Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East
|
Something came up today that threw me for a bit. Player said the because he was a Paladin of Torag, and the Torag's strictures say to take no prisoners, he was obligated to kill every enemy he came across. Wether during combat, or coup-de-gra'ing the downed people after combat, or just people who were generally evil.
I stopped him for tonight, be wanted to see what the actual limits were for this murderous paladin.
|
Im examining what you said there.
Torag's strictures indeed say take no prisoners. If we are applying that strictly in a combat sense (which Im guessing we are), I would not count the 3 ladies as prisoners because at the first sign of a hostile party they go into lockdown in their room and are no threat. As he is not in battle with them (as they arnt carrying weapons but hiding) then the capacity for them to be in the situation to become a prisoner isnt there.
Killing a defenceless person is an evil act. React accordingly.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh Torag, you scamp!
To say Torag's code is problematic is putting it lightly. This is a case of needing to choose between the code or choosing to actually be LG. In most cases, I'd say GMs probably need to give some leeway on the code in order to make such paladins playable as something other than monomaniacal murderers.
Then again, Torag's code is unfortunately set up perfectly for anyone to play a butcher and pass it off as LG.
One sentence in Torag's code you might want to point out: "my actions must always bring honor to Torag's name." That can be used as a safety net of sorts whenever stunts like this come up.
"Does this really bring honor to Torag?"
And before the other popular Torag paladin situation comes up, it's "scatter the families of my enemies", not "slaughter them down to the last child".
Between his code and his actions in Clash of the Kingslayers, he's hard to take seriously as LG sometimes...
One has to take into account that a Dwarf is usually Lawful Good by alignment.
While one can hate Orcs and Goblinoids, they can still relent when it comes to butchering civilians.
There is also room for interpretation when it comes to "scatter the families of my enemies" as a command IMO.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ran into a similar problem, except I was on the other end. I have a paladin of Ragathiel, who is fervently about wrath and punishment. I was playing The Hydra's Fang Incident. I had just dropped the main boss and his two flunkies surrendered. I asked them if they had committed the crimes they'd been accused of and they admitted their guilt. I told them to assume the position, asked if they had any money/possessions/messages to send to relatives. I said a quiet blessing to Ragathiel and give them quick, clean, and merciful executions. The GM was fine with this but one of the other players was mildly shocked and said, 'but you're a paladin!' I countered with 'yes, but Ragathiel has very clear strictures about evil doers and swift vengeful justice.' I and my character felt they were perfectly in line with LG and Ragatheil tenets of faith.
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hail and well met, my comrades. I am Gennadi, chosen warrior of Torag, and I could not help but overhear questions about the Forge-father's code.
Some of our friends here, they ask if we are blood-thirsty? They wouldn't ask such questions if they carried the Code in their hearts. We are men of honor and action, protectors of our kith and kin. Do we basely slay the non-combatant? Of course not. But you should instruct them on the fundamentals of "take no quarter".
Let the paladin of lovely Shelyn embrace her foes once she has beaten them. Let her teach them beauty, and pray they learn from her and not the other way 'round.
Let the paladin of Iomedae demand surrender from her foes, and then support them as her wardsmen. The shield maiden's champions demand the respect due a warrior, but sometimes forget how to give it in return.
But explain, my stout brother-in-arms, how it is the will of the Forge-father that we carry the hammer to our foes, and how, once battle is joined, it is sacred. We would no sooner accept surrender from a foe than we would accept spoiled food or shoddy armor. If a foe throws down his weapon, we demand he take it up again. Should he refuse, we finish the fight.
But tell those Pathfinders over there that Torag demands that we work his will with honor. I've cured a foe's diseases, and once kept one safe from poisons, even as my blows laid him low. May Pharasma never hear that a woman I fought had died of affliction, or slow bleeding, or old age. If a drunkard threatens my folk, let him speak his words again when his head is clear. And if his heart is unchanged, let him take up his sword and die.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Killing a defenceless person is an evil act. React accordingly.
So every execution ever is evil? Or do you think Golarion death penalties involve handing the prisoner a weapon and having a fight to the death, rather than simply hanging/beheading/spellcasting them to death while they're bound?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Something came up today that threw me for a bit. Player said the because he was a Paladin of Torag, and the Torag's strictures say to take no prisoners, he was obligated to kill every enemy he came across. Wether during combat, or coup-de-gra'ing the downed people after combat, or just people who were generally evil. ** spoiler omitted **
I stopped him for tonight, be wanted to see what the actual limits were for this murderous paladin.
