Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Shayde 12-04-06, 03:55 PM	I am a dm and I have my own homebrew, the specific question I have, and this is absolutely debateable is how does a Paladin interact with this situation without violating his code of conduct, because once I find some serious players (ones that won't ditch me for months at a time ) this will probably come up at some point. Most of the evil aligned countries allow, and even encourage slavery, are the following situations and responses too rigid as to make it impossible for a paladin to overcome without violating his code of conduct? I would like some solutions to these questions and opinions on these scenarios. 1) If the evil country is ruled legitimately (such as a centuries old dynasty or by appointed generals should the king be assassinated). then is a paladin obliged to obey all it's laws (which are normal for the most part except for slavery, which is done through raiding other countries as well as a punishment for criminals)? 2) When a Paladin encounters a slaver in a licensed market selling innocent people how can he\she react without violating her code of conduct. Killing the slaver to free his captives would be I think a good act but would also be incredibly stupid since the slavers' guards as well as the town millitia would be down his throat for murder, additionally most people in one contry own at least one slave, the paladin can't go killing everyone that owns a slave without being marked as a serial killer, how can the paladin resolve this. 3) Can a Paladin simply purchase a slave with the intent that he\she will free him\her at the first safest opportunity (i.e in a place where the captive would not simply be caught and sold again) without violating his\her code of conduct? In my opinion this would be a lawful act but is kind of grey on the good\evil side. I am asking this specifically because it is the easiest solution to the problem of a Paladin confronting a slaver in a kingdom that allows slavery.
Batshido 12-04-06, 04:09 PM	1) Evil Laws are still Evil. The lawful portion of the Paladin's code applies to his own personal actions, not to the laws of whatever country he's in. Think about it this way. A country has a law that says that you can't eat anything without first slaughtering a child and anointing yourself with it's blood. That law goes directly against the Paladin's code, so the character can (and SHOULD) break it. The same applies to court sponsored murder, slavery, etc. 2) There are several ways to go about this. I would work with your players to roleplay the party convincing the Paladin that an up front confrontation wouldn't solve anything. That a long term plan would be more effective than simply gutting the slaver on the spot. If they are convincing enough, let the Paladin stew about it and swear to come back and avenge these slaves. Or a less character oriented solution; the Paladin gets into a heated debate with the slaver and slugs him/her (with fists, non-lethal) and finds him or herself locked up in the village jail for the rest of their stay in this town, lamenting his ineffectiveness. 3) Purchasing a slave with the intent of freeing them is perfectly fine. I would stress to the player that steps should be taken to ensure the long-term freedom of the former slave, lest they be re-taken and your good works undone. That's how I'd play it. :)
Shayde 12-04-06, 04:30 PM	Thank you for your input Batshido I understand what you are saying and it makes sense, (and kind of agrees with what I was thinking) but I would like some other opinions as well please, perhaps some that have a completely different point of view, I just want to get some more complete input on this topic, which could spark a war in my game so that I can plan for such contingencies.
Treantmonklvl20 12-04-06, 04:32 PM	Since you haven't begun the campaign yet, I would consider defining the code of conduct "grey areas" yourself and explaining them to anyone considering a Paladin PC. That way the player has a bit of a more relevant guideline to follow before these situations come up. Keep in mind that your player will have mere seconds to decide what course of action is "right" while you are thinking about that same situation now over an extended time period. You will probably need to be flexible, as long as the player is showing some effort to "do the right thing". That said: 1) A Paladin would not be required to uphold a law they believe to be evil and unjust. As for respecting legitimate authority, one could argue that the Paladin might question the legitamacy of any evil governance, since their power is likely maintained through tyranny (use of slaves is certainly a form of tyranny). 2) A Paladin would not be forced by his code of conduct to immediately act in a suicidal manner. More likely the Paladin would be forced to ally himself with any good forces that might either supplant the evil rulers, or force the governance to modify its evil laws. Allying himself with a neighbouring kingdom that is enemies with this evil country would also be an option. 3) This does not sound like an evil action, and would certainly not be against the paladin code, though I would stress to the player that it probably will do no good, since the slaver will use that money to recruit another slave for sale.
