Pally LayOnHands/Healing of disguised demon?

[rom90125]

Setup: The party encounters a nalfeshnee demon that has been summoned to kill the LG Pally PC. The nalfeshnee uses an Alter Self spell to disguise itself as a wounded and dying human, with the appearance that implies it is a fallen ally. When the party discovers the fallen ally, they don't spot the spell effect and the Pally steps forward to Lay on Hands\cure wounds.

Q1. What is the affect on the demon from the Pally's Lay On Hands ability? Is the affect different if the Pally instead cases a Cure X Wounds spell?
Q2. If the Pally did not know that the dying creature was really a demon, should she be penalized by her deity for committing a heinous act?

I'm interested in both the RAW and your opinion...

Thanks.

 

[domino]

From what I read in the SRD, Lay on Hands would work just the same as Lay on Hands against a demon. LOH only does damage to undead, not demons.

 

[Diirk]

Regarding 2, I don't see how healing an apparent dying woman is an evil act. Even if he knew it was a demon, you could probably make a fair case for healing her... mercy is a good trait after all

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Q1. What is the affect on the demon from the Pally's Lay On Hands ability? Is the affect different if the Pally instead cases a Cure X Wounds spell?

The demon is healed. Lay on Hands is positive healing energy, just like a Cure spell. Neither ability affects demons any differently than humanoids.

Q2. If the Pally did not know that the dying creature was really a demon, should she be penalized by her deity for committing a heinous act?

Of course not. Paladins are penalized for willingly commiting evil acts. Not for being dominated/tricked/duped.

Of course, the guilt may cause the paladin some grief. But I certainly wouldn't penalize the paladin mechanically.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Paladins are penalized for willingly commiting evil acts. Not for being dominated/tricked/duped.

Was it 1E where a Paladin lost his paladinhood for any evil act, but if it wasn't intentional, he could atone?

-Hyp.

 

[nimisgod]

2E as well, I think. IIRC, A 2E paladin was penalized for chaotic and evil acts. But for chaotic acts and unintentional evil acts (bec. of enchantment, etc.), he could atone for them. For intentional evil acts, bye-bye paladinhood forever.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

All of this is assuming the demon was injured to begin with. The original post seems to indicate that the injuries were part of the alter self spell. If that's the case and the demon wasn't already injured, then laying on hands would have no effect at all.

 

[FireLance]

Q1. What is the affect on the demon from the Pally's Lay On Hands ability? Is the affect different if the Pally instead cases a Cure X Wounds spell?

Both Lay on Hands and Cure spells use positive energy. Positive energy heals living creatures and damages undead creatures. Outsiders are living creatures. The demon would be healed, regardless of whether the paladin uses Lay on Hands or a Cure spell.

Q2. If the Pally did not know that the dying creature was really a demon, should she be penalized by her deity for committing a heinous act?

I'm interested in both the RAW and your opinion...

This is what the SRD says about Good and Evil:

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

I would argue on the basis of the SRD that healing a creature, even an evil one, is usually a good act because it shows a respect for life. It is generally not an evil act, unless that healing directly and obviously helps a creature to hurt, oppress or kill others (casting a healing spell on someone rampaging through a village and cutting down everyone he meets, for example).

Of course, different people will have different ideas on where to draw the line between mercy and stupidity. As a DM, do realize that the consequences you dictate for the PC's actions will have an effect on what they do in future. If acts of mercy are never rewarded, but are punished whenever you feel they cross the line into stupidity, do not expect the PCs to act mercifully again.

The Lord of the Rings would be quite a different story if Bilbo and Frodo's acts of mercy towards Gollum did not result in the destruction of the Ring, but led to its recovery by Sauron instead!

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Attempting to assist an apparently wounded innocent is always a good act. The fact the Paladin might feel guilty for an ideologically embarassing action in hindsight is an entirely separate issue. That is only a matter of politics and has nothing to do with Good or Evil.

 

[Jesus_marley]

Wouldn't the Pally's Detect Evil work despite the ruse? The demons alignment would still be the same in the disguise....