I haven't read Torag's code, but here are some thoughts, based on the assumption that all it says on the topic is "take no prisoners":
• Letting a coward run away screaming is not taking prisoners.
• Walking away from a downed-but-not-dead enemy, leaving them where they lie, is not taking prisoners.
• Simply not starting a fight in the first place is not taking prisoners.
Etc.
|
|
Killing a defenceless person is an evil act. React accordingly.So every execution ever is evil? Or do you think Golarion death penalties involve handing the prisoner a weapon and having a fight to the death, rather than simply hanging/beheading/spellcasting them to death while they're bound?
This is not the modern world. People do not have right to a speedy trial of their peers. People do not have the right to face their accusers.
What they do have, is the right to plead their case, on the spot, with their judge, jury, and executioner.
Yes, a Paladin is often all three, in the moment.
It is not evil for the Paladin to carry out his sacred duty to execute those they deem worthy of no quarter.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Killing a defenceless person is an evil act. React accordingly.So every execution ever is evil? Or do you think Golarion death penalties involve handing the prisoner a weapon and having a fight to the death, rather than simply hanging/beheading/spellcasting them to death while they're bound?This is not the modern world. People do not have right to a speedy trial of their peers. People do not have the right to face their accusers.
What they do have, is the right to plead their case, on the spot, with their judge, jury, and executioner.
Yes, a Paladin is often all three, in the moment.
It is not evil for the Paladin to carry out his sacred duty to execute those they deem worthy of no quarter.
To put it another way:
Good: Killing someone who deserves it/needs to be stopped, regardless of whether you have the authority to make that determination.
Evil: Killing someone who does NOT deserve it, regardless of whether you have the authority.
Lawful: Killing someone you have the authority to condemn, regardless of whether they deserve it or not.
Chaotic: Killing someone you do NOT have the authority to condemn, regardless of whether they deserve it or not.
So whenever a PC kills someone, you only need to ask two questions:
1) Did the person deserve to die?
2) Did the PC have the authority to decide?
The first determines good/evil, and the second determines law/chaos. But remember to ask the two questions independently of each other! The presence or absence of authority never affects the good/evil axis, and deservingness of the target's death never affects the law/chaos axis.
Or at least, that's how I see it. YMMV.
|
|
My question is, are Paladins considered representatives of the law for the purposes of finding someone guilty of a crime, and executing them.
I know there is a prestige class, whose point is that they are officially appointed to do this, but otherwise, at least inside city limits, it would seem at the very least not lawful to kill someone who is no longer a dangerous threat.
Justicar is the prestige class by the way.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My question is, are Paladins considered representatives of the law for the purposes of finding someone guilty of a crime, and executing them.
I know there is a prestige class, whose point is that they are officially appointed to do this, but otherwise, at least inside city limits, it would seem at the very least not lawful to kill someone who is no longer a dangerous threat.
The lawfulness of a paladin executing an evildoer personally will depend on each GM's interpretation of the authority of paladins in general (as well as specific circumstances), and interpretations could include lawful, chaotic, or neutral. Fortunately for paladins, they don't fall for a single chaotic act the way they do for a single evil act; they'd have to behave so consistently unlawfully as to merit an actual alignment shift (same as any other PC) before they would lose their paladin powers.
To help with adjudicating law/chaos issues with paladins, here's a useful metric: ask yourself whether you would shift a monk to neutral and require him to atone before taking more monk levels. If not, the paladin's alignment doesn't shift either, and she keeps her powers.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
...here's a useful metric: ask yourself whether you would shift a monk to neutral and require him to atone before taking more monk levels.
|
|
Regarding the paladin of Torag, I've played an AP with a LG cleric of Torag who executed any remaining goblins after every battle. Given the racial hatred towards goblinoids, the "take no prisoners" aspect, and the goblins' chaotic evil alignment, the GM had no issues with this. But in PFS, I could see some GMs taking issue with this.
I think when I'm running a paladin in PFS, I'll try to explain any potential issues in my code to the GM before the game. And get a phylactery of faithfulness.