Stormbrand 12-04-06, 04:33 PM	Respecting legitimate authority does always mean followin laws, it often means trying to change those laws, or working through proper channels rather than assassination or sword-point. 1) A paladin is obliged to obey all the just laws within a nation. Unjust laws such as slavery need not be obeyed. In fact, I would expect the paladin to try to do something about the law. 2) In such a context, killing slavers is fine, as is killing those who mistreat their slaves. Freeing slaves is all well and good within the paladin code, just not necessarily the most pragmatic thing to do. 3) Yes, it is not a gross violation of the code, although comes close to associating with evil since it is supporting the industry. A bad habit but generally not an affront to the code.
Ariath Ska'Vhor 12-04-06, 04:44 PM	In my opinion, if he bought the slave he would honestly tell the salver his intent of freeing it. But likely not tell him where he'll free him and if the slaver does not oblige he'll free them all by wounding or killing the slaver. All of this of course with the most noble intent.
Shayde 12-04-06, 04:59 PM	All good points, thank you and keep them coming.:D
FloppyLlama 12-04-06, 05:21 PM	In my opinion, if he bought the slave he would honestly tell the salver his intent of freeing it. But likely not tell him where he'll free him and if the slaver does not oblige he'll free them all by wounding or killing the slaver. All of this of course with the most noble intent. Why would he tell the slaver?
Grey_Mage 12-04-06, 05:22 PM	I am a dm and I have my own homebrew, the specific question I have, and this is absolutely debateable is how does a Paladin interact with this situation without violating his code of conduct, because once I find some serious players (ones that won't ditch me for months at a time ) this will probably come up at some point. Most of the evil aligned countries allow, and even encourage slavery, are the following situations and responses too rigid as to make it impossible for a paladin to overcome without violating his code of conduct? I would like some solutions to these questions and opinions on these scenarios. 1) If the evil country is ruled legitimately (such as a centuries old dynasty or by appointed generals should the king be assassinated). then is a paladin obliged to obey all it's laws (which are normal for the most part except for slavery, which is done through raiding other countries as well as a punishment for criminals)? 2) When a Paladin encounters a slaver in a licensed market selling innocent people how can he\she react without violating her code of conduct. Killing the slaver to free his captives would be I think a good act but would also be incredibly stupid since the slavers' guards as well as the town millitia would be down his throat for murder, additionally most people in one contry own at least one slave, the paladin can't go killing everyone that owns a slave without being marked as a serial killer, how can the paladin resolve this. 3) Can a Paladin simply purchase a slave with the intent that he\she will free him\her at the first safest opportunity (i.e in a place where the captive would not simply be caught and sold again) without violating his\her code of conduct? In my opinion this would be a lawful act but is kind of grey on the good\evil side. I am asking this specifically because it is the easiest solution to the problem of a Paladin confronting a slaver in a kingdom that allows slavery. 1)Lawful Good. It is indeed a legitimate authority. While he is in their country, unless he is specificly on a mission to free the slaves ala the Gaurdians of the flame. 2) Murder isnt an option. This is a paladin, they dont go around just randomly killing people- its far to chaotic. On the other hand, challenging the slave owner to a duel outside of town, killing him, and freeing his slaves- thats entirely different. 3) I dont see how this could possibly be evil. Hes sacrificing his material possessions for the good others... good act all the way. Why would he tell the slaver? And yes, theres no reason he should tell the slaver- theres a difference between lying, and just keeping ones mouth shut. Slaver: So, what kind are you looking for? what services do you want them to preform m'lord? Paladin: None of your buisness sir, now let me have a look at your "stock". Slaver: Yes m'lord, over this way we have some fine.... etc.
