Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2

TOPIC: Paladin question

Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #1

I know some of you have played paladins and I have a question for you. I'm playing a paladin of Torm. We had a member of the party try to attack the leader of the party. He failed and was knocked below zero without dropping below -10 right away. The leader of the party preceded to kill the party member. I understand that paladins of Torm believe in quick painful deaths to traitors but I also do not believe that a paladin would be okay with killing someone who is unconscious. That would be like stabbing someone in the back to a paladin. Am I right or wrong in my thinking? The DM thinks that I am wrong due to the dogma of a paladin of Torm with the quick and painful death thing.
Striking from the shadows of my reality.            If you want peace be prepared for war."The truth will set you free, but it'll make you miserable first." - I know who said it but his name would make some people mad and I would rather you think about the quote."Question with boldness the very existence of God, for surely He would rather honest questioning over blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #2

If he was unconscious, it was only quick, not painful. In the case of Torm, I agree with you.
The Worst Rogue Ever!
Member of the Michigan Marauders
Ranger Extra-ordinary
--Rocky


BEWARE THERE ARE SILVER BULETTES NEARBY!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #3

Since Torm is about bringing "painful, quick death to traitors," you could argue that killing him while unconscious was undesirable because the traitor wasn't awake to suffer sufficiently for his crime. It was quick, but lacked the painful part.

But most executions involve the prisoner being bound and helpless, unable to defend themselves. So if you were thinking the guy should have been conscious so he could have a fair chance to defend himself (which I believe is the basic moral objection to backstabbing) then I think you're off-base.

So I probably agree with you, but perhaps for the opposite reason.
barkley.neo.rr.com -->see my trade thread HERE , my eBay store HERE or my web store HERE
"Ceci n'est pas une pipe" - Magritte

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Brad Mortensen.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #4

I'd say it depends on the reason that the member of the party attacked the leader of the party, and whether the attack was clearly meant to kill the party leader. If the PCs are in a developed part of the Forgotten Realms, it may have been better to turn him over to local authorities. If it's the wilds, and there's no one to hold a trial, then a quick death would seem to be the least bad option.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #5

  • Picc
  • Picc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • 9th Level
  • Supporter
  • Remember when we were explorers?
  • Posts: 5968
I agree you could argue it both ways. Personally I'd argue it whichever way causes less disruption to the group. That said if it were me I'd likely argue that while the act itself was strictly within the precepts of what your God allows your Pali still has moral qualms about the killing and the one who did it. It could be a good roleplaying spring board for a crisis of faith or possibly even a change of deity.
Semper Gumby, Always flexible.

Sartre sits in in a coffee shop and asks for a coffee without cream. The barista apologizes “Sorry, we don't have any cream. Can I offer you a coffee without milk instead?”

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #6

Picc wrote: I agree you could argue it both ways. Personally I'd argue it whichever way causes less disruption to the group. That said if it were me I'd likely argue that while the act itself was strictly within the precepts of what your God allows your Pali still has moral qualms about the killing and the one who did it. It could be a good roleplaying spring board for a crisis of faith or possibly even a change of deity.


or to challenge for party leadership

to make sure this sort of conflict does not occur again.
*mental note* always listen to Jeff

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #7

I have to agree with you Bloodwolf and what the others have said.

Killing an unconscious person comes off as both dishonorable (since they cannot defend themselves) as well as not fulfilling the precepts of Tormish doctrine by having them be defenseless in their unconsciousness.

I do not believe that by 'quick and painful' do they mean 'you must bind and execute them for being traitors' but more that you should honorably kill them in a rather painful way and not prolong their suffering.

Just my two cents on the matter.
Tobin Blake, Crusader of Bahamut, Knight of the Merciful Sword, and Triadic Knight.

"Turtle!"

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #8

And don't forget rule #1 - whatever the DM says goes.

If the DM says the execution was legal, then it was. But how you choose to role play your reaction to the situation is up to you.
barkley.neo.rr.com -->see my trade thread HERE , my eBay store HERE or my web store HERE
"Ceci n'est pas une pipe" - Magritte

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #9

I did not mean to imply that I had a problem executing a defenseless person. An individual brought to the gallows or chopping block is bond and helpless but they are conscious so that the record of their crimes can be read to them so that they die knowing what they died for. To do otherwise I would think of as unlawful. And we were just outside of a city. It even had a temple of Torm in it.

If it had been up to me I would have seen if he survived his injuries, without aid, and once he became conscious taken him to the local magistrate to be judged. And if we had been out in the wild I would have waited and if he survived I would have ran him through once he became conscious.
Striking from the shadows of my reality.            If you want peace be prepared for war."The truth will set you free, but it'll make you miserable first." - I know who said it but his name would make some people mad and I would rather you think about the quote."Question with boldness the very existence of God, for surely He would rather honest questioning over blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #10

When I get a chance I will put out the full situation. There are about 5 or 6 storylines going at once and a lot of this is what could happen depending on the roleplay of the rest of the group.
Striking from the shadows of my reality.            If you want peace be prepared for war."The truth will set you free, but it'll make you miserable first." - I know who said it but his name would make some people mad and I would rather you think about the quote."Question with boldness the very existence of God, for surely He would rather honest questioning over blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #11

No doubt the killing of an unconscious foe would be dishonorable to a paladin of Torm. It would be a murder and an execution, either of which are honorless.
Of all the traits of humanity, there is only one we do not share with other species, which sets us apart and makes us unique <br />-- the ability to imagine.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Paladin question 6 years 11 months ago #12

Disbeeleaf wrote: No doubt the killing of an unconscious foe would be dishonorable to a paladin of Torm. It would be a murder and an execution, either of which are honorless.


Are you agreeing with the ludicrous notion of "see if he bleeds out, and if he doesn't, wake him up, then kill him"?

There is nothing that suggests that Torm is opposed to executions - in fact, the tenet of "bring painful, quick death to traitors" says that you must kill someone judged a traitor. It's at odds with his mercy, which is supposed to bind the Triad together, but FR gods aren't always consistent in that regard.

Maybe when we get the full situation, we can judge whether the dead character was a traitor. Attacking a party leader could be traitorous, or it could be noble if the party leader was seeking to do evil.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
Time to create page: 0.239 seconds