Paladin's Attack = Evil?

[homersolo]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

[TheSummoner]

Recognized country by who? Definatly not the Paladins or survivors of Azure City.

[Draconi Redfir]

mostly true, but the prisioners in the prision didint do any crimes, so i think the plaidans are safe.


Recognized country by who? Definatly not the Paladins or survivors of Azure City.

cliffport + 16 others.

[Jayngfet]

No, they need to hold themselves to a paladins code to stay paladins, and follow laws recognized by azure city to stay in the saphire guard. Gobbotopea doesn't factor in.

[Darius1020]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

They're not prisoners, they're slaves. It seems to me than Thanh is working under the law of justice, as in it is a crime against humanity to keep people as slaves.

[Hallavast]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

Political prisoners? Prisoners of war? No. Besides, I highly doubt the Azure city exiles would actually recognize the goblins' "new" nation.

[Kish]

"Lawful" means "Ordered," not "obeys the law."

[TheSummoner]

cliffport + 16 others.

Yes, I know that, I was merely pointing out that from the perspective of the paladins and survivors, the Hobgoblins are still no more than an invading force and that their authority is illegitimate.

[Hallavast]

"Lawful" means "Ordered," not "obeys the law."

Indeed. However, it is true that the paladin code includes "obeying the laws of legitimate authority".

In this case, however, it is not likely that the paladins see the goblin nation as a source of legitimate authority.

[Zexion]

I would say no, because of several reasons, one being that it is part of their duty to protect AZURE CITY, not Gobbotopia (the name still cracks me up! LOL)

[drengnikrafe]

Let's turn this into a hyperbole for a moment, shall we?
An absolutely evil warlord has seized control of land. He has a collection of prisoners. These prisoners were thrown in jail for various "legitimate reasons" ranging from smiling at a cute girl to waving at his friend to thinking about books. The evil warlord personally executes 3 every day by beheading.

Tell me, what is more good and lawful. To save these poor, defenseless, innocent people from the tyranical rule of an evil dictator... or to not interfere with the functionings of a country.


Now, let's take it back into perspective. Most of the prisoners, I imagine, were citizens of Azure City. It is a Paladin's duty to aid his people when they are in need. Probably. It may not be his duty, but it's almost definitely the right thing to do.

[Hallavast]

Let's turn this into a hyperbole for a moment, shall we?
An absolutely evil warlord has seized control of land. He has a collection of prisoners. These prisoners were thrown in jail for various "legitimate reasons" ranging from smiling at a cute girl to waving at his friend to thinking about books. The evil warlord personally executes 3 every day by beheading.

Tell me, what is more good and lawful. To save these poor, defenseless, innocent people from the tyranical rule of an evil dictator... or to not interfere with the functionings of a country.


Now, let's take it back into perspective. Most of the prisoners, I imagine, were citizens of Azure City. It is a Paladin's duty to aid his people when they are in need. Probably. It may not be his duty, but it's almost definitely the right thing to do.

By what right is this warlord's claim to authority legitimate?

[drengnikrafe]

By what right is this warlord's claim to authority legitimate?

He used old, obscure, and mostly forgotten about rules to take he place of the king by something that technically qualified as a duel. Something like that.

[Jayngfet]

By what right is this warlord's claim to authority legitimate?

What makes anyone's claim legitimate? Go far enough back into any political system and you'll find it involved some guy with a bigger stick. The difference is the paladin listens to the guy who knows when to use the stick to build a house instead of keep whacking people over the head.

[DeltaEmil]

By what right is this warlord's claim to authority legitimate?Probably by Might makes Right. Which theoretically, applies to all nations of the world, because a government with its police, army, navy and perhaps even airforce is theoretically the most powerful organization locally.

[Dr.Epic]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

Okay, 'lawful' as in you have a set of personal vows you must obey. They don't have to conform to the laws of state.

[Water-Smurf]

Okay, 'lawful' as in you have a set of personal vows you must obey. They don't have to conform to the laws of state.

