Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Winged_Death 12-12-06, 04:26 AM	Just a quick question to find out how a paladin would react to this situation. We need to get info on a certain area i was thinking about taking a couple of "prisoners" and getting the info out of them, i dont think he would have a problem with that it comes in afterwards when i have to kill the prisoners else our positions will be given away. Would he object to this or see the fact that it is for the greater good? If he cant deal with it my character will just do it without him being there and come up with some story how i gained the info!
Alediran 12-12-06, 08:05 AM	You could imprison them.
krocha 12-12-06, 10:03 AM	Just a quick question to find out how a paladin would react to this situation. We need to get info on a certain area i was thinking about taking a couple of "prisoners" and getting the info out of them, i dont think he would have a problem with that it comes in afterwards when i have to kill the prisoners else our positions will be given away. Would he object to this or see the fact that it is for the greater good? If he cant deal with it my character will just do it without him being there and come up with some story how i gained the info! I'd say it all depends on the tyep of "prisoners" you take. If they are evil types then he MIGHT be okay with it. He'd probably feel the need to atone for the act at some later time but other then that it should be okay. Now if the 'prisoners" where just normal folk who where working as guarda, just trying to feed their families, etc... then he should oppose the act IMHO.
Faraer 12-12-06, 10:27 AM	It entirely depends on the morality of your campaign world and exact interpretation of paladins. Gary Gygax would tell you these qualms are ridiculous (if the prisoners are evil). In the Realms... I don't have a clear sense.He'd probably feel the need to atone for the act at some later time but other then that it should be okay.Doing something you intellectually know is bad and then trying to atone for it is hypocrisy. If you know something is bad, you shouldn't -- moreover, don't -- do it in the first place.
Inspired_Mage 12-12-06, 11:16 AM	Please note my mail does mention items referring to the COTSQ module, so if you wish to avoid any spoiler then do not read on.. Well I actually play as that Paladin, we have currently just arrived in Myrmedria (sp?) in the COTSQ module and we basically need info about what is going on other basic intel, now i know if we set any form of prisoner free he would straight away run to a superior and tell them that us surface dwellers are in the city which would surely doom myself and my companions whislt if he was dead i know that we are safe, or as safe as you can be in an enemy occupied city, i agree we could imprison them but there is always the chance of escape and the risk of that surely outways the "evil" of killing the prisoner (which would be down quickly and as painlessly as possible of course :D ) My character is an Aasimar paladin of Lathander, orginally hailing from Silverymoon and with a particular hatred of giantkind as well as all other evildoers. His main setback (and possibly the party's best way of getting this past him) is that he has a slightly below average intelligence of 9 which means they could hold back the whole about an incident without much fear of being found out, as long as he wasnt around when said incident occured... What do you think?
krocha 12-12-06, 11:19 AM	Doing something you intellectually know is bad and then trying to atone for it is hypocrisy. If you know something is bad, you shouldn't -- moreover, don't -- do it in the first place. Then you should read up more on articles discussing alignment in publications like Dragon and various WotC publications. It's been mentioned numerous times that a Lawful Good alignment doesn't mean that you can NEVER act in a certain way. It's a reflection of your tendencies NOT a straight jacket. It just means that the occasional times when you act outside of thoes tenants you feel horrible later and typically look to atone for the action with some type of personal penance or task.
Nicholas the Paladin 12-12-06, 11:40 AM	If you were just good, you would *consider* using force to extract info out of an evil character. If this character woudl be utter evil (like undead or outsider), it would make the decision a lot easier. But a paladin is something more. He has *personal* rules (that in my opinion is the larger part of his *lawfull* alignment), that guide his life. Not torturing woudl be a very applicable rule, even if it's not that practical in some situations. It's these tests of will that make the paladin. Even torturing an evil outsider would be a test of conscience for a paladin. Good luck !
GothicDan 12-12-06, 12:56 PM	It's been mentioned numerous times that a Lawful Good alignment doesn't mean that you can NEVER act in a certain way. Faraer said nothing about Lawful Good in his statement. If I believe correctly, it was a general note to keep in mind when playing a character of any alignment that has any form of moral code. You have to be neither good nor lawful to have one. (Though some alignments are more likely to live by one than others.) Cognizant free choice is the fuel behind alignment.
Faraer 12-12-06, 01:04 PM	Krocha: It has nothing to do with lawful good in particular, but a paladin is the mortal epitome of goodness and law, so that his alignment can be detected magically in the same way fiends' can. If a paladin knowingly performs an evil act, he loses his paladinhood -- in the original conception, and as I prefer it, irrevocably.
Yakostovian 12-12-06, 01:32 PM	It all depends on how you play the chracter, after all, his actions are your choices. But, I don't think a Paladin in good standing (and by this, I mean one that does not show any signs of falling) would be willing to torture, and then kill a prisoner. He might allow his party to do so, but I think this would set him on a path away from Paladinhood. Were I the DM, I would interperet that torturing a prisoner was an evil act that your charcter knowingly commited, further cementing your loss of status.
GothicDan 12-12-06, 01:36 PM	But what if he was using the "torture but not torture" type of stuff from the Book of Exalted Deeds? ... Just love 3E's alignment system. Poisons = EVIL! ... Oh look, here's some SPECIAL poisons. They're Good.
