Paladin Question

[BBiggar]

So I am runnning a campaign for my buds and they are in a fight with a group of Hobgoblins, which they prety much beat down. The last 2 hobgoblins throw down their weapons and try to surrender. The groups paly says "I kill the one near me."

Now call me crazy, but a paly killing a surrendering foe seems to be an evil act to me, but he says his rational is that it is an evil creature and he has to vanquish it.

I asked him twice, "so you are gonna kill a defensless, surrendering enemy?" To which he replied "yes, he is an evil creature," both times.

I punished him by taking away his paly abilities until he had atoned, but the player became very upset, because he believed that is how a play should behave. So my question, was I too harsh, or is he acting in a true paly way and I just don't get it?

 

[Infiniti2000]

Whether you realize it or not, this is a hot topic and many will view it as a troll.

That said, you need to sit down with your group and hash this out among yourselves. Personally, a vote works and so you lose being outvoted 2 to 1.

Good luck.

 

[shilsen]

The issue's open to interpretation, so I strongly suggest you and your player sit down and decide between yourselves what his individual paladin's code is and what actions are or are not acceptable for a paladin.

That being said, I think taking away all his paladin abilities instantly is a lousy DMing move. It would be far better to have him perhaps lose one ability and have dreams or visions from his deity explaining the error of his ways to him. And do that in-game while discussing out-of-game what's acceptable or not.

 

[domino]

Personally, a vote works and so you lose being outvoted 2 to 1.

And now it's tied again.

Killing a defenseless foe, who surrendered is willfully committing an evil act.

It might be justifiable if the enemy was an evil outsider, who is more or less MADE of evil, but hobgoblins have that capacity for change.

Unless he goes around killing every evil human he sees as well.

 

[BBiggar]

>>Whether you realize it or not, this is a hot topic and many will view it as a troll<<

Yikes! No I had no idea and believe me that was not my intention, I just was seeking opinions. I want to be the kind of DM that my buds like to have run a game. That being said i think that if players don't behave in a manner that reflects the type of character they are playing, then there should be consequences. Playing a Paladin should be (IMO of course) one ofthe most difficult classes, simply because of the inherent restaint that must be displayed.

The player in question is a good player, but he always plays the rogue, and he always plays his rogue as a "twisted" type that had a horrible life that lead to his current lack of real morals.

So when he elected to play Paladin I was shocked, but happy that he was branching out. I should also add that the loss of his abilities didn't effect him really, because he fouund a temple and prayed to his diety and they came to an understanding about his behavior.

That being said I take to heart the comments from above and I see where you are coming from and I plan on sitting down with the group and discussing it. I have a perception in my head of proper behavior, but, I do not want to be perceived as closed-mined on the issue, so I will talk to my playeers about it.

Thanks for the input, and again sorry if it seemed like a troll, that was the furthest thing from my mind when I posted the question.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No problem, BBiggar.

Sitting down with the group is definitely the best action. You will certainly find people who agree with either side, and quite vehemently. I'd wager that no other topic has caused more threads to lock or people to get banned than Paladin-killing-surrendering-foe-or-baby-orc threads.

 

[werk]

It really comes down to: did he break his code?

There is a definite line between surrendered enemies and innocents, and you need to see how close your paladin is to that line.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I agree with the sitting down with your player as the solution.

One thing to keep in mind is how you handle Clerics. It is not particularly logical IMO that a Paladin's Code should be significantly more restrictive than a LG Cleric of a LG god, frex. Perhaps the Paladin is special and that class' conduct must be even better than a similar styled Cleric. But if you are going to take away all Paladin powers in a gray area, are you willing to take away all spells from a straying LG or CG Cleric in a similar situation?

That is not meant as a criticism, just a useful exercise to help to see the player's POV.

 

[hong]

I agree with the sitting down with your player as the solution.

But the BETTER solution is to not have bad guys surrender, thus ensuring that this problem never crops up in the first place.

 

[edemaitre]

Lawful Good behavior

I had a very similar situation arise in a recent party. However, there was no Paladin among the Player Characters at the time, just a few Clerics and a Druid-like Sorcerer. A Paladin's code of ethics may be more restrictive than that of many Clerics, since he or she is Lawful Good in alignment, while Clerics follow the entire range represented by different deities.

I agree that a warning from the P.C.'s patron in the form of a single temporary ability loss or a dream/vision would be appropriate for the first infraction, and that you as Game Master should hash out common guidelines with your group. A Non-Player Character priest or superior among an order of holy knights can also help provide guidance here. Ultimately, however, it's your world and your interpretation of alignment (through your campaign's deities) that is law.

A Paladin should be concerned with honor and justice as well as with smiting evil and the preservation of life. Might a surrendered Goblin be turned to good (or at least neutrality), or can it at least yield some information about enemy forces? Should prisoners be turned over to the proper local authorities? Can they be traded for prisoners of your own kind held by the enemy?

If the surrender happened on a larger battlefield, would different rules apply than for a party-level skirmish? Do demihumans refuse to give quarter, expecting none from humanoids in return? Even young Paladins are wise enough to realize that they probably can't destroy all the evil in the world, so they must learn which battles to pick (both against monsters and within their parties)... Good luck!