Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thia Halmades" data-source="post: 2728587" data-attributes="member: 35863">Eh, my answer stands:- Short game, valid solution.  My understanding of what Thanee is saying (without conferring with the other two players or the DM) is that she was, AFASWC, utterly out of options.  It was kill or be screwed.  Charm might not have worked; Hold Person might've been an option, if she had it and they failed their saves.  That leaves the same problem; you're still considered criminals.Sub query: At what point is the Paladin reasonably allowed to defend herself with the use of deadly force, against 'innocent' targets?  If you've seen Tri-Gun, the answer is "never."  At no point does Vash ever take down a civilian, because he's Lawful Good in an unlawful world.  He does lots of chaotic things, but his code is clear and he never deviates from it.  Not once.  He doesn't even kill people who deserve, simply incapacitates them.Further point from prior post with Gothic Demon: I can (and did, with some revision) say that the Paladin can be relieved without having done it (or been involved, etc. - just because they're relieved doesn't mean they're HAPPY, two separate feelings on the issue) and further said that in the immediate term, the Code would force the Paladin to likely arrest Thanee, if the PC chose to go that route, they'd be in the right.However.  I still find no fault with Thanee's CG actions in terms of her view of what was strictly necessary to ensure survival and options.  She posits a valid argument: I either tac-nuke these three people here, put the fear of GOD into the rest of the crew, get us where we're going and move on, or flounder in a cell without control over my destination.  This is a great moral dilemma, and great RP.</blockquote>

Verification