QFT. Lawful doesn't mean 'obeying the law.' It means 'sticking to a set of rules that may or may not conform to the law.' Roy's Lawful because he sticks to a personal sense of honor, though he isn't above doing some illegal things (like going against the Sapphire Guard behind their backs). Belkar is Chaotic because he has no code that he follows. Similarly for paladins.

[Kish]

I seem to remember reading an article that deconstructed the idea of a paladin who enters a swamp to find and kill the evil orc warlord, promptly having to go to said warlord and turn himself in for attempted assassination of the swamp's political leader. Who wrote that article? Oh, right, a fellow named Rich Burlew.

[Jayngfet]

I seem to remember reading an article that deconstructed the idea of a paladin who enters a swamp to find and kill the evil orc warlord, promptly having to go to said warlord and turn himself in for attempted assassination of the swamp's political leader. Who wrote that article? Oh, right, a fellow named Rich Burlew.

Never heard of him:smallbiggrin:!

[Hallavast]

Well, in fantasy settings there are actual ideals, entities, and factions of Good and of Evil. It is assumed that these are what constitute right to rule in said fantasy worlds. This is somewhat true in the Oots world. In this world the "might makes right" rule wouldn't apply. So... what force of Good (notice the capital G) would this Evil (notice the capital E) warlord be acting in accourdance with in order to assume said power?

Also, remember that while lawful doesn't mean obeying laws, a paladin's code surely does (provided those laws come from a legitimate source (of Good).

[Shpadoinkle]

Lawful != legal

[PallElendro]

I'm sure there's something about ability to break them out of a Neutral Evil country.

[Zxo]

This is the DM's interpretation of paladin's lawfulness from one of the games I played - I don't know how canon it is, but is seems logical to me.

The laws a paladin must follow are the laws and orders of his deity, his lord, his order - the ones he has chosen (or who have chosen him) for this role. He owes this loyalty regardless of the location he's currently in. As for local authority, he will obey the non-evil laws which do not conflict with his allegiance and duty - that is, he'll keep off grass unless he needs to go there to save someone who is in danger. Whenever the paladin witnesses evil being done and it is in his power to stop or prevent it, he must attempt to do so, the only exception is when there's a greater evil or greater duty requiring immediate attention and action.

The AC paladins' duty is to their lord - they have no contact with Hinjo, but it is pretty clear that his orders would be to help captured AC citizens and fight the evil forces who have taken over the city - to the extent it is possible given how outnumbered the paladins are. So they are doing exactly what they should be doing.

[KiwiImperator]

Gobbotopia is a recognized nation, but recognized by whom? Cliffport? The Paladins probably don't recognize Cliffport as a nation either, more like a tenement building that needs demolishing but has too many rats in it to survey. No, the legitimacy of authority is not derived from whether or not some fear-stricken politicians in a score of puny neighboring states agree that a warband squatting in a destroyed city qualifies as a nation. What exactly makes a state legitimate has been an arguing point for millennia in the real world, and is not going to see an end to debate here, but if there is anything that the government of Gobbotopia is not,, it is legitimate in the eyes of a Paladin.

[slayerx]

Indeed. However, it is true that the paladin code includes "obeying the laws of legitimate authority".


Y'know i don't think it could be that cut and dry...
Fact of the matter is, Paladins are Lawful GOOD, and the simple tenant that they must always follow "legitimate authority" does not at all make it certain that the paladin's can remain "good" while following those laws.

There are plenty of ways some tyrant could come to power in a country in a legitimate fashion. For instance you could have a prince that's been spoiled rotton placed on the throne after his father dies; the family line just dclines from there until a few generations later your dealing with a tyrant... If said tyrant started creating all kinds of laws that went against what is commonly excepted as good and just, could the paladin's really just follow through? i mean if he regularly had citizens killed or enslaved, could the paladins really just sit by and let him do it? To sit back and do nothing would follow the "lawful" aspects of being a paladin, but it in no way would be following the "good" aspects

No, i don't think they could... when it comes to "legitimacy" and "recognition", either that statement has a very HUGE hole in it, or there is more to "legitimacy" then who the laws say should be in charge... Paladins would follow good laws, and neutral laws, but they could not ever follow evil laws as they would likely contradict with everything they stand for

[Killer Angel]

Paladins must follow the Good, in a lawful way.
To set free prisoners (honest citizen and other paladins, imprisoned by an invader) is a good act.
Even if they recognize a "legitimate" nation in Gobbotopia (I doubt, but let's say Yes), Azure City is at war with Hobbos: they lose the city, but the government didn't surrender. Try to free PoW is a lawful act.

