Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
Paladin Behavior?
- Thread starter Raven Crowking
- Start date
Torm
Explorer
Is it possible that they are hoping that one of the BBEG's minions will be corrupted by the sword, and the resulting internal conflict in their organization will weaken them enough to make them vulnerable to being mopped up?
Sounds like a good strategy, honestly, IF that is what they're thinking of and the rogue isn't just being a git.
Sounds like a good strategy, honestly, IF that is what they're thinking of and the rogue isn't just being a git.
Hjorimir
Adventurer
I usually answer these kinds of questions with a "do what feels right for your group of friends" kind of thing. But, this has perked my interest. Instead of a longwinded answer I will simply ask this: Does the paladin have some kind of secular authority that allows him to interfere with the transaction between the rogue and the FantaNazis in the first place?
ARandomGod
First Post
Hjorimir said:
Yea...
You have to know answers like this.
In general, it's phenominally stupid. It could be evil, but you'd have to know that the paladin knows. Plus there's the issue that the paladin may feel that he doesn't have the right to interfer with his companion's sale of the item.
To make things more clear for yourself, you have to make it more clear to the Paladin. This is easily justified in game. The god grants the paladin special powers, there's no reason why the god can't grant the occasional insight as well. Just give the paladin a simple straightforward vision of the likely consequenses of this act... if the vision is of evil then allowing the act would be evil. Instantly solving your problem.
Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
shilsen
Adventurer
I'll vote for the "phenomenally stupid but not evil" approach too. Don't mess with his alignment. Just have his deity give him some really bad dreams and then (you, not his deity) proceed to take him on a substantial guilt trip as he gradually gets more and more information about what the BBEG is doing with the sword.
Lord Pendragon
First Post
Well, if I were the DM the paladin would already have been in trouble for using the evil sword in the first place. It doesn't matter what the circumstances are, paladins don't use the powers of evil. Necessity or not, a paladin in my campaign would be in a world of trouble for knowingly and intentionally taking up the power of evil, no matter how pure and good the reason for doing so.
That said, a paladin isn't responsible for other characters' actions. There are no negative evil acts. i.e. It isn't an evil act to not do something. So the paladin is in no danger of falling by not interfereing with the rogue's plans, though I'd think most paladins would certainly do so.
Again, his willingness to take up evil powers is far more troubling.
That said, a paladin isn't responsible for other characters' actions. There are no negative evil acts. i.e. It isn't an evil act to not do something. So the paladin is in no danger of falling by not interfereing with the rogue's plans, though I'd think most paladins would certainly do so.
Again, his willingness to take up evil powers is far more troubling.
Torm
Explorer
I, too, have a problem with him having taken up the use of the evil sword in the first place. I'm surprised the weapon let him - usually such weapons do some sort of damage to opposed alignments. I suppose a lot DOES depend on his attitude towards having taken it up, though, because as I mentioned above, it CAN be a valid strategy to pit evil against evil.
I have to humbly disagree with the others' assessment of the implications of the Paladin's actions as described - the definition of "Good" is a little more stringent for a Paladin than for other classes. "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." And even assuming he didn't know beforehand, if he has any reasonable inkling of where the money came from, he should want no part of it - refuse his share or give it all to his temple. "No good can come from an impure beginning."
I have to humbly disagree with the others' assessment of the implications of the Paladin's actions as described - the definition of "Good" is a little more stringent for a Paladin than for other classes. "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." And even assuming he didn't know beforehand, if he has any reasonable inkling of where the money came from, he should want no part of it - refuse his share or give it all to his temple. "No good can come from an impure beginning."
Similar Threads
