|
I think it's skirting the edges. Also depends on context of course.
If we're talking a white-collar criminal like a dirty criminal lawyer or an embezzler, and a paladin goads him into a fist-fight and then kills him, yeah, that's evil. If you goad him into a fist-fight, then have him arrested for disturbing the peace, that's still sketchy; by goading him you're complicit in the crime. If you did it so he'd be arrested, and therefore unable to make it to the courtroom to render legal defense for a drugs dealer, you're basically obstructing the drug dealer's fair trial, which is also not very Lawful Good...
If it's a hobgoblin chieftain that's blocking a mountain pass, on an advantageous position, then goading him to charge (abandoning his tactically superior spot), that would be okay by me.
Likewise, there's an evil necromancer but for some reason the townsfolk won't believe you, then goading to reveal his true identity would also be fair game.
conclusion it really depends...
|
Not knowing any details other than what you supplied, I think you're justified. If you offer the BBEG a chance to repent/surrender/stop the madness and he refuses, what are you supposed to do? Scowl at him? Of course, I'm assuming that something Really Bad will happen if you don't stop him. If his plan is to drive up the price of grain or ruin a picnic, you might want to hold back on the ultra-violence.
Goading innocents into attacking is a different story, as is killing the BBEG after you've subdued him. Don't believe him if he promises that your hate will make you powerful.
Easy question to answer. Yes they would provoke a fight with an evil guy. They actually have a spell for that express purpose.
I don't know what kind of flower sniffing paladins you play, but if he is evil and he is scheming, you need to put a stop to his plans. With the edge of your sword. I don't get these rules of yours that neuters Paladins.
|
I'm showing my nerd side here but my answer to this is demonstrative.
Optimus Prime in Transformers the movie (the 1986 one) (My present posting circumstances prevents me from finding the scene which I am certain is on Youtube).
Megatron, the enemy leader, is down on his knees, more or less beaten, he spies a pistol under some rubble he thinks Optimus doesn't see.
Megatron: No! No more, Optimus Prime!
Optimus Prime: You who are without mercy, now plead for it? I thought you made of sterner stuff.
Now my personal belief is Prime knew he was reaching for the gun, and was trying to /goad/ him by insulting his pride. The fact that one of Prime's brash young compatriots then leapt into the scene, got grabbed by the aforementioned Megatron, and this resulted in Prime getting shot repeatedly doesn't change this.
Optimus Prime, who'd I'd exemplify as a paladin (albeit a robot one), wanted his enemy to give him a reason so he could Ion Cannon the murderer of his friends and the destroyer of his world through the cabasa. He also however /wasn't going to shoot/ if Megatron genuinely surrendered.
I don't know what kind of flower sniffing paladins you play, but if he is evil and he is scheming, you need to put a stop to his plans. With the edge of your sword. I don't get these rules of yours that neuters Paladins.
Hear hear!
Paladins are champions of Law and Good - that means they fight on its behalf. Provided they do not break noble and just laws, local custom or considerations of honour, a Paladin must thwart Evil and does so by using physical violence.
So stand tall, throw down that gauntlet and challenge the evildoers! If not you, who? If not here, where? If not now, when? And if not by righteous force... how?
|
|
I agree. Paladins are killers for their god!
Seriously, a paladin has god-given powers to detect evil so that he can smite evil! He isn't given any powers to turn evil people less evil (certain archetypes excepted).
I expect some paladins to be really nice guys in general, compassionate to a fault. I except others will be dour, taciturn and humourless. But what they all have in common is that when they realise that proper Evil needs to be stopped then they will kill, kill, kill, and god wants him to!
I think it depends on the situation.
for example the lawful Evil Hobgoblin Ambassador is in town to negotiate a Truce. Attacking the ambassador would prolong a War and violate the sanctity that Ambassador are suppose to enjoy.
On the other hand a Paladin is in someplace where slavery and dueling are legal and sees some one beating a young slave child severely . The Paladin. The Paladin then could start questing the person manhood until challenged to a duel with no problem.
|
|
In the abstract case, if a paladin case goads an evil person who's not done anything evil (that the paladin knows about) yes into committing an evil act - I think that makes the paladin complicit in the evil act. It wouldn't have happened if the paladin hadn't goaded; therefore the paladin is involved in causing evil to happen.
Suppose there's a guy, who happens to be evil, but he hasn't done anything evil yet. He resents that his sister got more money than he got from an inheritance. If the paladin goads him into killing his sister to get the whole inheritance, then the paladin caused evil to happen. Baaaad.
If the bad guy is going to do something evil anyway, or is already doing it (he's blocking the orphans from escaping the burning orphanage), then goading him to attack the paladin can be a good thing: the paladin opens the way for the orphans to escape while he distracts the villain.
So there are cases where goading is acceptable, even a good thing to do; but also cases where it can cause a fall.
In the abstract case, if a paladin case goads an evil person who's not done anything evil (that the paladin knows about) yes into committing an evil act - I think that makes the paladin complicit in the evil act. It wouldn't have happened if the paladin hadn't goaded; therefore the paladin is involved in causing evil to happen.