The_Shaman 12-12-06, 02:16 PM	Heh, deja vu. I had a "paladins and torture" arguments awhile back in the characters and races thread. Anyway, here's my 3 stotinki (1.9 cents under the current rate) The paladin would probably be against torture anyway, especially as an aasimar. It's evil, per se, it's dishonorable, and doubly so when doing it to someone who has not even tried to harm you. IMO it's just something that paladins don't do. A paladin with a low intelligence should be even more against it, as they may not quite understand the "greater good" concept, but know a flagrant violation of their moral code if they see one. Lying your buttocks off would be way preferable over that. As for killing someone after that, this is seriously evil stuff. Evil like, imo worth an alignment change if you're neutral. Remember, you have alternatives. They may not necessarily be as safe (although imo they might be safer - torture tends to take a while and may attract attention), but a paladin isn't only about efficiency. Bribery, divination, creative diplomacy (i.e. with disguise self, and a (lesser) geas or heavy-duty bluff check to shut the other guys up) can get the job done just as well. Even an old-fashioned kidnapping with a club to the head, a cloth around the head, and some questions would be preferable, although the paladin could still get an atonement for good measure. "Questioning" and killing commoners and slaves, indeed - and a paladin, no less. Seriously, youngsters these days... What happened to valor, to heroism, to braving overwhelming odds with honor :nonono: ? [/ramble]
krocha 12-12-06, 03:32 PM	Faraer said nothing about Lawful Good in his statement. If I believe correctly, it was a general note to keep in mind when playing a character of any alignment that has any form of moral code. You have to be neither good nor lawful to have one. (Though some alignments are more likely to live by one than others.) Cognizant free choice is the fuel behind alignment. Well, indirectly he actually did unless you/he are using a house rule which allows for non-Lawful Good Paladins.
krocha 12-12-06, 03:37 PM	Krocha: in the original conception, and as I prefer it, irrevocably. I'm glad you prefer how things where (insert past edition here) but in the current edition Alignment and Paladin Restrictions are no longer that black and white. I say whatever works for you or anyone else is what really metters but for my tastes I agree with the current stuff I've seen in Dragon and such in which they cast alignment not a straight jacket. So if we look past alignment to a code of conduct, that open for interpretation and again a single act against such a code is not cause for losing abilities. Codea, like alignment are meant as guidelines. In may cases stromg quidelines. Now a strict Vow would be someting else IMHO. But a paladin interrogating a bad/evil guy and putting them to the sword after they are done can be rationalized as an isolated incident if NO other solution presents itself.
The_Shaman 12-12-06, 03:45 PM	Hmm, I could agree with this only if the bad guy has earned himself a death sentence several times over and the paladin has (as they usually do, btw) permission to act as a Justice of the Peace, or sheriff, or whatever is the local form of the title. In which case, it is an execution and that's that. Killisng a bandit leader or a similarly depraved individual who tried to ambush your party is also acceptable, at least for paladins whose deities/orders tend more towards the lawful side of the spectrum. Sure, bringing them to proper justice or redeeming them is preferable, if you can do it, but if you can't - they've done something that is normally punishable by death anyway. However, interrogation is one thing: using torture or anything like it another thing entirely. Furthermore, in this case the people who would be "questioned" have done nothing to the paladin and would generally be considered innocents. So we have kidnapping and killing someone to "erase the evidence" + possibly torture. Now, that's just plain wrong for a paladin. I understand getting atonement for something that you did if you really did not have a choice, but doing an evil deed so thoroughly would either be beyond an atonement spell (at least for a year or two) or would require something almost unthinkable - such as persuading a fallen solar to rejoin the celestial hosts - to grant absolution.
Aratharn 12-12-06, 04:05 PM	a paladin of a certain level could simply cast some type of truth spell and ask then, but he would not just kill him if the prisoner has a death sentence on him the paladin if correctly informed and sanctioned (meaning that he has been allowed to execute the person by the local authority and follows the rules given for it , that can be witnisses or any other rule) can and even will execute him (of course if he believes that the man deserves death and has enough proof)
Meldread 12-12-06, 04:35 PM	I agree with some others who posted in this thread that it is wrong, as well as with the person who said with nine intelligence, the character would probably be just that more vigilant against violations because he'd lack the ability to understand the "Greater Good". Paladins are the epitome of Goodness. The fact that he is an Asimar just makes him a Paladin +1. Paladins are hard character's to play because the entire group really has to accommodate them. They aren't the type of people who hook up with a bunch of folks and go out on adventures. They tend to conflict a lot with non-lawful characters and non-good aligned characters (even Neutral characters). The typical party that works best with a Paladin is Lawful Good or Neutral Good. Outside of that a Paladin can really become a drag on the party, and you also need the right DM as well. Many other characters have guidelines that they must follow, but a Paladin's guidelines are much more extreme. There really is no flexibility - the lack of flexibility is there because it prevents them from falling into temptation. Mortals are easily corruptible and a Paladin must always be vigilant against corruption - especially within himself and those he travels with. That is how evil takes root, after all mortals aren't born evil - they become evil. Those things that are naturally evil are things such as Devils and Demons. Take this situation: A paladin is hunting a horrible criminal. A serial child murderer. This murderer killed his niece and he is grief stricken. He finds the murderer and confronts him and the murderer - afraid for his life - begs to be spared. However, the Paladin convinces himself that such an evil person cannot be allowed to live so he killed him. To me, that Paladin instantly becomes fallen. Why? First, the Paladin allowed hatred and anger to enter into his heart which clouded his judgment. The hatred and anger prevented him from forgiving the man, even a man as evil as that - mercy, kindness and generosity are all things that make a paladin - this made his action evil. It was an act of vengeance. Second, the Paladin violated his code which holds him to an insanely high standard. So that nets him a chaotic shift as well. In this situation? Same difference but its much worse. If these people beg for their lives the Paladin is under obligation to show them mercy. Torture is absolutely out of the question. The best that can be done? Leave them imprisoned for the time being and hope for the best. If they escape that's just a chance the Paladin has to take. Courage is also part of being a Paladin. A Paladin has to have faith that everything will turn out for the best, if not in this life then the next. Paladin's lead by example. They inspire others to be the best that they can be but it comes at a great personal cost. A Paladin normally ends up dying BECAUSE of his standards - because he showed mercy when he should have been merciless. Because his code was restricting him from doing what he knew was right. That is just how I view the class and expect it to be played. It doesn't sit well with a lot of people, who basically treat the paladin like a cleric crossed with a good aligned fighter. It is also why I think the Paladin should be a prestige class instead of a base class... but I digress. In this situation if the Paladin tortured an individual for information, then killed them (especially after they begged for mercy) he would instantly become fallen. Instantly. I would even change his alignment to Chaotic Neutral if his character KNEW it was wrong but DID IT ANYWAY – all based on the premise "oh, I'll atone for it later." That would just not fly with me at all. No Paladin should ever be that disregarding of the code. A Paladin IS the code, just like a Jedi IS his code. It is the code that separates a Jedi from a Sith. In the same way it is the Paladins code that separates him from everyone else. Without the code, there are no Paladins.
