Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kreil 07-29-07, 01:43 PM	A group approches the town of hillsedge, a preist of tyr,a paladin of tyr,a halfling rogue and a dwarf fighter, plus a elf sorrcer. as they approch they are met by two guards, one is evil. as the paladin uses his detect evil skill to discover. the evil guard aks why we are there and we say for loging. he then tells us that it will cost us 100 gold to bring the paladins griffin into the town,with a smart azz remark. the paladin then asks is it 100 gold to go THROUGH the gate? Yes the gaurd says! So the paladin jumps over the gate on the griffin,haha now its free! then the evil guard stabs the other guard in the neck an kills him, and starts running through the town yelling were under attack!!! You should know that all the player are 10th level or higher! as the guard runs through the street the paladin flys after the killer and grabs him up by the griffins claws, just as the halfing shoots him in the back. now because they are so hi level they stand there ground and no one else draws a weapon other then the rogue, since the guards here can't seem to hit them, they try to talk there way out of it. on one else is killed and things are set right later when the priest raises the dead guard, so he can tell everyone what happen. the question is was the paladin out of line? and did he cause the dead of the other guard, directly or indirectly?
StSteven 07-29-07, 01:51 PM	He was out of line, but didn't cause the death of the other guard. He should be scolded or charged with a crime, but that's about it. He did an unlawful thing, not an evil thing.
Drag0nUL 07-29-07, 03:21 PM	I think it depends on how you view paladins in your campaign. If you see that the duty of the paladins is to combat evil relentlessly and act as judge jury and executioner in the case of evil foes, then your player's actions are fully justified. The paladin witnessed a clearly evil act (a murder), comited by an evil person and punished him as he deserved. If you think that paladins should act as guardians of righteousness within the society and use less radical means of fighting evil when possible (such as delivering evil persons to justice instead of taking matters into their own hands) then your player was overreacting. Nevertheless, I don't think what he did was so serious as to be worth any in game consequences; rather you should talk with the player out-of-game and explain him how you view the paladins in your world.
Mirage_1 07-29-07, 03:33 PM	th jumping over the gate was a bit juvenile, a bit smartassed. Mostly a bit chaotic. The actions of the evil guard made no sense whatsoever though. In many games, the paladin not chasing the evil guard and stopping him (possibly causing death) might have been ground for punishment In other words depends on the game
stargate525 07-29-07, 03:37 PM	It was a clever trick by the Paladin, first off. Secondly, just bad planning all around. They should have just stayed outside the gates, showing no signs of agression, explain the situation to the guard captain who's bound to come running, and get the evil guard charged with murder.
zorgling25 07-29-07, 03:50 PM	and starts running through the town yelling were under attack!!! You should know that all the player are 10th level or higher! as the guard runs through the street the paladin flys after the killer and grabs him up by the griffins claws, just as the halfing shoots him in the back. the question is was the paladin out of line? and did he cause the dead of the other guard, directly or indirectly? Ahem. WHAT DO YOU THING DOING SUBDUAL DAMAGE IS FOR!? :D
Mirage_1 07-29-07, 03:52 PM	Ahem. WHAT DO YOU THING DOING SUBDUAL DAMAGE IS FOR!? :D Paladin didn't do any damage whatsoever to the guard, or help kill him.
zorgling25 07-29-07, 04:41 PM	Paladin didn't do any damage whatsoever to the guard, or help kill him. It depends if you consider the Paladin's holy mount to be a spiritual extension of himself. I do, especially since the Paladin has total control over its actions. Therefore, the griffon's action to grapple the guard and allow the rogue to sneak attack him was effectively the Paladin's own action. So yes, the Paladin may not have dealt damage, but by giving the rogue a position to sneak attack the guard, he DID help kill him. Personally, I think you should have a LONG chat with this player about how to play Paladins (any DM should when they play with someone whom they've never had as a Paladin before). Its not an issue of who's right, who's wrong, but rather, the two of you should be on the same page about what is right for a Paladin. If necessary, write out the whole Paladin Code of Conduct with the player. Once you have established these rules, affirm with the player that so long as grounding is in the aforementioned Code of Conduct, you henceforth by Rule 0 have full right to declare the Paladin fallen if breaks his code. Let him off on this specific offense, but make VERY SURE he knows what he's getting into next time. IMO 99% of Paladin problems arise because the DM and player haven't worked it through thorougly enough.