I actually had to have this discussion with a monk's player recently. He was playing what was essentially a slightly insane version of Jackie Chan, and had a propensity for rolling dice to determine his decisions.
That's interesting. Was he doing it as "There are 4 options, and I'll choose based on the die roll?" Or was it "I want to do X, but I shouldn't, so I give myself a 'will save' to stay in control"? Both are a pretty interesting character dynamic. (I often make Fort saves for my characters to avoid vomiting in especially "icky" situations, even when the GM doesn't require it.)
Honestly, I could see a lawful character using some random factor to determine the "will of the Cosmos" before acting, but I would expect the character to have the dice/cards/fortune telling device. That could be worse than being confused!
|
|
My question is, are Paladins considered representatives of the law for the purposes of finding someone guilty of a crime, and executing them.
This probably varies greatly by area. In say, the five mountains the paladin of Torag probably does have a good bit of legal authority to capture but not kill. In riddleport, hermea, or gods forbid Rahadoom... not so much.
In your typical lawless dungeon or stretch of wildnerness they probably can have be the authority.
|
|
My question is, are Paladins considered representatives of the law for the purposes of finding someone guilty of a crime, and executing them.This probably varies greatly by area. In say, the five mountains the paladin of Torag probably does have a good bit of legal authority to capture but not kill. In riddleport, hermea, or gods forbid Rahadoom... not so much.
In your typical lawless dungeon or stretch of wildnerness they probably can have be the authority.
Even in the middle of Absalom, the city guard will probably accept, "These evildoers attacked our group, so we killed them" as a valid argument, and not arrest the Pathfinders for murder. As long as the Pathfinders didn't start the fight, finishing it with lethal force is usually going to be legal, almost anywhere on Golarion.
Again, assuming that the attackers also used lethal force. In a non-lethal bar fight, for instance, the first one to pull out a lethal weapon would be the guilty party. Those who take him down, using either lethal or non-lethal means, would be justified.
|
|
Again, assuming that the attackers also used lethal force. In a non-lethal bar fight, for instance, the first one to pull out a lethal weapon would be the guilty party. Those who take him down, using either lethal or non-lethal means, would be justified.
He hit me with a dagger and took out my kidney, so i hit him with a sword and it took off his head is going to be justified.
He's an evil person who hit me with a dagger, so when he was down and bleeding i judged him guilty and took off his head (what was implied to me with the other poster saying execute) is probably a different matter.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
He hit me with a dagger and took out my kidney, so i hit him with a sword and it took off his head is going to be justified.
He's an evil person who hit me with a dagger, so when he was down and bleeding i judged him guilty and took off his head (what was implied to me with the other poster saying execute) is probably a different matter.
Only on the law/chaos axis, and with variance depending on who you are and where you are.
|
Golarion is a violent and bloody world full of murder-hobos (Adventurers). If justice does not come swiftly it arrives not-at-all.
| 24 people marked this as a favorite. |
Torag's paladin code does not say "take no prisoners." It says:
1) What's Torag the god of? Dwarves.
2) The dwarven hatred racial ability says,
3) So who are the "enemies" Torag's people? Goblinoids and orcs.
4) So what "my people's enemies" is that part of the code referring to? Goblinoids and orcs.
5) Are three old human women running an inn goblinoids or orcs? No.
6) Are those three old women any sort of threat to a paladin? No.
7) Should those three old women be considered "my people's enemies"? No.
8) Should they be considered opponents, or even villains? Certainly.
9) Is any random evil person on the street automatically an enemy of the paladin or his people? No. Paladins are not above the law and do not have the legal right to just kill anyone they want based on detect evil.
Dealing with threats to your entire race is one thing, dealing with three old ladies who don't even attack you directly (and who, as the scenario specifies, hide in their room because they know they're no match for you in combat) is an entirely different thing.
Don't play a paladin if you can't handle hard questions like "am I justified in killing this person who is no longer a threat to me."
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Core Rulebook, Environment chapter:
Having an evil alignment is not a crime (except in some severely theocratic cities, perhaps, with the magical power to back up the law); only evil deeds are against the law.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Torag's paladin code does not say "take no prisoners." It says:
1) What's Torag the god of? Dwarves.
2) The dwarven hatred racial ability says,
3) So who are the "enemies" Torag's people? Goblinoids and orcs.
4) So what "my people's enemies" is that part of the code referring to? Goblinoids and orcs.