The_Shaman 12-12-06, 06:36 PM	Preach it, father :tiphat: ! To quote one great song "Being good isn't always easy, Lord knows how hard I tried." A good character who gets in trouble because s/he is good need not be an idiot. There is such a thing called "principles", even for adventurers.
GothicDan 12-12-06, 06:37 PM	Well, indirectly he actually did unless you/he are using a house rule which allows for non-Lawful Good Paladins. Faraer's reply was this: Doing something you intellectually know is bad and then trying to atone for it is hypocrisy. If you know something is bad, you shouldn't -- moreover, don't -- do it in the first place. This could apply to any character with a code of morality and a religion. I say whatever works for you or anyone else is what really metters but for my tastes I agree with the current stuff I've seen in Dragon and such in which they cast alignment not a straight jacket. So if we look past alignment to a code of conduct, that open for interpretation and again a single act against such a code is not cause for losing abilities. Codea, like alignment are meant as guidelines. In may cases stromg quidelines. Now a strict Vow would be someting else IMHO. Alignment was never a straight jacket, in any edition. A Paladin's Codes, however, were. That's what GAVE THEM THEIR POWER. And as to vows... Well, what do you think Paladins do when they swear to uphold their Code? They vow to do so.
Winged_Death 12-13-06, 03:11 AM	There seems to be alot of different views here. We would not be taking commoners as the prisoners. The prisoners would be more part of the force that holds mermydria(excuse the spelling) so they will be warrior types that would attack us on site. Would that make a difference to the paladins involvment. The other option would just be for my character to do this without the paladins knowledge. What are your thoughts?
Inspired_Mage 12-13-06, 03:42 AM	Please note I would never stand for the torture of the subject either, all prisoners deserve to be treated respectfully, but killing them swiftly after questioning? especially if they are evil and they were captured from a combat situation?
Bonzai 12-13-06, 04:15 AM	I disagree with Meldread's point of view. I believe that a Paladain's morality is based upon the laws of his diety and society, and not the particular morals and norms of the the player. There are reports of Helmites enslaving the native peoples of Mazteca. Well, slavery is considered an evil act in most real world societies. However, it would be a mistake to necassarily believe that there can't be a paladin of Helm. Instead, in the campaign setting, slavery is tolerated, and a lawfull act. Under those circumstances, a Paladin isn't compelled to liberate the slaves, and can even own some himself. It's lawfull, and according to the laws and traditions established, not some evil act. So, like wise, if the precepts of his diety demand justice at all costs, or if some other zealotess behavior, I don't think a little torcher of mercy killings should prevent them from being a paladain. `
Karsus the Mad 12-13-06, 05:56 AM	I disagree with Meldread's point of view. I believe that a Paladain's morality is based upon the laws of his diety and society, and not the particular morals and norms of the the player. There are reports of Helmites enslaving the native peoples of Mazteca. Well, slavery is considered an evil act in most real world societies. However, it would be a mistake to necassarily believe that there can't be a paladin of Helm. Instead, in the campaign setting, slavery is tolerated, and a lawfull act. Under those circumstances, a Paladin isn't compelled to liberate the slaves, and can even own some himself. It's lawfull, and according to the laws and traditions established, not some evil act. So, like wise, if the precepts of his diety demand justice at all costs, or if some other zealotess behavior, I don't think a little torcher of mercy killings should prevent them from being a paladain. Well said. There's also entire groups of paladins who do nothing but slaughter humanoid tribes, even when those tribes haven't actually done anything. It all really depends on the deity the paladin serves. For this particular situation, being a paladin of Lathander and taking Lathander's dogma into consideration (along with a paladin's code) I'd say the torture would be acceptable (frowned upon to be sure, but acceptable if there's no other course), but not the murder. I do find it a bit ironic. A paladin of a deity who's dogma is to place more importance on helping others than abiding any rules and dictates.
GothicDan 12-13-06, 10:06 AM	The easiest thing to do? Toss out the Paladin (except for use of the clergy of Torm) and just make up individual holy warriors for each church!