vegetalss4 07-29-07, 04:56 PM	i think the other guard was the non evil one. you know the one the evil killed. the paladin had nothing to do with his death.
navar100 07-29-07, 04:58 PM	A group approches the town of hillsedge, a preist of tyr,a paladin of tyr,a halfling rogue and a dwarf fighter, plus a elf sorrcer. as they approch they are met by two guards, one is evil. as the paladin uses his detect evil skill to discover. the evil guard aks why we are there and we say for loging. he then tells us that it will cost us 100 gold to bring the paladins griffin into the town,with a smart azz remark. the paladin then asks is it 100 gold to go THROUGH the gate? Yes the gaurd says! So the paladin jumps over the gate on the griffin,haha now its free! then the evil guard stabs the other guard in the neck an kills him, and starts running through the town yelling were under attack!!! You should know that all the player are 10th level or higher! as the guard runs through the street the paladin flys after the killer and grabs him up by the griffins claws, just as the halfing shoots him in the back. now because they are so hi level they stand there ground and no one else draws a weapon other then the rogue, since the guards here can't seem to hit them, they try to talk there way out of it. on one else is killed and things are set right later when the priest raises the dead guard, so he can tell everyone what happen. the question is was the paladin out of line? and did he cause the dead of the other guard, directly or indirectly? Yes, the paladin was out of line. He commited Chaos. "100gp to go through the gate" then use a loop hole to ignore it? It was not an evil law. Even if the guard just made it up the paladin would have no way of knowing but have the confidence in knowing Justice will win out in the end. The guard killed his "partner". That sin of murder falls unto him, but the situation itself is the fault of the paladin. From his one act of Chaos the situation spread out into more Chaos. The paladin did not commit Evil so he doesn't lose paladinhood, bu the does have a mark against him. Keep this up, and he'll lose his paladinhood anyway for ceasing to be Lawful Good even if it's "only" Neutral Good.
Radijs 07-29-07, 05:23 PM	No the paladin wasn't out of line. If a guard comes up to me and wants 100 gold coins from me for bringing my griffon into the city the first thing going through my head would be "Scam" and the next one would be "Detect Evil". Personally I would have arrested the guard for his disgraceful behaviour but learning him a lesson in such a way (by flying over the gate) would have been the nice solution. That the bad guy suddenly stabbed the other guard would have surprised me and I would have moved to bring the bad guy down for an arrest or a swift death.
calronmoonflower 07-29-07, 05:30 PM	The paladin may have committed a legal infraction in game, but the dungeon master is at fault. The paladin did something unexpected and the dungeon master suddenly had the guard turn stupid evil.
Derren S. 07-29-07, 05:51 PM	The paladin did nothing wrong. Flying over the gate was maybe a bit childish (n the other hand 100 gold is a huge sum of money) but a very lawful interpretation of the rule. A chaotic character would have assumed that this fee is for entering the town not for going through the gate. Using a loophole to circumvent a law is lawful or neutral. Plainly ignoring the law is chaotic. And punishing (killing) the murderer is what paladins normally do. They fight evil and don't give evil persons a slight slap on the wrist. Even if the paladin himself would have killed the guard he would have done everything right. Besides, as a paladin of Tyr, he is supposed to be judge, jury and executioner more than any other paladin. I'm really surprised how many people suggest that paladins whos only duty is to fight evil must act completly powerless when comfronted with evil and have to rely on other (most of the time very low level) people (=town guard) to confront evil. And who is better suited to judge people. SOme guy in a town who earns a little money by walking along a street or someone who has been bestowed by the deity of justice with gifts to help him finding and eliminating evil? When someone is a known paladin any town guard should follow his orders no matter what because the paladin knows better what is good and lawful than anyone else.