So yeah, they are acting lawful good from every point of view.

[Ancalagon]

Also, remember that while lawful doesn't mean obeying laws, a paladin's code surely does (provided those laws come from a legitimate source (of Good).

Simply wrong.

"Lawful Good" is beyond mortal law. That "good" mortal laws from good governments fit with "lawful good" is the logical consequence of a "good government that makes good laws".

If you want a good read on that, check out the various lawful good deities that have paladins in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (3.5). Some of the gods demand their paladins "follow the laws where they are right and change the others" while others demand "follow the laws where they are right and remove the others or add new ones".

Following the law no matter what without regard if the law is actually good or bad or if you could do "more" good by not obeying the law is Lawful Neutral, not Lawful Good.

[ChowGuy]

The AC paladins' duty is to their lord - they have no contact with Hinjo, but it is pretty clear that his orders would be to help captured AC citizens and fight the evil forces who have taken over the city - to the extent it is possible given how outnumbered the paladins are.

To be precise, Thath, who is the only paladin known to still be in the Territory Formerly Known as Azure City, is acting in the name of what he considers the legitimate government in exile as the leader of the organized resistance, a role for which he was specifically designated by that government's recognized leader - Mr. Scruffy. :smalltongue:

Seriously though, it is his duty as a paladin to coordinate and oversee the actions of the resistance and insure they are directed toward honorable ends (such as rescuing prisoners) rather simply acts of random terrorism.

[Katana_Geldar]

Part of being lawful is also recognising that not all laws are in fact good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0282.html) and that it is one's duty to change them when they are.

Lawful Good does not mean a strict adherance to meaningless laws. It acknowledges the possibility of bad laws.

The two domains, both of Law and Good, need to be considered. Is the law doing good? Is good being done in a Lawful way?

In Azure City, slavery is not a lawful act, regardless of trade deals Gobbotopia may may. They will be fine.

[Hallavast]

Simply wrong.

"Lawful Good" is beyond mortal law. That "good" mortal laws from good governments fit with "lawful good" is the logical consequence of a "good government that makes good laws".

If you want a good read on that, check out the various lawful good deities that have paladins in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (3.5). Some of the gods demand their paladins "follow the laws where they are right and change the others" while others demand "follow the laws where they are right and remove the others or add new ones".

Following the law no matter what without regard if the law is actually good or bad or if you could do "more" good by not obeying the law is Lawful Neutral, not Lawful Good.

Don't care about FRCS. I'm reading from the Player's Handbook. Their code of conduct is specifically stated in the paladin entry of chapter 3. This conduct explicitly includes "respecting legitimate authority". Now, I don't know what you'd call legitimate, but it seems only natural for it to mean "good" or "sanctioned by the source of good" that the paladin follows. The laws of Azure City would certainly qualify. The laws of Gobotopia would not.

Now, if one of those laws would require the paladin to commit an evil act, he is in a bit of a pickle. He is still bound by both, however. If he commits evil, he loses his powers. If he disregards LEGITIMATE authority, he loses his powers. One is easier to atone for, however. It would be a rare case indeed for such legitimacy to be considered evil, however. So this is almost a non-issue. As it happens, breaking the laws of Gobotopia require the paladins to neither commit evil or disrespect legitimate authority. The Goblins' authority is not legitimate.

[Snake-Aes]

The personal code takes priority.
"Legitimate Authority" is whatever authority is recognized by the people that follow it as a community. This means that within any enclosed circle he's supposed to blend in, the recognized leader has legitimate authority. A gang-leader thug is no legitimate authority to the city, but it is legitimate authority for the gang he leads.