The_Shaman 12-13-06, 11:01 AM	I disagree with Meldread's point of view. I believe that a Paladain's morality is based upon the laws of his diety and society, and not the particular morals and norms of the the player. There are reports of Helmites enslaving the native peoples of Mazteca. Well, slavery is considered an evil act in most real world societies. However, it would be a mistake to necassarily believe that there can't be a paladin of Helm. Instead, in the campaign setting, slavery is tolerated, and a lawfull act. Under those circumstances, a Paladin isn't compelled to liberate the slaves, and can even own some himself. It's lawfull, and according to the laws and traditions established, not some evil act. So, like wise, if the precepts of his diety demand justice at all costs, or if some other zealotess behavior, I don't think a little torcher of mercy killings should prevent them from being a paladain. ` Hm, I'm feeling more than a bit worried about whoever wrote that book. Now, the Helmite paladins have sometimes been considered a bit heartless by the other orders, so maybe their restrictions are a bit looser in this respect. Yet let's put things in perspective: slavery itself need not be antithetical to a paladin, at least no more than feudalism is. It's a form of social organization, and while it may seem primitive or cruel to us, members of another society and age might find it quite acceptable (say, anyone from ancient Babylon-ish society would consider it civilized and just as opposed to killing the prisoners of war). In such a case, a paladin may be a slave-owner, and probably won't feel he/she's doing anything wrong, but he will disapprove of and sanction anything that is considered cruelty to slaves (similar to how s/he would probably oppose a lord cruel to his serfs in medieval society). Perhaps it matters what the cause of slavery is (i.e. debt slavery, born slavery, war slavery), perhaps not. However, torture was not acceptable behavior in any society I know of. While it was sometimes done, it was considered ignoble by any group with a pretense of honor and usually left to the "untouchables" of the society, especially if the society would make a claim to culture. It is the mark of a scoundrel and a brigand, and even when applied to a proven enemy I would claim it is dishonorable and cruel. A paladin, regardless of his or her patron, can get some leeway here and there, but that would be way too much. Also, last time I checked, Lathander strongly dislikes Loviatar (Faiths and Pantheons), so an act of malice or torture on the side of his champions would be a major no-no. As for mercy killing... Excuse me, but when YOU capture someone, get the information out by any means, and then kill them so they can't tell on you, this is not mercy killing, but a cynical and heartless act of significant importance. In other cases, Lathander (as a deity of healing and life) would probably still be strongly opposed. A paladin of Kelemvor could have more free rein there, but even then killing someone who's at your mercy would be rather ignoble, especially when you yourself have went out and captured them. For paladins, imo torture would basically be a taboo. It could be useful, but it would be about as abhorrent as having (sexual) intercourse with a dead animal. Some things just aren't done.
Bonzai 12-13-06, 12:31 PM	I don't know about that. I could see a paladin of Hoar resorting to torture. Especially if the victim was guilty of torture and worse himself. Hoar preaches vengeance at any cost, and retrobution. I think that could give a paladin some leeway. Conversly, if you had an overly zealous helmite paladin, who views that he must uphold his duty, no matter what, there is also leeway there. I think it really depends on the diety. Now Lathander would be a tough one. Unless it was intrigal in bringing about significant growth or reknewal I don't really see the justification.
The_Shaman 12-13-06, 04:59 PM	Erm, this is why afaik Hoar does not have any paladins :D - "eye for two, tooth for a jaw" is not exactly the typical paladin creed. On a more serious note, generally I'd say the argument "don't go down to their level" might hold some sway with a paladin of that kind. A Hoarite paladin, if indeed there's such a group/order, might be incredibly creative with bringing about the downfall of a foe and spend over a decade engineering their downfall, but they would probably lose their powers if they put the already defeated foe onto a rack and start having "fun." However, leaving a criminal infamous for his tortures and cruelty in a pit with a huge viper or stranded in a desert could be considered "only fitting." A Helmite might get some leeway only if s/he is administering punishment, instead of using torture as an instrument to gain something, and even then I'd advise you to stop short of actual torture. However, I could see him or her whipping someone if that's the appropriate punishment for the crime and due process has been served. "Due process" is iirc a very serious thing for Helmites, iirc any refugee can find sanctuary in their temple until promised a fair trial (also holds for Tyrran temples I believe).
Meldread 12-13-06, 05:04 PM	A Paladin of Lathander condoning torture - worse... actually torturing someone? All right, let me paint the picture for you and I want you to tell me if this is how you picture a paladin. The room is dimly lit and there are two captives tied to chairs on the far side of the room. There is a musty smell to the air and it is damp. You are unmistakably within the cellar of an Inn where you have rented a room. Your comrade, a Paladin of Lathander stands before the two men tied to the chair. They are unconscious having taken a hard knock to the back of their heads. To awaken them the Paladin takes a bucket of water and splashes it on them. It is ice cold. "WAKE UP!" The Paladin shouts at the top of his lungs. The two men quickly begin to come around, more than a little bit frightened at their circumstances. "Now you are going to tell me what I want to know." The Paladin says in a threatening tone. "Or things will begin to get ugly." The two men begin to question who the Paladin is and what they want from them. They claim they haven't done anything and are asking to be set free. "SHUT UP!" The Paladin shouts. "You are going to answer my questions." The Paladin asks a series of questions and the men refuse to talk. They say they don't know anything about that stuff, that they are just mercenaries. The Paladin doesn't believe them and feels that they are lying. He walks forward and with all the strength he can muster slugs one of the men in the face. Once. The man's head swings violently to the side. The Paladin swings at him again. And again. He begins beating him - both men are yelling and screaming while begging for mercy. The man who is being beaten is crying and his face is bloodied. The Paladin regains composure and ceases beating the man. The man has a broken nose and is now missing two teeth. The Paladin begins his questions again and still he gets nowhere. As a result, the Paladin decides to up the anti - he pulls out a blade. He moves toward the man who hasn't been beaten. He grabs his head with one hand and forces it backward. The man is screaming and already crying - he actually wets himself from fear. The Paladin begins to gouge out the mans eye with the blade. The other man so terrified and disturbed blacks out. When the mans eye is removed the Paladin hurls it onto the ground and slams his foot down on it. There is a sickening squishing sound. Unearthly screams of pain and torment come from the man. The interrogation carries on for several more hours. Finally, the men make up a story - anything - hoping to save themselves. By this point they both have broken bones and are mutilated in various ways. The Paladin, having heard what he wanted to hear, now decides that he will "mercifully" kill them to avoid them warning the others. He draws his blade and with a swift swing decapitates them both. A clean cut. Both heads roll off onto the ground. ...tell me... Does that sound like a Paladin to you? Because that is torture. Tell me, do you think a Paladin would willingly travel with someone knowing that they had committed this act? Or do you think the Paladin would seek to bring this person to justice? Also, let us not forget the long-range implications of this type of scenario. As a result of the Paladin's actions he has harmed other people who are innocent of any crimes. Those two men had families. They didn't like the bad work they had to perform, but it provided good pay that they could send home to their families. As a result of this Paladin's actions four children will be deprived of a father who loved them. As a result of the Paladin's actions two mothers now grieve over the loss of their sons. As a result of this Paladin's actions entire families have been irrevocably harmed. Forever. On the bright side, the Paladin did manage to get the "bad guys" and kill them, too.