Suppose there's a guy, who happens to be evil, but he hasn't done anything evil yet. He resents that his sister got more money than he got from an inheritance. If the paladin goads him into killing his sister to get the whole inheritance, then the paladin caused evil to happen. Baaaad.
If the bad guy is going to do something evil anyway, or is already doing it (he's blocking the orphans from escaping the burning orphanage), then goading him to attack the paladin can be a good thing: the paladin opens the way for the orphans to escape while he distracts the villain.
So there are cases where goading is acceptable, even a good thing to do; but also cases where it can cause a fall.
Humans don't "happen to be evil". They won't give off any sort of evil aura if they aren't doing anything evil. Only Clerics, Inquisitors, and Paladins (and other classes with an aura) actually emit an aura of their alignment.
And, if a guy is blocking orphans from escaping, then you cut him down. To try and goad him into a fight isn't even necessary.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Humans don't "happen to be evil". They won't give off any sort of evil aura if they aren't doing anything evil. Only Clerics, Inquisitors, and Paladins (and other classes with an aura) actually emit an aura of their alignment.
A level 6 human will detect as some alignment. Maybe it's evil, because he's become bitter and cynical due to life's reversals. What he feels and wants is evil. But he hasn't acted upon it yet, because he's also Lawful and doesn't want or dare to break the rules.
Or are paladins the Thought Police now? In my view a paladin is supposed to fight people that do evil, not people with merely dubious feelings or even intentions.
And, if a guy is blocking orphans from escaping, then you cut him down. To try and goad him into a fight isn't even necessary.
Suppose that's not practical. For some reason it's better to fight him here, rather than there. Maybe you're too far away, and the orphans don't have five rounds to spare while you climb through difficult terrain to get to him. Now if he'll only move away from the doorway, towards you, the orphans can slip out behind him.
What is a paladin supposed to do but challenge the big bad man. I would say that it is more evil to not challenge the squirrely jerk to a fight.
Goad an evil necromancer into fighting your personally, rather than hiding behind a thousand zombies, sure.
Goad an embezzling accountant into punching you for 1d2 nonlethal (provoking an AoO from you), then hack him to pieces (because he's just an Expert), no.
well that guy would just be thrown in prison by a pali, no fight even needed
|
|
I dunno, does the paladin have any evidence? Does the accountant get any sort of trial?
Or are we locking people up because of Detect Evil now? In that case all it takes is one well-placed fake alignment to make a paladin victimize an innocent person with a fake evil aura...
I'll accept that paladins are generally authorized to make arrests within the jurisdiction of their church, but making them judge jury and executioner goes a bit far. I think of them more as the military - contain violent threats - than as being heavily involved in civic justice.
A level 6 human will detect as some alignment. Maybe it's evil, because he's become bitter and cynical due to life's reversals. What he feels and wants is evil. But he hasn't acted upon it yet, because he's also Lawful and doesn't want or dare to break the rules.Humans don't "happen to be evil". They won't give off any sort of evil aura if they aren't doing anything evil. Only Clerics, Inquisitors, and Paladins (and other classes with an aura) actually emit an aura of their alignment.
What? No, you don't detect evil unless you are evil. If he wants to do evil but never does it then he is neutral (possibly LN since you said he is lawful).
Evil is by action not by thought alone.
My Paladin is quick retort but quicker to charge. If he's evil, force of arms is required to subdue him. If I had a DM try to give me an evil politician and I could get to him, I would defeat him, and when guards come after me, all I need is a zone of truth so they know I'm being honest when I tell them I detected evil. And Smote it.
if that someone is picking on one of my allies in a fight, even if he's not evil, its still a good thing for me to use the feat antagonize to draw the enemy away from my allies
i cant see something like that being frowned upon either
if you go around picking fights just for the heck of it, chances are that is unlawful, not necessarily not good
i would say as long as you have just cause there really is no issue, and you dont and shouldnt have to worry about only opposing evil in this regard either
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know these questions are done to death, and they ultimately boil down to GM & player agreement, but what do you folks think of this:
Is it an evil act for a Paladin to goad someone into a fight?
Not unless "goad" is code for "cast knight's calling on," no. Depending on the context it might make you come off as a pig-headed jerk though.
If the BBEG won't end his dastardly scheme, but also won't initiate a fight - is it considered evil for the paladin to initiate?
Absolutely not, and I'd love to hear their logic if anyone tells you otherwise.
|
|
A level 6 human will detect as some alignment. Maybe it's evil, because he's become bitter and cynical due to life's reversals. What he feels and wants is evil. But he hasn't acted upon it yet, because he's also Lawful and doesn't want or dare to break the rules.Humans don't "happen to be evil". They won't give off any sort of evil aura if they aren't doing anything evil. Only Clerics, Inquisitors, and Paladins (and other classes with an aura) actually emit an aura of their alignment.
What? No, you don't detect evil unless you are evil. If he wants to do evil but never does it then he is neutral (possibly LN since you said he is lawful).
