Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Paladin Actions - Appropriate?
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="Hawken" data-source="post: 3672295" data-attributes="member: 23619"><p>#1: There was no agreement <em>not</em> to attack the imp at the end of their agreement. The agreement was to work together;, nothing more or less was stated. Which they did. Even the OP stated that. They both met their goals (got their respective items). Any implied truce that came with that agreement ended when both sides met their goals (getting their items). Before then, the paladin didn't attack the imp. After the agreement ended (and the imp for whatever reason didn't get the heck out of there) was when the paladin took out the imp. </p><p></p><p>#2: As I stated in a previously ignored response, silence does not equal or imply compliance. Whether the paladin was involved in the agreement or not, his silence on the matter does not indicate his agreement to it. And no one apparently bothered to ask him if he agreed to it; they just assumed he did because he was silent on the matter. That's called reserving judgment. He appeared to be going along with the agreement (by not attacking the imp immediately); however, as I stated before, only indicates he prioritized his goals and dealt with the immediate concerns of the group over a different, less immediate threat. Once the group met their goals, their main threat taken care of (and incidentally, the terms of the agreement with the imp met), then he took it out. </p><p></p><p>#3: Argue all you want. It was a given (by nature of the paladin's class) that unless the imp fled, its very nature as a devil (that had to commit unspeakable crimes to become a devil) meant that the paladin was going to deal with it or attempt to at one point or another. You can try to rationalize your morality into it, but the paladin killed an evil fiend. Period. And the terms of the group's agreement with the creature had been met when it died, so there was no killing it while protected by a truce.</p><p></p><p>And for those of you that argue the chance for the redemption of fiends or that not all of them are evil; take a trip down to the Abyss or Hell and see how many of them you can get to stop dismembering you and flaying your skin long enough for them to listen to your words and consider the "error of their ways"!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hawken, post: 3672295, member: 23619"] #1: There was no agreement [i]not[/i] to attack the imp at the end of their agreement. The agreement was to work together;, nothing more or less was stated. Which they did. Even the OP stated that. They both met their goals (got their respective items). Any implied truce that came with that agreement ended when both sides met their goals (getting their items). Before then, the paladin didn't attack the imp. After the agreement ended (and the imp for whatever reason didn't get the heck out of there) was when the paladin took out the imp. #2: As I stated in a previously ignored response, silence does not equal or imply compliance. Whether the paladin was involved in the agreement or not, his silence on the matter does not indicate his agreement to it. And no one apparently bothered to ask him if he agreed to it; they just assumed he did because he was silent on the matter. That's called reserving judgment. He appeared to be going along with the agreement (by not attacking the imp immediately); however, as I stated before, only indicates he prioritized his goals and dealt with the immediate concerns of the group over a different, less immediate threat. Once the group met their goals, their main threat taken care of (and incidentally, the terms of the agreement with the imp met), then he took it out. #3: Argue all you want. It was a given (by nature of the paladin's class) that unless the imp fled, its very nature as a devil (that had to commit unspeakable crimes to become a devil) meant that the paladin was going to deal with it or attempt to at one point or another. You can try to rationalize your morality into it, but the paladin killed an evil fiend. Period. And the terms of the group's agreement with the creature had been met when it died, so there was no killing it while protected by a truce. And for those of you that argue the chance for the redemption of fiends or that not all of them are evil; take a trip down to the Abyss or Hell and see how many of them you can get to stop dismembering you and flaying your skin long enough for them to listen to your words and consider the "error of their ways"! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Paladin Actions - Appropriate?
Top