I am running a game and the party is pretty murder-hobo. While none of them are fully evil, I've informed them recently that an attempt at Smite Evil has a 50% chance of working.
In the party there is an Inquisitor of Torag. Torag is a lawful good diety.
I know Inquisitors have a bit more leeway in follow the edicts of their church, but I think there must be limits.
Last session the character assisted in killing about a half dozen lawful good pilgrimages in an unprovoked attack. They stole the body of the groups leader to prevent a raise dead attempt.
The following session the character promised to take items from a dungeon and return the items to a local Baron. He had made a vow to the baron. When time came to give the items to the baron, he hid the items and lied to the baron about what they had found.
The party accepted accepted food, lodging, and hospitality from the Baron. During their stay they discovered he may be a BBEG. They decided not to confront him, but instead ambushed him in his library and tried to kill him.
For most of the party this just the way they are, but for the follower of Torag I'm beginning to think there may be consequences. Possibly a loss of spellcasting ability and or some other class features.
Is this too heavy handed? Should I just let it go?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why did the party attack the pilgrims?
Ostensibly, this act seems very evil. Evil enough to change the alignment of those partaking in the attack to evil as well.
Which would cause the Inquisitor to lose their connection to Torag. Now, that's not a permanent loss in power, because all they need to do is find a new patron deity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or atone for their misdeeds.
|
Atonement
And gold, lots of gold
Giving the Inquisitor a penalty on his WBL, for the heavy fines / gifts required by the church / deity for keeping his powers, should be very effective actually, though likely causing screaming fits from the whole party ;-)
Otherwise, I think that repeated or unrepentant acts directly opposed to the deity's alignment would trigger the "slips into corruption" clause for falling.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Divine magic offers all kinds of power - the price is faith in a demanding and attentive higher entity. You're being too lax, it sounds like. Torag wouldn't say "no" at the first act of jaywalking or whatever, and as you say, Inquisitors are meant to get more leeway, BUT Torag would say "no" quite a bit sooner than this.
The way the party's dealing with this Baron is very sketchy, but given that he himself is proving to be sketchy, it's not the primary concern. The "handling" of those pilgrims and their leader's corpse, THAT sounds very hard to forgive.
Yes, it's time for this Inquisitor to fall; he's failed his duty to his god.
Leave him in a lurch for a bit; make him make an effort to find a new path. There are plenty to choose from (in addition to selling out to a less moral god, I can imagine a fallen Inquisitor turning into a Rogue, or maybe the "help" of tormented spirits will turn him into a Medium or Spiritualist), and you need to provide them and opportunities to pursue them, but don't just spoon-feed it to him. He chose to play an Inquisitor of Torag, and didn't walk the walk. That's part of how the game works.
|
|
"An inquisitor who slips into corruption or changes to a prohibited alignment loses all spells and the judgment ability."
At this point the next time they try to use a judgement or casts a spell inform them nothing happens.
From there as others have said they have the option of Atonement, the Heretic archetype or finding a new deity who's okay with slaughtering the innocent.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alternatively, this is a good exemple of a moment when you can change a player's deity subtly.
I could imagine a CE deity noticing the severed divine link the instant torag cuts it off and immediately tying it to him. This could be very gradual, you say that on a particular morning it take 15 more minutes to prep his spells, but not more.
His deity's reassuring voice in his ears sounds a bit different at first, but then it changes.
Then you start giving him ''dream visions'' of holy quests his deity wants him to do. Little stuff at first, but eventually it involves the murder of innocents, rape, human traficking, drugs, things of that nature. And you make sure to play to the victim's horror and pain. And if the player tries to investigate, you tell him he's now the worshiper of a demon lord, without realizing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something that's also very important is to *ensure communication between all parties' and 'make sure as GM you're not giving unconscious tics or tells that the players are mis-reading'.
What may feel like exasperation on your part, any sarcastic comment, any comment that's made off-the-cuff could be misconstrued as NOT being what is intended as GM.
I've had my fair share of GMs who *thought* they were telling a tale of one thing, but when we as players encountered the situation immediately went 'Oh, right, this is all a conspiracy and here are the data-points to prove our case'.
As a GM I've been running tables and suddenly the players go 'We're burning down the orphanage even though half of us came from there and we had positive experiences our entire life. It's obviously a nest of evil.'
...and in completely guile-less manner.
