Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 304378" data-attributes="member: 5834">Re"Without a civilized legal code with which to guide their judgements, they often default to a doctrine roughly equivalent to 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth'." (Again, clearly the Bandit Kingdoms don't have an established legal code, so this default would have applied).Tyrran's would never have done what this Paladin did. They still follow the law of Tyr which is righteous and just. It may be an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, but that doesn't mean the dead don't receive decent burial and a trial. He is supposed to help civilize such lands, not do whatever act of vengeance he wishes because no law exists.Tyr's followers may carry out revenge, but they don't engage in mass slaughter and the cover it up by disintegrating the bodies. I just will never see why a Paladin of retribution would hide his act of vengeance behind such veils.Why didn't the church demand open retribution? Would not the church have sent a stronger message if the Paladin had killed the bandits openly? The bandits would have then known that to strike at the followers of this church invited war with the church and its followers. I am sure from now on bandits from that area will avoid tents.Also, think of this scenario. The Chaotic Evil church finds out what the Paladin has done. This church decides to have one of its knights dress up as a knight of this church and then goes to another area and does the same thing except instead of bandits, it executes simple criminals in some village. The knight and priests use a zone of truth to determine if the villagers have committed some crime, then if sentences them to death if bad enough or just some other form of punishment like cutting a hand off for stealing or a whipping for some other transgression. It doees this all in the name of the Paladin's church using what happened to the bandits as fuel to the fire of paranoia. It does it all in a tent veiled in silence spells with an illusionary trial court.The DM could easily use this against the Paladin. As I said before, what he did is something an evil church would have no trouble undertaking. Why? Because the way he carried out vengeance was rather evil.I ask once again. What would you think of  a justicator who killed a bunch of criminals in one on one combat without a real trial and then disintegrated their bodies? I mean think in terms of your own character. How he or she would feel about an organization that would condone such an act.</blockquote>

Verification