StSteven 07-29-07, 07:02 PM	The guard had legitimate authority. It was clearly a violation of the CoC. It was a chaotic act. It wasn't enough to change alignment right away, but, as said above, definitely a mark on the record, so to speak.
Thunder Dragonbane 07-29-07, 07:14 PM	The paladin in this case should have challenged the gaurd on the excessive gate fee, not fly over it. Also the GM should be told to never run a game because of the stupidness of the encounter. Yes they are both at fault.
Drag0nUL 07-29-07, 07:17 PM	The guard had legitimate authority. It was clearly a violation of the CoC. It was a chaotic act. It wasn't enough to change alignment right away, but, as said above, definitely a mark on the record, so to speak. In what way do you see the paladin violating the legitimate authority of the guard? By flying his griffon over the city gates? Or by killing the evil guard? In the first case the paladin obeyed the letter of the law, although I find what he did a bit childish. In the second case, I think you are judging things based on modern day mentality. Today, if you kill a murderer you are comitting an unlawful act, because every man has the right to a trial guaranteed by law . But in medieval world (on which D&D is based) men had no such rights. There were much less laws back then, so killing a man was most likely more of an evil act (not in this case however since the man was evil and the paladin had seen him murdering another man) rather than an unlawful one.
StSteven 07-29-07, 07:26 PM	He did not respect the guards legitimate authority by flying over a gate. It is something that my teenage son would do to be a smart ass. It is not respect. He was perfectly within the bounds of proper action to kill the other guard.
mortalgod666 07-29-07, 07:28 PM	Ok I just want to say something that I THINK you have overlooked( not sure) but the fact that some of you are saying the 100 gold rule to be ( scam, was it?) you gotta think that having such a creature in the town might cause for fear( in the more insane inhabitants) and some clen up afterwords.( think of it like an airline, the bigger the item the more it cost to get on) ( or into the town as the situation maybe)( or at least I think thats how it goes,well you get the point,the rule aint a "scam" )
zorgling25 07-29-07, 09:00 PM	He did not respect the guards legitimate authority by flying over a gate. It is something that my teenage son would do to be a smart ass. It is not respect. He was perfectly within the bounds of proper action to kill the other guard. A lawful alignment does not require that the character respect all legitimate authority indiscriminately from all sources. Take a look at the Avenger PrC on Wizards' site. They have a Lawful requirement, but they commit murder and espionage all the time against foreign nations, obviously without respect for the rulers of these nations. Why are they Lawful? Because they are fulfilling their DUTY, which is to serve their country till death. The Paladin's duty is to his God, his Code of Conduct and his Paladin Order. Does flying over a gate when he would be charged by an evil guard for going through violate his duty to any of those 3 things? The only one I can think it might violate is the Code of Conduct, but this is why the player and the DM have to sit down and VERY CAREFULLY come up with a Code. Since such a code was not in place at the time of the offense, the Paladin should not be retroactively punished (that would be very ex post facto wouldn't it?).
StSteven 07-29-07, 09:01 PM	A paladin's CoC DOES require him to respect legitimate authority.
StevenO 07-29-07, 09:20 PM	The Paladin flying over the gate instead of going through the gate after getting lip is a bit immature but isn't such a terrible response to the guards poor choice of words. I fully imagine the Paladin would have paid the fee had it been requested either more politely or at least more professionally. As for a 100gp fee to bring a Griffon into a community that is perfectly reasonable. You could argue the number but if you're going to bring an exotic animal that favors horse meat into my community you'd better believe I would charge you something. That is my way to cover expenses should something happen and you jump on and fly off leaving a mess behind. As for the Paladin's dealing with the evil guard after the incident they were what I'd expect from a Paladin. He just witnessed a murder at took steps to apprehend the subject. Perhaps he knew the Halfling would shoot but note that the paladin's catching the subject as the halfing shoots him isn't the paladin's fault. To me that sounds like a great encounter for what is otherwise a boring task.
