A evil prince in a paladdin kingdom [Archive] - Wizards Community

A evil prince in a paladdin kingdom [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Heredom
07-08-05, 12:15 PM Ok so here's the situation: the kingdom of Bremaī is a L-G realms govern by a truly good king. The paladdin of Bremaī are known to be particularly zealous and everyone of them swore eternal obedience to the king and vow to protect the kingdom from any ennemy.
However, the king, lord Marius, is not as young as he used to be. The clerics of Pelor did their best to prevent him from dying but the end seem inevitable. And now, the prince Ethal, only successor of Marius is about the become to new king.

Now, is such a setting, one might expect the prince to be as good as his father. But what if it's not the case? What if the prince was evil. What if he didn't care about the safety and morality of his peoples and was power-hungry. How would a nation of paladdin react to a king ordering them to, let's say, slaughter the guard of the dwarves empire because they refused to sell their diamonds mines. Or to kill Firmax the gold dragon, once a ally, because he refused to help them to kill the dwarves.

How would you handle it?
DragonDeadite
07-08-05, 01:22 PM Monarchy=Chaos. The problem with a ruling monarchy is that the entire nation changes with every new king, no matter how good the previous king was the new king could be a bloodthursty fiend bent on world dominion. The new King should realise that no matter what happens, he is only as strong as his army/people allow him to be. If he becomes too much of a killer then the paladins could very well raise up against him and destroy him for being evil. The paladins swore an oath to the old king, that doesn't mean they'll do it for the new king. If they swore an oath to defend the nation from any enemy this also includes any enemy within the nation itself, which means after the new king orders them to destroy an enemy they could see it as evil and destroy him instead. If you want the characters involved then have a paladin hire them to kill the king because he doesn't think he can do it himself.
CzarGarrett
07-08-05, 01:29 PM If they know the prince is Evil, the Paladins and other LG (and probably CG, NG) people will do whatever is possible to keep him from the throne (short of assassination and the like).

If they can't keep him from the throne, I could see some sort of Council of Paladins who step in and wrest control from the Prince, keeping the Council in charge until a proper heir can be found.
Lord Ian Stark
07-08-05, 01:30 PM If the order of Knights did not see this coming then they were idiots. I doubt it was a secret that the Prince was an evil POS and that when he got the chance to take the kingdom under his wing, he would destroy it through his nature.

Like in the movie The Gladiator I would see the king appoint the leader of the knights or General to be the new ruler upon his demise. Obviously the Evil twirp would be PO'd and want revenge and that would all make for a great RP game. ;)

If there was no way that the King could appoint anyone a ruler besides his kin then the Knights would probrably leave the kingdom wanting no part of the soon-to-be dictatorship.

I could even see an older Knight that is ready to retire, make the ultimate sacrifice and comit an evil act by killing the prince. This is all if the prince truely is as evil as he seems to be.
OracleYori
07-08-05, 01:32 PM Yeah, it would definately seem like an Episode III thing going on-
Gedrin
07-08-05, 02:16 PM I see a tragic situation coming...

I assume the leader of the order of paladins is also the king's champion, and responsible for defending the honor of the royal house. He is, naturally, bound by those oaths.

Of course, some other high ranking paladin, say the greatest warrior in the order, might go up and call the evil prince out. A prince who acts in the way you describe would be an enemy of the kingdom,"By your acts of evil, betrayal of our allies and the murders you have ordered, you have harmed the kingdom, it's people, and it's honor."

The champion takes the prince's place.
There's a duel, neither party wants to kill the other, but everyone's bound by their honor to fight as hard as they can. Pally leader dies.
The great warrior wins and demands the prince step down.
The prince refuses, and declares the pally order traitors.

Now...either A: the prince has enough influence to hold on and the nobility is split in a civil war, or B: in the LG kingdom, where the prince is a known bastard and the pallys are great heroes of the kingdom, the nobility forces the prince out. Given the situation, I think B is more likely, particularly among people who have an understanding and commitment to the concept of honor.

This may seem like a tragic waste, but the champion keeps his vows, the order defends the kingdom and the cause of good. Presuming the rest of the nobility is similar to the good king, they'll see what happens and pressure the prince to abdicate. The paladins would no doubt plan to call out the prince in the most public way possible. They won't let an evil man who betrays his allies out of greed come to power. Further, they'll let everyone know, honestly and publicly, what their reasons are. The character of the remaining nobility will have a lot to say on how things pan out.

Of course, there's always the chance that some power of LGness would see the duel about to happen and intervene.
Me, Myself, & 101 others
07-08-05, 02:19 PM Are the paladins more lawful or more good? If they are more lawful, if they swore their loyalty to the crown they'll stick around while the evil guy ascends, and do their best to try and block him. "Sire, I advise against that," and "Sire, you should be aware that is against the will of the people," and so on. It can be that, while evil, the prince is unwilling to alienate his most loyal troops, most of his kingdom, and all of his allies. So, he might be evil, but also behave himself for the most part.