5) Are three old human women running an inn goblinoids or orcs? No.
6) Are those three old women any sort of threat to a paladin? No.
7) Should those three old women be considered "my people's enemies"? No.
8) Should they be considered opponents, or even villains? Certainly.
9) Is any random evil person on the street automatically an enemy of the paladin or his people? No. Paladins are not above the law and do not have the legal right to just kill anyone they want based on detect evil.Dealing with threats to your entire race is one thing, dealing with three old ladies who don't even attack you directly (and who, as the scenario specifies, hide in their room because they know they're no match for you in combat) is an entirely different thing.
Don't play a paladin if you can't handle hard questions like "am I justified in killing this person who is no longer a threat to me."
Respectful Counter-Argument
3 and 4a. Certain Dwarves can take alternative Racial Traits (not Racial. Traits.) That change this hatred to other races or gives them advantages over other races. So you're argument presents immediate loopholes (Ancient Enmity, Giant Hunter, Saltbeard, Sky Sentinel, Xenophobic, Wyrmscourged, with a nod to the Stonelord Paladin Archetype to also toss in any and all constructs and golems).3 and 4b. The code of Torag does not mention racial hatred, it says my people's enemies. You're inferring, not RAW, that this only applies to those races mentioned in the various Racial Traits (not Racial. Traits.) as particular enemies of the Dwarves.
3and 4b part deux. Now I'm not disagreeing that we shouldn't use inference to understand this rule, but that said, it can logically be argued that
9. Based on what I was described as a player in this Scenario,
Finally, the actions of these women, in conjunction with the plots of the "legal authority" of this area, were decidedly evil and not just evil, but potentially world endingly stupid evil, I would argue that the Paladin of Torag was acting 100% in accordance to his and the Paladin code.
The Defense Rests :P
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Golarion is a violent and bloody world full of murder-hobos (Adventurers). If justice does not come swiftly it arrives not-at-all.
It has previously been defined in the campaign that doing a single point of damage to a captured enemy while interrogating them is torture and has been defined as an evil act.
I fail to see how a point of damage on a captured foe is an evil act but a coup de grace is not.
Perhaps Torag is not a valid choice for paladins in the Pathfinder Society Campaign.
|
|
Can you source that Dhjika, I did a search of both Mike and Mark's comments and didn't find anything like that?
I ask, because my Paladin also executed a prisoner for War Crimes and Crimes against Creation, because there was no true lawful authority (the legal authority was complicit in the prisoner's crimes) to hand the prisoners over too. My GM complimented the process I put my Paladin through before making the decision to execute the prisoner, but it would be handy for me in the future, especially as a Judge.
The Defense Rests :P
You do realize that the individual that you are arguing with is the one who wrote the gods for Pathfinder, right?
The person who is in a definite position of knowing exactly what the gods think about things and how their code should be interpreted, right?
|
|
Torag's paladin code does not say "take no prisoners." It says:
1) What's Torag the god of? Dwarves.
2) The dwarven hatred racial ability says,
3) So who are the "enemies" Torag's people? Goblinoids and orcs.
4) So what "my people's enemies" is that part of the code referring to? Goblinoids and orcs.
5) Are three old human women running an inn goblinoids or orcs? No.
6) Are those three old women any sort of threat to a paladin? No.
7) Should those three old women be considered "my people's enemies"? No.
8) Should they be considered opponents, or even villains? Certainly.
9) Is any random evil person on the street automatically an enemy of the paladin or his people? No. Paladins are not above the law and do not have the legal right to just kill anyone they want based on detect evil.Dealing with threats to your entire race is one thing, dealing with three old ladies who don't even attack you directly (and who, as the scenario specifies, hide in their room because they know they're no match for you in combat) is an entirely different thing.
Don't play a paladin if you can't handle hard questions like "am I justified in killing this person who is no longer a threat to me."
I agree with everything here (I play dwarves almost exclusively) however
|
|
Really?
That's what the developer tag means?
Holy crap!
I...I'm in such awe and so embarrassed.
/sarcasm.
The point of my post was to make a point that just because it was in his head that way when he wrote the rule, doesn't mean he wrote it in such a way that the reader could be expected to understand he meant only Goblins and Orcs.
