Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rystil Arden" data-source="post: 3674564" data-attributes="member: 29014">For what it's worth, I think the Paladin choosing option B has grossly violated 'Protect innocents' and a Paladin who chooses option C has done so as well while also violating 'Act with honour'.&nbsp; They would lose their status in my game, as would option E (or F if you prefer) for being a sneaky letter-of-the-law &quot;But I technically didn't agree&quot; little weasel who was acting more Lawful Evil in the situation than the Lawful Evil Outsider.&nbsp; Option D violates 'Act with honour' but it may not grossly do so, so the Paladin might not lose the abilities right away, as per the section of Ex-Paladins (Paladins can violate the code as long as they don't grossly do so).&nbsp; There might be a vision or sign of displeasure, and a continued record of doing things like this would lead to a fall.&nbsp; Option A is not a violation of any sort, or alternatively it may be&nbsp; a small one if you disagree with me on the best definition of 'associate'.&nbsp; Either way, it is clearly not gross enough to warrant a fall.&nbsp; Grossly violating the 'associate with evil' would be starting a romantic relationship with Anyiel, for instance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rystil Arden, post: 3674564, member: 29014"] For what it's worth, I think the Paladin choosing option B has grossly violated 'Protect innocents' and a Paladin who chooses option C has done so as well while also violating 'Act with honour'. They would lose their status in my game, as would option E (or F if you prefer) for being a sneaky letter-of-the-law "But [I][B]I[/B][/I] technically didn't agree" little weasel who was acting more Lawful Evil in the situation than the Lawful Evil Outsider. Option D violates 'Act with honour' but it may not grossly do so, so the Paladin might not lose the abilities right away, as per the section of Ex-Paladins (Paladins can violate the code as long as they don't grossly do so). There might be a vision or sign of displeasure, and a continued record of doing things like this would lead to a fall. Option A is not a violation of any sort, or alternatively it may be a small one if you disagree with me on the best definition of 'associate'. Either way, it is clearly not gross enough to warrant a fall. Grossly violating the 'associate with evil' would be starting a romantic relationship with Anyiel, for instance. [/QUOTE]

Verification