If the king absolutely insists, the knights can get creative. Say, the evil king demands that the knights lead the army to invade the allied dwarf kingdom. The knights could mobilize the entire army, ride out in force, get within sight of the dwarven stronghold. One of them can then reach down, pick up a rock, and throw it at the dwarven walls saying, 'Oh, we tried, it apears their defenses were just too strong for us." They could then ride back to report their 'failure.' At that point the king has accomplished nothing, lost a lot of money, and the army is -much- less likely to follow his orders.

Another option is the king could manipulate the knights. Say, the king wants bloody war, loot, and more territory. The knights are fervent defenders of good. The king could propose a war against neighboring evil kingdoms/monsters, and the knights could go along with it. Everyone is happy.

If the knights are more good, however, there's a decent chance they'll be going after the prince before or after he becomes king. If they kill him before he ascends, theres a good chance they haven't violated their oath. One of them could even dip into Shadowbane Inquisitor, Shadowbane Stalker, or Slayer of Domiel so that he could get the skills to assassinate the prince. And, all of those classes are LG.

Another option would be for the paladins to remain publicly loyal and seek a way to overthrow the new king. Have them obeying the laws of their faith, the laws of decency, or something like that as opposed to the laws of the kingdom. They could start building a rebellion.
Clawhound
07-08-05, 02:50 PM Most kingdoms have rules about succession. These would include "competence" on part of the successor, along with "honor."

If the law is entirely on the Prince's side, his Paladins can step down from their position. Refusing to server an evil lord is a lawful and good thing to do.

Likewise, a public condimnation from a leading good religious figure can also server to bolster the paladins. "Man's laws says X, but the God, eternal and good, require that a King be both Honorable and Good. In the eyes of the gods, and their higher law, this man can not be king, and I will not crown him, nor will I bless his reign."
Always-Late
07-08-05, 02:58 PM If the paladin's were declared enemies of the prince, then the paladin's have the right to go to war against the prince. Most likely the common troops will stand aside, and the prince is incarcerated.
Sildatorak
07-08-05, 03:05 PM Yeah, it would definately seem like an Episode III thing going on-

Agreed. To be an effective evil ruler, you have to manipulate things behind the scenes so that people think you are at worst questionable (rather than outright, baby-killing evil).
rbingham2000
07-08-05, 04:00 PM An evil prince in a paladin kingdom?

One of the Political Situations in the DMG II has a sniveling, villainous king kept in check by powerful, virtuous lords, with the officials doing the lords' bidding. It sounds like the situation that this could easily turn into.

