Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LuYangShih" data-source="post: 1153388" data-attributes="member: 10414">Actually the consensus is about even on this issue so far.And you seem to be missing my point that unless a persons greed or selfishness is so great that they will harm or destroy others because of it, they are more Neutral than Evil.  Again, when determining alignment, I would always ask, "Would this character be willing to destroy other peoples lives (in various ways), so he can attain what he wants?"  If no, he is not Evil.According to the description given in the PHB, Paladins are arbiters of life and death.  My view of alignment fits perfectly with the Crusader ideal of a LG character.It is because of those issues that the Paladin must make a stance against evil creatures and keep them from hurting others.  The Paladin dedicates his life to protecting others (altruism), keeping them safe from harm (respect for life), and removing any oppression upon them (concern for the dignity of sentient beings).  He does all this without expectation or need of thanks or reward, as it is his sacred duty to do so.  Exactly.  This is the type of creatures the Kobolds are, and so they must be dealt with appropiately.  The convient path for the Paladin to take in this scenario would be to leave the Kobolds to their machinations, and not take responsibilty for protecting the town of Oakhurst.  Compassion is what drives the Paladin to take sword in hand, and protect innocents who cannot protect themselves.  A Lawful Evil character cares only for furthering his own goals and ambitions.  A Lawful Evil character would have no compunction to even consider the fate of the Kobolds or the town of Oakhurst, unless it directly affected himself or any organization he might serve.  No, but that is not what I am describing.  And how is the Paladin in this scenario doing that?  As I have said so many times before, I do not believe in using Detect Evil as a license to kill in and of itself.  However, it can be used as a deciding factor when taking into account the whole picture.  The Kobolds are a threat to nearby innocents in the town of Oakhurst, and are raising a White Dragon who could, given time, become a true terror upon the land.  Given that, the fact that they are Evil should motivate the Paladin to making sure they do not have the chance to harm those he is sworn to protect. I could easily say your concept of a Paladin is so indecisive and unwilling to take action to protect the innocent, that he will never accomplish anything worthwhile.  Nor will he ever be a true champion of justice. And how is the Paladin doing that?  It is not as if he walked into the room, detected Evil, and started cutting down Kobolds left and right.  He has taken his time, he has considered his actions, and he is informing his party of the course of action he has chosen to take.  A course of action that is just, and wise.  You also remove any chance of the creature harming another innocent again.  The Paladin is not duty bound to redeem Evil, especially if that Evil shows no wish to change.   Again, I could state a similar viewpoint about your version of the Paladin.  He is unwilling to courageously face the Evil he confronts and deal with it in an appropiate manner.  He is so afraid of the possible Evil he might commit, he never takes the harder path, the righteous path.  Alignment is a result of your actions.  If a creature detects as Evil it is because he has done Evil.  True.  Which I myself mentioned in my previous post.  If you mean to say that the Kobolds should not be judged because it is possible they can change, I have already responded to that argument.</blockquote>

Verification