NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="airwalkrr" data-source="post: 2908795" data-attributes="member: 12460">Don't have time to read the whole thread but wanted to comment. I don't wish to get embroiled in the discussion about what constitutes an evil act or a violation of the paladin's code. That is such a vague topic and so heavily dependent upon individual DM interpretation that I won't touch it with a 10-foot poll. What I do wish to point out is that there are only three things that necessitate revoking a paladin's abilities: 1) ceasing to be lawful good (which I don't think is the issue here), 2) willfully committing an evil act and 3) GROSS violation of the paladin's code (emphasis my own). The last two are obviously what is at issue. Concerning 2), I will not comment on whether I think you made the right decision or not; you clearly did, since you are the DM and it is your game. What I will say is that obviously you and the player do not share the view of what constitutes an evil act and that this should probably be clearly delineated before the campaign moves on if the player wishes to keep playing a paladin. As I like to say, in my experience players prefer consistency more than one particular ruling. If you say it is always an evil act to kill a surrendering opponent and always enforce it that way there is no ambiguity and the player is fully cognizant of the fact that he will lose his paladinhood if he does it. Regarding 3), this is not what I would consider a gross violation and could in fact be interpretted as carrying out the code since the evil hobgoblins were likely guilty of some crime which the paladin is obliged to mete out punishment for.My recommendation: Go back to square one, let the player have his paladin abilities back and say that this was simply a warning from his deity or the forces that grant him his powers whatever they may be. At that point, clearly dilineate for him what constitutes an evil act or violation of his code of conduct so that he has no one to blame but himself if it happens again in the future. IMHO, a paladin should never lose his paladin abilities because the player didn't realize he was committing a morally ambiguous act. If a paladin loses his paladin abilities, the player should be expecting it, even if his character might not. A player may be playing a paladin who has a fiery passion that overtakes him and makes him overzealous and the player wants to roleplay the atonement. Or the player might just be wanting to cause a scene and do something drastic without caring about the consequences. But your player has a legitimate complaint based solely upon the fact that it really just boils down to the fact that he couldn't read your mind (you did ask him to confirm what he wanted to do and although you might have implied that you considered it an evil act, he may not have understood your implication i.e. a failed innuendo check lol). Now once you have explained what your interpretation of the rules is, he can argue with you until he is blue in the face as long as he accepts your judgment in the end. Otherwise, he is a disruptive player and is just trying to have his cake and eat it too.I hope my suggestions help you. They are only my opinions after all and if someone else has something more valuable to add feel free to ignore me. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification