|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I talked to the GM, and he pointed out that because the first guard grabbed me and said something in a tone indicative of a sexual threat, my actions were justified, and because the other four guards were drunk in a bar and never even asked her to stand down before attacking, that was justified as well, as she had no way to know of they were planning on arresting her or doing something far worse (Which I never even thought of. I assumed they intended an arrest, but the GM is hinting their thoughts on what to do with her were very different.).
+1 GM
I disagree with a lot of posters. A paladin, if they are accepted in the realm due to their god/goddess, is almost like a Federal Marshall in the wild west. They had a LOT of authority, even over local police.
This. And even if they are not recognized authorities in town, their divine mandate overcomes whatever pitiful moral authority could be wielded by drunk off-duty guardsmen. They laid unclean hands on a lady and a member of the clergy, and were suitably chastised for it.
The actions of the paladin in question is something I would see a Barbarian or other uncivilized person doing, she acted as bad or worse than the drunks in question.
An uncivilized person would have killed him. In general, savages are far more polite than civilized men, because a civilized man believes he can be rude without having his skull split. Non-lethal force is an entirely appropriate response to non-lethal force, even for Paladins.
You overreacted? Sure you did
It's a big deal? No
I would just go to the town king/mayor/elder/whatever, apologize for beating up his guards, suggest a better instructor and be done with it.
Basically what happened was:
Chaotic Neutral: Guard talks to paladin and grabs paladin
Chaotic Neutral: Paladin knocks out guard
Lawful Good: Guards attempt to apprehend the paladin
Chaotic Evil: Paladin wipes out the guards
Let's put aside for a moment them being members of the city guard, because they were off-duty and made no demands to acquiesce to arrest. Punching out a group of men coming at you with fists and saps? That's self defense, not Chaotic Evil.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just feel Pally's are a lot more concerned with rules than Jedi are. Jedi have a strong personal code, but they really don't care about breaking laws if they feel what they are doing is right. I always thought Jedi were CG, not LG.
Confusing a Paladin with a law abiding citizen is a common mistake. A Paladin lives by his code and not by the law of the land, the same as a jedi. A paladin will not hesitate to break an unjust law if it conflicts with his code. A Lawful character doesn't blindly follow laws, otherwise it would be pretty tough for a Lawful Evil character to be evil. I have always characterized the Jedi as Lawful, Lawful Good for the Jedi and Lawful Evil for the dark side.
Let's put aside for a moment them being members of the city guard, because they were off-duty and made no demands to acquiesce to arrest. Punching out a group of men coming at you with fists and saps? That's self defense, not Chaotic Evil.Basically what happened was:
Chaotic Neutral: Guard talks to paladin and grabs paladin
Chaotic Neutral: Paladin knocks out guard
Lawful Good: Guards attempt to apprehend the paladin
Chaotic Evil: Paladin wipes out the guards
Except that the first group weren't coming ather with fists; only unwanted advances. The next group came at her with saps after she escalated the situation by almost taking their friend's head off.
I find it a bit scary that our society tends to think that female violence toward males is acceptable, yet if this same situation were to occur in real life, and the shoulder-tapping guard was a gay guy, hitting on a man, and the man responded with a punch, then he'd be branded as a homophobe and charged with a hate crime.
Or, if it were a female guard who came onto a male pally, and he punched her, I really doubt that any of you would find that acceptable.
If she's tough enough to take on the mantle of a pally, then she can't lose her cool over an insult to her ego by an ignorant commoner.
Confusing a Paladin with a law abiding citizen is a common mistake. A Paladin lives by his code and not by the law of the land, the same as a jedi. A paladin will not hesitate to break an unjust law if it conflicts with his code. A Lawful character doesn't blindly follow laws, otherwise it would be pretty tough for a Lawful Evil character to be evil. I have always characterized the Jedi as Lawful, Lawful Good for the Jedi and Lawful Evil for the dark side.
I just feel Pally's are a lot more concerned with rules than Jedi are. Jedi have a strong personal code, but they really don't care about breaking laws if they feel what they are doing is right. I always thought Jedi were CG, not LG.
