Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 3973486" data-attributes="member: 32740">Depends on the circumstances.  I kill someone.  Is that good, neutral or evil?  I kill someone to preserve national security.  Is that good, neutral or evil?  I kill a comrade in arms, who volunteered as a SOLDIER, in the heat of battle, from a distance, as he is being tortured by our enemies when I know they have learned that he holds the secret to our code and can divulge it all that very moment.  Is that good, neutral, or evil?Actions dictate alignment.  At the time of accepting the mission there would have to be some rather more notably and inexcusably nefarious machinations taking place before the paladin would,A) be considered to have committed an evil actB) otherwise have lost his paladin statusAs is often the case in such situational ethics examples the area where things will likely turn is that of "a paladin tells the truth".  Interpretation of that maxim is VARIABLE regarding just how pathological the paladin is regarding the truth, or rather how pathological he is EXPECTED to be regarding the truth.  And, as always, the paladin WILL KNOW the answer to whether or not he MUST act in a given way.  Some interpretations would have the paladin able to lie, cheat, and steal as a military necessity.  Some interpretations would have the paladin forced to reveal his true mission to the codetalker only if no other answer could be given without lying.  Yet other interpretations would have the paladin forced not only to refuse the mission (excepting perhaps if the codetalker was fully informed) but to then inform the codetalker REGARDLESS, and possibly take further action to bring the whole project to an end as being unacceptable in the paladins view.As noted, it depends on specifics of how the DM interprets the paladins code, what additional specifics the paladin may have taken an oath for, and additional specifics of the situation at the time.  As a rule, however, and again as noted, the paladin IS NOT IGNORANT OF HIS COMMITMENT.  If the paladin does not know the answer (as can be asked of, and verified by the DM) then the paladin is NOT in danger of falling, nor indeed of even temporary loss of abilities and atonement should he accept the mission and/or follow through with its worst-case commitment.If the DM knows what is right and wrong for the paladin to do then the PLAYER must also know by default and thus the CHARACTER.  Paladin PC's CANNOT endanger their status except by WILLFUL disregard of what they know to be correct behavior or dangerous flirtation with borderline behavior, and even then atonement is possible for non-evil acts.  And given the general circumstances I see nothing overtly evil about the paladins commitment to the mission nor carrying it out.  Possibly not-as-LG-as-preferred but nothing evil and thus nothing that couldn't at least be atoned for should circumstances warrant.</blockquote>

Verification