Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567891011121314 LastLast
Results 361 to 390 of 396
  1. - Top - End - #361
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Foeofthelance View Post
    It has been said before that the gods are off busy doing Godly things, or are otherwise incapable of interfering. Which is the entire reason the characters are there. Deus Ex Machina is a tool of the DM, not a weapon for the player.
    I find it really odd the gods don't view the destruction of the world worth their time.

    Explaining what I would do IF the Paladin falls is not the same thing as saying the Paladin SHOULD fall. I answered two seperate questions. The first question was which course of action I would take. I said slay the child and then continued explaining what I would do given a certain set of circumstances. It was then raised whether the Paladin should fall, and I said no. Please do not use my answer from the first as my answer to the second.
    I didn't intent to. My point was you stated what you would do if you fell. Now the paladin will fall for commiting evil, and you stated a perfectly good thing to do afterwards. What is wrong with that?


    Quote:
    Let me use a (less severe) real world example:

    I am crossing the street, and am hit by a car. Well, whose fault is it?

    Did I look both ways or was I ignoring traffic?
    Was the light in my favor or his?
    Was the driver drunk, speeding, or driving in any other dangerous manner?
    Dude, this is an absurd example. Really quite absurd.
    1. No real relevence
    2. Who fault it is in debeatable depending on details so i can't tell in this example. But apperenly i have barely enough details about the demon summoning to know that the paladin ought to fall for falling his duty, killing the baby thus commiting an evil act
    (Emphasis Mine)
    you migth want to really quote this, or it would look like you wrote it.


    The example you assumed was absurd was rhetorical in nature. It is not meant to be determined who is at fault, but merely to be used as example for my second paragraph. The point was that looking at only one piece of information when making a decision is not generally a wise course of action.
    rhetorical or not, it is quite irrelevant

    Nobody is trying to weasel out of anything. We are merely arguing that taken in the context of the situation it is not sufficient cause for the paladin to fall. I will agree with you that ends does not always justify the means, and that the Paladin should not use that as an everyday philosophy. I do, however, believe that there are times when the ends do justify the means, and that this is one of them.
    Wait, i think we have a flip flopping here.
    You are trying to weasel out of the paladin falling. Just have him fall and atone. Ain't that hard.
    I will agree with you that ends does not always justify the means
    I do, however, believe that there are times when the ends do justify the means, and that this is one of them.
    Ok, so the paladin can commit evil when he can't find a good option. Right...................
    from,
    EE

  2. - Top - End - #362
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Foeofthelance's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    I find it really odd the gods don't view the destruction of the world worth their time.
    Not really. Quite often gods are forbidden from interfering too directly in the mortal realms, as such actions tend to cause Really Bad Things to happen. Which is why they have clerics, paladins, and worshippers in general to take care of things for them.

    Wait, i think we have a flip flopping here.
    There was no flip-flopping. My statement was that it does not means Always justify the ends, but that there are times that it does. I also said that in this case I believe they did, which has been what I have been saying all along.

    Ok, so the paladin can commit evil when he can't find a good option. Right...................
    No, the Paladin can not do evil when he can't find a good option. But he can look for a neutral option, as well as take the lesser of two evils when prevented with two choices. There is a difference there.
    Basilisk 6
    Pilot of the Thing

    I'm not evil. My morals just aren't the same as society's.

    On a one man quest to beat the Star Wars Universe, using nothing but simple, plain, ordinary logic. Score so far: Me 593 SWU 450


  3. - Top - End - #363
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Foeofthelance View Post
    Not really. Quite often gods are forbidden from interfering too directly in the mortal realms, as such actions tend to cause Really Bad Things to happen. Which is why they have clerics, paladins, and worshippers in general to take care of things for them.
    Not in GreyHawk, default champain, not in FR, nor most of the more normal champains. Ebberon maybe, but the gods still exist and would be willing to pervent the lose of the universe. Also even if the gods can't do anything directly, why aren't their more people sent. Like a celestrail.


