Here Comes the Jury!

[Gothic_Demon]

That's why it's such a small breach of the paladin's code and easily atoned for. This does not change the fact that it is a breach of the code.

- DJ

3.5SRD: 'A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct...'

Those of you who would punish the paladin seriously insist that this incident could be cited as a GROSS violation of the Code of Conduct? Whilst I accept this wasn't in the spirit of chivalry, it is still not a gross violation of the rules. A minor slip easily corrected with a small telling off, nothing more. This is so minor it doesn't warrant the god taking the time to remove and replace a Paladin's powers.

 

[Gothic_Demon]

I find it fascinating that in here, its 70/30, but over in my thread (http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=89486), with only Paladin players voting, its currently 50/50. Guess maybe that means we're harder on ourselves than the rest of you are on us? Or it might just be a statistical anomaly.....

Sorry Torm. I just read your alternative post with the Paladins, and I can sum it up as follows:

Paladins who think this was evil: 0
Paladins who think this was unjust: 0
Paladins who think the Paladin in question could have handled it better: 5

I agree it could have been handled better, but no-one seems to think this is a great violation, so why the stripping of the powers?

(And to further note, there are a number of paladins who arrived too late to the trial to officially vote. If you include their unofficial opinions you'll find your numbers closer to 70/30. )

 

[Henry]

I find it fascinating that in here, its 70/30, but over in my thread (http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=89486), with only Paladin players voting, its currently 50/50. Guess maybe that means we're harder on ourselves than the rest of you are on us?

You Tormites always are... (little Zhentish humor)

Or it might just be a statistical anomaly.....

More likely, given it's a 3-to-1 or 4-to-1 split over here, and the fact that even THIS is speculative, since the question was something like "should the paladin lose his powers?" A LOT of posters think Vindicator's Paladin would have SOME kind of atoning to do, but not to the extent of losing his powers.

 

[Zimri]

Totally different point of view than mine - namely, that the paladin would even slice in such a way as to have the body or head fall on the girl. He would slice likely AWAY from the girl, not toward, as there would be a possiblity of hitting her with his stroke - but again, that's artistic license, same as putting his head in her lap.

Interesting Off-topic note: I discussed this with my wife last night, and she told me if she were ever in a similar position, she gave me free permission to spill as much of the attacker's blood as I wished to. Her total non-D&D opinion was, to put it mildly, MUCH more ferocious than mine about what to do with the evildoer, and what accolades to give the paladin.

The way I *see* the scene based on the description is (girl =g Perp=S paladin=P) they are in a smallish room ( I would guess rl it would be about 7.5 feet but sense we have to work with 5' areas in d and d and it isn't 10 we'll say it's 5 so just room for single file). We know the paladin is behind the perp and the perp is in front of the girl and all are withing melee range of each other so it looks like this to me g S P. Now giving the confined are and that the paladin needs to take a certain kind of swing to sever the head from behind (ie a flat arc at neck level away from the paladin) where else does the head have room to land ?. The girl is bound to a chair so is lower than the upper torso/neck level of the perp and so is safely out of the way of the swing from the paladin.

On the side note.... Damn straight. I walk in the house and find someone assaulting my wife. Heck if I am walking down the streeat and see a sexual assault taking place (although walking down the street I won't have my sword) you best be betting this scorpion is going to be stinging and shouting for someone to call 911. Not because I'll be afraid of getting hurt but because I know I won't be stopping until I am pulled off or dead. But I am not a paladin, heck most days according to any dogma but my own I am not a very good christian.

Of course I would expect better from people (even in todays world) that I recognize as clergy/ holy teachers / ministers of whatever faith they follow

 

[Vigilance]

Paladin grabs pedophile... pedophile turns out to be tougher than expected (a 6th level Commoner class vs. a 5th level Paladin- the Paladin will win but not an easy matter)... they struggle... the Paladin's sword is useless at such close range... Commoner gets to Paladin's dagger before Paladin... Paladin drops sword to grab for dagger... need I go on?

Its ridiculous.

