Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Artoomis" data-source="post: 3001917" data-attributes="member: 111">I think there is no doubt that some self-interest was involved. What does this paladin's vow have to say about following church rules?  And, is there any rule about returning such items to the church for destruction?  At times like this it's good to have all that stuff written out.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Gross violations of the code (which I certainly do NOT think this was, even if it was a violation) would strip a paladin of powers.Yes, it was a chaotic act.  No overly so, but "freedom, adaptability, and flexibility" were involved here, and that's part of the D&D definition of Chaos.A chaotic act will NOT strip a paladin of powers unless it actually is an alignment-changing act.  An evil act yes, a chaotic act, no.Finally, there is of course no doubting that this was NOT an evil act - it was, in fact, a very good act.Heck, the paladin gave up two shares of "loot" to get the sword and scrolls in his possessiion so the sword could be destroyed.  Of course, that may be a meaninlgess personal sacrifice when all but five items must be left behind anyway.</blockquote>