BNW whether you like it or not...
1: The Cheliaxian State is a recognised Lawful state (in both senses), with a clear set of Laws that apply to its citizens.
2: The Paladin/HK is a recognised agent and enforcer of those laws.
3: The Paladin/HK, has a moral and ethical responsibility to now carry out his duties in accordance with those Laws; he is duty bound by both his Paladinhood and his HK status to act in accordance with the Law.
There is no dispute here, there can't be.
Now,
The question we have before us is whether the Paladin/HK combination is viable, and what happens when the (to our tastes) unpalatable happens and the Paladin is put under a moral dilemna; can the combination survive being placed in a position where their sensibilities are offended.
Terms of reference:
a: We are assuming an LG Paladin/HK combo.
b: Paladin/HK do not normally ride around with the holy trinity of classes backing them up, they tend to operate in groups made up of other fighter based classes.
c: Given the rather 'low level' scope of what has been presented, we will assume the PHK is not swimming in a sea of magic items, but then that wouldn't change a lot anyway.
So lets now go to your slave scenario.
***
Bobus the LGPHK is out on his daily rounds when he is confronted by a poorly presented Halfling woman; she is dirty, wearing cheap torn clothes, and is bawling in tears.
Bobus, being the gentleman he is, immediately moves to comfort her... at the same time his professionalism ensures he looks around for the cause of the situation, and he begins asking her some questions about what is going on.
Halfling divulges that she is an escaped slave, fleeing the toil and hardship of her lot in life, and is in fear of the masters lash should she be found...
Bobus knows taht slavery is quite legal in Cheliax, although it bothers him deeply.
"Ma'am, you'll have to come with me to the station whilst we sort this matter out" he informs her; though he is polite about it, there is a firmness in her tone that makes it clear she has no choice.
Bobus has just detained her for questioning - not an abduction, not a kidnap.
This is Legal, this is Moral, and this causes no breach in any of his codes.
Back at the office, Bobus uncovers that the Halfling was rightfully sentenced to indentured servitude after failing to repay debt, the slave owner has paid for the title over her for a contracted period, and that period has not expired.
The Slave owner eventually arrives, and explains that he doesn't think much of slavery either, however he has had to buckle under the reality that if he doesn't use slaves, his produce from his farm will be farm more expensive to produce than his neighbours who all use slaves - he would be ruined at the markets as his prices would be too high. He worries that soon it will be undead brought in to work the fields and then even slaves wont be enough.
Bobus hands her back to the 'slave owner' that she may be returned to work, no different from taking an escaped prisoner back to prison.
Bobus doesn't like slavery though, and feels it is disgusting. He goes to see Brother Peter about it, and as he feels conflicted he seeks Atonement if needed and vows to start immediately petitioning the local magistrates (and indeed anyone he can get to) to better the lot of Slaves in general.
No breach of ANY of his vows here, just some hurt feelings.
Twist 1
Bobus looks at the records of the trial and sees the Halfling has been set up in a sham trial with unfair contracts she had no way of ever honouring.
He immediately notes his findings to his nearest friendly magistrate and asks for an immediate hearing on the matter.
1) The dubious contract gets looked at as not being in the Public Interest and is voided. The slave is freed, and Bobus helps the Slaver petition for damages.
2) The dubious contract is upheld, Bobus gets told that the Halfling took it and it was caveat emptor.
Bobus hands the woman back over, annoyed at the injustice, but as he is aware that many people are probably stuck under the same shady dealings, he brings together some like minded people to begin an advocacy service, Cheliax has its first embryonic Legal Aid and Public Defender system brought into being. The greater good now being satisfied, Bobus can feel some respite from the nagging at the social injustice.
Twist 2
During his investigation, it is verified that the Slave was taken unlawfully. Bobus waits patiently until the owner turns up and arrests him on suspicion of Kidnap, and a range of other crimes. Bobus realises that the Slave owner might have MORE slaves stashed away, and may even be connected to a Mr Big source.
Bobus is delighted that his patience, foresight, and wisdom might see him break open an illegal slavery ring. It might even invlove weedig out a few corrput officials. He is thrilled.
End
So which part of any of that was in conflict with any of his aims?
Why couldn't he have done the above, rather than simply aid and abet the commission of a crime? Why, when faced with all those options, would he just decide to be thrown out of the HK order, discharged from his status as a Paladin?
How was any of that immoral?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm doing this on my phone, so I won't be quoting your former post, Shifty. Suffice to say, it was heavily skewed to support your argument. My contention, however, is that provided your GM is not bent on "trapping" you, a clever and careful player can work the system in a Lawful and Good way. Let me re-twist your story a bit.
Bobus, the Paladin-Hellknight, comes across the unfortunate halfling lady, who says, "I'm an escaped slave fleeing the cruel depravities of my master. I've been beaten fequently, and... and..." she gasps, "he abuses me in other ways..." She breaks down into uncontrollable sobs.
Shortly thereafter, a Chelish noble, accompanied by several armed guards, arrives at the scene.
"I am Lord Hyral," he states boldly.
"Greetings, Lord Hyral," Bobus replies, recognizing the name as a minor noble house whose star is in sharp ascent. "This halfling claims to be fleeing from your service on account of abuses suffered. By her words, these abuses have been frequent and overly... harsh."
"I emphatically deny it," Hyral replies. "Furthermore, she has no standing to level such an accusation at me. Fortunately, I have a remedy for this situation."
Hyral draws a long, wickedly curved dagger from his belt.
"You intend to kill her?"
"Please do not attempt to tell me how to dispose of my own things." Hyral levels a look of utter contempt at the poor halfling. Then turning a wicked smile at you says, "I promise not to leave the mess in the streets."
Thinking quickly, Bobus steps between Hyral and the halfling. "I'm sorry, my lord. But, pursuant to my investigation, I am impounding as evidence all property involved in the commission of this crime."
"What? What crime?"
"A life-slave, attempting to escape her lawful bonds, is a crime of tremendous importance. It is possible that she was aided in this endeavor by a party, or parties, unknown. An investigation is required. Do not worry, my lord. We shall get to the bottom of this immediately, and return your property to you as soon as possible. You should return to your estate. I am sure the Inquisitors will not wait until the morrow to begin questioning your household."
Hyral's pale skin pales to impossibly white at the mention of the Asmodean Inquisitors. Any investigation within his own house could have terrible consequences. At the very least he would be required to "donate" a tremendous amount of gold, or find himself "fined" for any trumped up venal infractions the Inquisitors could come up with.
"Is that... truly necessary?"
