The "orc baby" paladin problem

[billd91]

Big difference evil does not have any respect for life. They will take it without remorse and to suit their needs. By the paladin respecting an evil creatures right to life he is allowing this creature the ability to kill other innocent creatures.

That's a big assumption. Maybe the evil creature just wants to sell them bad real estate in a swampland for big bucks or prefers to turf orphans out of their institutions to sell for money. Not all evil creatures are murderous. Not all evil acts should be punishable by death.

Who has more right to live the evil creature or the innocent who has never done any wrong?

They have the same right to live if the evil things done by the evil creature don't warrant death.

The paladin has a chance to think this over because they are not a threat yet. But they will be if he does nothing. So he has to make some kind of decision. Now the DM has said these creatures are evil because they have already done evil acts and will do them again. In this case the duty of the paladin seem pretty clear. There is a part of the code that says must protect innocents.

Like troll tadpoles who don't know any better and just do what their momma has them do?

<snip>

I played a paladin in Forgotten Realma game with a DM who thought like you do.

We chased some evil drow clerics into the woods for over seven days after they had kidnapped some elven children. They were to be used in an ancient ritual to unleash a horrible plague onto the land and throw the world into darkness.
We caught up to them right before they killed the last child. We battled and killed all but the high priestess who surrendered. In the battle tow of our party were slain. I wanted to kill the last drow right then and there but the DM told be that I would be violating my code. So we tied the cleric up gagged her and off we went back on the seven day journey.

It may well have been violating your code. Does your code allow the killing of enemies who surrender? Does your code include the power of life and death outside of a fight? Is it reasonable to assume it does? The way I run, it does not. Killing people in a fight is one thing, but being judge and executioner when the weapons are down is not part of the package where the rule of law applies. Dukes and higher get that power of high justice. Mere paladins do not.

Now since there was only two of us left we had to take watches alone while the other slept. On day three she got lose and killed the other PC on watch she then grabbed the child and ran I went after her but she had a head start. I could hear her chanting something as she ran. She threw herself and the child off a cliff thus finishing the ritual and unleashing hell.

Even to this day this makes me mad that my lawful good paladin hands were tied in such a stupid way as to allow the destuction of the world.

Did you consider deliberately disabling her by breaking her hands or her jaw? In this case, it does seem like the DM railroaded the game right into the ground. Makes me wonder what he was thinking. Did he think that he won by getting one over on the PCs?

 

[billd91]

Whose conscience is it on when the troll grows up big and strong and rapes, then eats someones wife? Someones mother? Butchers an entire town?

All preventable by a swift moment of action.

It wouldn't be on mine. That troll was given a chance, a choice, and it blew it. Any number of kids could grow up to do stuff that bad and worse. Does it justify killing anybody and everybody?

 

[Mighty Veil]

That's the one thing of D&D I just can't stand. Thanks to endless ecologies, players have gotten to know the monsters enough that they begin to feel for them. Think their people.

Why can't an orc just be some evil guy humanoid. Born from mud. When times get bad, more emerge from the filth of the ground. When times are good, they go back into the ground.

 

[VirgilCaine]

That depends on you. Are troll, orcs and such inately (sp?) evil or is it just a cultural thing.

Yes, I'm sure the tadpoles were abused and twisted by the scrag clerics to be evil.

IMC I'll come up with a spell that teleports any non-evil person you cast it on back to a paladin re-education camp where they can be raised and reformed to be good productive members of humanoid society.

Hmmmm. Or give Paladins sleep as a 1st level spell.

 

[ivocaliban]

Are "evil" humanoids like orcs and goblins (a) genetically *EEEEVIL* (like demons, or like JRRT's orcs), (b) generally predisposed to evil behavior, or (c) the product of evil cultures? IF the latter, or even the second, orc babies probably wouldn't register as evil to the smackdown radar.

This was the first thing that came to my mind, as well. Personally, I don't think babies of any naturally-occurring, humanoid race are evil. In other words, it's nurture, not nature, that puts the evil into the troll. Being born with a pre-disposition towards evil is fine, but being born evil is for fiends and such. Otherwise, I'd probably put newborns and infants (tadpoles, in this case) in the Neutral column (with a possible argument for Chaotic Neutral).

Of course, if they register evil as in this particular case, then I'd say it's a coin toss. The paladin should make this decision for himself. If he's the sort of Lawful Good that thinks evil is always evil and it cannot be altered, then killing the little river trolls should be permitted without any punishment. After all, they are likely to grow up and bring harm to neighboring communities.

However, if he's the sort of paladin that believes that harming a helpless creature is inherently evil in and of itself then he has every right to defend the lives of the little scrags. He may even believe that the creatures can be brought up to turn away from evil...it's called redemption, something which a paladin should understand.

So, the solution should depend greatly on how the paladin interprets Law and Good, as well. I commend any player who plays a thoughtful paladin and doesn't see every solution as the easist one ("Kill it before it multiplies"). Not every paladin is the same, despite the like alignment. Any variety you can milk from the class should be rewarded.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Nothing is born innately evil. It grows up and learns to be evil. So those tads should not have registered being evil.

Nothing in our world is born innately evil...

If I was the GM, I'd simply let the paladin make his own choice - and not penalize him for his decision in either way. I might later let him come across paladins who made a different choice in this situation - without loosing their paladin powers.

Frankly, I'd rather have the PC in question explore what it means to be "good" on his own than force my views on him.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

When in doubt, cast augury. Your god will tell you.

Personally, if a player casts Augury in this situation, he will get an answer of "nothing". I wouldn't penalize a paladin or a cleric either way, no matter what his decision is. And whether the tadpoles or whatever live or die certainly won't have an impact on his immediate future.

Similarly, if the cleric casts Commune, the answer to the question: "Would killing the tadpoles be a good idea?" is also "unclear" - unless the deity has something like "monster hunting" in its portfolio. Like the spell description says, deities aren't omniscient, and they don't know the repercussions of all the actions of the PCs in advance. Alternatively, the deity might answer with "Do as you see fit" or "Do what you consider best". That's not neccessarily a cheap trick - benevolent deities might want their followers to think about questions of morality instead of simply following a static doctrine.

 

[Li Shenron]

The paladin sees them registering as evil...

Don't let anyone's babies "register as evil".

If you let them register as evil, it means they are already capable of discerning between good & evil, and they choose evil. Let infants of evil races be like animals or no-Int creatures are with regard to alignment.

 

[DMH]

Whose conscience is it on when the troll grows up big and strong and rapes, then eats someones wife? Someones mother? Butchers an entire town?

All preventable by a swift moment of action.

Then why don't paladin's kill more evil nobles and royalty? They have the power to cause great harm, yet not many settings have them purging governments based on alignment.

As to the person who suggested that paladins should be the ones to raise children, why? They should hand them off to monks or clerics of their faith who will raise them "right".

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Don't let anyone's babies "register as evil".

If you let them register as evil, it means they are already capable of discerning between good & evil, and they choose evil. Let infants of evil races be like animals or no-Int creatures are with regard to alignment.

Why? For some creatures, being evil might not be a conscious choice depending on your cosmology. Some creatures are just "born bad". And fiction is full of "bad seeds".

As to the person who suggested that paladins should be the ones to raise children, why? They should hand them off to monks or clerics of their faith who will raise them "right".

How many monasteries are out there that are capable of raising orc or troll children? And of these monasteries, how many have the capacity to take on more?