...I am looking for opinions here...
We are playing Crown of the Kobold King. Last night the group found the kobold nursery. Guarded by the unarmed brood mother (kobold). The small cave has dozens of kobold eggs and infants.
The PC party is all good characters with one lawful good paladin. The discussion begins. What should the party do?
Do they leave the kobold, the eggs, and infants alone?
Do they kill everything under the belief that all kobolds will grow up to be evil and thus a threat to the nearby civilized populations?
Do they spend the time to bring them to the local human town to be "redeemed" but in doing so face a life of bias and persecution?
Would killing kobold eggs and infants constitute an evil act that would force the paladin to lose his paladin abilities?
If the paladin uses his detect evil ability on the room (with the kobold mother removed) would the infants and eggs give him a positive reading on "detect evil"?
If the kobold babies did detect as evil would the party be justified in killing them even though they were not a threat to the party?
Would leaving them there to die of starvation be an evil act and thus killing them an act of mercy?
These were just some of the questions coming up?
...I have NO doubt that these questions have come up before. If you know of the message board thread please point me to it.
Thank you for responding.
As the DM I was unsure how to answer these questions.
I can answer one answer definitively. They will not register to Detect Evil. In Pathfinder, no mortal creature below a certain HD generates an aura, no matter how evil.
|
As to the Paladin's Detect Evil, in Pathfinder most aligned creatures with 5 or fewer hit dice have no aura to detect. The exceptions to this would be Clerics and Paladins, and aligned undead and outsiders. The chart is on top of p.266 in the Core Rulebook.
This basically means that in a fair sized town, a Paladin is only going to find a handful of people with evil auras. Even if a sizable chunk of the town is evil aligned, the vast majority will lack a discernible aura.
As to your questions about the morality of the party's actions, it's probably good that they're asking the questions, but...
You don't want to pigeonhole the Paladin's player by assuming that there is only ever one right answer to every situation. As long as the player is hand-wringing about doing the right thing, I would cut him/her some slack.
If I were playing the Paladin, I would leave the eggs and the infants alive, as well as the unarmed brood mother. I'm not saying that's the only right answer, but that's what I would do. When I play a Paladin, it's important to me that my character believe both in redemption and in free will. If I start killing things based on what they might do in the future, when they're guilty of nothing, or if I assume that every member of a race must be/is destined to be evil, then I'm moving into uncomfortable territory.
Another aspect of how I would play a Paladin would be to deal with present threats, not possible future threats. If it was okay to kill based on what I thought someone would do in the future, then I would have no reason to accept anyone's surrender. I could just kill unarmed prisoners because they would likely repeat their past behaviors in the future. That doesn't sit right with me.
Of course, that's how I'd play a Paladin. That doesn't mean everyone should play one that way.
The other thing that might be important to consider is the gods in your campaign that might be served by Paladins. It's certainly reasonable that one could be all about tolerance and forgiveness, and another might be about justice and judgement. Even though both of those gods are Lawful Good, their servants might see things from a slightly different perspective.
*)Do they leave the kobold, the eggs, and infants alone? Good=yes, Paladin=Yes.
*)Do they kill everything under the belief that all kobolds will grow up to be evil and thus a threat to the nearby civilized population? Good=NO Paladin = NO ((outsiders = this might be yes, GM says Kobolds can only be evil = yes, but i as gm would rule NO since i do not enforce racial alignment's))
*)Do they spend the time to bring them to the local human town to be "redeemed" but in doing so face a life of bias and persecution? Good=Yes, Paladin = Yes. ((All int creatures are persecuted and face a life of bias... better to be alive, even if you have a hard life)).
*)Would killing kobold eggs and infants constitute an evil act that would force the paladin to lose his paladin ability? Good=Yes, Paladin=Yes ((outsiders = this might be no, GM says Kobolds can only be evil = no, but i as gm would rule YES since i do not enforce racial alignment's))
*)If the paladin uses his detect evil ability on the room, with the kobold mother removed, would the infants and eggs give him a positive reading on "detect evil". Good=No Paladin=NO ((outsiders = this might be yes, GM says Kobolds can only be evil = yes, but i as gm would rule NO since i do not enforce racial alignment's))
*)If the kobold babies did detect as evil would the party be justified in killing them even though they were not a threat to the party? Good=Yes, Paladin=YES. ((if, and only if, All Kobolds are evil, and GM say that they can not be anything except evil then yes.... mush like an outsider demon. BUT would i allow detect evil to work on Material Plane children, eggs, infants = NO.))
