Was I in the wrong here?

>>49192253
sounds fair to me, i think your group is unreasonably butthurt unless you're leaving things out to make yourself look better. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for now.

You might have had a discussion with your Gm on what he expected from you, and taken a queue from that. But in the end, you role played. So everyone else can fuck off

Also, fuck " paladin falls " scenarios

>>49192253
This seems to be reasonable behavior. "Parole" was a thing back in the day, and if you showed up to fight again after being released they killed you. You had ample evidence that they had no interest in redemption and were a threat to the peace.

>>49192253
I'd side with you on that one. You meted out the justice of written law and God as a paladin, as you are intended. The bandits are like that guy in California that keeps setting forest fire--they're a menace to society and must be removed from it. Obviously, these guys can't be kept locked up, so they should be executed. You can't expect fantasy settings to run Norway-style rehabilitation centers.

>>49192253
Important to context; did any of this actually happen in real life in front of actual human beings, or are you starting a thread because you don't have anyone to play with in real life and thus don't have a chance to talk about this stuff normally?

No judgements by the way, lots of people have no groups.

>>49192253
No, you acted in-character. Basically exactly the sort of thing Charlemagne did at the Massacre of Verden.

Medieval values are not modern values.

In real life would it be? No, they had their chance, they commited crimes, you were following the law, and they would have escaped again.
In the autismal mind of DnD? Yes.

>>49192340
It didn't happen in real life technically, we were playing over discord. But yes, this happened.

It's cool, man, do what you want.

>>49192253
>banditry
>getting a prison sentence in the first place

Find a GM who at least looked at a few wikipedia articles on medieval justice.

>>49192353
Not even in the dumber official interpretations of Good would executing murderous, repeat offender bandits be considered wrong.

>>49192816
Being put to work in the mines is a pretty apt sentence.

Anyway, context is important. Are these people who turned to banditry because it seemed easy and they had little regard for their fellow man? Are they people who turned to it due to a lack of options, being outcast, etc?

Everyone has a story, and there is rarely a clear good or evil in any realistic scenario. I'd say your character did what he felt was right and, unless he knew these people to have been fucked over somehow into banditry, that's enough.

>>49192253
>Also offer them all forgiveness of sins, if they desire to confess.
>None of them do, so I execute them one by one.
These are some dumb ass bandits. You have a servant of the settings god offering you absolution before death and not one of them take it? Your captured and about to be executed for repeat crimes. They should all be crying and begging for it. Now they're all in hell, right where they belong.

>>49192253
>Be paladin
Yes

>>49193124
If a hell exists in his setting.

And this assumes that the bandits follow the same faith as him.

>>49193209
If it didn't exist why confess sins? He's a vassal of the Realm's duke. I would assume there is a shared religion unless they were filthy heathens.

>>49192253
Lawful and good.

>>49192253
Gary Gygax himself would have applauded you. Unfortunately I have not my screencap of his quote, so I'll hope that some other anon has posted it.

>>49193339
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2013/06/on-alignment-by-gygax.html

>>49192253

Played perfectly, honestly. Not sure what else to even say.

>>49192253
Shouldn't have accepted their surrender.
If you will go full Dredd and execute as the law, you should not create the impression that they might be spared by surrendering.
Not saying you were wrong to kill them. Just wrong to have accepted their surrender.
Upon accepting surrender, you may want to transport them to another, equally sane (get rid of the repeat murder pillage monsters) agent of the local justice.

Mind you, the DMs setting seems a bit odd.
As >>49192816 noted, labour for banditry seems out of place in a medieval culture. Is there something else up?

Short version, Medieval Europe is actually a sorta shit setting for D&D and Paladin falls stories are usually shit anyway.

>>49192253

You did nothing wrong

Those people broke the law once escaped and broke it again doing the same thing as before

all you did was save time and effort taking them to be hung or beheaded for repeated crimes

>they killed women and children
Cleave and repeat

>>49193124
Bandits were pretty anachronistic, as in the DM borrowed heavily from russian prison culture. So, the bandits, even if religious, would not kneel before a poli... paladin or act like they did anything wrong.

>>49193339
Gigax paladin would have been one of the women rapist children murderer in fact

>quick death after they killed women and children
You were too kind.

>>49193761
Bloody and cruel vengeance is not really the paladin way, anon.

The important thing is
>did you fill out the required paperwork for judgment and execution (afterwards)?
If not you deserve to fall

>>49193729
It is neither rape nor murder if it is done to someone with an evil component in their alignment or from a race that usually has an evil component to their alignment.

>>49193370
He's basically saying it's okay to torture to death a violent criminal if they really were guilty and their crime was really bad. It basically makes the stereotypical Inquisition actually lawful "good" because they were obeying laws that were supposedly good. It makes the concept of lawful good completely meaningless by saying the ends justify the means and it's okay to do evil things as long as it's for a good purpose.

>>49193806
Depends on the Paladin.
Oath of Vengeance is not love and hugs.
In fact, very few areas outside of the 3.5 Book of Exalted Deeds expects much other than obedience to a law or higher authority coupled with a desire to oppose evil and protect the innocent.

>>49193876
G.G. also is a firm proponent of genocide.
No wonder he is so popular with the grimderp edgelords here.
It's like he's a prophet of the Emprah or something.

>>49193885
Lawful good really is the worst alignment. Lawful neutral is retarded but at least it's not contradictory.

>Brigands burn down a village and slaughter the villagers, women and children included

They deserved the same mercy they showed the villagers. None.

>>49193968
Lawful Good is fine, in concept.
The best way to protect the most people is with a stable and just society.
The problem is when the Laws aren't Good.
When the system exist to protect itself or to benefit a small cabal at the expense of the innocent, then we get nasty.
In the Lawful Good mind, unjust laws are no more lawful than personal benefit is good.
Then again, alignment is gonna be a sticky wicket for several reasons, high collateral damage planet destroying to hunt a small group of racial enemies being deemed Chaotic Good being only one of them.

File: 13264653691641.png (22KB, 510x546px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 510x546px

>>49192253
>That very textbook disposal of criminals

What exactly was their problem with that scenario?

>>49194068
Stop projecting your personal viewpoints on alignment. The way lawful good is classically played so mercy and fairness for everyone, even criminals. Although apparently GG didn't get the memo and made them the exact opposite.
>>49194136
Except according to GG it only matters if the laws are good and not the punishments. If the law says if you rape someone you get drawn and quartered, then apparently a lawful good character would have no problem with that because it's da laah, after all.

File: 1461865253730.jpg (14KB, 229x301px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 229x301px

>>49194526
>GG didn't get the memo about the alignment system that he personally created and defined.
>Lawful good is "classically" played as the modern cliche stemming from people who've never played older ttrpgs.
Please go and stay go.

>>49194771
The alignment system has always been ridiculously oversimplified schlock, but it was usually self-consistent. Saying that a lawful good character would have no problem with barbaric and cruel punishments simply because it's part of the law contradicts the part where a lawful good character is supposed to care more about good than the law.

>>49193120
Being put to work in the mines = protracted death sentence; execution is kinder.

Look up Roman Salt Mines.

A paladin is a member of a MILITANT holy order.

This isn't your village pastor.

This is an individual tasked to dispense divine justice.

Why the fuck do you think they give them weapons?

Weapons are for killing; a Paladin who cannot kill the wicked cannot do his job.

Anybody who says different is running MLP-Quest.

>>49194352
Apparently there are enough jails in this setting that could rehabilitate these poor lose souls?

Not sure what to say sir Fortesque, but perhaps this was an exceptionally light hearted game and nobody thought about what would come after they played hero.

>>49192253
> Be paladin
What the fuck were you thinking!? Oh, right, paladin.

>>49192253
> Be paladin
> Have no idea how to play it
Bravo.You are the reason why I usually don't let people play Paladins at my table.
At least have the curtesy to read the Book of Heroic Deeds. Then swap to fighter.

>>49192253
One of two things have happened here:
1) Your group is shit
2) You're playing in a cheery noblebright setting and broke the tone.

>>49194526
Fuck alignment.

>>49195069
If he was playing in a cheerful, upbeat setting he probably wouldn't have encountered a band of murderous bandits.

File: 11817118_479920558853661_3530059659399368962_n.jpg (15KB, 250x324px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 250x324px

>>49194992
>>49195005
>>49195074
>>49195069
pls stop being baiting faggots

>>49195069
>>49195112
dont forget the children

>>49192253
A lot of people have a very comic book perception of right and wrong. If someone surrenders, no matter what horrible things they've done, you never hurt them, because then you're the bad guy. It is a wholly unrealistic way of looking at the world, but a lot of people, especially young people, cannot get past it. Sounds like you have a group of such players.

So, what you did was logical, and given the circumstances, the ethical choice. But your fellow players clearly don't see it that way. They will get more and more upset with you if you repeat such things, and it will poison the relationship. I've had this happen to me before in a super hero game. Ultimately, not only did it ruin the game, the players and GM came to legitimately think I was some kind of psychopath in real life, because I tried to kill super villains who were repeatedly escaping custody and murdering innocent people. The GM even threatened to have my character hunted down and killed by a team of NPC Avengers stand ins when I tried to kill the villain who had murdered my wife.