zorgling25 07-29-07, 09:20 PM	A paladin's CoC DOES require him to respect legitimate authority. Now thats a point worth bringing up. It appears then, that this paladin seems to not have read through his code of conduct carefully. As a DM, I get the feeling that you'd end up with one ****** player if you just had him fall. As I suggested before, come up with a complete code of conduct with the player, and if necessary, post-it to the character sheet so he doesn't forget. Henceforth he should be responsible for it.
Mock26 07-29-07, 09:32 PM	Overall, both the DM and the Player are at fault for not sitting down before the campaign and working out and discussing their viewpoints on the Paladin's code of honor. In this specific example, the player is at fault for having his character pull such a stupid stunt when the paladin should have just demanded to speak to the captain of the guard. Maybe there was such a high fee for bringing in such an exotic mount. But, the DM was also at fault for having he guard pull such a stupid move. For the most part, city gates tend to be relatively busy places. And, even though the original poster didn't say, I'm assuming this incident happened during the day. Why would the guard take the risk of being witnessed as he slew his comrade in arms? Evil doesn't necessarily mean stupid.
Mathurian 07-29-07, 10:51 PM	A paladin's CoC DOES require him to respect legitimate authority. Actually, if you use all the published rules it may well not, read Quintessential Paladin I and II and it discusses codes of conduct in depth and mentions that no two are alike, and specifically states that some Paladins may not always respect legitimate authority as part of their codes.
Mock26 07-29-07, 10:56 PM	Of course, this example is one reason why every high level character should carry around a portable hole full of coppier pieces.
weasel0 07-29-07, 11:41 PM	Paladins also kill evil trolls. 1 post evil trolls are the best kills.
Sigurd van Norhusen 07-30-07, 03:51 AM	the question is was the paladin out of line? As it was not really lawful what he did, it was out of line. and did he cause the dead of the other guard, directly or indirectly? Not really, no. It's not his fault that this town is guarded by psychotics.
CCS 07-30-07, 04:12 AM	Assuming that the gate tax was the normal lawfull procedure in Hillsedge, then yes, I'd say that he was a bit out of line with trying to skirt it. Afterall, just because the evil guard was the one to inform him of it wouldn't make it untrue.... As far as he & the rogue killing the evil guard? Again, I don't see much wrong. But I'm also one of the people who view alignments as cut & dried black/white distinctions. The D&D world IS composed of good guys & bad guys. And they ARE locked in eternal struggle. As such paladins as divinely sponsored to be judge/jury/executioners. It's there duty to put the forces of evil to the sword whereever they find them. Did the paladin CAUSE the other guards death? No, I don't think so. I read no good reason concerning why the evil guard attacked his partner just because the griffon riding paladin flew over the wall..... Though I suppose that I'm intended to infer that there's more evil doers about and that they forced into revealing their presence.... The death of the guard lies solely with some bad DMing IMO. So what DO I think of the paladins actions? Poorly played, but not really anywhere near risking a fall from grace. Perhaps some sort of comment should be made both in & out of game to the player about the less than bright idea to hop the wall....
Radijs 07-30-07, 04:27 AM	The guard had legitimate authority. Thats a bold assumption. I think it was more likely that the guard was trying to earn some extra pocket money by abusing his position.