    There was no flip-flopping. My statement was that it does not means Always justify the ends, but that there are times that it does. I also said that in this case I believe they did, which has been what I have been saying all along.
    But when do you draw the line? What stops you from becoming Kore?
    No, the Paladin can not do evil when he can't find a good option. But he can look for a neutral option, as well as take the lesser of two evils when prevented with two choices. There is a difference there.
    Taking the lesser of two evils is still commiting evil. Hence he falls. Also where does it say killing an innocent is a neutral option. It is an evil option, just neutral people can sometimes do it. Anyways, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
    from,
    EE

  4. - Top - End - #364
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Foeofthelance's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Not in GreyHawk, default campaign, not in FR, nor most of the more normal campaigns. Ebberon maybe, but the gods still exist and would be willing to prevent the lose of the universe. Also even if the gods can't do anything directly, why aren't their more people sent. Like a celestrail.
    At that point, why bother playing the game? The entire point is for the players to overcome problems. Counting on the DM to give you a Divine out to every problem you object to doesn't work.

    But when do you draw the line? What stops you from becoming Kore?
    Now that is an interesting question, and a rather personal one, which means my reply to it will be entirely opinion. Nonetheless I think it a fair one. Kore, (and I assume you mean the dwarven paladin from the Goblins comic) suffers from the same view of total evil that Miko seems to suffer from. He even executes a small dwarven child simply because the boy had the misfortune to be adopted by an ogre of unknown alignment. (As far as I know Kore never actually uses Detect Evil on either of them.)

    Myself, I draw the line quite bit far back. In my view a Paladin should do the right thing when balancing the line between good and law. As i stated earlier, my ideal would be some one like Bahzell Bahnahkson, from David Weber's Sword Gods books. I would have no problem stabbing an enemy in the back, if I knew or believed that such an enemy posed too great a threat for me to deal with 'honorably', especially when my goal is to protect those who would be endangered by his survival. If a BBEG took a small child hostage I would seek to delay until the child could be rescued by one of my party members, but if that same child was destined to destroy the world in hellish apocalypse I would not hesitate to destroy it. For me, the ideals are ranked Right, Good, Honor, Law in that order. My honor should be above the law (though that has more of a military aspect to it, as it has more to do with obeying orders then the law), but my honor does not come before the greater good. Most importantly I shoudl always try to do the right thing by the greatest number of people. But remember, that is all opinion.
    Basilisk 6
    Pilot of the Thing

    I'm not evil. My morals just aren't the same as society's.

    On a one man quest to beat the Star Wars Universe, using nothing but simple, plain, ordinary logic. Score so far: Me 593 SWU 450


  5. - Top - End - #365
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kreistor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    K-W, Canada

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    His action is "Walking into villlage and knowingly infecting population.
    Infecting the population is not an action. It is something that occurs, but not something he does.

    dictionary.com
    Action: an act that one consciously wills and that may be characterized by physical or mental activity

    What physical or mental activity does the soldier perform in order to infect the village? Nothing. He stands there. That is not an action. He is inactive. The virus is spreading from him without his performing any action. He is just infected, something he couldn't control in the first place.

    But, I can work with your answer anyway.

    You used the word "knowingly". That means he knows that he is infecting others. That means he is trying to kill with the virus.

    That means the intent to kill is also required in order to make the act of killing potentially evil. Without the intent to kill, he's not doing evil.

    So, have you retracted your previous statement that Intent is not part of the determination of whether an act is good or evil?

    Quote Originally Posted by EE
    morals are judged by actions, not by intent.
    Or would you like to retain your previous statement about intent and morality?

  6. - Top - End - #366
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bikini team land
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Riding my horse at full canter: neutral.
    Riding my horse at full canter through a crowd of children: evil.

    I didn't kill the kids. All I did was ride. But that they would die from my action was a directly forseeable consequence.

    The same holds with lancing a dummy with or without knowing that someone had stashed a kid inside (hmm, those kids do get around). And the exact same holds with walking into a village while knowingly infected by a virus. You can foresee what consequences your action will have, and that defines what kind of action it is - good, evil or in between.

    For the kid on the altar, you can foresee that killing it will directly result in a dead, innocent kid. Hence evil. That the alternative was worse isn't a factor - that still doesn't change the fact that the world is short one child as a direct, foreseeable consequence of your action.