Either play lawful stupid characters, or find another group. Otherwise, you're just going to make yourself and everyone else unhappy.

>>49195216
>If someone surrenders, no matter what horrible things they've done, you never hurt them, because then you're the bad guy. It is a wholly unrealistic way of looking at the world, but a lot of people, especially young people, cannot get past it.
Apparently the Geneva Convention was written by unrealistic young people.

>>49195216

What I always do is to go "Surrender, or by God I will give you no quarter!" when the fight starts.

This is because the bad guys NEVER surrender. Now you're justified in killing them.

>>49195266
Guess all those Nazi war criminals were let off with a slap on the wrists after they surrendered then.


Oh wait, they were executed for their crimes by the proper authority. Just like in this situation.

A thought, what if next time this happens the paladin offers the rest of the party the option to take custody of the prisoners instead.

No, really. Go on, show me what you would do instead to a gang of killers of women and children. I'll just follow what the rest of you decide, back here. Sharpening my sword for when you make the rational decision.

>>49195299
Regardless of the Nuremberg Trails being a kangaroo court, the point is you don't kill people in the field after they've surrendered. OP went wrong by being judge, jury, and executioner.

>>49195353
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_execution#Exceptions_to_prisoners_of_war_status

>>49193677
Don't see the problem with killing women in DnD, apparently they're just as strong as men, which would suggest they are capable of taking care of themselves.

>>49195383
If you continued to read you'd see that those exceptions rarely apply anymore. And now only apply to illegal combatants committing a war crime by wearing an enemy uniform while fighting.

>>49195353
> the point is you don't kill people in the field after they've surrendered.

I'd say it depends on what they did. Wanton murder (and what one can assume, excessive rape) of women and children just for kicks is something most people would consider to be execution-level actions. Not to mention the logistics of it.

>>49195546
>illegal combatants

Hey, these guys are having a war without permission, what the fuck!

>>49195546
Which still refutes your claim that you don't kill people in the field, even in the 21st century, let alone a medieval Europe analogue.

>>49195579
kek
>>49195588
Almost all circumstances you don't kill people who surrendered. Which refutes the original post I was quoting which says that it's an unrealistic viewpoint.

>>49195546
In actual practice, enemy combatants who surrender but have been found to have committed acts deemed in poor taste by the victors are often killed and simply added to the tally of battle-dead post-facto without much fuss.

Yes, even in Western militaries.

Applying rules to war has always been a rather futile thing.

>>49195629
Your original claim was that you don't execute people who surrender. Being obviously wrong this was quickly refuted. Then you claimed that you don't execute people then and there. This was also refuted. Far less common today true, but it's still legal in some circumstances.

The only real argument against OP's actions is whether or not he actually has the authority to pass judgement and execute criminals. Given his status as the agent of the ruler's will and the fact that these people were outlaws (literally outside the law) he had the authority and the justification.

they escaped from prison for banditry and slaughtered an entire village for banditry. PLUS you're a paladin that's also a knight of the Duke that they were prisoners to and that the village that they slaughtered were subjects to. you even gave them a chance to confess and be forgiven. you have every right to execute them

>>49194952
>MLP
uh, not that I've really paid attention to it, but don't they literally turn a fucker to stone, with him still aware of the outside world?

>>49195709
>an entire village for banditry

i need some more coffee

>>49195700
Ya, you're right. I was wrong on both accounts. But still, under most circumstances you're not supposed to execute prisoners.

To bring up a historical example, Henry V had several hundred French knights and men-at-arms summarily killed in the aftermath of the Battle of Agincourt, though the extenuating circumstance was that he believed that the French rearguard was preparing for another attack. Apparently, he was not criticized by his contemporaries for it. However, the source cited for this claim (Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle that Made England) is very much pro-Henry V, so take that with a grain of salt.

>>49195795
In the 21st century, in a western country, sure.

>>49195798
The Battle of Agincourt took place in 1415, very much in the Late Middle Ages, so take that into account as well.

>>49195795
>you're not supposed to
says who?

>>49195717
Indeed they do; I'll own up, I've watched two seasons of that shit.

Of course, you can't expect Sugarshit; the setting to really have the moral nuance to really compare the suffering of eternal imprisonment with the instant oblivion of death.

Nor can you expect a GM with the tonal inconsistency to have rapacious murderbandits who butcher women and children in the same setting as huggable Pillowdins to understand that part of being a good Paladin is bearing the burden of judgement over evildoers; OP already pointed out that these bandits escaped from a PRISON MINE, which is a hellish condition to live in; a condition which few escape alive, and none escape without some sort of long-term mining related disorder like black-lung or rickets that will eventually kill or cripple those unlucky enough to not be killed quickly in a cave-in after being sent into an unstable section by uncaring overseers.

In fact, instant field-execution would probably be preferable to many people who had just escaped such a dreadful place; in addition nobody would be profiting from the forced labour of convicts; which is still slavery, and nobody's suffering would be dragged out longer than needed.

In this case Field Execution = Instant Justice.

>>49195798
There's also the famous "Kill them. For the Lord knows those that are His own." quote said by an abbot during the Albigensian Crusade which gives you an idea of the typical treatment of non-noble PoWs in the Middle Ages.

>>49195859
Modern law and morality, which we are supposed to think is objectively true. So if you're playing a paladin you should be playing by supposed "objective" morality and not the outdated "morality" of ancient times.

>>49195936
Arnaud Amalric - before the massacre at Béziers; the Albigensian crusade was an extermination by the catholics who were trying to root out Catharism in Southern France.

In response to a soldier who was concerned that he would be killing "Good Catholics" as well as heretics.

>>49195970
Supposed by whom?

Some ones who suppose that they are the authority I suppose.

>>49195936
Ah, I know that by the modern variant, "Kill them, and let God sort it out." Not quite a paragon of Christian mercy, that fellow.

>>49195970
Nah that's dumb.

>>49195970
That's pretty retarded though, ye olde fantasy kingdom doesn't have norwegian pleasure prisons where you meet with a therapist every week and spend all your days weaving baskets which would be expected by a kingdom using modern law and morality.

>>49195988
Fuck I don't know.
>>49196004
So is the entire fucking alignment system. Who decides what's good or evil? What if two good gods have contradicting moral codes and their paladins get into fights about who's good? How the fuck can someone be true neutral? How the fuck do you fit all imaginable behaviors into a 3x3 selection?

There's also the lovely treatment that Charlemagne, Holy Roman Emperor and official Saint of the Roman Catholic Church, gave to captured Saxon prisoners at Verden.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden

>>49195266
>>49195353

The Geneva Convention assumes a state of war, in which two sovereign powers use standing military forces to overcome the enemy by force of arms. It only protects Soldiers, and it also assumes that any Soldier of either army hasn't committed any warcrimes, because most Soldiers are either pressed into service as part of a draft, or are fighting for their country, which is generally seen as a positive thing.

A band of murderers aren't protected under a set of laws meant to protect people who were following the orders of a sovereign government.

>>49192253

It depends.

In most places in England, capital punishment was in the hands of the lord of the land (usually the King, but not always). Even if you're a vassal knight of someone who has the right to put someone to death, you do not have that right.

The campaign setting is likely not modeled off of medieval England however, and Paladins are knights of holy orders whose first duty is justice, so it's possible they do have the right to dispense summary execution for capital crimes.

I don't feel you did anything wrong, and the escaped murderers who went back to murdering got what they deserved.

>>49193687
>Or act like they did anything wrong

So they thought its ok to slaughter innocent people and steal stuff and did not think its a big deal? You group knew that and still were uncomfortable? Damn if people think they are in the right, nothing will stop them from repeating it and they have shown that already after their escape. They were beyond redemption and you just saved the next village or even just prison guard from those bandits, nothing to feel bad about. Had any of those confessed their crimes and begged for mercy you could have brought them back to prison, even then it would have been a risk.

Remind your group that they thought what they did was alright and with that mindset would have killed again and again. Had they gone to prison again the blood of others would be on the parties hand and even if it would just be the prison guard holding the key for the next escape.

>>49196173
I don't think it matters if they have the right to dispense justice as much as they THINK they have the right.

>>49194831
>beheading bandits who escaped their prison sentence, who are also arsonists and murderers is cruel
Yeah, I mean they should have just been given a slap on the wrist. It's not like they did anything deplorable.

>>49192253
Uh, no.

They slaughtered innocent men, women, and children. They could have just escaped and tried to start over, but no, they went right back to killing.

If I was your DM, I'd have had you fall or at least seek penance if you were stupid enough to let them off the hook.

>>49196200
Isn't that the essence of justice, really?

And the only thing that differentiates it from spite I suppose.

Who thinks you had the right to do what you did.

Subjectivity between observers notwithstanding.

>>49195798
>>49195842
I will note that, however, the person of authority here was the literal highest authority of the land. That is also the case in >>49196090, and even then I understand he got some flak for it.

The relevant exceprt for the Agincourt scenario is here:

>
"In humanitarian terms, Henry's decision was indefensible: to order the killing of wounded and unarmed prisoners....violated every principle of decency and Christian morality. In chivalric terms, it was also reprehensible...The law of arms stated that a man who surrendered should be treated with mercy...On this reading, not only the king but the men to whom the prisoners had surrendered were in breach of their chivalric obligations. In military terms, however, Henry's decision was entirely justified..." (Barker, _Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle that Made England_, "Felas, let's go!")

