is an absence of authority to handle matters, it's up to you to do right. At least you didn't get penalized for not living u to others' expectations.

 

[Agemegos]

I would argue that this is a slippery slope that should be avoided in most campaigns.

I agree, which is one reason I think a GM is ill-advised to include areas that require this sort of service unless there are no paladins in any PC parties, or unless the focus of the campaign is on thus imposing order and delivering justice.

Another reason is that without some sort of social order there are few ways to apply appropriate disincentives to psychopathic PCs.

And another is such power vacuums are unstable, and develop fairly quickly into tyrannies or war zones.