Should there be Repercussions for This? (opinions wanted)

[Czhorat]

Did the paladin think the cleric was supernaturally causing the problems and afflicting his comrades? If so not evil, no violation of code, it is his job to smack down evil active threats.

Did the paladin cut down the cleric "because she's evil" and he didn't want the distractions while dealing with the comrades' mess. If so then gross violation of the code's act with honor requirement and loss of paladin powers.

Did the paladin cut her down because she smiled and it pissed him off? Evil act, loss of paladin powers.

Good points. I should have added that if the paladin had accepted the priest's surrender then he's obligated to treat him honorably unless he can be shown as a real threat. Consider that the "lawful" part of "lawful good". A quick-thinking DM could ask why he did that. If the answer was that the paladin suspected that the cleric either was causing or could effect the situation then no loss of paladinhood. If it's that he couldn't trust the prisoner to stay put while he put out the fire then he should immediately become an ex-paladin.

 

[JDragon]

Ok, thanks for the quick responses.

To answer a few questions....

"2) Which god? Does the god abide and condone retribution in his name? If so, *maybe* it was OK."

He is a paladin of Heironeous.

"Did the paladin think that she had anything to do with his friends condition?"

Character /player did not say anything to indicate he thought the cleric had caused the problem. (I need to check with the player on this)

I did not give him any indication what so ever that she had done anything to cause the problem, and she could not even see the affected characters when the problem started.

"I think just about the only way this would be evil is if the prisoner had surrendered to the party in echanged for sparing her life."

The cleric had yeilded to them toward the end of the combat.

Ok, thats the first set.

 

[Piratecat]

I'm with Wayne, and see no problem with this other than a "keep your eye on him" reminder. Putting evil to the sword is what paladins do, and I'd also expect that the prisoner was behind the odd behavior - especially with that smile.

 

[Hjorimir]

The paladin should be punished. Remember, it isn't the paladin who decides what is and is not evil. It is the judgment of his respective deity. Paladins are held to a higher code of ethics. They don't get to do things because they are tactical or convenient.

An evil act committed is an evil act regardless of the paladin's state of mind at the time. Monte Cook provided some interesting guidelines in the Book of Hallowed Might (which I don't have with me at the moment). But, basically, it went along the lines of don't kill when subduing will work; don't subdue when parley will work; etc.

Let's take another step back. For the moment we will assume that this prisoner did in fact cast some kind of spell upon his friends. Did they die? Did they commit murder? Did anything happen that would justify a death penalty? From what little we've seen here I would say the answer is no.

Remember, good characters are not supposed to solve all the world's problems with the application of violence. If they are, what sets them apart of the evil characters? Are those good alignments really just the foundation of a great hypocrisy that gives them carte blanche to kill others?

How heroic.

 

[Arnwyn]

Taking the easy way out and killing the manacled prisoner instead of doing subdual damage? Lame.

IMO, there should be repercussions (and there would be, if this were my campaign).

DMs are not mind-readers - if the player has his/her paladin do something iffy, they'd better have a damn good reason - explained coherently and rationally - for that action.

 

[hong]

The paladin should be punished. Remember, it isn't the paladin who decides what is and is not evil. It is the judgment of his respective deity.

So, who died and made you god?

Remember, good characters are not supposed to solve all the world's problems with the application of violence.

D&D is all about the violence, sweetie. Did you somehow fail to notice that?

 

[Carnifex]

I think this depends on the player's motive - if he just killed the prisoner out of anger at their amusement of his comrades plight, then he is outta line and needs to have some sort of punishment exacted.

But it sounds to me like the player may well have thought that the prisoner was the one behind the madness afflicting his comrades; it certainly wouldn't be a big jump to conclude that, especially if the guy's already shown himself to be a spellcaster or having some sort of supernatural powers. Since D&D societies are generally in a medieval-based setting where life and justice is, frankly, going to be nasty, brutal and unpleasant, killing the prisoner is an acceptable step to protect the party. After all, they're going to have butchered dozens of other enemies just to get this far; killing the cleric is fine if he poses a threat through mental/magical means, even in physically he wont manage much. Attacking the mind is often far more evil and deadly than attacking the body, after all.

 

[Voadam]

I'm with Wayne, and see no problem with this other than a "keep your eye on him" reminder. Putting evil to the sword is what paladins do, and I'd also expect that the prisoner was behind the odd behavior - especially with that smile.

If wayne's line of thinking was the paladins then I agree. Giving the paladin the benefit of the doubt that would be how I would assume he was interpreting the situation.

However, actual thoughts and intent of the paladin matter.

If he was thinking she did not cause the situation or present a threat and he simply used the chaos to justify killing her, then that would be dishonorable and evil and could cross the line as written in the rules. Say he wanted to kill her from the beginning because she was an evil cleric opponent but the group accepted her surrender. Killing a helpless prisoner is not honorable, even if they are evil.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I really see no problem with this at all.

Either 1 he thought the cleric had something to do with it, and so took quick action to stop the evil befalling his friends, or he said hmmnn I'm good but not dumb, and I'm not going to leave the evil cleric who'se just waiting for a moment of weakness to strike, up behind me when I go help my friiends.

Paladins smite evil its what they do, even surrendered all this ends up being is a sped up execution at worst.

I jsut think too many people insist the lawful good in the paladins code must somehow equal lawful stupid.

 

[Hjorimir]

So, who died and made you god?

Exactly...the paladin isn't god. Thank you for making my point (though I don't think you intended to).

D&D is all about the violence, sweetie. Did you somehow fail to notice that?

Really? Can I have a page referrence on that ruling? sweetie?