  7. - Top - End - #367
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Foeofthelance View Post
    At that point, why bother playing the game? The entire point is for the players to overcome problems. Counting on the DM to give you a Divine out to every problem you object to doesn't work.
    Watch yourself, your backsliding. On the same note, why bother play the game when i only have two choices with not good option? Because there always will be a good option short of railroading, and no body likes being railroaded

    Now that is an interesting question, and a rather personal one, which means my reply to it will be entirely opinion. Nonetheless I think it a fair one. Kore, (and I assume you mean the dwarven paladin from the Goblins comic) suffers from the same view of total evil that Miko seems to suffer from. He even executes a small dwarven child simply because the boy had the misfortune to be adopted by an ogre of unknown alignment. (As far as I know Kore never actually uses Detect Evil on either of them.)
    You right, Kore never uses Detect Evil on his victiom, he does not care
    "All evil, even potientail evil must be eleminated"
    But because morals are not relative in D&D, that idea does not work. I would point out, that while the moral in question may belieave the ends justify the means, that does not make it so. Good and evil are very real powers in D&D and they care about the means and the ends. Or at least good does.
    Myself, I draw the line quite bit far back. In my view a Paladin should do the right thing when balancing the line between good and law. As i stated earlier, my ideal would be some one like Bahzell Bahnahkson, from David Weber's Sword Gods books. I would have no problem stabbing an enemy in the back, if I knew or believed that such an enemy posed too great a threat for me to deal with 'honorably', especially when my goal is to protect those who would be endangered by his survival. If a BBEG took a small child hostage I would seek to delay until the child could be rescued by one of my party members, but if that same child was destined to destroy the world in hellish apocalypse I would not hesitate to destroy it. For me, the ideals are ranked Right, Good, Honor, Law in that order. My honor should be above the law (though that has more of a military aspect to it, as it has more to do with obeying orders then the law), but my honor does not come before the greater good. Most importantly I shoudl always try to do the right thing by the greatest number of people. But remember, that is all opinion.
    Ok, you have fun with that, but you forget something.
    This view does not fit the paladin class following the concept that good and evil are very real forces
    If you don't use the D&D aligment system, this would be far more suited to you, or if you just made a LN paladin. If in your games, there are not aligments then sure you are good. By all means have fun. but that does not work by the idea of "Morals are not relative". Maybe you can make your own aligment system that differns or follow a LN ideal. Maybe LG fighter
    Infecting the population is not an action. It is something that occurs, but not something he does.

    dictionary.com
    Action: an act that one consciously wills and that may be characterized by physical or mental activity

    What physical or mental activity does the soldier perform in order to infect the village? Nothing. He stands there. That is not an action. He is inactive. The virus is spreading from him without his performing any action. He is just infected, something he couldn't control in the first place.
    That is like saying my shooting a gun in your direction is just me shooting a gun, nothing inheritly evil about that. Then the bullet hitting you and killing you is not murder, but an acidient. Just no.
    But, I can work with your answer anyway.

    You used the word "knowingly". That means he knows that he is infecting others. That means he is trying to kill with the virus.

    That means the intent to kill is also required in order to make the act of killing potentially evil. Without the intent to kill, he's not doing evil.
    Wrong because he is activly infecting the poplutation. It is like Pocket Lint's example.
    Or would you like to retain your previous statement about intent and morality?
    I've always said action count for more. Take an example made by somebody else
    If a hermit sits in a cave and thinks about killing people, does that make him evil?
    No, because he is not doing anything
    If he gets a chance to kill somebody and gets away with it but does not, then no he is not evil. Not good but not very evil
    Neutral only needs ether intent or action
    The hermit only has intent, so i'd say he is neutral
    A LN person who kills the kid has only the action, but has the intent as well could stay neutral because it is a greater good thing, but not keep up that ideal for long
    A evil person needs intent or action
    A CE person who saves the life of a kid for a selfish reason is still evil, evil intent
    A LE person who murders a political rival for the "Good of the country" is still evil, evil action
    A good person need good intent AND good action, but action makes the decision
    Action is more important, because a CE person who does nothing but act like a LG person will eventually need to do something to keep him CE. Eventually he would ether become LE, LN or even LG
    from,
    EE