What I don't see, though, is why there's so much of a ruckus in this thread. It's plain simple that the paladin's duty with his gods take priority. It's the POINT of being a representant of the damn deity.

Thahn doesn't recognize Gobbotopia because it is there due to forfecully removing his actual nation from there. If, at any given moment, his liege contacts him and orders a withdrawal because it's better off that way, Thahn will recognize Gobbotopia as a nation, even if he disagrees with it's tenets.
And no, that doesn't mean he wouldn't fight the evil there. Odds are he would, instead, try to work in accordance to the authorities there. Likely it'd turn to the political side of the game before back to violence.

[Ancalagon]

You should care about FRCS as it details how the stuff mentioned in core should work in case of a conflict.

See it as "supplementary comment to a very short paragraph in the core rules".

I find it obvious that letting a paladin fall for not following a bad law is surely not what being a paladin about.

The thing is:
Paladins do not fall for doing "unlawful acts".
They fall for two reasons: A) They commit an evil act or B) they are unlawful enough to shift their alignment.

"Not following a bad law in certain cases" is neither of those!

[RickDaily12]

The thing is:
Paladins do not fall for doing "unlawful acts".
They fall for two reasons: A) They commit an evil act or B) they are unlawful enough to shift their alignment.

Incorrect. In this case, at least. They must also follow every rule and statement of their code.

Azure's Paladin Code binds them to listen to their superiors. Without diobeying or lying to them. They are also bound to follow the laws of a legitimate authority.

Recall a bonus comic to War and XPs. Miko asked two coworkers to join them for dinner. She annoyed them so much, they lied to her about being lesbians as a pass to "wanting to be alone", stopping them from dining with her. They then had to atone for their actions. Therefore, they must NEVER lie to their superiors, or they may be stripped of their powers.

So yes. In this case, their Paladins CAN fall for doing both unlawful and evil acts.

[Killer Angel]

As it happens, breaking the laws of Gobotopia require the paladins to neither commit evil or disrespect legitimate authority. The Goblins' authority is not legitimate.

As I've said before, even if it were legitimate, Azure City and Gobotopia are at war, with paladins' liege keeping up the fight from exile. IN war, you have no care for the enemy's laws.
The legitimate authority in Hell (recognize by the Gods themselves) is Asmodeus and the archdevils. I doubt A Paladin in Hell (http://home.flash.net/~brenfrow/dd1/pih.htm) will care about any devils' rule.

Slavery can be lawful. Imprisoning and torturing Good people, can be lawful.
They're never good act, so a Paladin won't turn his back against injustice because "there is a law about it".

[Kish]

Gobbotopia is a recognized nation, but recognized by whom? Cliffport? The Paladins probably don't recognize Cliffport as a nation either, more like a tenement building that needs demolishing but has too many rats in it to survey.
I suspect you have Cliffport confused with Greysky City.

[Ancalagon]

Incorrect. In this case, at least. They must also follow every rule and statement of their code.

Azure's Paladin Code binds them to listen to their superiors. Without diobeying or lying to them. They are also bound to follow the laws of a legitimate authority.

Recall a bonus comic to War and XPs. Miko asked two coworkers to join them for dinner. She annoyed them so much, they lied to her about being lesbians as a pass to "wanting to be alone", stopping them from dining with her. They then had to atone for their actions. Therefore, they must NEVER lie to their superiors, or they may be stripped of their powers.

So yes. In this case, their Paladins CAN fall for doing both unlawful and evil acts.

The thing in the spoiler is a very minor thing and I doubt "atone" was meant in the "atonement-spell-regions". Call it more character-RP (and many cases of 'small transgressions and not-atoning for (in an RP-way) them' will lead to an alignment-shift anyway).

And the "obeying the superiours": It's because they swore and oath to do that. So disobeying would not only be disobeying, but breaking an oath, which is much stronger.
I also doubt a paladin would fall if he broke that oath to follow an order from an superiour if that order is an evil one (as in "Kill that innocent there!").