Now his oversight has created an issue because PFS is RAW, not rules as SKR intended*
I'm glad he clarified, but he did so in way that makes it seem like it should have always been clear.
He used arguments based on the rules he helped write. Rules that have options for who the Dwarves hate most — which can with the proper selection include anyone who isn't a dwarf.
My counter-argument was to point out why it could be reasonably inferred, by a person who is not SKR or has access to his innermost thoughts, that the enemies of the dwarves could easily include three women who were running a concentration camp for Dwarves based on the way He wrote the code.
And finally, he mentions how the scenario was written, well we don't know how the Judge presented these three women. In the scenario I played, the GM actually had the women watching through a window as we dealt with the immediate threat and then cowering in the inn once their muscle had been defeated.
My comment at the end that the Defense Rests, was just because I had written a long and well thought out argument that reminded me of how a lawyer would defend his client. It was intended to poke fun at me, see below about the intent of a writer sometimes being unclear even when the writer thinks it is clear.
*This isn't meant as judgement on SKR. I write advertising for a living, I've put plenty of sentences down on paper that I intended for the reader to take one way, but didn't make perfectly clear, so some people reasonably read another way.
|
|
Can you source that Dhjika, I did a search of both Mike and Mark's comments and didn't find anything like that?
I ask, because my Paladin also executed a prisoner for War Crimes and Crimes against Creation, because there was no true lawful authority (the legal authority was complicit in the prisoner's crimes) to hand the prisoners over too. My GM complimented the process I put my Paladin through before making the decision to execute the prisoner, but it would be handy for me in the future, especially as a Judge.
I don't know how to link to a specific post - but I have copied it from the torture thread
Yes torture is evil.
Intimidation is when you threaten to do physical harm that would cause maiming, injury, etc...
Torture is when you deliberatly cause pain and suffering to an individual and they are unable to defend themselves. It also includes inflicting such pain for the purposes of obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession or needlessly and excessively punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed (even if you can heal the damage afterwards).
As I tell my six year old, if you have to ask......
|
|
K, gotcha. He later on amends the point from causing deliberate pain and suffering to causing excessive.
Of course this becomes an entirely different situation that I wouldn't begin to presume to have the right answer to, but if I recall correctly from the thread, he said what's excessive is up to the discretion of the Judge. Or as we are all so found of saying, expect some table variance ;)
Thanks for the follow up!
|
|
K, gotcha. He later on amends the point from causing deliberate pain and suffering to causing excessive.
Of course this becomes an entirely different situation that I wouldn't begin to presume to have the right answer to, but if I recall correctly from the thread, he said what's excessive is up to the discretion of the Judge. Or as we are all so found of saying, expect some table variance ;)
Thanks for the follow up!
I would think by anyone scale - all of a person's damage would be excessive
Really?
That's what the developer tag means?
Holy crap!
I...I'm in such awe and so embarrassed.
/sarcasm.
Actually, I wasn't referring to his developer tag. I was referring to the fact that SKR is the one who writes up the entries on the Gods at Paizo. He wrote Pathfinder Chronicle Gods and Magic in 2008, and if you take a look at the Shattered Star AP, Curse of the Lady's Light, p70, there is a 6 page write up on Torag, please note that he is the author of that.
*This isn't meant as judgement on SKR. I write advertising for a living, I've put plenty of sentences down on paper that I intended for the reader to take one way, but didn't make perfectly clear, so some people reasonably read another way.
This I agree with - whom ever drafts something knows what they want to say so it is perfectly clear to them. But as the reader doesn't have that background information in their head, may not interpret the words in the manner that the author.
In this case, while your arguments are logical, the author has cleared up what was intended.
Paladin of Torag: I deem these old ladies to be enemies of the dwarves.
The Paladin slays the ladies
TORAG: These were not enemies of the dwarves. Enemies of the dwarves are those that threaten the race as a whole, the orcs and goblinoids!
Paladin of Torag: But the holy texts could be interpreted to mean that they are.
TORAG: I am telling how my texts should be interpreted. Now go forth and spread the word.
|
|
5-01 stuff
Spoiler:The old ladies doesn't tortured the dwarfs ! (Even the dwarf prisonner said they saw the old ladies only once, just before being put to prison, then to the question by the Priestess) They are just old ladies devotees of Razmir.
be sure to spoiler your text.