Ensure that the communication that is attempting to be made from all parties is understood *first* before doing anything drastic to the campaign.
Otherwise it becomes a 'death spiral' as the players slide their scale of morality to what they perceive as proper as influenced by the GM, and the GM continues to push the spiral not realizing they are doing so.
It's a tough job, but that's why not everyone is cut out to GM, and even the best ones sometimes need to take some time to regroup.
Torag may give a little leeway when dealing with a racial enemy, but he still requires his followers to be honorable. The first line of Torag’s paladin code is “My word is my bond”. The second on says they are truthful and honorable, but their alliance is to their people.
I don’t see how killing innocent pilgrims can be considered honorable. That is a pretty good reason to fall.
Breaking a sworn oath is in no ways honorable. That is also a good reason for the inquisitor to answer for his failure.
The part about not confronting the Baron is probably not a good reason to fall. That one could fall under the whole doing what is necessary to server his people. Without further information I would be hesitant to use this as a reason to strip him of his class features.
You should have warned the player the first time he failed to live up to what is expected of him. As a rule anytime the player does something like this you should give a warning. The warning should not be to the character, but rather the player. Let them know that what they did was wrong and if they continue to ignore the teachings of their deity they will lose class abilities. This should be done when the action occurs and not at a later date.
Since you did not previously give the player warnings do so now. Let him know how he failed, and the consequences of further failure. Don’t be an ass about it, but be firm about what you expect.
I am running a game and the party is pretty murder-hobo...
...Last session the character assisted in killing about a half dozen lawful good pilgrimages in an unprovoked attack. They stole the body of the groups leader to prevent a raise dead attempt...
...The following session the character promised to take items from a dungeon and return the items to a local Baron. He had made a vow to the baron. When time came to give the items to the baron, he hid the items and lied to the baron about what they had found.
The party accepted accepted food, lodging, and hospitality from the Baron. During their stay they discovered he may be a BBEG. They decided not to confront him, but instead ambushed him in his library and tried to kill him...
Ummm...hate to be the bearer of bad news, but, a few things:
1. That is literally the definition of murderhoboing right there, so saying they are "pretty" murderhobo-y isn't an adequate description. Most everyone here will outright say "They are murder hobos," even if they have a roundabout way of saying it.
2. How, in any conceivable game, would these acts be performed by characters be considered actions of a Lawful Good entity? Even an Inquisitor of Ragathiel (which we actually have in our game) isn't this overzealous, and that combination is probably the most free-form aspect of Lawful Good you can get.
3. Torag would probably not tolerate mass genocide of Lawful Good NPCs, even if they are ethnical enemies of the Dwarves. Needless to say, sometimes falls should happen without warning, though only in cases like these...
Why did the player choose Torag? Maybe he is willing to see his PC being tempted to follow a more sinister deity (meaning: a more fitting god). That could be a fun quest, with some purposeful murdering - you might enjoy the 'purposeful' part, they might like the 'murdering' part.
Don't try to work against the desires of your players, rather attempt to find something both sides enjoy. Sometimes impossible, but worth to try...
Thanks for the feed back everyone. I'm still considering what I will do.
To give a little more info on the situation:
1. Yes, I have informed the players in general that they were sliding towards evil and I have talked to the player of the inquisitor in particular about the consequences of his actions before he lied to the baron and stole from him. He considers the deception and theft as serving the "greater good".
2. The pilgrims were dwarves searching for the lost homeland of the clan. The baron considered them trespassers and asked the party to "remove them from his mountain".
3. At one point after some tension between the party and the pilgrims the party decided to leave with some stolen artifacts. A few of the pilgrims followed to make sure they actually left. The party laid an ambush and attacked the group following them. When the rest of the pilgrims came to help they killed most of them too. A few used non-lethal, but most of them, including the inquisitor, went full lethal.
4. I have been messing with the party a little bit and they have been interacting with multiple factions that are not entirely good. Everyone has hidden motives. A few session ago, after an evening of intrigue one of the players laughed and cried out loud, "I can't tell who the good guys and bad guys are!" I thought this would lead to more careful investigation, but has instead lead to a policy of "kill them all and let the gods sort them out".
5. They are murder hobos. Everyone knows it and is generally fine with the situation. We are all having a good time. I just doubt Torag would be cool with the whole thing.
Thanks for the feed back everyone. I'm still considering what I will do.
