Paladin problems

[ThoughtBubble]

I think you'll be well served by mentioning that "I like what you're doing with the character. I think that it's neat you're not just going into a 'detect evil then smite' paladin. And I like how you're trying to live out your code. But, most random NPC's aren't really going to be redeemable in the game. It's a bit too adventure heavy for that. The ones who will be will be specific, or people who've fallen on hard times. I'll try to give you clues. The ones who don't talk, for example, aren't good choices."

In that way you let him know you know what's up. You let him know you approve. You help channel him into things that work out better.

 

[Sejs]

Wait, binding up a gnoll and marching him off to the nearest outpost of civilization's version of a lawman = redemption?

Er, since when?

More likely the local law would just take the gnoll into custody with a somewhat puzzled expression on their face, thank the paladin for what he's done, let the fuzzy bugger stew in a cell for a day or so, then tell it the date of its execution.

 

[wingsandsword]

Paladin: I detect evil!

GM: Ok, sure. You pick up some faint evil from that table in the corner.

Paladin: I draw my sword and attack!

Does that make more sense? I've got a cold medicine buzz right now, so if it doesn't make sense, I'll try to clarify.

Or, instead you could try and deal with it realistically.

Paladin: I draw my sword and attack

Inn Patrons: *screaming and taking cover*

*Paladin slays the guy sitting at the table in the corner who detected as faintly evil, a minor local noble who's unscrupulous and selfish in his business dealings and fairly uncaring about those under him, but no worse than many modern executives or politicians*

City guard shows up after someone ran for help after a sword-wielding madman cut down . . .

Guard: You're under arrest for murdering the Mayor's Son! Put down your weapons and surrender or die!

Paladin (about to lose his Paladinhood): "But he was Evil! I was just doing my god's work!"

Guard: Get him, boys!

(If the Paladin is taken alive, the Raised victim will be glad to testify at the Paladin's trial about how he was just sitting there eating his dinner when this fanatical zealot stormed over and attacked him. If the Paladin isn't lucky, he might be facing a hangman's noose or an executioner's axe in the near future.)

Remember, detecting as "Evil" isn't a crime in the vast majority of Fantasy civilizations, certainly not a capitol crime. Killing a civilized person in a civilized place (like a tavern) with no warning and no cause other than you had a feeling that they were evil is a crime, Murder. Summary execution of someone just sitting there by a wandering Paladin is pretty outrageous, and would probably cost a Paladin his paladinhood (hardly a lawful act to slay a nonoffensive person in a civilized place, where presumably there is some justice system). At most let him get an Atonement the first time and warn him that playing a vigilante in a place with a working legal system and attacking nonaggressive people who just happen to be evil isn't lawful at all. Would a LE Blackguard walk into a tavern, go "Detect Good" then charge the PC's recklessly during dinner? Not if the Blackguard was smart in the least (which he would probably have to survive to Blackguard status).

I've seen the "detect and smite" type too in one of my games. He walked around and Detects Evil on every NPC, and started a fight with everyone who Detected, until he was beaten down soundly by a powerful NPC who was an informant/merchant who dealt with the PC's and just happened to have an NE alignment (meaning he wasn't above cheating the PC's on occasion and was working only in his best interest). The PC's didn't even bother to heal him, figuring he was a total fool for attacking the renowned archmage necromancer, they left hiim at deep negatives and stable on the floor of a cellar somewhere and went about their adventures. The player quit the game after that (and frankly, everyone, DM included, was glad to see him go), but not before a rant to us about "unrealistic" NPC's which amounted to: "They're Evil, they don't help Good Guys, they're there for us to kill, you were Evil just for dealing with him!".

I am thankful for my current group of players, so I don't have to deal with the likes of that. I've got a player joining my game playing a Paladin who has sworn never to kill a "person" (i.e. humanoid, monstrous humanoid or giant), and is going to carry a Merciful weapon and have the Subdual Strike feat from BoED. Given that his model of Paladinhood is admittedly Captain America, I don't expect many problems out of him.

 

[Turanil]

"Redemption cannot be found on either end of a sword."

From the code of the Order of the Sword of Malicean the Prophet. (the paladins in my campaign)


This is taken to mean two things:
1 - When seeking to redeem an evildoer, it does not pay to do so using the idea of might = right.
2 - When an evildoer has a sword in his hand, he has already forsaken redemption.

They are encouraged to redeem those that they find willing, and slay those who are not.

Great! I will try to remember that for my own campaigns.

I was playing a paladin in the return to the temple of elemental evil and we had been harassed by Thrommel, (a fallen paladin vampire.) After a few clues, divination spells and what not, I dedcided to try and help Thrommel back to human form (and back to his lost love and home.) After some back and forth role playing, he was on a bridge we were trying to cross asking why we kept pestering him. I had a way to bring him back, but as an act of trust, I dropped sword, shield and helm and walked out to him. (unarmed and open). A couple of very precious wish spells later, he was back home, elderly but human.

Hey, cool adventure! I like to read stuff like that.

 

[Doctor Shaft]

I think your player is seriously under-representing what combat actually is. I think, if this player is going to knock out a beserker gnoll, of all opponents, then he'd better exhibit this kind of "knock em out" behavior all the time, or just cut it out. Preferably, I'd probably say he has to cut it out.

Here's what irks me about it. If this were a "REAL" situation, no one, not even a paladin in their right mind would waste time trying to only "knock out" a beserking gnoll with a huge battle axe. This is a serious fight, involving a serious opponent that wants blood. It's too easy to metagame the situation by just guessing the stats and also the difficulty CR of the encounter, and then based on that make the decision to "spare the opponent."