These are all my personal views on how dwarves would act in bearing witness to the events. They would not sit back and let those responsible go unpunished.
**These are all my personal views on how dwarves would act in bearing witness to the events. They would not sit back and let those responsible go unpunished.
So, you are advocating that if a Paladin of Torag sees someone following the laws of their country, but who has harmed dwarves (or who has not stepped in to help the dwarves), that they should kidnap those individual, smuggle them across sevearl countries, and then bring them before magistrates in a dwarven nation.
How are you able to present any evidence? How are they supposed to defend themselves when any possible physical item that could aid in their defence is likely 1000s of kilometers away?
This brings honor to Torag's name?
Based on what is in the scenario, they don't go downstairs (they send their less than gifted stable boy). They don't torture anyone. The detainees are visited on a regular basis by clerics of their religion, likely seeking to convert the poor souls in the basement (and if that conversion is helped by a little physical persuation, well spare the rod and spoil the child type thing).
The ladies had nothing to do with the transit fees paid or not, and likely don't know and don't care about them.
Case 1: kidnap them, smuggle them into Mendev, then back home. Break laws of other countries and likely those in HighHelm.
Case 2: Burn down the inn, which as the three ladies are running the facility on the behalf of the government they likely will get another one, but this bit of arson will also punish all of the locals who use that inn as a social gathering place, merchants who sell them food, items, etc.. locals who are innocent (or presumedly so)
Again, these two scenarios bring honor to Torag how?
|
|
It's quite disappointing if the take no prisoners attitude does indeed only apply to goblinoids and orcs. This would mean that each and every paladin of Torag I've seen in play should have been given alignment infractions out the wazoo for choosing to slay enemies rather than leaving them a crumpled mess on the ground, but still alive.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
Derail aside, I think I see the problem. You're, rightfully so as we're in the GM forum, looking at this from a GM perspective. The problem is not every GM describes the situation exactly as written. If you read several of the people who posted from a player's perspective, almost all of them had the crones explained as:
Now, I would point out that as this inn was being used by the enemy for military/internment purposes, it's total destruction is not an evil act, it's a consequence of War, a War this nation has initiated. Now whether you want to execute the directors of this internment camp or scatter them is up to you. But again, from my experience as a player in this scenario.
*Edited out a joke that could be seen as a personal insult,
Developer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If only we had a book coming out soon that presented the opportunity to clarify this tenet of Torag's faith so there's absolutely no room for differing interpretations. It's a shame when we have to dilute the flavor of the game so that no element of flavor can be treated as a rule and abused under the auspices of RAW, but it is what it is. Needless to say, when we get to the Torag section of Inner Sea Gods, I imagine this point will be one that gets extra attention.
We seem to disagree, which is cool, everyone is entitled to an opinion
I am not sure that we do disagree much. I wanted to make sure that you knew who SKR was, that he is the author of the write ups of the Gods of Golarion. If you knew, then great, if not, it may have changed some of your arguments/approach.
And I agree that a clarification should be included somewhere, the FAQ or the new product that Mark Moreland has mentioned, the Inner Sea Gods.
But I was also trying to address some of the comments by the OP, about Paladin's of Torag having to kill everyone who fought them, and not just this scenario (with all of the table variations that occur about them - when I ran it, I tried to play up their kindness, grandmotherly approach).
I would prefer that people do not play a Paladin as Lawful Stupid or Lawful Butcher or Lawful etc..
Oh, I didn't take the joke as an insult, nor was I offended.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My favorite paladin of Torag did several things in Torag's name.
- Every game would start with his usual clause to the GM. "I am fine with paying for an atonement if I do anything that breaks my oath." To my knowledge, he's paid for several.
- He tossed out pamphlets of Torag to a group of impoverished citizens in a kind of "join our church" college-campus styled way of advertising his faith. The pamphlets were in reality heavy stone slabs, so the GM described them crashing into the gathered masses. Dozens injured.
- He would give enemies traditional Toragian burials, where he would bury his opponents in the ground up to their neck, and then pretend to "tee off." Using his earthbreaker like a golf club and their head as the ball.
- With levels in Holy Vindicator, he would start bleeding from his face using his stigmata. As he attacked foes, he'd cry out "I'M UNCLEAN! YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE I'VE BEEN!!"
- He murdered his herald, after he convinced himself that the herald had slept with his wife. An atonement was paid.
