Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6267303" data-attributes="member: 4937">Sure, but my understanding was that mens rea per se was no longer the standard, and that had been deprecated in favor of strictly defined terms of culpability - such as 'knowingly', 'negligently' and the like.   So that you might say that first degree is 'purposefully', second degree is 'knowingly', manslaughter is 'recklessly', and beyond that (whatever it is) is 'negligently'.   The actual consideration of whether the person had a 'guilty mind' wasn't a part of the law any more.And in any event, I'm holding that the Lawful Good legal code includes space for items of Strict Liability - especially as it pertains to positions of authority and privilege like Paladins.   For example, if Galahad violates his oath of Chastity, it doesn't matter why he violated it, it doesn't matter if he was enchanted, or sleep walking, or deceived - he is guilty.Just because modern American legal codes highly disfavor strict liability, doesn't mean that there won't be cases in other codes involving for example, religious orders.   And, not knowing the law much, I wonder how much defense a lack of guilty mind however it is defined actually is in a case like 'statutory rape'.  It seems like at least in the prevailing understanding of the law by non-experts, legitimately not knowing the age of the person even if they were deceptive and misrepresented themselves isn't in fact a defense.      No, again, as the Vow of Chastity indicates, he has in fact acted contrary to his value.  Intentionality doesn't matter.  If he's not a virgin anymore, he's strictly culpable.   Arguably, even if it is within the power of the party to forgive, and even if they are willing to do so, it's not in the power of the party to restore the lost status.   I'm arguing that Paladinhood could conceivably be that sort of status.But you discount that Law or Good could demand perfection (or near enough for mortal purposes) as a condition of holding special authority and privilege?  What makes this a necessity?  Isn't there at least the possibility that a legal code could contain items of strict culpability, or where even complete lack of a guilty mind only meant you were guilty of lesser - but still serious - offence?I'm sure that a Lawful one would.  I'm reasonably convinced that a Lawful Good one would.   I'd be less convinced that a Chaotic Good one would, but I've never thought about this question enough to be convinced on that.</blockquote>

Verification