    from
    EE
    Last edited by EvilElitest; 2007-04-08 at 03:09 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #368
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilElitest View Post
    Not in GreyHawk, default champain, not in FR, nor most of the more normal champains. Ebberon maybe, but the gods still exist and would be willing to pervent the lose of the universe. Also even if the gods can't do anything directly, why aren't their more people sent. Like a celestrail.
    That goes both ways. Maybe Torm can't just appear because Bane is trying to prevent it.

  9. - Top - End - #369
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Felius View Post
    That goes both ways. Maybe Torm can't just appear because Bane is trying to prevent it.
    But if this demon woule want to destroy all the gods, then they would work toegeher to stop the threat
    from,
    EE

  10. - Top - End - #370
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Jayabalard's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
    This is what I was originally referring to.



    "Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit." was the helpful quote you presented. Though it's not a quote from PHB, as far as I can tell...

    In any case, the logical statement form of this sentence {evil -> (debase or destroy innocent life for fun or profit)} cannot possibly be used to prove that someone must be evil. If it's actually in the rules, it can only prove that someone isn't evil.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
    This is what I was originally referring to.



    "Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit." was the helpful quote you presented. Though it's not a quote from PHB, as far as I can tell...

    In any case, the logical statement form of this sentence {evil -> (debase or destroy innocent life for fun or profit)} cannot possibly be used to prove that someone must be evil. If it's actually in the rules, it can only prove that someone isn't evil.
    the quote is from the SRD; under the Good and Evil heading: first line, second sentence.

    assumption: if the SRD says that an evil character does something, then it's giving an example of an evil act. I didn't state this but thought it was obvious enough to not state explicitly.

    "debasing or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit is an evil act" by that assumption

    "killing innocent for fun and profitable is an evil act." is the contrapositive of the above statement.

    "killing innocent for the greater good is therefore an evil act." substitution of the "he greater good" for "fun and profitable" in the contrapositive. I think I listed that as an assumption in that first post.

    No converse was used in that series of statements.

  11. - Top - End - #371
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Jayabalard's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Foeofthelance View Post
    I do, however, believe that there are times when the ends do justify the means, and that this is one of them.
    Well, then there's not all that much more to discuss, since we've identified the fundamental disagreement; there should probably be more discussion specifically on that rather than getting off on tangential cases.
    Last edited by Jayabalard; 2007-04-09 at 02:17 PM.

  12. - Top - End - #372
    Orc in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Pocket lint View Post
    For the kid on the altar, you can foresee that killing it will directly result in a dead, innocent kid. Hence evil. That the alternative was worse isn't a factor - that still doesn't change the fact that the world is short one child as a direct, foreseeable consequence of your action.
    And that is my problem with the original premise... A Paladin, especially one faced with the possibility of squaring off with a demon powerful enough to challenge the entirety of the planet - has the resources to atone for the action of slaying a child - and starting that atonement with resurrecting the child. Heck, said paladin would most likely be able to True Resurrect the child, so the youngling won't face a life of suffering by being depleted of Constitution.


    This is also a really good reason to include something like Fax's paladin - where the Code of Conduct is built around the abilities the paladin wants to espouse (or vice versa). With his build, even a LG paladin could be able to play morally ambiguant in regards to loss of innocent life in this exact scenario.

    At any rate - it is ultimately up to the DM to determine if any action or inaction, willful or coerced is sufficient to make a Paladin fall. Every DM is different, every Paladin player is different. Debating to absolutes is an extreme waste of time. Each situation needs to be looked at in whole - from each players perspective - and judged on it's own merit. To do otherwise, results in what we've seen on these boards. 34095890093489209094 opinions and 0 concensus.

    Theo
    What... ya mean me ale\'s all whacky?

  13. - Top - End - #373
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    And that is my problem with the original premise... A Paladin, especially one faced with the possibility of squaring off with a demon powerful enough to challenge the entirety of the planet - has the resources to atone for the action of slaying a child - and starting that atonement with resurrecting the child. Heck, said paladin would most likely be able to True Resurrect the child, so the youngling won't face a life of suffering by being depleted of Constitution.