>>49196246
I guess when you've been given a mandate by a god, holy powers and a bitching white steed you don't question if you have the right to dispense out justice or not according to the laws of the land, and metaphysical entity has already approved of your sense of judgement.

>>49196173
A paladin could get the authority to smite evil from the god they are worshiping. And the old question who has more authority gods or the local Lord/King/Emperor?

>>49196317
obviously your king.

T. Henry

>>49196085
Cosmic forces.
Paladins of differing entities could certainly come into moral conflict with each other.
True neutral is a bit of a cop out and really should be limited to animals.
The categories are really broad and aren't strict definitions of behaviour.

>>49196354
Depending on the setting you could do what Henry did and invent your own faith. Make yourself a god and the problem is solved.
If the gods are proactive however, you are pretty much fucked

>>49196315
Depends on your sect I guess; some faiths could have proscriptions against breaking the law of the host country - a Paladin of Erathis - the god of Civilisation for instance might hold the strictures of a civilisation's law to be an integral part of the expansion, spread and maintenance of that civilisation.

Conversely a paladin of Bahamut might be compelled to ensure that justice is meted out on his faith's "objective" terms - and kill them all on the spot for bringing death to the innocent.

Paladins have as much wiggle room as any other religious class - it's just a matter of cultic affiliation, which can be far more nuanced a code of conduct than the broad strokes of alignment alone.

And that's why I play Rune Quest.

>>49196407
That was Henry VIII, though.

>>49196217
I was mainly referring to what GG was talking about.
>>49196373
That doesn't explain what the "good" and "evil" in the alignment system even refers to. Selflessness compared to selfishness? Benevolence to malevolence? Do the ends justify the means? Is it good or evil to kill or steal?

>>49196430
Wasn't sure about the VIII. Dude was crazy

>>49196492
Pick any you like.

>>49196537
So it's just what you think of yourself as? Then how can paladins and rangers fall? Why would anyone think they're evil?

File: Prince of Sartar - Belintar - Pharoh - God-King.jpg (4MB, 1829x2403px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1829x2403px

>>49196407
Depends if you can accrue enough worshipful energy and channel it to project a divine influence over your domain and worshippers LIKE a god.

Patchwork, man-made or pseudo-gods or powerful individuals who have donned the mantle of a living god - and have the power to back it up, can be pretty ballin' patrons or nemeses.

>>49192384
>Eh well face
>Discord
I FOUND THE FLAW GUYS

>>49196561
I was more meaning the DM. (or whoever wrote the setting you're in.)

>>49195216
In a Supers game I can understand not killing super-villains because that's in line with the prevailing tone of the genre. Unless we're all playing Punisher knockoffs or have gone full Alan Moore.

In D&D though, even for a paladin I'd find what OP did pretty justified. Good is not always nice, and like he says the fact that they escaped lawful imprisonment and went back to their lawbreaking ways makes it pretty clear that they have no interest in redemption. Especially if OP's character really did have the authority to act as judge, jury, and executioner as he implied he did.

>>49196565
QUICKLY, EVERYONE POUNCE ON IT AND CALL OP A FAGGOT

>>49196564
Plus the title of "God King/Emperor" has a nice ring to it.

File: alan_moore.jpg (169KB, 500x494px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 500x494px

>>49196601
I cannot see any reason not to roll deep with Maximum Alan Moore at all times - but I guess that's just my tastes..

Plus, conflict between methodologies of dispensing justice is a classic superhero versus superhero thing; the superheroic thing to do is resolve it by ingame plot and keep everybody acting in-character with the understanding that conflict in a collaborative storytelling exercise drives the plot forward as long as it's kept inside the game.

Alan Moore is in your house right now, what do you do?

>>49196660
Hey, dude's got a game. Better than a lot of other people that post here.

>>49192253
OP, I think you did the right thing... but...

If bandit carried a penalty of hard labor in the nation where your Paladin was, he may have overstepped. If that nation relies on the labor of its criminals, they might not be too happy that you didn't return the men to the workforce.

>>49196694
I think you're misunderstanding

Given the examples pointed out here, I would say that a Lawful Good paladin erred. I think your DM was fair to say that he would note it, but not make you fall. To be merciful even at your own expense is Good, as it is to offer the chance of redemption even if refused once already. You can assume, and you might well be right, that they would continue to commit crimes; but you are not clairvoyant.

That OP uses his position as the Duke's knight and agent--that is, as an enforcer of Law--to support his actions means that, given more actions of this nature, would make him more Lawful Neutral.

Your group wanted a lawful cuck paladin. You played a harsh, but somewhat well reasoned character.

I'd argue you weren't exactly in the right, nor really in the wrong. But you definitely made a sound decision. The other players probably just have weak stomachs and are too used to paladins who wuss out at any sort of brutality.

>>49196713
Nah, unrepentant murderers who have already shown the ability and willingness to escape their punishment and kill again - and who actively resist absolution cannot be rehabilitated.

Otherwise you'd never have a legitimate reason to kill anybody, and you'd have no way to fight back against a murderous villain who simply surrenders when their back is against the wall knowing that you won't ever kill them.

This is why Batman consistently fails to prevent The Joker from killing dozens/hundreds of people.

He isn't willing to take responsibility for killing him - so ultimately he is partly to blame every time he kills again.

The Lawful Neutral thing to do would have been clapping them in irons and taking them back to court.

The Lawful GOOD thing to do would be to take upon yourself the burden of their fate in order to ensure that they never slaughter innocent women and children again.

Good is about self-sacrifice and taking burdens upon yourself - not defaulting responsibility when it is handed to you.

>>49196780
To be fair, Batman isn't always about not killing people in the hopes that they can be redeemed, he's usually about not killing people because he's afraid that once he starts, he won't stop.

>>49196780
Is Judge Dredd Lawful Good because he takes the burdens of being executioner into his own hands?

>>49196684
Make him a cup of tea and talk with him about anything. I'm sure it'll be interesting.

>>49196821
Depends on the writer really; but either way his actions have the same result.

Batman doesn't kill Joker, he doesn't even let anybody else do it.

And so Joker inevitably continues to spread death and misery on a large scale whenever he inevitable escapes incarceration or reappears after falling off something tall or apparently being crushed by debris for the umpteenth time.

>>49196859
On the contrary
>Superman kills Joker
>Injustice happens
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

>>49196859
Joker would be better as a legacy villain. So you could kill him, but he comes back as someone else.

>>49196879
NO, writers just make shitty excuses why he is not dead. The truth is that no jail would be willing to take him, and he would be killed by the state the moment he was captured.

File: Batman_Judge_Dredd_Vol_1_1.jpg (7MB, 1954x3040px) Image search: [Google]

7MB, 1954x3040px

>>49196828
You could make a case for it; but Dredd is a borderline chap; the law of megacity One is harsh, and he dispenses it by the absolute letter with no pity or remorse.

Then again, I hate the alignment system for lacking nuance, I like my games to have a little more wiggle-room for personal tribulation and cognitive dissonance.

>>49196953
Well, he's iconic. You can't kill Joker off for good, for the exact same reasons you can't kill Bats or Supes or Lex Luthor off for good.

>>49196422
A lot of people forget that D&D paladins in most editions aren't a religious class in the same way clerics are.

Gods have no effect on their code or influence over their powers, its purely a fluff choice. Anything off limits or permitted for a paladin "of X" is off limits or permitted for ALL paladins, and if a paladin "of X" did something that X didn't approve of, X wouldn't be able to punish him directly any more than he could punish a fighter. Which could be a lot depending on how active deities are in a given setting, but still, he wouldn't be able to just cut off his powers like he could with a misbehaving cleric.

>>49196953
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfH3bDPNGHw

File: Superboy Prime.jpg (1MB, 1253x1188px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1253x1188px

>>49196879
Man, I hated that plotline.

Evil Supermans are old hat.

>>49197042
But that's objectively shit.

Why on earth would the holy orders of every distinct LG god in existence be functionally indistinguishable?

Give 'em domains, cult spells, unique codes of conduct.

House-rule this shit nigga.

Also, stop playing D&D, every alignment thread simply shows to serve how they only serve to let the DM penalize you for making exceptions to your broader standards - y'know, like everyone has - instead of becoming a potential plot-point with realistically played through outcomes you get told to "stop behaving out of character or I'll change your character sheet and take away your superpowers".

Shitty, shitty, shitty from both a gameplay and world-building perspective.

>>49196984
Yes, but at the price of having a setting where it does not make any sense. Because the government would slap him with a kill on sight rating.

>>49197224
Well, you aren't wrong. Sometimes continuity is the bane of comic books.

OP, you are not in the wrong. So many people play Noblebright pallys and that's fine. But, just like you said, they had a chance and they blew it. You know as a paladin that mercy will only go so far. Killing them now will prevent more suffering down the line. Someone has to do it. It may as well be you.

>>49197224
Eh, the setting already has to bend itself backwards to try and justify itself for every single hero and villain.

>>49196984
This is part of the innate problem with ongoing series with recurring characters.

Sooner or later it just starts to get ridiculous.