Merlin_Durwood 12-13-06, 05:10 PM	Bonzai would be correct on this. It comes down to basically the beliefs of your God and what they view as proper/improper conduct. Hoar does preach vengeance and retribution at any cost. I can see Helm allowing torture, but death? I think with a few exceptions for some Gods, most Paladins would not allow torture or death for a prisioner...even if they were evil.
Meldread 12-13-06, 05:26 PM	Yes, Bonzai is correct up to a point. A Paladin's cultural views and religious dogma reflects how he views the Code. But always, at all times, he is bound to the Code. Also, it must be remembered that the vast majority of deities who allow Paladins are of good alignment. There are a handful of Lawful Neutral deities who have Paladins. Helm is a Lawful Neutral deity and can even have Lawful Evil Clerics. However, just because that is the way the Helmite church as a whole is does not mean that is how the Paladin is - he is still bound by the code. He is also bound by his good alignment which means, that while Helm may call for certain things, his good nature will always ensure (or should always ensure) that he is acting in a manner that is befitting a good aligned individual. The Code also clearly states that a paladin will never knowingly associate with an evil aligned individual. So even if the party was filled with followers of Helm, there STILL could not be a Lawful Evil Cleric of Helm in the party. The Paladin would not work with him, and if he did he would face chaotic shifts in his alignment until he has fallen (going against the code).
vezina 12-13-06, 05:49 PM	*sigh* Here we go again. It doesn't matter what deity a paladin worships. His alignment is Lawful Good, regardless of his deity's alignment. His code of conduct speaks for one that is supportive of both Lawful and Good ideals, regardless of his deity's alignment. Just as clerics can espouse different ideals of their deity (e.g. A neutral cleric of Lathander dealing mainly with the balance of rebirth or healing, including things considered unsavory by most of civilization, or an evil cleric of Silvanus that deals with nature's wrath on those that take it for granted.), a paladin supports the Lawful Good(duty, honor, welfare of community, protection of innocents, justice etc.) facet of his deity's portfolio. (Sune is an exception here because she doesn't technically have a Lawful side, but that's another case.) That being said, it doesn't matter who the deity is. Torture is wrong. Killing of prisoners(unless said prisoners were captured for a crime and the paladin has the Authority to be Judge, Jury and Executioner; or if the "prisoner" is inherently evil i.e. demons/devils, but that's just ludicrous) is dishonorable. If a paladin is going to do something as ignoble as killing his prisoners, then he shouldn't have taken prisoners in the first place. It doesn't get much more clear-cut than that, folks. I agree with Dan. Bring back the Crusader from 2e(and not just in the ToB: Nine Swords style) so we can have a holy warrior class that fits the respective deity.
vezina 12-13-06, 05:50 PM	Yes, Bonzai is correct up to a point. A Paladin's cultural views and religious dogma reflects how he views the Code. But always, at all times, he is bound to the Code. Also, it must be remembered that the vast majority of deities who allow Paladins are of good alignment. There are a handful of Lawful Neutral deities who have Paladins. Helm is a Lawful Neutral deity and can even have Lawful Evil Clerics. However, just because that is the way the Helmite church as a whole is does not mean that is how the Paladin is - he is still bound by the code. He is also bound by his good alignment which means, that while Helm may call for certain things, his good nature will always ensure (or should always ensure) that he is acting in a manner that is befitting a good aligned individual. The Code also clearly states that a paladin will never knowingly associate with an evil aligned individual. So even if the party was filled with followers of Helm, there STILL could not be a Lawful Evil Cleric of Helm in the party. The Paladin would not work with him, and if he did he would face chaotic shifts in his alignment until he has fallen (going against the code). You barely beat me to it. I'm usually the first to come along and pull that rant. :D
The_Shaman 12-13-06, 06:17 PM	I agree with Dan. Bring back the Crusader from 2e(and not just in the ToB: Nine Swords style) so we can have a holy warrior class that fits the respective deity. Divine champion and Sacred Templar fit the role quite well, I think. However, the problem is finding a good base class: the variant paladins in UA and Dragon are far from perfect I believe.
vezina 12-13-06, 08:02 PM	Divine champion and Sacred Templar fit the role quite well, I think. However, the problem is finding a good base class: the variant paladins in UA and Dragon are far from perfect I believe. Yeah, that was kinda my point. Hell, sometimes I believe that the whole 'holy warriors' concept should just be religious fighters that may or may not take levels in cleric, and may or may not take levels in prestige classes such as these. Crusader in 2e used the kit system, which modified the base class with different abilities and such. It was a modification of cleric that focused more on the martial aspect rather than spellcasting. I think that sort of 'martial cleric' would make a good base class, myself.