Bobus allows himself an inward smile. "It is, my lord. As she was still your property when she absconded with herself-"
"I'm sorry, my young Hellknight. I'm afraid you've misunderstood. I only wished to dispose of this," he waves the dagger. "A gift for the young lady that I set free only an hour ago."
Handing the dagger to the stunned halfling, Hyral beats a hasty retreat.
And I would say that there's nothing wrong with any of the above either.
And once again, at no point does it require the PHK to run around swords drawn and assaulting Hyral, nor does it involve aiding and abetting that slave in escaping Cheliax or any abandonment of duty.
The PHK in this case has pretty much acted in line with all the points I have made earlier.
So we are in agreement.
BNW seems to feel all of this is horrible nastiness and the act of kidnappers, abductors, and the morally bankrupt. By impounding her (the evidence) you would allegeldy be an abductor... go figure.
I don't think the outcomes of either Twist 1 or Twist 2 are realistical in the setting of the Chelaxian court system, Shifty. In fact, they go pretty directly against published setting flavor.
I like The Crusader's solution much better, although it does hinge on everything going the Pal/HK's way and the owner not standing up to him or being better connected than he is.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*dons his helmet*
And recall, all, that as a Hellknight, the laws are mine to interpret. By the hand of Abrogail I Thrune and reaffirmed by each monarch of the Empire since, the Hellknight Orders stand apart.
Little draws my attention faster than a slaveholder so lax as to allow their slave to escape. A slaveholder whose slave is found to have been driven to escape by abuses of the slave's person has caused disruption to society, not merely to their own household. Worse, their selfishness places all at risk. The Disciplines of Asmodeus and the laws of individual provinces and cities may permit such use of property, but such cities always have laws regarding the destruction and endangerment of the property of the state or their neighbors. These often come with considerable fines, public corporal punishment, or loss of rights.
In addition, in extreme cases even Inquisitors have come to agree with me that the rights pursuant to nobility and wealth carry with them responsibilities. Failing these responsibilities is a sign of poor character, personal weakness and personal indulgence. Such weakness is not tolerated. It too often travels in the company of still further transgressions against the law.
I am cruel. Precisely cruel. And I understand what the people need. The people cry out for Order. The people cry out for justice.
*removes his helmet*
I was trying to keep up..then my windows crashed, had to be reinstalled and now I am having to reinstall/hunt all my stuff.
I blame this thread, it must be evil.........
I like The Crusader's solution much better, although it does hinge on everything going the Pal/HK's way and the owner not standing up to him or being better connected than he is.
The point being that they were a couple of the key issues raised.
What HAS been demonstrated over and over is that the Paladin has many many options, and they dont involve him blowing his load of vows at the first hurdle and falling.
I'm sure we could cover just about any and every eventuality and still find a way forward for the Paladin that lets him retain all his happy-joy-goodfun.
I was merely starting to paint a bunch of scenarios...
*Slave was a legit slave
*Slave was an illegitimate slave
*Slave owner shown as not just some slobbering rapist sadist kidnapper
*Slave owner shown as just some slobbering rapist sadist kidnapper
*Slave returned
*Slave not returned
They were purposely kept a little short and succint for the sake of brevity, and to ensure that a wide range of outcomes and potentialities have been covered. The aim was to have a wide enough set of examples so that BNW didn't feel inclined to argue the 'oh yeah but what it', as it should now be completely and abundantly clear that the Paladin has a range of solutions to the full range of problems - none of which involve pulling swords on citizens unlawfully.
Crusader added some extras in as well, which frankly just continued to expand my point about the paladin being able to retain ALL his loyalties.
BNW was positing that this was not possible, and that teh Paladin doing anything other than aiding the halflings immediate escape was a 'non-good' act and morally wrong.
Then again, arresting or detaining the Halfling was also cited as unlawful and immoral, being cited as 'abduction'.
I like The Crusader's solution much better, although it does hinge on everything going the Pal/HK's way and the owner not standing up to him or being better connected than he is.
I agree. There are definitely holes. The purpose was twofold. First, to reset the story so that the halfling was chattel, rather than a convicted criminal on "work release" type slavery. I was trying to include that, to prevent that being used to counter the validity scenario. Secondly, I wanted to demonstrate pure "Lawful-ness" that involves some of those "evil laws by evil lawmakers in an evil society led by evil rulers" that can still achieve the desired result of "Lawful Good". That said, I put that together in a few minutes, building off of someone else's scenario...
The thing is that while the owner COULD have stood up to the Hellknight, the owner would always have at the back of their mind that challenging the HK might come with a raft of potential problems; from the HK himself being well connected, or the HK's superiors deciding to give the noble a bit of a kick in the guts to set the example to the other Nobles to remember to stay in line, or it could end with the Noble under scrutiny, in which case he needs to ensure his whole house is in order....
All that over a 50gp worth of slave?
Not worth his effort or trouble.
And even if it was, the Paladin HK still has a lot of latitude to push back.
And not a law broken, not a vow ignored, not a crime committed.
1: The Cheliaxian State is a recognised Lawful state (in both senses), with a clear set of Laws that apply to its citizens.
2: The Paladin/HK is a recognised agent and enforcer of those laws.
3: The Paladin/HK, has a moral and ethical responsibility to now carry out his duties in accordance with those Laws; he is duty bound by both his Paladinhood and his HK status to act in accordance with the Law.
There is no dispute here, there can't be.
1 agreed, 2 agreed, 3 .... problem. It only makes sense if you are correct. Its circular. Your unstated supposition here is that
4) Legal responsibilities are moral responsibilities
There is a dispute here. To pass it off, shrug it off, repeatedly refuse to address it, and pretend it can't exist while its dancing in front of you in tassels and sparklers is at best, absurd. It is insulting and demeaning for you to persistently act as if I'm saying nothing here while you continue to ignore my points.
Do you believe that chaotic good exists? There is no point to further discussion without an answer to this.
This is the entire crux of the matter, and one with which you seem to be at odds with the D&D ethical system. You believe that chaotic good people cannot morally assault "innocent" slavers acting within the law because it would be assault. The entire (and valid) code of the alignment is about doing the RIGHT thing, not the legal thing, and that they sometimes conflict.
A LG country can execute for slavery. Its a heinous crime that brings misery and degradation to its victims. The law enforcement person gathers evidence, shows the king, the kind decides, and lops off his head if he thinks he's guilty.
To a chaotic good person there is no special or divine mandate that allows the king alone to do this. One man's eyes are as good as another, and for all the king knows his justicar could be lying. The chaotic good person sees an obvious slave, hears an obvious slave catcher, and acts to preserve the freedom and dignity of a fellow sentient being as he, and he alone, thinks is best.