Evil is by action not by thought alone.
I disagree.
But this is really a matter of which philosophical principle you use; either way can work in a game. Just make sure to talk it over in advance with anyone playing paladins :P
|
|
My Paladin is quick retort but quicker to charge. If he's evil, force of arms is required to subdue him. If I had a DM try to give me an evil politician and I could get to him, I would defeat him, and when guards come after me, all I need is a zone of truth so they know I'm being honest when I tell them I detected evil. And Smote it.
But then you'd probably Fall for being unLawful. After all, you just committed murder.
My Paladin is quick retort but quicker to charge. If he's evil, force of arms is required to subdue him. If I had a DM try to give me an evil politician and I could get to him, I would defeat him, and when guards come after me, all I need is a zone of truth so they know I'm being honest when I tell them I detected evil. And Smote it.But then you'd probably Fall for being unLawful. After all, you just committed murder.
I was being mildly facetious. Also, I said defeat, not kill. And if it came to killing, he's the BBEG. If my GM gives us the chance to defeat him, it's time.
Would my paladin fall for breaking into a Slavers' Mansion to free the captives?
Being in a group with a Chaotic Good and Neutral Good means we don't do black and white morality. Good supercedes Lawful and we don't over examine our actions.
A level 6 human will detect as some alignment. Maybe it's evil, because he's become bitter and cynical due to life's reversals. What he feels and wants is evil. But he hasn't acted upon it yet, because he's also Lawful and doesn't want or dare to break the rules.Humans don't "happen to be evil". They won't give off any sort of evil aura if they aren't doing anything evil. Only Clerics, Inquisitors, and Paladins (and other classes with an aura) actually emit an aura of their alignment.
What? No, you don't detect evil unless you are evil. If he wants to do evil but never does it then he is neutral (possibly LN since you said he is lawful).
Evil is by action not by thought alone.
I disagree.
But this is really a matter of which philosophical principle you use; either way can work in a game. Just make sure to talk it over in advance with anyone playing paladins :P
This is absolutely not a matter of philosophical principle.
Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
A 6th-level neutral character that leaves his house with the tools to commit an evil act will detect as evil. There is no interpretation about it.
Edit: I apologize for the strong wording of this post.
|
|
My Paladin is quick retort but quicker to charge. If he's evil, force of arms is required to subdue him. If I had a DM try to give me an evil politician and I could get to him, I would defeat him, and when guards come after me, all I need is a zone of truth so they know I'm being honest when I tell them I detected evil. And Smote it.But then you'd probably Fall for being unLawful. After all, you just committed murder.I was being mildly facetious. Also, I said defeat, not kill. And if it came to killing, he's the BBEG. If my GM gives us the chance to defeat him, it's time.
Would my paladin fall for breaking into a Slavers' Mansion to free the captives?
Being in a group with a Chaotic Good and Neutral Good means we don't do black and white morality. Good supercedes Lawful and we don't over examine our actions.
Eh. I'm not for trying to set up a paladin to fall, but this does sound a bit too easy to me. What are you going to do? Drag a politician out of his limousine/carriage and beat him up? Overthrow the government? Doesn't sound very lawful to me.
I could go for an adventure with a very white-collar BBEG who make sure there's never any proof that he did stuff himself, and that he's completely covered as far as legal stuff is concerned. Paladins can't touch him; they can only try to foil his lieutenants. Well, that's the theory anyway; at some point the party (the rogue, particularly) manages to actually get at the evidence, the paladin can obtain an arrest warrant, and gets to enjoy the look on the bad guy's face when he realizes...
My Paladin is quick retort but quicker to charge. If he's evil, force of arms is required to subdue him. If I had a DM try to give me an evil politician and I could get to him, I would defeat him, and when guards come after me, all I need is a zone of truth so they know I'm being honest when I tell them I detected evil. And Smote it.But then you'd probably Fall for being unLawful. After all, you just committed murder.I was being mildly facetious. Also, I said defeat, not kill. And if it came to killing, he's the BBEG. If my GM gives us the chance to defeat him, it's time.
Would my paladin fall for breaking into a Slavers' Mansion to free the captives?
Being in a group with a Chaotic Good and Neutral Good means we don't do black and white morality. Good supercedes Lawful and we don't over examine our actions.
Eh. I'm not for trying to set up a paladin to fall, but this does sound a bit too easy to me. What are you going to do? Drag a politician out of his limousine/carriage and beat him up? Overthrow the government? Doesn't sound very lawful to me.
I could go for an adventure with a very white-collar BBEG who make sure there's never any proof that he did stuff himself, and that he's completely covered as far as legal stuff is concerned. Paladins can't touch him; they can only try to foil his lieutenants. Well, that's the theory anyway; at some point the party (the rogue, particularly) manages to actually get at the evidence, the paladin can obtain an arrest warrant, and gets to enjoy the look on the bad guy's face when he realizes...
Metaphorically this explanation is brilliant, but I fear too many will take this literally