Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RigaMortus2" data-source="post: 3680173" data-attributes="member: 11586">I see your point, but they are still all &quot;what ifs&quot; and there can be an infinite amount of questions like that with an infinite amount of answers.&nbsp; So rather than go through every single &quot;what if&quot; scenario, I prefer to deal with the one at hand.FWIW, to give you a better (more broad) answer...&nbsp; I think each case should be looked at individually.&nbsp; Given the circumstances of the OP, without knowning any more than we already do, and without making broad assumptions, I don't think killing the Imp was the Paladin's best choice or option.&nbsp; I think if it were any other LG person, the choice of killing the imp would not be under as much scrutiny...&nbsp; But I like to keep Paladins to a higher standard than average LG characters, and if there is an option that is more viable to pick, they should pick it.Given the choice of not killing the imp and letting it go, but warning it not to cross your path again if it valued its life is the more honorable one vs just smiting it and voiding your agreement.&nbsp; Both actions are not evil.&nbsp; Both actions are not good.&nbsp; But only one action is honorable, and one action is dishonorable.&nbsp; Breaking your word is breaking your word, no matter who you give it to.&nbsp; And if the Paladin was so concerned about being involved in an agreement with a possible enemy, he should have spoke up.Really, when it comes down to it, I think the player of the Paladin is to blame for not taking a more active role in the agreement.&nbsp; Even if his intentions were not to agree at all, for the sake of his friends (and their souls) he should have been more involved in the discussion with the invisible creature.&nbsp; I mean, they can Detect Evil at will.&nbsp; Doesn't that tell you something about the player if he chose not to use it?&nbsp; Every player I know has Detect Evil on speed dial, heh.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RigaMortus2, post: 3680173, member: 11586"] I see your point, but they are still all "what ifs" and there can be an infinite amount of questions like that with an infinite amount of answers. So rather than go through every single "what if" scenario, I prefer to deal with the one at hand. FWIW, to give you a better (more broad) answer... I think each case should be looked at individually. Given the circumstances of the OP, without knowning any more than we already do, and without making broad assumptions, I don't think killing the Imp was the Paladin's [b]best[/b] choice or option. I think if it were any other LG person, the choice of killing the imp would not be under as much scrutiny... But I like to keep Paladins to a higher standard than average LG characters, and if there is an option that is more viable to pick, they should pick it. Given the choice of not killing the imp and letting it go, but warning it not to cross your path again if it valued its life is the more honorable one vs just smiting it and voiding your agreement. Both actions are not evil. Both actions are not good. But only one action is honorable, and one action is dishonorable. Breaking your word is breaking your word, no matter who you give it to. And if the Paladin was so concerned about being involved in an agreement with a possible enemy, he should have spoke up. Really, when it comes down to it, I think the player of the Paladin is to blame for not taking a more active role in the agreement. Even if his intentions were not to agree at all, for the sake of his friends (and their souls) he should have been more involved in the discussion with the invisible creature. I mean, they can Detect Evil at will. Doesn't that tell you something about the player if he chose not to use it? Every player I know has Detect Evil on speed dial, heh. [/QUOTE]

Verification