Per the CRB, Pallies do abide by the law (obviously, so long as they aren't in WW2-era Berlin).
Per the CRB, Pallies do abide by the law (obviously, so long as they aren't in WW2-era Berlin).
Just a quip: so a Paladin must follow the rules until the rules are evil, which is determined at the discression of the GM and/or player.
I find it a bit scary that our society tends to think that female violence toward males is acceptable, yet if this same situation were to occur in real life, and the shoulder-tapping guard was a gay guy, hitting on a man, and the man responded with a punch, then he'd be branded as a homophobe and charged with a hate crime.
I don't think female-on-male violence is acceptable. I think violence in response to unwanted physical contact is acceptable, especially when combined with crude and unwanted sexual advances. It would have been just as acceptable if it were a male paladin punching out a gay guard-- or, for that matter, a male paladin punching out a female guard. If she's enough of a big girl to strap on a badge and a nightstick, she's big enough to take a punch in the mouth, especially if she's got it coming.
And that's all we're talking about here. Punches. She was justified in drawing blood, and she chose not to, because she is a Paladin and that's what Paladins do.
Chaotic good: Knock out the guards and then buy them drinks, then show them how to keep their left up.
|
Kelsey, it seems to me as if your GM is repeatedly putting you into situations where you risk falling. I don't know if it's because he/she has something against you, or against paladins, or against the way you play a paladin, but in any case, you should talk to the GM and find out whether you should even continue to play one. If one of you isn't enjoying it, you should probably find out sooner rather than later.
Yeah, I'm done with this thread. Some of you guys and I just aren't going to be on the same page as to what constitutes right and wrong. That's cool, though. Peace out.
|
I find it a bit scary that our society tends to think that female violence toward males is acceptable, yet if this same situation were to occur in real life, and the shoulder-tapping guard was a gay guy, hitting on a man, and the man responded with a punch, then he'd be branded as a homophobe and charged with a hate crime.I don't think female-on-male violence is acceptable. I think violence in response to unwanted physical contact is acceptable, especially when combined with crude and unwanted sexual advances. It would have been just as acceptable if it were a male paladin punching out a gay guard-- or, for that matter, a male paladin punching out a female guard. If she's enough of a big girl to strap on a badge and a nightstick, she's big enough to take a punch in the mouth, especially if she's got it coming.
And that's all we're talking about here. Punches. She was justified in drawing blood, and she chose not to, because she is a Paladin and that's what Paladins do.
Violence should always be the last option, not the first.
Violence should always be the last option, not the first.
She's not the one who swung first.
|
|
My opinion:
1) Your response to the drunken boor was a poor choice for a paladin. Not so much for the level of response, but for the fact that you lost your self-discipline. It sounds like there's no way your character could have really perceived him as a legitimate threat.
2) The fight with the other guards, while awesome to visualize, was even more lack of self-control.
IMO, this is a perfect situation in which to seek atonement. This wouldn't create an alignment shift - that notion is silly. You are (human?) after all.
Think of it in the same manner as the military would expect an officer to conduct him or herself. Just because the other guys were in the wrong, a wrong on your part doesn't make a right. You're expected to hold yourself to a higher standard, and set an example.
My position assumes that the guards were non-evil, and that the authority of the town/city was non-evil. If this situation were to take place in festering cesspit of a city, then I would say that your character could rightly assume the guards to be a real threat.
Great RP opportunity, IMO.
I agree.
From a mechanics, no problems.
But it's a really great time for RP.
As for myself, I probably would have let it go until they started getting actually rough. I've been provoked before as a paladin, but I always take the higher ground until they start something. And then I try to keep the damage to a minimum (it never works).
If I was GM, I would hint to your character from a superior or the local authority that you weren't in the wrong, but you should restrain yourself in the future.