*)Would leaving them there to die of starvation be an evil act, and thus killing them an act of mercy? This is 2 questions. Would leaving them there to die of starvation be an evil act = YES. Would killing them be an act of mercy = NO. ((Sorry, but once the party kills the evil parents, they just assumed that role; if the party is good. The infants and children are now the party's responsibility, and if good, they need to find a good solution to the problem they just created:))
Some questions for the DM=
1) Do you allow kobolds to be any alignment other than whats listed in the Bestiary or do you allow PC Kobolds in your game??
2) Ok to be honest i forgot what my second question was....
I was about to argue with you, RJGrady but then I realized you said mortal and outsiders and undead don't count as mortal. Anyway Bloodwort, although the low hit die cratures wouldn't give off auras, some DMs allow detectection of an evil presence. It's just too weak to pinpoint to any particular creature.
I still wouldn't let them grant detect evil to work on the eggs though, they're eggs. Even if they came from an evil creature, they can't have any intent much less an evil one, nor are they imbibed with evil magical energy.
As for whether or not the Pally's actions are justified, that one you're just going to have to wait for your player's explanation. It will most likely stem from their previous experience with kobolds. I don't see any problem with it unless someone starts having a game with the smashing of kobold eggs. You could say it's dishonorable, but how honorable is it to just let menacing lizards hatch and raid your town when you have a chance to stop it in it's track? It's not evil to destroy things you believe will eventually harm you or your loved ones.
There's no problem with letting the potentially harmful buggers die of starvation, however if they're doing it because they are deliberately trying to cause pain, it's still okay, unless it's the paladin. Even good characters can have sinister thoughts at times, only the Paladin is expected to live up to that code.
Alignment = PFphb page 166 good vs evil = Good = Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good character make personal sacrifices to help others.
Killing children, infants, or eggs of any sentient being that can be brought up to be of good alignment is a evil act.
Once the group creates the problem of no one to take care of those children, those children become the group responsibility. They at best might get off dumping them at an orphanage, at worst they now have to pay for their upbringing, and be there guardians.
There's no problem with letting the potentially harmful buggers die of starvation, however if they're doing it because they are deliberately trying to cause pain, it's still okay, unless it's the paladin. Even good characters can have sinister thoughts at times, only the Paladin is expected to live up to that code.
Evil or Neutral alignment might leave them to die, but a good person would not.
Kill em all let your god sort it out ;)
Kill em all let your god sort it out ;)
LOL = ya but which God ?
Kill em all let your god sort it out ;)LOL = ya but which God ?
the paldin has faith that the "right" god will get his hands on the recently dispatched souls ;)
Kobolds tend toward evil aligment, which may be partly instinctive but is also partly cultural. They do not have the Evil descriptor on their creature type, which means it is not inherent or inescapable, which in turn means that the eggs are absolutely not evil. They start neutral like most creatures, and can only evil through their behavior.
What to do about the situation is still a difficult decision, but the paladin should know this basic fact of mortal alignment (it's part of his job description, after all) and conclude that they are innocent; slaughtering them is an evil act.
|
the paldin has faith that the "right" god will get his hands on the recently dispatched souls ;)
As they haven't really had a chance to pick a faith yet, I suppose that Pharasma would have to pick a final destination for them.
Or just rule them as atheists (since they technically don't believe in any gods yet), and feed them to Groetus.
If the kobolds, all the way down to eggs, were racially determined to be defaulted to evil before they could choose otherwise, then killing them only strengthens the power of the evil gods, who will claim their souls and use them for whatever they use souls for. If raised to be LG instead, evil will be denied their souls, and Team Good gains more souls, and the good gods gain more of whatever it is they get from good souls.
On the other hand, since undead are anti-life, and therefore default evil, and it is regularly stated on undead threads that life defaults to good, then the kobold eggs and infants might start out as default good, because they are living creatures, all filled up with positive energy, and killing these innocents *immediately* would send them straight to the Upper Planes, to be issued harps and birkenstocks, while allowing them to grow up and possibly *choose* to worship evil kobold-friendly gods would then hand their souls over to Team Evil, which would suggest that a Paladin's duty would be to kill them before they can choose evil, while still in a 'state of grace.'
