OotS 406

ruleslawyer said:
she believes (not completely implausibly) that the OotS is in allegiance with Xykon, and now she's overhearing a bunch of potentially nefarious-seeming plotting going on. I don't think this is an implausible conspiracy theory; I think it's a vast, tragic misunderstanding.
Miko never really gave the OotS a fair chance, and never even bothered to think how Xykon can still be in existance (unlike Durkon, where it is for comedy value, she doesn't have much of an excuse to lack Knowledge (religion)).

ruleslawyer said:
To the first: Hinjo is not. Miko is his superior. The only scenario under which Hinjo would be rightful leader is if Shojo's appointment of him as heir is legitimate. If Shojo's rule is not legitimate, then neither is his determination of the succession.
Hinjo is the legitimate authority for Azure City, I believe, and Miko for the Sapphire Guard at most. Shojo's rule was legitimate (his actions were a disgrace to his posts, but he inherited the throne), and it seems that a monarchical order of succession is in place for Azure City, with Hinjo being the next on the list of successors.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Grog said:
So in other words, paladins get to murder whoever they want to so long as there's an imminent threat on the horizon.

And given how fungible the definition of "imminent threat" is, you're basically saying that paladins can murder whoever they want to, whenever they want to.

Before we go any further in this discussion, why don't you tell us exactly what you think it takes for a paladin to fall. That would be extremely helpful.

First of all I have to say that the crap writen in the PHB is just that crap. It is one of the main reasons paladins are often not fun to play and cause problemsin the game.

It expects that paladin to answer to three masters, their god, the law and good. Sooner or later this is going to come into conflict with each other and the paladin is just screwed.

First of all I don't have modern 21 law or ethics in my game which is one of the big problems. People judge paladins based on todays morality like you don't kill prisoners, you don't execute without a trial, bigorty makes you evil, slavery is evil.

I have the player tell me how they see their paladin and who do they serve. A paladin of Pelor is going to be different that a paladin of St Cuthbert.

Then I ask them do they see themselves as more lawful or more good.

Then comes the code one that we work on together. This code is from the gods it is the divine law that a paladin follows. This is the code that if the paldin breaks will cause them to fall. It takes precedence over in law made by man.

Some general things will make a paldain fall in my game. Some examples stealing from a merchant because you don't want to pay the price he is asking for an item.

Lying in some cases like telling a priesoner that if he surrenders and tells you everything he knows that you will spare him knowing full well that you have no intention to do so.

Making a vow that you had no intention of keeping.

Using evil items and evil spells. Acting in a selfish self centered way for personal gain is another way for a paladin to fall.

I have not said anything about killing. Becuase this depends on the code and the god they serve and the society they live in. For example in one game there is a war going on between elves and humans. They are fighting a holy war over who has the right to occupy the most holy city the birthplace of the elven and human gods. Both sides have a legal claim both sets of gods want it for their followers. You have paladins on both sides they are obeying their gods and their codes.

Right now the elves have control of the city so the humans have it blockaded and are attacking any reinforcements or supplies that the elves are trying to get through, If the humans catch any elf trying to aid the city they face summary execuation. No trial no prisoner exchange just a swift death. It does not matter the reason it does not matter if the elf in question is not evil. The elves know this and know the risk before they try.

The human god that the paladin serves in my game is a god patterned on St Cuthbert a god who believes in divine retribution. His paladins follow law over good. They bring evil doers to justice they are tasked with being judge, jury and ex:):):):)ioner and they are leading the charge to return the city to the humans control. So a paladin of this order can kill an innocent elf who is breaking their law a leader in a throne room who has been judged by the paladin to have broken one the the gods laws.

Now this not mean that they can kill just because they feel like it they have to have astrong belief that the person has viloated the law. Take the Miko case if this was happening in my game Miko would not have done anything wrong becuase Shojo broke the law and admited it.

There is another human god based on Pelor her paladins are more intrested in doing good, helping the humans and protecting them. They kill to protect themselves and the humans under their protection but their order belives in the possibility of redemption (we use the rules from Exalted deeds to turn evil to good) they are not allowed to kill if there is another way. A lot of their holy weapons have the ability to use subdual damage rather than lethal damage. If Miko was of this order in my game she would have fallen because Shojo was not armed he was not currently trying to harm any under her protection and even though he broke the law she needed to offer him the chance to atone for what he had done.

The rules of this goddess only apply to humans and not elves so these paladins can slay any elf they find trying to aid the enemy without losing their paladinhood.

As for your question about "imminent threat" there is a hobgoblin army led by a Litch about to attack. If your code states that you bring lawbreakers to justice and your code allows you to judge and decide punishment then yes a paladin could very well kill a leader breaking the law as quickly as possible because there is not time to deal with a trial. There is no time at the present to deal with the distraction that a trial would cause.

I can also see a paladin locking the leader up again in this situation I would look to see what the paaldin in question's code was what evidence they had and why they were doing what they were doing.
 


ruleslawyer said:
You say murder, I say execution.

Look at it through Miko's eyes for a second. She *genuinely* believes (and, IMHO, it's not a convenient fiction; she seems quite motivated about this) that Shojo has betrayed the ideals of the Sapphire Guard and conspired with Xykon to leave the city open to being overrun by an evil lich-led horde.
The only reason she believes this is because she's actively trying to find an excuse to murder the OotS. It's a complete fabrication on her part.