Well, the storyline has progressed. My pally met up with two of the guards again (one of them was the one who grabbed her), and killed them. They raped a barmaid, then dragged her outside a guard house, beat her until she couldn't move, and left her for dead when she walked into the guard house they worked at to report the incident. After my paladin found out what happened she came to the house they shared in the middle of the night, broke the door down, and challenged them to justify their actions. They charged her, and she killed them.
Was gonna say, i think we're having an ethical debate about the first scene in a Clint Eastwood movie (roving gunslinger gives corrupt deputies a Talking To)p; as is nice job Kels; given your last few posts, just don't sell your soul to any demons and don't sweat the small stuff lol.
Well, the storyline has progressed. My pally met up with two of the guards again (one of them was the one who grabbed her), and killed them. They raped a barmaid, then dragged her outside a guard house, beat her until she couldn't move, and left her for dead when she walked into the guard house they worked at to report the incident. After my paladin found out what happened she came to the house they shared in the middle of the night, broke the door down, and challenged them to justify their actions. They charged her, and she killed them.Why the chance to justify their actions?
Felt bad about the bar fight, and wanted to make sure this time around that I talked first, then fought.
Huh, gnarly.
Guess the issue resolved itself in the end.
There are still the other three guards from the bar fight to deal with, but they haven't done anything I can justifiably behead them for yet. There is also the guard captain, who looked the other way while this sort of behavior occurred. I need to deal with her somehow, too.
There are still the other three guards from the bar fight to deal with, but they haven't done anything I can justifiably behead them for yet. There is also the guard captain, who looked the other way while this sort of behavior occurred. I need to deal with her somehow, too.
Here's what you do, start working against the remaining guards and the captain from the inside, using proper channels. File complaints, pointing things out to their superiors, actions like that.
And while you're doing this they'll get tired of it, come after you, and then you can kill them.
Problem solved.
Except you need a wise-cracking sidekick, who may get kidnapped/killed/both.
As for your original actions, I felt they were perfectly fine for a paladin, maybe a bit more of warning first (with some intimidation thrown in) but it wasn't unreasonable.
If you're feeling unsure about it, RP it with your Paladin, talk to priest of your faith, essentially go to confession.
Except you need a wise-cracking sidekick, who may get kidnapped/killed/both.
Wait did I say Clint Eastwood? Cause I totally meant Roadhouse :P
I thought Cainus was talking about one of the Wayans. Like Snail.
(Just ignore the final scene. Please.)
Otherwise, do exactly like Cainus suggests. Plus street-preaching the corrupt nature of the constabulary to all involved.
For the (inevitable?) trial that follows...
Do you have any clerics you know, whether in-town or out of high enough a level to cast zone of truth? 'Cause if so, you could totally send them (a) letter(s) (multiple to make sure they get through) to get them to come to town. Willingly enter a zone of truth and detect lies (either cast by your known ally or by the town's local priest... after said priest also undergoes a zone of truth and detect lies (willingly failing the saves for both - easy enough to check the detect lies first, then the zone). State your actions and the justifications during a trial. BAM. No more legal worries.
Follow this by taking the leadership feat and filling the new town guard and watch with your followers and your cohort as the head. All paladins. Leave the town in good hands. And smile. You've just made the world a better place.
EDIT: also, for the derail, I've just always taken it that the Jedi were Lawful Neutral (lawful - adhering to their own code, regardless of the law of the land, and neutral because, psche, screw morality, amirite?!) while the Sith were Chaotic Evil. Obviously, individual exceptions apply.
ALSO, for the OP: yeah, it was an over-reaction. As others have said, it's not the worst thing ever. If it's an issue with your own conscience, confess it somewhere. But you're young! You're only second level! Young people make hot-headed decisions all the time! Just be calmer in the future - like you did with the guards the second time - and you're golden!
|
|
Per the CRB, Pallies do abide by the law (obviously, so long as they aren't in WW2-era Berlin).