Of course, the rules state nothing for or against that so it's a bit open to interpretation. But letting a paladin fall for such minor things would be outright stupid and probably not what a paladin is about.

[Souhiro]

It's easy.

From the bestiary, we see that goblins are Neutral Evil. All the goblins deities are Evil. They are just plane EVIL. A pityful evil, yes. a Crappy evil. The coke-light evil, the barely powerless evil (their only force is the huge numbers)

And killing evil is good.


When whe are ill, we take antibiotics, and they kill the virus and bacteriae. Adult bacteriae and larval bacteriae. Is killing larval bacteriae evil? Nope.

Then, Gobbos are the bacteriae, and a few fleshgrinder-wielders, high level paladins are the cure.

[SoC175]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities? Illegal =! evil and paladins don't fall for chaotic acts unless the accumulate enough or big enough ones to change alignment

[hamishspence]

I don't think OoTS subscribes to this philosophy. "They're listed as evil, so we can kill them without alignment penalties" is brought up in Origin of PCs- and criticised severely.

[Conuly]

I don't think OoTS subscribes to this philosophy. "They're listed as evil, so we can kill them without alignment penalties" is brought up in Origin of PCs- and criticised severely.

And yet, paladins don't seem to fall for it. If they did, they wouldn't do it anymore.

So the rule seems to be "It's evil if members of "evil races" do it, but neutral or good if other people do it to those "evil races" no matter who started it".

This, of course, is profoundly wrong.

[Kish]

It's easy.

From the bestiary, we see that goblins are Neutral Evil.
Usually Neutral Evil.

You know, the same way Vaarsuvius is Chaotic Good and Belkar is True Neutral.

[Snake-Aes]

Can't we really stop and realize that we cannot accurately assess the paladin attack in a manner that explains their maintained status?. They were sent on a mission to kill that guy, and succeeded, and proceeded to wipe the village. We know that they did those things rather cruelly(kind of a game) and we also know that, based on our experience with the comics, they didn't fall. That's it.

[hamishspence]

So the rule seems to be "It's evil if members of "evil races" do it, but neutral or good if other people do it to those "evil races" no matter who started it".

This does seem to be a common claim.


This, of course, is profoundly wrong.

Sadly, only BoED agrees with this outright- stating that even evil beings have the right to not be attacked unless they do something to provoke it (and just "being evil" isn't enough).

Unfortunately, some of its other things are less well thought out- leading to people dismissing the whole book.

[veti]

Don't care about FRCS. I'm reading from the Player's Handbook. Their code of conduct is specifically stated in the paladin entry of chapter 3. This conduct explicitly includes "respecting legitimate authority". Now, I don't know what you'd call legitimate, but it seems only natural for it to mean "good" or "sanctioned by the source of good" that the paladin follows.

As you have correctly identified, the key word is "legitimate". This is a historical take on paladins in D&D:

The key, defining attribute of a paladin is not alignment - if it were, then Roy would be one - but loyalty. A paladin is absolutely, unswervingly, unhesitatingly, unconditionally loyal to their cause (or order, or church, or whatever they belong to). To qualify as a paladin, you have to show that you can be trusted absolutely to put your lord's interests ahead of your own. (That's why it always ought to have been a prestige class in D&D, but never mind.)

That's why paladins in OOTS don't fall for doing evil actions, or chaotic actions - they fall, as evidenced by Miko, for disobeying orders.

So they're not "lawful good" because of some arbitrary rule that says "only LG characters can have the class 'paladin' on their character sheet". They're lawful because it's inherent in their nature - to obey orders so consistently is a very lawful way of life, regardless of what those orders are. And they're "good" because their parent order is "good".

When you look at them in that light, the "legitimacy" of an authority is easy to decide. It's "legitimate" precisely so far as their lord/order/etc. says it's legitimate. That allows for a whole continuum of possible attitudes, from total subservience to total enmity. (Via "willing co-operation", "respect", "grudging co-operation", "complete indifference", "limited opposition" etc.) What other people say about the authority is irrelevant.