    This is also a really good reason to include something like Fax's paladin - where the Code of Conduct is built around the abilities the paladin wants to espouse (or vice versa). With his build, even a LG paladin could be able to play morally ambiguant in regards to loss of innocent life in this exact scenario.

    At any rate - it is ultimately up to the DM to determine if any action or inaction, willful or coerced is sufficient to make a Paladin fall. Every DM is different, every Paladin player is different. Debating to absolutes is an extreme waste of time. Each situation needs to be looked at in whole - from each players perspective - and judged on it's own merit. To do otherwise, results in what we've seen on these boards. 34095890093489209094 opinions and 0 concensus.

    Theo
    Well, if we are following the D&D standards, then yes the paladin falls
    If somebody like the DM has a homebrew or is following their own rules, different story.
    from,
    EE

  14. - Top - End - #374
    Orc in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    see... I don't see it that way:


    "Code of Conduct:
    A paladin must be of lawful good alignment

    and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act."


    Being forced to commit an evil act is not being willing. The Paladin didn't wake up one morning and say 'gee, I think I'll go slaughter an innocent child for fun today'. No, they woke up to an evil sorcerer who has summoned a demon who will possess the child, and it (the demon) is basically taunting the paladin to kill the child or kill the world. That isn't a willing choice - either way. The Paladin certainly doesn't want to do either, but inaction will create the greater ill. So, the Paladin unwillingly slays the child, retains their Paladinhood and saves the world from unending torment and destruction.

    Pretty clear to me.

    Last edited by Theodoxus; 2007-04-10 at 09:52 PM.
    What... ya mean me ale\'s all whacky?

  15. - Top - End - #375
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    see... I don't see it that way:


    "Code of Conduct:
    A paladin must be of lawful good alignment

    and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act."


    Being forced to commit an evil act is not being willing. The Paladin didn't wake up one morning and say 'gee, I think I'll go slaughter an innocent child for fun today'. No, they woke up to an evil sorcerer who has summoned a demon who will possess the child, and it (the demon) is basically taunting the paladin to kill the child or kill the world. That isn't a willing choice - either way. The Paladin certainly doesn't want to do either, but inaction will create the greater ill. So, the Paladin unwillingly slays the child, retains their Paladinhood and saves the world from unending torment and destruction.

    Pretty clear to me.

    Except killing a baby who has done nothing wrong is an evil act. Sure if this guy is willling to fall then fine, but you can't justify it with greater good
    from,
    EE

  16. - Top - End - #376
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Darkxarth's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    In the land of Ten-Thousand Puns!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    see... I don't see it that way:


    "Code of Conduct:
    A paladin must be of lawful good alignment

    and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act."


    Being forced to commit an evil act is not being willing. The Paladin didn't wake up one morning and say 'gee, I think I'll go slaughter an innocent child for fun today'. No, they woke up to an evil sorcerer who has summoned a demon who will possess the child, and it (the demon) is basically taunting the paladin to kill the child or kill the world. That isn't a willing choice - either way. The Paladin certainly doesn't want to do either, but inaction will create the greater ill. So, the Paladin unwillingly slays the child, retains their Paladinhood and saves the world from unending torment and destruction.

    Pretty clear to me.

    I'm pretty sure the 'unwilling' part refers to whether it was on accident or on purpose. The Paladin, by his own free will, killed a baby. Maybe he felt like he was 'forced' to, but he wasn't actually physically (or magically) forced to kill said innocent baby.
    Working on a campaign world or adventure and need feedback?
    Check out this site.

    Truth

    Quote Originally Posted by Talya
    Anyone casting a ninth level spell should not be just bending the fabric of reality, but chewing up the fabric of reality and spitting it out. It represents an expenditure of raw magical force that should be momentous, and should have similar shock value as the events following Grand Moff Tarkin's "You may fire when ready."

  17. - Top - End - #377
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    see... I don't see it that way:


    "Code of Conduct:
    A paladin must be of lawful good alignment

    and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act."