He could give her his horse and make his own way on foot
An adventuring type might give her a hat of disguise if they have one
"Quick, dive into my backpack"
He could lie to the slave catchter "Quick! she went thataway!"
And yes. A good person could indeed pick up arms against the immoral yet perfectly legal act of slave catching
The question we have before us is whether the Paladin/HK combination is viable, and what happens when the (to our tastes) unpalatable happens and the Paladin is put under a moral dilemna; can the combination survive being placed in a position where their sensibilities are offended.
When the "unpalatable" rises to the level of evil its no longer a matter of personal taste.
So lets now go to your slave scenario.
You did say in any case , and you've needed to change the scenarios multiple times in order to avoid that. You're also essentially avoiding the LE character of the chelaxian empire that i have insisted is the crux of the problem.
You're also completely ignoring the fact that slaves can be born into their situation or legally imported across the border as slaves.
***
Bobus has just detained her for questioning - not an abduction, not a kidnap.This is Legal, this is Moral, and this causes no breach in any of his codes.
This depends entirely on her reaction. If she agrees then its not. if she makes a break for it (which i consider far more likely) then you are in fact abducting her.
Bobus hands her back to the 'slave owner' that she may be returned to work, no different from taking an escaped prisoner back to prison.
Minus the legal and harsh penalty for attempted escape, which is going to be at least a whipping and possibly the lopping off of a foot. Also she attempted to escape, thats worth lat least 5 years onto her sentence. Seriously, you're not thinking evil here.
Bobus doesn't like slavery though, and feels it is disgusting. He goes to see Brother Peter about it, and as he feels conflicted he seeks Atonement if needed and vows to start immediately petitioning the local magistrates (and indeed anyone he can get to) to better the lot of Slaves in general.
The old bemoan and atone is far from whats expected of a paladin.
Twist 1
Bobus looks at the records of the trial and sees the Halfling has been set up in a sham trial with unfair contracts she had no way of ever honouring.
He immediately notes his findings to his nearest friendly magistrate and asks for an immediate hearing on the matter.
1) The dubious contract gets looked at as not being in the Public Interest and is voided. The slave is freed, and Bobus helps the Slaver petition for damages.
... Lawful. EVIL. The dubious contract is LEGAL. Your entire purpose as a hellknight is to uphold the LAW. That means unfair contracts. In a society run by devils i'm pretty sure that standard form 4362-666-c: standard contract for a period of indentured service, is pretty air tight.
Bobus hands the woman back over, annoyed at the injustice, but as he is aware that many people are probably stuck under the same shady dealings, he brings together some like minded people to begin an advocacy service, Cheliax has its first embryonic Legal Aid and Public Defender system brought into being. The greater good now being satisfied, Bobus can feel some respite from the nagging at the social injustice.
You mean an organization dedicated to undermining the social order of slavery on which the empire is built? On the offhand chance its not illegal already it will be in a week.
Bobus is delighted that his patience, foresight, and wisdom might see him break open an illegal slavery ring. It might even invlove weedig out a few corrput officials. He is thrilled.
- And then your halfling is sentenced to 5 years of indentured servitude for escaping to seek your aid.
-I'm not trying to screw over the Pally HK. I'm trying to play a lawful EVIL empire here.
How was any of that immoral?
You're taking a free person and taking her back into slavery.
Does chaotic good exist? Your entire point hinges on the idea that it does not.
...it could end with the Noble under scrutiny, in which case he needs to ensure his whole house is in order...
This is, perhaps, the most powerful weapon in the PHK's arsenal. Bringing potential subversives or corruption to light does not violate either Code, and can turn what might have been a hindrance into an asset.
Fact. CG in fact does exist. That is not the point of this thread, the point of this thread is "Is there any reason a paladin can't be a Hellknight?", and we have demonstrated that this is the case.
I really have to stop talking with you now before I start really having a go at you personally, but I will rest on this one point:
When being arrested, YOU ARE NOT BEING ABDUCTED.
Your own reference makes that point, although (as noted earlier) you selectively edited that reference to remove the part that brings down your whole point.
You are 100% set on finding a CG solution, and indeed, just refuse to accept any scenario that doesn't reflect your tastes. Simply put, in your restrictive and oppressive world, you couldn't even BE a Paladin in Cheliax, let alone a HK, and no HK could be anything other than the most malevolent LE.
Not every citizen is a moustache twirling villan just waiting to screw over the halfling.
Anyhow, I am satisfied that you have been given more than enough scenarios to show the Pally/HK/LG combo works, and I am satisfied that all you can do to debunk it is point and deny.
You believe that chaotic good people cannot morally assault "innocent" slavers acting within the law because it would be assault.
I don't think anyone believes that. Or, at least, I don't think it was espoused in this thread. I believe that Lawful Good people, especially Paladins, cannot attack a slaver who is acting within the law. He has to find a legal work-around.
Almost by definition a CG person would fight to free the slaves (he might try other methods, too).
You're also essentially avoiding the LE character of the chelaxian empire that i have insisted is the crux of the problem.
You're also completely ignoring the fact that slaves can be born into their situation or legally imported across the border as slaves.
I tried to adjust for that. You'll have to judge for yourself if I was at all successful.
if she makes a break for it (which i consider far more likely) then you are in fact abducting her.
This hearkens back to an earlier post of mine.
And when they run to you for protection, and the Law is on their heels, do you place you body before them, do you draw your sword and scream that THIS time, THIS time the slave will not go back? When the halfing sneaks into your room and begs you to help him return to his home, where he was kidnapped so long ago, do you return him to the "authorties" because in Cheliax he is property?Do you not yet see the fallacy in your question?
Your halfling slave will not run to a stranger for protection. She will not sneak into a stranger's room and ask for aid. She can not and will not approach anyone. Fear and starvation are her companions, now. She must flee when people appear, and hide when they draw near. To survive, she must debase herself even further; hiding in squalor where others do not go, stealing to feed herself.
Yes, she has run from the man who holds her chains, but she is no more free today, than she was yesterday. Freedom, Justice, Vindication. These things can only be found within the Law.
I think, by your statement, you tend to agree with me.
Does chaotic good exist? Your entire point hinges on the idea that it does not.
I'm a bit confused. Why does Chaotic Good have anything to do with this? If a Paladin behaves chaotically, he loses most of his abilities and will have to atone. If the PHK behaves chaotically, he loses most of his abilities, will have to atone and face a Reckoning.
I don't think anyone believes that. Or, at least, I don't think it was espoused in this thread.
Almost by definition a CG person would fight to free the slaves (he might try other methods, too).
Indeed.