I like limited run comics better as a rule - the plotting is always tighter than a long-runner that's been through several writers.

>>49195353
I always thought that as a champion if god, a Paladin was literally given the authority to be judge, jury, and executioner.

>>49192253
Rapid dogs get put down.

In the end the important part is not to punish them or get justice, it's about protecting others and keeping the peace. To do that you had to get rid of them.

>>49194526
>The way lawful good is classically played so mercy and fairness for everyone, even criminals
There's mercy, and then there's stupidity.

The salt mines are an execution, and a paladin's blade is cleaner than dying slowly of infection in a lightless airless hole in the ground.

For criminals that are apparently incapable of doing nothing but harming others to survive, it's the best way to remove them from the equation smoothly to protect others.

>>49197570
Rapid dogs are too hard to catch.

You're thinking or Rabid ones; they come to you.

>>49197293
Worm shows that you can have a superhero setting that makes a degree of sense. People like the joker get killed.

>>49197166
Honestly, in the last few campaigns I've run, I've just completely ignored the alignment system with the exception of outsiders (demons vs. devils, etc). Works out great, you're not really LOSING anything because the system never really contributed that much to the gameplay.

>>49197734
Worm relied on a literal plot device to function.

>>49197794
My GM uses more of a morality based system as opposed to the Law/Chaos/Good/Evil one. I am a cleric of Bahamut, so I value life, justice, freedom, honor and duty.

>>49197794
That's exactly what I do when I have to run D&D.

I refluff shit like Smite Evil type spells to work in much the same way, but also have extra effects against mortals who provably act in contravention of the cult's doctrine - aka, enemies of the faith.

>>49195353
In parts of France banditry was punishable by summary execution till the 1760s.

What a lot of people do not get just how much damage bandits cause to a area. In OP case they were attacking a settlement, which is very bad.

>>49197897
I think the real issue is that many posters seem to mistake the destruction of evil to prevent harm befalling others as an evil act in and of itself.

Of course, this is a problem in real life too, where we don't have dictatorial definitions of good and evil sourced from a grand cosmological conflict between the forces of light and darkness.

Fucking Manichean philosophy ruined nuanced ethics for a thousand years.

>>49197166
I never said it was a good design, just pointing out they're not god-powered by default.

>Give 'em domains, cult spells, unique codes of conduct.
Clerics and paladins have been one class to begin with in my opinion. Clerics got the flexible religious system, but then their spell list is mostly shared with wizards. Paladins got all the distinct holy warriorish spells and abilities, but then they got stuck with a single alignment and rigid code that no one can agree on.

>>49192816
Seriously, that's what being an "outlaw" literally means. They don't respect laws and they can't expect the law to protect them.

They made their choice. Fuck 'em.

File: slaaneshhorde.jpg (288KB, 760x1051px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 760x1051px

>>49192253
as a man who constantly plays cannibalistic barbarians, warlocks that worship world eating slime gods, and all around villainous bastards, I'd hate to meet your paladin on the field. Mainly because you'd probobly have all the right reasons to defeat me, but also because I'd have to meet your group. Keep playing by the fluff, you rock!

>>49198084
>I think the real issue is that many posters seem to mistake the destruction of evil to prevent harm befalling others as an evil act in and of itself.

I blame batman and other comic characters like him.

File: dubrovnik_by_radojavor-d46xgc6.jpg (351KB, 1250x723px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1250x723px

>>49192816
Well that just means the bandits should of been IN THE NAVY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw

Jokes aside medieval prison sentences were a thing, but mostly as a galley slave or as a salt miner. Normally two to three years. Longer then that the odds of getting out alive were so low the prisoners would just take their own lives. For prisoners doing galley work the death rate was around 40% and for salt miners it was much worst.

>>49194952
I actually kinda hate the idea that paladins have to be part of a holy order of a church.

What happened to the good old paladin that's just a virtuous knight called to action by his god? You know, like the actual paladins of folklore. Or the farm boy who finds his hero's sword and is assigned a holy cause by the forces of good?

>>49198907
Everybody wishes life were like in mangas where you talk to the bad guy and he actually changes his life around after only beating the crap out of him

File: 1421105791866.png (200KB, 600x451px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 600x451px

>>49192253
What you did was Good, but not Nice. Idiots and relativists tend to use the two interchangeably. What else were you supposed to do, pull a Batman and lock up the clearly dangerous in the knowledge that they'll escape sooner or later and kill the innocent, making you a de facto culprit?

>>49192816
To be fair, it's a pseudo-medieval setting. We wouldn't see the idea of prison sentences (for anyone but nobles captured in battle) pop up until around the French Revolution. It's not beyond imagination that a fantasy kingdom (which, while (late) medieval in technology level, is usually depicted as far more centralized than even many Ancien Régime kingdoms) would have the infrastructure in place for large prison complexes.

>>49199122
Didn't most medieval kingdoms (I know France and England did for a fact, the two medieval kingdoms that probably had the largest influence on how fantasy kingdoms are portrayed) outlaw slavery (within their own territory, which conveniently their colonies wouldn't belong to after being established)? Maybe it's pure etymology but I doubt they'd be slaves.

Paladin of which god exactly?

>>49192253
While you could have been more merciful, you surely did the righteous Lawful Good thing. You delivered retribution upon those evil-doers. As you said they slaughtered innocents and they were escaped convicts. As you said, you were the landlord's knight and the agent of his law, and in a medieval feudal settings there isn't such a thing as a 'fair trial' as we intend it, so ... yeah, you did good.

>>49192253
Have a read of Carolingian punishments for brigandry. While execution was common, so was mutilation and branding. Perhaps next time, instead of just killing them, chop off their hand and brand a B onto their cheek.

>>49192253
Nah, you did fine.

What were you supposed to do? Bring them before a higher authority to pass judgement on them? HELLO? You're a PALADIN, not a fucking rent-a-cop! You ARE the higher authority!

Justice is meted out by the gods. If not the gods, then the kingl if not the king, then his lords; if not the lords, then their duly appointed servants. There is no trial by fucking jury. You are a direct servant of one of the gods AND a high-ranking lord of the realm, so justice ends with YOU. They were bandits once and now they escaped hard labour, they are again. They've squandered the just mercy their last sentencer offered them and now they pay the price.

The only mistake you MIGHT have made is not making it clear when you initially attacked that you would be giving no quarter, but oh well so what?

>>49197897
This. Not only were bandits always seen as a major issue by the population, but control of banditry and protection of the roads was seen as one of the prime indications of good government, so there was a major incentive to crack down hard.

>>49201069
Yes they did.

Question is - will be this situation problem if your class was just warrior or knight? I thing this is not moral problem, just people waiting to pounce on paladin on every ocasion. This is kinda strange. Druids also can be fallen mechanicaly in dnd, but no druid ever question morality when cross iron bridge or sleep on wooden bed.

>>49197166
The reason why its retarded to make politically correct rainbow paladins of every stripe and creed is that we ALREADY FUCKING HAVE a Holy Knight of God class: the cleric. The cleric is a heavily armed and heavily armored ass kicking knight in service to God.

You don't need to water down the cleric and the paladin at the same time to further blur the two.

>>49201273
not op, but I think I am going to have to try that.
I don't think my paladin has mutilated enough people in his career, it's always been death or redemption. Next chance I get I am going to have to try the "Mercifully alowing you to live with the stain of your crime visable to all"

>>49201329
That's because druids only fall if they purposefully teach druidic to a nonbeliever or "cease to revere nature," neither of which is going to happen unintentionally.

>>49192253
I don't understand this D&D shit where people get punished mechanically for playing what they want to play. Alignment is cancer.

>>49192253
> Since I'm duke's own knight and his agent, this was as close to official justice as it gets.

This is the relevant point for me. If you were just a member of a religious order I'd say you would be obliged to take them to the proper authority to be judged and sentenced.

But you ARE a proper authority in this case. Like a US Federal Marshall in the wild west.

File: IMG_20160813_183145.jpg (110KB, 500x741px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 500x741px

>>49192253
Got similar stories

>LG cleric of Ilmater
>group gets attacked by a cult of the local villagers
>after slaughtering them in self-defense we happen upon a kid
>people are afraid he will bring more cultists if we let him go
>dickass CN thief suggests killing or trapping him there
>he should go find his mother
>literally everyone bitches and moans for the entire rest of the session OOC because a LG cleric let an innocent child go
>mfw

>>49201371
>>49197166
For the umpteen-thousandth time, alignment is not a fucking box to define HOW you can play your character! It's a descriptor for it! ACTIONS come first and the ALIGNMENT is just what we call those actions! It's not a fucking straight jacket!

>>49201391
Another one, same dnd group

>there's a restless ghost in a tomb
>kill him
>dickass CN thief suggests robbing the grave
>the code astartes doesn't support this action.jpg
>entire group bullies their LG healbot into leaving because he won't stand for grave robbery

Murder hobos.

>>49192253
Sounds like you're in the right there.

Being a Paladin doesn't mean you have to be nice about it. Mercy and Justice can both be LG, and which one you use depends on the situation, your specific Paladin code, and your personal insight and judgement.

>>49201400
Then why is it a problem for the paladin to do anything outside lawful good?