Only your DM knows for sure which 'logic' applies.
There was a similar post about goblin babies
My thoughts: Killing them is not evil. Killing them would not make a Paladin fall. As far as the Paladin, and most of society, is concerned, Kobolds are a scourge on the land and the only proper solution to them is to exterminate them. In some campaign worlds this attitude is less prominent, to the point that monsterous races may be treated as equals. Others this is more prominent.
As for the Paladin, he should ask himself. Is it crueler to leave the infants after exterminating the adults, or just kill the infants. Killing them is merciful to me.
<--currently playing in a campaign with favored enemy kobold.
|
My two cents:
Good implies mercy. Killing unarmed infants isn't merciful, so it isn't a good act. Killing what are perceived as evil infants isn't really an evil act either, so if the PCs truly believe that all kobolds are irredeemably evil (whether they actually are or not in your game), then at worst it's a neutral act, but I'd give good PCs some sleepless nights over that one.
As for the Paladin, there's one factor that I don't see used enough. Not only is the Paladin a bastion of Good, he's also a paragon of law. Especially in this case, which is morally ambiguous, the Paladin should be following the letter of the local law. Is there a bounty on Kobolds? Does it specify a minimum age? A Paladin would also be completely happy with passing this decision on to a higher authority, either praying for guidance or literally dropping them eggs off on the doorstep of the local lord or temple. One of the best parts of being extremely lawful is there's always someone to ask for orders...
Oooh, we're doing this one again?
Alignment = PFphb page 166 good vs evil = Good = Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good character make personal sacrifices to help others.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Murdering innocent children is evil. And will cause Any GOOD cheacter, LG, NG, CG, to have to give a bloody good reason why it is not, even then require atonement if it could not be helped. If it could be helped in any way, and player knows that this is evil, and they still did it anyway = Then there alignment shifts to neutral at best, and might even just flip it to evil, based on character actions.
Murdering sentient being who are immobilized, jailed, or helpless is also an evil act.
Even torturing an evil jailed or helpless creature is an evil act = Despite what Bush/Channey said, despite what there lawyers say, doing this is evil, and wrong. I might see a LG or NG character doing it for the good of the kingdom, but the act itself is evil, and i would require the character to accept the consequences of there actions. Which might mean a temporary alignment shift until they can atone for what they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------
As for the Paladin, he should ask himself. Is it crueler to leave the infants after exterminating the adults, or just kill the infants. Killing them is merciful to me.
The thing is a paladin (or Good) would not kill infants. Take them to an orphanage, to grow up to be successful members of the community. Raise them as there own children. Or find a family that would take them in.
The whole killing them is merciful to me, just does not cut it with being good. ((Incurable disease, worms eating out your brain and in pain, and begging to be killed... maybe.)) just because your to lazy to take care of the children you just made homeless and cant take the time, to bring them to the nearest orphanage...sorry but thats just evil.
Oh and the Favored Enemy listed does not say you hate the enemy, just that is you Favored enemy. The enemy you are most accustom to fighting. If your evil, go right ahead. If your neutral, and dont want to make the personal sacrifices to help others, that is within your alignment. If your good, then i would hold your action to that until you changed alignment.
As for the Paladin, he should ask himself. Is it crueler to leave the infants after exterminating the adults, or just kill the infants. Killing them is merciful to me.The thing is a paladin (or Good) would not kill infants. Take them to an orphanage, to grow up to be successful members of the community. Raise them as there own children. Or find a family that would take them in.
Where they will be promptly executed for being a plague on the world... I see no reason that the Paladin should burden himself with this. Multiple good gods in the Golarion execute monsters on site, no questions asked.
The whole killing them is merciful to me, just does not cut it with being good. ((Incurable disease, worms eating out your brain and in pain, and begging to be killed... maybe.)) just because your to lazy to take care of the children you just made homeless and cant take the time, to bring them to the nearest orphanage...sorry but thats just evil.Oh and the Favored Enemy listed does not say you hate the enemy, just that is you Favored enemy. The enemy you are most accustom to fighting. If your evil, go right ahead. If your neutral, and dont want to make the personal sacrifices to help others, that is within your alignment. If your good, then i would hold your action to that until you changed alignment.