The_Shaman 12-13-06, 09:35 PM	Still, some form of a stricter alignment tenet should be in place. I like the idea of a paladin being something more than a devoted fighter sans bonus feats, but it could be applied to more alignments. Sorry, but the Holy Liberator is a bit of a joke.
Meldread 12-13-06, 10:05 PM	I also feel compelled to speak on the point about slaves. Yes, it is completely possible a Paladin who lives in a society that has many slaves may be a slave owner himself. However, he will be nothing like the average slave owner that you can imagine. First and foremost, he would likely find forced slavery wrong in almost all cases. His slaves would easily be the best treated slaves you can find. A Paladin who has slaves would not treat them like cattle or animals. He would address them by their names and treat them as humans (or whatever their race happens to be). Most of his slaves would likely be purchased from Masters who treated them badly, in effect he'd be running a shelter of sorts - seeking out slaves who need protection and purchasing them to keep them safe from cruel masters. It is important to understand that societies as a whole are mostly Neutral in alignment. Good and Evil are the extreme ends of the spectrum, and while most of the people who are neutral STRIVE to be good people - they fall considerably short. Good aligned people, in fact, the essence of goodness is the ability to empathize with others. It is what motivates a good aligned individual to do good deeds, and contrary to that evil is the lack of the ability to empathize with others. That is really, at the core of it, what separates good from evil. An evil aligned individual who CARES and EMPATHIZES with someone or something is MUCH less inclined to cause it harm. Yet, an evil aligned individual is selfish and does not think much about others, and when he does it is only how he can use them to his best advantage. When it comes to harsh treatment, such as torture, the evil aligned individual can perform the action without remorse because he does not empathize with the individual he is torturing. Good aligned individuals are the opposite. Because they empathize with others, because they care for others so much they often put the needs of others before their own. A good aligned person is much less likely to harm another individual because he sees another human being, because he can empathize with the suffering he would inflict and not wish to do that. Not even to a evil individual. A good aligned individual sacrifices his own well-being for the benefit of others because he cares about others to a huge degree. However, no matter how good you are you can still be corrupted. This is why the Code is there. The code is strict and inflexible because it aids in ensuring that a Paladin DOES NOT fall. That he does not commit actions that aren't good. Adventuring with an evil aligned individual in and of itself is not bad, and you might even bring about many good things as a result, but the fact remains that you are aiding an evil individual. That person is likely to use whatever he gained from you to cause suffering and pain to others, and as a Paladin you aided him in doing that. You aided him in becoming stronger. To make matters worse you open yourself up to temptation. An evil aligned person can more easily get what they want because they are inclined to use underhanded methods. Those methods are sometimes tempting and sometimes it might be easy for the Paladin to slip and say, "Okay well that isn't SO bad..." Evil is cunning and manipulative. It is a real and pervasive force within the Realms and it is something that a Paladin has sworn to fight against. As I said in my original post in this thread, Paladins are a hard class to play. They don't work without the right group, the right player, or the right DM. If you lack one of those three things a paladin is not going to be much of a paladin. People admire the Paladin because he is the very embodiment of the TRUE Hero and he is someone many people secretly wish to be but know that they probably never could become. However, a Paladin's life is always filled with sacrifice, giving up his own happiness to ensure the happiness of others and to hope for a great reward in the hereafter. And a true Paladin deserves the reward because he has earned it.
vezina 12-13-06, 10:13 PM	Still, some form of a stricter alignment tenet should be in place. I like the idea of a paladin being something more than a devoted fighter sans bonus feats, but it could be applied to more alignments. Sorry, but the Holy Liberator is a bit of a joke. I think we're kind of speaking past each other. I agree that the Unearthed Arcana paladins fall short of the finish line. I agree that there needs to be a strict tenet in place. However, I think that the tenet needs to be based on a stricter form of the deity's dogma, and not necessarily on alignment. In the Realms, things tend to get a little blurry when it comes to alignment, and the easiest separation in religion comes from dogma, not alignment.
The_Shaman 12-13-06, 10:17 PM	One or the other, really. True, on Faerun deities have more importance than in generic D&D, but paladins or their non-LG alternatives should have something like a code to be careful about, too.
vezina 12-13-06, 10:21 PM	Yep. I love to play paladins and that's why I tend to be in these paladin threads a lot. :D Despite the code of conduct, it's really not that hard to play one if you just take a step back and think about what's going on. Be merciful, keep your word, protect the innocent, serve justice and the community. Not that tough.