She's just heard a discussion between Shojo and Roy that plausibly seems to back this up.
It does not support her conclusion at all. It suggests that something is amiss, but not that either of the two have conspired with Xykon to attack the city. The only reason she makes the connection to that conclusion is because she's looking for an excuse to murder people...and her desire to murder is stronger than her desire to uphold her paladin vows.
 

Elf Witch said:
Then comes the code one that we work on together.

This is a key point any time anyone plays a paladin. Before the game begins, the DM and the player need to make sure they're on the same page regarding what the paladin's code entails.

If I'm DMing a serious game, I'd consider a paladin who started hacking on someone in a tavern because they radiated evil to be exceeding their mandate.

If I'm DMing a beer-and-pretzels game, I'd consider a paladin who started hacking on someone in a tavern because they radiated evil to be successfully snatching at the plot hook.

But I wouldn't DM a paladin without making sure the player knew what I expected, and if there's a fundamental disconnect between our views, we need to either resolve it somehow, or the player's better off going with another class.

Similarly, I once played under a DM who declared that a Paladin/Rogue multiclass was an impossibility, because "Rogues are thieves, and paladins can't steal". That made me pretty determined to play neither a paladin nor a rogue under her (and before very long had passed, anything else either!), since our views on the classes were too dissimilar.

-Hyp.
 

Hypersmurf said:
Divine Grace is gone!
Smite Evil license revoked!
I blame the halfling.

"Anger is red, and
Miko shows us all: it cures
the Paladin blues."


Great sky arrow, spin,
sing, and stop: "The Rooster says,
Pride hath come, now fall."


... although the original ":):):):)-a-doo-dle-doo" would have worked, too, if you speak chicken.

-- N

EDIT: Oh man! I was totally rooster blocked up there!
 


Hypersmurf said:
This is a key point any time anyone plays a paladin. Before the game begins, the DM and the player need to make sure they're on the same page regarding what the paladin's code entails.

If I'm DMing a serious game, I'd consider a paladin who started hacking on someone in a tavern because they radiated evil to be exceeding their mandate.

If I'm DMing a beer-and-pretzels game, I'd consider a paladin who started hacking on someone in a tavern because they radiated evil to be successfully snatching at the plot hook.

But I wouldn't DM a paladin without making sure the player knew what I expected, and if there's a fundamental disconnect between our views, we need to either resolve it somehow, or the player's better off going with another class.

Similarly, I once played under a DM who declared that a Paladin/Rogue multiclass was an impossibility, because "Rogues are thieves, and paladins can't steal". That made me pretty determined to play neither a paladin nor a rogue under her (and before very long had passed, anything else either!), since our views on the classes were too dissimilar.

-Hyp.

We are agreement on this. And why I have not found the entire Miko storyline all that good. I find a lot of it really funny but I find some of it a little annoying as well. If this was not a comic script but a game and Miko was a PC and the player wa telling us all this I think some of us would be crying foul on the DM and talking about railroading and how this DM was just setting her up for failure.
 

Grog said:
Um, because the behavior of common monsters is common knowledge?

And again, since you're trying to incorrectly bring rules into this - page cite, please?

Anywhere there are goblins, people are going to know about goblin raids. When you ride into a village after a goblin attack, you don't need a Knowledge skill to find out what happened from Bob the farmer.

Ah, so everyone is an expert investigator, then? With comprehensive knowledge of battle tactics, creature behaviors and the like? They somehow know the paragraphs from the MM inside and out? And the justification for this is...what, exactly?

Do you seriously make your players roll Knowledge checks to find out that goblins/orcs/etc. attack human settlements?

Mostly I make them do this crazy roleplaying stuff we all keep hearing about. Knowledge checks come in where it's appropriate - like discerning the behaviors of monsters. Your argument that 'everyone' knows something like this, well:

"Most of the things 'everyone knows' are wrong. The rest are merely misinformed." - Neil Gaiman
 

Elf Witch said:
We are agreement on this. And why I have not found the entire Miko storyline all that good. I find a lot of it really funny but I find some of it a little annoying as well. If this was not a comic script but a game and Miko was a PC and the player wa telling us all this I think some of us would be crying foul on the DM and talking about railroading and how this DM was just setting her up for failure.

If someone playing a paladin starts hacking on unarmed old man who is the leader of her country based 90% on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence (the only thing that Miko knows for a fact about Shogo, rather than from her own guesses, is that he is a liar who doesn't respect the Paladin's oath to Soon) I'd avoid inviting him into any future games. I like players who actually think. What if in a sci-fi espionage game a special taskforce agent charged into the White House one day and popped a cap in the president's forehead just because the agent found out that the president had rigged a suspected terrorists trial, so he believed that the President must be a terrorist doppelganger plotting to facilitate the overthrow of the US? Dumb...plain dumb.

Even if all the things that Miko believed were true, she chose a pretty stupid way to handle the situation, but either way Miko was not railroaded into believing anything other than that her ruler wasn't lawful. Everything else she assumed on her own.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top