I guess my Paladin is more Old Testament than yours.
I guess the answer to this depends on how you view creatures like Goblins and Kobolds. In broad terms do they have a racial tendency towards evil due to the nature of their society, or are they evil to the core like evil outsiders?
In my world Kobolds are only mostly evil, the race doesn't have to be evil. In that case it most definitely is not a good act to kill off kobold babies and doing so would make a paladin fall. The argument that 'he was 60% likely to grow up to be evil!' simply doesn't cut it as justification.
Agreed.
While we are not burdened with other sentient races in our world to deal with, in the fantasy world of D&D there are Other sentient races other than humans. As such one still needs to deal with these other races based on there character alignment.
Well I'd take it this way... if a bunch of Ogres slaughtered a town down to the last child, your adventurers would be heading up into the mountains to destroy the savage evil brutes wouldn't they?
I certainly appreciate everyone's thoughtful comments so far.
The bit about my paladin being more old testament than yours made me laugh! :-)
For the record, the paladin in question is a paladin of Iomedae. The party (thus far) has merely bound the kobold brood mother and left the infants and eggs alone. It's quite possible they will forget about the entire room before the adventure if finished, we'll see.
After having read everyone's comments I think I am essentially asking players and GMs alike whether they saw sentient creatures as born neutral and then slowly growing into their alignment through their culture and environment. Right now I'm leaning toward eggs and infants as beginning life as neutral.
I liked the bit about being alive means they're filled with positive energy. However, if you put a baby human and a baby kobold in the same play pen my bet is the instincts of the kobold will have it attacking the human since kobolds seem to be more predator-like than a human. I'll admit that is an assumption on my part. Maybe they will just cuddle and coo with each other.
I do think we need to consider the view of the humans living in Falcon Hill and most normal settlements. Kobolds are considered monsters. They hunt and kill and steal and they're part bogey man and things that go bump in the night. A normal human probably flees or fights to slay any kobolds they meet seeing them as pests and a danger to their life and livestock. If kobolds are stealing your goats, or snatching your babies, you probably lean towards wiping them off the face of the earth.
Another good question to ask is how would a druid, who sees all life (or just most life) as part of nature and having its own special niche in the environment, would they protect the baby kobolds or kill them?
Are monstrous humanoids part of the normal ecological system or a blight on the system to be removed?
...that's a good point about ogres, but what about the ogre children? ;-)
Which kind of Druid, A Neutral good druid, A True Neutral Druid, or a Neutral Evil druid ?
Smiles evilly with a halo over his head :)
|
Don't know if it was mentioned above, but...
In your game, are they inherently evil? If not, then why are the only two options "kill or leave to grow up, potentially killing the town?" Why not the following option:
Try to take the kobolds and the unarmed den mother away from the evil influences (evil Kobolds). Reason with her on the basis that they the others are evil, and if she attacks, use subdual and steal the eggs to somewhere else. Yes, it's heavy handed, but as long as the paladin sets them up somewhere safe (far away from the den mother who may be evil) and provides for them, you'll be good by example and (perhaps) raise some non-evil kobolds. You can even take the den mother, and slowly convince her that you're helping.
If they are inherently evil, then subdue the den mother, bring her to justice in town, and seal the area.
Agree with Oliver McShade; genocide = evil regardless of the motivation.
"The ends doesn't justify the means" in one of the few tenants of good that most of us can agree on.
'findel
Bloodwort -- not sure if you actually caught what Talynonyx was getting at: to the kobolds, your PCs are the ogres!
Also, it's been rightly pointed out that this can vary across games. But by my reading of the core rules, only creatures with the Evil descriptor on their creature type are BORN evil.
"The ends doesn't justify the means" in one of the few tenants of good that most of us can agree on.
Heh, I've always thought of that as a terribly dangerous and short-sighted statement because it perpetuates the idea that there's a separation between "ends" and "means" in the first place; it's like trying to end racism with affirmative action. Better to say that every action has consequences (some good, some bad), and singling out the consequences you care about while ignoring the rest doesn't make the side-effects go away.
|
As for the Paladin, he should ask himself. Is it crueler to leave the infants after exterminating the adults, or just kill the infants. Killing them is merciful to me.The thing is a paladin (or Good) would not kill infants. Take them to an orphanage, to grow up to be successful members of the community. Raise them as there own children. Or find a family that would take them in.
