Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bayushi Seikuro" data-source="post: 3667310" data-attributes="member: 23328">I don't know.Book of Exalted Deeds covers what it means to be Good in pretty good depth.&nbsp; Is making war on Evil good?&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; But not nessecarily as good as giving to the poor and helping your community.Here's what I think.&nbsp; To me, a lot of the answer is in the details.&nbsp; To me, the 'I didn't make the deal, I was just nearby' is a bunch of bull, it sounds like, to get out of consequences.&nbsp; Did he know the party had a contract to help this 'invisible person'?&nbsp; Did he act to help the party accomplish the mutual goals?&nbsp; It's chaotic to break the contract and 'rationalize' it as War on Evil; he's essentially giving into his anger at being duped.Being a paladin means you have to juggle the Law/Chaos AND Good/Evil axis at the same time.&nbsp; I don't punish a paladin who errs on the side of Good and righteousness; I DO punish a paladin who acts chaotically - breaking a deal, even a deal his party members made and he supported, is chaotic.&nbsp; And killing the evil afterwards, after he failed to take appropriate measures to guarantee the trustworthiness of the 'invisible person'...&nbsp; Remember also: his party made this deal.&nbsp; There should definitely be consequences to that, if he's out to kill evil.&nbsp; His party actively aided evil because it benefitted them; they wanted in this house, and it wanted something in the house.And, generally, where paladins are concerned, siding with Law over Good is how Inquisitions start.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bayushi Seikuro, post: 3667310, member: 23328"] I don't know. Book of Exalted Deeds covers what it means to be Good in pretty good depth. Is making war on Evil good? Yes. But not nessecarily as good as giving to the poor and helping your community. Here's what I think. To me, a lot of the answer is in the details. To me, the 'I didn't make the deal, I was just nearby' is a bunch of bull, it sounds like, to get out of consequences. Did he know the party had a contract to help this 'invisible person'? Did he act to help the party accomplish the mutual goals? It's chaotic to break the contract and 'rationalize' it as War on Evil; he's essentially giving into his anger at being duped. Being a paladin means you have to juggle the Law/Chaos AND Good/Evil axis at the same time. I don't punish a paladin who errs on the side of Good and righteousness; I DO punish a paladin who acts chaotically - breaking a deal, even a deal his party members made and he supported, is chaotic. And killing the evil afterwards, after he failed to take appropriate measures to guarantee the trustworthiness of the 'invisible person'... Remember also: his party made this deal. There should definitely be consequences to that, if he's out to kill evil. His party actively aided evil because it benefitted them; they wanted in this house, and it wanted something in the house. And, generally, where paladins are concerned, siding with Law over Good is how Inquisitions start. [/QUOTE]

Verification