I have a very strong feeling your paladin PC would not attempt to do this against another encounter if the enemies were powerful.

Personally, I like the Worf analogy another poster used. Worf is actually a really good character to look at in terms of codes of honor and paladins. Worf may be a sci-fi klingon, but he's as straight and holy warrior philosophy as they come.

I wouldn't completely discourage a paladin PC from knocking opponents out, but they should definitely use the "Worf Approach" to things. When you're up against a bunch of raging barbarians... do you take the time to play around with "knocking the guy out" when your party members are around, and I suppose potentially in danger while you're tied up. Or do you take the challenge seriously and finish the fight before it gets worse?

I can't say that knocking the gnoll out was completely crazy. But the rope and the dragging him back to town thing was just completely meta-game. No person in his right mind would drag a barbarian gnoll back to the authorities of some time miles and miles away. Or, if they were fighting life and death... they'd probably not go through all the pains to merely maim or injure everyone. They'd finish said conflict and move on.

If anything, the best way to take care of annoying paladins is to simply let his actions become known throughout the town. People might get suspicious of this paladin if he plays his "redeemer" hand too much. The DM can always impose consequences for overzealous or obvious behavior.

And another analogy besides Worf. To get super cheesy: think Jedi. Obi Wan Kenobi has a mission at hand. If he has the opportunity to capture someone... he will. But if there's a bigger goal ahead of him, he's not going to waste time knocking out or "attempting to save" every person he encounters.

 

[hong]

GM: You enter the Green Bramble Inn, pleasant music can

Paladin: I detect evil!

GM: Ok, sure. You pick up some faint evil from that table in the corner.

I generally answer with "You detect nothng more than general background levels of evil".


Hong "evil at -40 dB" Ooi

 

[Marius Delphus]

I, too, like Torm's rules and the Worf approach. Gotta remember those.

Echo ThoughtBubble and Byrons_Ghost: good approaches.

One possible (RBDM?) response to this event is to have the barbarian gnoll reach town, break free of the restraints (raging then taking 20 to beat the Break DC?), go on a brief killing spree, then leave town. And it's all the paladin's fault for not living up to his mandate. Naturally, the hireling is one of the survivors (stabilizes then recovers from neg. hp?), at least long enough to tell people about the paladin and his strange sympathy for dirty, smelly, demonstrably Evil, violent humanoids. The party will have to do some fancy diplomatic footwork to recover from this one.

You might not feel like smiting the party like this, but neither I nor any of the DMs I've ever gamed with would hesitate. We all have a pretty narrow "holy WARRIOR" interpretation of the paladin's code, you understand.

 

[Doctor Shaft]

Here's an idea.

The subdual system in D&D is easily abused as it is anyway. Not so much that any powergamer would use it, but it is a system that can easily be used do nothing more than create huge conflicts between PC's and 'holy' PC's on the subject. Personally, I never liked stories that involved the "incredible guy who could just knock everyone out".

If you don't want your paladin to become a huge time waster, House Rule your subdual rules. Introduce rules the better represent the grittiness of combat.

Only the best of fighters, dedicated to the art day in and day out, are going to be able to get into numerous piles of life-and-death situations, and then summarily "knock their opponents out". I would say, don't let a Paladin become capable of subdual damage against opponents within 3 levels of him. Or, if he does attempt, make the penalty more severe, or introduce a system where at the end of the fight, the opponent as a slim chance of stabilizing from it. Especially if he's using a sword... that would be so incredibly hard to do. At least make him use a club next time if he's going to do that.

It just doens't make sense if you have raging opponents everywhere that you're just going to calmly "knock the guy out".

 

[Errant]

The Paladin manages to knock it out with the flat of his blade, and they bind it with rope and manacles. After some arguement (the Paladin wanted to drag it along until they hit a town), a hireling they have is instructed to escort the Gnoll back to town and turn it over to the authorities.

Hireling: You want me to what?!?!? Take that bloody thirsty monster back to civilization? By myself? No way you pay me enough for that! You're the almighty paladin, you captured him, you take him back! I'll look after your horse.

Paladin wants to be (self) righteous & force his code on those around him? Let him live with the consequences of his actions. If the PCs don't want to go out of their way to cater to his whims why should NPCs? Hirelings are there to earn some money. They don't even have the personal commitment of a follower, let alone a cohort.

Paladin wants to capture the odd wrongdoer? Let him escort the prisoner back & deal with the ensuing investigation/trial etc instead of placing NPCs, hirelings or city guards etc, at risk.

Remind the player, subtly if possible, that his character lives in a world that carries on even when he's not present. NPCs have lives & priorities of their own, & as a paladin, he'll find very few NPCs share his priorities & commitment.

I love paladins. IF they're played right & thats a fine line to tread. Sounds like this paladin doesn't care much about the consequences of his actions, or any other words he lacks compassion for the effects & risks his personal code have others.

 

[Marius Delphus]

Hireling: You want me to what?!?!? Take that bloody thirsty monster back to civilization? By myself? No way you pay me enough for that! You're the almighty paladin, you captured him, you take him back! I'll look after your horse.

Assuming the hireling hasn't yet departed on his trip, I like this solution better than the idea I had. Nice one!

Alternately, and only if the hireling has a *lot* of moxie, he could go ahead and start toward town with the gnoll, kill it (slit throat, toss from a height, etc.) at his earliest opportunity, and simply never return to the (obviously mad!) paladin. Follow up by telling his harrowing tale far and wide... with whatever side effects.