To give a little more info on the situation:
1. Yes, I have informed the players in general that they were sliding towards evil and I have talked to the player of the inquisitor in particular about the consequences of his actions before he lied to the baron and stole from him. He considers the deception and theft as serving the "greater good".
2. The pilgrims were dwarves searching for the lost homeland of the clan. The baron considered them trespassers and asked the party to "remove them from his mountain".
3. At one point after some tension between the party and the pilgrims the party decided to leave with some stolen artifacts. A few of the pilgrims followed to make sure they actually left. The party laid an ambush and attacked the group following them. When the rest of the pilgrims came to help they killed most of them too. A few used non-lethal, but most of them, including the inquisitor, went full lethal.
4. I have been messing with the party a little bit and they have been interacting with multiple factions that are not entirely good. Everyone has hidden motives. A few session ago, after an evening of intrigue one of the players laughed and cried out loud, "I can't tell who the good guys and bad guys are!" I thought this would lead to more careful investigation, but has instead lead to a policy of "kill them all and let the gods sort them out".
5. They are murder hobos. Everyone knows it and is generally fine with the situation. We are all having a good time. I just doubt Torag would be cool with the whole thing.
1. While he isn't a Paladin, I fail to see how stealing items from a noteworthy individual to benefit themselves as being an act in the name of the "greater good." Unless he thinks that he, himself, is the greater good, the justification here doesn't make any sense, and even if it does, it's by no means logical.
2. Consider what the Baron said: remove. He didn't say "kill" or "eliminate," but "remove." To a Lawful Good character, they shouldn't resort to full-on lethal violence except as a last resort in a "them or me" situation, especially on defenseless pilgrims. There were a dozen solutions that could have applied here that would have fulfilled the requirements of the Baron's request without violence.
3. Typical murder hobo behavior. See something, kill it, take all its stuff, rinse and repeat. Not only is that not Lawful Good, it's borderline Chaotic Stupid.
4. The Inquisitor can detect any non-neutral alignment, as the Detect [alignment goes here] spell. Unless they are all less than 5 hit dice, they will radiate an aura of some kind. Players not using their tools is either a result of players not knowing their class mechanics, or ignorant player mentality in relation to these things. Based on his decisions, it appears to be the latter.
5. If everyone is having fun, then that's fine. Just understand that at most tables this kind of behavior will easily be scoffed at for lack of authenticity to the game.
Number 4 indicates that the DM wishes to play one kind of game and the players wish to play another kind of game. Since you're saying everyone is having fun, I'd go with the suggestions provided on how to switch the patron deity to something more appropriate, such as Gorum.
Not to be an ass, but I would like to hear more of the story. Because this sounds like incredibly dry murderhobo.
Number 4 indicates that the DM wishes to play one kind of game and the players wish to play another kind of game. Since you're saying everyone is having fun, I'd go with the suggestions provided on how to switch the patron deity to something more appropriate, such as Gorum.
Gorum would look at the Inquisitor and say he isn't worthy of being a part of his faith on the account of murdering numerous defenseless pilgrims.
Even Asmodeus wouldn't want this character due to how quickly he reneged on the Baron after accomplishing a task (akin to fulfilling a contract).
This calls for Chaotic Stupid gods (maybe one of the Outer/Old One Gods) to come in and shower the Inquisitor with praise and affection for sewing so much death and chaos in the world. Unfortunately, I don't know the names of any of these gods, so someone more knowledgeable can give a better answer.
|
|
Typical murder hobo behavior. See something, kill it, take all its stuff, rinse and repeat. Not only is that not Lawful Good, it's borderline Chaotic Stupid.
If you think about it, that's not Chaotic Stupid (something which hardly ever shows up outside of Warner Brothers cartoons), that's Lawful Stupid - unimaginative, predictable, cut-and-dried groovethink and mob mentality. This party's behaving more like a pack of wolves.
The Outer Gods would take no interest in such a humdrum, predictable party. Maybe Moloch or Mammon? Maybe Norgorber, a Horseman, or a Daemon Harbinger?
So he decided to kill dwarven pilgrims looking for their homeland...... Exactly at that point does Torag say no.
Glad you guys are having fun. You are right Torag should have dropped him already. I would probably just ask him to pick a new god and drop his alignment to neutral
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...I missed that a follower of Torag attacked some basically-innocent dwarves. Yeah, that's already past "Your god says 'no' now".
