Abraxas
Explorer
Well I've waited to the very end to make a comment in this thread (although I participated in the Jury thread).
Agemegos, it seems (to me at least) that your arguments that Vindicator's paladin did wrong are based on the campaign your paladin is being played in. If Vindicator's paladin were being played in the campaign I play Abraxas in, his actions would have been seen as a touch rash - but would be seen in no way wrong. Paladins are judge, jury and if need be executioner in this campaign. In the campaign I play in
As Judge he weighs the evidence - he doesn't have to demonstrate this to the populace at large before he takes action.
As Jury he decides sentance - This may run him afoul of local secular law, but the sentence is based on the tenents of his faith. (In fact Abraxas has run afoul of local law many times because slavery is legal in Mulhurond, where he hails from)
As Executioner (if needed) he carries out the sentance in a way that does not include undo suffering. - if death is warranted.
There is no need for a public display to prove his lawfulness and there is no need for a public display for his actions to be lawful.
In addition, if you expect that a paladin should use non-lethal means in this situation, you would have to expect him to use non-lethal means in every situation that doesn't involve a demon/devil or mindless beast. All the possible what ifs that could have have made this go terribly wrong (possesed, mind controlled, faked, etc etc) would have to always be considered. And carrying this to an extreme, a paladin played in such a way should use non-lethal force at all times unless sanctioned ahead of time by his God even if by doing so he could possibly lose - because shouldn't he be willing to sacrifice himself so that a potential innocent isn't harmed?
Anyways - I'm not looking to continue this thread - Vindicator has gotten his verdict. Just something I've been meaning to say for a while and wanted to get it out of my head.
Peace
Agemegos, it seems (to me at least) that your arguments that Vindicator's paladin did wrong are based on the campaign your paladin is being played in. If Vindicator's paladin were being played in the campaign I play Abraxas in, his actions would have been seen as a touch rash - but would be seen in no way wrong. Paladins are judge, jury and if need be executioner in this campaign. In the campaign I play in
As Judge he weighs the evidence - he doesn't have to demonstrate this to the populace at large before he takes action.
As Jury he decides sentance - This may run him afoul of local secular law, but the sentence is based on the tenents of his faith. (In fact Abraxas has run afoul of local law many times because slavery is legal in Mulhurond, where he hails from)
As Executioner (if needed) he carries out the sentance in a way that does not include undo suffering. - if death is warranted.
There is no need for a public display to prove his lawfulness and there is no need for a public display for his actions to be lawful.
In addition, if you expect that a paladin should use non-lethal means in this situation, you would have to expect him to use non-lethal means in every situation that doesn't involve a demon/devil or mindless beast. All the possible what ifs that could have have made this go terribly wrong (possesed, mind controlled, faked, etc etc) would have to always be considered. And carrying this to an extreme, a paladin played in such a way should use non-lethal force at all times unless sanctioned ahead of time by his God even if by doing so he could possibly lose - because shouldn't he be willing to sacrifice himself so that a potential innocent isn't harmed?
Anyways - I'm not looking to continue this thread - Vindicator has gotten his verdict. Just something I've been meaning to say for a while and wanted to get it out of my head.
Peace