And speaking of the political situations, I'm very much liking them -- a lot of them are very reminiscent of the swashbucklers, which earns definite cool points with me.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Heredom 07-08-05, 12:15 PM	Ok so here's the situation: the kingdom of Bremaī is a L-G realms govern by a truly good king. The paladdin of Bremaī are known to be particularly zealous and everyone of them swore eternal obedience to the king and vow to protect the kingdom from any ennemy. However, the king, lord Marius, is not as young as he used to be. The clerics of Pelor did their best to prevent him from dying but the end seem inevitable. And now, the prince Ethal, only successor of Marius is about the become to new king. Now, is such a setting, one might expect the prince to be as good as his father. But what if it's not the case? What if the prince was evil. What if he didn't care about the safety and morality of his peoples and was power-hungry. How would a nation of paladdin react to a king ordering them to, let's say, slaughter the guard of the dwarves empire because they refused to sell their diamonds mines. Or to kill Firmax the gold dragon, once a ally, because he refused to help them to kill the dwarves. How would you handle it?
DragonDeadite 07-08-05, 01:22 PM	Monarchy=Chaos. The problem with a ruling monarchy is that the entire nation changes with every new king, no matter how good the previous king was the new king could be a bloodthursty fiend bent on world dominion. The new King should realise that no matter what happens, he is only as strong as his army/people allow him to be. If he becomes too much of a killer then the paladins could very well raise up against him and destroy him for being evil. The paladins swore an oath to the old king, that doesn't mean they'll do it for the new king. If they swore an oath to defend the nation from any enemy this also includes any enemy within the nation itself, which means after the new king orders them to destroy an enemy they could see it as evil and destroy him instead. If you want the characters involved then have a paladin hire them to kill the king because he doesn't think he can do it himself.
CzarGarrett 07-08-05, 01:29 PM	If they know the prince is Evil, the Paladins and other LG (and probably CG, NG) people will do whatever is possible to keep him from the throne (short of assassination and the like). If they can't keep him from the throne, I could see some sort of Council of Paladins who step in and wrest control from the Prince, keeping the Council in charge until a proper heir can be found.
Lord Ian Stark 07-08-05, 01:30 PM	If the order of Knights did not see this coming then they were idiots. I doubt it was a secret that the Prince was an evil POS and that when he got the chance to take the kingdom under his wing, he would destroy it through his nature. Like in the movie The Gladiator I would see the king appoint the leader of the knights or General to be the new ruler upon his demise. Obviously the Evil twirp would be PO'd and want revenge and that would all make for a great RP game. ;) If there was no way that the King could appoint anyone a ruler besides his kin then the Knights would probrably leave the kingdom wanting no part of the soon-to-be dictatorship. I could even see an older Knight that is ready to retire, make the ultimate sacrifice and comit an evil act by killing the prince. This is all if the prince truely is as evil as he seems to be.
OracleYori 07-08-05, 01:32 PM	Yeah, it would definately seem like an Episode III thing going on-
Gedrin 07-08-05, 02:16 PM	I see a tragic situation coming... I assume the leader of the order of paladins is also the king's champion, and responsible for defending the honor of the royal house. He is, naturally, bound by those oaths. Of course, some other high ranking paladin, say the greatest warrior in the order, might go up and call the evil prince out. A prince who acts in the way you describe would be an enemy of the kingdom,"By your acts of evil, betrayal of our allies and the murders you have ordered, you have harmed the kingdom, it's people, and it's honor." The champion takes the prince's place. There's a duel, neither party wants to kill the other, but everyone's bound by their honor to fight as hard as they can. Pally leader dies. The great warrior wins and demands the prince step down. The prince refuses, and declares the pally order traitors. Now...either A: the prince has enough influence to hold on and the nobility is split in a civil war, or B: in the LG kingdom, where the prince is a known bastard and the pallys are great heroes of the kingdom, the nobility forces the prince out. Given the situation, I think B is more likely, particularly among people who have an understanding and commitment to the concept of honor. This may seem like a tragic waste, but the champion keeps his vows, the order defends the kingdom and the cause of good. Presuming the rest of the nobility is similar to the good king, they'll see what happens and pressure the prince to abdicate. The paladins would no doubt plan to call out the prince in the most public way possible. They won't let an evil man who betrays his allies out of greed come to power. Further, they'll let everyone know, honestly and publicly, what their reasons are. The character of the remaining nobility will have a lot to say on how things pan out. Of course, there's always the chance that some power of LGness would see the duel about to happen and intervene.
Me, Myself, & 101 others 07-08-05, 02:19 PM	Are the paladins more lawful or more good? If they are more lawful, if they swore their loyalty to the crown they'll stick around while the evil guy ascends, and do their best to try and block him. "Sire, I advise against that," and "Sire, you should be aware that is against the will of the people," and so on. It can be that, while evil, the prince is unwilling to alienate his most loyal troops, most of his kingdom, and all of his allies. So, he might be evil, but also behave himself for the most part. If the king absolutely insists, the knights can get creative. Say, the evil king demands that the knights lead the army to invade the allied dwarf kingdom. The knights could mobilize the entire army, ride out in force, get within sight of the dwarven stronghold. One of them can then reach down, pick up a rock, and throw it at the dwarven walls saying, 'Oh, we tried, it apears their defenses were just too strong for us." They could then ride back to report their 'failure.' At that point the king has accomplished nothing, lost a lot of money, and the army is -much- less likely to follow his orders. Another option is the king could manipulate the knights. Say, the king wants bloody war, loot, and more territory. The knights are fervent defenders of good. The king could propose a war against neighboring evil kingdoms/monsters, and the knights could go along with it. Everyone is happy. If the knights are more good, however, there's a decent chance they'll be going after the prince before or after he becomes king. If they kill him before he ascends, theres a good chance they haven't violated their oath. One of them could even dip into Shadowbane Inquisitor, Shadowbane Stalker, or Slayer of Domiel so that he could get the skills to assassinate the prince. And, all of those classes are LG. Another option would be for the paladins to remain publicly loyal and seek a way to overthrow the new king. Have them obeying the laws of their faith, the laws of decency, or something like that as opposed to the laws of the kingdom. They could start building a rebellion.
Clawhound 07-08-05, 02:50 PM	Most kingdoms have rules about succession. These would include "competence" on part of the successor, along with "honor." If the law is entirely on the Prince's side, his Paladins can step down from their position. Refusing to server an evil lord is a lawful and good thing to do. Likewise, a public condimnation from a leading good religious figure can also server to bolster the paladins. "Man's laws says X, but the God, eternal and good, require that a King be both Honorable and Good. In the eyes of the gods, and their higher law, this man can not be king, and I will not crown him, nor will I bless his reign."
Always-Late 07-08-05, 02:58 PM	If the paladin's were declared enemies of the prince, then the paladin's have the right to go to war against the prince. Most likely the common troops will stand aside, and the prince is incarcerated.
Sildatorak 07-08-05, 03:05 PM	Yeah, it would definately seem like an Episode III thing going on- Agreed. To be an effective evil ruler, you have to manipulate things behind the scenes so that people think you are at worst questionable (rather than outright, baby-killing evil).
rbingham2000 07-08-05, 04:00 PM	An evil prince in a paladin kingdom? One of the Political Situations in the DMG II has a sniveling, villainous king kept in check by powerful, virtuous lords, with the officials doing the lords' bidding. It sounds like the situation that this could easily turn into. And speaking of the political situations, I'm very much liking them -- a lot of them are very reminiscent of the swashbucklers, which earns definite cool points with me.