Bleyn 12-04-06, 05:42 PM	I would say that a Paladin should oppose the mistreatment of slaves and the procurement of slaves against their will, but not necessarily the institution of slavery itself. It might be difficult to distinguish 'evil' slavery from merely a caste system in many societies. Is indentured servitude the same as slavery? Are a king's subjects really different from his slaves (especially if there is no magna carta type document?) What about chain gang type slavery of convicted criminals? There might be societies where slaves accept the fact that they are slaves, and maybe they have hopes of buying their freedom someday. Does a Paladin have to oppose all of these things? A chaotic good character, on the other hand, would probably oppose the whole institution of slavery.
UncleScrewtape 12-04-06, 05:47 PM	2) When a Paladin encounters a slaver in a licensed market selling innocent people how can he\she react without violating her code of conduct. Obviously, the truly righteous Paladin would be able to convince the slaver to repent and free his slaves of his own accord. Hey, no one said being a bulwark of the true faith would be easy.
Nexis 12-04-06, 07:55 PM	From K's Tome of Fiends Code of Conduct: Paladin Again This has to be repeated: Paladins don't get Smite Chaos. They are not champions of Law and Good, they are Champions of Good who are required to be Lawful. If your game is not using Word is Bond Ethics, Paladins have no reason to be Lawful. Paladins are only encouraged to follow the laws of the country they live in if those laws are Good. They are actually forbidden by their code of conduct from following the precepts of Evil nations. The Paladin shtick works equally well as a loner or a leader, and it is by definition distinctly disloyal. A Paladin must abandon compatriots. Is a good definition on how I feel about the code. So, to answer your questions... 1. No they don’t need to follow the evil laws 2. They won’t just kill the slave trader, but they should, at least, be thinking how to free the slaves, and stop the traders. 3. Nothing wrong with purchasing the slave with intent to free. Only slightly evil act there seems to be giving money to the trader, and that’s not a gross violation of his conduct (so its debatable whether that should break his code, I say no)
The_Shaman 12-04-06, 08:19 PM	Ok, here's another take: 1. If the law is against the paladin's code, s/he doesn't need to obey it. I translate the lawful part into "laws are important" - i.e. the paladin believes that a well-functioning society needs some laws/regulations (might be just traditional institutions, not a codified law). The key word is "some", though: if the current laws are not satisfactory, the paladin does not need to follow them blindly. As long as s/he proposes a different set of laws and not anarchy, there shouldn't be a problem. Even covert action would imo be ok, as much as anything covert is ok with a paladin (they tend to be a rather valorous, wave-my-sword-in-triumph people, generally). 2. Well, butchering the slaver there and then might cross the paladin's mind, but unless they have a wisdom of <7 they shouldn't seriously consider it. An interesting idea might be to admonish the slaver and try getting him/her to repent. Paladins can actually do that quite often if they've maxed their diplomacy score. If not, the pally could be persuaded that action against the source of evil would be better. - note: if the slaver is obviously abusing a slave, though, the paladin could interfere more directly. A sword-point "purchase" comes to mind; in general a paladin should refrain from killing but a more hot-headed one might start a fistfight or strike the slaver for non-lethal damage without (imo) worrying about losing their paladin grace. Of course, it may cause some political complications, but still. 3. Buying a slave to free him/her should not be a problem. It's unfortunate that the slaver benefits, all in all, but that is not in itself an evil act. - just out of curiosity, would slavery be evil if it's typical for the culture and mistreatment is not tolerated? For example, would a paladin born and raised in an ancient Babylon-esque setting feel guilty about slavery in general?
FloppyLlama 12-04-06, 08:29 PM	- just out of curiosity, would slavery be evil if it's typical for the culture and mistreatment is not tolerated? For example, would a paladin born and raised in an ancient Babylon-esque setting feel guilty about slavery in general? Much more of an issue. A good amount of people on these boards think of Slavery and think of American style slavery, which makes sense, but not all systems of it were like that. A system of servanthood where one class works for another, but the class they're working for is required by law to treat the slave humanely, provide them with food and decent shelter sounds a lot less outrageous.
