Morality, oh and come in and help out!

[shilsen]

Dragonblade did a good job of describing what I think a paladin would do in the given situation.

As to the debate, I think that too many DMs believe a paladin has to be some sort of lawyer. From the PHB, pg. 89:Note the parts about hating to see the guilty go unpunished and fighting evil without mercy.

Just because a paladin is lawful does not mean he needs to respect and follow every law. Nor does it mean he has to withhold his smite because there is a sheriff's office nearby, or the lich cries out "spare me!"

In D&D evil is evil, and must be destroyed. A paladin is not a lawyer to wade through the laws of the land, he is the Holy Sword of God, placed on earth to smite the Hand of Darkness.

Of course, this doesn't mean he's stupid, nor does it mean he'll go around smiting everyone who detects as evil (the Detect Evil ability itself allows for degrees of evil, after all.) But if the paladin decides a foe is evil, and if he has the opportunity to destroy that foe, he takes it. It's what he was born for.

I'm just curious about one thing. In your campaign, how does society in general, and law enforcement in particular, view it if a paladin lops someone's head off because he is sure that the person is evil?

 

[Arnwyn]

There would be no dilemma, IMC. It would be option #5: do nothing, for the reasons Shilsen pointed out, above.

#4 is viable, simply because adventurers like to meddle.

 

[Sanackranib]

Re: edging off topic

[B}I don't know if I agree with you on this. Two thoughts on the subject:
1) Is a being more evil because of its nature, or because of its choices? The devil is creature formed of evil, it being the very stuff of its creation. It exists (with a few exceptions) in a realm of cruelty and hate where the only real crime is to break the system (being a devil and in DnD lawful rather than a demon, to whom that would not be an issue). It is evil without comparison. It has no choice. Now the commoner does have a choice. Even if raisd by evil cultists at some point there is a rational thought of being something else, seeing an example of a normal life and tossing it aside. They have chosen their nature.
2) This is an extension of the first idea really. Imagine hannibal Lector, but take away his niceties, his manners. This man will kill children, he has no compassion in the least. He is however a 1st level human commoner. Is he not just as evil than say a Kyton, whose enjoyment is part of its nature in much the same way as our psychopath? [/B]

allow me to clarify: some creatures are inherently evil others choose to be. that basically summs up your first point and we are in agreement so far. what I ment about degrees of evil was posted as well in a difernt post namly that nore powerfull evil registers higher then less powerfull evil ( in D&D this has always been an expression of HD) IMO Hannibal wouldnt be a commoner, he was a doctor (psych) that would make him an expert also I never have pictured him as 1st level (maby 8-10th)

 

[Skade]

Re: Re: edging off topic

allow me to clarify: some creatures are inherently evil others choose to be. that basically summs up your first point and we are in agreement so far. what I ment about degrees of evil was posted as well in a difernt post namly that nore powerfull evil registers higher then less powerfull evil ( in D&D this has always been an expression of HD) IMO Hannibal wouldnt be a commoner, he was a doctor (psych) that would make him an expert also I never have pictured him as 1st level (maby 8-10th)

Bad example. I was referring to his psychosis not his actual level. You are right about his level though, Smart Hero 3/Field Medic 3/Cannibal 3

I was thinking about the Evil descriptor on my drive home (three hours). I think Evil has only been applied to outsiders because of the evil nature thing I was descibing earlier. I know this seems self-explanatory, but it is my opinion that the Evil descriptor should only be applied to creatures who originate in a plane of pure evil. Hell, Carceri, the Abyss, etc. I don't think a human born in Hell can be good. The energies of those planes permeate too deeply, changing everything to match. So even in my normaly grey shaded campaigns, there is true Evil and Good.

 

[Skade]

Re: Re: edging off topic

allow me to clarify: some creatures are inherently evil others choose to be. that basically summs up your first point and we are in agreement so far. what I ment about degrees of evil was posted as well in a difernt post namly that nore powerfull evil registers higher then less powerfull evil ( in D&D this has always been an expression of HD) IMO Hannibal wouldnt be a commoner, he was a doctor (psych) that would make him an expert also I never have pictured him as 1st level (maby 8-10th)

Bad example. I was referring to his psychosis not his actual level. You are right about his level though, Smart Hero 3/Field Medic 3/Cannibal 3

I was thinking about the Evil descriptor on my drive home (three hours). I think Evil has only been applied to outsiders because of the evil nature thing I was descibing earlier. I know this seems self-explanatory, but it is my opinion that the Evil descriptor should only be applied to creatures who originate in a plane of pure evil. Hell, Carceri, the Abyss, etc. I don't think a human born in Hell can be good. The energies of those planes permeate too deeply, changing everything to match. So even in my normaly grey shaded campaigns, there is true Evil and Good.