From the Core Rulebook:
Through a select, worthy few shines the power of the divine. Called paladins, these noble souls dedicate their swords and lives to the battle against evil. Knights, crusaders, and law- bringers, paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve. In pursuit of their lofty goals, they adhere to ironclad laws of morality and discipline. As reward for their righteousness, these holy champions are blessed with boons to aid them in their quests: powers to banish evil, heal the innocent, and inspire the faithful. Although their convictions might lead them into conflict with the very souls they would save, paladins weather endless challenges of faith and dark temptations, risking their lives to do right and fighting to bring about a brighter future.
This is the passage from the CRB. I don't mean to be a rules-lawyer, because I am not but it is clear that a Paladin "adheres to ironclad laws of morality and discipline." The laws of the land may or may not fit into this description.
I don't mean to be a rules-lawyer, because I am not but it is clear that a Paladin "adheres to ironclad laws of morality and discipline." The laws of the land may or may not fit into this description.
They usually don't.
A paladin will follow any local law that is not inherently evil. For example, if someone is being evicted for not paying their rent, and the person is evicting them legally, the Paladin is not going to punch out the constable for kicking the evictee out. Even if the evictee is a widow with 10 kids. The Paladin will try to help the widow, get his church to help, do what he can, but he's not going to flout the local law to do it. For that matter, if a CG character starts threatening the landlord for evicting the widow, the Paladin will remonstrate with the CG character, even going so far as to help the constable arrest him if he makes threats against the landlord.
Here's how it breaks down. A Pally follows his God's teachings. He follows his Palladin's crede (where this crede does not violate his god's teachings). A Pally follows local laws (where those laws do not violate his crede or god's teachings).
It's a hierarchy thing. Much like how a Knight owes fealty to his king. He also owes fealty to the duke, but only if it doesn't violate his fealty to the king. And he owes it to the baron he works for, so long as it doesn't violate his fealty to his duke, or his king.
So a pally owes fealty to his God. Then to his Code. Then to the church. Then to his kingdom. Then to the laws of his kingdom. Note that if any of them violate a higher hierarchy, he's not going to follow them. If his kingdom passes a law saying all members of his church are to be executed, the pally is not going to do so, as he has a higher fealty to his church and code and god.
What this all boils down to, is a Pally is LG and does obey the local laws to a T. He pays his taxes, he pays his fees to enter the city. He get's out of the way of nobles if that's the law. He stands aside as people are evicted for not paying rent as that's the law. He doesn't allow them to be beaten for it, but they didn't pay they have to move out. He can help them, pay their rent, he can beg the landlord to not do it, even offer to do something for the landlord in exchange. But he can't disobey a law if it's not an evil law. He just has to work around them as best he can without breaking them (like renting the house himself and letting the widow live in it, that's working around the law, but not breaking it).
So all these people who say he's not obliged to obey the local law, you're wrong. Ignoring local laws, when they are not evil, is chaotic, and a violation of his code. It makes him a common criminal.
Who died? Where's the lethality in non-lethal fighting. Do boxers and mma fighters get arrested where'd your at after each match?
Go punch out a cop and then see if his buddies ask why you did that instead of beating you down and arresting you.If I saw my buddy punching out some chick because she put her hand on him and said something lecherous, I wouldn't go "good for you!" and high five him.
Arguing that these actions were LG is insane. What would the CG, CE and LE actions have been then?
A violent, lethal and destructive action like that is the definition of CE in all groups I've played in.
There's some metagame thinking involved here: any time you strike someone (in real life), even if you don't intend to kill, unless you are a complete moron you know that you could inflict grievous, permanent harm, even lethal harm. The vagaries of any particular fight don't affect the moral currency of the action. Morally, if not in the eyes of the law, choosing to punch someone in the face is the same whether you happen to land a glancing blow or break bones or kill the person.
|
|
Punching out a town guard for making unwanted advances gets you jailed. If you honestly felt threatened by his behavior, aka he pulls a knife, or even says "I'm the law in this town, and unless you do CDE sexual thing for me I will do XYZ to you", it would be a different story, but he didn't. He was drunk, which is sort of a past time for many, and you entered the seedy bar, where drunk people are, willingly.