As a matter of fact, that's "Torag suddenly opens up a spiked hungry acid pit beneath your feet, and if you somehow survive, you're stuck with a permanent Oracle Curse sans benefits."
Typical murder hobo behavior. See something, kill it, take all its stuff, rinse and repeat. Not only is that not Lawful Good, it's borderline Chaotic Stupid.If you think about it, that's not Chaotic Stupid (something which hardly ever shows up outside of Warner Brothers cartoons), that's Lawful Stupid - unimaginative, predictable, cut-and-dried groovethink and mob mentality. This party's behaving more like a pack of wolves.
The Outer Gods would take no interest in such a humdrum, predictable party. Maybe Moloch or Mammon? Maybe Norgorber, a Horseman, or a Daemon Harbinger?
Just because I generalized what they do doesn't make them Lawful. By that logic, all animals are Lawful because they eat, sleep, and mate, until they die, even though the specifics of how and why they do it differ between them.
At best, it's Neutral Evil, and that's just one instance, in which case I imagine they are still able to worship Outer Gods. Agreeing to the Baron's terms just to backstab him and take his stuff is most certainly both Murder Hobo and Chaotic Stupid, and would no doubt put them at the Outer Gods' doorsteps.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have a contract demon for Asmodeus show up and say "I hear you are about to become a free agent! Have I got a deal for you....just sign up right here on the dotted line!"
Or have real inquisitors of Torag go hunt him down, like he was a bad jedi that turned to the Dark side lol...
|
|
Just because I generalized what they do doesn't make them Lawful. By that logic, all animals are Lawful because they eat, sleep, and mate, until they die, even though the specifics of how and why they do it differ between them.
First of all, (non-human) animals are nowhere near so simple or predictable as you're making them out to be. These players, by contrast, sound like they're trapped in a groove I've seen people get sucked into all too often. Even if you were just generalizing, I'm wagering there's more to it than you might have meant to convey.
At best, it's Neutral Evil, and that's just one instance, in which case I imagine they are still able to worship Outer Gods. Agreeing to the Baron's terms just to backstab him and take his stuff is most certainly both Murder Hobo and Chaotic Stupid, and would no doubt put them at the Outer Gods' doorsteps.
It sounds like you're getting into the "Lawful Evil is inherently better than Chaotic Evil" and/or "stupid means Chaotic" fallacies - nothing personal, but both of those are some super-deep bonnet-bees of mine.
As for "agreeing to the Baron's terms just to backstab him and take his stuff," that's textbook Norgorber-style Neutral Evil - not Neutral Evil "at best". The Outer Gods in particular have no interest in such mundane-minded mercenary intrigue.
And neither are humans, so this doesn't really add up.
Not really, I'm just saying that Lawful people are more complex and have reasons to do stuff other than "Because I can," or "Because I feel like it." In short, Murder Hoboing is more Chaotic and/or Neutral than it is Lawful.
Again, I'm not exactly savvy on the Outer Gods, but I don't think all of their worshippers are random entities spewing random garbage just to be random...
|
|
Not really, I'm just saying that Lawful people are more complex and have reasons to do stuff other than "Because I can," or "Because I feel like it." In short, Murder Hoboing is more Chaotic and/or Neutral than it is Lawful.
Again, I'm not exactly savvy on the Outer Gods, but I don't think all of their worshippers are random entities spewing random garbage just to be random...
I'm unhappy to say these are exactly the fallacies I'm talking about.
You're basing your definition of "Chaotic" and "random" based on the bandwagon-poseurs rather than the much rarer genuine articles; the people who forward Internet spam, say, rather than the people who wrote the SPAM sketch in the first place.
If anything, it's the opposite: Lawful people do stuff "because X said so." They don't think for themselves; they follow external imperatives (which can take many, many forms, including animal instinct).
Have a contract demon for Asmodeus show up and say "I hear you are about to become a free agent! Have I got a deal for you....just sign up right here on the dotted line!"
Interestingly enough, a contract demon showed up about 4 sessions back. It was the end of a long plot arc than involved one of the characters trying to find redemption for his father. His father had gotten mixed up in some bad dealings and sold his soul to Hell. This was an opportunity for the character to learn about his father and try to deal for the freedom of his father's soul. Months worth of gaming led to this crucial point. It was a moment for growth and revelations. Before the character could learn anything, the rest of the party murdered the %@#$*&^! out of that thing. Major face palm moment.