Thomas_Covenant 12-04-06, 10:31 PM	A couple points about basic definitions, before any Paladin questions. A)Every Paladin has a Code of Conduct. These vary more widely than you could believe, and often each Paladin Order (some Gods have more than one Order) have their own Code of Conduct. They are all LG, but you'd be surprised how complex, varied, and different they can still be. If you don't provide/agree on a Code of Conduct for a Paladin player in a homebrew setting before play, and you object to his behavior, and that behavior does not involve an evil act, or blatant, repeated, chaotic acts..... The Player is RIGHT, and you are WRONG. Seriously, for homebrew especially, you need it in writing. Also, the character will have the Code memorized, even if the Player does not, so warning him before he violates it the fair action. B) As FloppyLlama touched on, if by "slavery in Evil aligned countries" I assume you mean lifelong slavery, often by birth, possibly by ethnic type (or humanoid race, for that matter.) Good countries can easily put debtors or criminals into labor and/or slavery for a period of years, a Paladin should not object to this, unless the Code of Conduct for some reason does. (see above) 1)As a Paladin is by definition Lawful, he will by default attempt to follow any laws that are not, in fact, Evil, and do not violate his Code of Conduct. Slavery (see above) is Evil in the context you describe, and he should be perfectly willing to take risks to oppose the law where it regards slavery, but not willing to commit effective suicide with no possibility of success. There's a balance here, it's not easy to find. 2)A Paladin would almost certainly not be willing to kill a slaver in a licensed slave market, even if he knew the slaves were "innocent". If he somehow believed he had a real chance of freeing the slaves and getting out of the country, he would more than likely order the slaver to surrender and hand over the slaves (readied action to attack) and be willing to kill him if necessary. 3)Buying a slave from evil owners with the intent of taking said slave to safety and freeing it is, quite simply, a Good act. I disagree with you completely, it appears. I see it as both Good, AND opposing Evil. If anything it may be mildly chaotic. As Treantmonk said, a Paladin may well realize that this is giving money to a Slaver, so won't make a difference in the long run, but is still a Good act. In addition, realize adventuring in a strongly LE society can cause great difficulties for a Paladin. The Paladin class has great restrictions on never committing an Evil act, even a minor one, but says nothing about Chaotic. This is intentional. He may well come into contact with strongly CG "rebels" actually working to oppose the strongly LE society. When a Paladin MUST choose between CG and LE (and he should make an effort to find a LG path, if possible), this is not a choice at all, CG every time.
Shayde 12-05-06, 12:12 AM	well it seems at this point that I need to explain more about the slavery of my world. None of the good aligned contires use slavery at all not even as a punishment for criminals. Some of the neutral aligned countries do use slavery as a punishment for criminals only, but frown on permanant forms of slavery and indentured servitude. The country I am specifically refering to is Lawful Evil and extremely expansionistic so if the PCs choose to adventure on that continent (I have several continents but since most players choose an eclectic grouping of races I typically start them in a "melting pot" community that lies between this LE country and it's neighbors.) there will definately be encounters with slavery at some point, in fact the "bad guys" of each continent typically keep slaves of some sort so no matter where they go they will run into it at some point. In this LE country the people are extremely racist and sexist, the population is predominatntly human and almost all members of other races are slaves in this country, and non-Human visitors are almost always followed by the countries secret police. They practice a form of slavery that is more like American style slavery, they enslave members of other intelligent races without remorse and the patriarchy (which views women as prized posessions at best, and no not all societies in my world are patriarchies, I have a fair amount of non-Drow matriarchies as well) severely opresses the human women that are not enslaved to a master. Brutality against slaves is common and few people in this country treat their slaves well. In other words it's just begging for the players to interviene and defeat the evil king and his generals which would take over as warlords in the event of his assassination. As for puting a Paladins code in writing that is a good idea but I would much prefer to work out a code with any player interested in playing a paladin than just make one myself and force it upon said player, after all people playing paladins deserve to have a say in what would and would not violate their code. now that that has been elaborated on let's keep the opinions coming:D
Mitchell 12-05-06, 12:21 AM	From K's Tome of Fiends Is a good definition on how I feel about the code. So, to answer your questions... 1. No they don’t need to follow the evil laws 2. They won’t just kill the slave trader, but they should, at least, be thinking how to free the slaves, and stop the traders. 3. Nothing wrong with purchasing the slave with intent to free. Only slightly evil act there seems to be giving money to the trader, and that’s not a gross violation of his conduct (so its debatable whether that should break his code, I say no) These pretty much sum up my ideas as well, so there you go.