The whole killing them is merciful to me, just does not cut it with being good. ((Incurable disease, worms eating out your brain and in pain, and begging to be killed... maybe.)) just because your to lazy to take care of the children you just made homeless and cant take the time, to bring them to the nearest orphanage...sorry but thats just evil.
Oh and the Favored Enemy listed does not say you hate the enemy, just that is you Favored enemy. The enemy you are most accustom to fighting. If your evil, go right ahead. If your neutral, and dont want to make the personal sacrifices to help others, that is within your alignment. If your good, then i would hold your action to that until you changed alignment.
With that concept of good, the heros would spend their entire career ferrying humaniod infants and al fronteir towns would be fully racially mixed. I hope your game world supports that. Good most certainly can go with mercy in death, they are not required to be flawless saints.
Additional complication: kobold eggs are delicious, and a brood that size could easily feed a small village for several weeks.
Discuss.
I'm currently running a group of 6 good PC's through the same module. While they have not gotten as far as your group has, we did have a brief moment where one of the kobolds on the upper level succombed to a Hideous Laughter spell and was rolling around on the ground. The cleric wanted to go finish him off but she had guilt pangs at the thought (placed in her head by me, the DM), and grappled him instead. Good thing, too, as he turned out to be somewhat helpful later on.
I'm curious to see how the PC's handle the nursery in my game. Thanks!
|
Each of the players has to make the decision on their own, but what is your Paladin players Code of Conduct? Have you two discussed it?
If anything you should iron out that wrinkle first. The Player should tell you what they want it to be (with some oversight by you) but overall it should be a Code they strive to follow. Then once the Code is clarified you can point your player back to that. The others could even use it as a baseline.
Personally I would leave the brood alone. If in the future they prove meddlesome then they will be judged, but not till then.
Funny though how this question changes if those eggs were some other creature type, like aberrations. Would you leave the eggs of the Xenomorph race from the Alien franchise to live?
--Between a Vrock & a hard place.
I think the main question is whether or not the characters would view them as inherently evil or good or whatever, not whether I as the DM have decided one way or another. Does the world I'm running tip the player's perception one way or the other? Who cares what our modern (as someone said, 'First World') take on it might be?
(...)Would you leave the eggs of the Xenomorph race from the Alien franchise to live?
Excellent come back!
Well played indeed!
The following is an excerpt from Frank Trollman's and K. As far as I understand, Frank was (is?) a notorious figure on many message boards, who nevertheless wrote a few rather interesting essays, including the following:
9.1; The Socialomicon
“Can I kill the baby kobolds?”
When people are asked to name a historical point that D&D most closely represents, they’ll usually say something like “The Middle Ages”, or perhaps a date between 1000 AD and 1500 in Europe. Truth be told, to find a historical period which has a social setup anything like D&D, you’re going to have to go back. Way back. D&D represents a period in history that is most closely identifiable with the Iron Age: the landscape is dotted with tribes and aspiring empires, the wilderness is largely unexplored, and powerful individuals and small groups can take over an area without having a big geopolitical hubbub about it.
The source material for the social setting of D&D is not Hans Christian Andersen, it’s Homer’s The Iliad and Caesar’s The GallicWars. In the backdrop of early historical empire building, crimes that modern humans shake their heads at the barbarity of are common place – even among the heroes. D&D at its core is about breaking into other peoples’ homes, possibly killing the residents, and taking their stuff home with you in a sack. And in the context of the period, that is acceptable behavior for a hero.
9.1.1 Living With Yourself After a Raid
The goblins have gone and conducted a raid on your village in full force. They rode in, took a bunch of the sheep, killed some of the people, set fire to some of the cottages, and rode away again with Santa Sacks filled with this year’s crop. And they laughed because they thought it was funny. And now that your elder brother has been slain you want to dedicate yourself to the eradication of the Goblin Menace and begin the training necessary to become a Ranger so that you can empty the goblin village from the other side of the valley once
and for all.
