<Theorhetically (msp), if a player does harm or something sacreligous to an altar of a Dark god, the Paladin can take up the defense of a Dark god in the name of justice.>

AYUP. In fact, i'd go so far as to say he should and must.

I am...

THE CONDUCTOR

<<Drongol doesn't count.>>

Just for that, I'll have to do it.

<<However, if we view Justice as a force that maintains the ever turning machine of life, and that life is preferrable to not-life>>

Life is not necessarily valuable in and of itself. The life of a serial killer or otherwise dangerous individual (such as Sura) is worthless, whereas the life of an "innocent" may be said to have higher value. I won't get into a debate on the ethics of capital punishment, but it is safe to say that such things are, in fact, supported by DR. Witness the abortive Treasonist event.

Additionally, "justice" is an ephemeral concept that is extremely difficult to nail down. To use an example from comic books (yes, I know, I'm a geek), Captain America is a "law" sort of guy, whereas Batman is a "justice" kind of guy. Cap will follow the letter of the law and deal with criminals as he CAN to get the job done, whereas Batman willingly breaks the laws (which, afterall, are flawed) to take the criminals out of the picture.

The Law is a murderer going to jail or perhaps being relatively painlessly executed. Justice is allowing the family of a murdered child five minutes alone with the criminal with all kinds of nasty implements and NO ONE WATCHING.

Drongol's Player

Drongol, I award you 27 points for using Captain America and Batman in a discussion. Unfortunately, there is a 28 point deduction for use of the word "ephemeral". ;-)

Arcelebor

I take it you're Batman Drongol?

Phanton

I'm Batman.

Arcelebor

P.S. - How sweet would that be?

Name: Bruce Wayne (hidden) Race: Human Guild: Crimefighter
Gender: Male Age: 28 Circle: 98
You were born on the 2nd day of the 6th month of Arhat the Fire Lion in the year of the Iron Toad, 347 years after the victory of Lanival the Redeemer.

Your birthday is over 3 months away.

Strength : 44 Reflex : 44
Agility : 42 Charisma : 25
Discipline : 60 Wisdom : 40
Intelligence : 52 Stamina : 42
Favors: 12
Concentration: 460 Max: 460
TDPs: 563
Encumbrance: None

Coins:
no Kronars.
no Lirums.
10 copper Dokoras.

Circle: 98

Roof-hopping: 390 22% learning Hiding: 498 97% learning
Stalking: 462 25% concentrating Forensics: 659 66% concentrating
Batarangs: 334 08% dazed Ninjitsu: 399 98% learning

Time Development Points: 563 Favors: 12 Deaths: 3
Overall state of mind: clear
EXP HELP for more information

> Your mind hears Batman thinking, "Just 2% to rank ninjitsu, 400 ranks here I come!"

<<And finding the real killer five months later...yeah.>>

Unlike the real world, there has yet to be any wrong convictions in DR that I know of, at least among PCs. Therefore, the perceived faults of the justice system has nothing to do with this discussion, but thank you for sharing.

<<I take it you're Batman Drongol?>>

Drongol's Player, Phanton, Drongol's Player. Drongol can't type at a keyboard in an OOC forum. That said, no. Drongol's rarely broken any law and has killed a whopping four characters in over six years of playing him. He's mean, he's rude, but he's not a vigilante.

<<However, religious, moral, ethical, or otherwise law is not necessarily justice, justice is not necessarily lawful.>>

This is exactly what I was attempting to get to. Thanks.

Drongol's Player

Justice is relative and, therefore, incapable of definition.

Evil is relative and, therefore, incapable of definition.

Good is also relative and, therefore, also incapable of definition.

Laws on the other hand, are not relative, thus they are capable of definition allowing for an actual judgment regarding whether one is acting within or outside of the law.

Laws are not necessarily either good or just, because, as noted, those terms are incapable of definition.