After exhausting all other reasonable and good means, the CG person may move to force of arms to achieve the liberation of said slaves.
On the other hand, if he just chose to attack slave owners without warning and not even bothering to try any other peaceful solution, then I'd say 'CG' would be rather questionable in Cheliax. Choosing the most violent and bloody act as a preference is not the hallmarks of a good and moral person.
Fact. CG in fact does exist. That is not the point of this thread, the point of this thread is "Is there any reason a paladin can't be a Hellknight?", and we have demonstrated that this is the case.
A Palladin Hellknight cannot exist if they come accross a situation where laws and morals conflict: something has to give. Your re writing of the scenarios involved demonstrate that. Rather than deal with the situation you were given, finding a lawful solution, or finding a good solution, you were forced to re write reality. A player can't do that.
I really have to stop talking with you now before I start really having a go at you personally, but I will rest on this one point:
Start?
When being arrested, YOU ARE NOT BEING ABDUCTED.
They are only not synonomous depending on the method of arrest in question as well as the agency you're being turned over to.
Your own reference makes that point, although (as noted earlier) you selectively edited that reference to remove the part that brings down your whole point.
ANd tried quoting the entire thing before that. I must be the worst supervillian ever. It might surprise you to know that i don't look up every word as I'm choosing it. It fit the flavor of what your paladin was doing absent the veneer of law that you mistake for substance.
You are 100% set on finding a CG solution
Again, demonstrably false. See the list for paladin solutions above.
and indeed, just refuse to accept any scenario that doesn't reflect your tastes. Simply put, in your restrictive and oppressive world, you couldn't even BE a Paladin in Cheliax, let alone a HK, and no HK could be anything other than the most malevolent LE.
How dare I make cheliax restrictive and oppressive! What was i thinking...
Look, Cheliax has "restrictive and oppressive evil empire" stamped on their business cards (in triplicate!)
No HK could live up to the standards of a paladin in all situations. Some situations just don't allow for an unyielding good and an unyielding law.
The law of cheliax is restrictive and oppressive
Hellknights follow the law
Hellknights will be restrictive and oppressive.
Not every citizen is a moustache twirling villan just waiting to screw over the halfling.
No, but the law itself is set up to screw over the halfling. Anyone following the law will thus screw over the halfling. That's the insipid nature of lawful evil: it gets you do to evil by getting you to follow the law. It insists that you grow a mustache and requires daily twirling.(in no small part due to the fact that prominent council members own stock in the only mustache wax company with a license)
Every judge has a vested interest in keeping the social order going as it is. The very RUMOR of a halfling slave escaping to a hellknight and gaining their freedom would have halflings across the empire practically chewing off their feet in the hopes of similar treatment.No judge is going to allow it, because
1) They'd be executed, or at least in trouble, for causing unrest
2) chances are that they or their family own a large number of slaves (you don't reach the position of judge without a little moola)
3) Its not the law. She, at the very least, escaped while in the legal custody of her owner.
Anyhow, I am satisfied that you have been given more than enough scenarios to show the Pally/HK/LG combo works, and I am satisfied that all you can do to debunk it is point and deny.
Equivocation:
There are scenarios that allow one to be a paladin hellknight vs You can be a paladin hellknight in all scenarios.
A paladin hellknight walks into a bar (clang) He sits down, and orders a meal and a drink, drinks, and leaves. No conflict.
A paladin stuck with a halfling that does not deserve to be a slave has a huge conflict. Since you see good and law as the same thing you don't see the problem. Notice how many changes you had to make to the scenario as given, and indeed, how many changes you needed to make to the flavor of cheliax , in order to get it to work. You're making a lawful Good hellknight work in what is effectively Molthume rather than Cheliax
I have yet to see a solution that was both lawful and good in a properly run evil empire.
|
|
With a very twisted legal system, the hellknight paladin can screw over the bad guys as easily as the bad guys can screw over everyone else. After all, that's why there are two or three laws overlapping the same topic in every case. So that the matter is up to interpretation and can be exploited by Lawful Evil sorts.
It just so happens that also allows Lawful Good sorts to screw evil people over.
Plus when in doubt, the paladin hellknight can break hellknight vows and take reckoning. As I've stated before, my hypothetical hellknight persona does that a LOT.
I don't think anyone believes that. Or, at least, I don't think it was espoused in this thread. I'm a bit confused. Why does Chaotic Good have anything to do with this?
Swifty stated that attacking the slavers would not be good, it would be assault.
Funny, you seemed quite happy to consider facing off against the slaver under force of arms as being perfectly ok, despite there being no trial given, no investigation held into the legitimacy of that persons suit, and there being no lawful excuse to be threatening and assaulting him, nor thieving what is (apparently) his property.
Thats a WHOLE RANGE of NOT GOOD acts.
He is calling, what you correctly pointed out as the Chaotic Good character's most likely action, as not good.
I believe that Lawful Good people, especially Paladins, cannot attack a slaver who is acting within the law. He has to find a legal work-around.
I think that he SHOULD try to find a legal workaround. I listed a few possibilities, but many of them involve bending the law, and hell-knights can't do that.
I tried to adjust for that. You'll have to judge for yourself if I was at all successful.
I don't think you were thinking evil enough. Should i be worried that i am? :) I think its likely that corporal punishment for slaves is legal, if not required. Its fairly probable that the owner either has a record of slave x commited y crime and got z lashes, or they can say she's complaining about having received z lashes for y crimes and you know who's testimony is going to hold up in court.
I think, by your statement, you tend to agree with me.
She's deciding where to run, where to go, and what to do with her day. I think that does make her more free than being bound in chains.
If a Paladin behaves chaotically, he loses most of his abilities and will have to atone.
Nope, he won't. This is one of the overlooked loopholes, one of which i think is very telling of the classes flavor as a whole.
Palladins CAN (but shouldn't) commit chaotic acts. They do not loose their power or need to atone for a single act of chaos (but they should have some introspection and talk it out with someone as a good point of roll playing)
They cannot commit EVIL acts. A SINGLE act of evil robs them of their powers. They need to change their alignment entirely to NG or CG in order to loose their powers, something that should take more than one act: especially given the circumstances.
And recall, all, that as a Hellknight, the laws are mine to interpret. By the hand of Abrogail I Thrune and reaffirmed by each monarch of the Empire since, the Hellknight Orders stand apart.
*Grabs Axe, Bow, and Bear*
Excellent! You're a step closer to joining me.
When you ignore the law that is written in favor of your own judgement you are placing your heart, morals, and values above the law: where they belong
When you have a law that says so many things that it says nothing you may as well have a law that says nothing. I'd never thought you could gain complete freedom of action by simply writing so many laws that say you can do anything you want.
