|
|
Post by LadyWinterWolf on Dec 24, 2003 2:54:12 GMT -5
A captured paladin is forced into an arena to fight for his life. The men he faces are also captured citizens, innocent of any crime. Would he be able to fight and kill these men to save his own life?
|
|
|
|
Post by Merkuri on Dec 24, 2003 9:32:17 GMT -5
Physically able? Yes. But if he killed any of them (rather than just knocking them out or otherwise incapacitating them) he risks losing his paladinhood. Whether he actually does or not depends on his god and the DM. If I were the DM I'd say yes, if only because it sets the stage for a redemption quest. Most paladin players are good/smart enough to keep their powers unless you give them a moral dillema like this that basically forces them to go against their oaths.
|
|
|
|
Post by Loki3 on Dec 24, 2003 17:41:55 GMT -5
Not really I dont think.
Since were talking 1E AD&D here. The Paladin can protect himself if in a situation like that, after all the Paladin must protect himself or he will die.
Now defending ones self even from fellow prisoners is not a EVIL act, it an act of preservation, thus at the worst CHAOTIC in nature. Thus he would have to seek out a cleric of higher than 7th level to receive pennence and forgiveness.
Now this would apply only if he defends himself, if he attacks first then he would be doing an evil act thus losing his powers.
Thats my take on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Loki3 on Dec 24, 2003 17:43:50 GMT -5
OH and keep in mind per the PHB if the Paladin intentionally does an evil act he IRRIVOCALBLY loses his powers.
There is no chance to allow them back, however the idea of a quest to gain them back depending on the DM is an interesting notion.
|
|
|
|
Post by EK - Shadow of Death on Dec 26, 2003 10:37:40 GMT -5
I agree with Merkuri. Even in 2nd edition, he would, at most, be charged with commiting a chaotic act. Since I'm sure that he would feel remorse at dealing their death (as opposed to maliciousness) "murder" is striken out. This is especially true if his captors threaten to kill him if he doesn't fight (as opposed to giving him the option to fight or suffer another torment). If the paladin brings the evildoer (the one who captured him and organized the matches) to justice, unless he has a very strict patron, it should be a sufficient atonement.
|
|
kaber
Squire
the magic of life is it's mystery, never let the wonder of it all die.
Posts: 117
|
Post by kaber on Dec 31, 2003 5:44:40 GMT -5
If he can rally the prisoners and revolt against the true enemy then that would be the best route, so long as the Paladine knows that they have a good chance at escape or success. Again if no other option presents itself and the Paladine defends in the begining then I think he should be able to attone for his "sins" without jeprodising his Paladin hood. Note that the Paladine should only kill if there is no other option. He could wear his opponants down untill they were to tired to fight or defend in such a way that they end up hurting each other without the Paladine having to directly cause their deaths. Only as a last resort should he have to kill. That's my take anyway.
|
|