vonklaude 07-30-07, 04:50 AM	It was a clever trick by the Paladin, first off. Secondly, just bad planning all around. They should have just stayed outside the gates, showing no signs of agression, explain the situation to the guard captain who's bound to come running, and get the evil guard charged with murder. I guess being Lawful doesn't = dull; but that trick smacked of Chaos. In my games I tend to expect Paladins to live by the letter and meaning of the law. The meaning of the law covered entry to the town in any fashion. A paladin could certainly be mischevious, but that would take skilled RP to pull off. They might have leaped the gate, then immediately turned around and paid the fee. A paladin could play to the letter, but they will find that hard to equate with good. It's the age old question: is Judge Dredd good? For me the answer is no. He is deliberately cast as satire on a police state: that's why he works as a character. -vk -vk
Mock26 07-30-07, 04:53 AM	Thats a bold assumption. I think it was more likely that the guard was trying to earn some extra pocket money by abusing his position. If so, then who was the paladin to judge or ignore the guard? If the paladin suspected ulterior motives then he should have demanded to speak to the guard's superior or the captain of the guard and taken it up with him. The paladin, while suposed to uphold the law, was way out of line to take the authority in his own hand and enter the city in what was probably a very unlawful manner. But, as I said up above, I think the DM showed a serious lapse of common sense and good judgement when he had the evil guard kill his comrade in arms.
Infernostrider 07-30-07, 06:38 AM	The paladin is at fault for breaking his code of conduct. A paladin must abide by laws and rules imposed upon him (and if the guards tell him he has to pay 100g he has no choice but to do so or stay out of town) If only one of the guards was evil, then he should have talked to the other guard, or asked for the captain of the guard. Usually you can get around it that way, or get confirmation that he's not *just* out to get you
Radijs 07-30-07, 06:44 AM	Who the paladin was? He is a man sanctioned by the gods to dispense justice! I'll grant that it wasn't the wisesst thing the paladin could have done but there's no law against a wisecracking paladin. Out of a players perspective I'd say that there where several possible motivations for the PC to act the way he did. 1. He thought he could outwit his DM. 2. He thought he could teach the corrupt guard a lesson by outwitting him so easily. Obviously the man wouldn't be cut out to be a criminal.
PsychotropicDog 07-30-07, 07:48 AM	Back story – Setting: Faerūn -They have, in their adventures, defeated some powerful enemies, but a couple escaped, and at least one of those was a tanar'ri. -In exchange for a favour, they were tentatively offered a mission by Storm Silverhand to infiltrate Zhentil Keep, or at the least keep an ear to the ground for word of Manshoon, though they did not accept either. -An attempt to rid the world of a dangerous artifact went disastrously wrong, and as far as they can divine, it is in the possession of a dracolich, who also seems to be the main suspect in the sudden disappearance of a Tailor in Ashabenford (who was, coincidentally, making clothing out of dead dragon skin for the party) and also his shop and the ground within ten feet of it. Though sudden, witnesses said they heard loud frightful bellowing, and screams that lasted until false dawn. But nobody actually 'saw' anything because they were paralyzed with fear and hiding. -The party has stopped the maelstrom of magics affecting the Constable's Tower in Dagger Falls, and have been proclaimed by Randal Morn the 'Lords of Dagger Falls'. They have recovered an item that though not usable by them, should probably fetch a hefty price in a city that could afford it, and are on their way to Waterdeep. The previous day, as they are starting out, a portal appears some distance away, and from it come zombie wyverns and a couple of demons with four arms and two bows each.. the wyverns did not last long but the demons (all three of them) got away. [mostly accurate with only a wee bit of embellishment] The REAL and complete story, as told by Xlixtherax, pseudodragon. (abridged) ...and the next evening arrived outside of Hill's Edge. Welcome to 'Hell's Edge' they thought they heard one of the gate guards say. The paladin's sense determined that one of the guards was evil, and this was nearly confirmed when the guard made a disparaging remark "Oh great, more Holy Rollers'. When directly confronted if he had a problem with 'Tyr' the guard backed down, somewhat, yet told the paladin "There is a surcharge of 100 gold to bring magical beasts into the city. The paladin tried to baffle him with a semantic argument - "So you're telling me it will cost me 100 gold to go through the gates?" "Yep. That's right." He then proceeded to fly over the gate. Noticing that the 'evil' guard is about to do 'something', the sorcerer says he will pay the 100 gold, and as he is reaching for his overfull coin purse the cleric tells him 'no way', and they proceed to argue. The dwarf may have mentioned something about flashing coin around, but nobody listened to him. Not to be outdone, and because he really was evil, the guard stabbed his comrade in the throat with his spear, then ran inside screaming 'We are Under Attack!'