Fairly obviously, in this case, Sapphire Guard paladins regard Gobbotopia as the enemy. Even if every other country in the world - including 63 separate orders of paladins - declares Gobbotopia the new world empire, and themselves its willing vassals, the paladins of the SG would continue to fight against it until Hinjo (and no-one else) decides it's time to stop.

[snafu]

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

No, it would be an act of war. That's quite all right as regards the law-chaos axis, since a state of war most certainly exists between the Azurite nation (such as remains) and the hobgoblins.

While I think it's quite all right for a paladin, this special ops, behind the lines stuff might well be considered dishonourable by a samurai, who has his own specific code - but then, it's not samurai who are actually doing it. They have centuries of precedent for hiring ninja to pull stunts like these, so it's probably fine to let the elves do it too.

[HandofShadows]

While I think it's quite all right for a paladin, this special ops, behind the lines stuff might well be considered dishonourable by a samurai, who has his own specific code - but then, it's not samurai who are actually doing it. They have centuries of precedent for hiring ninja to pull stunts like these, so it's probably fine to let the elves do it too.

Ohhh. Ninja Elves. I like this concept. :smallamused:

[Snake-Aes]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

Not quite. "Illegality" isn't like that. Respecting legitimate authority means you must recognize it first. This means that if a paladin does not recognize the authority, he owes nothing to it. (Read my entry on legitimacy a few pposts ago).

[factotum]

Let's be honest, if it worked any other way a nasty DM could get a player paladin to fall really easily--just have them travelling in a country with an evil ruler and face them with a choice where they either have to obey an evil law (thus falling for breaking the Good part of their alignment) or disobey it (thus falling for breaking the Lawful part). Needless to say, it DOESN'T work that way.

[Souhiro]

Let's be honest, if it worked any other way a nasty DM could get a player paladin to fall really easily--just have them travelling in a country with an evil ruler and face them with a choice where they either have to obey an evil law (thus falling for breaking the Good part of their alignment) or disobey it (thus falling for breaking the Lawful part). Needless to say, it DOESN'T work that way.

Yeah... the old trick of the Lawful Evil King and the Chaotic Good rebels.

I'm GM-ing a campaing, and I have a "Honor" system. Breaking laws drains hono, but it depends what law is it. For example: Spitting to bards isn't frowned, even by gods.

[Graymayre]

With paladins it's simple to see if their action was evil.

Do they still have their powers? If so then the action was, at the very least, a neutral one.

[Kish]

With paladins it's simple to see if their action was evil.

Do they still have their powers? If so then the action was, at the very least, a neutral one.
In OotS, the Twelve Gods grant paladins' powers, and take them away. Haley said that she knows, through direct empirical evidence, exactly one act that will make a paladin Fall. Somehow, I doubt that means the only clear-cut evil act she knows is "killing one's defenseless liege lord."

We know that the paladins did something blatantly evil in Start of Darkness and didn't fall. We know, from the authors' notes, that the writer meant what they were doing to be clearly wrong. Does the fact that they didn't fall mean we should be going, "I guess massacring the goblins wasn't wrong then"? No. It means we should be going, "They didn't Fall for a reason, probably the Twelve Gods giving them some kind of pass."

Which doesn't relate to the act of attacking Gobbotopia, which is pretty much certain to be both sanctioned by the Twelve Gods and actually nonevil.

[Procyonpi]

This has more or less been said by various people already but no, for two simple reasons.
1. Paladins aren't lawful neutral, they're lawful good. The good overrides the lawful in cases of conflict.
2. They only have to abide by legal systems they're own order sees as legitimate. Goblin law hasn't traditionally been one of those systems for the sapphire guard. From the SG's perspective, Hinjo is the rightful ruler of Azure city, and the goblins are simply an organized crime group that has seized control.

[Snake-Aes]

Which doesn't relate to the act of attacking Gobbotopia, which is pretty much certain to be both sanctioned by the Twelve Gods and actually nonevil.

