Late Addition...
Where in the Realms are you? Knowing this would help to understand the culture and local law.
I think the DM was wrong for even warning you. You DON’T know that the man is nothing more than a commoner, nor does that fact even matter. To the Paladin, the criminal is a vile, evil creature. Anyone who would rape and torture a child is the embodiment of what the Paladin stands against. Just because he is LG doesn’t mean he is a pansy nor does he allow evil to run rampant due to legal loopholes and propriety. There is more at stake then killing one man. I also believe the Dm was wrong to strip the Paladin of his powers. If every Paladin was stripped of his powers for doing their duty – their wouldn’t be any Paladins left.
Why do I feel this way?
From the SRD:
Ex-Paladins: A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities.
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Thus the questions are:
1) Did the Paladin willfully commit an Evil Act?
2) Did the Paladin
“Grossly” Violate the Code of Conduct?
* Did the Paladin willfully commit an Evil Act?
GOOD VS. EVIL
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.
“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
“Evil” implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
Lets look at these step by step.
Is what the Paladin did Evil? In my opinion – Not in the least!
1st & Foremost: “Good characters and creatures protect innocent life.”
Unless the 10 year old child was a demon in disguise, there isn’t much more innocent than a child. The Paladin acted to protect the innocent, who at the time was in imminent danger. That is a good act.
“Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.”
1) The man was not an innocent, by any stretch of the imagination.
2) The Paladin did this act to protect the innocent, not for profit or pleasure. More so, by killing the man the Paladin not only protected the innocent at hand, but also protected all the potential future innocent victims the man would have molested.
“Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.”
Altruism – the unselfish concern for the welfare of others. The Paladin had only one thought going through his mind – saving the child and eradicating a source of evil from the world without concern for the cost to himself. Sometimes a Paladin has to get dirty and soil themselves, making a personal sacrifice of the MUCH touted Paladin “Honor” to do what is right instead. What is Honorable, and what is Right are not always the same thing – and a True Paladin knows when to sacrifice personal honor in order to do what is necessary and right.
“Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.”
Did the Paladin kill someone? Yes. Is this act in and of itself evil? No or there would be no such thing as Good Heroes. The difference between killing for good and killing for evil, is that the Paladin killed an evil man caught “in the act”, to prevent that man from further atrocities. The Paladin did not kill for pleasure, profit, or sport – and thus it was not an evil act.
So… did the Paladin commit an Evil act?
NO
* Did the Paladin
“Grossly” Violate the Code of Conduct?
From the SRD:
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
So to answer if the Paladin Grossly violated the code we have to ask:
1) Did the Paladin respect the Legitimate Authority?
2) Did he act with honor?
3) Did he NOT help those in need?
4) Did he NOT punish those who harm or threaten innocents?
LAW VS. CHAOS
Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.
“Law” implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
Lawful Good, “Crusader”
A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.
Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion.
Now to the question…
1) Did the Paladin respect the Legitimate Authority?
I am not sure as we do not know WHERE this occurred. However, in most places in the Realms this offense is a death penalty offense. Depending on where this occurred, it may even be that the Paladin knew that any other course would allow the criminal a chance to escape punishment, legal systems being as they are, and it is within the Paladin’s nature to
” hates to see the guilty go unpunished”. The Paladin caught the man in the act. That does NOT mean that a magistrate (court, etc.) is A) Going to believe the Paladin, nor does it B) Prove that the court will find the criminal guilty. The Paladin acted within the boundaries of what was GOOD and RIGHT. He may have avoided the legal system, but we also do not know what acts the Paladin followed up this event with. At the very worst, the Paladin acted as Judge and Jury.
Does this grossly violate the code? No. It may not have followed the local law to the letter but it falls within the LG alignment and within the Paladin code, assuming that the Paladin had ANY reason to be doubtful of the local authority. Remember the Paladin is only required to “Respect”
LEGITAMATE authority. At the absolute worst, the Paladin bent this aspect of the Code as a personal sacrifice to do what was the Good and Right thing. Again, as with the Good Vs. Evil argument – doing what is right is sometimes more important than doing what is “Lawful”.
(Example: Just because Slavery is legal somewhere, doesn’t mean a Paladin is going to suffer slavery as a Non-Evil act. To the Paladin, what is right – acting against slavery – is more important than respecting the law.)
2) Did he act with dishonor? (ie: Did he act cowardly or unjustly?)
In my opinion... No.
There was nothing the Paladin did that was unjust or cowardly. It is not a cowardly act to act immediately. If the Paladin had given the cretin a chance, he might have attacked or even killed the Child. Acting immediately was the best action.
From another viewpoint, as someone mentioned earlier, having the evil cretin “defend” himself would have done nothing. In fact, the Paladin acted in a MERCIFUL manner, killing the man outright in one swift strike. If the Paladin would have made the man defend himself, and face the fear of retribution and punishment, which would qualify as “playing with the victim” – THAT would have been an evil act.
3) Did he NOT help those in need?
I think the answer to this obvious. He acted fully within the code.
4) Did he NOT punish those who harm or threaten innocents?
I think the answer to this obvious. He acted fully within the code.
So overall, the Paladin MIGHT have bent One aspect of the Paladin code by doing the GOOD act rather than the LAWFUL act. I think the DM is wrong to strip the Paladin of his powers. The Paladin acted fully with the purview of what it is to be a Paladin. The DM “COULD” make the Law an issue depending on where they are. Somewhere like Waterdeep, the Paladin at worst would get a slap on the wrist and might have to pay a small fine for technically being a vigilante, however at best he would be commended for his act to protect the citizens and to stop a crime in the act.
The Paladin should NOT be stripped of his powers.