Par for the course D&D, right? Wrong! Killing all the goblins isn’t just an Evil act, it’s unthinkable to most D&D inhabitants. This is the Classical Era, and actually sowing the fields of Carthage with salt is an atrocity of such magnitude that people will speak of it for thousands of years. In the D&D world, goblins raid human settlements with raiding parties, humans raid goblin settlements with “adventuring parties”, and like the cattle raiding culture of Scotland, it’s simply accepted by all participants as a fact of life. When your city is raided by other groups of humanoids, it’s a bad thing for your city. Orcs may kidnap some of your relatives and use them as slaves (or food), and many of your fellow villagers may lose their lives defending lives and property important to them. But that’s part of life in the age, and people just sort of expect that sort of thing.
9.1.2 Razing Hell: When Genocide is the Answer
Sometimes in history there would come a great villain who just didn’t get with the program. The Classical example is the Assyrians. Those bastards went around from city to city stacking heads in piles and levying 100% taxation and such to conquered foes. They became. . . unpopular, and eventually were destroyed as a people. That’s the law of the jungle as far back as there are any records: if a group pushes things too far therules of mercy and raiding simply stop applying. Goblins, orcs, sahuagin. . . these guys generally aren’t going to cross that line. But if they do, it’s OK for the gloves to come off. In fact, if some group of orcs decides to kill everyone in your village while you’re out hunting so that you come home to find that you are the last survivor, other humanoids (even other Evil humanoids like gnolls) will sign up to exterminate the tribe that has crossed the line.
Cultural relativism goes pretty far in D&D. Acceptable cultural practices include some pretty over-the-top practices such as slavery, cannibalism, and human sacrifice. But genocide is still right out. That being said, some creatures simply haven’t gotten with the program, and they are kill-on-sight anywhere in the civilized world or in the tribes of savage humanoids. Mindflayers, Kuo-Toans, and [Monster] simply do not play the same game that everyone else is playing, mostly because their culture simply does not understand other races as having value. And that means that even other Evil races want to exterminate those peoples as a public service. Like the Assyrians, they’ve simply pushed their luck too far, and the local hobgoblin king will let you marry his daughter if you help wipe them out of an area.
Solitary intelligent monsters often get into the same boat as the Kuo-Toans. Since the Roper really has no society (and possibly the most obscure language in Core D&D), it’s very difficult for it to understand the possible ramifications of offending pan-humanoid society. So now they’ve done it, and they really haven’t noticed the fallout they are receiving from that decision. Ropers pretty much attack anything they see, and now everyone that sees a roper attacks them. In the D&D worlds, ropers are on the brink of extinction and it probably never even occurs to them that their heavy tendrilled dealings with the other races have pushed them to this state.
The following is an excerpt from Frank Trollman's and K. As far as I understand, Frank was (is?) a notorious figure on many message boards, who nevertheless wrote a few rather interesting essays, including the following:
** spoiler omitted **...
You see, in my game worlds the evil races have already hit the point of the Assyrians. They more or less have a KoS rule.
You see, in my game worlds the evil races have already hit the point of the Assyrians. They more or less have a KoS rule.The following is an excerpt from Frank Trollman's and K. As far as I understand, Frank was (is?) a notorious figure on many message boards, who nevertheless wrote a few rather interesting essays, including the following:
** spoiler omitted **...
Well, then it seems that you have your own answer. You then need to affirm and solidify your own interpretation of things and make sure that you and the PCs are all on the same level as far as alignment goes, and who crossed the line and who hasn't.
People keep saying Paladin Code of conduct. People keep saying how they few monsters.
Ok, my argument is not based on the paladin. It is not based on how they few monsters. It is how they very other forms of sentient life.
My argument is based on alignment, not all alignments, just on the GOOD alignment. What does it mean to be GOOD.
Now... change the name Kobold, or wyverns, or Goblins in the listed section to = Elf, Gnome, Dwarf, or Human.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Now if you, battle your way into a evil dwarf stronghold, to stop their rain of terror on the countryside, and slay the evil adults who are causing the problems. Deep inside the stronghold, you find a nursery, filled with dwarf children and infants.
What would a GOOD alignment person do ??
Would they slay the children? NO.
WOuld they kill them out of mercy? No.
Would they leave them their to die? NO.
-------------------------------------------------------
While it is easy to call a kobold a monster, the same is true for Dwarfs as monster, elves as monsters, or even Humans as monsters.
--------------------------------------------------------
(...)