Such an attitude frees you from the concepts of law while keeping your lip service to it. Its slightly dishonest but hey, its a good start!
We'll have you singing the barbarian national anthem yet!
Rather than deal with the situation you were given, finding a lawful solution, or finding a good solution, you were forced to re write reality. A player can't do that.
Thats just a flat out fallacy.
The original scenario was addressed, and then re-written to incorporate the myriad what-ifs you continued to raise.
I think it particularly churlish of you to pick fault and claim something has been 're-written' if you yourself was the one raising all the what-ifs as though it proved your case. Your what ifs have simlpy been answered, and more besides.
Simply put, to accept your position we have to accept that the Paladin HK has no power at all under law and then a whole ton of 'Fiat' to help your case stand.
Frankly I think you ran out of argument a long time ago and have just resorted to saying 'No'.
Thats just a flat out fallacy.
You changed the entire nature of Cheliax from Lawful Evil to lawful Neutral.
You ignored the point that no mater what else the slave is innocent of, she is guilty of being a run away slave, which is going to carry a harsh sentence no matter how she became a slave.
I said the slave was taken at a young age in varissa, and legally brought into the country. You turned her into a debtor.
I said the slave was being kept legally as a slave, you said she was being kept illegally as a slave so you could free her with a loophole.
I think it particularly churlish of you to pick fault and claim something has been 're-written' if you yourself was the one raising all the what-ifs as though it proved your case. Your what ifs have simlpy been answered, and more besides.
They weren't addressed, they were changed to something that would support you, which is problematic because your claim is that in all cases the hellknights actions are the same. My position is that the DM can break it any time they want to, and might do so on accident with a standard adventure hook.
Simply put, to accept your position we have to accept that the Paladin HK has no power at all under law and then a whole ton of 'Fiat' to help your case stand.
Not true. All you need to accept is the idea that
1)legal and moral are not the same thing
2)that the hellknight knows that manumission is a highly unlikely end result of any legal proceedings. (since whatever else she did she was a legal slave and she did run away)
3) That assisting the enslavement of sentient beings is an evil act.
Frankly I think you ran out of argument a long time ago and have just resorted to saying 'No'.
I don't think you understand the difference between legal and moral. Without a difference between the two my statements seem nonsensical. Without a difference between the two, there is no conflict. Without a conflict, there's no barrier to a hellknight pally.
Thats just a flat out fallacy.You changed the entire nature of Cheliax from Lawful Evil to lawful Neutral.
Nope.
Not once.
The Law is there, the Paladin simply used it to the advantage of the greater good. He worked with what he had. The Laws are punitive, and there is literally Devil in the detail, but that went both ways.
You ignored the point that no mater what else the slave is innocent of, she is guilty of being a run away slave, which is going to carry a harsh sentence no matter how she became a slave.
And once again, thats up for the Paladin to investigate, and there may in fact be a harsh penalty. I covered that one off too.
I said the slave was taken at a young age in varissa, and legally brought into the country. You turned her into a debtor.
Actually I covered all scenarios so that you couldn't continue to throw up objections - I covered her as being a debtor, as a legitimately purchased slave, and also as a kidnap victim to keep you happy.
I said the slave was being kept legally as a slave, you said she was being kept illegally as a slave so you could free her with a loophole.
Actually, per above I answered your original scenario, and then detailed the other potentialities as well. Legit slave (debtor), Legit slave (by nature), illegitimately enslaved. Thats the three possibilities and all covered.
They weren't addressed, they were changed to something that would support you, which is problematic because your claim is that in all cases the hellknights actions are the same. My position is that the DM can break it any time they want to, and might do so on accident with a standard adventure hook.
Your original set of arbitrary conditions was addressed. I also proactively addressed your next set of arbitrary objections. I haven't changed anything, I have provided for the initial scenario, as well as any twists and turns and objections you may hae raised.
I just handed you a choose your own adventure, you just didn't like the valid outcomes differing to your personal way of wanting things.
If the GM wants your Paladin to fall, he just needs to point his finger and go 'bang, you are no longer a Paladin'. Unless the GM is being sxceptionally childish, the GM would otherwise 'play fair' as in between the Gm and Players fair, and not rely on the significant acts of fiat that have been thrown around this thread.
The Pally HK carries a fair degree of clout in Cheliax, and a Slave owner taking him on would want to be exceptionally sure of not only the legitimacy of his case, but that everything else in his manor was watertight and completely above board.
Your objections would have us believe the Paladin/HK was just some chump.
Just not the case.
Alright, last post since this is going in circles.
The Law is there, the Paladin simply used it to the advantage of the greater good. He worked with what he had. The Laws are punitive, and there is literally Devil in the detail, but that went both ways.
That's just it. You are deciding that it does in fact, go both ways. That would be lawful NEUTRAL. Not lawful evil. You are deciding that there is some magic legal loophole that will wash away the conflict: that runs counter to the very idea of a lawful evil country and cheapens the role playing tension between a paladin's good and lawful nature's.
Actually I covered all scenarios so that you couldn't continue to throw up objections - I covered her as being a debtor, as a legitimately purchased slave, and also as a kidnap victim to keep you happy.
You made stuff up in contrary to the theme of the setting. You don't seem to understand that importing slaves into Cheliax from outside the country is LEGAL. You don't seem to understand that grabbing people off the street from other countries is LEGAL. The vast conspiracy your paladin would uncover would be looking at the halflings receipt/papers and seeing a long line of perfectly legal transactions starting with a legal seizing.
I have provided for the initial scenario, as well as any twists and turns and objections you may hae raised.
You had very unlikely turns of the plinko chip go your way at every turn. Thats for the DM to decide, not the player.
If the GM wants your Paladin to fall, he just needs to point his finger and go 'bang, you are no longer a Paladin'. Unless the GM is being sxceptionally childish, the GM would otherwise 'play fair' as in between the Gm and Players fair, and not rely on the significant acts of fiat that have been thrown around this thread.
And so far you've demonstrated my point that you would have to bribe the DM in order to keep the combo. You would need to ask the DM for some sort of legal loophole to get you out of the mess, a loophole i don't feel should be in the system and that is NOT within the power of the player to create.
I don't see any solution good enough for a paladin and lawful enough for a hellknight as I see cheliax. You might see it as lighter and sunnier than I do. It could be because i'm a pessimist, but when i see "lawful evil empire run by devils" that tells me to start with historical slavery and then try to make it WORSE. I don't think any of your solutions would fly in the real world equivalents, much less anything worse.
Your objections would have us believe the Paladin/HK was just some chump.