>>49193885
Every time I've seen this argument, it was used as a way to justify a paladin doing less.
I had another player in a game I was in throw the same line at me when I was playing a paladin to the highest of personal standards, and I shat on him and his bullshit.
Then the GM made me take the Saint template.

>>49196561
This is why you read the book and look at the explanations of how alignments work, rather than shitposting on /tg/.
I especially like how people only argue about 3.x alignments, because every other edition not only explained them better, but had less hinging on them for cuntwaffles to try and make edge cases.

>>49192253
> Brigands burn down a village and slaughter the villagers, women and children included
> However, I'm not cruel, they're getting a quick, noble death by beheading instead of something painful and drawn out.
You should have chopped their limbs first

>>49201433
Because you are posting bait?
Really the only reason.

>>49196090
>you will never get to shed the blood of the saxon man
Feels bad man

File: 1473085517483.png (570KB, 812x1520px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 812x1520px

>>49200922
Played a character like this recently.

>In his childhood he was saved from a kidnapper by a paladin who worked with the church of bahamut.

>He decided to become a warrior of the church just like the man he idolized

>fast forward 20 years and his dreams have been fully realized

>he had finally been released as an agent of the church helping a group of mercenaries and special agents (player party) to find and destroy a dragon cult.

>While doing the local monarchs building, he noticed they created a sea of collateral damage wherever they went.

>Troubled by this his faith began to waiver, and his doubt came to a head when the party happened upon one of his brothers of the church "interrogating" some of the common folk.

>Deciding that his brother was moving down the wrong path he challenged his authority and a fight ensued, he was victorious but the ensuing battle cost him his association with the church, his paladin abilities and his right hand.

>He cast away his great sword, switched to a one handed model and modified a shield so that he could use it with his stump.

>He kept the title of paladin and from that moment devoted himself to becoming a shield of the people, fighting both the cult and his overly zealous former brothers.

That character caused a lot of problems for both my DM and party but that idealistic bastard was more fun to play than most of the characters I've played in a while.

>>49201477
I'm not baiting and I truthfully would like an answer. Personally if I'd have paladins in my campaign I would let them answer to the state and to the gods for their actions rather than punishing them mechanically because they realize that being too nice for your own good isn't always viable.

>>49201512
Anon I want to have your Paladin's baby

>>49201407
>>entire group bullies their LG healbot into leaving because he won't stand for grave robbery
>Murder hobos.
I forget if this was my idea or I got it from a book, but I once had zombies rise up from a graveyard wearing jewelry the corpses were buried in.
When they PCs looted the bodies, they found the local villagers recognized their loved-ones jewels and accused the PCs of graverobbing.
Playing with murderhobos can be fun, but less so if you choose to be the voice of morality.

>>49201433
>Then why is it a problem for the paladin to do anything outside lawful good?
Not him, but the short of it is: It’s not.
When the Paladin Class was first implemented, it was relatively strong, so was given restrictions on their behavior to compensate.
Whatever the exact original restrictions were, how long ago they were removed, or other details regarding the development of the class, Paladins now are about following their oath to their god.
There exists a perception that paladins can never do anything the slightest bit Chaotic or Evil or they will fall hard. This perception has always been fabricated bullshit.

Saying alignments are shit because they restrict behavior is like saying cars are shit because of the safety problems of the open top Model-T.

>>49192253
Seems legit, running away from the law or your sentence typically got you outlawed anyway.

It's not exactly the nicest thing to go but its good by the law.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how Paladins respond to penal servitude, they are supposed to be against slavery generally and penal servitude comes pretty close.

>>49200922
Thing is, Charlemagne's companions; THE Paladins were all devout champions of Christianity and murdered pagans wherever they found them.

The only instance of a boy finding a magic sword in folklore that I can name, and boy do I know a lot of folklore is King Arthur, who is from a different but often conflated tradition; and that was pre-ordained only because he was secretly the righful king of Dumnonia all along.

>>49201645
Oh wait, there's also Kullervo who borrows a sword from the god Ukko, but he kills himself after butchering a rival clan.

Finns huh.

>>49201069
>Maybe it's pure etymology

It was. The correct term would be penal labour, but it was day in the a lot like slavery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labour

In the case of the french mediterranean galley fleet the convicts were used for a task that traditional was done by slaves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galley_slave#Early_modern_era

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6jp_MKI_6w

>>49200922
"Knight errant" is a better name than Paladin, in honesty. Chivalric faggots dancing around and delivering their own brand of justice is much more fun than "so you've gotta obey these rules...".

>>49201069
>and relativists
Relativists are the ones least likely to do such a thing.

>>49196111
Its not all about governments amigo. Resistance movements are recognized as lawful combatants if they follow a simple rule or 2.

>>49196684
Get dressed, probably.

>Was I in the wrong here?
>Be paladin
Yes

>>49201586
So the alignment stuff is gone. Then how come this constant discussion still keeps happening? OP doesn't even mention his alignment and yet everyone assumes he's LG.

File: 101[1].png (48KB, 524x1200px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 524x1200px

>>49192253
You are paladin'ing correctly and your fucking fellow players and DM are fucking idiot pussies.

EYE FOR AN EYE

WALK THE BREADTH OF THE LAND WITHOUT FEAR

SO SAITH ED

Now, you wanna know the REAL reason they're pissed? Cause you killed the DM's train tracks

>>49195579
Literally the war in iraq.

>>49193876
>He's basically saying it's okay to torture to death a violent criminal if they really were guilty and their crime was really bad.

Yes, and?

Medieval justice was about punishment, not rehabilitation

>>49201887
>So the alignment stuff is gone.
Technically, the alignment stuff we're talking about never really was.
But, yeah.

>Then how come this constant discussion still keeps happening?
1. Because/tg/.
2. Because idiots.
3. Because the perception I mentioned is still out there, as are stories of paladins falling, players playing then as LG fun police, DMs fixated on breaking the Paladin for no reason other than "it's a thing", and other memes. The idea is out there, just like the idea that you should drink 8 glasses of water a day or that the human body loses 90% of it's heat from the head.

Btw:
>OP doesn't even mention his alignment and yet everyone assumes he's LG.
Similarly, paladins can technically be of any alignment, but the classic idea of one was lawful and good, so that's the operating assumption.

>>49195557
>excessive rape
Wow did we get carried away back there or what?

>>49195353
Independent justice is kind of what I think paladins should be for. More fun.
>>49201985
>EYE FOR AN EYE
He did it perfectly. Not too cruel, just a simple death.
>>49195579
That's part of the purpose. State laws, written by states, for states.

File: grimgar2.jpg (45KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x338px

>>49201391
>>49201407
>want to, just once, get to play the plain-old archetypal party-face team-mom cleric who abhors unnecessary violence and is a natural friend to all
>it absolutely never works because one guy always rolls a crazy murder machine who slips out at night to murder innocents or something
>no potential for an interesting party conflict because his IC reasons for doing it always amount to "he's just that fucking crazy lol!"
>rework my character so that he doesn't have to leave the campaign two sessions in upon realizing that one of his comrades is Charles Manson
>my soul when

>>49192253
>noble death
My only beef here.
Beheading is quick but not really noble.

Not really. It's harder than you think to be "in the wrong" as a Paladin short of being intentionally ridiculous about it. The only thing I would suggest is bringing the rest of the party into it and asking for opinions before fielding yours. The way you tell the story, I get the impression that you were the one carrying out this execution, and not the party, and that's usually not a good thing in a party based game.

>>49202107
Not like he's stacking their heads to be converted into drinking utensils later. And he's a paladin so I doubt he'd be wandering around with poison for lethal injections.

Near 200 posts in an not a single dindu

>>49196313
Some knight, I've heard, refused to kill the prisoners bc "true knights don't do that shit".
This paladin discussion has been taken place to fucking long.

>>49195970
Fuck that desu

>>49202107
Beheading is a noble execution method. Hanging, quartering and burning is not.

>>49192253
Eh, your DM probably just wasn't expecting that to happen. If you spared them, maybe he was planning to have them crop up again later after escaping from the mines again.

> 201 replies

File: 1453631509513.jpg (55KB, 250x403px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 250x403px

>>49202642
>alignment thread
What did you expect, senpai?

>>49202642
That's not exactly unusual, anon.

>>49202107
It was commonly reserved only for nobles. Commoners got less honourable deaths, ex. by hanging or breaking wheel.

I think it's just a holdover from the old "die in battle" thing.

>>49202657
It's not a fetish thread or general.

>>49202673
It's still not unusual, anon.

>>49202673
You have a low opinion of everyone around you, huh?

>>49192253
Nope, those brigands were given a second chance and blown it, especially with the damage they did to that village alone.

You should have asked your fellow party members this question: What if they wound up picking YOUR pocket next or raided your homes after they escaped? Or what if it were your loved ones who were slaughtered by them?

They were beyond the point of redemption OP, they were recidivist scum which if left unchecked would cause more harm than good. Even if they were trying to survive as some of the party members could have stated, they failed to serve their sentence and gain a clean slate, they escaped from their sentence just to kill and rob again.

>>49192253
> Also offer them all forgiveness of sins, if they desire to confess.
> None of them do,
Did the bandits really believe they had done nothing wrong?