    Being forced to commit an evil act is not being willing. The Paladin didn't wake up one morning and say 'gee, I think I'll go slaughter an innocent child for fun today'. No, they woke up to an evil sorcerer who has summoned a demon who will possess the child, and it (the demon) is basically taunting the paladin to kill the child or kill the world. That isn't a willing choice - either way. The Paladin certainly doesn't want to do either, but inaction will create the greater ill. So, the Paladin unwillingly slays the child, retains their Paladinhood and saves the world from unending torment and destruction.

    Pretty clear to me.

    Then the Paladin is failing in their obligation to look at the larger picture of "least harm." For one, Demons do sometimes lie. What if killing the child actually destroys the world: Should the Paladin fall then, for being dumb and believing what the demon said?

    No matter how you word it if the paladin is in control of themselves and they intentionally inflict harm on an innocent (not by accident, by choice) then it's a willing evil act and they fall. The "willing" part is only supposed to protect a Paladin in cases where they are magically compelled or manipulated in some way, not from choices they feel "forced" to make of their own volition. Miko felt that she had no choice but to kill Lord Shojo, an evil traitor to Azure city and the Sapphire Guard. She fell because she slaughtered an innocent old man, even though she thought she was saving her world.

  18. - Top - End - #378
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Peregrine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Western Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Here's how I see it: This kind of no-win situation should not arise. If it does, it is purely by the will of the DM. Whether you believe such a thing happens in the real world or not, in the game world, it is utterly up to the control of the DM. If the DM has not intended a no-win, but 'that's just what the story dictated', either the player or the DM (or both) has failed of imagination, at least briefly.

    The game world has paladins. They are granted special powers, by a god or gods, in order to uphold Good in a Lawful way. A paladin is expected to do this, even if they believe that a less Lawful way is more expedient. They are required to have faith that the gods know what they're doing when they lay down these laws. This requires that, in this game world, the good gods do know what they're doing and the laws they lay down really do lead to the best solution. (That is, this is necessary, unless you are deliberately playing a 'dark' style of game. Making your good gods do dumb things will lead to a dark game -- you've made it so that the greatest-by-definition of Good is not enough, so sooner or later your players will have to be un-Good to be 'right'.)

    This does not mean that the gods will always show up in a blaze of deus ex machina to save the day. This does mean that there is always a way out. Start with this basic assumption that the paladin's god will have a way, and let your imagination run loose for a bit. Like this:

    So the child is the gateway through which Ultimate Evil will be unleashed upon the world, but killing him will prevent that. What does the paladin do? Stab the child with his sword? No. The paladin puts his sword down, takes the child into his arms, kneels, and prays. He prays for his god to protect the child and save him from this evil. He prays that, if the child simply must die, that his god will reach down and gently take the child's life, without pain or fear or violence (after all, all lives are in the hands of the gods, to take when their time is up).

    Is this deus ex machina? Is this not a good story? Is this not good roleplaying?

    What obstacles to such a solution can be thrown up? Dark cultists fighting back? Well, if you're forcing the paladin to be the one to do the killing, he's probably at arm's reach from the child anyway. He can get the child away, or he can kill the cultists first, or he can just take an even bigger leap of faith, trust his friends to protect him and the child, and kneel in prayer right there in the midst of battle.

    Evil gods keeping the paladin's god from interfering? Now you're risking going over the line into 'dark game'. But let's look at it. The paladin has his divinely granted powers, even there in that place, so his god is not completely unable to act. Maybe his god can't act that directly, whisking the child's soul away, but the paladin should be able to suddenly find himself the conduit for just the right power to do the trick. Imagine something suitable. Maybe the child falls asleep in his arms and gently stops breathing, a smile on his face.

    This is a game. If you make the paladin stab the child, everybody loses.
    I support paladins and the alignment system.