He was rude, certainly, but rudeness is not cause for physical violence. The others that then attacked were stupid, but the idea of a police force having to verbally identify themselves before arresting you is a relatively new concept. In many places, it still doesn't happen... the badge is the end-all be-all..
Having said all of that, >>In my opinion<< paladins aren't the oh so amazing law machines everyone says they should be... their description says they are noble, certainly, and that they dedicate their swords and lives to fighting. They are killing machines, all in the name of their gods, as long as it is to right wrongs and do good. All the while, they will uphold their gods teachings first and foremost, and obey any and all laws which are seen as fair within their strict moral and ethical worldview, generally in that order.
Killing Machine for their god > personal code of conduct > obeying laws which are just > all the rest.
In this case, your paladin stepped out of line... nothing you were doing was for your god, or in his/her name, followed any upright moral code of conduct, and you were not following the laws of the town, which I am assuming prohibit violence. Before finding out about the rape and such, if i were playing said paladin and acted as you did, i would have immediately walked to the jail and asked to be arrested for breaking said laws, while at the same time asking the capt of the guard to bring in the guard with info to be questioned by another party member. Will the capt. bring the guard in? Very likely not, but that's what I get for starting a...
+1000
He was rude, certainly, but rudeness is not cause for physical violence.In most medieval and pseudomedieval settings rudeness to someone important enough to bear arms is cause for physical violence.
At least to the point of what was considered non-lethal measures. Yes, you can kill someone with your fists, especially in a bar fight. But, historically, using a fist or a leather wrapped cudgel was considered a 'non lethal' alternative, similar to using a tazer now days. And yes, you can kill someone with a tazer (heart attacks, falling on something sharp, hitting their heads when they fall, etc).
So for it to be lethal she would have had to continue beating the guards after they lost consciousness correct? Hmmm yep still not seeing it as lethal. You feel embarrassed for me…I feel something…nope nothing sorry.
If you had read the first post of this thread, you would have seen that the paladin dealt more nonlethal damage than the guard had HP.
Can you finally accept that you are wrong and that dealing lethal damage is a lethal action, or do you have to keep making a fool out of yourself?
Doesn't matter. What matters was the intent. The intent was to knock the guy on his ass for being one. In your typical midieval culture, a punch by someone who had a broad sword on their hip was considered a measured non-lethal response. Same as using a tazer would be now days for someone putting their hands on you. And you can kill someone just as easy with a tazer as you can with a single punch.
There are still the other three guards from the bar fight to deal with, but they haven't done anything I can justifiably behead them for yet. There is also the guard captain, who looked the other way while this sort of behavior occurred. I need to deal with her somehow, too.Here's what you do, start working against the remaining guards and the captain from the inside, using proper channels. File complaints, pointing things out to their superiors, actions like that.
And while you're doing this they'll get tired of it, come after you, and then you can kill them.
Problem solved.
Except you need a wise-cracking sidekick, who may get kidnapped/killed/both.
As for your original actions, I felt they were perfectly fine for a paladin, maybe a bit more of warning first (with some intimidation thrown in) but it wasn't unreasonable.
If you're feeling unsure about it, RP it with your Paladin, talk to priest of your faith, essentially go to confession.
Do that.
(by the way long time not seeing you in the forum Cainus)Or call for an inquisitor they are better suited for this kind of job.
mmm nope, it may be important enough to challenge them to a contest of some sort, possibly to the death if you feel their rudeness has somehow shown you in a bad light, but i dont know of any medieval setting where rudeness allows a lawful good person to commit an act of violence. If you are the chaotic good warrior that takes umbrage at any perceived slight, no matter how small, you might get away with punching someone in the face for it, but no upstanding citizen of any kingdom commits violence when faced with an unruly citizen, especially not when they are the protectors of the community.
Again, we are still talking about a lawful good character, even if you take out the paladin part.
Actually, I don't think she's LG. I think she's LN or CG. Either way, either alignment could absolutely smack him for being a putz. Granted the LN would be doing it to teach his *$#& a lesson, while the CG would be doing it because he was being evil and needed a lesson on polite society.