The law makes him a chump. Absolute adherence to the law dictates his actions based on how tightly the laws are written. In an empire run by devils i think that is VERY tightly.
Lawful evil laws usually have the result of making people act more evilly than they normally would. In this case i think thats also the INTENT of the laws. Tempt a person into hell? Yawwwwn... Boorrring. Been there done that a million times. Tempt an entire NATION into hell? Now you're talking.
|
This thread is an example of why I hate the D&D alignment system.
An alignment is a guideline not a strait jacket.
I have seen many a game implode over this issue.
So here is my 2 copper.
Lawful Good dose not mean goody two shoes. You don't have to be nice to be for good and law. Just look at the Batman. He stands for Good and fallows a stricter code of conduct than most Paladins, and he dresses up in a scary costume too.
The Hellknights are a law enforcement organization. There like the Judges in Judge Dredd. Another good example is real life police forces. You have good cops and bad cops in the same department. So there is no reason that a Paladin would take issue on being on the police. He would be one of the good cops.
Lastly Paladins make some of the best villains. You PCs burn down an orphanage? Then send a Hellknight Paladin after them.
Just my 2 copper.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Grabs Axe, Bow, and Bear*
Excellent! You're a step closer to joining me.When you ignore the law that is written in favor of your own judgement you are placing your heart, morals, and values above the law: where they belong
When you have a law that says so many things that it says nothing you may as well have a law that says nothing. I'd never thought you could gain complete freedom of action by simply writing so many laws that say you can do anything you want.
Such an attitude frees you from the concepts of law while keeping your lip service to it. Its slightly dishonest but hey, its a good start!
We'll have you singing the barbarian national anthem yet!
*dons his helmet*
You. Understand. NOTHING.
Least of all do you understand the difference between a comprehensive system of laws and your bawdy disorder. The laws restrict action. It is the improper implementation, enforcement, and understanding of laws that permits this illusion of chaos. Is a prince or a judge also 'chaotic' in your savage estimation because they possess rightful authority to make rulings and judgments?
Typical.
This thread is an example of why I hate the D&D alignment system.
An alignment is a guideline not a strait jacket.
I have seen many a game implode over this issue.
So here is my 2 copper.
... *snip snip* ...
Wisdom.
Furthermore, on the subject of the taking of slaves, which is morally superior: annihilation or conscription? The enslavement of captives and prisoners taken in wartime is an ancient tradition. The choice of releasing an enemy, putting every last one of them to the sword, or enslaving them presents few options. More merciful than death and more rational than releasing foes to return and fight you again, enslavement is the best choice.
Those taken may be freed on ransom, as is customary for those of means. But without a ransom, what of the costs of provisioning and sheltering the captives? The legal institution of slavery creates rights and order to an otherwise chaotic process, preserving lives while turning fractious wills into a unified whole.
The import of slaves is a business, and there are legal avenues by which a slave of any stripe may receive manumission via petition and payment of ransom by others acting on the slave's behalf. Entirely fair. Those that cannot pay should not have started fights, or in the case of the Empire's expansion should have made diplomatic arrangements and so avoided bloodshed and enslavement.
I would note that Andoran was once, in the distant past, wise enough to negotiate its place in the empire and so avoided warfare during integration. Its people were not enslaved, and its cities received the bounty of empire, becoming wealthy and prosperous. Strange how quick they forget this fairness and protest loudly of imagined abuses.
*removes his helmet*
Also also ... reviewing the books has renewed my frustration with the naming conventions of Cheliax. The country is Cheliax, but the people there are Chelaxian (not Cheliaxian as I have misspelled earlier in the thread) but Chelish in descent, sometimes Chels but sometimes calling someone a Chel (as in Korvosa) is vulgar. What a convoluted naming convention!
I suppose I should expect no less from them ...
I suppose I should expect no less from them ...
Of course, spelling the name wrong is punishable by a 100gp fine and/or the loss of a finger, so the harder they make it the more money they have comming in :)
*dons his helmet*
You. Understand. NOTHING.
Least of all do you understand the difference between a comprehensive system of laws and your bawdy disorder. The laws restrict action. It is the improper implementation, enforcement, and understanding of laws that permits this illusion of chaos. Is a prince or a judge also 'chaotic' in your savage estimation because they possess rightful authority to make rulings and judgments?
Typical.
Wisdom.
Furthermore, on the subject of the taking of slaves, which is morally superior: annihilation or conscription? The enslavement of captives and prisoners taken in wartime is an ancient tradition. The choice of releasing an enemy, putting every last one of them to the sword, or enslaving them presents few options. More merciful than death and more rational than releasing foes to return and fight you again, enslavement is the best choice.
Those taken may be freed on ransom, as is customary for those of means. But without a ransom, what of the costs of provisioning and sheltering the captives? The...
Slavery for the purpose of making more slaves Is EVIL. It stems from the Sins of Gluttony and Sloth, and is based on the perversity of Pride.
Slaves have to be fed, but not fed well. They have to be sheltered, but not sheltered well. They are CHEAP LABOR, and upon them falls all the injustices of any social system where they exist, as immediate bias and relegation to the status of 'no rights' is promptly enforced upon them.
Slaves captured by slave raids are NOT subjects of war. They are a vile business, trafficking in human suffering, and all the costs are paid for by the person who purchases the slave...who them entices the slavers to go out and do the same thing again. Any nation that purchases slaves is supporting this very reason, and your slave-owners doubtless do not care where their slaves come from or why, only that they heed the lash and work for nothing.
As for Andoran, there was no plenty there. THe standard of living went UP after the nobility were thrown out and the yoke of Chelian taxes was removed. Oh, the NOBILITY were worse off, but the average man lives much better today then back then.
And the greatest proof of that is this...when the borders of Andoran and Cheliax come together, which way do the lower castes turn? They are not fleeing from Andoran back to the non-existent safety and security of Cheliax.
You labor in the support of Evil, you entrench it in your nation and your laws. You are no paladin.
===Aelryinth
I suppose I should expect no less from them ...Of course, spelling the name wrong is punishable by a 100gp fine and/or the loss of a finger, so the harder they make it the more money they have comming in :)
Precisely how a LE country would handle it. Ever more laws, social customs, traditions, special vocabularies, anything to differentiate the high from the low.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You labor in the support of Evil, you entrench it in your nation and your laws. You are no paladin.