>>49192253
>Should I have done something differently?
From what you've told us, no. It was good roleplaying, and even though people were uncomfortable, they weren't that uncomfortable, and in any case such (non-disruptive) interparty conflict is good.

Furthermore, having this case "noted" is not a bad thing. It's really, really good. Besides meaning your GM gives a shit about your character, it's the right thing to do; your instant, extra-judicial punishment *should* be seen as reflective of the paladin's character. Others would not have done as you did, for their own reasons. You showed, among other things, individuality and a lack of adherence to protocol and authority. These are definitely worth bearing in mind, depending on your future actions. So would doing the opposite, incidentally.

However, other details could change this. But we don't know these. And it's possible this is made up, anyway (not that that matters).

>>49196859
Hell in one comics Batman kills a guy to save the Jokers life.

Which is even more insane than Batmans normal stance.

>>49201400
But is is you S'wit.

And if it isn't then it serves literally no function and the game suffers not a whit for it being totally ignored.

>>49202642
>> 201 replies
Anon, I was once in a thread that went to 500 posts over discussing whether or not it was a good idea for a PC to try to murder the king in his throne room, in front of his elite guard, after failing to extort more payment for a successful quest.

>>49202885
I remember that thread.

>>49202781
Source?

>>49201400
You are wrong. The alignment system is designed with the same perspective as the combat mechanics. It is simply another method of balancing the game, or of determining playstyle. It is not meant to be used as an actual, narrative device, which is why it sucks when used as an actual, narrative device. People who play D&D in political or story-driven campaigns are trying to hammer a square into a round hole. It would be better to use the circle -- none of which have alignment systems, to my knowledge.

>>49201525
Roll dipomacy

ITT: Fucked up beings that are not able anymore to understand what a paladin stands for.

This world is going to hell.

Well, sometimes doing right doesn't mean doing good.

I could appreciate the pragmatism, at least.

>>49203202
In this post: autist incapable of understanding moral nuance and culturally appropriate justice.

Or bait, in which case (you).

>>49203202
What does paladin stand for, anon? What would you do differently and how? Enlighten us.

>>49203256
It means you're the fastest gun in the west.

>>49192253
To be honest your DM probably just expected you to keep rolling to hit until combat was over so anything else is just icing on the cake.

Either way making a paladin fall ever for anything that isn't absolute evil like murdering children or anything is dumb no matter how you slice it.

>>49203158
He is not wrong.
But aside from you saying that he was, neither were you.

File: phil_ken_sebben_by_jb_online-d2zohfr.png (187KB, 900x563px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 900x563px

>>49203293
Ha-ha!
Reference.

>>49201767
You're just mad that you can't play lg without coming off as lawful stupid

>>49201997
as opposed toooooo our current justice system?

>>49203429
Yes for most of the western world.

At least in theory.

At least in theory before private companies were allowed to stick their dicks into it and make money off of repeat customer.

>>49202107
Maybe not but more noble than what a bunch of rapists and murderers deserved, at least that's what I'd argue

>>49203442
fair enough

>>49196179
>So they thought its ok to slaughter innocent people and steal stuff and did not think its a big deal?
some people are sick in the head like that.
OP was right to do what he did, clearly these bandits were a threat and prison was not going to be enough to ensure the community would be safe from them.

>>49202057
>grimgar
How is it?

Heard it's pretty Grimderp

>>49203378
>You're just mad that you can't play lg without coming off as lawful stupid
you'd be surprised how many people on /tg/ have a poor grasp of the concept of "good".

File: Wake me up.gif (2MB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 512x512px

>>49203627
The point when playing a paladin or any other "nice guy" class for that matter isn't to be constantly good. You want to aim for being a decent person,flawed and fallible but overall decent otherwise you're just playing an anti murder hobo that's just as boring.

>>49201391
>edgelord captures the enemy wizard
>already has him unconscious
>decides to cut off his hands so that he can't cast any spells to aid his escape without even discussing it with anyone else
>in plain view of the paladin of Ilmater
>pally crits on his smite evil and 1 shots edgelord
Was that edgelord character's first session too. Was a good game.

>>49203840
You are literally That Guy.

>>49203378
I mean, the Imperial Guard are pretty much the living embodiment of Lawful Stupid.

>>49203883
I was the dm bro.
Also literally every other player stopped him ooc and told him what was going to happen.

>>49203826
except, a paladin is supposed to be a paragon of good, or at least as close as any mortal can achieve.

Which means not running around and acting like a prick 24/7. You might think this to be a simple concept, and yet how often do people come on here and present us stories of just that?

Like, even by medieval standards they'd be labeled as perpetual assholes.

>>49192253
You did right. You enforced the law.

DM and your group are limp-wristed AND anachronistic pansies.

>>49203908
>being an anti-murderhobo is just as bad as being a murderhobo!
>"OMG why do you want everyone to be a murderhobo???"

>>49203928
>You enforced the law.
Without consulting any of the local nobles, nor going through their legal system.

Depending on the noble, they may or may not be too happy to have a guy running around and killing people without permission.

>>49193544
This guy actually makes a good point. I was gonna say you probably acted as you should (although not knowing details about the setting or your deity I can't be sure), but now that this guy brought it up I do think that accepting surrender and then killing them anyway, humanely or not, is an iffy move. Maybe not "you fall" bad, but reasonable grounds for criticizing your approach.

I'd take this as an IC dispute with potential for some good role-playing as a party conflict, and possible IC consequences rather than getting salty OOC, though.

>>49193544
>If you will go full Dredd and execute as the law, you should not create the impression that they might be spared by surrendering.
Their souls might be spared. He talked about confessing &c., meaning there's more at stake here than simple life. From that perspective, there was a valid reason to accept surrender.
>As >>49192816 noted, labour for banditry seems out of place in a medieval culture. Is there something else up?
But it's not out of place. He was wrong. Labour is exactly what they did in place of our modern prisons.

>>49203893
the whole imperium is lawful stupid

>>49204068
No, lots of it is chaotic stupid.

>>49203883
Ilmater is the maimed god of healing, Anon. His symbol is his own severed hands.

It's not a matter of good, evil or moralfaggotry then. The edgelord was openly committing sacrilege in front of a god's chosen warrior! If the paladin had been an NPC, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

>>49203972
>what are the laws of gods

>>49203972
The OP said that he was the duke's own man, and was given the authority to enforce the law.

If anything, the duke would be pissed off he was disturbed over such an open-shut case.

>>49203972
Since when does nobles give a fresh fuck of belair about the lives of bandits?
If we go down this path a lot of adventurers end in people getting arrested for the murder of kobolds, orcs, and the unapproved seizure of a lich's property.

>>49204120
>What are the laws of men

>>49203908
A paladin is supposed to be devout and righteous, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're good. Some people like to play them as champions of the people and some like to go all crusades and grand inquisition.

What I don't get is why you're trying so desperately to boil down a potentially good story driven class to its lowest common denominator...

>>49192253
Disclaimer : I'm not judging what actually happened, only what you're describing.

This is how I would have done it too, and it is Lawful Good, yes. The law of talon applies in D&D. Gygax wouldn't have had an issue with your roleplaying.

If it's legit though, I'm pretty curious about why the players and DM reacted like that.

>>49204077
I can see that, alright I concede

>>49192253
Man I hate Paladins, they're so far up their own asses.

>>49204129
>The OP said that he was the duke's own man, and was given the authority to enforce the law.
You're right, and in that case he did nothing wrong.
>Since when does nobles give a fresh fuck of belair about the lives of bandits?
It's not about the lives of bandits you mong, it's about the killing power of a random bugger in your territory. And the fact that he didn't consult you, showing he's above your power.
>If we go down this path a lot of adventurers end in people getting arrested for the murder of kobolds, orcs, and the unapproved seizure of a lich's property.
This is not a bad thing. Sword and sorcery does not typically feature law-abiding characters.

>>49192253
Gary Gygax himself defined this as an iconic Lawful Good action, suitable for a paladin.

SJWs can fuck off and deal with it.

>>49204160
I would argue that the people at his table are less concerned about what actually transpired IC and more upset that he made an executive decision on what to do with the prisoners.

In my experience a lot of folks don't like to share the spotlight at the table and it really fires them up when you decide to borrow it for a few minutes to do something.

>>49204132
The laws of the gods.

Let me let you in on what a medieval monarchy works like: The king is the appointed regent of the god or gods. He in turn hands authority to his lords, who hands it to their knights, who hand it to their servants. All authority is ultimately from the gods and passed down the chain.

A paladin is a direct servant of a god. He may not have the power to rule, but in terms of justice, his ruling and action carries as much weight as the king's!

>>49192253

technicaaaally, you had to have had made a trial by combat against them individually.

>>49204208
I think the paladin was in the right here, but even I can tell you that Gygax was full of shit when it came to paladins.

>>49204221
>The laws of the gods.
Nope.
>The king is the appointed regent of the god or gods. He in turn hands authority to his lords, who hands it to their knights, who hand it to their servants. All authority is ultimately from the gods and passed down the chain.
And yet, kings often went to war with the Pope, or fought with the clergy.
>A paladin is a direct servant of a god. He may not have the power to rule, but in terms of justice, his ruling and action carries as much weight as the king's!
Which is why the King might not like him, you dingus. The conflict between church and state is not exactly new.