Ariath Ska'Vhor 12-05-06, 12:46 AM	Why would he tell the slaver? Well, only if the slaver asked. Lying is against the paladin's code, even for the sake of good.
FloppyLlama 12-05-06, 01:23 AM	Well, only if the slaver asked. Lying is against the paladin's code, even for the sake of good. Yes but "It doesn't concern you", "I'd tell you if I thought it was appropriate", "I just want to do business and have my way with the slave", and ignoring them are not lying. Paladins are under no obligation to spill the beans in full every time they get asked something.
travellersside 12-05-06, 09:40 AM	Killing a slaver would be murder - a definite crime, regardless of how much the paladin despised his victim. Self-defence is not an acceptable defence if the paladin was confident enough of his abilities that he encouraged them to attack. Demanding (at swordpoint) that the slaves be freed is a definite incitement to violence, not to mention arguably being theft. In my campaign, any paladin who did this would be in major trouble with his own church. If he repeated this, he'd fall. A paladin should plan ahead. If he wants to free slaves, how much good will it do to violently free this particular dozen slaves, but cause the authorities to hunt him down? None, since those dozen slaves may well be recaptured, and the paladin is far less effective, since he can no longer move around unhindered in that country. If he buys slaves and sets them free, this is also counter-productive, since a slaver is a merchant, and merchants buy low and sell high. In other words, by purchasing those dozen slaves that the paladin then legally freed, the slaver now has the funds to obtain perhaps 18 more. In other words, by buying slaves, regardless of his intent, the paladin is in fact both encouraging and subsidising the slave trade. Not good. Add to this the fact that a freed slave may well be incapable of functioning in a normal society, and you have a problem. You see, strange though it sounds, many slaves are better off that way. Taking a slave out of his country and freeing him means that he is in a foreign country, with no understanding of the laws (which by definition are very different) and almost certainly has no trade - any skills he has are likely to be in short demand in a country without slaves :rolleyes: The usual fate for these freed slaves is to become petty criminals or beggars. Was that really a Good act? A slave is better off in a lawful evil society than in a chaotic evil society. In a LE society, slaves are valuable goods. They are worked as hard as is practical, bearing in mind that if they are over-worked, they will break quickly, but by ensuring that they remain in good health, you can get many years of work out of them. They will certainly be afraid of beatings, but they will know that these beatings will only be inflicted for a reason. Consequently, they will do their utmost to please their masters, in exchange for which, they will have reasonable lives. On the other hand, CE societies tend to have an extremely high turnover, since their slaves are usually captives from raids or invasions, and there are always going to be more of them, so why care? A paladin is lawful good. This doesn't mean that he only obeys the laws that he approves of (that's a neutral to chaotic stance) instead it means that he has to behave in an ordered way for the benefit of others. The correct way to handle this would be to change the social order. Firstly, he needs to persuade slave-owners that their slaves are valuable resources, bringing them closer to the ideal LE slave status. If they are valued, they won't be badly treated. A part of this would be to anonymously arrange for any slave-taking raids to be met with extreme opposition. By ensuring that there is no outside supply of slaves, the more chaotic societies will either start to treat their remaining slaves better, in order to extent their working lives, or run out of slaves, with all the problems that that would entail. Another step would be to clearly demonstrate how much more work a healthy slave can produce when a positive encouragement is provided. The encouragement needn't be particularly impressive - perhaps a half hour of free time once a week - but it would be the first step in persuading the slave-owners to provide rewards, which would lead to payment. Once the slaves were being 'paid' it wouldn't be long before the paladin was able to arrange matters so that the levels of 'pay' that various owners provided were widely known. By further social manipulation, those who paid less would scorned, on the grounds that they obviously didn't care enough about efficiency - in other words, since