Very well. We shall smite the slavers. We shall smite the rulers. What of the sailors? They sail the ships that bring the slaves. We shall smite them, as well. We shall smite the dock workers and the carpenters, for they are accessories. We shall smite the smiths who forge the chains. This family eats food from the fields harvested by slaves. They are certainly complicit. We shall smite the jewelers, the sculpters, and the masons, for that ore was drawn from the ground by slaves' hands. These streets are built, cleaned and maintained by the labors of the slaves. All who walk them doom themselves in their guilt. Your wisdom appeals to me, Aelryinth. But, will you now tell me:
Who shall we save?
Who is worth protecting?
Who deserves redemption?
I had once thought that all men were worthy, deserving.
Let's end this thread right here. According to the Inner Sea World Guide, "Although severe, the Hellknights are not an evil group. There are ertainly numberous evil members - particularly amoung the upper echelons of power - but the majority of the members are lawful neutral, with members of all lawful alignments filling out the ranks of each order." (pg 266)
A Hellknight venerates law and justice. They are called Hellknights partly because of the imposing armor they wear. Paladins CAN be Hellknights. To those who believe otherwise, you need to talk to Paizo.
|
|
Let's end this thread right here. According to the Inner Sea World Guide, "Although severe, the Hellknights are not an evil group. There are ertainly numberous evil members - particularly amoung the upper echelons of power - but the majority of the members are lawful neutral, with members of all lawful alignments filling out the ranks of each order." (pg 266)
A Hellknight venerates law and justice. They are called Hellknights partly because of the imposing armor they wear. Paladins CAN be Hellknights. To those who believe otherwise, you need to talk to Paizo.
Well, yes. I believe we had established that much about 200+ posts ago when the writers themselves descended from their Extraplanar Kingdom to spake Words Of Great Wisdom.
But we've moved past that. The impassioned insistence of a few of our number that the Hellknights, regardless of intentions, stood for something inherently evil and so were incompatible with the oaths and ideals of paladinhood. And there are related questions of alignment which we are also eager to hash out, since the answers to these questions have serious implications in the telling of stories of civil and political conflicts.
The present dialogue is revolving around a particular sort of example: there are paladins on either side of the Cheliax-Andoran border, and if their kingdoms went to war than they might find themselves fighting each other. Naturally, both must assuage their consciences and tell themselves that they are doing the "right thing", and if they do not "fall" as paladins than presumably they each have some fair claim to righteousness. But their personal and political differences are confounding: one believes devoutly that the rights of sentient beings extend to personal liberty, while the other believes that the enslavement of sentient beings is not only legal but moral ... if a bit unpleasant, mind you.
Spawning the debates, in and out of character, that have since overtaken this thread. And to that end:
*dons his helmet*
Observe, all, the mentality of the Andoran rebel. His homeland enjoyed centuries as a province, the second wealthiest in the empire, and in that time its great cities were built, its indigenous nobility permitted to expand their holdings, and its people grew numerous. And yet because his province was not so rich as the heartland of Cheliax itself he cries out that there was NO PLENTY.
Of course the wealth of the average Andoran increased after they seceded from the empire. They stole the whole of the treasury and began systematically pillaging the households of every pure-blooded Chelaxian they could find, every person with strong ties to the House of the Thrune, the new order and the history of their province. Those nobles still loyal were turned out with nothing, or else butchered by frenzied mobs with pitchforks and torches. Your precious wealth is stolen and paid for with the blood of people you decided arbitrarily could be sacrificed to your revolution.
The saving grace of Andoran is that the first mob lost its wind after the initial overthrow, rather than losing its head and turning on itself again and again like the miserables of Galt.
Even the precious industries of Andoran -- the same that they are so proud to tell you prosper without slave labory -- are the product of decades of Chelaxian investment. Did they build the cranes and shipyards? No, those were built in Augustana many many years past, and served the empire before they served Andoran alone. Did they create the system of replanting and harvesting that ensures the controlled harvest of timber from Arthfell Forest? No, that again was a policy carefully implemented before their revolution was even a twinkle in anyone's eye.
They howl at the Order of the Rack for its diligence in collecting the histories of our empire, even as they rewrite history to falsely claim that they were never a willing part of the empire and suffered mightily over a period of centuries.
This, then, is the mind of the Andoran rebel. Hypocrisy and self-righteousness. The meandering, fickle moralizing of an adolescent who has come to despise the world and her parents.
Confronted with legally acquired slaves, slaves purchased from foreign markets or taken in war, they are swift to place their imaginary moral outrage on the purchasers, as though they had any ground by which to dictate how the people of the Inner Sea, let alone the people of Cheliax, conduct business. One might as well become a monk of Irori and take a vow never to harm another living thing, if one is so willing to put one's head in the sand. But of course, the druids tell us that the cutting of timber brings harm to the forest, and the consumption of animals brings harm to the animals. I, myself, have met a talking bird, so it is not impossible that every stew in your pot is the death of another sentient being with rights not to be stewed in a pot. And if the Andoran wit were responsible for ordering all the commerce of the world, one must assume they would do their best to dictate a steady diet of millet and leaves to every man, woman and child. Just to be on the safe side.
Go hunt pirates or go to war with Qadira, you Andoran nancies, if you are so perturbed by the trading of slaves.
*removes his helmet*
This thread is an example of why I hate the D&D alignment system.
An alignment is a guideline not a strait jacket.
I agree that the alignment system is not a strait jacket, and if the question was a generic "can a paladin serve in a LN organization" i would answer yes.
The problem is that a hellknight is an intentional tightening of a loose concept
-The law without exceptions
-Justice without mercy
-punishment without recourse
They are not concerned with morality. they are not concerned with methods, they are concerned with results.
If that isn't making the lawful part of their alignment into a strait jacket, its at the very least making it a pair of paint on leather pants.
*dons his helmet*
Observe, all, the mentality of the Andoran rebel. His homeland enjoyed centuries as a province, the second wealthiest in the empire, and in that time its great cities were built, its indigenous nobility permitted to expand their holdings, and its people grew numerous. And yet because his province was not so rich as the heartland of Cheliax itself he cries out that there was NO PLENTY.
Observe all, the sophistry of absolute meanings, and the sly, diabolic twisting of words. Of course there was plenty...among the nobility. And second wealthiest was far, far down the scale from first wealthiest.
Of course the wealth of the average Andoran increased after they seceded from the empire. They stole the whole of the treasury and began systematically pillaging the households of every pure-blooded Chelaxian they could find, every person with strong ties to the House of the Thrune, the new order and the history of their province. Those nobles still loyal were turned out with nothing, or else butchered by frenzied mobs with pitchforks and torches. Your precious wealth is stolen and paid for with the blood of people you decided arbitrarily could be sacrificed to your revolution.