Bonzai 12-14-06, 12:45 AM	Oh I fully agree that Paladins must adhere to a strict code of ethics. I just tend to believe that the code changes a bit from diety to diety. For example, a Helmite paladin's number one tenent is to protect and guard. To fail in that task is the biggest sin imaginable for him. I tend to believe that if he had to torture a villian to get information that he needed to protect his charge, he wouldn't hesitate to do so. Afterward he would give them a quick, merciful killing to end their pain. He would not enjoy it, and would not prolong their agony one moment more than what it took, but if that was the only way to get his information, he would do it. And helm would most likley not strip him of his divine blessings. Another example would be a Paladin of Torm. Duty, loyalty, and obediance are the most holy tenants of Torm. If the paladins superiors order the torture and interrogation of a villian, that paladin must remain loyal, obey, and fullfill his duty by following orders. He may feel bad about it, but the code is clear. Like I said, mileage will vary between diety and diety.
vezina 12-14-06, 02:08 PM	I would disagree with that to an extent, bonzai. A paladin's methods will differ slightly from deity to deity, but only in the manner of portraying their deity's lawful good aspect. For example, and this a pretty easy thing to copy and paste: Kelemvor: Destroy Undead, Be merciful, keep your word, protect the innocent, serve justice and the community. Mystra: Repair the Weave and spread magic, Be merciful, keep your word, protect the innocent, serve justice and the community. Sune(and I use this example to show that even though Sune is CG, the paladin still shows the LG aspect): Protect, preserve, and foster beauty and love in the world, Be merciful, keep your word, protect the innocent, serve justice and the community All a paladin's chosen religion does is add one or two agendas to the paladin's code of conduct. He will still not go against his code of conduct, regardless of his deity's dogma. If he truly wants to do anything(including torture) in the name of guarding and protecting, he would be a cleric of Helm, not a Paladin. A cleric of Torm would not ask a Paladin of Torm to torture someone. If they did, the paladin would absolutely second guess the cleric's motives because that's something good people just DON'T do - loyalty, duty, and obediance don't have anything to do with that.
Aratharn 12-16-06, 04:19 PM	as long as one is able to feel bad after having done somthing bad you are not beyond redemption, a hero must keep himself alife to be able to do more good deeds like showing the villan what it means to be good, acomplishing something good because it's the right thing to do is rewarding, even Artemis Entreri, one of the most dangerous assasins ever, understood what it means to do good because it's right to do so The code of the paladins is not a restriction, it's one of the allways difficult ways to live a happy, fullfilled life with the possiblity of enlightment which is the highest point of goodness one can reach and lets you understand the world in all it's apects without being naive or a pessimist making mistakes is human (or what ever goodly race you want), forgiving is divine (at least good goods should be)
Ramenth 12-16-06, 08:19 PM	It's entirelly up to the Paladin. Some paladins would be willing to slaughter hundreds of innocents if it would save thousands of lives; Others wont even kill one.
boards 12-16-06, 10:37 PM	There is a quote from the White Wolf book of David Gemmell (Not D&D but it still works) that typifies how I view a Paladines actions. 1. "Let me ask you this, if a hero sees a child in danger of drowning does he need to know that the fate of the world hangs in balance before leaping in and trying to rescue it? No. But if we are playing this game, what if someone told the hero that the child was destined to be evil? A good question. What then would Druss do? He would jump in a save the baby. And why? Because that is what heroes do."
The_Shaman 12-16-06, 11:00 PM	That's the little tragedy behind it all. Paladins are heroes 101%, and yet many games seem to leave no place for heroism. Of course, the worst part is that in many cases expediency and efficiency are preferred over valor and justice. As one author put it, the paladin is a hero in a world of mercenaries.
Yakostovian 12-17-06, 03:08 AM	It's entirelly up to the Paladin. Some paladins would be willing to slaughter hundreds of innocents if it would save thousands of lives; Others wont even kill one. Such a Paladin that gives serious consideration to slaughtering innocents would likely need an atonement. One that does actually perform it would be no Paladin at all. Paladins are not a "by the numbers" type of good. They are GOOD. No exceptions.
boards 12-17-06, 03:26 AM	It seems I posted my last response (No 44) to the wrong thread, but it still fits generally. On to the OP I agree that torture would be completely out, however if you look at Code from Call of Duty it says "....and punish those who harm or threaten innocents". It then goes onto say "Paladins exist to thwart the plans of evil in order to prevent suffering and further acts of evil." So presuming that the prisoners have done evil, and you feel that they will do further acts of evil then you are permitted to kill that person. One last quote is that "Of course, the most evil offenders, the types that paladins seek out with the most vigor, must be destroyed, and a paladin should not hesitate to carry out that sentence.Clerics of evil deities, evil outsiders, and undead are examples of creatures who radiate a palpable form of evil that must be banished. Granting mercy to such a foe is inadvisable, as it is unlikely they will change their ways" So if you have a prisoner who has committed many acts of evil (ie child murderer), and you do not feel that his "conversion" and "pleading for mercy" are real, then a paladin should have no compunction with slaying this foe.
Derren S. 12-17-06, 05:19 PM	Even in the FR a paladin first and foremost has to be good and only after that comes the deities dogma. So no matter what deity the paladin follows he would not allow prisoners to be tortured or killed (when he wants to keep his powers). Killing evildoers generally is ok for paladins but as soon as you take them prisoner they are under the paladins protection and can't be killed for convenience. Neither does the "greater good" excuse count.
Mirtek 12-17-06, 06:07 PM	There are reports of Helmites enslaving the native peoples of Mazteca. Well, slavery is considered an evil act in most real world societies. However, it would be a mistake to necassarily believe that there can't be a paladin of Helm. Instead, in the campaign setting, slavery is tolerated, and a lawfull act. Under those circumstances, a Paladin isn't compelled to liberate the slaves, and can even own some himself. It's lawfull, and according to the laws and traditions established, not some evil act. While the Helmites did all those thing, there certainly were no paladins among this particular group of Helmites. And that's not the only stain on Helm's "white vest", yet he never used his paladins for those things. Helm certainly even has some blackguards somewhere, he simply makes sure that they never meet his paladins and his paladins are never faced with proof of the exitance of his blackguards. Helm is not a good deity, he's LN. I think that sort of 'martial cleric' would make a good base class, myself. The standard cleric is already a very martial class. High HD, heavy armor, second best BAB group (OK, there are only 3 groups in 3.x, but in 2e clerics really were the second best, right behing the warrior classes, the cleric THAC0 was better than the rogue THAC0).
