The "orc baby" paladin problem

[Wulf Ratbane]

The best description I've seen tossed out is that Paladins are like Superman, moral-wise. WWSD?

Superman doesn't kill anyone, ever, no matter how evil they are.

So the analogy immediately fails.

 

[Harm]

Oh and if a creatures detects as Evil, it is the paladin's god-given duty (literally) to smite them. Otherwise, what's the point? It's not Detect Evil Outsider or Smite Evil Outsider after all. If you as a DM don't like it, then house rule the paladin to your heart's content. Or ban them. Whatever.

Although, say, humans tend towards neutrality you will find a significant number of evil aligned humans in every human town. A few will be in prison, or in chains as slaves, most will not as they're either too lawful to commit a crime, unable to perform a crime or just haven't been caught yet. Under your idea of a paladin it is their duty to go around and butcher a fair percentage of the population of every town and city... which would get the paladin executed pretty fast as a mass murderer and lose them their paladinhood.

 

[Seeten]

This makes for one sort of cool thing.

All the DM's holding the position that they should be brought back to the baby orc/troll/giant/dragon raising monastery have created an easy way for their players to justify playing a Half-Ogre, Troll, Half-Dragon or what have you when their current character dies. They grew up in the Monastery, after all.

 

[Arkhandus]

Right, let's all ignore the 'honor' clause in the Paladin Code and argue about the nature of evil and where the blurry line ends on what paladins can and cannot smite at any given time. That'll be solved right quick.

......except it hasn't.

 

[Seeten]

I choose to honor the human women and children(and men) who I will save by killing these "tadpoles" that look like crocodiles, and kill and eat humans, and regenerate, and only die by fire and acid.

I honor them. I honor the fishermen who have been eaten already. I honor their wives. I honor all of those people by ensuring they dont GET EATEN.

There is your honor.

 

[Trench]

Superman doesn't kill anyone, ever, no matter how evil they are.

So the analogy immediately fails.

Fair enough. I still think the analogy holds if one remembers the restrictions and neccessities of the game and setting.

 

[Seeten]

Superman is indestructible, and Super fast, with heightened senses, and x-ray vision, so he can afford to let the "Tadpoles" lie, and know instantly when they "reoffend" and stop them before harm comes to anyone, without any fear for his safety.

I think you'll agree Paladins dont have this same ability.

 

[Harm]

Superman is indestructible, and Super fast, with heightened senses, and x-ray vision, so he can afford to let the "Tadpoles" lie, and know instantly when they "reoffend" and stop them before harm comes to anyone, without any fear for his safety.

Superman doesn't have tadpoles as archvillians, and when his enemies reoffend he can't instantly stop them before harm comes to anyone. Whole planets get wiped out before he can stop them in some cases. Batman's villians regularly escape Arkham and commit murder. But DnD isn't a 4-colour comic. Paladins aren't superheros.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Superman doesn't kill anyone, ever, no matter how evil they are.

So the analogy immediately fails.

You haven't read comics for a while. Superman not only killed in his earliest appearances, but has done so periodically over the last decade.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Tadpoles != eggs

A lot of folks on this thread seem to be confusing the two. There's a whole range of being a tadpole, up until the moment that limbs are grown, but at no point are they equivalent to innocent eggs or immobile babies. The scragpoles are sentient free-willed beings who have had the opportunity to act.

They're evil because they have and intend to again.

er, Whizbang, maybe folks are "confusing" the matter because you titled this thread "the orc baby paladin problem" not "the orc adolescent who has already killed multiple sentient beings but is not quite full grown paladin problem."

You framed the situation in a way that naturally evoked assumptions of the tadpoles as helpless and currently blameless. Turning around and criticising people who respond to a thread with the word "baby" in the title as if you are talking about babies.... I'm going to assume it indicates a poor choice of thread title rather than any intent to cause confusion, but I'd tone down your responses.