Quick question, my GM is a b evil one and muffs up on a regular and our last session we were in a town that we previouslywere at and a member of my party needed to go to a tavern for questions, this is an evil and corrupt tavern and all characters in thetavern are evil. I play a paladin and I make sure our characters are safe at the end of the day and I've followed mycode very well until this point according to the dm, upon arriving I was attacked by an evil character which was an orc and in one strike my dwarven paladin killed the evil orc, no act of provoking the evil character in any way was made and my dm was unhappy and still isthat I am arguing this and like I saidI'm new to this all together and I feel as a paladin and a dwarf allI did was make one less evil for the world and he feels I should lose everything I gained as a paladin, feedback please.
There should never be a time when a Paladin 'falls' for killing an evil foe, especially if the evil foe provoked the battle.
He claims it as murder and says it's bc he works at the tavern even though evilwas detected and he was one of the evil entities
|
If I was your GM and you went around with an evil-radar and fought to the death anything evil you detected, your PC would not be around very long. Differnet folks play different ways. Sounds like your GM is going one of two ways with this, either being evil isnt free reign to murder someone, or he is looking to screw your pally.
A normal orc who works at a tavern will not detect as evil. Unless the orc was a cleric or antipaladin, or over 5th level he does not detect as evil. If the orc was killed in a single hit he probably was not over 5th level so will not register as evil.
That being said you were attacked by someone and defended yourself. This is neither an evil act, nor against the paladins code so there is no reason for you to fall. The fact that the orc works at the tavern does not mean if he attacks someone they cannot defend themselves.
|
If you walked in and murdered the guy unprovoked (aside from him being Evil), your GM is right.
If he tried to kill you and you just tried to kill him right back, you are right and what you did was fine.
If the guy in question threw a (non-lethal) punch at you and you responded with lethal force...then I'm inclined to go back to the GM being right, but I'm betting it's the second situation and your GM is being unfair.
|
It all depends on how strictly you read into the paladin's code. Some would say that acting in self-defense would be considered a justified killing, others would argue that you should have subdued your assailant and at least offered him the chance at redemption.
I would ask your DM to explain his views on how the paladin code works, come to a compromise on how to avoid future accidental incidents like this, and ignore this incident as it was obviously unclear that you two were on different wavelengths about how the code worked.
Just goes to show that the problem with Paladins is as much the fault of the GM's (at least as often) as it is with the players.
If a Paladin is sincerely trying to do good then he should really never fall, unless the GM wants him to... and if he does cross the line, I'd expect some sort of divine warning before all of his class features are simply stripped from him - the Paladin is there to do his deity's work after all, and what use is a servant who's been neutered? The deity WANTS the PC to have these powers and would only take them away if they were used in a manner that hurt their faith rather than upholding it.
I can just see a God thinking 'yeah, I know you were on your way to investigate and ultimately destroy that evil cult which is about to open a portal into the abyss through which demons can come pouring into your world... but you punched an evil bartender without proper cause, so I guess the greater good will have to suffer'...
I'm so glad we went to Paladins being primal avatars of alignment rather than the way they're written. Paladins of Order, Chaos, Good and Evil - much easier to play and they avoid stepping on the toes of Clerics and Oracles.
What it came down to is he hates paladins he still feels he was right bc it'shis game hesays and code doesn't matter hesaid so I had to atone and now I know for future reference and I'll just make my cohort who's chaotic good take care of it if something like this happens again and for the record I don't walk around with anevil radar it was something I had to do for our quest and I just found out thebar was evil and corrupt and in yesterday's session I went to that bar again and sanctified it and he wasn't happy but I got to kill a lot of evil and went about everything the "right" way according to him and we moved on from it
This reminds me of a saying - "What the DM says, goes. If he says enough stupid s..t, the players go as well."
My 2 cents? If someone attacks you, you can defend yourself, paladin or no. Now, a barehanded attack is usually not considered a lethal weapon, so using lethal force might constitute a crime and likely be an evil act, and if a paladin in my games did it I´d have a serious chat with the player if it the character was otherwise ok. The player may still be considered a murderer, and relatives or friends of the slain would want restitution.
Explain to your DM what a Sadistic Choice is and that it takes away from gameplay more than it adds.
Once the DM and players are aware of issuues like this it becomes a lot easier to avoid them.
There should never be a time when a Paladin 'falls' for killing an evil foe
Ahahah, what!?
, especially if the evil foe provoked the battle.
(Scene: Tavern)
Drunken mercenary: "Hey, Paladin! Your MOM fell! In my lap!"
Paladin: *runs mercenary through*
Sure, totally legit.
There should never be a time when a Paladin 'falls' for killing an evil foeAhahah, what!?
, especially if the evil foe provoked the battle.(Scene: Tavern)
Drunken mercenary: "Hey, Paladin! Your MOM fell! In my lap!"
Paladin: *runs mercenary through*
Sure, totally legit.
Strawman is strawman.
Strawman is strawman.There should never be a time when a Paladin 'falls' for killing an evil foeAhahah, what!?
, especially if the evil foe provoked the battle.(Scene: Tavern)
Drunken mercenary: "Hey, Paladin! Your MOM fell! In my lap!"
Paladin: *runs mercenary through*
Sure, totally legit.
You might want to look up the meaning of that term again.
You might want to look up the meaning of that term again.Strawman is strawman.There should never be a time when a Paladin 'falls' for killing an evil foeAhahah, what!?
, especially if the evil foe provoked the battle.(Scene: Tavern)
Drunken mercenary: "Hey, Paladin! Your MOM fell! In my lap!"
Paladin: *runs mercenary through*
Sure, totally legit.
It seems appropriate to call you out for using an example that neglects the 'foe' and 'battle' thing.
Can we start a new thing where we call people out for claiming that you are using a phrase or statement wrong when in fact you are not?
Drunken mercenary provokes a fight with a paladin. Paladin kills him. Seems pretty straightforward.