The_Shaman 12-17-06, 06:14 PM	Blackguards serving Helm'd be more than a bit strange. Paying lip service to him, perhaps, but a LE blackguard would probably prefer Bane if they're into law and order. Anyway, I'd agree - Helmite paladins might be colder and more distant compared to other paladins, but LG is still LG Anyway, back to WingedDeath: really, try not to involve the paladin in anything that smacks that much of evil. While the orders may have different requirements with regard to discipline (which btw is more of law-chaos sort of thing), and you might target people who would be your enemies, the paladin should always conduct him/herself with valor and a measure of compassion. A paladin of Lathander could get off the hook for being an irrepressible flirt (ok, that's more of a Sune paladin thing, but you never know - new beginnings is such a wide concept :D ) or for antagonizing a church leader, but that would be a bit too much.
GothicDan 12-17-06, 10:20 PM	The standard cleric is already a very martial class. High HD, heavy armor, second best BAB group (OK, there are only 3 groups in 3.x, but in 2e clerics really were the second best, right behing the warrior classes, the cleric THAC0 was better than the rogue THAC0). Obviously he wants more martial than that. :) Me, I want the Cleric and Paladin classes erased from my FR games, to be replaced with Priests and Champions (one for each church).
vezina 12-18-06, 02:22 AM	The standard cleric is already a very martial class. High HD, heavy armor, second best BAB group (OK, there are only 3 groups in 3.x, but in 2e clerics really were the second best, right behing the warrior classes, the cleric THAC0 was better than the rogue THAC0). You missed my point, then. I meant it in the way that a Paladin is a "martial cleric." Clerics are the spellcasting branch of a divine team, and paladins are the martial side. Sure, a cleric is more martially focused than, say, a wizard or rogue, but that's not putting him in the same boat as a fighter like paladin does.
Derren S. 12-18-06, 08:49 AM	Blackguards serving Helm'd be more than a bit strange. Paying lip service to him, perhaps, but a LE blackguard would probably prefer Bane if they're into law and order. Anyway, I'd agree - Helmite paladins might be colder and more distant compared to other paladins, but LG is still LG Helm having Blackguards is in no way stranger as Helm having Paladins.
Aratharn 12-18-06, 10:22 AM	what are Helms portfolios again? (noobs like me forget such things easily) i think one was protection, but i'm far from sure
The_Shaman 12-18-06, 08:00 PM	Vigilance, guards, protection, enforcement of the law - that kind of thing. Let me check (shuffles Faiths and Pantheons)... Ok: "guardians, protectors, protection." Seriously, that would be some weird blackguard. I'm not saying it can't work, ever, just that it would be more than a little strange, given the BGs predilection towards dishonorable tactics and traficking with fiends, that one should conform to any good degree with the Helmite teachings. Oh well, might at least make for a great story.
Inspired_Mage 12-19-06, 01:16 AM	A very interesting discussion all round folks, but I hate to be the bearer of bad news (maybe good news for some of you):D but the paladin was actually killed in the very next gaming session, a bloosy wandering monster encounter with some ghasts and abyssal ghouls who flanked my ass and annhilated me in a round... bring on my new shadow adept!
Aratharn 12-19-06, 03:41 AM	A Blackguard of Helm would protect what is his to protect with an extreme brutality and would take great pleasure in killing his victims after having them savagely tortured to get out of them who and why they attacked him and what he protects. In some ways such a beast comes to existence from a paladin who found to much pleasure in killing but is still loyal to his comrads and his oaths. At the moment i'm working on an NPC with these "qualities" and was looking for a fitting god and it seems that i have found one.:) He will come upon his enemies like an angel of death:schemes:, he will be like a weapon of last resort for the organisation he once founded with his best friend (he was still a paladin at that moment)
Yakostovian 12-19-06, 08:49 AM	It seems I posted my last response (No 44) to the wrong thread, but it still fits generally. On to the OP I agree that torture would be completely out, however if you look at Code from Call of Duty it says "....and punish those who harm or threaten innocents". It then goes onto say "Paladins exist to thwart the plans of evil in order to prevent suffering and further acts of evil." So presuming that the prisoners have done evil, and you feel that they will do further acts of evil then you are permitted to kill that person. One last quote is that "Of course, the most evil offenders, the types that paladins seek out with the most vigor, must be destroyed, and a paladin should not hesitate to carry out that sentence.Clerics of evil deities, evil outsiders, and undead are examples of creatures who radiate a palpable form of evil that must be banished. Granting mercy to such a foe is inadvisable, as it is unlikely they will change their ways" So if you have a prisoner who has committed many acts of evil (ie child murderer), and you do not feel that his "conversion" and "pleading for mercy" are real, then a paladin should have no compunction with slaying this foe. Paladins, being creatures of law as well as that of good, should feel obligated to offer most criminals a fair trial before execution. (My example ignores innocent until proven guilty) Exception being an escaped felon that was convicted of crimes warranting capital punishment in the first place.
boards 12-19-06, 04:37 PM	Probably but I dont think that due process of the law as it exists in the RW works the same as it does in FR. With their ability to detect lies and evil they can serve as Judge Jury and Executioner if need be. If they are out in the boondocks where there is no strong central authority then a Paladine would likely do so. If they were in Cormyr or Waterdeep etc, then they would probably turn them over to the Purple Dragons or War Wizards.