. Other guards ran up to see him (name of Floktrok by the way) catch a flaming arrow with his back before getting swooped up into the sky by the griffin, and they attacked. Sadly, they were ineffectual versus the paladin and the cleric, and were not too eager to try much harder when their 'best shot' did not even dirty the shine of the paladin's armor. Essentially the guards made threatening gestures while the party, for the most part, stood their ground. The sorcerer turned invisible, and teleported into the town, near some archers. The cleric summoned a pair of hound archons, which seemed to cause the guards to consider the best part of discretion (that being surviving), and the archons' teleporting amidst the archers convinced them to stop taking potshots at the griffin, who was approaching 500 ft in the air with what looked like one of their dead 'buddies'. The sorcerer revealed himself (haha, I mean he turned visible) to the latecomer who appeared to be in charge, and somewhat got the 'Official' (henceforth known as the 'Official') to listen to his arguments, and it was deemed that the guards should retreat a bit and calm down. Next proceeded a lengthy and heated debate about who killed who. "Look," the sorcerer finally said, "There is no blood on our weapons, only on that guard who killed his comrade." This was apparent. The paladin, and cleric, feeling that the case was closed began demanding that the evil Floktrok (who is indeed evil and guilty and certainly miscalculated the speed of an unladen griffin) be, erm, suffused with the justice of Tyr. The Official wants to hear Floktrok's side of the story, even though he tells the party he tends to believes them. But he does not want them to stay at the gates of his town (and he also does not want them in it, near it, above it or on a parallel plane with it). The cleric and the paladin however, are eager to volunteer their services to mete out the punishment that is allready, in their minds, preordained. When he sees them bickering, the paladin yelling at the sorcerer to 'shut up', the Official thinks shutting up would be nice – if only the paladin would do so! It would be a wish granted, but not before the night birds began calling. “We are here to do Tyr's justice” declares the cleric, and the Official can feel the vein in his temple throbbing. “If you want to set up a revival tent say, 25 miles outside of town, that would be great. But I am in charge here.” And then he was berated for being useless at being in charge, harbouring criminals, hiring incompetents, and it may even have been insinuated that he liked the feel of wool just a little too much, if you know what I mean. The 'Official' just wants them to leave, because frankly, nobody within a 100 feet was going to survive a fight with these heroes, and who knows who will get caught in the crossfire. He also felt it was a given that somebody in town was going to die, and not alone, if these heroes stayed; thus he agreed to get the dead guard 'Jot's wife 'Jillian' for them to ask whatever strange thing they were demanding. The distraught woman is not given much of a chance ( if one second actually counts) to grieve, before she is hounded with words she can not hear at this time. Interspersed with the cleric's colorful description of this armpit of a city, this den of evilness, this hellhole of s..., He convinced Jillian to accompany the party with Jot's body, who would almost assuredly be raised from the dead, by the grace of Tyr and all that is just. It may have been the 100 gold he offered her to start a new life (She figured at first they wanted to pay her 100 gold to accompany them outside of town for.. whatever) with her soon to be no longer dead husband, in someplace other then this sty of a city. And so they ride off into the moon rise, to camp, and hear the rogue's suggestion that they sneak in and finish off that evil bastard, and meditate, and raise the dead guard Jot bythegraceofTyr and to amicably discuss their visit to Hill's Edge, and that is where we leave them for now. The party still knows very little of Hill's Edge. If you know nothing of Hill's Edge, remain in blissful ignorance. The surcharge was 100 gold to bring a magical beast into the city. Manner of egress is not important. Evil does not have to be stupid, but very often it is. Lawful good does not equal lawful stupid, though this does occasionally occur. Tyr is not renown in Faerūn for his sense of humour (it could even be that people don't get it, notice it, or that he does not share it with just anyone). One arm, one eye, dour countenance, nicknamed the suffering god.... Me? I find it hilarious, and I am not done laughing. How I rule it. The paladin's clowning set off the chain of events. Had there been more substantial guards arriving, and maybe a fumbling spellcaster or two, bystanders could have gotten fragged. Definitely a chaotic act. The paladin and cleric bullied the town guards and the 'Official', without true malice but with utter contempt for any authority present. It does not matter if said authority figure is an evil git, they have without a doubt disturbed the peace, and all this stemming from one stupid act. Tyr knows his followers are not unattainably perfect, and frankly, is not readying a lightning bolt. The DM may have other plans. muhahaha!
