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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tzarevitch" data-source="post: 1209828" data-attributes="member: 1792">So you are implying the more dangerous the situation the less you need to think about the best way to handle it? That statement doesn't make sense. You don't automatically react to an unknown threat with overwhelming force. That is tactically stupid and leaves you vulerable to traps and feints. You react to an unknown threat by determining the extend of the threat.  Then you determine the extend of the response needed. Again, failure to determine the extent of the danger is not an excuse. A 1st level protection from evil would protect you from mind control then you could disable them at your leisure. And very few abilities do not require at least a line of effect (if not line of sight).  If you think about it, if they were that powerful then the party was doomed the minute they entered range. It sounds to me that there were probably better ways to deal with the children that would both have allowed them to be taken (mostly) alive and would have been safer for the PCs. If you are dealing with them inside then it may be possible to use the passageways and doors to contain them and limit their ability to move about or get at you or anyone else. Outside, missile weapons at long-ish ranges are your friend. A bow, or a crossbow should be able to drop them into negatives with a hit without killing them so long as you don't crit and get a good roll. That makes no sense. "I had to kill him because I didn't know what he could do." It is possible that the party or the players had some idea that the children had other powers but that has not come out that I have seen. Barring that, you can't argue that killing them is justified simply because it is POSSIBLE that they may be able to do something else. Again the implication that taking your time and generating a plan is somehow a bad idea. Now, bear in mind I am not necessarily criticising the decision the paladin made to kill the evildoers. I am criticising this particular argument on why they charged in and did it. It may be that cutting them down really was the only way to deal with them but it doesn't sound to me like anything else was really tried beyond "kill them all and let the gods sort them out" and THAT is not paladin-ly. The paladin code is not a document that requires only adherence to the letter without regard to the circumstances. If that was the case, paladins would be LN not LG.20+ kids with dominate abilities statistically will clean that party's clock if they charge in there and try to hack them down without a good plan. Barring very good saves they are going to loose. My objection isn't so much with killing the Children of the Corn but with the lack of plan that led up to it. The party seems to have plowed headfirst into a fight with the odds stacked against it then realized the only way out was to kill the children to stop them and save themselves (and finally have the DM come to their rescue). That is not noble, that was simply a poor plan and not just on the paladin's part. Tzarevitch</blockquote>

Verification