Was V's act evil? (Probable spoilers!)

[Remus Lupin]

we'll still start a thread discussing whether or not Piratecat's action was evil.

Thanks!

As a moderator, you're actions are beyond good and evil, aren't they? You are as inscrutable as the cosmos!

 

[steenan]

I voted No. Black dragons are evil - and evil to a level that makes them irredeemable. Mass-killing such creatures is not a good act (killing never is - risk taken when fighting to protect someone may be), but definitely isn't evil. It's hard to find a better example of when killing is justified.

I haven't had a PC paladin fall (as in "turn evil") in any of my games. I had NPC paladins turn evil and I had PC paladins temporary lose their powers. The latter was never caused by really evil acts - rather by an unhonorable behavior, like arguing with superiors (or older family members), breaking given word or backing from a (winnable and justified) conflict.

 

[catsclaw227]

the two words Civis Romanus

The question What is the virtue of a proportional response ?

Actually, it's Civis Romanus Sum. "I am a Roman Citizen".

And it looks like you watch West Wing with the question.

Anyways..... in V's case, are you saying that his response was proportional? A proportional response is one where the punishment matches the crime. V laid down punishment far, far, far beyond the crime.

 

[steenan]

I voted No. Black dragons are evil - and evil to a level that makes them irredeemable. Mass-killing such creatures is not a good act (killing never is - risk taken when fighting to protect someone may be), but definitely isn't evil. It's hard to find a better example of when killing is justified.

I haven't had a PC paladin fall (as in "turn evil") in any of my games. I had NPC paladins turn evil and I had PC paladins temporary lose their powers. The latter was never caused by really evil acts - rather by an unhonorable behavior, like arguing with superiors (or older family members), breaking given word or backing from a (winnable and justified) conflict.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm INTENSELY glad Jeff brought up paladins, because I was trying to skirt around this, but here goes:

People who are saying not evil, have you ever had a paladin fall in your games?

Yes. He abandoned the rest of the party to be eaten by ghouls, and ran away to save his own skin.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

In my games, gods and characters do not follow our modern values, but fantasy/medieval ones. The paladin would not fall for killing black dragons, just as she doesn't fall for killing evil people.

No? Suppose there's a despicable fellow, who watches children undress, secretly rejoices every time there's a murder in the street, in his heart of hearts he wants to be a serial killer/rapist, but just doesn't have the courage to even hold a knife, much less use it. Paladin walks into the bar, detects evil and lops his head off, even though he's broken no law.

In MY games, he'd no longer be a paladin.

 

[Fenes]

No? Suppose there's a despicable fellow, who watches children undress, secretly rejoices every time there's a murder in the street, in his heart of hearts he wants to be a serial killer/rapist, but just doesn't have the courage to even hold a knife, much less use it. Paladin walks into the bar, detects evil and lops his head off, even though he's broken no law.

In MY games, he'd no longer be a paladin.

If said fellow would have his fascination under control, and not give in to temptation once he feels he can get away with it - or gets enough liquid courage - he'd not detect as evil in my game. If he detects as evil killing him is a good deed, but at the very least not evil.

In other words - I have a lot broader "Neutral" area in my game than most. Evil is restricted to the clear-cut cases, not the morally ambigous ones. Ruthless mercenary that enjoys torturing criminals? Not Evil in my game. Cheating merchant? Not Evil. Racist Guy that hates elves, but won't ever kill or attack them, just sneers at them and wants them out of his town? Not Evil.

My paladins still have to make moral choices with those cases, but if something or someone detects as Evil, then killing it won't make them fall.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

No? Suppose there's a despicable fellow, who watches children undress, secretly rejoices every time there's a murder in the street, in his heart of hearts he wants to be a serial killer/rapist, but just doesn't have the courage to even hold a knife, much less use it. Paladin walks into the bar, detects evil and lops his head off, even though he's broken no law.

In MY games, he'd no longer be a paladin.

Paladins are the arbiters of justice, invested with that power by the gods, and they're expected to use it to further the cause of good.

If I tell him, as the DM, that despicable fellow radiates evil-- well, what should I expect to happen?

That's not to say there might not be worldly repercussions for the paladin-- it depends on whether or not the locals view paladins as legitimate authority or not-- but he certainly wouldn't fall out of favor with his god, for goodness sake.

The gods don't give the paladin the ability to detect evil in order to force them into moral dilemmas and trick them into falling from grace.

As far as I am concerned, detect evil is the gods' way of saying, "Needs killin'."

If that's not the message they want to send, then I (as the DM) don't send it.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I agree. Mind you this is from a guy that is currently playing a character that has taken a vow to never inflict lethal damage.

I hope you don't get more than a half share of loot.

I make the character as a personal challange. My 3.0 Cleric/Bard is the best warrior of the group. I take down more creatures than anyone else. Granted I built my character to be a spellcaster first and a trip specialist and and my spells had little use until recently. I have earned my keep. And I have yet to inflict a single point of lethal damage.

Killing is overrated.

 

[Remus Lupin]

Paladins are the arbiters of justice, invested with that power by the gods, and they're expected to use it to further the cause of good.

If I tell him, as the DM, that despicable fellow radiates evil-- well, what should I expect to happen?

That's not to say there might not be worldly repercussions for the paladin-- it depends on whether or not the locals view paladins as legitimate authority or not-- but he certainly wouldn't fall out of favor with his god, for goodness sake.

The gods don't give the paladin the ability to detect evil in order to force them into moral dilemmas and trick them into falling from grace.

As far as I am concerned, detect evil is the gods' way of saying, "Needs killin'."

If that's not the message they want to send, then I (as the DM) don't send it.

But Paladins are also the representatives of law. Now, a lot has to do with how this all plays out in your campaign world. But if your world has systems of due process and "innocent-til-proved-guilty" [of a crime, rather than just of being evil], then the Paladin as a lawful person ought to take the matter before the magistrate (even those "Roman Citizens" referred to above got to do that, ask the Apostle Paul, who got to appeal all the way to the Emperor).

However, if the Paladins are designated as the enforcers of righteousness (say, in a theocracy), and/or if simply BEING evil is punishable by death in your world, then the Paladin may not only be authorized but obligated to do the head-lopping.

For me, as GM or player, I'm far more comfortable with the idea of due process and people being punished for what they DO rather than what they ARE (even if what the *are* is EVIL), and I'd play a Paladin that way. If it's anachronistic, so be it. It's my character and/or my campaign.