    My Homebrew Gaming Stuff (not updated lately) - My Campaign (ended)
    Homebrew licence:
    Spoiler
    Show
    All my homebrew stuff is released under the Open Game License, except where based on non-OGC work or otherwise stated. For Section 15:

    <name of homebrew here> Copyright <year first posted>, T. Pederick

  19. - Top - End - #379
    Orc in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    WTFPWN'd by a true Paladin. Peregrine, that is by far the best description of what a Paladin should endeavor to do... it's too bad that most people (myself included) tend to see them as Jedi, forever fighting first, asking questions later - instead of simply being a vessel of a higher power and knowing without seeing that all will be ok.

    Of course, the demon will still slaughter the praying Paladin and take the child anyway - because we all know the gods don't exist... but the Paladin would never be in fear of falling, and would get to spend eternity dancing in Vahalla, or somesuch.
    What... ya mean me ale\'s all whacky?

  20. - Top - End - #380
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    WTFPWN'd by a true Paladin. Peregrine, that is by far the best description of what a Paladin should endeavor to do... it's too bad that most people (myself included) tend to see them as Jedi, forever fighting first, asking questions later - instead of simply being a vessel of a higher power and knowing without seeing that all will be ok.

    Of course, the demon will still slaughter the praying Paladin and take the child anyway - because we all know the gods don't exist... but the Paladin would never be in fear of falling, and would get to spend eternity dancing in Vahalla, or somesuch.
    Dude, you deserve some credit for manners here
    You admited that you see paladin's as jedi and went along with peregrine's disrciption.
    I think you deserve a round of appulse (clap)
    Thank you very much
    from,
    EE
    p.s. The gods could answer the paladin.

  21. - Top - End - #381
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anywhere the wind blows..
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    @Peregrine:

    Fantastic. *applauds* Haven't looked at this thread for a while and skipped to the last page, but I think this is the best post I've seen on the subject.
    Asymmetrically shod ass-kicker of the fan club

    Nice Guys: Read this.

    Quotes:
    Spoiler
    Show
    "Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest."

    -Mark Twain

    "Courage is not merely one of the virtues; rather, it is the form of every virtue at its testing point."

    -C.S. Lewis

  22. - Top - End - #382
    Banned
     
    EvilElitest's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oh gods i wish i knew
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    So it a wrap then?
    from,
    EE

  23. - Top - End - #383
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    psychoticbarber's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Windsor ON, Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    This may have been covered, but I didn't have time to read the whole thread.

    My Paladin would kill the child, fall, and become a bitter atheistic fighter. The point of RPG is to create a story, and sometimes in stories bad things happen to good people. It's quite possible (even likely, if I were DMing this hypothetical) that the character may slowly return to the path of good, drawn by the screams of the innocents, or the ghost of a child, to once again pick up his sword to save the day.

    The dualistic nature of the decision is crappy. Personally, I'd hate it, but sometimes it's interesting to see how a character will react to the situation. Sometimes it's interesting to see how a good character will react to being "forced" (let's face it, the "DM"'s choice was probably presented by the Demon, used as a front to cause the Paladin to fall.) to do evil.

    My Paladins would probably have a hard time believing in God or the Gods after being forced to make a choice like that, but that doesn't mean the character would cease to exist, or that the character wouldn't ever do anything meaningful again.

    This is *extremely* hard for most players (and in all likelihood I am included) to accept. If the player doesn't like what the character becomes, the player has the choice to try a new character (I would introduce the atheistic fighter into a new campaign, giving him the chance to atone and rise again).

    Forgive me for rambling, but my point is this: D&D is a game about choices. Sometimes the choices are hard, and none of the answers seem sufficient. But D&D is also a game about roleplaying, and difficult choices bring out emotional responses which make the roleplaying all the more heartfelt. The Paladin isn't real: The roleplaying is what matters.

    [Note: It was 4am (local) when I wrote this. Please forgive the rambling nature of the comment]

    Edit: I'm leaving this up because I see it as another possible interesting alternative, but I must point out the wonderful post by Peregrine. This is what Paladins should be made of (and this is why I don't normally play them). "Knowing without seeing that all will be well" (Or something like that, it's late).

    You have my respect and admiration.
    Last edited by psychoticbarber; 2007-04-20 at 03:02 AM. Reason: I saw something after I posted that I needed to respond to.