No police officer (you know, officers of the LAW) would engage at close range AND give a warning first.

He'd either shoot, or blindside the guy. Assuming the Paladin didn't have a crossbow handy, he'd blindside the guy.

Wyatt Earp (there's another LAW enforcer of fame) blindsided people all the time, often critically injuring them, out of a desire to avoid gunfire that could harm him or (more often) innocent townsfolk.

These real world examples aside, I would vote "no" because the DM put the Paladin in a no-win situation, something many DMs seem to delight in doing to Paladins.

Was it an easy call? No. But it wasn't the WRONG call. Tie goes to the person in the crapper imho, which means I still vote no

Chuck

How exactly does grabbing him from behind when he is unaware and dragging or tossing him from the room but the child in more danger ?

The action I described saves the child from the trauma of watching a homicide take place, being covered in blood from a spurting jugular vein, and seeing the eyes of her attacker as his head falls in her lap.

It also SHOWS justice to be done, spares the honor of the paladin, gives the paladin and or local authorities the chance to find co-conspiritors.

 

[Vigilance]

This is a pretty idea and totally lacking any historical grounds at all.

Now this is a game with magic and elves, so I normally wouldn't quibble, but when you throw the "code of chivalry" in the paladin's face, please do it correctly.

Here's the 411.

The Code of Chivalry did not apply to infidels (as someone completely outside the social and religious order) and those who had, by word or implicit deed, abrogated his place in the social and religious order.

This is why all the knights, following the code of chivalry weren't stripped of their knighthood and excommunicated for slaughtering every Saracen in the holy land.

This is why knights serving the Star Chamber in England were allowed to execute traitors on the spot in front of their screaming wives and children.

You note that knights were judge jury and executioner.

100% correct. But then you place namby pamby limits on that right that would have had the little medieval grade schooler learning his latin scratching his head at you.

There was no "he has the right to execute the child molestor BUT"...

He had the right.

He was upholding the social order by removing a cancer, in the way that posed the least threat to him and the girl.

Chuck

He was free to act as judge, jury and executioner, but a paladin still has to follow the chivalric ideas of honor.
- DJ

 

[Zimri]

Vigillance Apparently you and I interpet "He is a LOWLY COMMONER YOU'LL KILL HIM WITH 1 HIT" differently.

In my world a longsword (standard paladin fair) does 1d8, his strength bonus was at least +1. So I think it is fair to say that on average he is doing (assuming the sword isn't magical or anything) 1d8+1 I don't think I am far off in calling that a 4 or 5.

How does a 6hd commoner have fewer than 5 hit points

A police officer today would lose his job for shooting an assailant ,that was about to mount a rape victim and was unarmed , from behind, and likely serve jail time. Police however are not bound by any kind of code to always act with honor, valour, and chivalry.

Do not make this about "todays standards" as they dictate you lose. It is much more grey in FRCS.

Although we are on different sides of the fence I do at least admire that you have chosen a side to be on.

 

[Agemegos]

I find it fascinating that in here, its 70/30, but over in my thread (http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=89486), with only Paladin players voting, its currently 50/50. Guess maybe that means we're harder on ourselves than the rest of you are on us? Or it might just be a statistical anomaly.....

The vote is now 6-5, with Barconius yet to opine.

And I suspect that others besides myself may have misunderstood your euphemism of 'unbecoming conduct' for 'gross impropriety'. I notice that no-one who voted 'guilty' has suggested that Vindicator's characer should lose his paladinhood.

 

[Agemegos]

You note that knights were judge jury and executioner.

Some were. Most weren't.

He had the right.

With every right goes an obligation, at least in the Lawful world-view.

 

[Agemegos]

3.5SRD: 'A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct...'

Those of you who would punish the paladin seriously insist that this incident could be cited as a GROSS violation of the Code of Conduct?

Perhaps some of them do: the ones who thing there is more to justice than arriving at the correct verdict. But you should also allow for the possibility that some think the action was so irregular, disorderly, and disrespectful to authority that it casts severe doubt upon the 'Lawful' component of the paladin's alignment.