Paladin: Tricked Into Killing the Wrong Target

[Kahuna Burger]

It would not at all be unreasonable to expect a paladin to ritually purify himself (atonement) before again being a propper vessel for the power of good to flow through. As long as this process was relitively painless and did not require long quests or hassle, I see this as no more unfair than a PC beng poisoned and having to get a restoration spell cast or wait out the recovery.

To followup my own post, from the atonement spell : "The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds. If the atoning creature committed the evil act unwittingly or under some form of compulsion, atonement operates normally at no cost to you."

So there's no xp cost, a fifth level spell might seem steep, but if no casters were available, I'd allow a day or more ritual (involving fasting and washing plus some material components, prolly) to take the place of the spell for an unintentional violation. It don't see it as being any worse than hitting someone with ability damage when tey don't have access to restoration, but I guess it depends on how often it came up.

 

[I'm A Banana]

In the second example, I'd have him loose his powers. That's one of the problems of being held to a higher standard -- you have no excuse.

Of course, an atonement sets things right. But you killed an innocent, man. You gotta expect to have a consequence, even if it is just a minor mission for an atonement spell.

IMHO, the Code exists not just as a role playing aid, but as something to use. A Paladin should feel constrained and treated roughly by his Code and his alignment. He chose a hard path. He should be happy to adhere to that hard path, no matter how much it abuses him, and he should be eager to return to that hard path if he took the easy and expedient way out once or twice (he's only mortal, after all).

 

[Sejs]

Are you saying that a paladin can only act on what information he has and has no obligation to verify his information or beliefs or a responsiblity to be correct when he makes life and death choices?

Personally, I think that the power would hold paladins acting in their name to a little higher standard.

I can see where you're trying to go with that, but essentially, yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.


The paladin is allowed to make mistakes and not have his powers ganked as long as what he did was what he thought, what he knew to be right based on the information he had at the time action was required.


Not "You're not allowed to screw up, no matter the situation, if you fail your powers are revoked", but rather "Try and do your best in all things, it's the effort and intent that counts".

 

[TheAuldGrump]

That would be your interpretation.

I'm of mixed minds on being tricked into 'sin' as it were. I think a lot depends on the nature of the campaign and the conception of the paladin.

There's definitly mythological support for divine retribution for mistaken actions. Abraham kept getting cities struck with plagues by lying about his marriage, Helen was held responsible for starting the trojian war in spite of being essentially under a love spell, the arthurian fall mentioned earlier.... Also, there's the idea of "spiritual cleanliness". Striking down an innocent could be seen to leave a spiritual stain which interferes with the purity of soul which is the paladin's source of power. (campaign dependant thinking here obviously). It would not at all be unreasonable to expect a paladin to ritually purify himself (atonement) before again being a propper vessel for the power of good to flow through. As long as this process was relitively painless and did not require long quests or hassle, I see this as no more unfair than a PC beng poisoned and having to get a restoration spell cast or wait out the recovery.

The other side obviously hinges on the interpretation of the word "willingly" and the feeling that its unfair for the paladin to suffer a temporary loss of powers based on an outside agency's actions. If this was used to "screw" the paladin, or the player simply could not get into the "ritual cleanliness" mode, I'd see it as a bad thing for the game.

Willingly implies an exercise of will. Accidents do not count, neither does trickery. Again, the interpretation is implicit in the word, so none is needed.

And yes, the paladin should loose his powers, loose his righteous smite that is. (The word is 'lose' people, to loose your powers is to unleash them...)

The Auld Grump, feeling pedantic...

 

[Testament]

This happened a few years ago in Living Greyhawk. No Spoilers, as I believe the module is retired now.

During the adventure, the party (under duress) agreed not to harm an evil minion if the minion ceased his evil ways and helped the party accomplish its goals.

The minion betrayed the party, and appearently slew several members of the party with spells.

The paladin slew the minion.

The minion had been pretending to cast evil spells. His invisible Evil Master had actually cast the spells that slew the PCs.

The party then destroys the invisible evil master after they discover the invisible enemy.

Should there be any ramifications to the Paladin's actions?

Ahhh, this sounds like Escape from Tenh. The greater issue there is that you're willingly associating with a Cleric of Iuz to try and get out of there. I could see people making a case for the Paladin losing his powers for that, but as far as killing the scumbags when they reveal the fast one they've pulled on you...non-issue. Pretend to cast [Evil] spells at the Paladin and their companions, you're gonna get smoten.