Unfortunately, this part of the code:

>If a Paladin does not agree with a law, he must still respect it and should work to change it rather than disregarding it. The only exception to this is if the Paladin believes the law to be truly Evil. In this instance, the Paladin must follow the dictates of his conscience

Is badly flawed as it discards that which is capable of definition (the law) in favor of concepts that are inherently incapable of definition (evil). It abandons a clear "Bright line" (compliance with the law) for a chasm of relativity and will lead to more disagreements and dissension than it will to a commonly held course of action in any give situation.

Likewise:

>Serving another god or gods is possible for a Paladin provided that the path that he follows does not work against Good or Justice.

Is a "code" that relies totally on relative concepts incapable of definition (Good and Justice), and, again, instead of providing guidance, creates another area where dispute and dissension will rule.

Unfortunately, the "code", although nice to have, is not likely to really clear up any of the questions regarding "Palidinly behaviour" that have plagued this guild since its inception.

Gloryarm

Whoo, Lennon's on my side. I win.

---

Absorb...
and Transform!!!

>>Justice is dictated by the morality of those who make the laws.

I AM THE LAW!

-Puredread.

Need a babelfish for DragonRealms?

http://www.bakshiloa.com/libraryindex.html

<< I AM THE LAW!

<< No you are a LAWn. Allow me to cut you down =P

Great line, LRENK! I know someone who says the former all the time, and they don't read this board. Muwahahaaaaa... Thanks again.

Arcelebor

<<Batman, has never killed anyone>>

Incorrect. Batman killed quite often when he debuted, but lately you are definitely correct.

Drongol's Player

>>A Paladin is not bound by laws if they are unjust by design, the code says that the Paladin must work to change such laws.

Define unjust.

Need a babelfish for DragonRealms?

http://www.bakshiloa.com/libraryindex.html

<<Generally when people get into the 'define this', they fail to actually look at the source document which usually defines or provides a process by which to define something.>>

In the CODE's case, it does not make an attempt. Rather, it leaves all definitions up in the air, allowing for each Paladin to decide for him or herself.

That said, I think the vast majority of the Guild would agree on some basic tenets of "right and wrong." However, the devil's in the details, and the vast majority of the arguments I have seen both in and out of the game have been about relatively minor details.

This, in my opinion, is a Good Thing (tm). We don't need any documentation to let us, as a group, understand the basic tenets of "good" versus "evil," and any debates, heated or not, that might crop up about the rather insignificant aspects of the CODE just serve as a roleplaying opportunity.

After all, which is "more good"--the Paladin that shows mercy to a group of murderers in the hope that they might learn from his or her example or the Paladin that sends their souls screaming to the Void so that they will not be able to harm others? Highly debatable topic right there, but both Paladins would be able to argue passionately that what they were doing was "good."

Drongol's Player

Madigan said:

<<Generally when people get into the 'define this', they fail to actually look at the source document which usually defines or provides a process by which to define something.>>

Drongol said:

<<In the CODE's case, it does not make an attempt. Rather, it leaves all definitions up in the air, allowing for each Paladin to decide for him or herself.>>

Actually, very incorrect. Make sure you study the Code and its provisions. I'll simply point to my last example.

<<Pureblade, here is the language from the Code which discusses a Paladin and his relationship to man's laws:

If a Paladin does not agree with a law, he must still respect it and should work to change it rather than disregarding it. The only exception to this is if the Paladin believes the law to be truly Evil. In this instance, the Paladin must follow the dictates of his conscience.

A simple reading of the Code provisions states that it is a subjective determination as to whether a paladin agrees or disagrees with the law (i.e. If Madigan doesn't agree with the law in his opinion), that paladin must abide by it still, and can only work to change it. However if the paladin 'believes' the law to be truely Evil (once again a subjective standard) then the Paladin must do what he thinks best.>>

The definitions for the entire provision is within the document itself, in this case it is a subjective definition left up to the individual paladin.

The Code is just not the brain-surgery many are trying to make it out to be.

My opinion anyway.

Madigan

<< Define what makes a law evil. Then define the difference between working to change it and disregarding it. >>

Smiles... this really has gotten to the point where it could really be considered a rather obscure form of absolutism.

