The Paladin killed someone...what to do?

[The Sigil]

Why is the slaughter of the halfling the only means to protect his family? The halfling is not directly assaulting his family, he is not an immediate threat. Arrest him, turn him in to the local authority or the paladin's own church...
that takes care of the threat quite nicely. That's what jails are for.

this comes off as nothing more than post hoc justification. Vengance is not protection, no matter how much you dress it up. And he had the halfling in his power in the middle of what we have since been told is a lawful city. Killing him at that point has no protective value over subduing him and handing him over to the police.

His action in no way shape or form protected his wife.

I'm not going to construe it as a "good act" myself, merely pointing out it CAN be construed as such.

However, ultimately, in my opinion, the question at hand is, "was killing the halfling an evil act?"

The SRD states that killing an innocent is an evil act (emphasis mine). It does not say that killing a helpless person is an evil act. It does not say killing a less powerful person is an evil act. It specifically says "innocents."

From what I can pick up (with incomplete information of course), the halfling is NOT an innocent - he's an accomplice to the crime. Therefore, killing him cannot, by definition, be an evil act (I'm not sure it's a good act, but it's certainly not evil either) as he is not an innocent and only slaughter of innocents is "evil killing."

I'm quite concerned that it's a chaotic act, but by the RAW, I cannot find any justification for calling it "evil." (The paladin questions the halfling, learns about the assault - presumably from the halfling - and learns the halfling was part of the assault - I can't find anywhere that suggests the halfling is innocent).

--The Sigil

 

[Numion]

Then it isn't mercy.

Then, should a Paladin show mercy towards enemies who he suspects will abuse his weakness, and commit evil again? Should a Paladin let Orcus off the hook if he asks?

Remember that by the PHB Paladins code requires them to punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

DM: "The lich blasts you with Disintegrate .. roll for save"
Pally: "A nat 20, I save!"
DM: "Um .. ok .. the lich asks for mercy, you know, um .. you must be merciful"
Pally: "Okay, okay, take a chill pill, I accept his atonement, I Smite his Blackguard servant!"
.
.
DM: "Sucker! The lich blasts you again with Disintegrate!"
Pally: "Dang .. I save"
DM: "The lich asks for mercy .."

I think its fair to say that any example in which the DM yells "sucker!" has extremely limited value for proving a serious point.

 

[howandwhy99]

There's nothing righteous about vengence.

You beat me too it.

 

[Numion]

Indeed. Sometimes a paladin must obey his duty towards justice.

Duty towards justice is not in the Paladins code while punishing evildoers is.

 

[painandgreed]

Then it isn't mercy.

It fits the definitions of mercy that paladins are responsible for IMC.

 

[mythusmage]

What would I do to the paladin? Nothing. I let people act out of passion, I let people make mistakes. I don't ask for absolute perfection from people because people are not capable of it.

Besides, some people need killing. The halfling's an accessory to the fact, thus he is as culpable as the actual perpetrators and earns their fate. The paladin is the injured party and as such has earned the right to retribution.

If that does not suffice to you, consider that the responsible parties have brought disorder -that is, chaos- into the world, and it is now the paladin's charge to restore order. That means that should the perpetrators die, the perpetrators die. All deeds have a cost, sometimes that cost is death.

The typical code of conduct is a bit of pretentious twaddle intended for people as they should be. I have yet to read one that has a snowball's chance in Hell of surviving for any length of time in the real world.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Then, should a Paladin show mercy towards enemies who he suspects will abuse his weakness, and commit evil again? Should a Paladin let Orcus off the hook if he asks?

Remember that by the PHB Paladins code requires them to punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

somehow I think we are acting off of very different definitions of mercy. In this example especially, we have a situation where the evil types can and will be judged and punished appropriately. It is not "kill or let go" and defining mercy that way is a complete strawman.

If a paladin has a way to bind Orcus into the body and (lack of) powers of a fluffy kitten rather than destroying him, he should seriously consider that act of mercy. More to the point, if a lawful good civil authority is sitting right there to judge the halfling for an event which is over, turning him over to them isn't even on the mercy/no mercy scale, its the non-murderous course of action.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

What would I do to the paladin? Nothing. I let people act out of passion, I let people make mistakes. I don't ask for absolute perfection from people because people are not capable of it.

Besides, some people need killing. The halfling's an accessory to the fact, thus he is as culpable as the actual perpetrators and earns their fate. The paladin is the injured party and as such has earned the right to retribution.

If that does not suffice to you, consider that the responsible parties have brought disorder -that is, chaos- into the world, and it is now the paladin's charge to restore order. That means that should the perpetrators die, the perpetrators die. All deeds have a cost, sometimes that cost is death.

The typical code of conduct is a bit of pretentious twaddle intended for people as they should be. I have yet to read one that has a snowball's chance in Hell of surviving for any length of time in the real world.

and yet the rest of us are talking about what to do with a paladin in a game of D&D. Obviously you don't play with anything resembling a paladin, so your comments are somewhat unhelpful on how to deal with one.

 

[howandwhy99]

DM: "The lich blasts you with Disintegrate .. roll for save"
Pally: "A nat 20, I save!"
DM: "Um .. ok .. the lich asks for mercy, you know, um .. you must be merciful"
Pally: "Okay, okay, take a chill pill, I accept his atonement, I Smite his Blackguard servant!"
.
.
DM: "Sucker! The lich blasts you again with Disintegrate!"
Pally: "Dang .. I save"
DM: "The lich asks for mercy .."

This is pretty funny, but in real situations the character is not going to ignore the lich. That's another example of paladin lawful-stupid. IRL, mercy comes in at the question of life or death after the enemy has been subdued. Do you kill the lich or set about towards saving him. (liches may be a special case here like demons, but the point is universal in a paladin's code.)

Choosing to kill a nonthreatening murderer in custody is the same end as someone losing their temper. The wiser course is debated mercy. Your example is like a creature of pure evil (demon) who, after a long pitched battle cries "mercy!" just before the final blow comes down. Hesitating is foolish, if no other course is possible [re: called action to kill the demon unless it disarms, etc.]

Batman is NOT a paladin. He's a Fallen paladin, but more gray than anything else.