The Paladin had agreed to judge the evil minion by his actions and not his past. Is Death too severe of a penalty for the action of "pretending to cast evil spells" even when his pretending allowed his master to kill several party members? The minion's actions would seem to fall under the category of conspiracy to commit murder, aiding and abetting, etc.

The Paladin has no way of knowing what's really going on with the Cleric and his slave, and they don't have many options. The scumbags have the ONLY sure way out of the city at this point, and the Paladin can live to serve again if he takes this option and gets out of the minor apocalypse that's happening. He's more than just aiding and abetting, he's an accessory during the event. You better believe he's fair game!

What if an Illusionist had cast a spell, making a complete innocent appear to be the Evil Master? Are there any ramifications to the Paladin slaying someone who is themselves a victim of the evildoer?

In the case of the illusionist's cruel trick, while he isn't going to get his powers revoked for it, he better damn well do something to atone for his actions there. He's been conned into the action, yes, but an innocent is still dead. As a protector of the innocent and a servant of good, that's still a seriously bad occurence, and to NOT do some action to atone is a sign of a serious moral lapse on the Paladin's part, that would be the evil action that would cost them their powers. 24 hr purification ritual/fast (Atonement), ensuring a decent burial for the victim and seeking the forgiveness of their family, and the powers above will be satisfied. As Kamikaze Midget said, a Paladin is held to a higher, near-impossible standard, and that has consequences.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Willingly implies an exercise of will. Accidents do not count, neither does trickery. Again, the interpretation is implicit in the word, so none is needed.

or willingly in the context of a magical game world means not under magical compulsion, and poor judgement, whether aided by active trickery or not, does count. Oh look, a choice of interpretation!

You've chosen your interpretation and defended it well, why make yourself look bad by playing a spoiled "My way is the only way" game? It doesn't work on anyone who doesn't already agree with you anyway.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

At least in my game, the paladin wouldn't loose his powers. However, if played correctly, he would try to make some sort amends and reflect on this event to make sure it won't happen to him again.

 

[Green Knight]

So silly in fact that I included it in one of my silly Orcz! games that I have run as one-shots. The PC's were all Orcs hunting down a Paladin and his party who had kidnapped all the women and children from their tribe (because you can't kill Orc women and children and instead must lug them back to town to "convert them from their evil ways" - another frequent flying theory in Paladin threads). During the big final battle, the Paladin whipped out his sword and stabbed one of the Orcs and...was stripped of his Paladinhood.

One of the Orc women had secretly slipped some poison into his scabbard.

The Paladin's last words were, "It's not FAIR!"

ROTFLMAO! That's the funniest damn thing I've read all day. It literally had me laughing out loud.

Are you saying that a paladin can only act on what information he has and has no obligation to verify his information or beliefs or a responsiblity to be correct when he makes life and death choices?

Personally, I think that the power would hold paladins acting in their name to a little higher standard.

If they did, then they wouldn't have a single Paladin worth a damn. What they'd have, instead, would be a horde of hand-wringing ninnies who're so preoccupied with examining every potential minutiae of a situation that they never actually do a damn thing.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

If they did, then they wouldn't have a single Paladin worth a damn. What they'd have, instead, would be a horde of hand-wringing ninnies who're so preoccupied with examining every potential minutiae of a situation that they never actually do a damn thing.

So the two possibilities are complete recklessness and "hand wringing ninnies"? I'm very glad I don't live in your world, it sounds too dangeous either way.

I think some folks are making an Atonement out to be a lot more of a character destroying burden than it actually needs to be. The quest is optional the XP component is dependant on the fall and most people here are suggesting that the paladin seek out atonement and rp the issue before any mechanical penalties are applied.

 

[Green Knight]

So the two possibilities are complete recklessness and "hand wringing ninnies"?

No, because you're over-exaggerating. Using your best judgment with what you're presented is not being reckless, in this or ANY world. Really, who can forsee the possibility of someone PRETENDING to be attacking you with spells?

On the other hand, you don't think that it's at all unreasonable to make a Paladin investigate every possibility, no matter how minute, while he's engaged in combat? Just ignore all the deadly spells being lobbed your way. You first gotta investigate if the guy who's apparently throwing the spells is actually throwing them, if he's under a magical compulsion, if he's blackmailed, if he's got a split personality and the evil one's in the drivers seat, etc. When your life is in IMMEDIATE danger, you're under no obligation to do anything else aside from defending it. And if someone's there PRETENDING to be putting your life in danger, well, then he's just a damned idiot.