Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 2714028" data-attributes="member: 19675">The Paladin ascertained the Halfling's complicity.  He had been questioned and stopped cooperating.Yep...and the Paladin was actively looking for his pregnant wife- he was, in the parlance, "in hot pursuit," facing a co-conspirator who was no longer cooperating with his questioning, even to the point of not letting the Paladin know if his wife was to be killed or merely held hostage.Months ago, someone proposed a scenario in which a Bandit Lord and his large band of miscreants captured a village an a Paladin therein, demanding that the Paladin kill one villager in order for the others to be set free.  If he didn't, all, including the Paladin, would be slain.The overwhelming consensus in that thread was that the Paladin should either not act (ensuring the death of everyone in the village and himself), or attack the Bandit Lord, consequences be damned, still letting innocents die.  (I agreed with neither.)The Paladin here was avoiding that kind of ethical whipsaw, eliminating one minion at a time.The OP said the Halfling was involved.  Even as only a decoy, he is BY LAW, as guilty as the people who did the actual assault.  That is why getaway car drivers get sentenced to all the crimes involved in a bank robbery, including murder, even if all they did was transport the guys in the bank to and from the scene of the crime.Assault & Nighttime home invasions were potential death-penalty crimes- combine the 2 and the Halfling's neck was in the noose as soon as he knocked on the door seeking to draw the Paladin out.The Paladin merely acted as the executioner.He was apprehended after acting in furtherance of an evil act.  He's guiltier than most mercenaries.Already disproved.  The OP stated that the Paladin found out the Halfling was involved.Let me ask you: Do Paladins in your campaigns kill dragon hatchlings?  Kobolds in their nests?  Coup de Grace opponents?  If so, what's your problem here?The Halfling was complicit in a heinous act and was caught- one that made his life forfeit by law.  Unlike a young monster, he ACTED in an EVIL fashion.  The Paladin had no way to determine how deeply involved in the plot the Halfling was, and the Halfling wasn't cooperating anymore.He gambled on the mercy of a Paladin who had been personally violated by an evil act,  and he lost.No.  We're know how he acted.  We know some of what the PC did, and that anger (at an evil act) was a motivating force.  But we also know that merely acting out of anger is not sufficient to strip a Paladin of his powers.What we're doing is discussing whether he did so in a way that he actually violated his code.  Obviously, minds differ.Yep.  And here we have a winner.The Halfling was complicit in a night time invasion of a private domicile- this much the Paladin ascertained.He then shut up.The Paladin had no way to figure out where in the scheme the Halfling fit.  Mastermind?  Mook?  But his actions had already damned him- he participated in an evil act.In the meantime, as he's trying to get a lead on his wife's whereabouts, time is slipping away.  The more time that passes, the greater the chance that his wife and unborn son are being further mistreated.  She is in "imminent danger."And the Halfling doesn't care, doesn't alleviate the Paladin's concerns by saying something like "Your wife is unhurt- cooperate with us and she'll stay that way..." NOTHING.Kid gloves come off.  (Note- the OP doesn't say that the Paladin tortured the halfling at any point.)Yes it is.  You can find such laws as old as the Roman 12 tables (450BC), and even the laws of Dracon (somtime between 800-500BC).  For certain offenses, a citizen could beat someone to death in the street, without fear of legal action.Then there is the question of the lex talionis, the age-old expedient of an exact retaliation.  In it, you took "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life."  And abductions were equated with murder.Under Judaic Law, there was a person called the "Avenger of Blood," a bounty hunter of sorts, acting for the kindred and carrying out the blood feud or law of self-help.  By custom he could kill the offender wherever he finds him.  If the offender acted suddenly without malice (our manslaughter) or accidentally, and was not his enemy, nor sought his harm, the people of the city were to deliver the accused out of the hands of the Avenger of Blood and there in the city of refuge he stayed until the death of the high priest.  But he must stay in the city of refuge-if he comes out he can be killed.  After the death of the high priest, the slayer can return to his own land.Was instant justice frowned upon?  Yes.  Was it occasionally permitted?  Yes- and it still is.</blockquote>

Verification