...and is even willing to give the 'benefit of the doubt' to the party.
Not to be an ass, but I would like to hear more of the story. Because this sounds like incredibly dry murderhobo.
Like Freehold guessed, there is much more to the story. Way more than could be reasonably written up in a few posts on the forum. None of the characters are really as one dimensional as a quick post makes them look. They are murder-hobos, but they are not just murder hobos. I was just hitting on the high points. Or low points.
There are always extenuating circumstances and justifications of behavior. When placed fully in context things rarely appear quite as jarring.
Just a few tidbits:
---The pilgrims were most assuredly not defenseless. They actually drove the party off.
---While the baron only said to remove the pilgrims, he definitely implied that he did not care if the party killed them. (In fact he was counting on the party killing them, because he is in fact the BBEG. But, keep that on the down low. Just between us. The party isn't 100% certain about that yet.) ;)
---The inquisitor justified stealing from the baron because he suspects the baron is a bad guy and the items are better left out of his hands. And he plans on giving some of the proceeds to the church as tything.
---While the pilgrims were dwarves, they were not worshipers of Torag. They worshiped a pantheon of Torag's children, primarily Kols and Trudd. For some reason the inquisitor decided this was heresy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having only read the first few posts, this is less "you've lost your spellcasting and must seek atonement" and more "Torag has tasked his true faithful with putting and end to your heresy."
|
|
This definitely does change things.
---The pilgrims were most assuredly not defenseless. They actually drove the party off.
Wait...didn't you say the party killed them? You even specifically said they stole the leader's corpse (as far as I'm aware, Torag doesn't have any explicit dogma about body-snatching, but based on everything I do know, it definitely sounds like something He'd frown on).
---While the baron only said to remove the pilgrims, he definitely implied that he did not care if the party killed them. (In fact he was counting on the party killing them, because he is in fact the BBEG. But, keep that on the down low. Just between us. The party isn't 100% certain about that yet.) ;)
If the party thinks that's justification for massacring them (or at least trying to), that's as Lawful Evil/Stupid as it gets. It's called "The Nuremberg Defense".
---The inquisitor justified stealing from the baron because he suspects the baron is a bad guy and the items are better left out of his hands. And he plans on giving some of the proceeds to the church as tything.
That's actually Chaotic Good - so it's not wrong, but Torag still wouldn't care for it.
---While the pilgrims were dwarves, they were not worshipers of Torag. They worshiped a pantheon of Torag's children, primarily Kols and Trudd. For some reason the inquisitor decided this was heresy.
Forget alignment/pseudo-alignment - this just sounds like mythos illiteracy. Perhaps you ought to have clarified at the time whether the player understood his own chosen deity and knew what he was saying and why he was saying it. Depending on what his answer would have been, you could have (at the time) made him roll Knowledge (Religion) with a bonus since it's kind of really important to his own faith, or you could have branded HIM a Heretic (complete with Archetype)...OR perhaps you could have branded him some kind of fundamentalist, with an alignment shift to Lawful Evil (maybe Lawful Neutral would suffice) and covertly switching his patron to whichever Archdevil was feeding him lies (which I think is how fundamentalist behaviors among Good-aligned faiths are handled in the Golarion setting).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's pose Torag as, "The Boss".
The Boss has some rules (and a paladin's code is a decent place to begin):
1. My word is my bond. When I give my word formally, I defend my oath to my death. Traps lie in idle banter or thoughtless talk, and so I watch my tongue.
This suggests that Torag has a thing for following through with what you say you're going to do. If you're lying to someone about the treasure that you collected, that you were supposed to turn over to that person, this is something that Torag would frown upon, and not just because the character is a paladin. That's something that a priest of Torag would be preaching to the congregation.
2. I am at all times truthful, honorable, and forthright, but my allegiance is to my people. I will do what is necessary to serve them, including misleading others if need be.
"My people", among dwarves, generally refers to dwarves. If your inquisitor is killing off a bunch of dwarves, they're not really living up to the spirit of this part of Torag's code, and so Torag wouldn't take too kindly to his inquisitors pulling these sorts of shenanigans, either. They wouldn't suffer a "fall" like a paladin, but it would definitely earn them some side-eye/a visit from one of Torag's celestial servitors (or one of their flunkies).