Grumman 07-30-07, 08:47 AM	Not to be outdone, and because he really was evil, the guard stabbed his comrade in the throat with his spear, then ran inside screaming 'We are Under Attack!'. ... The paladin's clowning set off the chain of events. Had there been more substantial guards arriving, and maybe a fumbling spellcaster or two, bystanders could have gotten fragged. Definitely a chaotic act. The paladin could not have been expected to foresee the actions of the guard, because a reasoning person wouldn't murder his co-worker because someone tried to exploit a loophole, and the guard had given no indication that he was not a reasoning (if slightly evil-aligned) individual. If the guard hadn't been of the "evil stupid" variety, the worst that would have happened was a peaceful confrontation with the city guard, and then only if it turned out the guard was telling the truth about the surcharge. If the DM had of taken the "peaceful confrontation" route then he could have used this to reign in the paladin's behaviour, if he wished.
Radijs 07-30-07, 08:55 AM	Why did the guard stab his mate to death? "Because he is evil" isn't a valid reason really. Being evil is a consequence to your actions. If anyone's at fault its the guard because he decided to escalate all the events by murdering his comrade. Nobody could have seen that coming.
wrecan 07-30-07, 09:17 AM	The guard stabbing his co-worker to frame the others for murder is assinine. That should never have happened. In my opinion, it makes the entire attempt to discern whether the paladin was justified in his actions futile. I mean, how many towns guardsmen are there? How fungible are they? Surely the guard's co-workers have noted this guy's sadistcic and untrustworthy tendencies. One doesn't merely kill a co-worker with no prior behavior. And the guard seemed to do this for no reason other than to spite the paladin. "evil is often stupid" doesn't hold water. The DM seems to have done as a DM-stick with which to beat the paladin into a life of humorless role-play. Just ban paladins in your game. As a side note, failing to show respect for legitimate authority is only noteworthy if it constitutes "grossly" violating the Code. Not all Code violations have consequences, even for a paladin. Was grandstanding a gross violation of the Code? I really doubt it. At most, he might be chastised if his superiors hear about that and are utterly humorless individuals. I think they'd find it funny, and as long as the paladin didn't make a habit of it, no consequences whatsoever.
vonklaude 07-30-07, 09:40 AM	As a side note, failing to show respect for legitimate authority is only noteworthy if it constitutes "grossly" violating the Code. Not all Code violations have consequences, even for a paladin. Was grandstanding a gross violation of the Code? I really doubt it. At most, he might be chastised if his superiors hear about that and are utterly humorless individuals. I think they'd find it funny, and as long as the paladin didn't make a habit of it, no consequences whatsoever. Chastising would be about right for the putative crime.As you say, Pallies need not be humourless. I like to think they can and should be filled with a joy of living. The act feels a touch chaotic to me, ofc, but not desperately so. I'd rate it on balance of actions. The third time he does it, that's when to start questioning his committment to law. -vk
wrecan 07-30-07, 09:44 AM	The third time he does it, that's when to start questioning his committment to law.I wouldn't disagree, although that might depend on what sort of flavor campaign I was running.