"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with this. Power politics does.

>>49204256
You're forgetting the fact that this is a fantasy world.

The gods are real. They can be proven as real. There is no question where divine right to rule comes from.

I'm from the same group, and this guy forgot to mention that one of the brigands started spilling the beans to the more criminal part of the party, i.e rogue and warlock. On thieve's cant, but whatever.

And said paladin then proceeds to kill the guy WHILE WE'RE TALKING TO HIM!

>>49195353
You're full of shit.

Firstly, the Geneva convention is for soldiers, not criminals. Criminals get zero reprieve by surrendering.

Secondly, paladins are authorized and empowered specifically to be judge, jury and executioner.

File: 7550634.jpg.png (85KB, 492x280px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 492x280px

>>49204314
I want your story to be true but I can't believe you without definitive evidence.

>>49195629
>Almost all circumstances you don't kill people who surrendered
You don't kill soldiers who surrender. It's got nothing to do with criminals. That's a massive difference.

>>49204314
At this point, he stopped spewing useful information, and we've had everything that we needed. I'm sorry I've executed him before you managed to let him go.

>All the people ITT implying that because the bandits slaughtered women and children their crimes are Especially Heinous

Feminism is a joke, equality doesn't exist and never will exist precisely because even people who belive in "equality" have a bias towards women
Why even pretend to be egalitarian at this point?

File: 1462332888009.jpg (37KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 600x600px

>>49204431

>>49204314
So what? Criminal chatting to another criminal in secret criminal language is supposed to spare him from judgement?

>>49203202

Mercy doesn't mean pardoning the guilty.
Mercy doesn't mean pardoning the guilty.
Mercy doesn't mean pardoning the guilty.

With bandits, or rather raiders (since these enemies literally slaughtered a whole village), who are already on their second chance, the absolute least you can do is execute them. It's not like a war where prisoners of war are supposed to just laze around for the duration of the conflict until one side wins and they're freed. Raiders are outlaws by their own actions. You don't get to just let them live. A paladin who refuses to kill raiders who he knows will likely get free and kill again, after already having done so, is being willfully negligent, and therefore likely fall. Offering to pardon their souls, though, is the ultimate act of Lawful Good morality, and by doing so perhaps the paladin saved a few more souls than he would have had he just killed them.

Besides, didn't the villagers deserve justice? The lex talionis states that the punishment must fit the crime -- how can you atone for the taking of life without giving up your own life in return?

>>49204431
Equality doesn't mean the same in every possible way. Killing those that are not able to defend themselves is generally considered worse than killing someone who presents a threat or can fight back.

>>49192253
It sounds like good, interesting roleplaying. Talk with your dm about what problem he has with the way the scenario turned out though. I'd like to just say your group is being stupid, but taking such an abrasive stance in your mind will only cause problems down the line.

>playing a fighter who doesn't trust anybody
>one person in our party is playing a paladin
>we are at an underground castle
>evil wizard girl starts asking paladin for help
>paladin uses detect evil
>knows she is evil
>''Okay, I will help you for now...''
>evil wizard asks us to go into this one room, so we can talk, promises riches if we can make a deal
>nope.jpg
>I stay outside
>party goes in, including paladin
>wizard casts a 7th level fireball as soon as we are in the room
>party goes down
>I am still alive
>run for my life

Worst Paladin ever

>>49193330
Hell doesn't exist in the real world but people confess sins all the time, is that a real question?

>>49192329
Forest fires are actually needed for new redwoods to grow though.

>>49194526
>The guy who made the alignments didn't get the memo how they're supposed to actually be played

File: 1472612614362.gif (3MB, 264x192px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 264x192px

>>49204614
>''Okay, I will help you for now...''

>>49204469
>uncomfortable facts about your beliefs is bait
Confront your own beliefs you spineless fuck.
WHY do you believe that killing women and children makes the crime worse than if they had just killed the men other than body count?
But clearly, body count isn't the issue because it wasn't described using body count but instead gender and age.
Fuck you people are so entrenched in your beliefs and don't even question them and get upset when someone points out your own inconsistencies.
>>49204509
>Equality doesn't mean the same in every possible way.
But when your "equality" is saying "mens lives are worth less than women and children" you're making a massive statement about society that no amount of "equality" in other areas will make up for because your very foundations are extremely unequal.
>Killing those that are not able to defend themselves
Why do you assume the women and children are unable to defend themselves? Child soldiers are a thing that have always existed.
>generally considered worse than killing someone who presents a threat or can fight back.
Why do you assume all the men present a threat and can fight back?
I didn't hear a single thing about the elderly men being slaughtered makes the slaughtering worse.

>>49195353
>by being judge, jury, and executioner
Yeah what the fuck, did OP think he was a paladin or something?

Why do people keep pretending that executing violent murderers who refuse to even try to reform stops you being good?

Especially in a society without actual prisons and a concept of rehabilitation. Paladins are supposed to punish the wicked and protect the innocent.

>>49192253
I need more badass dispensers of justice like you in my games. I keep getting idiot paladins who want to be all noblebright and happy in my grimdark settings.

>>49195795
>I was wrong about X, but still, X applies
No

>>49204705
Calm your tits, anon, whether they be saggy landwhale tits or manboob tits.

The casual misogyny/misandry of >implying
the women were unable to fight but the men were fair game is honestly pretty tiny. If OP had said they killed a bunch of crippled men unable to fight and the women guard battalion protecting them I doubt the thread would have gone different except a diverging offtopic part on the GM trying to force his magical realm with female soldiers.

>>49204867
INB4 they were drow
I wonder if Drow say "Even the men and children" when describing a mass slaughter? or do they just call it "A typical tuesday"?

>>49204230
Depends on the legal system of the duke.

>>49204705
It's been a long time since I've seen a double bait this good

>>49192253
Shoud've brought them to trial first.

If the case was clear cut as you laid out, it shouldn't of been more than formality.

>>49192253
That's badass, did you also yell "I am the law!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJiYrRcfQo

>>49192253
>not Paladins
>bitching about your ruling.

If they want to ride a high horse they can buy one and play the class to ride it.

The only thing more obnoxious than a boyscout are the little shits that smoke behind the gym and think they're in a goddamn philosophy class.

also
>slaughter villagers and children
>prior counts
What would their alternative have been, exactly? Yardsticks across their bums? They slaughtered innocents and once you've gone that far you don't go back. Not to mention they clearly have experience escaping justice.

>>49203984
The thing is, he's perfectly capable of enacting justice as a noble. "Due process" really shouldn't be hamfistedly introduced into a setting like this. There is literally nothing odd about a paladin being judge and executioner.

>>49201687
Penal labour is still a thing now though

>>49195988

Supposedly.

>>49193876
Just because it's become a common platitude, 'the ends do not justify the means' is not really a truth, just one way of looking at morality.
Utilitarian morality is perfectly valid, in the sense that all morality is axiomatic.
Just because you've never been forced to confront a truly difficult choice with your own flesh and blood and felt the weight of innocent lives press upon you, you believe in some black and white fairy tale of clean justice.

Is Gygax's logic wrong? Probably, because his opinion is not epistemologically well-founded, but not because his conclusion is false.

>>49196684
>

Make fun of his Snake God and challenge him to use his wizardry right here and now to keep me from grappling him down and shoving his beard in milk.

File: laughing owlbear.jpg (769KB, 2849x3474px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 2849x3474px

>>49195970
>Modern law and morality, which we are supposed to think is objectively true.
Oh dear, never thought I'd run into someone who you could unironically call a sheeple without being faulted

>>49196859

You know, it always stuck in my craw that Batman actively saves the Joker from being killed at times. It is the most frustratingly stupid thing that nearly every writer does.

File: 2016-09-06 19_55_28-(152) _tg_ - Was I in the wrong here_ - Traditional Games - 4chan - Nightly.png (28KB, 235x179px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 235x179px

>>49201489
>tfw you will never shed the blood of four thousand Saxon men

>>49203561
>Grimderp
Absolutely not. It's very melancholy, but the central theme is overcoming loss and growing from it. The ED captures the tone pretty well: http://youtu.be/hLZOlNOszd4

Would recommend giving it a go if you're cool with a show being kinda slow.

>>49192253
> I calmly tell them that they already fucked up their chances to redeem themselves by escaping their fair punishment and starting life of crime again
> I am not going to return them to the place they've already escaped from, they're getting executed right here and right now for their crimes.

Without knowing the whole story this is what I find interesting:
You told the bandits they couldn't be redeemed for doing crime again, then offered redemption before killing them.

You didn't return them to the mines. The escaped prisoners. You didn't shackle them and bring them before the Duke, like an agent of the Duke would do.

You most likely bound them, and behead all of the prisoners personally. Didn't offer a prayer and left the bodies to rot.

Paladins aren't 50% justice 50% I AM THE LAW.
you should still be rational. Take the prisoners back to the mines. Take them to the city, let the Duke decide a new sentence for jailbreak+murder arson.

Personally I wouldn't Sully my deities good name by murdering unarmed men whom have already surrendered, and are likely bound and defenseless. But I guess every paladin is different.

Also I am 90% sure you probably omitted quite a few details...

