JDragon said:
Regarding the Paladins Frame of Mind...
As I said before the player did not say anything about what he thought was going on.
Also he is a half orc and the player did say something to the effect of "His half orc bold lust kicking in"
There's your answer. This was not about "stopping the mind control" - this was about the wanton bashing of prisoners, half-orc or no. I would assume a half-orc paladin would be working to "curb and control" any natural bloodlust - trying to be holy and "overcome" the carnal self.
Bloodlust, to me, is definitely not a lawful thing and not a good thing (I consider it chaotic neutral - not evil, because it's not malicious, but chaotic because it's indiscriminate - you don't care who gets beat up as long as someone does).
Allowing bloodlust to take over is a "medium" violation of the code... you have done something in direct antithesis to what you are trying to live. This probably would result, for me, in a loss of paladin powers and would require a minor act of atonement. The paladin receives his powers by being a "pure vessel" - giving himself over to the bloodlust sullies that vessel and hence, the power withdraws until the vessel is properly scrubbed.
On the other hand, if it was an "outburst of temper" where the paladin smote the prisoner down, then immediately realized his error and attempted to use his lay on hands ability to heal the guy, I'd probably let him get away with a minor admonition and no loss of power.
A hot-tempered paladin who occasionally loses control but is sorry about it when he does is fine (though he may be atoning a little more often than a more even-keeled paladin). A paladin who loses control and ISN'T sorry about it is an ex-paladin.
Another note, 6 out of 7 of the people in the party are from the same church (no other paladins) and they had already determined as a group any prisoners would be turned over to the law if possible, and if not they would do a trial on their own.
I can but assume that "if possible" means "if they don't fight to the death." This prisoner had surrendered. That means, by "law" (the "law of the group", which the paladin presumably knew and agree with). The paladin, by appointing himself as judge and jury and executioner here - when he specifically agreed NOT to do such - is acting unlawfully. Even the decision itself to do take on those roles is in my mind a minor violation of The Code, and would result in a light admonishment from deity, even if he never acted upon that decision. No loss of powers, though.
And once again thanks for the input, I know that I'm going to say something to the player and the character wioll have something happen to indicate this was an issue/pushing the limits of his code, as soon as I figure out how far hes gone over, if he has.
Lethal use of force against a helpless opponent - albeit one who has demonstrated magical ability in the past - that's a no-no. The paladin should have demanded of the prisoner "what is going on/what are you doing?" If that failed, use of subdual force was warranted, with lethal force used only if the prisoner resisted. I see this as a major violation of The Code, probably grounds for loss of power and need for atonement.
Hope that gives you some ideas. If you feel he needs a minor admonition, I think a constantly bleeding sword (so it cannot be sheathed) is a nice way of punishing him for losing his temper/a moment of bloodlust (though bloodlust to me is more than a momentary loss of temper). Perhaps his hands stay dirty no matter what he does if he decided he should be judge/jury/executioner - or perhaps his gear increases in weight by one encumbrance level to symbolize the extra weight he has taken upon his own shoulders. If he's committed a major violation, in your judgement, perhaps part of his propitiaion should include freeing unjustly imprisoned folks or something - or perhaps spend time as a servant (as in bringing meals, food, blankets, etc.) of the local prison facility. And if he attempted to slay the prisoner without remorse, he's an ex-paladin, no chance of atonement.
But then, being the curmudgeon I am, perhaps I'm more harsh than most.
IMO, YMMV, etc.
--The Sigil
