Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Archive-threads
My Paladin killed a child molester (and now my DM wants to take away my powers!)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="italianranma" data-source="post: 1570381" data-attributes="member: 15788"><p>Wow, what a touchy subject. I read the first and last page leading up to this post. As I see it, there are two arguements here: 1) is the act a Chaotic, and or Evil act, and 2) What should your DM do. At first these two may seem related, but I would hold that there not. Here's my peice: I've been rp-ing for 6 years and DMing for 4. While I'm sure this isn't on par with some of the people posting here I at least have seen some action on all sides. In fact in the very first game I played, the player sitting next to me was a paladin, and two gaming sessions later was disintigrated by his God for being cowardly. The result was a huge arguement like this one that ended in the player never sitting at our table again. I've had to sit through some troubled players, and disgruntled players, and even one guy who was a little crazy (full on mental problems). When you get down to it this is a game, and you win if you have fun. It's not only the players who need to have fun, it's the DM too. What you two need to do is find a compromise. Throw away who's wrong and right, and sit down and discuss until an agreement that is acceptable to both is reached, and finally if you can't reach one then you might try to find a new group. If your satisfaction level ever reaches the point that you'd be happier not playing then why would you stick around to play.</p><p>As far as question 1 goes, this is a debate that likely will not end. I'm no philosophy major (thank God) but I have taken a few classes, and the biggest thing I've gotten from them is that people (the race, not individuals in this context) have changed. The Greeks thought differently from the Romans who thought differently from the Franks, and so on. Good and Evil aren't objective values. Our society is trying it's best to come up with a firm set of standards to measure these two values by, but so far have failed. Our Chief Justices (who decide cases not only by right and wrong but by determining if such decisions are feasible) realise that they disagree not because of difference in knowledge, but by differences in opinion. Good and Evil will always be subjective. To make them directly objective in any context (such as a Forgotton Realms campaign) is rediculous. Such being said you can look at them with some objectivity.</p><p>When is killing an unarmed, unaware human in the defense of an innocent victum an evil or chaotic act. I'd say that in the 1400 the opinion at the time would vote this as definitly unhonorable. I would say that in 2000 we would consider this act as not unhonorable, not evil, and not chaotic. For evidence I offer the Tom Clancy hero. Or Matt Damon in the Bourne Identity, or the russian sniper in "Enemy at the Gates." I believe that subjectively judge the acts of these 'heroes' as not unhonorable because were they to boldly walk up to the enemy and offer them a 'fair fight' they'd not only be killed, but be ridculed for their stupid behavior. In Medival times sniping was very dishonorable, and the Bold Paladin could valiently walk up to an evil dark knight, issue a challange, and have said dark knight meet him for fair combat (or reasonably fair, if the Dark knight is evil, he might very well cheat). Now the next question; Does D&D emulate the modern, or the historical fantasy setting. I would say that the majority of players and DMs and even game designers use a fantasy setting with modern ideas: the deepwood sniper, the chapter 4 of the complete warrior, the feats system. 1st edition D&D was a very different game and it used very historical ideas. If a Player is forced to role play his paladin according to medival thought, but the rest of the world uses modern ideas, then the Paladin is rediculously underpowered and very unsatisfying to play. However I would say that many people (including game designers) still hold that idea. I say they are wrong. The game has evolved, the majority of playing styles have evolved. The Paladin has evolved. I remember another debate akin to this one were a Paladin lost his powers because he CDG a sleeping villian. That player was wronged.</p><p></p><p>This player; </p><p></p><p>sorry to pick on you, but you're the closest post. I don't agree with this line of thinking: The president (btw, I just learned that if you talk about the president of the United States, it isn't capatilized) doesn't have said responsabilities on him. Cops don't have the authority to do that. Judges outside of court don't have that authority. There is only one breed of American who may deal death without the due course of the law and that is a soldier in combat. The Paladin however is empowered with the ability to lawfully deal death to the enemies of his God, Society, and the abstract notion of Goodness. The Paladin doesn't need to hold trial: he decides. The hard part is that he must decide correctly. If he was wrong about the rapist, if for example it was a law abiding citizen who happened to have an S&M relationship, then the paladin would have to atone. However I would still take offense to the ruling because the DM described it to him differently.