While it is easy to call a kobold a monster, the same is true for Dwarfs as monster, elves as monsters, or even Humans as monsters.
While I agree with you, we could call a kobold a monster. This is not how they are defined by RAW, but a homebrew world like Caineach's (or at least a homebrew interpretation of a published world) might define the kobold as otherwise.
They may be otherworldy Evil (with a capital "E") on the same level as a demon, or inhumanly aggressive toward every living creatures from birth on the same scale of the xenomorphs of the Alien(s) franchise.
Again, that's not how RAW describes them and that's now how I like to see them personally speaking, but since its a fantasy world, Caineach has every right to define them like that.
Does that change it from being an evil act? I don't know, but it certainly changes the rules of engagement...
(...)
While it is easy to call a kobold a monster, the same is true for Dwarfs as monster, elves as monsters, or even Humans as monsters.
While I agree with you, we could call a kobold a monster. This is not how they are defined by RAW, but a homebrew world like Caineach's (or at least a homebrew interpretation of a published world) might define the kobold as otherwise.
They may be otherworldy Evil (with a capital "E") on the same level as a demon, or inhumanly aggressive toward every living creatures from birth on the same scale of the xenomorphs of the Alien(s) franchise.
Again, that's not how RAW describes them and that's now how I like to see them personally speaking, but since its a fantasy world, Caineach has every right to define them like that.
Does that change it from being an evil act? I don't know, but it certainly changes the rules of engagement...
Where did he say he was not using RAW?
As to your question, what if they were like demons with fixed alignments, then no. It would not be an evil act, because they are irredeemably evil and they can never be anything but evil. Just like animals are not sentient and can never be anything but animals.
Pathfinder is the rules, we are discussing. In those rules, sentient creatures of the prime material plane are listed with alignments due to general behaver, culture, and upbring. Those sentient creatures, can choose to go against the general alignment listed in the creature listing. Or to think of it another way the alignment listing is just a general indication of what you might except.
Example: Humans are listed as Neutral. Some humans kingdoms might have the majority of people as good, while the kingdom next door might be mostly evil people. This is due to how the humans in said kingdom were raised, the choice they make, the choices that were forced on them at an early age, and how they thought they could best survive in said kingdom.
(...)
While it is easy to call a kobold a monster, the same is true for Dwarfs as monster, elves as monsters, or even Humans as monsters.
While I agree with you, we could call a kobold a monster. This is not how they are defined by RAW, but a homebrew world like Caineach's (or at least a homebrew interpretation of a published world) might define the kobold as otherwise.
They may be otherworldy Evil (with a capital "E") on the same level as a demon, or inhumanly aggressive toward every living creatures from birth on the same scale of the xenomorphs of the Alien(s) franchise.
Again, that's not how RAW describes them and that's now how I like to see them personally speaking, but since its a fantasy world, Caineach has every right to define them like that.
Does that change it from being an evil act? I don't know, but it certainly changes the rules of engagement...
I never said that Kobolds were evil. I said that they were viewed as evil by others. Big difference. I love my grey areas. My characters go in with the assumption that Kobolds are evil, and Paladins are the embodiment of might makes right. Paladins therefore smite and kill kobolds on site, because that is what is right to do. Other good characters have more leadway. Like I said, my Paladin is Old Testament.
I never said that Kobolds were evil. I said that they were viewed as evil by others. Big difference. I love my grey areas. My characters go in with the assumption that Kobolds are evil, and Paladins are the embodiment of might makes right. Paladins therefore smite and kill kobolds on site, because that is what is right to do. Other good characters have more leadway. Like I said, my Paladin is Old Testament.
Paladins are not what makes right. Paladins are the symbol of Law and Good.
And while a Lawful Good paladin will fight evil, aka kobolds, how he fights them is determined by his alignment and his paladin code, which should support his alignment.---------------------------------------
Ok, off of Raw and game, on to real world=
During Old Testament there would have not been any paladin, as the paladin is molded off the Christean knight during the crusades. Even then this was a romantic interpretation of the Knight class, and not a realistic few of what Knights did.
Most of these knights would have fallen under the Fighter, Cavalier, Ranger, or even Rogue class builds if used in game.
Now that the Cavalier class has come out, you might want to look into a Lawful Neutral Cavalier, for that Old Testament feel.