>>49203972
>Depending on the noble, they may or may not be too happy to have a guy running around and killing people without permission.
Heh
Like those bandits were?
The others made the smarter points, I just wanted to be a paladin of the obvious.

>>49206127
>Like those bandits were?
Yes.

Do you think they liked the bandits?

>>49204281
>"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with this. Power politics does.

File: newt.png (251KB, 605x661px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 605x661px

>>49192253
you done fine, op. sounds like the group were prissy faggots who think paladins should be mother theresa.

>Be paladin
>on quest to save some kids from evil woods for a lord
>lord's mage is sent to help us
>almost to where we suspect the kids are, camping and resting up in case of fight with monsters, lord's servant comes out to each player individually to tell them that we should team up and kidnap the kids and hold them ransom
>mage asks me first, i say nothing but i go out to collect more firewood for our camp
>as the mage asks the rest of the group, i build a big fire
>everybody asks me what im doing as i position myself with the mage inbetween me and the fire
>"burning the witch"
>proceed to push the mage into the fire, killing her.

the rest of the party wanted to hold the kids for ransom too, but technically i didn't hear them so i ignored it. It was really funny when we finally got to the kids, there was a knight with them who said the SAME EXACT SHIT as the mage and tried to hold them ransom again.

There was a unified groan by all the players as i said that i was going to collect firewood.

>>49206232
>mother theresa.
Suprisingly she was a bit of a cunt

>>49206248
I guess i shouldve done research. maybe gandhi was a better example?

>>49206137
>Do you think they liked the bandits?
Not at all. They probably are glad that somebody killed them.

>>49206272
Not really.

>>49192253
If it acts like an orc and sounds like an orc, it dies like an orc. You're just such a good paladin you aren't racist.

>>49206303
pope francis?

superman?

jesus? Turn the other cheek jesus not whip them the fuck out of my temple selling birds and shit Jesus

>>49206272
also a cunt. Don't even bother with Martin Luther King jr.

>>49206078
> then offered redemption before killing them
He offered a possibility to earn plus points when they are judged before God.
>You didn't return them to the mines. The escaped prisoners. You didn't shackle them and bring them before the Duke, like an agent of the Duke would do.
When the paladin is his law enforcer he in fact is trusted enough to do his job on his own.
Do you really think The chamberlain runs ever single time to his Lord asking for permission to punish the valet when he messed up?
Also why should he return them to the mines, only so they can escape again?
He isn't Batman.

File: 1448555646836.jpg (83KB, 319x340px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 319x340px

>>49206232
>burning the witch

>>49206248
>Suprisingly she was a bit of a cunt
No, she just acted on her beliefs and was a far better religious follower than a humanitarian.
That does not translate into "cunt".

>>49206272
>I guess i shouldve done research. maybe gandhi was a better example?
He did and said some questionable things in pursuit of peace that a number of modern losers who have done jack-all with their lives like to look down their noses at. None of which I find condemning, even when he let his wife die.

Basically, they want us all to believe everone is equally shit.

>>49203442

Hey, at least we've actually started scaling back on Private, for profit, prisons and are now phasing them out.

>>49206232
I would pay money to play with you.

>>49192253
You did holy work anon

>>49206379
He offered redemption after telling them they would receive none.

The law enforcer that the paladin is (using your Batman metaphor) should be more like commissioner Gordon. Instead of Two Face. Striving for what's right and just, even if he doesn't agree with the law.

Not flipping a coin between murder the defenseless people, or not.

Again. A paladin murdering defenseless people is still murder. Even if he decides beheading the unarmed people is "just"

Some of you need to remember that a paladin isn't like judge dredd. You picked a paladin. Don't ignore the laws, enforce them. Enforcing =/= beheading defenseless prisoners while your party watches in horror.

>>49204431

Considering that killing women and children was considered heinous even in Medieval times, it's not exactly new. Hell, Rape was considered a terrible crime and defined as having sex with a woman without her father's or husband's permission.

Horse theft was also considered a heinous crime and punishable by death. That doesn't mean we generally treated horses as anything more than things we owned.

>>49206232
>There was a unified groan by all the players as i said that i was going to collect firewood.
Even if I was intent on ransoming the kids the first time, I would have cackled like a maniac the second time.
That was awesomely done.
You sir, are welcome in my kitchen.

>>49206678
Fuck you I want to play Paladin Dredd and do some Righteous Smiting™.

File: noticedme.jpg (20KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x360px

>>49206595
you too

File: Cand-prietena-ta-iti-spune-ca-nu-are-chef.gif (245KB, 280x213px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 280x213px

>>49206719
Someday we shall smite the heretics and burn the witches together

>>49206678
>Enforcing =/= beheading defenseless prisoners while your party watches in horror.
Except, you know, when it does.

And sometimes, mercy is shooting an unarmed man in the face with a shotgun.

>>49206678
>He offered redemption after telling them they would receive none.
You can't offer redemption. You have to do this yourself. He offered a better afterlife like it was done before him.
>The law enforcer that the paladin is (using your Batman metaphor) should be more like commissioner Gordon.
I just used Batman because of his don't kill rule.
>Not flipping a coin between murder the defenseless people, or not.
You act like the bandits that rob and kill are only the victims here. And it is no murder when he is law is in every possible way on his side.
Or do you think it's also murder when he brought him back to the Duke and he execute him in pompous ceremony because he couldn't defend himself neither in this situation.

File: zdfczcdv.jpg (20KB, 236x318px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 236x318px

The only thing you should have done differently is getting non-leftist faggot friends m8. I actually consider your sentence a little lightweight. They murdered women and children, they don't deserve a noble death. But it0's alright, you've got a code of honor.

>>49206716
Nothing wrong with that. But if I remember correctly. Paladins who kill unarmed prisoners gets a hit to alignment for not being righteous.

Paladin killing chaotic evil fighter in combat- good

Paladin killing chaotic neutral bandits by beheading them, unarmed and likely bound- not good

Paladin giving prisoners option to fight for their freedom, or be taken to a heavy labor camp. dueling the prisoners 1v1 to the death and killing them- good+the most honorable paladin ever.

The meaning of righteous isn't murderhobo

It doesnt mean be dishonorable

It doesn't mean Sully the good name of a diety

It doesn't even mean being right.

It means that you will be an upstanding virtuous man/woman who will uphold the laws of the land by any means deemed lawful and just.

So yes, being a righteous paladin would be one who follows the laws, shackling the survivors, taking them back to the mining camp, where they will serve their sentences again. And if they escape again. The paladin captures them again unless they die fighting.

I with I could play a game where the paladin is basically chaotic neutral, but the gm won't make him fall.

I have witnessed paladins:
Rape
Pillage
Assassinate
Aid a necromancer
And finally...

Murder the groups cleric because "he worships st.cuthbert and not my diety."

Paladins are good guys, not rogues, stop playing them like rogues.

Maybe next time paladin murderboner will talk with his allies before beheading everyone.

As an avid paladin+cleric player I say this:

Make that paladin fall. He deserves it for playing a paladin the literally wrong way.

Paladins literally have to obey posted laws...that's it. How can you fuck this up.


Fucking players and their murderhobo personalities

Morality is complicated and sometimes it's not easy to decide what's right or wrong. While personally as a player I would have approved of OP's actions, as a DM I would have probably just said nothing and let the other players judge as they saw fit. It's not my job as DM to tell you if you're right or wrong, it's my job to make you live with the consequences of your actions, whatever those may be. In this case, since the only witnesses are the other players, it's up to them if other people hear about how you rid the town of bandits or executed helpless men in cold blood.

>>49206952
You sound like a shit player in a group of really shit players.

>>49206927
NO...because the Duke would execute him based on his crimes

The paladin killed the surrendering party.
Without giving a shit.

Think PoWs
Do you think the captain in the barracks should shoot all the PoWs because their bad.

Or should they be tried for warcrimes?

Maybe the bandits would have given away where other bandits were.

All I know, is that the paladin shouldn't have reached for a beheading before not being a murderer.

I guess most of you don't understand what surrender is or what it can mean.


If I was that guys DM from that moment on. Nobody surrenders because the paladins reputation is to kill prisoners without any exceptions

>>49206983
I second this appraisal.

>>49206232
That's how a paladin should be played.

Kill the evil people who want to kidnap and Ransom kids.

Surprisingly hard to find a paladin who is like this.
All I ever get are paladins who would kill the kids or ransom them. Or kill the witch and ransom the kids.

I wish paladins were righteous like they used to be.

>>49207051
Not that anon but,
>Think PoWs
>Do you think the captain in the barracks should shoot all the PoWs because their bad.
Not because they're bad, but if the logistics of keeping them don't work, yeah they get executed rather than released.

But, you are ignoring far too much for me to take you seriously.

>>49206444
Putting your religious beliefs before the welfare of the poor you claim to care for makes you a cunt.

You cannot get out of that by making up absurd lies about people who recognise her for what she was. There are plenty of good people out there.

>>49207136
You aren't supposed to, I'm just fucking with him. Didn't think it would make him this angry.

Honestly, their fucking bandits, you could kill a million of them and be fine. Your only problem would be whether or not you get bored killing them.

>>49206444
>even when he let his wife die.

Even when he asked for the life-saving medical treatment he refused to let his wife have for the same affliction?