</p><p>That's my piece.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="italianranma, post: 1570381, member: 15788"] Wow, what a touchy subject. I read the first and last page leading up to this post. As I see it, there are two arguements here: 1) is the act a Chaotic, and or Evil act, and 2) What should your DM do. At first these two may seem related, but I would hold that there not. Here's my peice: I've been rp-ing for 6 years and DMing for 4. While I'm sure this isn't on par with some of the people posting here I at least have seen some action on all sides. In fact in the very first game I played, the player sitting next to me was a paladin, and two gaming sessions later was disintigrated by his God for being cowardly. The result was a huge arguement like this one that ended in the player never sitting at our table again. I've had to sit through some troubled players, and disgruntled players, and even one guy who was a little crazy (full on mental problems). When you get down to it this is a game, and you win if you have fun. It's not only the players who need to have fun, it's the DM too. What you two need to do is find a compromise. Throw away who's wrong and right, and sit down and discuss until an agreement that is acceptable to both is reached, and finally if you can't reach one then you might try to find a new group. If your satisfaction level ever reaches the point that you'd be happier not playing then why would you stick around to play. As far as question 1 goes, this is a debate that likely will not end. I'm no philosophy major (thank God) but I have taken a few classes, and the biggest thing I've gotten from them is that people (the race, not individuals in this context) have changed. The Greeks thought differently from the Romans who thought differently from the Franks, and so on. Good and Evil aren't objective values. Our society is trying it's best to come up with a firm set of standards to measure these two values by, but so far have failed. Our Chief Justices (who decide cases not only by right and wrong but by determining if such decisions are feasible) realise that they disagree not because of difference in knowledge, but by differences in opinion. Good and Evil will always be subjective. To make them directly objective in any context (such as a Forgotton Realms campaign) is rediculous. Such being said you can look at them with some objectivity. When is killing an unarmed, unaware human in the defense of an innocent victum an evil or chaotic act. I'd say that in the 1400 the opinion at the time would vote this as definitly unhonorable. I would say that in 2000 we would consider this act as not unhonorable, not evil, and not chaotic. For evidence I offer the Tom Clancy hero. Or Matt Damon in the Bourne Identity, or the russian sniper in "Enemy at the Gates." I believe that subjectively judge the acts of these 'heroes' as not unhonorable because were they to boldly walk up to the enemy and offer them a 'fair fight' they'd not only be killed, but be ridculed for their stupid behavior. In Medival times sniping was very dishonorable, and the Bold Paladin could valiently walk up to an evil dark knight, issue a challange, and have said dark knight meet him for fair combat (or reasonably fair, if the Dark knight is evil, he might very well cheat). Now the next question; Does D&D emulate the modern, or the historical fantasy setting. I would say that the majority of players and DMs and even game designers use a fantasy setting with modern ideas: the deepwood sniper, the chapter 4 of the complete warrior, the feats system. 1st edition D&D was a very different game and it used very historical ideas. If a Player is forced to role play his paladin according to medival thought, but the rest of the world uses modern ideas, then the Paladin is rediculously underpowered and very unsatisfying to play. However I would say that many people (including game designers) still hold that idea. I say they are wrong. The game has evolved, the majority of playing styles have evolved. The Paladin has evolved. I remember another debate akin to this one were a Paladin lost his powers because he CDG a sleeping villian. That player was wronged. This player; sorry to pick on you, but you're the closest post. I don't agree with this line of thinking: The president (btw, I just learned that if you talk about the president of the United States, it isn't capatilized) doesn't have said responsabilities on him. Cops don't have the authority to do that. Judges outside of court don't have that authority. There is only one breed of American who may deal death without the due course of the law and that is a soldier in combat. The Paladin however is empowered with the ability to lawfully deal death to the enemies of his God, Society, and the abstract notion of Goodness. The Paladin doesn't need to hold trial: he decides. The hard part is that he must decide correctly. If he was wrong about the rapist, if for example it was a law abiding citizen who happened to have an S&M relationship, then the paladin would have to atone. However I would still take offense to the ruling because the DM described it to him differently. That's my piece. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Archive-threads
My Paladin killed a child molester (and now my DM wants to take away my powers!)
Top