Best worst paladin of Torag ever.
|
|
I would prefer that people do not play a Paladin as Lawful Stupid or Lawful Butcher or Lawful etc..
Oh, I didn't take the joke as an insult, nor was I offended.
1. I completely agree. I very rarely and only in extreme circumstances treat my Paladin character as Judge, Jury and Executioner. This scenario (as I was presented it by the GM) was one of those few scenarios when I made a hard decision (I'm not a Paladin of Torag, and they didn't surrender, I arrested them). I explained my logic to my fellow characters and to my GM and asked for my Goddess to provide me with a sign before I struck the killing blows (The GM actually loved the way I rped it out and he's a friend in real life who I know is anti-death penalty as am I)
2. Good, sometimes people take things the wrong way on the forums due to lack of inflection or knowledge of the person chatting with you, I tend to be a good natured smart aleck and can take as good as I can give, so I'm glad you didn't take any offense.
|
|
If only we had a book coming out soon that presented the opportunity to clarify this tenet of Torag's faith so there's absolutely no room for differing interpretations.
Respectfully, there was plenty of room for differing interpretations and people presented plenty of logical reasons as to why their interpretation was logical, especially when you read the spoiler quotes and saw how some GMs were presenting the scenario.
That is until a developer came in and said, "NO THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO INTERPRET WHAT I INTENDED FOR TORAG'S CODE AND HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF WHY IT SHOULD BE SO BLATANTLY OBVIOUS TO YOU IF YOU'D JUST READ THE RULE BOOKS."
Now there is no room for differing interpretations, because the developer has spoken, that's not our fault.
It's a shame when we have to dilute the flavor of the game so that no element of flavor can be treated as a rule and abused under the auspices of RAW, but it is what it is.
Again, respectfully, I wonder how, when you read the way GMs were presenting this scenario, how you could feel the Paladin of Torag was abusing the flavor under the auspices of RAW.
If anything, the vagueness of the developer's flavor, when he so clearly had a one-true interpretation intent, led to a character feeling that he had to make a hard decision to stay true to his character's code.
I also played a Paladin (not of Torag), and I also executed the crones, not because of my code or in spite of my code, but because I felt it was the only way to ensure that they received their justice and that the war effort would not be further hindered by the Razmiran Gov't.
In over 50 scenarios played, they made numbers 2, 3, and 4 captured NPCs that any of my LG, NG, CG, LN, N or CN characters have executed. I don't take my decision to end imaginary life lightly.
Needless to say, when we get to the Torag section of Inner Sea Gods, I imagine this point will be one that gets extra attention.
Again, that's only up to you guys.
You run the campaign.
You set the rules.
You tell us what's open to interpretation and what's not.
Don't get mad at us when we take loosely worded Flavor and derive a different interpretation from it than intended. Instead embrace the fact that worshippers of Torag don't suffer fools who would cause harm to the Dwarven People. And that some worshippers of Torag, might show them the mercy of letting them live while burning their house down. And other worshippers of Torag only slaughter Orcs and Goblins without a thought to whether their life has meaning.
In the end, SKR could have ended the discussion by saying. Torag demands there be no mercy shown to the enemies of the Dwarves, but sometimes Torag has a different idea on who the enemies of the Dwarves are than you do, perhaps you should ask Torag (your table GM) before you show no mercy.
And boom, we just set the precedent that the GMs are the final authority on what is or isn't a breaking of Paladin code, while reinforcing the PFS rule that a Judge has to warn a character before they do something that would be considered an evil act or cause them to fall.
Problem solved, no reason to rehash old ideas in another splat book.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't write the paladin codes for Torag. I did look them over before they were published and I thought they were fine.
Apparently my mistake in reading that code was assuming that people aren't going to twist words to justify a paladin killing old ladies who can't directly harm said paladin.
|
|
I didn't write the paladin codes for Torag. I did look them over before they were published and I thought they were fine.
My apologies for saying you did. I think the rules are fine too, as is without clarification, they leave enough ambiguity that you can get some fun table variance. I've never used this as an excuse to play judge jury and executioner. I have used it to create creative tension for my characters, making hard moral decisions.
I appreciate that you take time to respond. Sorry you think I'm a dumbass for having what I thought was a logical thought out interpretation to the rules, that made for an interesting character.