they offered such paltry rewards, they were incompetent managers. Since LE societies (which is what we're aiming at for the moment) tend to care a great deal about people doing exactly what they should do (no more, no less) this would be quite serious. It wouldn't be long before the rewards were standardised. Once standardised, the society, or at the very least, the slavery-related aspects of it, would have shifted heavily towards LN - a major step. All that's now required is to encourage the authorities to confiscate slaves from owners who fail to use their resources effectively, and award them to those who can make more effective use of them. After all, the owners pay taxes to their masters, and the more effective their slaves are, the more they'll have left after taxes. In other words, it's in their best interests to do whatever they can to maximise productivity. And in any form of skilled work, productivity rises when the worker is content. So, what have we now? A society where slaves are paid, treated well and removed from placements where they are being mistreated, on the grounds that this is counter-productive activity. Things are looking up. How best to encourage slaves? The normal rewards and payments would certainly help, but a major reward - difficult to achieve, yet attainable with hard work - would be freedom. A slave would be highly motivated if he knew that he was guaranteed freedom after providing 10 years of work without a single black mark on his record. It shouldn't be a far step to reach this point and from there a shift to, rather than providing an actual 10 years of work, the slave simply had to provide an effective 10 years - thus by working harder, it could be over with quicker. Of course, if the slave slacked off, it would take longer, thus providing the kind of incentive that would appeal to LE masters. The best way to measure how much work a particular slave was performing, would be to look at how much a freed-man would expect to earn performing that exact same work. Obviously, slaves wouldn't actually receive any of this pay, but all work performed would count towards their freedom. Those who worked in higher skilled positions would obviously be 'earning' more, and so they would finish their terms quicker. After being freed, they would presumably keep working, else they would be penniless, and after all, they are the best people to do that work, thus encouraging their masters to either pay them a reasonable wage, or find somebody less capable. At this point, you have a society where the line between slave and servant/worker would be almost indistinguishable. Most likely those who had slave status would wear a metal collar, which would be removed ceremonially when they achieved free-man status. This aside, they would be treated much the same. In fact, since freed-men only came from those slaves who worked extremely hard, they would quickly rise to become important figures in their own right, reinvigorating the upper levels of society. While they certainly wouldn't be counted amongst the nobility, it would quickly be known that if you wanted a job done well, you would take it to a freed-man - they're used to working very hard, and would therefore perform better than a normal person would. As a result, their status would rise, and so would that of those still slaves, since slaves would come to be regarded as freed-men-in-waiting. Consequently, you could pretty much consider your work complete, since there wouldn't be any significant diference between these 'slaves' and a normal apprentice. But how would a paladin - a holy warrior - be doing this? Surely his abilities lie in hitting things? Well, with a class that values charisma highly, has diplomacy as a class skill, and has access to a decent amount of healing magics, including the ability to remove diseases (which is extremely broad spectrum), you would do well right off the bat. Pump your diplomacy high, and save your combat skills for duels. You will make some enemies, despite the fact that you're going to be doing your best to make friends, and enemies mean duels. You've got Smite Evil, which will probably give you the win. Doing the above would be the best LG solution - you're acting in an ordered fashion to provide the most good possible. Sure you can hack down a few traders and free a few slaves, but you won't be very effective, and you certainly won't get rid of the problem. Come on, how many paladins would like to claim that they redeemed an entire society? Yes, it would take a while, many years in fact, but it would be far more effective in the long run.
Shayde 12-05-06, 11:47 AM	:OMG! wow that is a well written opinion