Again, the allusions to theft, when what happened was RECLAMATION as the wealth stolen unjustly from the people was returned to them, and they tyrants and nobility who thought a bloodline meant they were entitled to a standard of living and dominance over the common man were put to the sword or sent packing.
The saving grace of Andoran is that the first mob lost its wind after the initial overthrow, rather than losing its head and turning on itself again and again like the miserables of Galt.
Even the precious industries of Andoran -- the same that they are so proud to tell you prosper without slave labory -- are the product of decades of Chelaxian investment. Did they build the cranes and shipyards? No, those were built in Augustana many many years past, and served the empire before they served Andoran alone. Did they create the system of replanting and harvesting that ensures the controlled harvest of timber from Arthfell Forest? No, that again was a policy carefully implemented before their revolution was even a twinkle in anyone's eye.
those cranes have been replaced many times over, and using instruments built on the back and the sweat of the common man to benefit the common man and not pour wealth into the coffers of pampered dandies and their thugs is a GOOD thing. You mistake the act of construction with the purpose of it, and who stood to benefit from it.
They howl at the Order of the Rack for its diligence in collecting the histories of our empire, even as they rewrite history to falsely claim that they were never a willing part of the empire and suffered mightily over a period of centuries.
the order that is famously REWRITING the histories, to show that Cheliax has always stood in honor to Asmodeus? That is hiding any uncomfortable truths that confront with their own worldview? That Order, steeped in the ways of word-twisting devils? It is difficult to endure when your lies are thrown in your face, and revealed to all, isn't it?
This, then, is the mind of the Andoran rebel. Hypocrisy and self-righteousness. The meandering, fickle moralizing of an adolescent who has come to despise the world and her parents.
This from a Hellknight eager for conquest. Lies, bigotry, revisionist history, and arrogance. The deluded view of a decadent sot who believes the world exists for his benefit and no other.
Confronted with legally acquired slaves, slaves purchased from foreign markets or taken in war, they are swift to place their imaginary moral outrage on the purchasers, as though they had any ground by which to dictate how the people of the Inner Sea, let alone the people of Cheliax, conduct business. One might as well become a monk of Irori and take a vow never to harm another living thing, if one is so willing to put one's head in the sand. But of course, the druids tell us that the cutting of timber brings harm to the forest, and the consumption of animals brings harm to the animals. I, myself, have met a talking bird, so it is not impossible that every stew in your pot is the death of another sentient being with rights not to be stewed in a pot. And if the Andoran wit were responsible for ordering all the commerce of the world, one must assume they would do their best to dictate a steady diet of millet and leaves to every man, woman and child. Just to be on the safe side.
And defending the weak who cannot fight for themselves, or arming them and training them TO fight for themselves, yet meets with ferocious disapproval from Cheliax and its lackeys, and those who traffic in the weak and defenseless, who count human misery and suffering as a source of profit. To be expected of one without compassion for others, lacking in empathy, and refusing to admit that 'legal' is a term that varies place by place, but what is GOOD is above them all.
But having abandoned Good, it is no surprise that a Hellknight finds such things impossible to comprehend any longer.Go hunt pirates or go to war with Qadira, you Andoran nancies, if you are so perturbed by the trading of slaves.
Or we could simply battle those who acquire those slaves, destroying the market for them by driving up the costs in gold and lives, and shut down much of their slaving operations by dint of pure economics. This, in turn, would start bringing down those societies dependent upon slave labor. Such as Cheliax.
Qadira will come in time.*removes his helmet*
|
|
The problem is that a hellknight is an intentional tightening of a loose concept-The law without exceptions
-Justice without mercy
-punishment without recourseThey are not concerned with morality. they are not concerned with methods, they are concerned with results.
Like I said think Judge Dredd and it makes for some dam good drama in a game.
I like the Hellknights there complex and not evil.
It's true. All the other knights and paladins are just jealous because we look like rockstars.
Yes they do. :)
The present dialogue is revolving around a particular sort of example: there are paladins on either side of the Cheliax-Andoran border, and if their kingdoms went to war than they might find themselves fighting each other.
It's so nice to see the Self Governing Provinces of the Empire of Taldor squabble like the children they are. Soon the Mother Lion shall bring them back in to the fold.
Like I said think Judge Dredd and it makes for some dam good drama in a game.
I like the Hellknights there complex and not evil.
Its very cool, and i think a hellknight would have to work like hell (sorry) to stay lawful Neutral in Cheliax.
I just don't think it mixes well with paladin. If Judge Dread were a paladin he would have fallen so hard and so often that he could be used for mining equipment.
|
|
Oh yeah. On that point I think everyone is in full agreement. Much easier to be a Hellknight anything than a Hellknight paladin.
I mean, just look at the logical loops and borderline-shenanigans I've claimed above in my "in character" posts. For the Hellknight Paladin, everything has to be about the institutions and laws as he feels they ought to be rather than the institutions and laws as they presently function. And to manage that, I have to keep making my paladin hellknight a crazy patriot and philosopher of Law.
Oh yeah. On that point I think everyone is in full agreement. Much easier to be a Hellknight anything than a Hellknight paladin.
I mean, just look at the logical loops and borderline-shenanigans I've claimed above in my "in character" posts. For the Hellknight Paladin, everything has to be about the institutions and laws as he feels they ought to be rather than the institutions and laws as they presently function. And to manage that, I have to keep making my paladin hellknight a crazy patriot and philosopher of Law.
And in a way, that can (not will, but can) make the risk of falling even greater. Especially if said character is forced to choose between their patriotism and a right that seems incompatible with that.
Whether or not this is an insurmountable challenge, of course, depends on the GM, the player, and the desired tone of the campaign in question.
|
|
Oh yeah. On that point I think everyone is in full agreement. Much easier to be a Hellknight anything than a Hellknight paladin.
I call that a challenging Role Playing experience for advanced players.
If Judge Dread were a paladin he would have fallen so hard and so often that he could be used for mining equipment.
True. But playing out the fall would be a game that a player would soon not forget.
Something to consider: the Hellknight Orders are founded on a lie.
Hell is not the epitome of absolute proper law, any more than the Abyss is the epitome of absolute evil. To claim that Hell's order is the be-all and end-all of Law is simply wrong; it's Law deliberately skewed toward cruelty and oppression.
The idea of a paladin successfully upholding a code of honor founded on an evil lie such as this is nonsense. Never mind falling, such a person couldn't rise in the first place. You want to be a paladin who values Law a little more than Good? Go talk to Abadar, he'll set you up.
tl;dr - it shouldn't be possible to become a paladin while upholding the Hellknight Code.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something to consider: the Hellknight Orders are founded on a lie.
Not so much a lie, as a mis-perception.