3. I respect the forge, and never sully it with half-hearted work. My creations reflect the depth of my faith, and I will not allow flaws save in direst need.
I haven't heard of your inquisitor doing anything that would go against this sort of edict from Torag.
Against my people’s enemies, I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except when strategy warrants. I will defeat them, yet even in the direst struggle, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag.
Is your inquisitor (and their party) really acting in a way that brings honor to Torag? If the answer is yes, then fine. If no, then Torag's going to be upset.
So... The Boss has made these rules clear (or something like these rules). Maybe they'll miss you violating the rules your first time (or look the other way) 'cause you do good work. The second time, though, you're going to have an uncomfortable talk with HR. The third time, The Boss might put you on probation. Beyond that, you're strung up by the short and curlies, and you're out on your rear collecting unemployment. But even before that happens...
The Boss' rules for the regular employees are going to be different from a paladin's code, but as I said, it's a good place to start. Follow the employee handbook, or you're going to be filing for unemployment. Torag may not be some kind of cosmic bean-counter, but he probably employs minions who are tasked with ensuring that the faithful are living up to his good name. A warning or two is warranted, and an alignment shift to reflect their current behavior (arguably some form of evil; I personally see this as neutral-evil, as it is very self-serving behavior) is justified. Sorry, Inqui... You just lost your certification for Torag's employment, and now you have to recertify before Torag can hire you back.
Best wishes!
Thanks everyone. Lots of good input.
The hammer will be coming down soon. But I don't think I will let him just transition to a different god. Breaking up with a god has to be at least as traumatic as breaking up with a red head. You don't just quietly walk away from that without repercussions.
Could be a good time for a quest for redemption. A side plot point a few months back was an NPC paladin killing a few people in a fit of rage. The paladin was stripped of all power and even an atonement didn't set things right. She went off to fight at the World Wound to try to redeem herself. Sounds like a good place to start.
1: Gorum takes over as his deity. Depends on how important their mission.
2: Total loss of divine power. Would that percipitate a TPK? Maybe.
3: Horrific visions demanding atonement or a change of class and alignment.
4: Start transforming them into a cursed monster such as a Lamia or Minotaur. Maybe some demon or Devil is providing them with power, but their changes are just now becoming noticeable. Maybe they are ok with completing the campaign but ruining their life.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a perfect switch for the Inquisitor from Torag would be Droskar, the Dark Smith. Once a student of Torag, his greed for power and respect lead him down a dark path where he had kidnapped, imprisoned, and tortured a smith for the designs that he used to impress others. He is now the god of cheating, slavery, and toil. Droskar would love to get his hands on one of Torag's former faithful, since they're both at engaged in a cold war with one another.
His favoured weapon would change from the warhammer to the light hammer, and his domains would change from Artifice, Earth, Good, Law, and Protection to Artifice, Charm, Darkness, Evil, and Trickery.
I'm sure that you can come up with some servants of Droskar that offer the Inquisitor power and glory. They don't have to mention Droskar by name, or if they do, they can repeatedly offer him respect and glory, even offering aid from time to time. It'll be especially fun if the Inquisitor continues to rebuke or attack them, and more keep coming to help the Inquisitor (and his party) anyway. Followers of Torag start shunning the Inquisitor, and won't offer him aid or succor. If that doesn't give the Inquisitor any clue as to how much of a douchecanoe he's being, then fine... he can slip into the willing embrace and service of Droskar.
Best wishes!
Realistically (within the game-world):
1) Torag cleric falls.
2) Anyone who willingly tries to Smites Evil becomes neutral (if good); anyone who succeeds becomes evil.
3) The baron sends every bounty hunter in the realm after them.
4) The campaign shifts into "ending of Berserk mode".
In the 'as intended' stuff, that Inqu would have gotten dropped already. In the 'get along with your players' sense, I'd suggest telling the Inq if he doesn't intend to change his behavior, he should change gods.
I'd make this a freebie if the other chars are functionally operating under no consequences as well. Singling out 1 guy out of the group can come across as unfair, even if his char logically should be the most punished.
With the smite evil stuff, are there other good aligned chars in the group with smite? If so, they should get corrected too.
Alternately accept that you're playing a game without consequences for behaviors as intended and just keep going. I would probably point out at least that seemingly every char in the group IS acting like evil t$**s, but if that's how they want to be, we can keep playing that game until (GM) gets bored with it.