This, however, could actully be a place where specific examples of what is evil could actually be worked into the code. Though it will not cover all forms of evil it could provide the proper launching point for debate on behaviours that seem to float in the more grey areas. For instance....

A paladin must not take nor aide in taking the possessions and/or coins of another unless the possession and/or coin were used or being used in a manner that defies the laws of the province or the life and livelihood of another. Provided that the act in question was not provoked or a part of the assailant gaining just retribution for acts committed by the other. In the latter case a council of three paladins should decide in full agreement if the retribuiton was just and the proper distribution of the goods in question. Understand that if complaints are lodged on a consistent bases against a particular group or common collection of paladins invoking the "power of three" that the council will call them for a review of their behaviour.

Intriguing.. as I think through it... this "power of three" concept could be very interesting and highly codeable. An actual concept that could really be playable.


< Can working to change it mean fighting the system in order to change it? Or does it mean taking a political and more democratic approach (which makse no sense in Elanthia). Does it mean getting another outside ruler to take over, and then work with a more apparently 'reasonable' person? <

To be honest, the act of overturning a law should be worked through a grouping of paladins and would probably end up before the council in the proper power structure. Though, in ways we do have a direct example of this in the realms on Hara'jaal.. which is essentially lawless.... I have led "cleaning" operations on Hara quite often in the enclave, and though captured and flogged I have never received a soul hit for it. As in the law is unjust and I actively work to overturn it's efforts.


The overwhelmingly huge piece missing are the works that should be coming from the contest. However, I believe a process of decision making and evaluation should be put in place first. As in the "power of three" and the oversight processes of the Paladin council. For the truth is, without these structures or something similiar we are headed directly for a rather muddled mess if all this new material is put into the game without a proper cohesive understanding of how they fit within the greater whole as well as an eye to the game playability of the situation. For I too am not particularly pumped about the idea that a sole GM may make an arbitrary decision based on "their" understanding of the code and trash our souls.

Daython

<< ps: In my opinion the council of three Paladins to decide on stuff would be neat. What if Drongol, Pureblade and Glemm decided to live int he same town? Would you really want to see their justified acitons on the three Paladins concept? >>

Daython takes out his mace and bops Phanton over the head.

I know I can be wordy.. but really now.... I did state that if a group of three and or similiar combination of three commonly participate in questionable choices their actions would come up for review by the council.

The mechanic could record what action took place and against who and be put in a log for review. That is if some mechanic was created for the "power of three". I think it is both workable and practical. The question is what level of committment there is to this code.

Daython

The key of course will be how the Code is enforced. If it is not, then it will become another parchment on the wall.

Madigan

<<Daython takes out his mace and bops Phanton over the head.>>

Phanton obviously blocks the attack.

<<The mechanic could record what action took place and against who and be put in a log for review. That is if some mechanic was created for the "power of three". I think it is both workable and practical. The question is what level of committment there is to this code.>>

doesn't it sound as much work as having the Gm's judge on the matter itself?

I'm not trying to ruin your idea, I've stated that I like it. Just trying to find holes in it so we can discuss, hope that much is clear.

Phanton

<<For example, we are suppose to be protectors...well for Chadatru's sake...give us the ability to protect better than anyone else in the game. Why should we be limited by global caps on spells that only serve to protect?>>

We're also supposed to engage in righteous combat. Why don't we have abilities to make use fight better than anyone else in the game? Who cares about global caps--we have a CODE!

Honestly, guys, we're going to be getting abilities that are considered "balanced" and "appropriate" no matter what we have written down or what restrictions are placed upon us. Making Paladins "uber-powerful" because we have a CODE won't fly--after all, it's terribly difficult to violate the CODE unless you get involved in CvC conflicts, and the game isn't designed around that sort of situation.

Drongol's Player

>>For example, we are suppose to be protectors...well for Chadatru's sake...give us the ability to protect better than anyone else in the game.

Sidenote: GM-Ssra is going to make you all wet yourselves.

Need a babelfish for DragonRealms?

http://www.bakshiloa.com/libraryindex.html