This calls to my mind a variant of paladins that are closer to less-casty-more-spanky clerics than anything else: They serve their gods, with a specific cause and enemies.
Alignment? Same of the deity.
Defend their cause, detect enemies of the faith.
Powers' targets? Portfolio!
God of Luxury?
Detect chaste.
Smite chaste.
Turn chaste.
Aura of debauchery.


God of war?
Detect pacifist
aura of ire
smite pacifist
turn pacifist

God of peace?
Detect violence
aura of peace
smite violence(let's call this one a defensive ability =P)
soothe violence.

Paladins of the twelve gods could, then, further the cause of the twelve gods. Defend their goals and so on.
Sucks to know it's probably not that...but it'd explain so much.

[Zeitgeist]

Anyone else find it odd that the title of this thread implies a discussion of good vs. evil while the actual topic matter is the other alignment axis entirely?

[Snake-Aes]

Anyone else find it odd that a thread about alignments avoid derailing for a surprising amount of time?

[Kish]

Anyone else find it odd that a thread about alignments avoid derailing for a surprising amount of time?
That's a trick question. Something can't be both surprising and not-odd. :smalltongue:

[Vaarsuvius4181]

So, I'll admit it. I'm not super-knowledgable on the D&D classes and so forth, but aren't Paladins (the remains of the Sapphire Guard) Lawful Good? And if so, they can lose their powers by doing illegal acts?

If Goblotopia is a recognized country, wouldn't breaking prisoners out of the jail be an illegal act that would cause them to lose their class abilities?

This is gobbotoia, not azure city. These are evil people doing evil things.

[Graymayre]

It still nags me kish.

First off if the 12 gods control the paladin's powers, then that begs the question of how much power they have. Can they see what the paladins will do or decide what they will do? If they wanted the paladins to massacre them some goblins then was the act really evil considering they essentially decide what is, or is not, evil for paladins?

Also, you said that the author said that the action was "clearly wrong". I'm suspicious that he didn't say evil.

[Kish]

If they wanted the paladins to massacre them some goblins then was the act really evil considering they essentially decide what is, or is not, evil for paladins?
I see no reason to cede them that power. :smalltongue: Rich gets to decide what is and isn't evil in his comic. Readers get to decide whether they'll accept what he decides, and quit reading if they decide the answer is "no." But the Twelve Gods, characters in the comic who, at least sometimes, act like petty, spoiled children, and who have never yet shown any particular wisdom or goodness? They get to decide whether their servants lose their magic powers. That's it.

[Graymayre]

I was just proposing that power based on maybes and possiblies. At the moment the 12 gods are too much of an unknown quantity to be judged of opinion and power.
I doubt one could successfully judge the morality of it until his raconteurness gives more information on them. For now, the topic is doomed to be stuck in the mire of supposition. The only ground one can actually get to is whether or not the act was evil to the reader, and even then it's not universal.

So here's my revised opinion on whether or not the action was evil.

General D&D rules (based on the characters not losing their powers) - No
OOTS - Unlikely, but possible
Richie B. - Undecided, but suspicious. Use of words very peculiar.
Other people - :smallcool:

[Morthis]

Here's an article on it. It clearly states, lawful does not necessarily mean "obeys the laws". It also explains how this applies to paladins. If a law is considered evil or corrupt, they do not need to follow it.

I think it's safe to say the azure paladins, and their Gods, find the goblin rule to be evil and their laws, especially concerning slavery, to be evil, so the paladin code does not require they follow those laws.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20050325a

[ericgrau]

When I read the thread title I was thinking of the paladin attack on the goblins way back when that killed many of them simply to prevent a possible major threat. Hmm, is that justifiable? That's tough. Then I found out that the OP was talking about the soon to be jailbreak and I thought "Lol wut?" If you haven't noticed the entire 705 pages of comic involves good heroes using violence, including killing, to solve their problems. Without doing so would lead to a very real and terrible failure as their opponents easily triumph.

[Ancalagon]

There also was an entire subplot including an NPC (Celia) to point that specific issue out. "Normal people might not understand how common it is for adventurers to solve their problems with violence and killing". ;)