  24. - Top - End - #384
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Starbuck_II's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Gender
    Male

    frown Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by psychoticbarber View Post
    This may have been covered, but I didn't have time to read the whole thread.

    My Paladin would kill the child, fall, and become a bitter atheistic fighter. The point of RPG is to create a story, and sometimes in stories bad things happen to good people. It's quite possible (even likely, if I were DMing this hypothetical) that the character may slowly return to the path of good, drawn by the screams of the innocents, or the ghost of a child, to once again pick up his sword to save the day.
    \
    Sorry, not gonna happen. If you make him fall he does'nt unfall till atonemrnt spell.
    If you make him not fall, but feel horrible and become a bitter "atheistic fighter" (well paladin). Now you have your story.

    The only way to get the story you want is not fall the Paladin. Just have become a bitter atheist.
    This is *extremely* hard for most players (and in all likelihood I am included) to accept. If the player doesn't like what the character becomes, the player has the choice to try a new character (I would introduce the atheistic fighter into a new campaign, giving him the chance to atone and rise again).
    You can't atone without atonement...

  25. - Top - End - #385
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2007

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    You know, in this entire "paladin" debate on the various threads, I still would like a clear answer as to why paladins have their code yet priests pretty much can do as they please.

    How is that Durkon, a LG priest of Thor (a god not known for being chummy with rogues/thieves and scoundrels) can get away with being in the OotS' party yet most paladins are seriously screwed.

    WTF?

  26. - Top - End - #386
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    psychoticbarber's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Windsor ON, Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck_II View Post
    \
    Sorry, not gonna happen. If you make him fall he does'nt unfall till atonemrnt spell.
    If you make him not fall, but feel horrible and become a bitter "atheistic fighter" (well paladin). Now you have your story.

    The only way to get the story you want is not fall the Paladin. Just have become a bitter atheist.

    You can't atone without atonement...
    Can I make something very clear? When I spoke about how the Paladin might atone, I was speaking in plot terms. The spell "Atonement" would obviously be included in atoning, as you said, it's a necessary component.

    And if the Paladin falls, and becomes an atheist, he's basically a fighter, because he doesn't get any of his Paladin goodies.

    Just because I didn't say anything about the spell doesn't mean I didn't know it was there.

  27. - Top - End - #387
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Matthew's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kanagawa, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    An Atheist?
    It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

    – Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)

  28. - Top - End - #388
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Demented's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    In search of cheese

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    It's not a Base Class, if that's what you're asking.

    Or maybe it is.

    Dun-dun-DUNNNNN!
    Belkar's Bad to the Bone.
    Dispossible a fetter hein and bemay kine a sinder's tock.

  29. - Top - End - #389
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Matthew's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kanagawa, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    That would be cool. Such a Base Class should get the power to deny the effects of Divine Magic through sheer none belief.
    It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

    – Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)

  30. - Top - End - #390
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Paladins and morality

    Quote Originally Posted by AllisterH View Post
    You know, in this entire "paladin" debate on the various threads, I still would like a clear answer as to why paladins have their code yet priests pretty much can do as they please.

    How is that Durkon, a LG priest of Thor (a god not known for being chummy with rogues/thieves and scoundrels) can get away with being in the OotS' party yet most paladins are seriously screwed.

    WTF?
    IMO?

    Because the idea of Paladinhood is rooted in the ideals of chivarious knighthood first and foremost?

    Clerics are servants of their Gods first and foremost: Whatever their god commands they *do* and no Code constrains them from that. Paladins are servants of their Code of Conduct and Lawful Goodness first, and obey their respective Gods secondly. You don't even need a God to be a Paladin in most settings.

    Thor doesn't mind baudy companions (which is good because that's the entire Norse pantheon more or less), so Durkon is fine with the sometimes shady friends he makes. Clerics who displease their respective God(s) lose their powers. Paladins who defy their Code face similar penalties.

    It's why I kinda disagreed with OotS's portrayal of the Twelve Gods stripping Miko of her powers. She lost her powers for defying her Code, not for defying her Gods and the way it's shown confuses the two. But it's Rich's world and I still love to read it!
    Last edited by Tokiko Mima; 2007-04-20 at 10:24 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •