Hijacked Thread in need of closure.

[Vaxalon]

This ancient relic is held by a group of N druids and they wont give it to you because they believe the undead king, though himself an ananthama to nature, is serving a vital purpose by remaining evil in a world heavily balanced towards good.

Going back to our earlier definitions of evil, by withholding their aid they are performing an evil act under case 16. This action deserves justice, and so therefore they are a valid target for the Paladin to use whatever nonevil means is necessary to retrieve the artifact.

 

[jgbrowning]

I think that this is not evil.

Why?

Because a paladin can only combat one evil at a time. If allowing an evil to continue while you pursue greater evils would cause a paladin to lose his paladinhood, then yes, no paladin in the world would be able to retain his paladinhood.

We must come to a resolution on this, I think, before we can go farther.

i think it depends on a time frame and the promis of combating evil in the future.

taken to its logical extreme, chosing to wait to fight evil can mean never fighting evil because you're waiting.

of course, one person can only do so much and i understand that.


unfortunately thats not what the paladins code says. it requires that she "help those who need help." it doesn't say she has the right to pick and chose who to help and when to help.

it depends on how you view "grossly violates the code of conduct."

but thats really another discussion. for the sake of arguement lets say we agree (although we don't ) that its not evil.

joe b.

(even this discussion about willfully ignoring the innocent who need your help, shows how the paladin, as written, is opposed to the concept of an absolute alignment system in DnD. but anyway, i'd like to hear what you'd do. )

 

[jgbrowning]

Going back to our earlier definitions of evil, by withholding their aid they are performing an evil act under case 16. This action deserves justice, and so therefore they are a valid target for the Paladin to use whatever nonevil means is necessary to retrieve the artifact.

they are only bringing despair to the paladins. the majority of the peasants/populace would PREFER to have a strong LE ruler than civil war.

joe b.

 

[Vaxalon]

The undead king learns of your plot to use the relic and he sends a threat to you, "If you use the relic, i will send this virulent plague upon your countries people, not just upon your army. I give my word. If you attempt to save your liege, i will send the plague upon your people. I give my word. If you surrender your kingdom to me now, i will never send the plague upon them. I give my word." You find his threat (on a note) in the king's tent, but the king is gone. Upon inspection, the note appears to be made of human skin.

If I have the relic, I will have the means to defeat that plague, too, so his threat is meaningless.

The paladin would attempt to retrieve the relic from the Druids. First, using diplomacy; if that doesn't work, inform them that he has the means available to take the relic by force (using the army, if necessary).

If the Paladin and his army die in the attempt, indeed, if the entire country is destroyed, that is preferable to serving the evil undead king.

If the undead king does unleash his plague upon the citizenry, the sin is on his head; it is no sin to defy evil.

 

[jgbrowning]

Why not? It seems to me that a trip to a high-level cleric, who can cast a "Commune" spell to ask, "How can this plague be averted?" is a perfectly reasonable way for a paladin to deal with this problem.

It also makes for a dandy plot hook.

yep unfortunately in this circumstance lets just say the god say "the relic will avert the plague"

Basically, im trying to show that eventually, for the sake of greater good almost every human will chose to do an evil act. Most classes arent so penalized for one slip. the balance of their actions outweigh one unfortuanate nasty, but necessary, decision. Paladins don't have the luxury, though.

good ideas though!

joe .b

 

[Vaxalon]

taken to its logical extreme, chosing to wait to fight evil can mean never fighting evil because you're waiting.

of course, one person can only do so much and i understand that.

You went beyond the extreme. You took out the part about waiting to fight some evil while fighting some other evil.

Sometimes you have to fight a greater evil first, because it's too immediate. Sometimes you have to fight a lesser evil first, because you're not strong enough to take on the greater evil. In either case, you're still fighting evil.

unfortunately thats not what the paladins code says. it requires that she "help those who need help." it doesn't say she has the right to pick and chose who to help and when to help.[/B]

And it doesn't say he doesn't. Clearly, there are many more people that need help in the world than the paladin can help; therefore he CANNOT DO ANYTHING ELSE but choose which ones to help first, based on criteria such as 1> Which is most likely to succeed 2> Which will do the most good.

but thats really another discussion. for the sake of arguement lets say we agree (although we don't ) that its not evil.
[/B]

Good enough for me.

 

[Vaxalon]

yep unfortunately in this circumstance lets just say the god say "the relic will avert the plague"

That works. That pretty much says that getting the relic is what the god would want the paladin to do.

Originally posted by jgbrowning Basically, im trying to show that eventually, for the sake of greater good almost every human will chose to do an evil act.[/B]

That may be true. Paladins are supposed to be paragons.

In this case, I think I have laid out a plan of action that does not include any evil actions, as we have defined them.

 

[jgbrowning]

If I have the relic, I will have the means to defeat that plague, too, so his threat is meaningless.

The paladin would attempt to retrieve the relic from the Druids. First, using diplomacy; if that doesn't work, inform them that he has the means available to take the relic by force (using the army, if necessary).

If the Paladin and his army die in the attempt, indeed, if the entire country is destroyed, that is preferable to serving the evil undead king.

If the undead king does unleash his plague upon the citizenry, the sin is on his head; it is no sin to defy evil.

I agree totaly here. unfortunatly a dead paladin is not one of the acceptable outcomes here

BUT, i think that it is the real outcome of such a situation as i have discribed if the paladin refuses to fall from his personal grace for the benefit of others.


OUCH! damn selfish paladin.. everything could have worked out eventually if he wasn't so damn "lawful good" hehehe

Evil, even in a fantasy world would continually find situations where the smart choice is to not be a paladin. people wouldn't want to follow paladins cause they have a better chance of their leader refusing to surrender his paladinship for the more realistic regular "Lawful Good" fighter. The LG fighter could make those tough decisions, take the alignment hit, and then later do all the good he could, but a Paladin... well

anyway.. that was a good idea as well (hadn't thought about it).. this is fun

 

[jgbrowning]

That works. That pretty much says that getting the relic is what the god would want the paladin to do.



That may be true. Paladins are supposed to be paragons.

In this case, I think I have laid out a plan of action that does not include any evil actions, as we have defined them.

unfortunatly the gods the clerics are talking to are LN.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

You went beyond the extreme. You took out the part about waiting to fight some evil while fighting some other evil.

Sometimes you have to fight a greater evil first, because it's too immediate. Sometimes you have to fight a lesser evil first, because you're not strong enough to take on the greater evil. In either case, you're still fighting evil.

Thats true. sorry bout that.


but you have to ask yourself. is allowing an evil act to occur because you know your too low level to fight it consistant with the concept of the Paladin being willing to sacrafice themselves in the fight against evil?

i think your much wiser version of fighting evil is quite appropriate for most LG, but only because they can perform the ocassionally evil act because they are weighed upon the totality of their actions, not upon a single action.

joe b.