ProZocK 07-30-07, 09:58 AM	Well, in my opinion, both sides are guilty. Guilty of Dumbness. The paladin, after hearing the amount charged to bring a beast to the city, should have asked: -Is this the city law or are you just trying to rob me? Upon the response from both guards that that indeed IS the law, pay up and walk in. Jumping over the gate was stupid and not a Lawful act. The law was CLEAR. Of course the paladin should not fall, that would be even dumber, but the GM should tell the paladin: Hey, that was a lil bit dumb and not lawful. The guard was EVEN DUMBER. The paladin clearly broke the law. He just had to call his superior, tell him the paladin did not pay the fee, and the "gooddoer" would have to pay a hefty fine PLUS the 100gp. Oh the joy! But NOOOOO, im EEEEEEEEBILLLLLLLL! I STABS THE GAURD IN THE THROAT LOLZ! Right there everything went just bonkers
PsychotropicDog 07-30-07, 07:10 PM	This should have been posted in the 'what's a player to do' section, because as the DM, I am not looking for advice on what to do. This is a player argument. The question of who is at fault has nothing to do with 'did so and so follow the paladin's code'. If it still is not clear, because you did not feel like reading the long 'REAL' description of the events, let me assure you, Tyr has no plans for any sort of chastisement of the paladin. So if you are a paladin hater on principle or a paladin pc in your game, just put that argument aside as it is not the real issue. The character's actions, and that character did not have to be a paladin, could have been a vanilla fighter, did set off a chain of events. It is not hard to grasp - player does A, and Z happens. Intentions, motives, these are things that may interest a Deity, but the DM has to think of the results of those actions. And the truth of the matter, even the most carefully thought out actions may have unintended results. Not everything turns out the way the players' envisioned; as unseen factors and dice rolls also have their effect. I only hope other DM's and players may get a chuckle out of the tale, but as far as 'what do the rules say should happen', I can only tell you what happens next, after it happens. The real question, what to do when players argue, has part of my answer here. I let the players argue amongst themselves and of course nearby NPC's are aware of this and react accordingly, possibly taking advantage of the situation. Don't bother blaming the DM (me) because neither I nor the players had an issue with the way the events were played out, (I was rather pleased with the session) they have issues with each other's actions.
StSteven 07-30-07, 07:21 PM	I don't see the killing of the guard as anything other than justified. I don't think that is what the pally did wrong. I don't believe in the 'black or white' alignment junk. You don't have to be a murderer to be evil. However, this guy was a murderer (aside from being a ridiculous encounter for the whole killing of the other guard thing). There was absolutely nothing wrong with killing this guy. Even if the pally had done it all himself. Nothing wrong with that. Just because you don't think a pally should smite on sight doesn't mean you think they should be flower bearing pansies. Only a 'black and white' alignment believer would think that.
Voran 07-30-07, 08:31 PM	Yknow, if I ever get back into the active game of GM'ing and I have paladin situations, or even characters in general, I may start implementing a butthead tally. When confronted with an action by a player char that is not quite evil, but arguably childish, snotty or all around aggravating, they get a tally mark. Once the count reaches 10 or 20 or so, they get a talk as if they've committed an 'atonable' action. As for the situation of the OP. Both sides have some fault. On the DM side, there was a bit of poor planning. From my opinion, it seems a bit of obvious railroading plus 'spur of the moment' planning. The whole 'stab my buddy guard and pretend the PC group is responsible' plot seemed half-baked, and a bit jumbled in execution, which probably struck the players as fairly obvious. As for the Paladin, while I have issue with Paladins that flip on Detect Evil like it was slapped on their keyboard hotbar, almost willy nilly, in this case the only real fault i can find in the Paladin's action is his blatant disregard for the situation without finding out more information. Sure it might be a scam, but from the description, it didn't seem they tried to find out if it was legit or not before essentially invading the town. Plus the idea of bringing an exotic beast like a griffin into town SHOULD cost extra.